With a view to “cutting up the whole matter by the roots” the anti-titleists moved a general postponement of the Senate report on titles—and the motion was carried. But with a tenacity worthy of a better cause, Lee insisted on placing the report on the files of the House as indicating that the Senate was in favor of titles. Carroll opposed this on the ground that an imperfect resolution should not be filed. He was seconded by Maclay as the filing carried with it the idea of adoption. This part of the motion was lost by a general postponement. Even after the subject had been postponed, the Senators persisted in the discussion. Morris rose and said that he disliked the title “Highness and Protector of the Rights of America” as protection lay with Congress. He was told that the question of postponement had been carried. Then Carroll rose, said he disliked the first part of the motion which stated the acts of the Senate to be in favor of titles. But, as a matter of fact, no such resolution had been passed in the Senate. Maclay then rose and moved a division on the motion and was seconded by Carroll. This precipitated another long debate on titles. Ellsworth went over the field again; Johnson “spoke much more to the point, Paterson said that a division should take place at the word ‘Senate’ and on this point he was supported by Morris and Maclay, the latter withdrawing his motion and seconding Paterson’s for a division at the word ‘Senate.’ The division was full enough to answer all purposes which they avowed, taking it at this place.” It was apparent, however, that the titleists still clung to their hope and even went so far as to charge the Lower House with affecting simplicity. Carroll declared that it was well known that all the Senators were not for titles, yet the idea held forth was that the Senate favored titles. He wished to have the yeas and nays placed on record and “let the world judge.” Senator Few said that it was too late for the yeas and nays as they should have been called for when the report against titles was rejected. Finally the question was put and it stood “eight with us; ten against us. Mr. Carroll called for the yeas and nays.” None rose with him except Senator John Henry of Maryland and Maclay “and for want of another man we lost them”—Rule 15 of the Senate holding that the yeas and nays can be placed on the journal of the House only when called for by one-fifth of the senators present. XVII. WASHINGTON’S ATTITUDE.