1. The bracketed words are in the JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends . As already mentioned, Congress on 2 October 1781 had referred to a committee, with Elias Boudinot as its chairman, the report of another committee, of which John Witherspoon had been chairman, “on the cessions of New York, Virginia, Connecticut, and the petitions of the Indiana, Vandalia, Illinois, and Wabash companies” (Papers of Madison description begins William T. Hutchinson, William M. E. Rachal, et al., eds., The Papers of James Madison (4 vols. to date; Chicago, 1962——). description ends , III, 283, n. 6; 294–95; 295, n. 6; JM to Jefferson, 15 January, and n. 9; JM to Randolph, 9 April 1782, and n. 5). Debate upon the Boudinot committee’s report, wholly adverse to Virginia’s claim to the Northwest Territory, had opened on 16 April (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 184; Virginia Delegates to Harrison, 17 April 1782, n. 1). Upon being resumed two days later, the discussion focused upon the initial recommendation of the committee, “That Congress do in behalf of the united States accept the Cession made by the State of New York” (NA: PCC, No. 30, fol. 2; JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 225). Arthur Lee then moved, and Bland seconded, a motion asking: “That the first resolve in the report under consideration be postponed till Congress shall have determined on the following motion: ‘That previous to any determination in Congress, relative to the cessions of the western lands, the name of each member present be called over by the secretary, that on such call, each member do declare upon his honour, whether he is, or is not personally interested directly or indirectly in the claims of any company or companies, which have petitioned against the territorial rights of any one of the states, by whom such cessions have been made, and that such declaration be entered on the journals’” (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 191).

In spite of the unanimous vote of the delegates from Georgia, South Carolina, and Virginia to retain the words “till Congress shall have determined on the following motion,” this clause was deleted—thus in effect relieving some of the congressmen from the embarrassment of appearing to oppose Virginia’s title to the Northwest only because they were land speculators (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 191–92). Against the will of the delegates of the three states mentioned above, Congress then struck from Arthur Lee’s motion the words “the first resolve in” (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 192). At this juncture in the debate, JM introduced his motion, but it failed to attract support, except from the one delegate present from New Hampshire and from South Carolina, one of the two delegates present from Connecticut and from New York, one of the four delegates from Pennsylvania, all five from Virginia, and both delegates from Georgia (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 193). Thus, as the day’s session drew toward its close, Arthur Lee’s motion had been reduced to, “That the report under consideration be postponed.” Before adjourning, Congress defeated, by a division of votes approximately the same as on JM’s motion, an effort by Lee to have “until Monday next” follow “postponed” (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 193–94). On 1 May, after Lee had left Philadelphia to return to Virginia, Bland tried without success to have Congress adopt Lee’s original motion. Finally on 6 May, over the adverse votes of the delegates from Virginia and South Carolina, Congress decided to table the Boudinot committee report without naming any day for its reconsideration (JCC description begins Worthington Chauncey Ford et al., eds., Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789 (34 vols.; Washington, 1904–37). description ends , XXII, 225, 232, 240–41). See also Observations Relating to the Influence of Vermont and Territorial Claims, 1 May, n. 9; Motion on Delegates’ Financial Interest in West, 2 May 1782.