suggest the omission, without going into a repetition of what had been
already said by others: that this was a waste and abuse of the time and
patience of the House, which could not be justified. And I believe,
that if the members of deliberate bodies were to observe this course
generally, they would do in a day, what takes them a week; and it
is really more questionable, than may at first be thought, whether
Bonaparte's dumb legislature, which said nothing, and did much, may not
be preferable to one which talks much, and does nothing. I served
with General Washington in the legislature of Virginia, before the
revolution, and, during it, with Dr. Franklin in Congress. I never heard
either of them speak ten minutes at a time, nor to any but the main
point, which was to decide the question. They laid their shoulders
to the great points, knowing that the little ones would follow of
themselves. If the present Congress errs in too much talking, how can it
be otherwise, in a body to which the people send one hundred and fifty
lawyers, whose trade it is, to question every thing, yield nothing, and
talk by the hour? That one hundred and fifty lawyers should do business
together, ought not to be expected. But to return again to our subject.

Those, who thought seven states competent to the ratification, being
very restless under the loss of their motion, I proposed, on the
third of January, to meet them on middle ground, and therefore moved a
resolution, which premised, that there were but seven states present,
who were unanimous for the ratification, but that they differed in
opinion on the question of competency; that those however in the
negative, were unwilling, that any powers which it might be supposed
they possessed, should remain unexercised for the restoration of
peace, provided it could be done, saving their good faith, and without
importing any opinion of Congress, that seven states were competent, and
resolving that the treaty be ratified so far as they had power; that