"What gave interest principally to the debate, was the disclosure by Mr. Tallmadge of Connecticut (an officer at the time, and commanding the advance guard when Major André was brought in) of his view of the merit of this transaction, with which history and the records of the country have made every man familiar. The value of the service he did not deny; but on the authority of the declaration of Major André (made while in the custody of Colonel Tallmadge), he gave it as his opinion that, if Major André could have given to these men the amount they demanded for his release, he never would have been hung as a spy, nor in captivity on that occasion. Mr. T.'s statement was minutely circumstantial, and given with expressions of his individual confidence in its correctness. Among other circumstances he stated, that when Major André's boots were taken off by them, it was to search for plunder, and not to detect treason. These persons, indeed, he said, were of that class of people who passed between both armies, as often in one camp as the other, and whom, he said, if he had met with them, he should probably as soon have apprehended as Major André, as he had always made it a rule to do with these suspicious persons. The conclusion to be drawn from the whole of Mr. Tallmadge's statement, of which this is a brief abstract, was, that these persons had brought in Major André only because they should probably get more for his apprehension than for his release." The question on reversing the report was decided in the negative:--Ayes, 53; Noes, 80 or 90. It is proper to say that the question was decided on the ground taken in the report, viz. on the injustice of legislating on a single case of pension, whilst there were many survivors of the Revolution whom the favour of the government had not distinguished. From _The Gleaner_, published at Wilkesbury, Pennsylvania (copied into the _National Intelligencer_ of Washington, March 4, 1817):