This report originated from two sources, Thomson and Barton, and the agency of each is clearly defined. The distinction of producing the arms of the United States can not justly be accorded wholly to either, but belongs wholly to both, with the larger share of distinction to the Secretary, Charles Thomson.

On June 24, four days after the seal had been adopted, Thomson wrote to Barton:

I enclose you a copy of the device by which you have displayed your skill in heraldic science, and which meets with general approbation.

The chief change made by Barton in Thomson’s design was in the substitution for the chevrons of thirteen pales, alternate white and red, with a blue chief, and this has been often attributed, without adequate warrant, to an outside source, which deserves to be noticed.

Sir John Prestwich was a distinguished English antiquary and a friend of the American Revolution. He enjoyed an acquaintance with John Adams when the latter was on his foreign mission in 1779, and they conversed on the subject of the seal, in which Adams, of course, took an interest, as he had been on the first committee to design it. It appears that Sir John made certain suggestions for a design which were afterwards enlarged into a claim by others that he had made the design of the arms which was finally adopted. Sifting from the question the conjecture and inference surrounding it one fact is important. It is set forth by the historian Benson J. Lossing in the Field Book of the American Revolution and War of 1812:[[26]]

In the manuscript letter before me [he says], written in 1818 by Thomas Barritt, Esq., an eminent antiquary of Manchester, England, addressed to his son in this country, is the following statement: “My friend, Sir John Prestwich, Bart., told me he was the person who suggested the idea of a coat of arms for the American States to an embassador [John Adams] from thence, which they have seen fit to put on their moneys. It is this, he told me—party per pale of thirteen stripes, white and red, the chief of the escutcheon, blue, signifying the protection of Heaven over the States.—He says it was soon after adopted, as the arms of the States, and to give it more prominence was placed upon the breast of a displayed eagle.”

There is no claim here that Sir John Prestwich suggested the eagle as an emblem, or the placing of the shield upon the eagle’s breast, but simply the pales and the chief. The theory is that Adams communicated this suggestion to Charles Thomson, who engrafted it upon his own and Barton’s designs. But it must be remembered that two shields were already on the files of Congress, with alternate red and white, or white and red, stripes, and Barton’s first design had bars of the same colors. Prestwich’s suggestion was, therefore, no more than that they be perpendicular instead of diagonal or parallel, and that the chief be blue; but in the device submitted by the committee of 1780 the diagonal stripes were charged upon a field azure. Sir John Prestwich, of course, knew nothing of these designs, and his statement after the seal was adopted was made in ignorance of the fact that the essentials of his suggestion were already before Congress.[[27]] That his suggestion influenced the final result even in the slight degree possible, seems improbable. Why did Thomson, with the Prestwich suggestion before him, make his first shield of chevrons, which Barton, it appears, changed to pales? Thomson may have told Barton of the Prestwich design, but what is more natural than that Barton should try of his own initiative the only new arrangement of the stripes that was left to try? Diagonal stripes, bars, chevrons, had all figured in designs and had not given satisfaction. Pales were then drawn and proved acceptable.

V
THE ARMS ADOPTED

On June 20, 1782, the seal was finally decided upon.

On report of the secretary, to whom were referred the several reports on the device for a great seal, to take order: