Although living most of his life in the discharge of educational and public duties, under circumstances inconsistent with “a local habitation,” he had strong domestic tastes and attachments, and was a genial companion in his own room and home. In 1837, he married Miss Swazey, the daughter of a merchant in Claremont, New Hampshire, and to this happy union were born two children. The oldest boy, George, was educated by the father on his own system, and had displayed vigorous health, and strong partialities and attainments in mathematical studies and their applications; but he survived his father only a few months—“long desolate months they were to the widow and children ”—and the tenement of that bright intellect was laid by the side of that of his hardy and indefatigable father in the little village burying-ground. The other son Henry, as he grew up, showed a partiality for the profession of law, and was pursuing his studies in Warren, Penn., when the call of the President of the United States for volunteers, summoned him to the defense of the flag of the country. He enlisted for the war, and was promoted to a captaincy in a Pennsylvania regiment, which was attached to the army of the Potomac, whose varying fortunes he shared till, greatly weakened by exposure and disease, he was honorably discharged from the service. His superior officer in writing to his mother, says: “He is in every respect a model officer. How could he be otherwise? He has it all by right of inheritance, and I fully appreciate that you have made a very great contribution to the government and the country in sending him forth to fight the battles which have been forced upon us.”
[POPULAR OBJECTIONS TO A NATIONAL MILITARY SCHOOL.]
NOTE.
As an Appendix to our Memoir of Capt. Alden Partridge, we republish the following Memorial by him to the Congress of the United States, not because we approve the objects or the arguments of either document, but as part of the educational history of the country.
[MEMORIAL OF ALDEN PARTRIDGE,]
Relating to the Military Academy at West Point, and praying that young men educated at other military schools may have an equal chance for admission to the army as those young men have who are educated at West Point. January 21, 1841. Referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.
To the Honorable Congress of the United States:—The memorial of Alden Partridge, President of the Norwich University, at Norwich, State of Vermont, respectfully showeth:
That your memorialist holds it to be a cardinal principle of our republican institutions, that stations of honor, trust, and emolument should be equally open to all our citizens, to which all have an equal right to aspire, and from which none can constitutionally be excluded by any law, rule, or regulation whatever. Your memorialist has, however, witnessed, with deep regret, a direct violation of this vital principle of our constitution, by the rules and regulations adopted for the organization and government of the Military Academy at West Point. The cadets of that institution, all of whom are educated at the public expense, have, for many years, monopolized nearly, if not quite, all of the stations of honor, trust, and emolument, above that of a non-commissioned officer, in the military establishment of the United States, to the utter exclusion of those who are equally well qualified, equally meritorious, and who are educated at their own expense. But, in order to place this subject more clearly before your honorable body, your memorialist would call your attention to the law of the 29th of April, 1812, entitled, “An act making further provision for the corps of engineers.” By the provisions of this act, no candidate can be admitted into the Military Academy who is under fourteen, or over twenty-one, years of age. The effect of this provision is to exclude every young man in the United States who is above twenty-one years of age from the appointment of cadet, while the rules of the War department require that none except those educated at this academy can be commissioned in the army of the United States. The effect, then, of the law and regulation is to utterly exclude all the youth of our country, except such select few as the President may think proper to place in this “public charity school,” from the military service of their country, who are above twenty-one years of age, unless they will enter in the humble capacity of privates or non-commissioned officers. And can such a system be in accordance with the principles of our constitution? Your memorialist believes not. On the contrary, he feels confident in the assertion that it is a most flagrant and palpable violation of them. The direct and certain effect of this institution is to extend Executive patronage; for the President has the entire selection of the chosen two hundred and fifty who are to be placed in the institution, and also to establish an aristocracy of the most dangerous kind, viz.: a military aristocracy in the United States. What, your memorialist would ask, is an aristocracy? Is it not where any particular class in a State claims and exercises privileges of which the great body of the people are deprived? And do not the cadets at West Point enjoy such privileges? and if so, do they not constitute an aristocracy? Your memorialist believes that neither the fact nor the inference can be controverted. But your memorialist will go further, and aver that the regulations at West Point have not only constituted an aristocracy in the United States, but that this aristocracy has already become, in a great degree, hereditary. How many individuals, your memoralist would ask, who have held offices of honor, trust, or emolument, under the Government, for the last twenty-five years, have had their sons, brothers, nephews, or other relatives, educated at the public expense at West Point, to the entire exclusion of those who (to say the least,) were equally meritorious, and equally capable of rendering service to the republic? And how many of those thus educated have ever rendered any service whatever? A reference to the rolls of the institution will answer these inquiries. Your memorialist has personal knowledge of many instances. Your memorialist is well aware that it has been attempted, by the friends of this monstrous invasion of the rights of the people, to cast around it the mantle of Mr. Jefferson. Your memorialist is ready to grant that the institution was established during the early part of the first term of Mr. Jefferson’s administration; but denies that any inference can be drawn from that circumstance to sustain the present system. The institution then consisted only of the corps of engineers, which was limited to sixteen officers and four cadets, without any of those exclusive privileges which have since been conferred upon it. On the 29th of April, 1812, (just previous to the declaration of war,) a law was, however, passed, entitled “An act making further provision for the corps of engineers;” by the provisions of which, the whole number of cadets, whether of infantry, artillery, or riflemen, was not to exceed two hundred and fifty; and the President to appoint a limited number of cadets, and conferring on him a discretionary power to attach them to the Military Academy, was evidently induced by the certainty of immediate war with Great Britain, and had a direct reference to a war establishment. Your memorialist would respectfully call the attention of your honorable body particularly to the provisions of the law of 1812 just referred to; and, if he does not much mistake, it will satisfactorily appear that the President is not required, but simply authorized, to appoint a single cadet; and that it is left entirely discretionary with him, after they are appointed, to attach them to the Military Academy, or to attach them to their respective companies, agreeably to the provisions of other laws then in existence. And here your memorialist would observe that, in the peace-establishment of the army previous to the late war, two cadets were allowed to each company of artillery, light infantry, and infantry, amounting, in the total, to a larger number than was authorized by the law of 1812. But neither President Jefferson, nor President Madison considered that the law required of them to fill those vacancies so long as they considered their services were not required; and they consequently did not fill them. The largest number of cadets ever in service at the same time, previous to the late war, did not exceed forty, and seldom exceeded twenty-five. Do the necessities of the country require that any larger number should be retained in service now, than were deemed necessary by Presidents Jefferson and Madison during a time of peace? Your memorialist believes not. But it is urged, in favor of this academy, that it presents a most favorable opportunity for the education of meritorious young men who are poor, and, consequently, unable to educate themselves. Your memorialist, however, has yet to learn by what constitutional authority Congress is empowered to appropriate any portion of the public revenue for the support of a national charity school for the education of the poor. Besides, if this power did exist, (which your memorialist presumes no reasonable person will contend does,) all the poor in the United States have an equal right to the benefits to be derived from its exercise, and that, consequently, the institution at West Point is on quite too limited a plan for the accomplishment of the contemplated object. Either, then, the institution should be very much enlarged, or several others established in different parts of the United States, which would be far more convenient for the great body of the poor. If, however, the rolls of this institution for the last twenty years be examined, it will be found that many more of the rich and influential have been educated there, than of the poor. Poverty, however meritorious the subject of it may be, is but a sorry recommendation for admission to this aristocratic establishment.