1. The Articles of Confederation explicitly authorized Congress “to appoint one of their number to preside” for a period of one year but were silent about what should be done if he did not resign when illness or other cause obliged him to be absent for a considerable time during his term. “Rules for conducting business,” adopted on 4 May 1781, failed to anticipate that emergency (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XX, 476–82).

Although the printed journal of Congress for 15 April 1782 does not refer to JM’s motion, he almost certainly drafted it on that date during the discussion occasioned by the illness of President John Hanson. This debate was interrupted by a request to tally the vote on a solution offered by John Morin Scott. When Scott’s motion was rejected, JM and Jones apparently left the room, possibly with Samuel Wharton of Delaware, in order to prepare the above resolution. It may be inferred from the printed journal that the motion was never introduced, because when they returned to their seats after missing the roll call on a second proposal, also defeated, they found Congress ready to vote, viva voce, on Thomas Bee’s suggestion that “whenever the President for the time being, shall be prevented, by sickness or otherwise, from attending the house, one of the members present be chosen by ballot to act as chairman for the purpose of keeping order in the house only, but that all official papers shall nevertheless be signed and authenticated by the President as heretofore.” This was acceptable to JM and Jones, and also to every member from each of the eight states which, being represented by at least two delegates, could cast an effective vote. Since Daniel Carroll was then chosen as “chairman” by an unrecorded ballot, there is no entry in the journal of how each member voted (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 180–83). JM and his three colleagues could hardly have favored Carroll in view of his staunch opposition to Virginia’s title to the Old Northwest.

2. When John Hanson (1721–1783) next attended Congress after 15 April is uncertain. Bearing in mind that as temporary presiding officer Carroll’s correct title was “chairman of Congress,” and assuming that the journal reflects titles accurately, Hanson returned after 7 May, when Robert R. Livingston addressed a letter to the “Chairman of Congress,” and before 13 May, when the “President of Congress” shared in the audience accorded to La Luzerne (Wharton, Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence description begins Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols.; Washington, 1889). description ends , V, 396; JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 262). Hanson probably had not resumed the chair by 9 May, because on that day he did not vote in the three polls recorded (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 251–53).

3. After first writing “execute the functions of the chair,” JM neglected to strike it out when he interlineated “preside in Congress” above it.

4. The word “chair” appears above an undeleted “same.”