1 It is proper to say, in this connection, that the insincerity of the Pro vincial Congress was never more boldly presented than in its Order concerning the disposition Which was to be made of the letter which it had just ordered to be written to the Governor of Connecticut, in the matter of the raid of Connecticut's ruffians -- instead of ordering it to be forwarded to the Governor, it "Ordered, Thatthesaid letter be engrossed and signed " by the President, so as to be ready to be transmitted, when directed." (Journal of the Provincial Congress, "Die Mar tie, 3 ho., P. M., Deer. 12, "1775.")

Just when the Congress "directed" it to be "transmitted, 1 ' is not known.

under the leadership of Thomas Smith, one of the distinguished body of political acrobats of that name 2 -- made no reply whatever to its letter, until the following June, when he adroitly turned the scale against the complaining Provincial Congress, by reminding it that the leader of the banditti was a resident of the City of New York, 3 doing business in that City, and, also/ a member of the complaining Provincial Congress ; that he was, therefore, amenable, directly, to the Congress itself, for what he had done ; and that it was not expedient, then, to call the rest of the banditti to account* -- a conclusion which was perfectly reasonable while the complaining Congress complacently permitted the leader of the party, who was the principal offender, to go at large, within its own jurisdiction, without question concerning it. The long process of intercolonial diplomacy, on what, in this instance, would have been an interesting topic, had the parties in that diplomatic correspondence been honest and consistent, might have been productive of useful results ; but they were neither consistent nor honest; and, like the greater part of other diplomacy, it consisted of little else than empty words, really meaning nothing and, really, producing nothing. 5