“The confidence of the public I have ever esteemed so invaluable a possession, that it has been my fixed determination not to forfeit it, by any voluntary act of impropriety. Where my conduct has been deficient in the discharge of my duty, I hope it will be imputed to want of ability, and not of integrity.

“Fully sensible of the importance of the office I have the honour to hold, I cheerfully commit it into the hands of those who properly are, and ever must be, the guardians of the public good. I am, sir, with great respect, your most obliged and very humble servant—

“David Rittenhouse

“The honourable the Speaker of the Assembly.”

From the commencement of the year 1777, at which period Mr. Rittenhouse was invested with the treasurership of his native state, until the month of September following, when its capital was actually possessed by the British army, that city was in imminent danger of an hostile invasion. When it was reduced to a moral certainty, that the speedy occurrence of such an event was inevitable, he had retired with the treasury (as before noticed) to Lancaster, as a place of security; where he remained until the succeeding summer: when, after the evacuation of the capital by the British forces, he returned thither, and replaced the treasury in its ancient seat. The time, therefore, at which he accepted the office of treasurer, was truly one of “difficulty and danger.”

That it was not, for many years, a lucrative place, must be apparent from the ever memorable circumstance of the great and unexampled depreciation of that species of paper-currency, called continental money;[[235]] which was the only circulating medium of the United States, until the year 1782, when the bank of North America went into operation. The vast accumulation in the treasury, of that depreciated and daily depreciating substitute for money, must necessarily have been “extremely burthensome” to the treasurer, and could not have afforded him “any prospect of profit,” during the first five years of his tenure of the office. And it was not, in fact, until those last few years, which constituted the interval between the time of augmenting the commissions and his retirement from the office, that the treasurership was profitable to him. During the greater part of the time he held it, the profits of the office did not enable him to employ even a clerk: nor could he have performed the numerous and laborious duties of that station (such as they then were,) had he not been greatly assisted by the assiduity, care and abilities, of an excellent woman—Mrs. Rittenhouse. Singular as this circumstance may appear, this notice of it seems due to the memory of an highly meritorious wife; while, on the other hand, it must be acknowledged, that it does not reflect any honour on the liberality of a great, wealthy, and populous state. Such a man as David Rittenhouse ought to have been otherwise employed, by a generous and enlightened public: the exercise of his transcendent talents, in works of great and permanent public utility, would not only have constituted services which would have entitled him to a bountiful remuneration; but such as would have conferred great additional benefits and honours on his country.

That he should have had, in thirteen years, successively, an unanimous annual vote for the office of treasurer, is a very strong testimonial of the exalted sense which his countrymen entertained of his integrity: it would have been so, under a popular government, at any period. But when it is considered, that, during the whole of the time he held the treasurership, the people of Pennsylvania were divided into two opposing parties, which sprung into existence with the adoption of the state-constitution of 1776, the unanimity of their representatives in favour of this individual, is still more conclusive evidence of his merits. Most of those men in the community, best acquainted with human nature, and practically versed in the science of politics, very early pointed out the radical defects of the new frame of government; and predicted the utter incompetency of that instrument, as they conceived, to promote the true interest and happiness of civil society. In a single legislative body, a plural executive, and in a limited duration of the judicial authority—consequently, an undue dependence of the judges on the executive for their re-appointment,—they foresaw those evils, which were too soon realized: and in a septennial council of censors, such as that constitution provided for,[[236]] they beheld a political chimera, at variance with common sense and the experience of mankind. Men entertaining these views, formed, of course, one of these parties.

The other was composed of the projectors of the constitution of 1776, and other speculative politicians; together with all those whom they were enabled to influence, through the medium of their prejudices, their inexperience or their interests.

These two parties continued to divide the state, until the adoption of the fœderal constitution. The great and multiplied evils which resulted to the people of the United States, after the restoration of peace, and which had also been severely felt during the greater part of the war, from the inefficacy of the original confœderation of the States, had convinced all thinking men of the necessity of forming a more energetic national government, as the only remedy for those evils. And the actual formation of such a government, aided by the long experience which the citizens of Pennsylvania had then acquired, of the injurious effects of their own existing constitution, disposed them soon after to establish the present constitution of the state, which was done in convention on the 2d of September 1790; a form of government, free from the palpable errors of the preceding one, and much more consonant to the genius and spirit of the fœderal constitution.

It is, then, a very extraordinary circumstance, and one that reflects great honour on the character of Mr. Rittenhouse, that, in the long course of years during which the people of Pennsylvania were thus divided into two contending parties, he alone could unite the favourable opinion of both parties, respecting his superior claims to hold one of the most important offices in the government.