House concurrent resolution commemorating the bicentennial of the 1824–1825 Farewell American tour of the Marquis de Lafayette
H.C.R. 130 is a House concurrent resolution commemorating the bicentennial of the Marquis de Lafayette’s 1824–1825 Farewell American tour. The resolution recounts Lafayette’s Revolutionary War service, his return to the United States in 1824 at the invitation of President Monroe and Congress, and the specific route and events of his 1825 visit through Vermont, including stops in Windsor, Woodstock, Royalton, Barre, Montpelier, Williston, and Burlington. It also notes the modern bicentennial reenactment organized by the American Friends of Lafayette.
The resolution formally expresses the General Assembly’s recognition of this historical anniversary and directs the Secretary of State to send a copy to the American Friends of Lafayette. It does not create or amend any substantive law, impose requirements, or appropriate funds; its effect is ceremonial and commemorative, aimed at honoring Lafayette’s role in American independence and Vermont’s place in the farewell tour.
H.C.R. 130 has no regulatory or fiscal impact on Vermont statutes or state agencies beyond the ministerial act of transmitting the resolution. It does not amend the Vermont Statutes Annotated, alter rights or duties, or affect private parties directly. Its practical effect is to place the General Assembly’s official recognition of the Lafayette bicentennial into the public record and to acknowledge the commemorative activities associated with the tour.
The bill appears to be broadly positive and noncontroversial. The text is celebratory in tone, emphasizing Lafayette’s contributions to the American Revolution, Vermont’s historical connection to his 1825 visit, and the value of commemorating the bicentennial. No committee testimony or recorded votes were provided, but the resolution’s ceremonial nature suggests general support and little expectation of opposition.
No notable points of contention are evident from the bill text or the available legislative history. Because the measure is a concurrent resolution honoring a historical event, there are no apparent disagreements over policy, spending, or legal change. Any discussion would likely center only on the historical framing or the appropriateness of the commemoration, rather than on substantive legislative disputes.