The Journal of the Commons House of Assembly

344 COMMONS JOURNAL, MARCH 5, 1759–APRIL 7, 1759It passed in the Negative.Then the Question being put that the Clause in the Oath to be takenby all Persons Elected to serve as Members to represent the Inhabitants ofthis Province in General Assembly, respecting the Situation of the Estates ofthe Persons so Elected, be dashed;It passed in the Negative.The Bill was read a Second time throughout with Blanks, which werefilled up and several Amendments were made by the House to the Bill.Ordered that Mr. Wragg, Mr. Graeme and Mr. Manigault do prepare aClause to be offered at the third Reading of the said Bill, to ascertain thedue Return of all Writts that shall hereafter be issued, to Elect Members torepresent the Inhabitants of this Province in General Assembly.Ordered that Mr. Lynch and Mr. Wareing do carry the Bill to the Council.Mr. Wright reported from the Committee appointed to enquire in whatmanner this Province can be eased of the Expence arising from the Carriageof Provisions to the several Garrisons in the Out Settlements of this Province,That the Committee had enquired accordingly, and had directed him toreport the same, as it appeared to them, to the House; and he read the Reportin his Place, and afterward delivered it in at the Clerk’s Table where thesame was read, and is as follows, (Vizt.)That Your Committee being informed that certain Persons in GreatBritain had Entered into a Contract with the Government for furnishingProvisions for his Majesty’s Forces in America, and that by such Contract theyhad bound themselves to carry and transport all such Provisions to thePlaces, Forts and Garrisons, where such Forces may be destined, at their ownExpence. But Your Committee have not been able to procure any otherEvidence of the Truth of the said Information than what is inserted in theLondon Magazine for July 1758, from Page 329 to Page 331, which Your Committeebeg leave to refer to, and humbly submit the Same to the Considerationof the House, with this Observation; That if the Matters asserted in thesaid Magazine be true, it is the Opinion of the Committee that the Expencearising from the Carriage of Provisions to the several Garrisons in this Provinceought to be borne by the said Contractors and not by this Province. 34A Message from the Council by Mr. Simpson.Mr. Speaker,34The reference is to the proceedings of the British House of Commons as reported in LondonMagazine for July 1758. In February and March, the members had conducted an investigation of thesupply contract between the Lords of the Treasury and the London firm of William Baker, ChristopherKilby, and Richard Baker. The merchants had told the legislators they considered themselves bound toattend the army with provisions wherever it should march by land. This cleared up an ambiguity in thecontract. The magazine article implied that the contract would otherwise have defrauded the public byallowing the merchants an extravagant profit for a negligible risk.