Army Comm^r Office N York 24 May 1786 The Commissioner for settling the Accounts of the late Army of the United States to whom was referred the memorial of Marinus Willett late commanding a Regiment of militia embodied in the State of New York, begs leave to report, That the Regiment entered the service of the United States at the commencement of the Campaign of 1782, under the resolution of Congress of the second day of April 1781 and continued on the Frontiers of this State of N York from that time until the end of the war. That the resolve of Congress appears to have annex'd certain conditions to the admission of the payment of the two Regiments of Infantry proposed to be raised by the State of New York, one of which is that the Officers be proportioned to the numbers of men actually in service, and another that the State fill up their quota of Troops for the Continental Army — That the Regiment had its full compliment of Officers when it entered the service excepting the recruiting Lieutenant and a small deficiency in the number of men necessary to compleat the quota of a Regiment of Infantry of about [undecipherable: probable reading Sixty-nine] men. That it appears by the returns of the War Office that the State of N York was deficient in its quota of Troops for the continental Army, at the commencement of 1781 in 696 Men at the commencement of 1782 in 515 Men and of 1783 in 1466 Men. That the Regiment has been paid by the State of New York for the year 1782. That it has been subsisted by the United States in consequence of a resolution of Congress of the 20^th Day of August 1782 and that it has been subsisted and paid the four months advance in the year 1783 in the same manner as the rest of the Army by the direction of the Commander in chief. That on this state of facts the Commissioner begs leave to lay the following question before Congress, whether the Regiment shall be intitled to the arrears still due, notwithstanding the conditions of the resolve of April 2^d 1781 have not been complied with. [initials] Charles Thomson Esq^r Sec^y of Congress Army Comm^r Office 24^th May 1786 The Commissioner for settling the Accounts of the Army to whom was referred the petition of Nathan Fuller praying that a certain act of Congress may be set aside in his case which was made the 30^th Day of January 1779 and which forcloses after a particular period the further allowance of the claims for back rations due to the Army previous to the last day of December 1776, begs leave to report, That the Petitioner alleges, that Colonel Alden who commanded the Regiment to which he belonged, was unable by reason of sickness to pay an attention to the settlement of the regimental accounts at the time that these demands became due, that soon after he was slain in battle. That since that event and until very lately it was unknown to the Petitioner; that the Regimental papers had been preserved, and that the monies for the dues of the Regiment had not been drawn by and lost at the death of the Colonel, and that these peculiar circumstances have hitherto rendered it impossible, that they should be sooner presented for admission — Your Commissioner having attended to the weight of these allegations is nevertheless of opinion that they are insufficient to supersede the provisions of this act of Congress, and humbly submits the following reasons 1^st That the payment of deficient or back rations previous to Dec^r 10^th 1777 was conducted in such a manner that great confusion had then arisen which proved to be often the cause of the admission of improper demands on plausible vouchers, the revolution of near ten years since that time having necessarily involved this business in a greater obscurity your Commissioner therefore presumes that this act now in consideration ought to be considered as binding in equity in almost every case that can occur. 2^dly That it was the duty of the Colonel to have drawn these arrears it appears probably he might have done it in March 1777 when he settled for and drew the pay of the Regiment for the same period of time that these demands became due, but as far as information can be procured of the manner in which the Regiments then received rations it appears that this was considered as the Quarter Masters and not the Colonels duty — the sickness or death of the Colonel could not therefore necessarily impede that duty of the Quarter Master especially as the accounts were kept by the latter and it was necessary for the Colonel to give them either an examination or sanction. 3^dly That the question of ignorance in respect to the preservation and contents of the papers appears to have [undecipherable] the Petitioner nor the Officers did not consider themselves sufficiently interested or were too inattentive to make an enquiry for them — for by [undecipherable] to the Colonels papers, the vouchers and information maybe will be obtained soon after his death as at the present time, and therefore it was negligence that hath prevented a sooner application. 4^thly That the vouchers themselves were probably inadmissible at the time, they being only founded on the certificate and attestation of the Quarter Master whereas the method of doing this business was then for the Commissary gen^l to take a receipt for the daily rations due to the Regiment, and give a due bill for these articles which was not received — this the bills the Commissary [undecipherable] paid and has since been discharged by the Publick, and the amount carried to his debit — and in case no due bill was given the certificate of this Officer appears essential as he was the only disinterested person who could at the time certify that the rations were due to the regiment. And 5^thly That admitting this instance will probably introduce