Transcriber’s Note:
Please consult the [end notes] for a discussion of the handling of textual notes, and any other issues that arose during the preparation of this transcription.
The front cover, which contained no text, has been modified by adding a simplified version of the title page, and, as so modified, is added to the public domain.
Any corrections are indicated using an underline highlight. Placing the cursor over the correction will produce the original text in a small popup.
Any corrections are indicated as hyperlinks, which will navigate the reader to the corresponding entry in the corrections table in the note at the end of the text.
MEMOIRS
OF THE LIFE
OF
DAVID RITTENHOUSE, LLD. F.R.S.
LATE PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, &c.
INTERSPERSED WITH
VARIOUS NOTICES OF MANY DISTINGUISHED MEN:
WITH
AN APPENDIX,
CONTAINING
SUNDRY PHILOSOPHICAL AND OTHER PAPERS,
MOST OF WHICH HAVE NOT HITHERTO BEEN PUBLISHED.
BY WILLIAM BARTON, M. A.
COUNSELLOR AT LAW;
Member of the American Philosophical Society, the Mass. Hist. Society, and the Royal Economical Society of Valencia, in Spain.
PHILADELPHIA:
PUBLISHED BY EDWARD PARKER, NO. 178, MARKET-STREET.
W. Brown, Printer, Church-Alley.
1813.
DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, TO WIT:
BE IT REMEMBERED, That on the ninth day of October, in the thirty-eighth year of the independence of the United States of America, A. D. 1813, William Barton of the said district, hath deposited in this office the Title of a book, the right whereof he claims as Author, in the words following, to wit:
“Memoirs of the Life of David Rittenhouse, L. L. D. F.R.S, late President of the American Philosophical Society, &c. Interspersed with various notices of many distinguished men: with an Appendix, containing sundry philosophical and other papers, most of which have not hitherto been published. By William Barton, M. A. Counsellor at Law; Member of the American Philosophical Society, the Mass. Hist. Society, and the Royal Economical Society of Valencia, in Spain.”
In conformity to the act of the Congress of the United States, intituled, “An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts and books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies during the times therein mentioned.”—And also to the act entitled, “An act supplementary to an act, entitled, “An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies during the times therein mentioned,” and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving, and etching historical and other prints.”
D. CALDWELL,
Clerk of the District of Pennsylvania.
PREFACE.
Agreeably to the plan on which the following memoirs have been conducted, it will be perceived, that they contain a great variety of matter; of which, some particulars have a remote, others merely an incidental connexion, with the chief object of the work. There may perhaps be some readers, to whom the introduction of such matters as the University of Pennsylvania and the Medical School connected with it, the Pennsylvania Hospital, the Philadelphia Library, and the like, into the Life of Rittenhouse, will, on a cursory view, seem to have little or no affinity to that object. But when it is considered, that this work is designed to comprehend Memoirs, not only of Rittenhouse personally, but of several literary, scientific, and other public institutions, as well as of many eminent men, with which his individual history and the annals of his time were in various ways associated, it is presumed, that the slight sketches which have been taken of those matters, in passing along, will neither prove foreign to the nature of the present undertaking, nor uninteresting in themselves. As a citizen of Pennsylvania; as an inestimable public and private character; as a distinguished son of science, of great probity and extensive usefulness in society; in all these points of view, the History of Dr. Rittenhouse may be contemplated, as holding a relationship with almost every object connected with science and the arts, in his day, that could in any wise contribute to the well being of mankind in general, and his native country in particular. Conspicuous and eminently meritorious as he was, yet an insulated account of his talents, his virtues, and his personal services,—a bare specification of such qualities and merits as he possessed, abstracted from a due consideration of the state of society and circumstances resulting from it, taken in connexion with them, during the same period,—would not be equally intelligible and instructive; and, consequently, must prove less useful. For these reasons, the Memorialist has pursued that course which he conceives to be perfectly congenial with the main design of his work; as best calculated to promote its general usefulness, and most suitably adapted to render it interesting, even to those who read for amusement solely.
In the adoption of this plan, the writer has been chiefly influenced by a desire to illustrate the history, genius and character of the times, which his Memoirs embrace; together with the progress and improvement of literature, science and the arts, within the same compass, more especially in this country; and this consideration has obviously led him to introduce, in conjunction with those objects, as well as with the Life of the great American Philosopher, various notices of many persons distinguished for their talents and merit, not only in our own time, but at different periods in the annals of science. He has thought it right to rescue from oblivion—to commemorate in this way, if not to consecrate, the names of some men in this country, more especially, who deserve to be ranked among the worthies of America. All this the writer has done, too, in conformity to the mode prosecuted by some of the most judicious biographers and memorialists, together with other writers of the same class: It is believed to be a manner of treating the interesting subjects, on which the pens of such authors have been employed, which, while it renders their works more pleasing, greatly increases their usefulness.—If, therefore, some of the matter which has been introduced into the present work should, at first sight, appear irrelative, and even unimportant, the Memorialist nevertheless flatters himself, that, on reflection, nothing will be deemed really so, how remotely soever it may seem, on a transient view of the subject, to be connected with the principal design of the undertaking; provided it has a tendency to illustrate the great objects he was desirous of accomplishing.[[I1]]
The diversity of the materials which are, by these means, blended with the biographical account of Dr. Rittenhouse, in the Memoirs now presented to the world, made it expedient, in the opinion of the writer, to have recourse to the free use of notes, for the purposes of illustration, reference, and explanation. In a work of such a complexion—constituting a book composed of very various materials, designed to elucidate and inform, as well as to please—it became, in fact, necessary to throw a large portion of that matter into the form of notes; in order to avoid, by numerous digressions on subjects arising out of the primary object of the work, too much disjointing of the text. There are persons, no doubt, by whom this course will be disapproved. The able and learned author of the Pursuits of Literature has been accused by some critics—while others, who have no pretensions to those qualifications which entitle a man to exercise the functions of a critic, have even affected to laugh at him—for the multiplicity, the variety, and the length of the notes, which he has appended to that poem. But its being a satirical poem, is the circumstance to which may be fairly attributed the censorious cavils which his work excited: his satire was felt; and it roused the spleen of those who were its objects, and their partizans. The present work, however, is far from being intended to satirise any one; its author has no such object in view: for, although he has, in some instances, expressed his disapprobation of certain principles, theories, and even measures, which he believes to be not only repugnant to true science, but destructive of both private and social happiness—he has refrained as far as possible from personal censure;—he would much rather be engaged in the functions of an eulogist, than those of a censor. The numerous notes the Memorialist has employed—many of them, too, pretty long—will not therefore, he presumes, be objected to, on the ground of personality or supposed ill-humour. He has introduced them into his Memoirs, because he believed them to be not only useful, but peculiarly well adapted to a work of this nature, and suited to answer the general scope of its design. The author may then say, in the words of the poetical writer just mentioned—as an apology for the frequency and copiousness of the notes annexed to these Memoirs;—“I have made no allusions which I did not mean to explain. But I had something further in my intention. The notes are not always explanatory; they are of a structure rather peculiar to themselves: many of them are of a nature between an essay and an explanatory comment. There is much in a little compass, suited to the exigency of the times. I expatiated on the casual subject which presented itself; and when ancient or modern writers expressed the thoughts better than I could myself, I have given the original languages. No man has a greater contempt for the parade of quotation (as such) than I have. My design is not to quote words, but to enforce right sentiments in the manner which I think best adapted to the purpose, after much reflection.”
The method of disposing of the notes, in this work, may be thought by some to impair the symmetry of the page: but so trivial a defect as this may be, in the typographical appearance of the book, will, it is supposed, be amply compensated by the convenience the reader will experience, in having the annotations, almost always, on the same pages with their respective references.
In the arrangement of the Memoirs, the author has placed the incidents and circumstances relating to the Life of Dr. Rittenhouse, in their chronological order, as nearly as could be conveniently done.
An [Appendix],—containing sundry letters and other papers, which could neither be incorporated with propriety into the text, nor inserted in marginal notes,—is placed after the conclusion of the Memoirs. In this part of the work the reader will find, among other interesting documents, Dr. Rittenhouse’s Oration on the subject of Astronomy, pronounced before the American Philosophical Society, in the year 1775. The addition of this treatise to the Life of our Philosopher, was rendered the more proper,—independently of the intrinsic merit of the performance,—by reason of the pamphlet having had, originally, a very limited circulation, and its being now out of print. The Notes, added to this little tract, as well as to some other papers in the Appendix, by the Memorialist, are designated by the initials of his name; in order to distinguish the annotations from either the notes originally attached to them,—or from other matter, in the Text, not written by himself.
The author has embellished his work with an elegantly engraved likeness of Dr. Rittenhouse, executed by an able artist, from a portrait painted by Mr. C. W. Peale, in-the year 1772,[[I2]] when our Philosopher was forty years of age. At that time he wore a wig,—and was so represented in the picture: but afterwards, when he resumed the wearing of his own hair, (and which he continued to do during the remainder of his life,) the portrait was altered accordingly, by Mr. Peale. The original picture (now in the possession of Mrs. Sergeant,) bore a strong resemblance to Dr. Rittenhouse, at that period of his life in which it was taken; and the engraving, prefixed to these Memoirs, is an excellent copy.
To a portion of the readers of this work, some of the matter it contains may be thought superfluous,—because already familiar to them: and, to men of extensive learning and research, much of the information herein collected may really be so. But to persons of less erudition and science, the knowledge thus communicated it may be presumed, will prove in some degree useful; and the writer indulges a confident belief, that the greater number of his readers will derive both instruction and gratification, from a perusal of the Memoirs now offered to their attention.
The favours which the Memorialist has received, in the communication of sundry papers and some information for this work, demand his thankful acknowledgments to the contributors. Among these,—besides those gentlemen occasionally mentioned in the Memoirs,—the writer returns his thanks to his worthy relatives, Mrs. Sergeant, Mrs. Waters, and Dr. Benjamin Smith Barton; and also to the Rt. Rev. Bishop White, Andrew Ellicott, Esq. John Vaughan, Esq. the Rev. Dr. Samuel Stanhope Smith, Charles Smith, Esq. and the Rev. Mr. Cathcart. To the friendship and politeness of these very respectable characters, he holds himself indebted, on this occasion.[[I3]]
It has been the earnest desire of the writer, to adhere strictly to Truth, in every part of his narrative: he has not, therefore, introduced into his work any thing, as a matter of Fact, which he did not believe to be well founded. Wherever he has ventured to express an Opinion of his own, on any subject of importance, it must be left to the judgment and candour of others to determine, what weight it may be entitled to.—In the various quotations which appear in his Memoirs, the writer has endeavoured to observe the utmost fidelity, with respect to the originals; and all his translations into the English, from other languages, have been made with a like scrupulous attention to correctness.—Some errors and inaccuracies have nevertheless, it may be readily supposed, found their way into the following work; though the writer trusts they are neither numerous nor very important: and, as they are wholly unintentional, of whatever description they may be, he hopes it will not be deemed presumptuous[presumptuous] in him, to claim for them the indulgence of a candid, liberal, and discerning public.
Lancaster, in Pennsylvania,
April 11, 1813.
[I1]. The biographer of Rittenhouse entirely coincides with the compilers of the Encyclopædia Britannica, in opinion, respecting the utility and propriety of giving an account, in such Memoirs as the present, of things as well as persons, connected in various ways with the main object of the work.
In the preface to that useful dictionary of arts, sciences and miscellaneous literature, are the following observations: the consideration they merit; is submitted to the good sense of the reader.
“While one part of our readers,” say the encyclopedists, when referring to the biographical department of their work, “will regret that we have given no account of their favourite philosopher, hero, or statesman, others may be disposed to remark, that we have dragged from obscurity the names of many persons who were no proper objects of such public regard. To these we can only reply, that, with the greatest biographer of modern times, we have long thought that there has rarely passed a life, of which a faithful narrative would not be useful; and that in the lives of the most obscure persons, of whom we have given any account, we saw something either connected with recent discoveries and public affairs, or which we thought capable of affording a lesson to great multitudes in similar circumstances.”—“Between eminent achievements and the scenes where they were performed, there is a natural and necessary connexion. The character of the warrior is connected with the fields of his battles; that of the legislator, with the countries which he civilized; and that of the traveller and navigator, with the regions which they explored. Even when we read of the persons by whom, and the occasions on which, any particular branch of knowledge has been improved, we naturally wish to know something of the places where such improvements were made.”
[I2]. Mr. C. W. Peale painted at the same time another portrait of him, for himself; which is likewise altered from the original painting. It has a place in Mr. Peale’s Gallery of Portraits. There is a third, by the same hand, in the possession of the American Philosophical Society.
Another good picture of Dr. Rittenhouse was also then made, by Mr. James Peale, for the Rev. Mr. Barton. This (which represents him with a wig) is now in the possession of John Moore White, Esq. of New-Jersey, who married Mr. Barton’s youngest daughter.
A pretty good mezzotinto, in a large size,—done from Mr. C. W. Peale’s painting of our Philosopher,—was executed by Mr. E. Savage, in the winter of 1796: and since that time, some small engravings have been made from different pictures of him; but these do not so well preserve the likeness.
[I3]. Some interesting information was likewise communicated by the late Professor Rush. The death of that gentleman having occurred since the completion of the present work, the author has inserted a concise biographical notice of him, in the Appendix, in place of the mention originally made of his name in this preface.
INTRODUCTION.
The individuals in society, who present to the view of their cotemporaries, and transmit to posterity, Memorials of illustrious men,—more especially those of their own country,—discharge thereby a debt of gratitude: because every man is, directly or indirectly, interested in the benefits conferred on his species, by those who enlarge the sphere of human knowledge, or otherwise promote the happiness of mankind.
But the biographer of an highly meritorious character aims at more than the mere performance of that duty, which a grateful sense of obligation exacts from him, in common with every member of the community, in commemorating the beneficence of the wise and the good: he endeavours to excite in great and liberal minds, by the example of such, an ambition to emulate their talents and their virtues;—and it is these, that, by their union, constitute true greatness of character.
The meed of applause which may be sometimes, and too often is, bestowed on meretricious worth, is ever unsteady and fleeting. The pseudo-patriot may happen to enjoy a transient popularity; false philosophy may, for a while, delude, if not corrupt, the minds of an unthinking multitude; and specious theories in every department of science,—unsupported by experience and untenable on principles of sound reason,—may give to their projectors a short-lived reputation: But the celebrity which is coveted by the man of a noble and generous spirit,—that estimable species of fame, which alone can survive such ephemera of error as are often engendered by the vanity of the individual and nurtured by the follies or vices of the many,—must ever rest on the permanent foundation of truth, knowledge and beneficence.
Virtue is essentially necessary to the constitution of a truly great character. For, although brilliant talents are sometimes found combined with vicious propensities,[[1]]—the impulse given to men of this description, often renders their great abilities baneful to society: they can seldom, if ever, be productive of real public good. Should eminent talents, possessed by a man destitute of virtue, even take a right direction in their operation, by reason of some extraordinary circumstance,—such an event ought never to be calculated on: It is not the part of common sense,—much less of a cautious prudence, acquired by a knowledge of mankind,—to expect praise-worthy conduct from any one, whose predominating passions are bad, however great may be his capability of doing good.
While, therefore, the mind may view, with a sort of admiration, the achievements of a magnanimous soldier, it turns with indignation from the atrocities of a military tyrant: and at the same time that it may be induced to contemplate even with complacency, at the first view, the plausible, yet groundless speculations of ingenious theorists, in matters of science,—still the fallacy of their systems, when developed by experience, strips them of all their tinseled glare of merit. Thus, too, the applause which the world justly attaches to the character of a patriot-hero, deserts the unprincipled ruffian-warrior, however valiant and successful he may prove: In like manner, reason and experience expose to the censure of the good and the derision of the wise, the deleterious doctrines of metaphysical statesmen and philosophers.[[2]] Such estimable qualities as they may possess, in either character, are merged in the mischievous or base ones, with which they are combined: thus, infamy or contempt eventually become the merited portion of crime or of folly, as either one or the other may prevail. A Cæsar,[[3]] a Cromwell and a Robespierre, with other scourges of mankind, of like character, will therefore be viewed as objects of execration by posterity, while the memories of an Alfred, a Nassau, and a Washington—a Chatham, a Burke, and an Ames,—will be venerated, to the latest posterity.
Much of the glory of a nation results from the renown of illustrious men, among its citizens: a country which has produced many great men, may justly pride itself on the fame which those individuals had acquired. The community to which we belong is entitled to such services as we can render to it: these the patriot will cheerfully bestow; and, in promoting the honour and prosperity of his country, a large portion of the lustre which the exertion of his talents shall have shed upon it, are again reflected on himself.[[4]]
The cultivator of those branches of natural science which constitute practical and experimental philosophy;—equally with the teacher of religion and morals,—extends the beneficial effects of his researches and knowledge beyond the bounds of his particular country. Truth is every where the same; and the promulgation of it tends, at all times and in all places, to elevate to its proper station the dignity of man. The more extensively, then, true science can be diffused, the greater will be the means—the fairer will be the rational prospect, of enlarging the sphere of human happiness. The philosopher may, pre-eminently, be considered as a citizen of the world; yet without detracting in any degree from that spirit of patriotism, which ever stimulates a good man to contribute his primary and most important services to his own country. There are, indeed, some species of aids, which are exclusively due to a community, by all its citizens; and, consequently, such as they are bound to withhold from other national communities, in certain contingencies and under peculiar circumstances. But a knowledge of those truths which lead to the acquisition of wisdom and practice of virtue, serves to meliorate the condition of mankind generally, at all times, and under all circumstances;—inasmuch as they greatly assist in banishing error, with its frequent concomitant, vice, not only from the more civilized portions of the world, but also by their inherent influence, from among nations less cultivated and refined.
The truths promulgated by means of a natural and sublime philosophy—corresponding, as this does, with the dignity of an enlightened spirit—must ever emanate from a virtuous heart as well as an expanded intellect. Hence, the real philosopher,—he whose principles are unpolluted by the sophisticated tenets of some modern pretenders to the appellation,—can scarcely fail to be a good man. Such was the immortal Newton; such were a Boyle, a Hale and a Barrow,—a Boerhaave, a Stephen Hales and a Bradley; with many worthies equally illustrious,—whose glories will, for ever, retain their primitive splendour.
Even the most celebrated sages of antiquity, extremely imperfect as we know the philosophy of the early ages to have been, elucidated, by the purity of their lives and the morality of their doctrines, the truth of the position,—that the cultivation of natural wisdom, unaided as it then was by the lights of revelation, encreased every propensity to moral virtue. Such were Socrates, Plato his disciple, and Anaxagoras; who flourished between four and five centuries before the Christian era.
The life of Socrates, who is styled by Cicero the Father of Philosophers, afforded a laudable example of moderation, patience, and other virtues; and his doctrines abound with wisdom. Anaxagoras and Plato united with some of the nobler branches of natural science, very rational conceptions of moral truth. Both of them had much higher claims to the title of philosophers, than Aristotle, who appeared about a century afterwards. This philosopher, however,—for, as such, he continued for many ages to be distinguished in the schools,—was, like Socrates, more a metaphysician than an observer of the natural world. His morality is the most estimable part of his works; though his conceptions of moral truths were much less just than those of Anaxagoras and Plato:[[5]] for his physics are replete with notions and terms alike vague, unmeaning and obscure.[[6]] The intimate connexion that subsists between the physical and moral fitness of things, in relation to their respective objects, was more evidently known to Anaxagoras and Plato, than to either Socrates or Aristotle: and the reason is obvious;—both of the former cultivated the sublime science of Astronomy.
To this cause, then, may be fairly attributed the half-enlightened notions of the Deity,[[7]] and of a future state, entertained by these pagan searchers after truth. To the same cause may be traced the sentiment that dictated the reply made by Anaxagoras,—when, in consequence of his incessant contemplation of the stars, he was asked, “if he had no concern for his country?”—“I incessantly regard my country,” said he, pointing to Heaven.
Plato’s attention to the same celestial science unquestionably enlarged his notions of the Deity, and enabled him to think the more justly of the moral attributes of human nature. According to Plato—whose morality, on the whole, corresponds with the system maintained by Socrates,[[8]]—the human soul is a ray from the Divinity. He believed, that this minute portion of infinite Wisdom, Goodness and Power, was omniscient, while united with the Parent stock from which it emanated; but, when combined with the body, that it contracted ignorance and impurity from that union. He did not, like his master Socrates, neglect natural philosophy; but investigated many principles which relate to that branch of knowledge:—and, according to this philosopher, all things consisted of two principles,—God and matter.
It is evident that Plato believed in the immortality of the soul of man; but he had, at the same time, very inadequate conceptions of the mode or state of its existence, when separated from the body. It seems to have been reserved for the Christian dispensation, to elucidate this great arcanum, hidden from the most sagacious of the heathen philosophers.[[9]] It was the difficulty that arose on this subject, the incapability of knowing how to dispose of the soul, or intellectual principle in the constitution of our species, after its disentanglement from the body; a difficulty by which all the philosophers, antecedent to the promulgation of Christianity, were subjected to unsurmountable perplexities;—it was this, that rendered even the expansive genius of Anaxagoras utterly incompetent to conceive of the possibility that the soul should exist, independent of some union with matter. He therefore invented the doctrine of the Metempsychosis; in order to provide some receptacle of organised matter for that imperishable intellectual principle attached to our nature here, after its departure from the human frame; and to which new vehicle of the vital spirit of its original but abandoned abode, the extinguished corporeal man, its union with it should impart the powers and faculties of animal life.
Cultivating, as Plato did, the mind-expanding science of Astronomy, faintly even as the true principles of this branch of science were then perceived,[[10]] this philosopher could not fail to derive, from the vastness, beauty and order, manifested in the appearances and revolutions of the heavenly bodies, a conviction of the perpetual existence of a great intelligent First Cause. It was, indeed, as the Abbé Barthelemy justly remarks, the order and beauty apparent through the whole universe, that compelled men to resort to a First Cause:[[11]] This, he observes, the early philosophers of the Ionian school (which owed its origin to Thales) had acknowledged. But Anaxagoras[[12]] was the first who discriminated that First Cause from matter; and not only this distinguished pupil of Thales,[[13]] but Anaximander, who, antecedently to him, taught philosophy at Athens, with Archelaus the master of Socrates, all treated in their writings of the formation of the universe, of the nature of things, and of geometry and astronomy.
According to Mr. Gibbon, the philosophers of Greece deduced their morals from the nature of man, rather than from that of God. They meditated, however, as we are informed by this very ingenious historian, on the Divine Nature, as a most curious and important speculation; and, in the profound enquiry, they displayed both the strength and the weakness of the human understanding. The Stoics and the Platonists endeavoured to reconcile the interests of reason with their notions of piety. The opinions of the Academicians and Epicureans, the two other of the four most celebrated schools, were of a less religious cast: But, continues Mr. Gibbon, whilst the modest science of the former induced them to doubt, the positive ignorance of the latter urged them to deny, the providence of a Supreme Ruler.
Cicero[[14]] denominated the God of Plato the Maker, and the God of Aristotle the Governor, of the world.[[15]] It is somewhere observed, that it is no reflection on the character of Plato, to have been unable, by the efforts of his own reason, to acquire any notion of a proper creation; since we, who have the advantage of his writings, nay of writings infinitely more valuable than his, to instruct us, find it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to conceive how any thing can first begin to have an existence. We believe the fact, on the authority of Revelation.
Great were, undoubtedly, the improvements in astronomy, made by the Greek philosophers of early ages, on such of its rudiments as were handed down to them from those nations by whom it was first cultivated:[[16]] Yet it can scarcely be conceived, that, until the celebrated Euclid of Alexandria,[[17]] and his followers, had reduced the mathematics of Thales and others of those philosophers, into regular systems of arithmetical and geometrical science, the true principles of astronomy could be ascertained. In fact, seventeen centuries and an half had elapsed, from the time of that great geometrician, before Copernicus appeared: when this wonderful genius, availing himself of such remnants of the ancient philosophy, as the intervening irruptions of the barbarous nations of the north upon the then civilized world had left to their posterity, opened to the view of mankind the real system of the universe.[[18]]—So vast was the chasm, during which the nobler branches of physics remained uncultivated and neglected, that, from the age of Euclid, fourteen centuries passed away, before Roger Bacon, an English Franciscan friar, began his successful enquiries into experimental philosophy.—This extraordinary man is said to have been almost the only astronomer of his age; and he himself tells us, that there were not, then, more than three or four persons in the world who had made any considerable proficiency in the mathematics!
But after the appearance of Copernicus,[[19]] succeeded by the ingenious Tycho Brahe[[20]] and sagacious Kepler,[[21]] arose the learned physiologist Bacon, Viscount of St. Albans,—one of the most illustrious contributors to the yet scanty stock of experimental philosophy.[[22]] And soon after, in the same age and nation, was manifested to the world, in the full glory of meridian splendour, that great luminary of natural science, who first enlightened mankind by diffusing among them the rays of well-ascertained truths; clearly exhibiting to all, those fundamental principles of the laws of nature, by which the grand, the stupendous system of the material universe is both sustained and governed:—
“Nature and Nature’s Laws lay hid in night;
God said, Let Newton be,—and all was Light.”
Finally, it was reserved for our own age and country to derive dignity and fame, from having given birth to an illustrious successor and disciple of that immortal man, in the person of the yet recently-departed Rittenhouse.
The objects of a genuine philosophy, are the discovery and promulgation of the truths which emanate from a knowledge of the laws of nature, in relation to the material world, and the inseparable influence of those truths, consequent on an acquaintance with them, in giving a right direction to the moral faculty of man. The intimate connexion subsisting between natural and moral science, is indubitable; and it is equally certain, that the accordant order, fitness and rectitude, which unite into one glorious plan of wisdom, goodness and power, all portions of creation, intellectual and sensitive as well as material, must rest on the same unerring principles. The infinite variety and boundless extent of nature’s works constitute a sublime system; manifesting a correspondent perfection in the design, and all-bountiful dispensation of good in its purposes.[[23]] The Almighty First Cause has founded this system on immutable principles; wherein truth, in relation to the moral world, may be considered as its basis,—as fitness is, when applied to the constitution of the natural world. These are, respectively, the correlatives of the one and the other: and the unity of design apparent in the whole system, plainly indicates the connexion that subsists, in the nature of things, between moral virtue, which is the result of a right perception of truth, and the fitness and order, to which all the operations of the material universe conform.[[24]]—Towards an investigation of these things, the researches of the great American philosopher were eagerly directed: such were the objects of his unwearied pursuit; and such were the views entertained by him, of the utility and importance of those sublime branches of knowledge, which he cultivated so ardently and successfully.[[25]]
The enlightened part of the people have, in every civilized nation and in all ages, very rationally valued themselves on their great men. It is both useful and proper to commemorate the renown of such as have approved themselves, in an eminent degree, Benefactors of Mankind. The Life, therefore, of so distinguished a Philosopher as Rittenhouse, must be expected to interest the feelings, as well as the curiosity, of the good and the wise, not only of our own country but of foreign nations.
With respect to the usefulness and importance of that majestic science, which was the favourite study and principal object of the pursuit of our philosopher, during a life of ordinary extent but of very extraordinary attainments and character, something may with propriety be said, with a view to an illustration of the subject. And among other evidence, which, it is presumed, may not be unaptly adduced on the occasion, the Memorialist will cite in the first place, as well as occasionally afterwards, the sentiments of a distinguished foreign astronomer, whose abilities and erudition rendered him eminently qualified to decide, in a discussion of this nature: He shall be made to speak for himself, though not in his own tongue; the great work from which the quoted extracts are made, being written in French.
Among the numerous and important advantages, then, resulting from astronomy, noticed by the celebrated Lalande (in the preface to his book, entitled Astronomie,) he remarks that it is well known, that besides the tendency of this science to dissipate many vulgar errors and prejudices,[[26]] cosmography and geography cannot go on, but by its means: that the discovery of the satellites of Jupiter has given greater perfection to our geographical and marine charts, than they could have attained by ten thousand years of navigation and voyages;[[27]] and, that when their theory shall become still better known, the method of determining the longitude at sea will be more exact and more easy.
“It is to astronomy,” says Mr. Lalande, “that we are indebted for the first voyages of the Phœnicians, and the earliest progress of industry and commerce: it is likewise to it, that we owe the discovery of the New World. If there remain any thing to desire for the perfection and security[security] of navigation, it is, to find the longitude at sea.” In continuation, he says:—
“The utility of navigation for the welfare of a state, serves to prove that of astronomy. But it seems to me, that it is difficult for a good citizen to be ignorant, now, of the usefulness of navigation; above all, (says Lalande, feelingly,) in France. The success of the English, in the war of 1764, has but too well shewn, that a marine alone governs the fortune of empires, their power, their commerce; that peace and war are decided on the ocean; and that, in fine, as Mr. Miere has expressed it,—
“Ancient chronology deduces, from a knowledge and calculation of eclipses, the best established periods in time, that it is possible to obtain: and in ages anterior to regular observations, nothing but obscurity is to be met with. We should not have in the history of nations any uncertainty in dates, if there had always been astronomers. We may perceive, above all, the connexions of astronomy in The Art of verifying Dates. It is by an eclipse of the Moon,[[28]] that we discover the error of date that exists in the vulgar era with respect to the birth of Christ. It is known that Herod was king of Judea, and that there was an eclipse of the moon immediately before the death of that prince: we find this eclipse was in the night, between the 12th and 13th of March, of the fourth year before the vulgar era; so that this era ought to be removed three years back, at least.
“It is besides from astronomy, that we borrow the division of time in the common transactions of life, and the art of regulating clocks and watches. We may say, that the order and the multiplicity of our affairs, of our duties, our amusements; the attachment to exactness and precision; in short, our habits; all have rendered this measure of time almost indispensable, and placed it among the number of the desiderata of human life.
“If, for want of clocks and watches, we should be under the necessity of recurring to meridians and sundials, even this would further prove the advantages derived from astronomical science; since dialling is only an application of spherical trigonometry and astronomy.
“Le Sage is displeased with good reason with those, whom an admiration of the stars has carried so far, as that they fancied them to be Deities:[[29]] but, far from condemning the study of them, he recommends it, for the glory of the Creator.”
Adverting to such as considered “fire, or wind, or the swift air, or the circle of the stars, or the violent water, or the lights of heaven, to be gods which govern the world,”[[30]] he applies the words of Solomon:—“With whose beauty, if they, being delighted, took them to be gods; let them know how much better the Lord of them is: for the first Author of beauty has created them—For, by the greatness and beauty of the creatures, proportionably the Maker of them is seen.”[[31]]
“David found also, in the stars,” continues Lalande, “means of elevating his contemplation of the Deity:”—“The heavens declare the glory of God;”[[32]] “I will view thy heavens, the works of thy fingers, the moon and the stars which thou hast established:” and we see that Mr. Derham has called by the name of “Astro-Theology,” a work, in which is presented, in all their force, the singularity and grandeur of the discoveries that have been made in astronomy; as being so many proofs of the existence of a God. (See what Aristotle thought on this subject, in the eighth book of his Physics.)[.)]
Such were the reflections of Mr. Lalande, on a subject with which he was intimately acquainted.
The opinions of eminent and enlightened men have deservedly great weight, in all those matters on which it is presumable, from the nature of their pursuits, their thoughts have been most employed. Notwithstanding, therefore, the fulness of the foregoing extracts, the writer believes that the very apt and judicious observations contained in the following passage, in support of similar sentiments, extracted from a voluminous work of a distinguished English astronomer, of the present day, will not be deemed to have been improperly brought into view, on this occasion:—
“The obvious argument of the existence of a Deity, who formed and governs the universe,” (says Mr. Vince, the author referred to,) “is founded upon the uniformity of the laws which take place in the production of similar effects; and from the simplicity of the causes which produce the various phænomena. The most common views of nature, however imperfect and of small extent, suggest the idea of the government of a God, and every further discovery tends to confirm that persuasion. The ancient philosophers, who scarce knew a single law by which the bodies in the system are governed, still saw the Deity in his works: how visible therefore ought He to be to us, who are acquainted with the laws by which the whole is directed. The same law takes place in our system, between the periodic times and distances of every body revolving about the same centre. Every body describes about its respective centre equal areas in equal times. Every body is spherical. Every planet, as far as our observations reach, is found to revolve about an axis; and the axis of each is observed to continue parallel to itself. Now as the circumstances which might have attended these bodies are indefinite in variety, the uniform similarity which is found to exist amongst them, is an irrefragable argument of design. To produce a succession of day and night, either the sun must revolve every day about the earth, or the earth must revolve about its axis: the latter is the most simple cause; and, accordingly, we find that the regular return of day and night is so produced. As far also as observations have enabled us to discover, the return of day and night, in the planets, is produced by the operation of a similar cause. It is also found, that the axis of each planet is inclined to the plane of its orbit, by which a provision is made for a variety of seasons; and by preserving the axis always parallel to itself, summer and winter return at their stated periods. Where there are such incontestable marks of design, there must be a DESIGNER; and the unity of design through the whole system, proves it to be the work of One. The general laws of nature shew the existence of a Divine Intelligence, in a much stronger point of view, than any work of man can prove him to have acted from intention; inasmuch as the operations of the former are uniform, and subject to no variation; whereas in the latter case, we see continual alterations of plan, and deviations from established rules. And without this permanent order of things, experience could not have directed man in respect to his future operations. These fixed laws of nature, so necessary for us, is an irresistible argument that the world is the work of a wise and benevolent Being. The laws of nature are the laws of God; and how far soever we may be able to trace up causes, they must terminate in his will. We see nothing in the heavens which argues imperfection; the whole creation is stamped with the marks of Divinity.”—[See A Complete System of Astronomy; by the Rev. S. Vince, A. M. F. R. S. &c. printed at Cambridge, in 1799—vol. ii. p. 290, 291.]
None of the works of creation present to the contemplation of man objects more worthy of the dignity of his nature, than those which engage the attention of the astronomer. They have, interested men of the sublimest genius, in all ages of the world: and the science of astronomy is spoken of with admiration, by the most celebrated sages of antiquity.
Although no astronomer of our day, how enthusiastic soever he may be in favour of his science, will be disposed to say with Anaxagoras, that the purpose for which he himself or any other man was born, was, that he might contemplate the stars; yet it does seem, as if the objects of this science more naturally attracted the attention and employed the research of elevated minds, than those things, within the narrow limits of this world, an acquaintance with which constitutes the ordinary mass of human knowledge. The disposition of man to direct his eyes frequently upwards, and the faculty to do so, arising from his erect figure and the position and structure of the organs of his vision, furnish no feeble argument in proving, that this temporary lord of his fellow-beings on this globe has nobler destinies, infinitely beyond them; being enabled and permitted by the Author of his being, even while in this circumscribed state of his existence, to survey those myriads of worlds which occupy the immensity of space; to contemplate their nature, and the laws that govern them; thence, to discern, with the eye of reason, the Great First Cause of their being;[[33]] and thus having acquired, a juster knowledge of his own nature, to grasp at an endless futurity for its existence.
That the erect countenance and upward aspect of the human species were his peculiar endowments by the Deity, for these purposes among others, appears to have been the impression on the mind of Ovid, when he said:—
“Finxit in effigiem moderantum cuncta deorum;
Pronaque cum spectent animalia[animalia] cætera terram,
Os homini sublime dedit, cælumque tueri
Jussit, et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus.”[[34]]
Met. i. 88.
Mr. Pope has well observed, that—
“The proper study of mankind, is Man:”—
But, in order that he may be enabled to[to] know himself, it is indispensably necessary for him to acquire such a knowledge of other created beings that surround him, as the limited nature of his faculties will allow. He must attentively observe the operations of nature in the material universe, survey with a reflecting mind its stupendous fabric, and study its laws. Hence, he will be made acquainted, and although in a partial, yet not an inconsiderable degree, with the powers and extent of that intellectual principle which he finds in the government of the moral, as well as the natural world. And being thus enabled to know his own proper standing in creation, and his appropriate relation to all its parts, he will by these means be qualified to ascend to those enquiries, which will open to his mind a just sense of the attributes of the Deity, of whose existence he will feel a perfect conviction. In this way, will man obtain a due knowledge of his own “being, end and aim;” and become fully sensible of his entire dependence on his Creator: while he will thereby learn, that he incessantly owes him the highest adoration and the most devoted service.[[35]] In this way it is, that the philosopher, more especially the astronomer,—
“Looks, through Nature, up to Nature’s God.”[[36]]
Pope’s Ess. on Man.
Besides the various and important uses of astronomy, here pointed out, it is connected, by means of numerous ramifications, with other departments of science, directed to some of the most useful pursuits of human life. Lalande has even shewn us, in the preface to his Astronomie, in what manner this science has a relation to the administration of civil and ecclesiastical affairs, to medicine, and to agriculture. A knowledge of astronomy is obviously connected, by means of chronology, with history. It is even a necessary study, in order to become acquainted with the heathen mythology; and many beautiful passages in the works of the ancient poets can neither be distinctly understood nor properly relished, without a knowledge of the stars: nay, that finely poetical one, in the book of Job, in which the Deity is represented as manifesting to that patient man of affliction and sorrow the extreme imbecility of his nature, is unintelligible without some knowledge of astronomy:—
“Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?—
Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season; or canst thou guide Arcturus, with his sons?”
Some of the greatest poets of antiquity were in a manner fascinated, by the grandeur of that science, (though they accompanied it with mystical notions,) which furnishes the sublimest objects in nature to the contemplation of the astronomer.
Ovid tells us, he wished to take his flight among the stars:
—-—-—“Juvat ire per alta
Astra; juvat, terris et inerti sede relictis,
Nube vehi, validique humeris insistere Atlantis.”[[37]]
Metamorph. lib. xv.
And Horace acquaints us with the objects of curiosity and research, in the contemplation of which he envied his friend Iccius, who was occupied in that way, on his farm:—
“Quæ mare compescant causæ, quid temperet annum;
Stellæ sponte suâ, jussæne, vagentur et errant,
Quid premat obscurum Lunæ, quid proferat orbem.”[[38]]
Lib. i. epist. 12, ad Iccium.
Virgil seemed willing to renounce every other study, in order that he might devote himself to the wonders of astronomy. In the second book of his Georgics, he says:
“Me vero primum dulces ante omnia Musæ,
Quarum sacra fero, ingenti perculsus amore,
Accipiant; cælique vias et sidera monstrent,
Defectus Solis varius, Lunæque labores;
Unde tremor terris, quâ vi maria alta tumescant
Obicibus ruptis, rursusque in se ipsa residant;
Quid tantum oceano properent se tingere soles
Hyberni,[Hyberni,] vel quæ tardis mora noctibus obstet—
Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.”[[39]]
l. 475 and seq.
And, in addition to these classical writers, a modern poet (Mr. Voltaire) appears, by a letter written in the year 1738, to have participated in the regrets expressed by Virgil; and to have been desirous of directing all his faculties towards the sciences. He produced, on the philosophy of Newton, a work which has contributed to the expansion of genius; and, in his epistle to the Marchioness du Chatelet, he pays that great man a very exalted compliment, in these poetic lines:
“Confidens du Tres Haut, substances eternelles,
Qui parez de vos feux, qui couvrez de vos ailes
Le trône oú votre Maitre est assis parmi vous;
Parlez: Du grand Newton n’étiez-vous point jaloux?”[[40]]
Astronomy has not only engaged the attention of multitudes of illustrious men, of every age and nation, but it has been patronized by great and enlightened princes and states; cultivated by men of genius and learning, of all ranks and professions; and celebrated by historians and poets.
This charming, as well as sublime and invaluable science, has also been studied, and even practically cultivated, by many celebrated women, in modern times. There are indeed circumstances connected with this innocent and engaging pursuit, that must render it very interesting to the fair sex. Some ladies have prosecuted this object with such success, as to acquire considerable distinction in the philosophical world. While, therefore, the meritorious transactions of men are held in grateful remembrance and frequently recorded in the annals of fame, it is due to justice and impartiality, that literary, scientific, and other attainments of the gentler sex, calculated for the benefit of civil society, should be alike commemorated. Among such then, as examples, may be named the following:—
Maria Cunitia (Kunitz,) daughter of a physician in Silesia, published Astronomical Tables, so early as the year 1650.
Maria-Clara, the daughter of Eimmart and wife of of Muller, both well-known astronomers, cultivated the same science.
Jane Dumée published, in the year 1680, Conversations (or Dialogues) on the Copernican System.
Maria-Margaretta Winckelman, wife of Godfrey Kirch, an astronomer of some distinction[[41]] who died in 1710, at the age of seventy-one years, worked at his Ephemerides, and carried on Astronomical Observations with her husband. This respectable woman discovered the Comet[[42]] of 1702, on the 20th of April in that year: she produced, in 1712, a Work on Astronomy; and died at Berlin, in the year 1720. Her three daughters continued, for thirty years, to employ themselves in Astronomical Observations, for the Almanacks of Berlin.
Elizabeth d’Oginsky Puzynina, Countess Puzynina and Castellane of Mscislau, in Poland, erected and richly endowed a magnificent Observatory at Wilna, in the year 1753; and in 1767, she added to this establishment a fund equivalent to twelve thousand (American) dollars, for the purpose of maintaining an observer and purchasing instruments. The king of Poland afterwards gave to this institution the title of a “Royal Observatory.”
The wife of the celebrated Hevelius was, likewise, an astronomer. Madame Hevelius made Observations along with her husband; and she is represented, in the Machina Cœlestis, as having been engaged in measuring distances.
In the century just passed, the Marchioness du Chatelet translated Newton: Besides whom,—
Madame Lepaute and Madame du Piery were both known in the Astronomical World.
In our own time, Miss Caroline Herschel, sister of the great practical astronomer of the same name, in England, has not only distinguished herself, by having discovered the Comet of 1786; another, on the 17th of April, 1790; and a third, on the 8th of October, 1793;[[43]] but likewise by attending to Astronomical Observations, along with her brother, for several years.
To these may be added the name of an illustrious female; Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Frederick V. Count Palatine of the Rhine and King of Bohemia, by the only daughter of James I. This Princess (who was an aunt of King George I.) cultivated a fine genius for the several branches of natural philosophy, and was well versed in mathematical science. Although this excellent woman was a Protestant, she was Abbess of Herworden in Westphalia, where she died in 1680, at the age of sixty-two years.
Mr. Lalande, in the prefatory department of his great work on Astronomy, after noticing the Abbé Pluche’s book, entitled Spectacle de la Nature, says: “The freshness of the shade, the stillness of night, the soft beams of twilight, the luminaries that bespangle the heavens, the various appearances of the moon, all form in the hands of Pluche a fit subject for fine descriptive colouring: it takes in view all the wants of man, regards the attention of the Supreme Being to those wants, and recognizes the glory of the Creator. His book is a treatise on final causes, as well as a philosophical work; and there are a great many young persons to whom the reading of it would afford satisfaction and pleasure.” Observing that he himself had no object in view, in his own work, but merely to treat of Astronomy, Lalande recommends to his readers, Nature Displayed, Derham’s Astro-Theology, and the Dialogues of Fontenelle on The Plurality of Worlds. Such works as these, with some elementary books on astronomy and those branches of science most intimately connected with that science, would be very proper for the study of that respectable class of females, whose minds are too elevated and correct to derive any gratification from the trifling productions of most of the modern novellists and romance-writers; but who, at the same time, might not be desirous of engaging in the more abstruse and laborious researches, which demand the attention of profound practical astronomers.[[44]] The grand, the delightful views of nature, which studies of this sort would present to the vivid imagination, the delicate sensibility, and the good dispositions of a woman of genius and refinement, would not only improve her understanding and sanction the best feelings of her heart, but they would furnish her mind with an inexhaustible fund of animating reflections and rational enjoyments: in every respect, indeed, they would contribute to her happiness.
Let not, then, the beauties of astronomical science, and the captivating studies of natural philosophy in general, be exclusively enjoyed by men; but let the amiable, the intelligent, and the improved part of the female sex, be invited to a participation, with them, in these intellectual pleasures.[[45]]
Here, perhaps, might be rested the evidence of the all-important usefulness of that branch of knowledge, in which our American Philosopher was pre-eminently distinguished.
But, inasmuch as astronomy forms a part of mathematical science, more especially of those branches of it, which, under the denomination of mixed and practical mathematics, are intimately and inseparably interwoven, every where, with physical considerations, the reader will, it is presumed, be gratified by a perusal of the following admirable description of the Uses of Mathematics, extracted from the great Dr. Barrow’s Prefatory Oration,[[46]] upon his admission into the Professorship, at Cambridge. Indeed, in writing the Life of a man so eminently skilled as Dr. Rittenhouse was, in the several departments or various branches of natural philosophy, it seems proper and useful to exhibit to the reader such views as have been furnished by men of renowned erudition, of the nature and importance of that complicated, that widely-extended science, in the cultivation of which our philosopher held so exalted a rank.
Dr. Barrow[[47]] thus eulogizes the Mathematics—a science “which depends upon principles clear to the mind, and agreeable to experience; which draws certain conclusions, instructs by profitable rules, unfolds pleasant questions, and produces wonderful effects: which is the fruitful parent of—I had almost said—all arts, the unshaken foundation of sciences, and the plentiful fountain of advantage to human affairs: In which last respect we may be said to receive from mathematics the principal delights of life, securities of health, increase of fortune and conveniences of labour: That we dwell elegantly and commodiously, build decent houses for ourselves, erect stately temples to God, and leave wonderful monuments to posterity: That we are protected by those rampires from the incursions of an enemy, rightly use arms, artfully manage war, and skilfully range an army: That we have safe traffic through the deceitful billows, pass in a direct road through the trackless ways of the sea, and arrive at the designed ports by the uncertain impulse of the winds: That we rightly cast up our accounts, do business expeditiously, dispose, tabulate, and calculate scattered ranks of numbers, and easily compute them, though expressive of huge heaps of sand, nay immense hills of atoms: That we make pacific separations of the bounds of lands, examine the momentums of weights in an equal balance, and are enabled to distribute to every one his own by a just measure: That, with a light touch, we thrust forward bodies, which way we will, and step a huge resistance with a very small force: That we accurately delineate the face of this earthly orb, and subject the economy of the universe to our sight: That we aptly digest the flowing series of time; distinguish what is acted, by due intervals; rightly account and discern the various returns of the seasons; the stated periods of the years and months, the alternate increasements of days and nights, the doubtful limits of light and shadow, and the exact difference of hours and minutes: That we derive the solar virtue of the sun’s rays to our uses, infinitely extend the sphere of light, enlarge the near appearances of objects, bring remote objects near, discover hidden things, trace nature out of her concealments, and unfold her dark mysteries: That we delight our eyes with beautiful images, cunningly imitate the devices and portray the works of nature; imitate, did I say? nay excel; while we form to ourselves things not in being, exhibit things absent, and represent things past: That we recreate our minds, and delight our ears, with melodious sounds; attemperate the inconstant undulations of the air to musical tones; add a pleasant voice to a sapless log; and draw a sweet eloquence from a rigid metal; celebrate our Maker with an harmonious praise, and not unaptly imitate the blessed choirs of heaven: That we approach and examine the inaccessible seats of the clouds, distant tracts of land, unfrequented paths of the sea; lofty tops of mountains, low bottoms of vallies, and deep gulphs of the ocean: That we scale the ethereal towers; freely range through the celestial fields; measure the magnitudes and determine the interstices of the stars; prescribe inviolable laws to the heavens themselves, and contain the wandering circuit of the stars within strict bounds: Lastly, that we comprehend the huge fabric of the universe; admire and contemplate the wonderful beauty of the divine workmanship, and so learn the incredible force and sagacity of our own minds by certain experiments, as to acknowledge the blessings of heaven with a pious affection.”
The honours that have been rendered to celebrated men in almost every age of the world, and by all nations concerning which we have any historical memorials, are noticed by numberless writers, both ancient and modern. The cultivation of astronomical science had, doubtless, its origin in the remotest ages of antiquity,[[48]] through the Chaldeans,[[49]] the Egyptians, the Phœnicians and Greeks, the Arabs, and the Chinese. But the Indians of the western hemisphere appear to have had little knowledge of astronomy, at the time of Columbus’s discovery, yet they were not inattentive to its objects: for Acosta tells us, that the Peruvians observed the equinoxes, by means of columns erected before the temple of the sun at Cusco, and by a circle traced around it. Condamine likewise relates, that the Indians on the river of the Amazons gave to the Hyades, as we do, the name of the Bull’s-head; and Father Lasitau says, that the Iroquois called the same stars the Bear, to which we give that name; and designated the Polar star by the appellation of the immoveable star. Captain Cook informs us, that the inhabitants of Taiti, in like manner, distinguish the different stars; and know in what part of the heavens they will appear, for each month in the year; their year consisting of thirteen lunar months, each being twenty-nine days.
Astronomy has been patronised by many great princes and sovereign states. Lalande observes, that, about the year 1230, the Emperor Frederick II.[[50]] prepared the way for the renewal of the sciences among the moderns, and professed himself to be their protector. His reign, according to the great French astronomer just mentioned, forms the first epocha of the revival of astronomy in Europe.
Coeval with that sovereign, was[was] Johannes de Sacro-Bosco,[[51]] a famous English ecclesiastic, who was the first astronomical writer that acquired celebrity in the thirteenth century. Very nearly about the same time, appeared also that prodigy of genius and learning, Friar Bacon:[[52]] and from that period, down to our own day, there has been a succession of illustrious philosophers: whose names have justly been renowned, for the benefits they have conferred on mankind; names which reflect honour on the countries to which they respectively belong. Many of those benefactors of the world were honoured with marks of high distinction, by their sovereigns and cotemporaries; and their fame will descend to the latest posterity.
In recording these Memoirs of the Life of an American Philosopher, whose name adds dignity to the country that gave him birth, it is the design of the author to represent him as he truly was; and in doing so, he feels a conscious satisfaction, that his pen is employed in delineating the character of a man, who was rendered singularly eminent by his genius, his virtues and his public services. Deeply impressed with the magnitude and importance, as well as delicacy of the subject, the writer has not undertaken the task without some hesitation. He is sensible of the difficulties attending it, and conscious of his inability to do justice to its merits. Arduous, however, as the undertaking is, and since no abler pen has hitherto attempted any thing more, on this subject, than to eulogize[[53]] some of the prominent virtues and talents of our philosopher, his present biographer will endeavour, by the fidelity with which he shall portray the character of that truly estimable man, to atone for the imperfections of the work in other respects. Possessing, as he does, some peculiar advantages, in relation to the materials necessary for this undertaking, he flatters himself it will be found, that he has been enabled thereby to exhibit to his countrymen, and the world generally, a portrait, which, in its more important features, may prove deserving of some share of public regard.
Sir William Forbes, in the introduction to his interesting Account of the Life and Writings of the late Dr. Beattie, reminds his readers, that “Mr. Mason prefaces his excellent and entertaining Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Gray, with an observation more remarkable for its truth than novelty;”[novelty;”] that “the Lives of men of letters seldom abound with incidents.”—“A reader of sense and taste, therefore,” continues Mr. Mason, “never expects to find, in the Memoirs of a Philosopher or Poet, the same species of entertainment or information, which he would receive from those of a Statesman or General. He expects, however, to be informed or entertained. Nor will he be disappointed, did the writer take care to dwell principally on such topics as characterize the man, and distinguish that peculiar part which he acted in the varied drama of society.”
Yet these observations of Mr. Gray’s biographer, though pretty generally correct, admit of some qualification and many exceptions, depending on a variety of circumstances. It is true, that a mere narrative of the life of a “philosopher,” as well as of a “poet,” considered only as such, and abstractedly, must be expected to be devoid of much “incident” that can interest the generality of readers. But, both philosophers and poets have, in some instances, been also statesmen; sometimes, even generals: both have, not unfrequently, distinguished themselves as patriots, and benefactors of mankind.
In writing the life of our philosopher, the plan of a dry recital of only such circumstances and occurrences as have an immediate relation to the individual, has not been pursued. Biographical Memoirs, it is conceived, do not confine a writer to limits so narrow, but permit him to take a much greater latitude. It is even allowable, in works of this kind, to introduce historical facts, memorable events, proceedings of public bodies, notices of eminent men, evidences of the progress and state of literature, science and the arts, and the actual condition of civil society, in the scene that is contemplated; together with occasional reflections on those and similar subjects. Some of these objects may not seem, perhaps, to be necessarily or very intimately connected with the principal design, the life of the person treated of: but such of them as should, at first view, appear to have the most remote relation to that object, may be afterwards discovered to be both useful and interesting in a discussion of this nature; while others serve to elucidate the main scope of the work. A latitude of this description, in the compilation of memoirs, seems to be quite consistent with the genius and spirit of works of that nature; and the modern practice of memoir-writers has been conformable to this view of the subject.[[54]]
The writer of the present work has therefore ventured, with all due deference to the public opinion, to pursue the course here described. And in doing this, he presumes that the comprehensive range he has allowed himself has enabled him to render his memoirs, even of a “philosopher,” not altogether barren of incidents, nor destitute, he trusts, either of pleasing information or useful instruction.
NOTE.—The reader is requested to substitute (with his pen) the word Earth, in the place of “Sun,” in the sixth line of the note numbered ([18]), page xxxii. of the foregoing Introduction: the error in the print is an essential one; and passed unobserved, until it was too late to correct it in the press. At the same time the reader will be pleased to insert the word security, in the place of “scarcity,” in the ninth line from the top of page xlii.
MEMOIRS
OF THE
LIFE OF DAVID RITTENHOUSE;
ANTERIOR TO
HIS SETTLEMENT IN PHILADELPHIA.
The paternal ancestors of David Rittenhouse were early and long seated at Arnheim, a fortified city on the Rhine, and capital of the district of Velewe or Veluive, sometimes called the Velau, in the Batavian province of Guelderland;[[55]] where, it is said, they conducted manufactories of paper,[[56]] during the course of some generations. The orthography of the name was formerly Rittinghuysen, as the writer of these memoirs was informed by an European member of this family.[[57]] But it is net improbable, that, in more strict conformity to the idiom of its Saxo-Germanic original, the name was spelt Ritterhuysen[[58]]—or, perhaps, Ritterhausen; which signifies, in our language, Knights’ Houses: a conjecture that seems to be somewhat corroborated by the chivalrous emblems alluding to this name, belonging to the family, and which have been already noticed.
It has been asserted, that the first of the Rittenhouses who migrated to America, was named William; and that he went from Guelderland to the (now) state of New-York, while it was yet a Dutch colony. This William was also said to have left at Arnheim a brother, Nicholas, who continued to carry on the paper-making business in that city.[[59]] But, in a genealogical account of the family in the possession of the Memorialist, Garrett (or Gerard) and Nicholas Rittenhouse are stated to have arrived at New-York, from Holland, so late as the year 1690: it likewise states, that Nicholas there married Wilhelmina Dewees, a sister of William Dewees, who came thither about the same time; and that, soon afterwards, they all removed to the neighbourhood of Germantown in Pennsylvania; where Nicholas established the first paper-mill ever erected in America.[[60]] It is believed, however, that Garrett and Nicholas Rittenhouse were sons of William; who is supposed to have arrived in some part of the original territories of New-York, prior to the year 1674;[[61]] that the Nicholas left in Arnheim, was his brother; and that his sons Garrett and Nicholas, who are stated to have been the first of the family that settled in New-York, in 1690 (from whence they removed, “soon afterwards,” into Pennsylvania,) did, in fact, transfer themselves into this latter province, in that year.—Garrett left children; some of whose descendants are resident in Pennsylvania, and others in New-Jersey.
Nicholas Rittenhouse, the grandfather of our Philosopher, died about the year 1730; leaving three sons, William, Henry, and Matthias; and four daughters, Psyche, Mary, Catharine, and Susanna. Of these daughters, Psyche intermarried with John Gorgas, from whom are descended the Gorgas’s of Cresham and Cocolico; Mary, with John Johnson, the father of Casper, John, Nicholas, William, and Benjamin Johnson, some of whom are now (or were lately) living, in the neighbourhood of Germantown; Catharine, with Jacob Engle, in the same vicinity; and Susanna, with Henry Heiley of Goshehoppen.
William Rittenhouse, the eldest brother of our Philosopher’s father, died at the paper-mills, near Germantown. He left several children, one of whom did lately, and perhaps yet does, carry on those works.—Henry and Matthias removed to the townships of Worcester and Norriton, about the year 1732 or 1733; where both lived to be upwards of seventy years of age.
The old American stock of the Rittenhouses were Anabaptists,[[62]] and persons of very considerable note in that religious society. Probably, therefore, they were induced to establish their residence in Pennsylvania, towards the close of the seventeenth century, by the tolerating principles held forth by William Penn,[[63]] in respect to religious[[64]] concerns; the justness of the tenure by which he became proprietor of the soil;[[65]] and the excellence of the political regulations established by that great legislator, for the civil government of his newly-acquired domains.
Matthias, the youngest son of Nicholas Rittenhouse, by Wilhelmina Dewees his wife, was born at the paper-mills belonging to his family, near Germantown,[[66]] in the county of Philadelphia and about eight miles from the capital of Pennsylvania, in the year 1703. Having abandoned the occupation of a paper-maker, when about twenty-nine years of age, and two years after his father’s death, he then commenced the business of a farmer, on a piece of land he had purchased in the township of Norriton,[[67]] about twenty miles from the city of Philadelphia; his brother Henry establishing himself in the same manner, in the adjoining township of Worcester. In October, 1727,—about three years prior to Matthias’s removal from the vicinity of Germantown,—he had become a married man. His wife was Elizabeth William (or Williams) who was born in 1704, and was daughter of Evan William, a native of Wales. Her father, a farmer, dying while she was a child, she was placed under the charge of an elderly English (or, more probably, Welsh) gentleman, in the neighbourhood, of the name of Richard Jones; a relation of her family. That truly respectable woman possessed a cheerful temper, with a mind uncommonly vigorous and comprehensive: but her education was much neglected, as is too often the fate of orphan children. Yet, perhaps, no censure ought justly to be imputable to Mr. Jones, in this case; because there were very few schools of any kind, in country situations, at that early day.[[68]]
The extraordinary natural understanding of this person, so very nearly related as she was to the subject of these memoirs, seemed to the writer to merit particular notice; and the more especially, for a reason which shall be hereafter mentioned.
By this wife, Matthias Rittenhouse had four sons and six daughters;[[69]] three of whom died in their minority. The three eldest of the children were born at the place of their father’s nativity; the others, at Norriton. Of the former number was David, the eldest son, the subject of these memoirs.—He was born on the 8th day of April, 1732.[[70]]
This son was an infant, when his family removed to Norriton and engaged in the business of farming; and his father appears, early, to have designed him for this most useful and very respectable employment. Accordingly, as soon as the boy arrived at a sufficient age to assist in conducting the affairs of the farm, he was occupied as an husbandman. This kind of occupation seems to have commenced at a very early period of his life; for it is ascertained, that, about the fourteenth year of his age, he was actually employed in ploughing his father’s fields.[[71]]
At that period of our future Philosopher’s life, early as it was, his uncultivated mind, naturally teeming with the most prolific germs of yet unexpanded science, began to unfold those buds of genius, which soon after attained that wonderful luxuriance of growth by which the usefulness and splendour of his talents became eminently conspicuous. His brother Benjamin relates,[[72]] that, while David was thus employed at the plough, from the age of fourteen years and for some time after, he (this informant,) then a young boy, was frequently sent to call him to his meals; at which times he repeatedly observed, that not only the fences at the head of many of the furrows, but even his plough and its handles, were covered over with chalked numerical figures, &c.[[73]]—Hence it is evident, that the exuberance of a sublime native genius and of almost unbounded intellectual powers, unaided by any artificial means of excitement, were enabled, by dint of their own energy, to burst through those restraints which the corporeal employments of his youth necessarily imposed upon them.
During that portion of his life in which this youthful philosopher pursued the ordinary occupations of a husbandman, which continued until about the eighteenth year of his age, as well as in his earlier youth, he appeared to have inherited from healthful parents a sound constitution, and to have enjoyed good health.
It was at this period, or rather about the seventeenth year of his age, that he made a wooden clock, of very ingenious workmanship: and soon after, he constructed one of the same materials that compose the common four-and-twenty hour clock, and upon the same principles. But he had exhibited much earlier proofs of his mechanical genius, by making, when only seven or eight years old, a complete water-mill in miniature.
Mr. Rittenhouse’s father was a very respectable man: he possessed a good understanding, united to a most benevolent heart and great simplicity of manners. The writer long knew him; and, from his early acquaintance with the character, the appearance, and the habits of this worthy sire of an illustrious son, he had long supposed him to have been inclined to the religious principles of the society called Friends, although he had been bred a Baptist:—but a circumstance which shall be noticed hereafter, will evince the liberality of this good man’s opinions, in the all-important concern of religion. Yet, with truly estimable qualities, both of the head and heart, old Mr. Rittenhouse had no claims to what is termed genius; and therefore did not, probably, duly appreciate the early specimens of that talent, which appeared so conspicuous in his son David. Hence, he was for some time opposed to the young man’s earnest desire to renounce agricultural employments; for the purpose of devoting himself, altogether, to philosophical pursuits, in connexion with some such mechanical profession as might best comport with useful objects of natural philosophy, and be most likely, at the same time, to afford him the means of a comfortable subsistence. At length, however, the father yielded his own inclinations, in order to gratify what was manifestly the irresistible impulse of his son’s genius: he supplied him with money to purchase, in Philadelphia, such tools as were more immediately necessary for commencing the clock-making business, which the son then adopted as his profession.
About the same time, young Mr. Rittenhouse erected on the side of a public road, and on his father’s land in the township of Norriton, a small but commodious work-shop; and, after having made many implements of the trade with his own hands, to supply the deficiency of many such as were wanting in his purchased stock, he set out in good earnest as a clock and mathematical instrument maker.
From the age of eighteen or nineteen to twenty-five, Mr. Rittenhouse applied himself unremittingly, both to his trade and his studies. Employed throughout the day in his attention to the former, he devoted much of his nights to the latter. Indeed he deprived himself of the necessary hours of rest; for it was his almost invariable practice to sit up, at his books, until midnight, sometimes much later.
It was in this interval and by these means, that our young philosopher impaired his constitution, and contracted a pain in his breast; or rather, as he himself described that malady to the writer, “a constant heat in the pit of the stomach, affecting a space not exceeding the size of half a guinea, attended at times with much pain;” a sensation from which he was never exempt, during the remainder of his life. About this time, he retired from all business, and passed several weeks at the Yellow Springs, distant but a few miles from his place of residence. He there bathed and drank the waters; and from the use of this chalybeate, he appeared to have derived some benefit to his general health, though it afforded little alleviation of the pain in his breast.
A due regard to the sacredness of historic truth demands, that some circumstances which occurred while Mr. Rittenhouse was yet a youth, and one which it is believed had a very considerable influence on his subsequent pursuits and reputation, should now be made known. Because the writer of these memoirs conceives he ought not to be restrained, by motives which would appear to him to arise from a mistaken delicacy, from introducing into his work such notices of his own father, long since deceased, as do justice to his memory; while they also serve to elucidate the biographical history of Mr. Rittenhouse.
In the year 1751, when David Rittenhouse was about nineteen years of age, Thomas Barton, who was two years elder than David, opened a school in the neighbourhood of Mr. Matthias Rittenhouse. It was while Mr. Barton continued in that place, supposed to have been about a year and a half, that he became acquainted with the Rittenhouse Family; an acquaintance which soon ripened into a warm friendship for young Mr. Rittenhouse, and a more tender attachment to his sister, Esther.
Two years afterwards (in 1753), the personal attractions and fine understanding of the sister rendered her the wife of Mr. Barton; who, for some time before, had officiated as one of the tutors in the then recently-established Academy, afterwards College, of Philadelphia; now the University of Pennsylvania. In this station, he continued until the autumn of 1754; when he embarked for England, for the purpose of receiving episcopal ordination in the church, and returned to Pennsylvania in the early part of the following year.
The very intimate connexion thus formed between Mr. Barton and a sister of Mr. Rittenhouse (who was two years elder than this brother), strengthened the bands of friendship which had so early united these young men: a friendship affectionate and sincere, and one which never ceased until Mr. Barton’s death, nearly thirty years afterwards; notwithstanding some difference of political opinions had arisen between these brothers-in-law, in the latter part of that period, in consequence of the declaration of the American independence.
Mr. Barton was a native of Ireland, descended from an English family; of which, either two or three brothers settled in that kingdom, during the disastrous times in the interregnum of Charles I. Having obtained very considerable grants of land in Ireland, this family possessed ample estates in their then adopted country. Hence, flattering prospects of an establishment there, in respect to fortune, were held out to their descendants. Through one of those untoward circumstances, however, by means of which the most unexpected revolutions in the affairs of families and individuals have been sometimes produced, the expectations of an independent patrimony which our Mr. Barton’s father had entertained, were speedily dissipated. Nevertheless, this gentleman, who was the eldest son of his family, was instructed in the rudiments of a classical education in the vicinity of his family residence in the county of Monaghan, under the direction of the Rev. Mr. Folds, a respectable English clergyman; and at a suitable age, he was sent to the university of Dublin, where he finished his academical education. Entirely destitute of fortune, but possessing a strong intellect, stored with useful and ornamental learning as well as an ardent and enterprizing spirit, this young adventurer arrived in Philadelphia soon after he had completed his scholastic studies.
The writer’s principal design, in presenting to the public view these slight sketches of the early history of the late Rev. Mr. Barton, shall be now explained.
When Mr. Rittenhouse’s father established his residence at Norriton, and during the minority of the son, there were no schools in the vicinity at which any thing more was taught, than reading and writing in the English language and the simplest rules of arithmetic. Young Mr. Rittenhouse’s school-education, in his early youth, was therefore necessarily bounded by these scanty limits of accessible instruction: He was, in truth, taught nothing beyond these very circumscribed bounds of literary knowledge, prior to the nineteenth year of his age; though it is certain, that some years before that period of his life, he began to be known—at least in his own neighbourhood—as a mathematician and astronomer, in consequence of his cultivation of the transcendent genius with which heaven had endued him.
Under such circumstances as these, the familiar intercourse between David Rittenhouse and his young friend Barton, which commenced when the age of the former did not exceed nineteen years, could not fail to prove highly advantageous to the mental improvement of both. The one possessed a sublime native genius; which, however, was yet but very imperfectly cultivated, for want of the indispensable means of extending the bounds of natural knowledge: the other had enjoyed the use of those means, in an eminent degree, and thus justly acquired the reputation of a man of learning. A reciprocation of these different advantages, as may be well supposed, greatly promoted the intellectual improvement of both.
It will be readily conceived, that Mr. Barton’s knowledge of books must have rendered even his conversation instructive to Mr. Rittenhouse, at so early a period of his life. But the former so greatly admired the natural powers of his young friend’s mind, that he took a delight in obtaining for him access to such philosophical works, and other useful books, as he was then enabled to procure for his use; besides directing, as far as he was capable, the course of his studies.
After Mr. Barton’s removal to Philadelphia and while he resided in that city, his means of furnishing his friend with books, suitable for his instruction, were greatly enlarged; an advantage of which he most assiduously availed himself: and it is supposed to have been about this time, that a small circulating library was established in Norriton, at the instance of Mr. Barton, zealously seconded by the co-operation and influence of Mr. Rittenhouse.
Finally, when Mr. Barton returned from England, in the year 1755—at which time Mr. Rittenhouse was yet but twenty-three years of age, he brought with him a valuable addition to his friend’s[friend’s] little library; consisting, in part, of books which he himself had commissioned Mr. Barton to purchase for him.[[74]]
No doubt can be entertained, that Mr. Rittenhouse derived the great and extraordinary faculties of his mind from nature; and it is equally evident, that for some years after he arrived to manhood, he possessed very slender means of improving his natural talents: Nay further, it is well known to those who were long personally acquainted[acquainted] with him, that after his removal to Philadelphia, when he was eight-and-thirty years of age, a period of life at which the place of his residence, and the condition of his pecuniary affairs, united in placing within his reach much that is dear to science,—even then, his long continued professional employment and the various public stations he filled, in addition to frequent ill health, deprived him of a large share of those advantages. The vast stock of knowledge which, under such untoward circumstances, he actually acquired, is therefore an additional proof of his native strength of intellect.
But, wonderful as a kind of intuitive knowledge he possessed really was, his mental powers would probably have remained hidden from the world, they would have been very imperfectly cultivated, at best, had not an incident apparently trivial, and which occurred when our Astronomer was a young boy, furnished what was, in all probability, the very first incitement to an active employment of his philosophical as well as mechanical genius.
Mr. Rittenhouse’s mother having been already noticed somewhat particularly, the reason for this being done shall be here stated: it is connected with the incident just now referred to. This valuable woman had two brothers, David and Lewis Williams (or William), both of whom died in their minority. David, the elder of these, pursued the trade of a carpenter, or joiner. Though, like his nephew and namesake, he was almost wholly an uneducated youth, he also, like him, early discovered an unusual genius and strength of mind. After the death of this young man, on opening a chest containing the implements of his trade which was deposited at Mr. M. Rittenhouse’s, (in whose family it is presumed he dwelt,) a few elementary books, treating of arithmetic and geometry, were found in it: With these, there were also various calculations and other papers, in manuscript; all, the productions of David Williams himself, and such as indicated not only an uncommon genius, but an active spirit of philosophical research. To this humble yet valuable coffer of his deceased uncle, Mr. Rittenhouse had free access, while yet a very young boy. He often spoke of this acquisition as a treasure; inasmuch[inasmuch] as the instruments of his uncle’s calling afforded him some means of exercising the bent of his genius towards mechanism, while the books and manuscripts early led his mind to those congenial pursuits in mathematical and astronomical science, which Were ever after the favourite objects of his studies.[[75]]
It being thus apparent, that not only Mr. Rittenhouse’s mother but her brother David Williams were persons of uncommon intellectual powers, the writer thinks it fairly presumable, that our Astronomer inherited his genius from his mother’s family.[[76]] His surviving brother has decidedly expressed this opinion: in a letter on the subject of the deceased, addressed to the writer of these memoirs soon after Dr. Rittenhouse’s death, he says—“I am convinced his genius was more derived from his mother, than from his father.”
A casualty that occurred in the year 1756, appeared to have been very near depriving the world of the talents, services, and example of our Philosopher, at a very early period of those pursuits in which he was afterwards so eagerly engaged. This circumstance is thus narrated by himself, in a letter dated the 26th of July, in that year, and addressed to the Rev. Mr. Barton, at his then residence in Redding township, York county.[[77]]
“I was,” said our young philosopher, “obliged to ride hard to reach Lancaster, the evening after I left you; and being somewhat tired myself, as well as my horse, I determined to go to the Dunker’s-Town,[[78]] where I staid the remainder of that day and the night following. I was there entertained with an epitome of all the whimsies mankind are capable of conceiving. Yet it seemed to me the most melancholy place in the world, and I believe would soon kill me were I to continue there; though the people were exceedingly civil and kind, and the situation of the place is pleasant enough.[[79]] From thence I went homewards, through Reading;[[80]] where I was agreeably surprised, the number and goodness of the buildings far exceeding my expectations.
“You have perhaps seen, in one of the last papers, an account of the prodigiously large hail-stones which fell in Plymouth.[[81]] The lightning struck a tall green poplar standing in our meadow, just before the door, and levelled it with the earth. I was standing between the tree and house; and, at the same instant that I saw the flash of lightning, felt a most violent shock through my whole body,—and was stunned with such a horrible noise, that it is impossible for imagination to represent any thing like it.”
The advantages and the disadvantages, which Mr. Rittenhouse respectively enjoyed and encountered, until after he had attained to the period of manhood, have been mentioned; and it will be readily perceived, that the latter greatly outweighed the former, in every other particular than that of his native genius, which alone was sufficient to preponderate against innumerable difficulties.
The great deficiencies in his education, as well as their causes, having been misconceived and incorrectly represented in some publications, a due regard to truth demands a correction of such mistaken opinions. Soon after his death, there appeared in the Maryland Journal, “Anecdotical Notices of Mr. David Rittenhouse;” which, although written with some ingenuity and knowledge of the subject, contained several errors. It is therein asserted, among other things, that “his parents, incapable of giving him any other education than common reading and writing, intended to have brought him up to country-business; but, being blessed by nature with a mechanical turn of mind, he soon gave specimens of his ingenuity in making wooden clocks: This so recommended him to notice, as to give him an opportunity of learning the clock-making business.”—It has been already shewn, that Mr. Rittenhouse never received the least instruction in any mechanic art; and it is not ascertained that he ever made more than one wooden clock. It is also notoriously an error, that his parents were “incapable” of giving him any other education, than the common schooling he received: they were by no means poor, though not wealthy. His father inherited some patrimony; and he had, besides, been about nine years concerned in conducting the paper-manufactory near Germantown, after his one-and-twentieth year, before he purchased the Norriton farm.[[82]] This part of his estate he was enabled to give to his eldest son, David, about the year 1764; prior to which time the old gentleman removed to a farm he had purchased, nearly adjoining it in Worcester township, and on which he had erected a good two-story stone dwelling-house with suitable out-houses. There Mr. David Rittenhouse’s father and mother afterwards resided, together with their other son, Benjamin, (the house being so constructed as, conveniently, to accommodate two small families,) until the death of old Mrs. Rittenhouse in the autumn of 1777, at the age of seventy-three years, and of her husband in the autumn of 1780, in the seventy-eighth year of his age. The Worcester farm was left to the younger son: and, in addition to these not inconsiderable establishments for his sons, the old gentleman had given small portions to each of his five daughters, when they severally married. The remains of this worthy and upright man, for he truly merited that character, were interred in the cemetery belonging to a Baptist congregation, in the neighbourhood, in which both he and his wife had long attended divine worship. But, some years before his death, the old gentleman disposed of a lot of ground very near to his own house,—and gratuitously, if the writer’s information be correct,—to a Presbyterian congregation, for a burial place, and site for a church they were then about to erect. If this little piece of land was a donation to the religious society to whom it belongs, the grant of it, though not of great value, furnishes an instance of that liberality of sentiment and goodness of heart which characterized our Astronomer’s father, and to which some allusion is before made.
When, therefore, all the circumstances here mentioned, respecting Matthias Rittenhouse’s property and condition of life, shall be taken into view, it will be evident that he possessed a decent competency; with an estate quite independent, though not large: for he never enjoyed what is now termed affluence.
Concerning our Astronomer’s early life and condition, even his eloquent eulogist, Dr. Rush, was mistaken in some particulars. His assertion, that Mr. Rittenhouse was descended from parents “distinguished for probity, industry, and simple manners,” is perfectly correct. But, although he was comparatively “humble” in his “origin,” his father held the highly respectable station of an intelligent, independent farmer;[[83]] and it has been also seen, that his paternal ancestors, for some generations in succession, were proprietors of considerable manufactories of an article important in commerce and the arts, and eminently useful in literature and science as well as in the common affairs of life.
Dr. Rush has remarked, in regard to Mr. Rittenhouse’s talents first becoming generally known, that “the discovery of his uncommon merit belonged chiefly to his brother-in-law, the Rev. Mr. Barton, Dr. Smith, and the late Mr. John Lukens.” Perhaps it might be said, with greater strictness, that the “discovery” here spoken of, belonged solely to Mr. Barton; by whom it was communicated, very early, to his learned and reverend friend, Dr. Smith,—and through him, to the ingenious astronomical observer, Mr. Lukens, (afterwards surveyer-general,) as well as some other distinguished characters of that time. The writer in the Maryland paper before referred to, after having noticed the prevailing opinion that Mr. Rittenhouse was self-taught, had corrected the full extent of that misconception, in these words: “This is not strictly true; for, while engaged in these acquirements,” (astronomy, &c.) “the Rev. Mr. Barton, a learned episcopal clergyman of Lancaster, married his sister.”——“Mr. Barton, admiring the simplicity of manners and natural genius of his brother-in-law, afforded him every assistance in his power,—not only in mathematics, but in several other branches of literature: Mr. Rittenhouse was worthy of his notice; for he lost no time, and spared no pains, to improve himself in knowledge, as far as his limited education would permit.”
Hence, as well as from the preceding narrative, it will appear that Dr. Rush was led into a further mistake, respecting Mr. Rittenhouse.—In regard to his exalted genius, the learned professor has amply done justice to his memory. He has, in particular, recorded one extraordinary fact, in proof of his genius, well worthy of notice; and which is therefore related in the Professor’s own words.——“It was during the residence of our ingenious philosopher with his father, in the country, that he made himself master of Sir Isaac Newton’s Principia, which he read in the English translation of Mr. Motte. It was here, likewise, he became acquainted with the science of Fluxions; of which sublime invention he believed himself, for a while, to be the author: nor did he know for some years afterwards, that a contest had been carried on between Sir Isaac Newton and Leibnitz, for the honour of that great and useful discovery.” Then exclaims the ingenious eulogist, in terms of well-founded admiration, “What a mind was here!”—But, immediately after, he adds—“Without literary friends or society, and with but two or three books, he became, before he had reached his four-and-twentieth year, the rival of two of the greatest mathematicians in Europe!”—The circumstance must, then, have escaped Dr. Rush’s recollection—if indeed he had ever been made acquainted with it,—that five years before Mr. Rittenhouse attained to the age of twenty-four, he found at least one literary friend, in Mr. Barton; whose intimate society he long enjoyed, prior to that period; and that, through his means, he had access to many books.[[84]]
It is not meant to be insinuated, however, that Mr. Barton ever gave Mr. Rittenhouse any insight into the knowledge of fluxions; or, indeed, much instruction, if any at all, in other of the higher branches of mathematics: because the first named gentleman never did himself pretend to the character of a profound mathematician; and because, likewise, although always esteemed a man of learning, his pursuits in science and literature were chiefly directed to objects of a different nature. That Mr. Rittenhouse derived some instruction and information from his early acquaintance with Mr. Barton, is certain: but, whatever may have been the extent of the literary advantages which the latter was enabled to confer on his young friend and companion, they could not in any degree derogate from the intrinsic excellence and greatness of our Astronomer’s innate genius[genius].
That a mind so formed as that of our young philosopher—situated in life as he was—should have impelled him to assume the business of clock-making, can not be a matter of surprize: this occupation, connected with that of a mathematical instrument maker, is such as may be well supposed to have presented itself to his youthful ingenuity; being in accordance with the philosophical bent of his genius in his early years, while yet untutored in science and unknown to the world.
The great utility of the common clock, in measuring time, is universally known. It possesses numerous and manifest advantages, beyond those of sun-dials, clepsydræ, sand-glasses, and other horological instruments, by reason of its vastly superior accuracy: the sun-dial, indeed, is oftentimes wholly useless in all situations, even in the day-time; and always necessarily so, at night.
But the many improvements which have been made in modern times, in chronometers,—more especially in pendulum-clocks,—have very much advanced a correspondent accuracy in astronomical observations: and these improvements, together with those lately made in telescopes—chiefly by Dr. Herschel, the discoverer of the Georgium Sidus[[85]]—afford good grounds for hoping, that yet farther and more important additions will continue to be made to the recent discoveries in astronomy.
Further improvements may also be expected to take place, in the construction of watches and other spring-chronometers; so as to render them still more useful for the purposes of navigation, by ascertaining with greater precision the longitude at sea.[[86]] For this purpose, the finely-improved English time-keepers of Harrison, Mudge, and others, have been found of the greatest utility. Mr. de Zach, (in his Explanation and uses of the Tables of the Motions of the Sun,[[87]]) after some observations on determining differences of longitude by means of astronomical observation, says,[[88]]—“De cæteris longitudinem determinandi modis, non est hic disserendi locus;—de uno vero, horologiâ maritimâ seu nauticâ, quidquam adjicere non alienum erit. Triginta jam abhinc annis, ingeniosissimi horologiorum artifices, Harrison, Cummings, Kendal, Arnold, Mudge, apud Anglos,—Le Roy et Berthoud apud Gallos, varia navigantium usui, egregia excogitaverant, et ad magnum perduxerant perfectionis gradum, horologia nautica, (Anglis, Time-keeper.) Cum eorum in longitudinibus itenere maritimo definiendis, usum quisque norit, plura hic dicere abstineo; simile horologium ab ingenioso horolopega Thom. Mudge constructum, in Observatorio Regio Grenovicensi sæpius exploratum, anno 1784, a Clar. D. Campbell, classis navalis præfecto[[89]] ad Terram Novam (Newfoundland) vectum, et reductum, ab hoc tempore in Observatorio Excellentissimi Comitis de Bruhl, Londini, Doverstreet, assidue observatum est. Hoc ipsum horologium maritimum, anno 1786, in terrestribus, iteneris longitudines determinandi gratia, concreditum mihi fuit, cum â Serenissimo Duce Saxe-Gothanâ, omnium scientiarum bonarumque artium patrono, imprimis astronomiæ, faventissimo, Londino evocatus in Germaniam me conferrem, ubi amplissimæ splendidissimæ Speculæ, Astronomicæ Gothanæ extruendæ cura mihi demandata erat;[[90]] attuli eodem hoc tempore, ad Serenissimi mandatum, minoris molis horologium, quod in braccis gestari solet (Anglis, Pocket-chronometer,) a Londiniensi artifice, D. Josiah Emery,[[91]] constructum, quod summâ accuratione et subtilitate elaboratum, nil majoribus cedit horologiis nauticis, ut videre licet ex tribus horum motuum elenchis ab Ilustr. Comite de Bruhl, et â aliorum Dr. Arnold, nuperrime publici juris factis. Sub finem anni 1786 et ad initium 1787, Serenissimum in itenere per Germaniam, Galliam, et Italiam, comitatus sum: hoc itenere quorundam locorum et Specularum astronomicarum longitudines definitæ sunt ex comparatione temporis horologii maritimi (quod ad tempus solare medium Londinense, in Doverstreet incedebat) cum tempore medio loci, quod sextante Hadleianâ per solis altitudines, quas correspondentes dicimus, vel ex comparatione cum illo, quod in Speculis Astronomicis ab ipsis astronomis traditum nobis fuit. Iisdem itaque automatis, cum primum Gotham advenissem, observatorii futuri longitudinem maximâ cum curâ atque diligentiâ definivi, quam paucis post diebus Serenissimus Dux Londinum profectus, chronometro suo secum deportato denuo perbelle comprobaverat.”
This very respectable testimony of an eminent German astronomer affords incontestable proof of the great accuracy, of which nautical chronometers are susceptible, and to which they have actually been brought by some artists of celebrity, mostly English.[[92]]
The general use of the common clock ought not to derogate from the ingenuity of an invention of such universal importance in the affairs of human life. The pendulum-clock now in use was brought to some degree of perfection, if not invented, by Huygens,[[93]] who was one of the first mathematicians and astronomers of the age in which he lived: and the date of this invention is about the middle of the seventeenth century; although Galileo[Galileo] disputed with him the discovery, a few years earlier. Clocks of some kind date their antiquity much higher; some writers pretending to carry their invention back as far as the year 510 of the Christian era. However, on the authority of Conrad Gesner,[[94]] the honour of inventing the clock, before the application of the pendulum to these machines was made by Huygens, belongs to England: He says, that “Richard Wallingford, an English abbot of St. Albans, who flourished in the year 1326, made a wonderful clock by a most excellent art; the like of which could not be produced in all Europe.”[[95]] This was forty-six years before Henry de Vic, a German, made his clock for Charles V. king of France; and fifty-six years before the duke of Burgundy ordered one, which sounded the hour, to be carried away from the city of Courtray, in Flanders.
Within our own day and a short period of time preceding it, great improvements have been made in the construction of the pendulum-clock,[[96]] as well as in other descriptions of Chronometers.[[97]] Mr. Rittenhouse’s early zeal in his practical researches into astronomy, prompted him to desire the greatest possible accuracy in the construction of time-pieces adapted to astronomical purposes; and uniting, as he did, operative skill with a thorough knowledge of the principles upon which their construction depends, he was enabled—impelled by so powerful a motive—to display to the world, by his own manual ingenuity, the near approach to perfection to which the pendulum-chronometer may be brought. Besides his astronomical pursuits, his early employment in ascertaining the limits and fixing the territorial boundaries of Pennsylvania, and of some of the neighbouring states, obliged him to supply himself with chronometers of the greatest possible accuracy: and these were either made by his own hands, or under his immediate inspection by his brother, who, with the aid of his instruction, became an excellent mechanician. One of these fine instruments, bearing on its face the name of Benjamin Rittenhouse as the maker, and the date of the year 1786, is now in the possession of Mr. Norton Prior,[[98]] of Philadelphia: but that admirable one, the workmanship of which was executed by our Philosopher himself, and which was part of the apparatus of his Philadelphia Observatory, is now placed in the hall of the American Philosophical Society.[[99]] This is constructed on a greatly improved plan of his own, which improvement was afterwards applied to that now belonging to Mr. Prior; and the latter is the same chronometer, it is believed, that was used by Mr. D. Rittenhouse, in fixing the northern line which divides Pennsylvania from New York, and in establishing the boundary line between the last mentioned state, and Pennsylvania and Massachusetts, respectively, in the years 1786 and 1787.—A description[description] of the principles of his observatory-chronometer here mentioned, together with some account of its mechanism, will be found in the Appendix: the former having been communicated to the writer of these memoirs by the ingenious Robert Patterson, Esq. director of the Mint; and the latter by that able mechanician, Mr. Henry Voight, chief coiner in that institution,—a person who, by reason of his well-known skill as a clock and watch-maker, was employed by Mr. Rittenhouse more than forty years since, in the fabrication of some of his philosophical instruments.
The great accuracy and exquisite workmanship displayed in every thing belonging to the profession he pursued, that came through his hands, soon became pretty extensively known: and this knowledge of his mechanical abilities, assisted by the reputation he had already acquired as a mathematician and astronomer, in a short time procured him the friendship, respect and patronage, of some eminent scientific characters; while it promoted his interest, in the profession he had thus newly chosen. In this he was, nevertheless, self-taught; for he never received the least instruction from any person, in any mechanic art whatever: and, therefore, if he were to be considered as being merely an excellent artist, in an occupation intimately connected with the science of mathematics—untutored, as he was, in any art or science,—he would deservedly be deemed an extraordinary and eminent man. It will be perceived, however, that it was the union of the almost unbounded powers of his genius, and his prodigious acquirements in a sublime science, with his wonderful abilities as a philosophical mechanic—and these faculties and attainments, moreover, combined with an amiable and virtuous character,—which constituted that celebrity so justly attached to his name.
Our young philosopher lived a retired, though by no means an inactive life, in his father’s family, for several years after he arrived to (what is usually termed) lawful age. In this situation, which was a pleasant one in many respects, he long continued to enjoy the tranquil scenes of rural life, amidst the society of an amiable and very intelligent family-circle, and surrounded by many worthy and estimable neighbours, by whom he was both loved and respected. His chief occupation was the profession he had chosen; but in such occasional intervals of personal abstraction from the mechanical part of his business, as the assistance the workmen he employed enabled him to obtain, he devoted much of the time to philosophical pursuits and study. Frugal in his expenditures, his industry furnished him amply with the means of comfort; and in the plentiful and decent mansion of his father’s family he experienced, with contentment, almost every gratification that a reasonable mind could desire. Good health seemed alone to be wanting to complete his happiness, in his earlier years; a privation which he felt through the greater part of his life.
Such was the condition of Mr. Rittenhouse, while he remained under the same roof with his father and mother, and some of their unmarried children. It was a mode of life which his disposition was calculated to enjoy; for, strongly attached to his kindred and friends by the benevolence of his nature, he derived much of his happiness from the reciprocal affections of a domestic circle and the kind intercourses of friendly esteem.
There does not appear to have been, for a long time, any occurrence that could have much disturbed the placid composure of our philosopher’s mind,—until 1762; in which year his sister Anne died, in the twenty-sixth year of her age. She was the wife of Mr. George Shoemaker, a respectable citizen of Philadelphia, and a member of the religious society of Friends. A letter which Mr. Rittenhouse wrote to his brother-in-law Mr. Barton, in October 1762, announcing this event, indicates the keenness of his sensibility on the occasion. Mrs. Shoemaker was a woman of intrinsic worth; she died in the prime of life; and it is believed, she was the first of Mr. Rittenhouse’s affectionate little band of brothers and sisters who had attained to the age of maturity, that he had then lost. After giving a circumstantial account of his sister’s illness and death, he informs Mr. Barton, that Mr. Daniel Stanton, an eminent public speaker in the society of Friends,[[100]] attended her in her last illness, at her particular request;—and, added Mr. Rittenhouse, “the same worthy gentleman who visited her in her sickness, delivered an excellent exhortation at the grave,—giving, in a few words, a very just character, I think, of our deceased sister.”
Mr. Shoemaker (who married again) had an only child named Jacob, by his first wife here mentioned. This son became a young man of promising character: but, having entered the American army at the commencement of the revolutionary war, and attained (it is believed) the rank of captain, under the patronage of his uncle David Rittenhouse, he was slain in the campaign of 1781, in South-Carolina. Mr. Rittenhouse was much afflicted by the death of this gallant young man, who fell in the flower of his age.
An occasion presented itself, in which Mr. Rittenhouse, when only in the thirty-second year of his age, was employed in transacting an important piece of business of a public nature: it was as follows.
In consequence of a petition of the Messrs. Penn to the court of chancery in England, exhibited in the year 1735, it was decreed by the lord chancellor, in 1750,—That an agreement which had been entered into between the Penns and Lord Baltimore, concerning the long-subsisting controversy relative to the boundary lines between Pennsylvania and Maryland, should be carried into specific execution: and, accordingly, a final agreement was executed by those proprietaries of the two provinces, on the fourth day July[day July], 1760.
In pursuance of the chancellor’s decree, provision was made for ascertaining and fixing the “circle,” to be “drawn at twelve miles distance from New-Castle, northward and westward, unto the beginning of the fortieth degree of north latitude;”—and thence, running a straight line westward, five degrees in longitude, to be computed from the eastern boundary; as described in the royal charter to William Penn. Commissioners were appointed under the chancery-degree, for settling these boundaries. But nothing was definitively done in the business, until the eleventh of January, 1769; when the line which was run by Messrs. Mason and Dixon in the years 1767 and 1768, in pursuance of the final agreement between the parties before mentioned, was approved and ratified by the king in council.
So early, however, as about the close of the year 1763, four or five years before the running and marking of Mason and Dixon’s line, Mr. Rittenhouse was employed by the Penn family in making some geographical arrangements, preparatory to the final establishment of those boundaries. He was engaged to perform this service, by the Rev. Mr. Richard Peters, (afterwards D. D. and rector of the united churches of Christ-Church and St. Peters, in Philadelphia,) who then officiated as the Governor’s provincial secretary; a gentleman of learning and great worth; and one who, on various occasions, manifested a friendship for Mr. Rittenhouse, as well the high opinion he entertained of his abilities.
The particular department of that business thus committed to Mr. Rittenhouse, seems to have been the fixing of the Circle,—or at least, the tracing of its course or route, topographically; and this was, certainly, a matter of no little difficulty. That this service was performed to the satisfaction of the then administrators of the government of Pennsylvania, and that it was an arduous one, will appear by the following extract of a letter from Mr. Rittenhouse to the Rev. Mr. Barton, dated the sixteenth of February, 1764.[[101]]
“I hope,” said he, “you will never believe that I am determined to disclaim all kind of intercourse” with you: for I can say with the greatest sincerity there are very few things I so much regret, as that I have it not in my power to spend a great part of my time with you. My attention has, for some time past, been engaged with such a multiplicity of things, that I may with some reason claim your indulgence for my not writing. Have I not, indeed, an equal right to complain?—for, I think this letter will balance our accounts, from the time I last saw you.
“I waited on Mr. Peters, as you desired me to do. He treated me kindly, and made an offer of doing me some services; for which I am greatly obliged to him. He likewise paid me for my attendance at New-Castle, and much more generously than I expected;—though I found it a very laborious affair; being obliged, singly, to go through a number of tedious and intricate calculations.”
It appears that about this time, Mr. Rittenhouse’s friends had some beneficial object in view for him; perhaps some official situation, which they conceived to be adapted to the nature of his pursuits, and such as might more permanently promote his interests. But whatever that object may have been, he seems to have hesitated about it. If it were a public appointment of a permanent kind, it would probably have required his removal to the city,—a measure which he did not contemplate at that time; and he might, besides, have been disinclined to undertake any official duties, which would be likely to occupy the greater part of his time. He expressed himself thus to Mr. Barton, on the subject, in the letter just quoted:—“I am greatly obliged to you, my dear brother, for pointing out any prospect of advantage to me: I shall consider the matter you mention in your last, and let you know my opinion. The objections you have so well answered, are those which would most readily occur to me. Considering the crazy state of my constitution, a retired life would certainly suit me best. Since death, to use John Bunyan’s[[102]] phrase, does usually knock at my door once a day, would it not be a folly for me to take up the load of any public business?”
About three years afterwards, Mr. Rittenhouse seemed to have been less indisposed to accept of an official situation: and, such was his high standing with the government and its most influential friends, there can be very little doubt he could have obtained a respectable one. It is evident that, at this latter period, when perhaps his health was improved, he had some particular office in view: because, by a letter to Mr. Barton, dated January 28th 1767, he said—“I am entirely satisfied with your proceedings in the affair I recommended to you; and I shall wait on Mr. Peters. The reputation of the office would be very agreeable to me; but the execution of it would, I am afraid, greatly interfere with the other projects you have so much insisted on.”
Mr. Rittenhouse continued a bachelor until the 20th of February, 1766, when he married Eleanor Colston, daughter of Bernard Colston, a reputable farmer in the neighbourhood. This person belonged to the religious society called Quakers; Mr. Rittenhouse[Rittenhouse] was not himself a member of any particular church: but the marriage was solemnized at Norriton, by the Rev. Mr. Barton, who went thither for the purpose at his brother-in-law’s request.
Some time prior to this event, old Mr. Rittenhouse, having previously made his son David the proprietor of the Norriton farm, removed with his family to the house he had built[[103]] on his place in Worcester township, already mentioned; while the son’s family occupied the old place of residence: and here our Astronomer remained about four years after his marriage. It was during this period, that his reputation as an astronomer became eminently conspicuous;[[104]] his name acquired a celebrity even in the old world, of which his early but now much increased fame, in his native country, was a sure presage.[[105]]
About the time that he projected his Orrery (which shall be duly noticed in its place), it appears he had been speculating on the doctrine of the compressibility of water. For in a letter to Mr. Barton, dated from Philadelphia the 27th of March, 1767, he mentions,—that he had not then met with any person, who had seen Mr. Kinnersley’s[[106]] experiment on that theory; but that he understood it was made with the air-pump, and conjectured it to have been similar to the one made by a member of the Royal Society, related in Martin’s Magazine: which is thus quoted in Mr. Rittenhouse’s letter:
“I took a glass ball of about an inch and 6/10 in diameter, which was joined to a cylindrical tube of 4 inches and 2/10 in length, and in diameter 1/100 of an inch; and by weighing the quantity of mercury that exactly filled the ball, and also the quantity that filled the tube, I found that the mercury in 23/100 of an inch of the tube was the 10000th part of that contained in the ball; and with the edge of a file, I divided the tube accordingly. This having been done, I filled the ball and part of the tube with water exhausted of air: Now, by placing this ball and tube under the receiver of an air-pump, I could see the degree of expansion of the water, answering to any degree of rarefaction of the air; and by putting it into a glass receiver of a condensing engine, I could see the degree of compression of the water, answering to any degree of condensation of the air, &c.”—Then adds. Mr. Rittenhouse—“Indeed I do not doubt the compressibility of water, although the above experiment does not much please me. If the particles of water were in actual contact, it would be difficult to conceive how any body could much exceed it in specific gravity; yet we find that gold does, more than eighteen times.”
The first academic honour conferred upon our philosopher, was on the 17th of November, 1767; when the College of Philadelphia, then in its meridian splendour, bestowed on him an honorary degree of Master of Arts. Mr. Rittenhouse being present at the commencement then held, the provost, in conferring this degree, thus addressed him,—in terms of a just and well merited compliment:
“Sir,—The trustees of this College (the faculty of professors cheerfully concurring), being ever desirous to distinguish real merit, especially in the natives of this province,—and well-assured of the extraordinary progress and improvement which you have made, by a felicity of natural genius, in mechanics, mathematics, astronomy, and other liberal arts and sciences, all which you have adorned by singular modesty and irreproachable morals,—have authorized and required me to admit you to the honorary degree of Master of Arts, in this seminary: I de therefore, by virtue of this authority, most cheerfully admit, &c.”
Mr. Rittenhouse’s great abilities, as an astronomer and mathematician, being now every where known, he was employed in the year 1769, in settling the limits between the provinces of New-York and New-Jersey. The original grant of all the territory, called by the Dutch New-Netherlands (sometimes Nova-Belgia), was made by King Charles II. to James Duke of York, on the 12th of March, 1663-4; and on the 24th of June following, the Duke granted that part of it, now called New-Jersey, to the Lord Berkeley of Stratton and Sir George Carteret, jointly. The Dutch reduced the country, in the year 1672; but it was restored by the peace of Westminster, February the 9th, 1673-4. On the 29th of June, in the same year, a new patent was issued to the Duke of York, for the lands comprised within the limits described in the former patent. On the 28th of the succeeding July, the colony of New-Jersey was divided into East and West-Jersey (hence, generally called the Jersies); and the former was then granted, by the Duke of York, to Sir George Carteret. In 1675, West-Jersey, being Lord Berkeley’s moiety of the province, was sold to John Fenwick, in trust for Edward Bylinge; who assigned his interest therein to William Penn and others,[[107]] in trust, for the use of his creditors. This partition was confirmed in the year 1719, by the general assembly of the Jersies. But prior to this confirmation, viz. the 10th of October, 1678, a new grant of West-Jersey was made by the Duke of York, to the assigns of Lord Berkeley; and on the 1st of February, 1681-2, East-Jersey was sold and conveyed, in pursuance of Sir George Carteret’s will, to twelve persons; who, by separate deeds, conveyed one-half of their several interests in the same to twelve other persons: and, on the 14th of the next month, the Duke of York made a new grant of East-Jersey to those twenty-four proprietors, thereby confirming the same to them. The proprietors of both the Jersies afterwards became very numerous, by purchase as well as by descent. This being attended with great inconveniencies, they finally surrendered the government to the crown, on the 17th of April, 1702: and from that time, the province of New-Jersey continued to be a royal government, until the American revolution.
The division-line, between East and West-Jersey, was to run from the south-east point of Little Egg-Harbour, on Barnegate Creek—being about midway between Cape-May and Sandy-Hook, to a creek, a little below Ancocus-Creek, on the river Delaware; thence, about thirty-five miles in a straight course, along the Delaware, up to 44° 40´ of north latitude.
The province of New-York passed a legislative act on this subject, in the year 1762; and the New-Jersey Assembly enacted a corresponding law, in 1764. Five commissioners—namely, John Stevens, James Parker, Henry Cuyler, William Donaldson, and Walter Rutherford—were appointed on this business, for the two provinces: their report was passed upon, by both; and it was confirmed by the King in council, the 1st of September, 1773. It is understood, that the division-line between East and West-Jersey remained unsettled, so late as the year 1789. But it nevertheless appears, that the territorial boundary between New-York and New-Jersey was fixed by Mr. Rittenhouse, forty-four years ago.
A recurrence shall now be had to a date anterior to our Philosopher’s employment in the transaction just mentioned.—Within the two years preceding that period, two objects of much importance to astronomical science, claimed a large share of the public attention, in this country: One of them, especially, had already actually engaged the investigations of the ablest astronomers of the other hemisphere, as well as our own; preparatory to the then approaching event, to which those researches were directed. The result of the expectations excited by both of those objects proved, on their final completion, highly honourable to the fame of Mr. Rittenhouse.
The first of these, in the order of time, was our Astronomer’s newly-projected Orrery; a general but concise description of which, was communicated by his friend, the Rev. Dr. Smith, to the Philosophical Society, on the 21st of March, 1768. Of this fine and eminently useful piece of mechanism, more particular mention shall be made in the sequel.
The other circumstance, just referred to, was the then approaching Transit of Venus over the Sun’s disk; an event which was to take place on the 3d day of June, 1769: And of Mr. Rittenhouse’s participation in the arduous labours of the astronomical world, on that very interesting occasion, the following narrative will furnish some account.
The American Philosophical Society, in their meeting on the 7th of January, 1769, had appointed the following gentlemen to observe that rare phænomenon,[[108]] as it was aptly styled by Dr. Smith; namely, the. Rev. Mr. (afterwards Dr.) John Ewing, Mr. Thomas Prior, Joseph Shippen, jun. Esq., Hugh Williamson, M. D., the Rev. Dr. Smith, Mr. David Rittenhouse, John Lukens, Esq. and Messrs. James Alexander, Owen Biddle, James Pearson, John Sellers, Charles Thomson, and William Poole. The gentlemen thus nominated were distributed into three committees, for the purpose of making separate observations at three several places; these were, the city of Philadelphia, Mr. Rittenhouse’s residence, in Norriton, and the Light-House near Cape Henlopen, on Delaware Bay. Dr. Ewing, an able mathematician and very respectable astronomer, had the principal direction of the Observatory in the City, which was erected on this occasion in the State-house Gardens; and Mr. O. Biddle, a person of much ingenuity, had the charge of superintending the observations at Cape Henlopen. Associated with Mr. Rittenhouse, on the Norriton committee, were the Rev. Dr. Smith, provost of the College of Philadelphia, well known as an astronomer and eminently skilled in the mathematics; Mr. Lukens, then surveyor-general of Pennsylvania, who possessed considerable abilities in the same departments of science; and Mr. Sellers, a respectable member of the provincial legislature, for the county of Chester. The Rev. Mr. Barton, with some other gentlemen of ingenuity and talents, voluntarily attended at Norriton, on this occasion; and rendered such assistance as they could, to the committee.
As the time approached near, when this extraordinary and almost unprecedented[[109]] astronomical phænomenon was to manifest itself, the public expectation and anxiety, which were before considerable, became greatly heightened. The ignorant—and those, generally, unacquainted with the nature of the looked-for event,—hearing much every where said on the subject, and seeing the preparations making for the occasion, had their curiosity wonderfully excited. To scientific men, the inestimable value of the approaching phænomenon suggested very different sensations. “Its importance to the interests of Astronomy and Navigation, had,” as Dr. Ewing observed at the time, “justly drawn the attention of every civilized nation in the world.” An accurate ascertainment of the Sun’s Parallax,—an important. and fundamental article in Astronomy, was a desideratum not yet obtained. Only two Transits of Venus over the Sun, had been observed, prior to the 3d of June, 1769, since the creation of the world; and of these, the first alone was seen but by two persons:[[110]] Yet, as the learned gentleman just quoted has remarked,—“the Transits of Venus, alone, afford an opportunity of determining this problem” (the settling the Parallax of the Sun,) “with sufficient certainty: and these,[these,]” he adds, “happen so seldom, that there cannot be more than two in one century, and in some centuries none at all.”
To an object, then, of such vast importance to science, were proportioned the expectations of our Observers. But they could not fail to experience, at the same time, in common with their astronomical brethren in other parts of the world, a large portion of anxious apprehensions, lest a cloudy day—nay, even a solitary passing cloud,—should baffle entirely their exalted hopes, and destroy all the fruits of their arduous labours! Yet such an occurrence, as one or the other of these events, was evidently within the calculations of a probable incident.
Mr. Rittenhouse participated largely in these blended hopes and fears. He had, for some time before, been laboriously employed in making the requisite preparatory observations and calculations: and, as Norriton was now rendered eminently conspicuous, by being fixed on as a principal site for observing the very interesting phænomenon so near at hand, he had been assiduously engaged, at the same time, in preparing and furnishing an Observatory at that place, suitable for the occasion. This he began to erect early in November, 1768,—“agreeably,” to use his own words, “to the resolutions of the American Philosophical Society;” but, through various disappointments from workmen and weather, he was not enabled to complete it till the middle of April, 1769.[[111]]
The Norriton Observatory was commodiously situated near Mr. Rittenhouse’s mansion, on a pretty elevated piece of ground, commanding a good range of horizontal view. This temporary edifice was as well adapted to the purpose for which it was chiefly designed, as the nature of the materials of which it was constructed, and other circumstances, would permit. Some monies had been previously appropriated by the Philosophical Society, towards defraying the expenses necessarily incident to this occasion, at the three several places of observation: but the funds of the society, at their disposal for such purposes, were very limited; and it is believed that the quota of these funds assigned for the expenditures actually incurred for making the observations of the transit, at Norriton, was quite inconsiderable in its amount.
In order that ample justice may be done to the merits of Mr. Rittenhouse, for all the preparatory arrangements made by him on this occasion, the reader is here presented with an extract from Dr. Smith’s subsequent Report, to the Philosophical Society, of the proceedings of the Norriton Committee, and made in their behalf.—“I am persuaded” says the doctor, “that the dependance which the learned world may place on any particular Transit-Account, will be in proportion to the previous and subsequent care, which is found to have been taken in a series of accurate and well conducted observations, for ascertaining the going of the time-pieces, and fixing the latitude and longitude of the place of observations, &c. And I am the more desirous to be particular in these points, in order to do justice to Mr. Rittenhouse, one of the committee; to whose extraordinary skill and diligence is owing whatever advantage may be derived, in these respects, to our observation of the Transit itself.”—“Our great discouragement at our first appointment,” continues the learned reporter, “was the want of proper apparatus, especially good Telescopes with Micrometers. The generosity of our Provincial Assembly soon removed a great part of this discouragement, not only by their vote to purchase one of the best reflecting Telescopes, with a Dollond’s micrometer;[[112]] but likewise by their subsequent donation of one hundred pounds,” (this was in sterling money, = $444) “for erecting Observatories and defraying other incidental expences.[[113]] It was forseen, that on the arrival of the Telescope, added to such private ones as might be procured in the city, together with fitting up the instruments belonging to the honourable the Proprietaries of the province—viz. the equal Altitude and Transit Instruments and the large astronomical Sector,—nothing would be wanted for the city Observatory in the State-House Square, but a good Time-piece, which was easily to be procured. We remained, however, still at a loss, how to furnish the Norriton Observatory:[[114]] But even this difficulty gradually vanished.”
Thus it appears, that while the public contributions, and such astronomical instruments suitable for the occasion as were the public property, were principally at the disposal of the Philadelphia committee, the Observatory at Norriton—which seems to have been considered as a private establishment, belonging to an individual,—depended almost entirely on other resources. Even an excellent reflecting telescope (though without a micrometer,) the property of the Library Company of Philadelphia, and to which institution it was a donation from the Hon. T. Penn,—the same that had been used by Messrs. Macon and Dixon, when employed in settling the boundary lines of Pennsylvania and Maryland—was necessarily appropriated to the use of Mr. Owen Biddle, who was appointed by the Society to conduct the Observation of the Transit, near Cape Henlopen.
The Norriton Observatory was, notwithstanding, at last completely furnished with every instrument proper for the occasion. In consequence of some previous communications made by Dr. Smith to the Hon. Mr. T. Penn of London, and to the Rev. Mr. Maskelyne, the British astronomer-royal at Greenwich, the former worthy and liberal gentleman had sent, for the use of the Norriton committee, a reflecting Telescope with Dollond’s Micrometer—such as the doctor had expressed a wish to obtain; and requested, that after the committee should have made their observations with it, it should be presented in his name to the College.[[115]] Through the means of Dr. Smith, likewise, an astronomical quadrant of two and an half feet radius, made by Sisson, the property of the East-Jersey proprietaries, was procured by Mr. Lukens from the Earl of Stirling, surveyor-general of that province. This had been pretty early sent up by Mr. Lukens to Mr. Rittenhouse, and was used by him in ascertaining the latitude of his Observatory.
In addition to these and some other apparatus used at Norriton on the occasion—a catalogue and description of the whole of which, are contained in Dr. Smith’s before-mentioned report—the zeal, industry, and talents of Mr. Rittenhouse enabled him to furnish his Observatory with the three following described instruments, made by himself,[[116]] as described by Dr. Smith.
1. An Equal Altitude Instrument—its telescope three and an half feet focal length, with two horizontal hairs, and a vertical one in its focus; firmly supported on a stone pedestal, and easily adjusted to a plummet-wire four feet in length, by two screws, one moving in a North and South, the other in an East and West direction.
2. A Transit Telescope, fixed in the meridian, on fine steel points; so that the hair in its focus could move in no other direction than along the meridian; in which were two marks, South and North, about 330 yards distance each; to which it could be readily adjusted in an horizontal position by one screw, as it could in a vertical position, by another.
3. An excellent Time-piece—having for its pendulum-rod a flat steel bar, with a bob weighing about twelve pounds, and vibrating in a small arch. This went eight days, did not stop when wound up, beat dead seconds, and was kept in motion by a weight of five pounds.[[117]]
Thus was the Norriton Observatory furnished with all the more immediately necessary apparatus, in readiness for the important event which was the main object of these arduous exertions. Much credit was due to Dr. Smith, much to Mr. Lukens and the other gentlemen engaged on this occasion, for the assistance which he, and they, afforded Mr. Rittenhouse. Yet the doctor himself very candidly says—in reporting the proceedings of the Norriton committee to the Philosophical Society,—“other engagements did not permit Mr. Lukens or myself to pay much attention to the necessary preparations; but we knew that we had entrusted them to a gentleman on the spot, who had joined to a complete skill in mechanics, so extensive an astronomical and mathematical knowledge, that the use, management, and even the construction of the necessary apparatus, were perfectly familiar to him. Mr. Lukens and myself could not set out for his house till Thursday, June 1st; but, on our arrival there, we found every preparation so forward, that we had little to do, but to adjust our respective telescopes to distinct vision. He had fitted up the different instruments, and made a great number of observations, to ascertain the going of his Time-piece, and to determine the latitude and longitude of his Observatory. The laudable pains he hath taken in these material articles,” continues Dr. Smith in his report, “will best appear from the work itself,—which he hath committed into my hands, with the following modest introduction; giving me a liberty, which his own accuracy, care and abilities, leave no room to exercise.”[[118]]
Norriton, July 18th 1769.
“Dear Sir,
“The enclosed is the best account I can give of the Contacts, as I observed them; and of what I saw during the interval between them. I should be glad you would contract them, and also the other papers, into a smaller compass,—as I would have done myself, if I had known how. I beg you would not copy any thing merely because I have written it, but leave out what you think superfluous.—I am, with great esteem and affection, yours, &c.
David Rittenhouse.[[119]]
To Rev. Dr. Smith.”
The result of the Norriton Observations of the Transit of Venus—as well as those also made under the auspices of the American Philosophical Society, at Philadelphia and Cape Henlopen—will be found, in detail, in the first volume of the Transactions of that Society.[[120]] And “the Work itself,” to which Dr. Smith refers, in his Report of the Proceedings of the Norriton Committee, bears ample testimony to the transcendent Astronomical Abilities of Mr. Rittenhouse.—Four days after the Transit, Dr. Smith transmitted to the Hon. Mr. Penn, in London, a short account of the Norriton Observations, more particularly mentioning the times of the Contacts, and a few other circumstances attending them. This was speedily communicated by Mr. Penn to the Rev. Mr. Maskelyne,[[121]] the Astronomer Royal; who, acknowledging the receipt of the communication, by a note, dated at Greenwich the 2d of August, 1769, says—“I thank you for the account of the Pennsylvania Observations (of the Transit,) which seem excellent and complete,[[122]] and do honour to the gentlemen who made them[[123]], and those who promoted the undertaking;— among whom, I reckon yourself[[124]] in the first place.”[[125]]
Here the observation will emphatically apply;—Laus est, â viro laudato laudari.
Before this interesting occurrence in the life of Mr. Rittenhouse is finally passed over, the reader’s attention is solicited to the beautiful and animated description given by Dr. Rush, in his Eulogium, of the sensations which must have been more particularly experienced by that extraordinary man, on the near approach of the long-expected Phænomenon.—“We are naturally led here,” says the learned Professor, “to take a view of our Philosopher, with his associates, in their preparations to observe a phænomenon which had never been seen but twice[[126]] before, by any inhabitant of our earth, which would never be seen again by any person then living, and on which depended very important astronomical consequences. The night before the long-expected day, was probably passed in a degree of solicitude which precluded sleep. How great must have been their joy, when they beheld the morning sun!—‘and the whole horizon without a cloud;’ for such is the description of the day, given by Mr. Rittenhouse, in the report referred to by Dr. Smith. In pensive silence and trembling anxiety, they waited for the predicted moment of observation: it came,—and brought with it all that had been wished for, and expected, by those who saw it.—In our Philosopher, it excited—in the instant of one of the contacts of the planet with the sun, an emotion of delight so exquisite and powerful, as to induce fainting. This,” then remarks Dr. Rush, “will readily be believed by those who have known the extent of that pleasure which attends the discovery, or first perception of Truth.”
On the 9th of November, following, there was a Transit of Mercury over the Sun. An account of this phænomenon,—as observed at Norriton by William Smith[Smith], d. d. John Lukens, Esq. and Messrs. David Rittenhouse and Owen Biddle, the Committee appointed for that Observation by the American Philosophical Society,—was drawn up and communicated to the Society, by direction and in behalf of the Committee, by Dr. Smith: this will be found in the first volume of the Society’s Transactions. In this report it is remarked, that—“the first time that ever Mercury was observed on the Sun’s disk, was by Gassendus at Paris, October 28th 1631, O. S. and that the Transit of Nov. 9th was the fourth in that class; the two intermediate ones, each at forty-six years distance, having been observed by Dr. Halley, in 1677 and 1723.”
Mr. Maskelyne, the celebrated English Astronomer before mentioned,[[127]]—in a letter to Dr. Smith, of the 26th of December, 1769—expressed a wish “that the difference of Meridians of Norriton and Philadelphia, could be determined by some measures and bearings, within one-fiftieth or one-hundredth part of[of] the whole; in order to connect,” continues Mr. Maskelyne, “your observations of the Longitude of Norriton with those made by Messrs. Mason and Dixon, in the course of measuring the degree of Latitude.”—This request of the Astronomer Royal was communicated to the Philosophical Society of Philadelphia; in consequence of which, Dr. Smith, Mr. Lukens and Mr. Rittenhouse, were appointed to make the terrestrial measurement required. These gentlemen, having taken to their assistance Mr. Archibald M’Clean and Mr. Jesse Lukens, two able and experienced Surveyors, commenced their operations at Norriton, early on the 2d day of July following, and completed their survey on the 4th day of that month. The Report of the able Committee, to which this business was assigned by the American Philosophical Society, is also contained in the first volume of the Transactions of that learned Body. After giving various calculations, resulting from the operations of that committee, the Reporter says—“Hence, by the above measurement and work, we get Norriton Observatory 52″ of time West of the Observatory in the State-house Square; which is exactly what we got by that excellent element, the external contact of Mercury with the Sun, Nov. 9th 1769.”—“The external contact,” continues the Reporter, “gave it something more; owing, no doubt, to the difference that will arise among Observers, in determining the exact moment when the thread of light is compleated: and the mean of all our Observations gives the difference of Meridians, between Norriton and Philadelphia, only 4″ of time more than the terrestrial measurement, and the external contact of Mercury, gave it,—which may be taken as a very great degree of exactness; if we consider that the difference of Meridians, between the long-established Observatories of Greenwich and Paris, (as Mr. De la Lande writes, Nov. 18th 1762,) was not then determined within 20″ of time—For, he says, ‘some called it 9′ 15″; others, 9′ 40″;’ but that he himself commonly used 9′ 20″, though he could not tell from what Observations it was deduced.[[128]]—Finally, the Report fixes Philadelphia to be 5h 0′ 37″, and Norriton, 5h 1′ 29″ West from Greenwich.[[129]] The Latitude of Norriton, as deduced from the actual mensuration just mentioned, connected with Observations previously made by Mr. Rittenhouse—predicated also, in part, on antecedent Calculations of Messrs. Mason and Dixon, who, (having been furnished with a complete Astronomical Sector,) had ascertained the southernmost point of the City of Philadelphia to be in Latitude 39° 56′ 29″,4. N.—is stated, in the same Report, as being 40° 9′ 31″. It came out, by the measurement, 25″.09 less North, with respect to the southernmost point of Philadelphia, than Mr. Rittenhouse’s Observations had given it; and, in making these, he had no better Instrument than Sisson’s two-and-an half feet Quadrant. Nevertheless, the framer of the Report remarks, “as both were fixed by celestial observations and experienced Men, the small difference ought perhaps to be divided; and if a mean be taken, to reconcile it with the terrestrial measure, the Lat. of the south point of Philadelphia would be 39° 56′ 42″; and that of Norriton, 40° 9′ 43″.[[130]]
The same Volume of the American Philosophical Transactions that comprehends the communications of these Proceedings—as well as various Observations, made at different places, on the then recent Transit of Venus—contains also a Memoir, by Dr. Smith, deducing the Sun’s Parallax from a comparison of the Norriton and some other American Observations of the Transit of Venus, in 1769, with the Greenwich and some other European Observations of the same: And with this paper, its learned writer has incorporated a communication, on the same subject, made to him by Mr. Rittenhouse.
Until about the period at which the latest of these favourite transactions of Mr. Rittenhouse took place—namely, his geometrical employment in ascertaining the Latitude and Longitude of Norriton and Philadelphia, respectively,—he continued to reside on his farm at Norriton. And here he still carried on, with the aid of some apprentices and journey-men, his self-acquired occupation of a Clock and Mathematical Instrument-maker: combining, at intervals, with these mechanical pursuits, an unceasing attention to his philosophical studies and researches; and occasionally employing himself, principally with a view to his health, in some of the occupations of Husbandry. Ever an economist of Time, of which he well knew the inestimable value, none of his hours which could be spared from necessary sleep were suffered to be unemployed. In this rural abode, he enjoyed the comforts of domestic life amidst his little family, consisting only of an amiable wife and two young children. In short, no part of his time was unengaged, or uselessly passed; although he, not unfrequently, felt the solace of friendly calls, and was gratified by visits from persons of science, worth, and distinction.
The writer of these memoirs designed to narrate those circumstances most worthy of notice, in the Life and character of Mr. Rittenhouse, in their chronological order; and this plan will be generally adhered to. Having followed our philosopher in his astronomical and mechanical pursuits, up to the year 1770, it therefore becomes proper to recur to a period of his life some few years earlier, in order to introduce the history of his Orrery,[[131]] before mentioned; a piece of mechanism which is admitted, by all competent judges of its merit, to be one of the greatest of his works.
The Planetarium invented by Mr. George Graham,[[132]]—and a model of which was improperly retained by Mr. Rowley, its constructor,—had, long before the appearance of Mr. Rittenhouse’s machine, acquired the name of an Orrery; in compliment to Richard Boyle, Earl of Orrery,[[133]] who merely patronized the construction of one, from the artist Rowley’s pirated model. This complimentary appellation of Mr. Graham’s then newly invented Planetarium is said to have been bestowed upon it by Lord Orrery’s friend, Sir Richard Steele:[[134]] and, the name being thus applied to that machine, all those of the nature of Planetaria, subsequently constructed,—however variant in usefulness or design, from the original one bearing the name of an “Orrery,”—were denominated Orreries.[[135]] In compliance, then, with long established usage, Mr. Rittenhouse modestly called his Planetarian-machine, from the first projection of it, an Orrery; although the entire merit, both of the invention and construction, belonged to himself.[[136]]
It is not ascertained, at what time Mr. Rittenhouse first conceived the plan of that extensive, complicated and inestimable Orrery, which he afterwards executed. Probably, he had long thought on the subject, before he publicly announced his design. It is certain, however, that before the beginning of the year 1767, there was some correspondence and some understanding, respecting it, between himself and the Rev. Mr. Barton. It appears in fact, that, prior to that period, Mr. Barton had been fully apprized of his brother-in-law’s desire to carry into effect his meditated design of constructing a complete Orrery, on a plan entirely new; and that some arrangement was previously made, between these gentlemen; by which Mr. Barton undertook to indemnify Mr. Rittenhouse, for such actual expenditures as he should incur in making the machine and his loss of time while employed in the work, not exceeding a stipulated sum; provided he should not be able to dispose of it, when finished, at a price then fixed on. The prudential caution of our young Philosopher (then about thirty-four years of age,) and the public spirit of his friend, grounded on the confidence he had in the artist’s talents and abilities, were alike evinced on this occasion.
The first written communication made by Mr. Rittenhouse to Mr. Barton, on the subject of the Orrery, is contained in a letter under the date of Jan. 28th, 1767: it is in these words:—“I am glad you took the pains to transcribe, and send me, Martin’s Account of Orreries.”[[137]] “Two forms (he says) have principally obtained, the Hemispherical Orrery and the Whole Sphere. But the idea given us by the former, is very unnatural and imperfect. An Orrery, then, adapted to an Armillary Sphere is the only machine that can exhibit a just idea of the true System of the World.”—“But in my opinion,” says Mr. Rittenhouse, “the latter is likewise very unnatural; for, what has a Sphere, consisting of a great number of metaline Circles, to do with the true System of the World? Is there one real, or so much as apparent Circle, in it? (the bodies of the Sun and Planets excepted.) Are they not all merely imaginary lines, contrived for the purpose of calculation? I did not intend to let one of them have a place in my Orrery, except the Zodiac, on which I would have the true latitude and longitude of each planet pointed out by its proper Index.”
“I did not design a Machine, which should give the ignorant in astronomy a just view of the Solar System: but would rather astonish the skilful and curious examiner, by a most accurate correspondence between the situations and motions of our little representatives of the heavenly bodies, and the situations and motions of those bodies, themselves. I would have my Orrery really useful, by making it capable of informing us, truly, of the astronomical phænomena for any particular point of time; which, I do not find that any Orrery yet made, can do.”
“But,” continues Mr. Rittenhouse, “perhaps it may be necessary to comply with the prevailing taste: If so, my plan must be entirely altered;—and this is a matter that must be settled between you and me, before I can proceed. However, I shall send you, in my next, a particular account of my design; such as I would have it, if not limited by the fear of making it too expensive.—A specimen (if I may so call it) of the most curious part of it, though much smaller than that intended for the Orrery, is now in hand, and I hope will soon be finished.”
To this letter Mr. Barton returned the following answer.
“Lancaster, February 21st, 1767.
“Dear Brother,
“I received, a few days ago, yours of the 28th ult.—after it had undergone the torture of some Dutchman’s pocket, which compelled it to force its way through the cover: However, the inside did escape without many fractures; so that I had the pleasure of getting it into my hands in such a condition that I could read it.
“Had I known your distress, at the time you received my letter, I should have sincerely felt for you. I well know the anxiety of an husband, on such occasions, and my heart will ever join in sympathy with him: For you, my feelings would have been doubled, as a husband, as my friend and brother. Glad I am, therefore, that I have no occasion to condole with you, but rather to rejoice; and I most sincerely and affectionately congratulate you, on the escape and recovery of your good girl, and wish you joy of your daughter. I desire to offer my best regards to sister Nelly, for the compliment she intended me, had her child been a boy. Her intention was kind, and I hope to have the continuance of her favourable opinion of me.
“I am much pleased with your remarks on Spherical Orreries, or rather on the circles generally adapted to such Orreries. Mr. Rowning seems to be so much of the same opinion, that I could not deny myself the pleasure of transcribing some part of his account of Orreries, and of an imaginary machine, which he thinks might be made very useful.[[138]] Several of his hints appear to me ingenious, and I hope they will not be unacceptable to you.
“I would have you pursue your Orrery in your own way, without any regard to an ignorant or prevailing taste. All you have to study is truth, and to display the glorious system of Copernicus in a proper manner;—and to make your machine as much an original, as possible. I beg you will not limit yourself in the price. I am now perfectly convinced, that you can dispose of it to advantage; and should be sorry you would lose one hour more in fears or doubts about it. In fact, I have laid such plans for the disposal of it, that I have almost a moral certainty of having a demand for more than one of the kind. I have not time to write you as fully as I could wish, as the transcribing from Rowning has detained me so long, and I am this moment setting out for Caernarvon.
“My letter to the Proprietor[[139]] is delayed, till I can send him the account of your design, which you are pleased to promise me. You say you have “a specimen” in hand: I should be glad to know what it is.
“I shall not neglect the things you mentioned to me, as I shall always receive a pleasure in serving you.... She joins me in love to father, mother and all friends.—I am, in haste, dear Davy, your very affectionate friend and brother,
“Thomas Barton.
“P. S. Forgive this wretched scrawl—I have not time to examine whether I have committed any errors in copying Mr. Rowning.
“I beg leave to recommend Huygens’, Cotes’, Helsham’s, and Power’s Philosophy to you. You will be much pleased with them.
“I wish you would purchase Bion’s Description of Philosophical and Mathematical Instruments, &c.”
“Mr. David Rittenhouse.”
His next letter to Mr. Barton, covering the promised Account of his Orrery, is dated the 27th of March, 1767: and this, it will be perceived, is very nearly a year before a description of it was communicated to the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia. In this letter, he says—“Rowning’s opinion of Orreries pleases me more than any thing I had met with before. The idea of his imaginary machine naturally presents itself to persons conversant in Astronomy; but, if actually made, it could not answer the purpose, unless prodigiously large,—which I presume is the reason it has never been done.[done.]
“I send[“I send] you a description of my imaginary machine: the foundation of it is now laid; and I hope that part of it, containing the mechanical Astronomy of the Moon, will be finished some time this spring: then we shall be able to judge, whether my abilities are equal to the undertaking.”
The “Description” here referred to, in Mr. Rittenhouse’s own hand-writing, is new before the writer of these Memoirs; and is thus endorsed by the Rev. Mr. Barton—“Original Description of Mr. Rittenhouse’s Orrery, first communicated to Thomas Barton.”—For the satisfaction of those, who may not have an opportunity of seeing the American Philosophical Society’s Transactions, in which this short account of the Orrery was afterwards published; and, as this original description of it differs somewhat from the printed one, it is presumed that the introduction of the former into this work, will not be unacceptable to the reader.
The impossibility of conveying to the mind of any one, even the most intelligent and skilful, by means of either any delineation upon paper in the nature of a diagram, or by words, an adequate idea of so complex and multiform a machine as the one now about to be described, will instantly be conceived. Indeed no description, alone, can render the nature of its construction, and the many curious and useful purposes it is capable of answering, perfectly intelligible to the most scientific Astronomer. Mr. Rittenhouse’s very concise description of his Orrery will, therefore, necessarily be found defective: it is thus worded by himself.
“DESCRIPTION OF A NEW ORRERY.
“This Machine is intended to have three faces, standing perpendicular to the horizon: that in the front to be four feet square, made of sheet-brass, curiously polished, silvered, and painted in proper places, and otherwise ornamented. From the centre arises an axis, to support a gilded brass ball, intended to represent the Sun. Round this ball move others, made of brass or ivory, to represent the Planets: They are to move in elliptical orbits, having the central ball in one focus; and their motions to be sometimes swifter, and sometimes slower, as nearly according to the true law of an equable description of areas as is possible, without too great a complication of wheel-work. The orbit of each Planet is likewise to be properly inclined to those of the others; and their Aphelia and Nodes justly placed; and their velocities so accurately adjusted, as not to differ sensibly from the tables of Astronomy in some thousands of years.
“For the greater beauty of the instrument, the balls representing the planets are to be of a considerable bigness; but so contrived, that they may be taken off at pleasure, and others, much smaller, and fitter for some purposes, put in their places.
“When the Machine is put in motion, by the turning of a winch, there are three indexes which point out the hour of the day, the day of the month, and the year (according to the Julian account,) answering to that situation of the heavenly bodies which is then represented; and so continually, for a period of 5000 years, either forward or backward.
“In order to know the true situation of a Planet at any particular time, the small set of balls are to be put each on its respective axis; then the winch to be turned round until each index points to the given time. Then a small telescope, made for the purpose, is to be applied to the central ball; and directing it to the planet, its longitude and inclination will be seen on a large brass circle, silvered, and properly graduated, representing the zodiac, and having a motion of one degree in seventy-two years, agreeable to the precession of the equinoxes. So, likewise, by applying the telescope to the ball representing the earth, and directing it to any planet,—then will both the longitude and latitude of that planet be pointed out (by an index and graduated circle,) as seen from the earth.
“The two lesser faces are four feet in height, and two feet three inches in breadth. One of them will exhibit all the appearances of Jupiter and his Satellites—their eclipses, transits, and inclinations; likewise, all the appearances of Saturn, with his ring and satellites. And the other will represent all the phænomena of the moon, particularly, the exact time, quantity, and duration of her eclipses—and those of the sun, occasioned by her interposition; with a most curious contrivance for exhibiting the appearance of a solar eclipse, at any particular place on the earth: likewise, the true place of the moon in the signs, with her latitude, and the place of her apoge in the nodes; the sun’s declination, equation of time &c. It must be understood, that all these motions are to correspond exactly, with the celestial motions; and not to differ several degrees from the truth, in a few revolutions, as is common in Orreries.
“If it shall be thought proper, the whole is to be adapted to, and kept in motion by, a strong pendulum-clock; nevertheless, at liberty to be turned by the winch, and adjusted to any time, past or future.”
“N. B. The diurnal motions of such planets as have been discovered to revolve on their own axes, are likewise to be properly represented; both with regard to the Times, and the situation of their Poles.”
The foregoing is a literal copy of the original manuscript; and such readers of this article as may think proper to compare it with the printed description of Mr. Rittenhouse’s Orrery, communicated to the American Philosophical Society by Dr. Smith, on the 21st of March 1768, and contained in the first volume of that Society’s Transactions, will find some (though, on the whole, not very essential) differences, in the two descriptions. The concluding paragraph, indeed,—designated, in each, by a N. B.—is materially variant in the two: and it appears, by its having been announced in the published (and later) account of this machine, that, “the clock part of it may be contrived to play a great variety of Music,” (a suggestion wholly omitted in Mr. Rittenhouse’s original communication, made to the Rev. Mr. Barton,) that the philosophic Artist had been afterwards induced, in one particular at least, “to comply with the prevailing taste.”[[140]] But this may be readily accounted for: our artist had previously made some extremely curious and beautiful Time-pieces, to each of which was attached the mechanism of a Musical Clock, in addition to a limited Planetarium, in miniature. These were in the hands of gentlemen of respectability and taste:[[141]] and they were much and generally admired, as well for the great ingenuity displayed by the constructor, in these combined and pleasing operations of his machinery, as for the superior accuracy and beauty of the workmanship; qualities eminently conspicuous in all his mechanical productions.
It appears, that when Mr. Rittenhouse sent the foregoing description of his projected Orrery to Mr. Barton—that is to say, on the 27th of March, 1767[[142]]—the “foundation” of it was “laid.” But, notwithstanding his earnest wishes prompted him to the utmost diligence, in his exertions to finish it, many circumstances concurred to retard its completion. The magnitude of the undertaking—the multiplicity of the work—and, perhaps, the difficulty of sometimes readily procuring, even from Philadelphia, the necessary materials,—all conspired, to prevent as early a completion of the machinery as he had anticipated: and, added to these causes of unavoidable delay, was the yet unabandoned pursuit of his professional business.
The Orrery was, nevertheless, then his favourite object. On the 18th of June, 1767, he wrote to Mr. Barton, thus—“I hope you will persuade your Pequea friends to stay for the clocks, till harvest is over; and then, I think, I may venture to promise them, for ready money: but, at this time, one part of the Orrery is in such forwardness, that I am not willing to lay it by till it is done. I hope it will far exceed the description I gave you of it. To-morrow morning I am to set off for Reading, at the request of the Commissioners of Berks county, who wrote to me about their town-clock. They had employed a ... to make it, who, it seems, is not able to go through with it: if I should undertake to finish it, this will likewise retard the great work.”
Amidst the more important philosophical pursuits which engaged Mr. Rittenhouse’s attention before his removal to Philadelphia, as well as after he fixed his residence in that city, he now and then relaxed the energy of his mind from its employment in laborious investigations, by bestowing a portion of his time on minor objects in physical science; and indeed, sometimes, even on little matters of ingenuity, curiosity and amusement. As instances of this, he addressed to the Rev. Mr. Barton the letter under the date of the 20th of July, 1768, which will be found in the Appendix; and also another, dated the 4th of February, 1770, to which there is the following postscript:
“I have,” says he, “seen a little curiosity, with which you would be pleased; I mean the glass described by Dr. Franklin, wherein water may be kept in a boiling state, by the heat of the hand alone, and that for hours together. The first time I shall be in Lancaster, where I hope to be next June, I expect to prevail on you to accompany me to the Glass-house,[[143]] where we may have some of them made, as well as some other things I want.”—A description of this instrument, then usually called Dr. Franklin’s Pulse-Glass,[[144]] by means of which water may be made to boil, in vacuo, by the heat of the human hand, was communicated by Mr. Rittenhouse to Mr. Barton in a subsequent letter.
[1]. Hence, in conformity to this sentiment, Mr. Pope says, when animadverting on the insufficiency of talents, alone, for acquiring an honourable fame and meriting a character truly great,—
“If parts allure thee, think how Bacon shin’d,
The wisest, brightest, meanest of mankind;
Or, ravish’d with the whistling of a name,
See Cromwell damn’d to everlasting fame.”
[Essay on Man.]
[2]. The miserable consequences which have resulted to the civilized world, from the mode of reasoning abstractly, and from the mere synthetical plan of philosophising, are too apparent to need much comment. Even some geometricians of great name have been seduced, by such means, into monstrous absurdities in physics; and into the maintenance of doctrines, alike subversive of religion and morals, as destructive of the foundations of civil society. Such were Descartes, Leibnitz and Spinoza, of the seventeenth century: and such have been, and even now are, too many of that class of modern philosophers, as well in this country as on the continent of Europe,—whose metaphysical notions of religion and government, (although some of them may, perhaps, be pretty correct on the subject of physics, alone,) have been the means of inundating the world with scepticism; and, after overturning regular, orderly, and peaceable states, of establishing despotism and misery on the ruins of rational government, in many of the fairest portions of the old world.
Even Voltaire, who had, himself, been instrumental in corrupting the mind of the great Frederick of Prussia, and, thus, of furnishing the means for the subsequent overthrow of that once powerful monarchy; even this infidel could not help exclaiming, in a moment of sober reflection, “Who could have believed, that geometricians have been wild enough to imagine, that, in the exaltation of the soul, we may possess the gift of divination; yet more than one philosopher took it into their heads, by the example of Descartes, to put themselves into God’s place, and create a world with a word! But now, all these philosophical follies are reproved by the wise; and even their fantastical edifices, overthrown by reason, have left in their ruins, materials, of which reason has made some use.—A like extravagance has infected the moral world: there have been some understandings so blind as to undermine the very foundation of society, at the time they thought to reform it. They have been mad enough to maintain that the distinctions of meum & tuum are criminal, and that one ought not to enjoy the fruits of one’s own labour; that not only all mankind are upon a level, but that they have perverted the order of nature, in forming societies; that men are born to be separated from each other, like wild beasts; and that amphibious animals, with bees and ants, confound the eternal laws, by living in common! These impertinences, worthy of an hospital of madmen,” continues Mr. de Voltaire, sarcastically, “have been for some time in fashion, just as it is customary to lead apes to dance, at fairs.” [See The Age of Louis XV. ch. 39.]
But although it cannot be doubted; that the society of Voltaire contributed to support, if not to generate, the deistical principles of Frederick II. other foreigners, whom he had patronized and cherished in his own capital, and with whom he associated, most of them Frenchmen, did much towards debauching his mind, in regard to religion. The Prince de Ligne, a distinguished Austrian field-marshal, has verified this remark. In a letter written to the king of Poland, in the year 1785, the prince narrates some particulars of a conversation which took place between the Prussian monarch and himself, in the year 1770; and observes, that the king expressed his libertine sentiments too freely, even making a boast of his irreligion. The prince de Ligne, on this occasion, charges freethinkers with a want of candour, in promulgating opinions fraught with infidelity, while many of them heartily dread the consequences of what they affect to renounce. But this, he remarks, is not their only fault: “they are also apt,” says he, “to make a parade of free-thinking; which betrays, at least, a want of taste. It was,” continues the prince, “from having been surrounded by men of bad taste, such as D’Argens, Maupertuis, La Beaumelle, La Mettrie, the Abbé de Brades, and some clumsy infidels of his academy, that the king had contracted the habit of abusing religion, and talking of dogmas, Spinozism, the court of Rome, &c.”
Letters and Reflexions of the Prince de Ligne.
[3]. However Cæsar may be admired as an accomplished gentleman and scholar,—or even as a great and gallant soldier,—he ought ever to be reprobated as an usurper and a tyrant.—Dr. Adam Ferguson remarks, that “Julius Cæsar possessed the talent of influencing, of gaining, and employing men to his purpose, beyond any other person that is known in the history of the world: but it is surely not for the good of mankind,” continues this able writer, “that he should be admired in other respects. To admire even his clemency, is to mistake for it policy and cunning.” [See Ferguson’s Hist. of the Progress and Termination of the Roman Republic, vol. 5. ch. 36.]
Indeed our admiration of the great military talents of such a man as Cæsar, may carry us too far. Mr. Hume, in his History of England (ch. 47.) very justly observes—that “The unhappy prepossession which men commonly entertain in favour of ambition, courage, enterprise, and other warlike virtues, engages generous natures,—who always love fame,—into such pursuits as destroy their own peace, and that of the rest of mankind.”
[4]. Mr. Fontenelle in his Eloge on Sir Isaac Newton (published by the Royal Academy of Sciences, at Paris,) mentions particularly the great honours that were paid him, by his countrymen, as well during his life as after his decease. “The English,” says he, “are not apt to pay the less regard to great abilities, for being of their native growth; but instead of endeavouring to lessen them by injurious reflexions, or approving the envy which attacks them, they all join together in striving to advocate them,”—“They are sensible that a great genius must reflect honour upon the state; and whoever is able to procure it to their country, is upon that account infinitely dear to them.”—“Tacitus,” says he, “who has reproached the Romans with their extreme indifference towards the great men of their own nation, would have given the English quite a different character.”—And, after describing the almost princely magnificence, in the manner of Newton’s interment in Westminster Abbey, Mr. Fontenelle remarks, that we must almost go back to the ancient Greeks, if we would find a like instance of so great a veneration paid to learning.
The following epitaph, in classical Latin, is inscribed on the noble monument erected to the memory of Newton, in the Abbey Church of Westminster:
H. S. E.
Isaacus Newton, Eques Auratus,
Qui vi animi prope divinâ
Planetarum motus, figuras,
Cometarum semitas, Oceanique æstus,
Sua mathesi facem præferente,
Primus demonstravit.
Radiorum lucis dissimilitudines,
Colorumque inde nascentium proprietates
Quas nemo antea vel suspicatus erat, prevestigavit,
Naturæ, Antiquitatis, S. Scripturæ,
Sedulus, sagax, fidus interpres,
Dei Opt. Max. majestatem philosophiâ asseruit,
Evangelii simplicitatem moribus expressit,
Sibi gratulentur mortales, tale tantumque exstitisse,
Humani Generis Decus.
Natus XXV. Decemb. MDCXLII. Obiit XX. Mart.
MDCCXXVI.
[5]. Aristotle is supposed, by some, to have imbibed the best and most rational of his notions from his master Plato; to whom, notwithstanding, he seems to have been greatly inferior as a moral philosopher.
His opinions respecting government, abound in good sense. As a general outline of his sentiments on this subject, it may serve to mention, that he distinguished civil government into two kinds; one, in which the general welfare is the great object; the other, in which this is not at all considered.[[5a]] In the first class, he places the limited monarchy—the aristocratical form of government—and the republic, properly so called. In the second, he comprehends tyranny—oligarchy—and democracy; considering these as corruptions of the three first. Limited monarchy, he alleges, degenerates into despotism, when the sovereign assumes to himself the exercise of the entire authority of the state, refusing to submit his power to any controul;[[5b]] the aristocracy sinks into an oligarchy, when the supreme power is no longer possessed by a reasonable proportion of virtuous men,—but by a small number of rulers, whose wealth alone constitutes their claim to authority; and the republican government is debased into a democracy, when the poorest class of the people have too great an influence in the public deliberations.[[5c]]
In Physics, Aristotle scarcely deserves the name of a Philosopher.—As to his metaphysical opinions, in the common acceptation of the term,—it is impossible to ascertain, with certainty, what they really were. It was not until eighteen centuries after his death, that his philosophy—such as it was then promulgated, anew—began to be generally known and studied. After the sacking of Constantinople by the Turks, in the year 1453, some fugitive Greeks, who had escaped the fury of the Ottoman arms, brought from that city into the west of Europe many of the writings of the Stagyritish philosopher: But, although some of his treatises were previously known, they were such as had passed through the hands of the Arabs, in translations into their tongue; done by men who, it may be fairly presumed, very imperfectly understood the author’s language; consequently not capable, even if they were disposed, to do justice to the sense of the original. Subsequent translations of those writings, from the Arabic, probably occasioned, in the same way, further departures from the meaning of the original Greek. Thus varying, as may be supposed, from the opinions taught by Aristotle himself,—the philosophy of the schoolmen, engrafted upon his systems, was neither entirely that of the Stagyrite, nor altogether different. His writings, nevertheless, gave birth to what is termed the Scholastic Philosophy,—“that motley offspring of error and ingenuity,” as it is called by Mr. Mallet.[[5d]] “To trace at length,” says this writer, “the rise, progress, and variations of this philosophy, would be an undertaking not only curious, but instructive; as it would unfold to us all the mazes in which the force, the subtlety, the extravagance of human wit, can lose themselves: till not only profane learning, but Divinity itself, was at last, by the refined frenzy of those who taught both, subtilized into mere notion and air.”[[5e]]
[5a]. Aristot. de Rep.—lib, 3. cap. 6.
[5b]. Id. Rhet.—lib. 1. cap. 8.
[5c]. Id. de Rep.—lib. 3. cap. 7.
[5d]. In his Life of Lord Chancellor Bacon.
[5e]. Ibid.
[6]. Baron Bielfeld (in his Elements of Universal Erudition) observes, that the fondness for Aristotle’s reveries began about the twelfth century. It was then, that the scholastic philosophy was formed. This was partly borrowed from the writings of the Arabs, who were always attached to the theories of Aristotle: they were initiated into a subtile, ambiguous, abstract and capricious mode of reasoning; by which they never hit the truth, but constantly went on the one side, or beyond the truth. Toward the end of the fourteenth century, continues the learned Baron, this absurd system arrived to a great height. It became a mere jargon, a confused heap of unintelligible ideas.
The celebrated Mr. Boyle, the great successor of Lord Verulam (St. Albans) in experimental philosophy, is said to have declared against the Philosophy of Aristotle, as having in it more of words than things; promising much and performing little; and giving the Inventions of Men for indubitable proofs, instead of building upon observation and experiment. He was so zealous for, and so scrupulous about, this true method of learning by experiment, that, though the Cartesian philosophy then made a great noise in the world, yet he would never be persuaded to read the works of Descartes; for fear he should be amused, and led away, by plausible accounts of things founded on conjecture, and merely hypothetical. (See Art. Boyle, in the New and General Biography.)—This great and excellent man was born the same year in which Bacon, Viscount St. Albans, died.
Epicurus, the disciple of Democritus, and follower of the Philosophy of Aristotle, was engaged, although unsuccessfully enough, in the labyrinth of Metaphysics, as well as in Physics. He adopted the system of Atoms, which Democritus first propagated; and hence appears to be derived Descartes’s equally preposterous doctrine of the Plenum and of Vortices.
[7]. “Nulla gens tam fera, quæ non sciat Deum habendum esse, quamvis ignoret qualem habere deceat.”
Cic. de Naturâ Deorum.
[8]. While Plato followed the morals of Socrates, he cultivated the metaphysical opinions of Pythagoras. He is said to have founded his physics on the notions of Heraclitus: it may be presumed, nevertheless, that he derived that branch of his system from a better source.
[9].
“Reason, tho’ taught by sense to range on high,
To trace the stars and measure all the sky;
Tho’ fancy, memory, foresight fill her train,
And o’er the beast he lifts the pride of man;
Yet, still to matter, form and space confin’d,
Or moral truths or laws that rule mankind,
Could ne’er, unaided, pierce the mental gloom,
Explore new scenes beyond the closing tomb,
Reach with immortal hope the blest abode,
Or raise one thought of spirit or of God.”
Vision of Columbus, book VIII.
[10]. “An inordinate desire to explain and generalise, without facts and observations, led the ancient philosophers to the most absurd and extravagant notions; though, in a few cases, they have displayed the most wonderful ingenuity, and sagaciously anticipated the discoveries of modern times.”
New Edinb. Encyclop. tit. Astronomy.
[11]. “If the petty motions of us mortals afford arguments for the being of a God, much more may those greater motions we see in the world, and the phænomena attending them: I mean, the motions of the planets and heavenly bodies. For these must be put into motion either by one common mighty Mover, acting upon them immediately, or by causes and laws of His appointment; or by their respective movers, who, for reasons to which you can by this time be no stranger,” (referring his reader to preceding arguments), “must depend upon some Superior, that furnished them with the power of doing this. And granting it to be done either of these ways, we can be at no great distance from a demonstration of the existence of a Deity.”—Wollaston’s Rel. of Nat. delineated, sect. v. head 14th.
[12]. A disciple of Anaximenes, and preceptor to Socrates. He died 428 years B. C. in the seventy-second year of his age.
[13]. Thales, of Miletus in Ionia, was one of the seven sages of Greece: he was born about six hundred and forty years before the Christian era. After travelling into other countries, he returned to his own, and there devoted himself exclusively to the study of nature. Being the first of the Greeks who made any discoveries in Astronomy, he is said to have astonished his countrymen, by predicting a solar eclipse; and he instructed them, by communicating the knowledge of geometry and astronomy, which he had acquired while in Egypt. He died in the ninety-sixth year of his age,—544 years B. C.
[14]. Marcus Tullius Cicero—the same that has been already mentioned. He was, himself, not only one of the most learned and eloquent men, but one of the greatest philosophers, of antiquity. This illustrious Roman (whose death occurred forty-three years before the Christian era) firmly believed in the being of a God. He was likewise a decided advocate for the doctrine of the soul’s immortality; concerning which, some fine reasoning will be found in his book on Old Age;—a doctrine, however, by no means confined to Cicero alone, but one maintained by many of the most eminent among the heathen philosophers, in the early ages. Plato appears to have been the first who supported that opinion upon sound and permanent arguments, deduced from truth and established principles.
[15]. Cicero himself says, “If any one doubt, whether there be a God, I cannot comprehend why the same person may not as well doubt, whether there be a sun or not.” [De Naturâ Deorum, 2. 2.]
It is observed by Dr. Turnbull, in his annotations on Heineccius’s System of Universal Law, that Polybius as well as Cicero, and indeed almost all the ancient philosophers, have acknowledged, that a public sense of Religion is necessary to the well-being and support of civil society: and such a sentiment of Religion is inseparable from a reasonable conception of the being and attributes of the Deity. “Society,” says Dr. Turnbull very truly, “can hardly subsist without it: or, at least, it is the most powerful mean for restraining from vice; and for promoting and upholding those virtues by which society subsists, and without which every thing that is great and comely in society must soon perish and go to ruin.”—“With regard to private persons,” continues this learned writer, “he who does not often employ his mind in reviewing the perfections of the Deity, and in consoling and strengthening his mind by the comfortable and mind-exalting reflexions, to which meditation upon the universal providence of an all-perfect mind, naturally, and as it were, necessarily lead, deprives himself of the greatest joy, the noblest exercise and entertainment, the human mind is capable of; and whatever obligations there may to virtue, he cannot be so firm, steady, and unshaken in his adherence to it, as he, who, being persuaded of the truth just mentioned, is daily drawing virtuous strength and comfort from it.” [See the Annotator’s remark on ch. v. b. i. of Heineccius.]
[16]. The Greeks derived their knowledge of astronomy from the Egyptians and Chaldeans. According to Plutarch, the sciences began to unfold themselves about the time of Hesiod, the Greek poet, who flourished upwards of nine centuries before the Christian era; but their progress was very slow, until the time of Thales, which was about three centuries later. And although this celebrated philosopher of antiquity rendered himself famous by foretelling an eclipse of the sun, he only predicted the year in which it was to happen. Even this, it is remarked by Mr. Vince (in his invaluable work, entitled, A Complete System of Astronomy,) he was probably enabled to do by the Chaldean Saros, a period of 223 lunations; after which, the eclipses return again nearly in the same order. Philolaus, a disciple of Pythagoras, lived about four hundred and fifty years before Christ, and is said to have taught the true solar system,—placing the sun in the centre, with the earth and all the planets revolving about it; a system which, it is believed, Pythogaras himself had conceived, and was inclined to adopt.
However, Hipparchus, who lived between one hundred and twenty-five and one hundred and sixty years before the Christian era, and whom Mr. Vince styles “the Father of Astronomy,” was the first person that cultivated every part of that science. His discoveries, together with those of Ptolemy, are preserved in the Μεγαλη Σύνταξις, or Great Construction,—Ptolemy’s celebrated work on Astronomy, named by the Arabs the Almagest, and now usually so called.
[17]. This great philosopher of antiquity, so justly entitled to celebrity for his mathematical works, flourished three hundred years before the Christian era. Care should be taken not to confound him with Euclid of Megara, who lived a century earlier. The latter, as the Abbé Barthelemi observes, being too much familiarized with the writings of Parmenides and the Elean school, had recourse to abstractions; “a method,” says the Abbé, “often dangerous, oftener unintelligible.” Just after, he adds: “The subtleties of metaphysics calling to their aid the quirks of logic, words presently took place of things, and students acquired nothing in the schools but a spirit of acrimony and contradiction.” Travels of the younger Anacharsis, vol. iii. chap. 37.
[18]. That the sun is at rest, and that the planets revolve round him, is an opinion that appears to have been received of old, by Philolaus, Aristarchus of Samos, and the whole sect of the Pythagoreans. It is probable, as Mr. Rowning[[18a]] observes, that this notion was derived from them, by the Greeks: But the opinion that the sun[sun] stood still in the centre, while the whole heavens moved around it, was the prevailing one, until Copernicus, by the establishment of his system, restored the ancient astronomy of the Pythagorean school.
[18a]. In his Compendious System of Natural Philosophy.
[19]. Nicholas Copernic (usually latinized, by adding the terminating syllable, us,) that celebrated astronomer, “whose vast genius, assisted by such lights as the remains of antiquity afforded him, explained the true system of the universe, as at present understood,”[[19a]] was born at Thorn in Royal Prussia, the 19th of January, 1442. He was alike distinguished for his piety and innocence, as for his extraordinary genius and discoveries. He died in the seventy-seventh year of his age.
[19a]. Ritt. Orat.
[20]. This great man was a native of Knudsturp, a province of Scania in Denmark, and born the 18th of December, 1546, of an illustrious family. He was the first, who, by the accuracy and number of his observations, made the way for the revival of astronomy among the moderns; although, “in theory,” as Rittenhouse has expressed it, “he mangled the beautiful system of Copernicus.”[[20a]]—Brahé (for this is the family-name) died at the age of fifty-five years.
[20a]. Ibid.
[21]. John Kepler, a native of Wiel in the duchy of Wirtemberg, in Germany, became as celebrated for the consequences he drew from the observations of Tycho, as the latter was for the vast mass of astronomical materials he had prepared. This eminent, though somewhat “whimsical”[[21a]] astronomer, was born the 27th of December, 1571, and died at the age of fifty-nine years.
[21a]. Ritt. Orat.
[22]. “Before his (Bacon’s) time, philosophy was fettered by forms and syllogisms. The logics of Aristotle held the human mind in bondage for nearly two thousand years; a miserable jugglery, which was fitted to render all truth problematical, and which disseminated a thousand errors, but never brought to light one useful piece of knowledge.”—Ld. Woolhousie’s Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Ld. Kames.
[23]. It is observed by an eminent philosopher of the present day, that “The more the phænomena of the universe are studied, the more distinctly their connexion appears, the more simple their causes, the more magnificent their design, and the more wonderful the wisdom and power of their Author.” (See Elements of Chymical Philosophy, by sir Humphrey Davy, LLD. Sec. R. S.)
[24]. On looking into Maclaurin’s Account of Sir Isaac Newton’s Philosophical Discoveries, since penning the above, the writer of these Memoirs was much gratified by the perusal of the following passage, in the last chapter of that valuable work; wherein its author treats “Of the Supreme Author and Governor of the Universe, the True and Living God.” The writer is induced to add it in a note, to his own reflections on the same subject, such as he has ventured to offer them in the text; presuming that the authority of so eminent a philosopher as Mr. Maclaurin will give weight to what he has himself advanced; so far, at least, as there may appear to be some coincidence of sentiment on the subject.
“The plain argument for the existence of the Deity, obvious to all and carrying irresistable conviction with it, is from the evident contrivance and fitness of things for one another, which we meet with throughout all parts of the universe. There is no need of nice and subtle reasonings in this matter: a manifest contrivance immediately suggests a contriver. It strikes us like a sensation; and artful reasonings against it may puzzle us, but it is without shaking our belief. No person, for example, that knows the principles of optics, and the structure of the eye, can believe that it was formed without skill in that science; or that the ear was formed, without the knowledge of sounds:”—“All our accounts of nature are full of instances of this kind. The admirable and beautiful order of things, for final causes, exalt our idea of the Contriver: the unity of design shews him to be One. The great motions in the system, performed with the same facility as the least, suggest his Almighty Power; which gave motion to the earth and the celestial bodies, with equal ease as to the minutest particles. The subtilty of the motions and actions in the internal parts of bodies, shews that His influence penetrates the inmost recesses of things, and that He is equally active and present every where. The simplicity of the laws that prevail in the world, the excellent disposition of things, in order to obtain the best ends, and the beauty which adorns the works of nature, far superior to any thing in art, suggest His consummate Wisdom. The usefulness of the whole scheme, so well contrived for the intelligent beings that enjoy it, with the internal disposition and moral structure of those beings themselves, shew His unbounded goodness. These are arguments which are sufficiently open to the views and capacities of the unlearned, while at the same time they acquire new strength and lustre from the discoveries of the learned. The Deity’s acting and interposing in the universe, shew that He governs it, as well as formed it; and the depth of His counsels, even in conducting the material universe, of which a great part surpasses our knowledge, keeps up an inward veneration and awe of this great Being, and disposes us to receive what may be otherwise revealed to us, concerning Him.”
[25]. Mr. Cotes, in his preface to the second edition of Sir Isaac Newton’s Principia, exposes the folly of those depraved dreamers in philosophy, “the sordid dregs of the most impure part of mankind,” who strive to maintain, that the constitution of the world is not derived from the will of God, but from a certain necessity of nature; that all things are governed by fate, not by Providence; and that matter, by necessity of nature, has existed always and every where, and is infinite and eternal. He then adds:—“We may now, therefore, take a nearer view of nature in her glory, and contemplate her in a most entertaining manner: and withal, more zealously than ever, pay our worship and veneration to the Creator and Lord of the Universe; which is the principal advantage of philosophy. He must be blind who, from the most excellent and most wise structure of the creatures, does not presently see the infinite wisdom and goodness of their Creator: and he must be mad, who will not own those attributes.”
[26]. “A man would deceive himself,” says Lalande, “in believing he could be a philosopher, without the study of the natural sciences. To be wise, not by weakness, but by principles, it is necessary that, to be able to reflect and think with vigour, we be freed from those prejudices which deceive the judgment, and which oppose themselves to the development of reason and of genius. Pythagoras[Pythagoras] would not have any disciples, who had not studied Mathematics: over his door was to be read, that “no one was to enter, unless he were a geometrician.”—Morals would be less sure, and less attractive for us, if they were to be founded on ignorance or on error.
“Ought we,” he asks, “to consider as of no importance the advantage of being freed from the misfortunes of ignorance? Is it possible to observe, without a feeling of compassion and even of shame, the stupidity of those, who formerly believed, that by making a great vociferation, during an eclipse of the Moon, they furnished relief to the sufferings of that (imagined) goddess; or, that these eclipses were produced by enchantment?”
“Cum frustra resonant æra auxiliaria Lunæ.”
Met. iv. 333.
Reyas, in the dedication of his Commentaries on the Planisphere to the Emperor Charles V. mentions a curious historical fact, in illustration of the effects of that superstition, derived from ignorance, which astronomy has banished from the civilized world. It is thus related by Lalande:—“Christopher Columbus, when commanding the army which Ferdinand, king of Spain, had sent to Jamaica, some short time after the discovery of that island, experienced so great a scarcity of provisions, that no hope remained of saving his army, which he expected to be soon at the mercy of the savages. An approaching eclipse of the moon furnished this able man with the means of extricating himself from his embarrassment: he let the chief of the savages know, that if they should not, in a few hours, send him all he asked for, he would oppress them with the greatest calamities; and that he would begin by depriving the moon of her light. At first, they contemned his menaces; but, when they saw that the moon began, in reality, to disappear, they were seized with terror; they carried all they had to the general, and came themselves to implore forgiveness.”
Comets were formerly, even in civilized nations, another great cause of consternation among the people; and one, also, which a knowledge of astronomy has at length divested of its terrors, by removing the source of those superstitious errors, a grossly mistaken notion of the nature of those phænomena. “We are sorry to find,” says Lalande, “such strange prejudices, not only in Homer [Iliad iv. 75.] but even in the most beautiful poem of the sixteenth century; whereby means are furnished of perpetuating our errors—
“Qual con le chiome sanguinose orrende
Splender Cometa suol per l’aria adusta,
Che i regni muta e i feri morbi adduce,
E ai purpurei tiranni infausta luce.”
Tasso’s Jerus. del.
Which Mr. Hoole has thus translated—
“As, shaking terrors from his blazing hair,
A sanguine Comet gleams through dusky air,
To ruin states, and dire diseases spread,
And baleful light on purpled tyrants shed.”
Further, the progress of genuine astronomy has almost wholly dissipated, in our day, the gross delusions of astrology, with the mischievous portents of its infatuated judicial interpreters; follies engendered by ignorance, which is, ever, the prolific parent of prejudice, of superstition, and of their numerous concomitant evils.
[27]. Mr. Rittenhouse observes, (in his Oration delivered before the American Philosophical Society, in 1775,) that “Galileo not only discovered these moons of Jupiter, but suggested their use in determining the longitude of places on the earth; which has since been so happily put in practice, that Fontenelle does not hesitate to affirm, they are of more use to geography and navigation, than our own moon.”—This great man, one of the first restorers of the true principles of physics, was condemned by, and suffered the penalties of the Inquisition, in 1535, for defending the system of Copernicus! He died in 1542.
A letter from Andrew Ellicott, Esq. to Mr. Robert Patterson, dated the 2d of April 1795, and published in the fourth volume of the American Philosophical Society’s Transactions, contains sundry observations of the immersions of the satellites of Jupiter, made at Wilmington in the state of Delaware, by Messrs. Rittenhouse, J. Page, Lukens and Andrews, respectively, on divers days from the 1st to the 23d of August (both included,) in the year 1784; together with those observed at the Western Observatory, by Messrs. Ellicott, Ewing, Madison, &c. on divers days from the 17th of July to the 19th of August (both included,) in the same year: also, of the emersions of those satellites, by the same Eastern Observers, from the 29th of August to the 19th of September (both included,) and by the same Western Observers, from the 27th of August, up to the 19th of September, both included; all in the year 1784. These observations were made,
“Le Trident de Neptune est le Sceptre du Mond.”[[27a]]
when those able geometricians and astronomers were employed in ascertaining the Western Boundary of Pennsylvania, by determining the length of five degrees of longitude, West, from a given point on the river Delaware.
[27a]. “The trident of Neptune is the sceptre of the world.”—This, as Lalande observes, is nearly what Themistocles said at Athens, Pompey at Rome, Cromwell in England, and Richelieu and Colbert in France.
[28]. Mr. Derham, speaking of the utility resulting from the observation of these phænomena, (in his Astro-Theology,) says—“As to the eclipses, whether of sun or moon, they have their excellent uses. The astronomer applies them to considerable services, in his way, and the geographer makes them no less useful in his: the chronologer is enabled, by them, to amend his accounts of time, even of the most ancient days; and so down through all ages: and the mariner, too, can make them serviceable to his purpose, to discover his longitude, to correct his account at sea, and thereby make himself more secure and safe in the untrodden paths of the deep.”
W. B.
[29]. Lucius Cælius Lactantius Firmianus, a Christian writer in the beginning of the fourth century, reasons in a conclusive manner against the heathen mythology, in the inference he draws from the argument, used by the heathens, to prove the heavenly bodies to be divinities. His argument, on this head, will be found towards the conclusion of Mr. Derham’s Astro-Theology, where it is translated from the Latin of that early and eloquent advocate of Christianity (in his Divin. Instit. l. 2. c. 5.) in these words:—
“That argument whereby they” (those idolaters) “conclude the heavenly bodies to be gods, proveth the contrary: for if therefore they think them to be gods, because they have such certain and well-contrived rational courses, they err: for, from hence it appears that they are not gods; because they are not able to wander out of those paths that are prescribed them. Whereas, if they were gods, they would go here and there, and every where, without any restraint, like as animals upon the earth do; whose wills being free, they wander hither and thither, as they list, and go whithersoever their minds carry them.”
Those vast orbs of matter in the universe, which constitute the planets of our system, if even we consider this alone, and each of which is known to have its appropriate motion, must of necessity have had those motions communicated to them, at first, by some Being of infinite power; the perfect order and regularity of their motions render it equally plain, that that Being was also infinite in wisdom; and the uninterrupted continuance of the same regularity of motion, in their respective orbits, demonstrates in like manner, that He who originally imparted their motions to the several planets is, moreover, infinite in duration.
The vis inertiæ of all material substances, a quality inseparably interwoven with their nature, deprives them (considered merely as such) of the power of spontaneous motion; matter is inherently inert: consequently, those great globes of matter, the planets (including the earth,) necessarily derive their motions from a supremely powerful First Cause, as well as from one infinitely intelligent, and everlasting in his Being. Hence, Lactantius well observes, in another place, that “There is, indeed, a power in the stars, of performing their motions; but that is the power of God, who made and governs all things; not of the stars themselves, that are moved.”
The reasoning of Lactantius, on this subject, is more worthy of a philosopher, than that employed by Descartes, in supporting his chimerical notion of vortices; or than that which led Kepler to adopt his scheme, equally unsupported by any rational principles, of a vectorial power produced by emanations of the sun, as primary agents of motion in the solar system. Because these schemes of Descartes and Kepler make it necessary to recur to some ulterior, as well as more adequate and comprehensible cause of motion, in the planets, than either vortices or emanations from the sun: whereas Lactantius resorted, at once, to an intelligent First Cause, capable of producing the effect; without conjuring up inefficient agents, as first movers; which left them still under the necessity of going back to a Creator of their respective causes (but second causes, at best,) of the planetary motions; consequently, the First Cause; and, also, of admitting the existence of Intelligence, as an essential attribute in the nature of that Being.
An edition of the works of Lactantius (who was a native of Fermo in Italy,) was printed at Leipsick, in 1715.
[30]. Wisdom of Solomon, ch. 13. v. 2.
[31]. Ibid. ch. 13. v. 3 and 5.
[32]. Psalm 19. v. 1.
[33]. In Mr. Smart’s Poetical Essay on the Immensity of the Supreme Being, after a glowing description of some of the admirable works of nature, is this apt, though laconic address to the Atheist:—
“Thou ideot! that asserts, there is no God,
View, and be dumb for ever.”
[34]. The poet gives a whimsical account of the first formation of man, out of this earth, which is represented as being then new; and, having been recently separated from the high æther, is therefore supposed as yet holding some affinity with heaven, and retaining its seeds. He describes the son of Japetus (Prometheus) moulding a portion of earth, mixed with river-water, into the similitude of those heathen deities, who were said to rule over all things.
A poetic translation into our own language, of the lines above quoted, which exhibit “the godlike image,” thus formed, after its being animated by the stolen fire of Prometheus, is comprehended in the italicised lines of the following passage, extracted from Mr. Dryden’s versification of the first book of Ovid’s Metamorphoses; in which the English poet has well preserved the beauty, the force, and the sublimity of the thought, so finely expressed in the original:—
“A creature of a more exalted kind
Was wanting yet, and then was Man design’d
Conscious of thought, of more capacious breast,
For empire form’d, and fit to rule the rest:
Whether with particles of heav’nly fire
The God of nature did his soul inspire;
Or earth, but now divided from the sky,
And pliant still, retain’d th’ ætherial energy:
Which wise Prometheus temper’d into paste,
And, mixt with living streams, the godlike image cast:
Thus, while the mute creation downward bend
Their sight, and to their earthly mother tend,
Man looks aloft, and with erected eyes
Beholds his own hereditary skies.”
[35]. Man will, unquestionably, by taking an extensive range in the contemplation of nature, proportionably enlarge his intuitive conceptions of the attributes of her Almighty First Cause; of whose transcendently exalted existence, the study of his own being, one of nature’s greatest works, will have taught him the reality: and a due knowledge of himself, alone, will also instruct him in the dependent nature of his condition, and the duties resulting from that state of dependence, in his humble relation to the Supreme being.
Mr. Smart, in the poem before quoted, has prettily expressed this idea, in the following lines:—
“Vain were th’ attempt, and impious, to trace
Thro’ all his works th’ Artificer Divine—
And tho’ no shining sun, nor twinkling star,
Bedeck’d the crimson curtains of the sky;
Tho’ neither vegetable, beast, nor bird,
Were extant on the surface of this ball,
Nor lurking gem beneath; tho’ the great sea
Slept in profound stagnation, and the air
Had left no thunder to pronounce its Maker;
Yet Man at home, within himself, might find
The Deity immense; and, in that frame
So fearfully, so wonderfully made,
See and adore his Providence and Pow’r.”
[36]. The same sentiment is beautifully expressed by Thomson, in the following apostrophe:
“With thee, serene Philosophy! with thee,
And thy bright garland, let me crown my song!
Effusive source of evidence, and truth!
A lustre shedding o’er th’ ennobled mind,
Stronger than summer-noon; and pure as that,
Whose mild vibrations soothe the parted soul,
New to the dawning of celestial day.
Hence through her nourish’d pow’rs, enlarged by thee,
She springs aloft, with elevated pride,
Above the tangling mass of low desires,
That bind the fluttering crowd; and angel-wing’d,
The heights of science and of virtue gains,
Where all is calm and clear; with nature round,
Or in the starry regions, or th’ abyss,
To reason’s or to fancy’s eye display’d:
The First up-tracing, from the dreary void,
The chain of causes and effects to Him,
The world producing essence, who alone
Possesses being; while the Last receives
The whole magnificence of heaven and earth,
And every beauty, delicate or bold,
Obvious or more remote, with livelier sense,
Diffusive painted on the rapid mind.”
Summer, l. 1729 and seq.
[37]. It delights me to soar among the lofty stars; it delights me to leave the earth and this dull habitation, to be wafted upon a cloud, and to stand upon the shoulders of the mighty Atlas.
Mr. Dryden has thus translated the original into English verse:—
“Pleas’d, as I am, to walk along the sphere
Of shining stars, and travel with the year;
To leave the heavy earth, and scale the height
Of Atlas, who supports the heavenly weight.”
[38]. Dr. Francis thus versifies this passage, in our language:—
————“What bounds old ocean’s tides;
What, through the various year, the seasons guides:
Whether the stars, by their own proper force,
Or foreign pow’r, pursue their wand’ring course:
Why shadows darken the pale Queen of Night;
Whence she renews her orb, and spreads her light.”[light.”]
[39]. Thus rendered, in English verse, by Mr. Dryden:—
“Ye sacred Muses, with whose beauty fir’d,
My soul is ravish’d, and my brain inspir’d;
Whose priest I am, whose holy fillets wear,
Would you your poet’s first petition hear;
Give me the way of wand’ring stars to know:
The depths of heav’n above, and earth below.
Teach me the various labours of the moon,
And whence proceed th’ eclipses of the sun.
Why flowing tides prevail upon the main,
And in what dark recess they sink again.
What shakes the solid earth, what cause delays
The summer nights, and shortens winter days—
Happy the man, who, studying nature’s laws,
Through known effects can trace the secret cause.”
[40]. The lines here referred to were written about eight years after Sir Isaac Newton’s death. Voltaire supposes an apotheosis of Newton to have taken place, among the planets personified by some of the deities of the heathen mythology. Thus ascribing intelligence to the stars, he considers them, by a poetical fiction, as being in the confidence of the Most High—the true God; and to those subordinate deities, or, perhaps, a fancied superior order of angelic beings, the poet makes his figurative address; which may be thus rendered in English verse:—
Ye confidents of the Most High,
Ye everlasting lights!
Who deck, with your refulgent fires,
The scene of godlike rights!
Whose wings o’erspread the glorious throne
Whereon your Lord is plac’d,
That Lord, by whose transcendent pow’r
Your borrow’d rays are grac’d;
Speak out, bright orbs of heaven’s expanse!
And frankly let us know:
To the exalted Newton’s name,
Can you refuse to bow?
[41]. Godfrey Kirch was born in the year 1640, at Guben in Lower Lusatia, and lived with Hevelius. He published his Ephemerides in 1681, and became established at Berlin in 1700. This astronomer made numerous observations.
[42].
—-—-—“Amid the radiant orbs
That mere than deck, that animate the sky,
The life-infusing suns of other worlds,
Lo! from the dread immensity of space
Returning with accelerated course,
The rushing Comet to the sun descends;
And, as he sinks below the shading earth,
With awful train projected o’er the heavens,
The guilty nations tremble. But, above
Those superstitious horrors that enslave
The fond sequacious herd, to mystic faith
And blind amazement prone, th’ enlighten’d few,
Whose godlike minds Philosophy exalts,
The glorious stranger hail. They feel a joy
Divinely great; they in their powers exult;
That wond’rous force of thought, which mounting spurns
This dusky spot, and measures all the sky;
While, from his far excursions through the wilds
Of barren ether, faithful to his time,
They see the blazing wonder rise anew,
In seeming terror clad, but kindly bent
To work the will of all-sustaining love:
From his huge vapoury train perhaps to shake
Renewing moisture on the numerous orbs,
Through which his long elipsis winds; perhaps
To lend new fuel to declining suns,
To light up worlds, and feed th’ eternal fire.”
Thomson’s Summer, l. 1702 and seq.
[43]. Mr. Messier observed this Comet in France, eleven days before it was discovered in England by Miss Herschel.
[44]. That the mind of the female sex is capable of compassing great and extraordinary attainments, even in the most arduous branches of science, is attested by many instances; and it cannot be doubted that these would be more numerous, were women oftener attentive to philosophical pursuits. Those who have been just named serve to shew, that astronomy has been cultivated with success, by them. And Dr. Reid tells us (in his Essays on the intellectual and active Powers of Man,) that both the celebrated Christiana, Queen of Sweden, and the Princess Elizabeth, daughter of Frederick, King of Bohemia, and aunt of George I., were adepts in the philosophy of Descartes. The latter of these princesses, though very young when Descartes wrote his Principia, was declared by that philosopher to be the only person he knew, who perfectly understood not only all his philosophical writings, but the most abstruse of his mathematical works.
[45]. The writer is happy in having it in his power to cite, in support of his own opinion, that of an amiable and conspicuous female, in favour of ladies making themselves acquainted with, at least, the rudiments of astronomical science.
The Countess of Carlisle, a woman whose literary attainments, as well as virtues and accomplishments, do honour to her sex and station, in her Letters, under the signature of Cornelia, thus recommends an attention to the study of astronomy, to the young ladies to whom her letters are addressed. “Attain a competent knowledge of the globe on which you live, that your apprehension of Infinite Wisdom may be enlarged; which it will be in a much higher degree, if you take care to acquire a general idea of the structure of the universe. It is not expected you should become adepts in astronomy; but a knowledge of its leading principles you may, and ought to obtain.”—Her ladyship then refers her young female correspondents to the Plurality of Worlds of Fontenelle, in order that they might acquire a knowledge of the planetary orbs; pleasantly recommending this author as a proper person, in the capacity of “a gentleman usher,” to “introduce” them to an “acquaintance” with “that brilliant assembly.”
Lady Carlisle’s Letters, lett. 8th.
[46]. Translated from the Latin.
[47]. This very eminent mathematician, as well as learned and pious divine, died in the year 1677, aged only forty-seven years. See the life of this extraordinary man, written in 1683, by the learned Abraham Hill; prefixed to the first volume of the doctor’s theological works; a fifth edition of which, in three folio volumes, was published by archbishop Tillotson, in 1741. He also wrote and published many geometrical and mathematical works, all in Latin.
“The name of Dr. Barrow,” says Mr. Granger, one of his biographers, “will ever be illustrious, for a strength of mind and a compass of knowledge that did honour to his country. He was unrivalled in mathematical learning, and especially in the sublime geometry, in which he was excelled only by one man; and that man was his pupil, the great Sir Isaac Newton. The same genius that seemed to be born only to bring hidden things to light, to rise to the heights or descend to the depths of science, would sometimes amuse itself in the flowery paths of poetry, and he composed verses both in Greek and Latin.”
This “prodigy of learning,” as he is called by Mr. Granger, was interred in Westminster Abbey, where a monument, adorned with his bust, is erected to his memory.
[48]. Flavius Josephus informs us, (in his Jewish Antiquities, b. i. chap. 7. 8.) that the sons of Seth employed themselves in astronomical contemplations. According to the same historian, Abraham inferred the unity and power of God, from the orderly course of things both at sea and land, in their times and seasons, and from his observations upon the motions and influences of the sun, moon and stars. He further relates, that this patriarch delivered lectures on geometry and arithmetic to the Egyptians, of which they understood nothing, until Abraham introduced those sciences from Chaldea into Egypt, from whence they passed into Greece: and, according to Eupolemus and Artapan, he instructed the Phœnicians, as well as the Egyptians, in astronomy.
[49]. We are informed by some ancient writers, that when Babylon was taken, Calisthenes, one of Aristotle’s scholars, carried from thence, by the desire of his master, celestial observations made by the Chaldeans, nearly two thousand years old; which carried them back to about the time of the dispersion of mankind by the confusion of tongues: and those observations are supposed to have been made in the famous temple of Belus, at Babylon. But these accounts are not to be depended on: because Hipparchus and Ptolemy could find no traces of any observations made at Babylon before the time of Nabonassar, who began his reign 747 years before the birth of Christ; and various writers, among the ancients, agree in referring the earliest Babylonian observations to about the same period. In all probability, the Chaldean observations were then little more than matters of curiosity; for, even in the three or four centuries immediately preceding the Christian era, the celestial observations which were made by the Greeks were, for the most part, far from being of any importance, in relation to astronomical science.
Indeed, the knowledge of astronomy at much later periods than those in which the most celebrated philosophers of Greece flourished, must have been very limited and erroneous, on account of the defectiveness of their instruments. And, added to the great disadvantages arising from this cause, the ancients laboured under the want of a knowledge of the telescope and the clock; and also maintained a false notion of the system of the world; which was almost universally adhered to, until the revival and improvement of the Pythagorean system by Copernicus, who died in 1543. Within the last two hundred years, but, particularly, since the laws of nature have been made manifest by the labours and discoveries of the immortal Newton, the science of astronomy has made astonishing advances towards perfection.
[50]. This sovereign re-established the university of Naples, founded that of Vienna in Austria, in the year 1237, and imparted new vigour to the schools of Bologna and Salerno. He caused many ancient works in medicine and philosophy to be translated from the Arabian tongue; particularly, the Almagest of Ptolemy.
Cotemporary with the Emperor Frederick II. was Alphonso X. King of Castile, surnamed the Wise. This prince was the first who manifested a desire of correcting the Tables of Ptolemy. In the year 1240, even during the life of his father, he drew to Toledo the most experienced astronomers of his time, Christians, Moors, or Jews; by whose labours he at length obtained the Alphonsine Tables, in 1252 (the first year of his reign:) which were first printed at Venice, in 1483. He died in the year 1284.
[51]. His name was John Holywood; deduced, according to a practice prevalent in his time, from the place of his nativity, which was Halifax, a town in the west-riding of Yorkshire, in England, where he was born in the year 1204. It was formerly named Holy-wood; and was, probably, so called in Sacro-Bosco’s day: but the more ancient name of that place was Horton, or Hair-town; and Halifax signifies Holy-hair.—This great man was the inventor of the sphere; and wrote a work, entitled De Sphærâ, which was very celebrated. He died at Paris, in 1256.
[52]. He died in 1294, at the age of eighty years.
[53]. Dr. Rush’s Eulogium, “intended to perpetuate the memory of David Rittenhouse,” &c. was delivered before the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia, (a great many public characters, and a numerous concourse of private citizens, also attending,) on the 17th of December 1796. It was pronounced in pursuance of an appointment made by the society, in these words, viz:
“At a meeting convened by special order, on the 1st of July, 1796, the following motion was made, and unanimously adopted; viz. That this Society, deeply affected by the death of their late worthy President, do resolve, That an Eulogium, commemorative of his distinguished talents and services, be publicly pronounced before the Society, by one of its members.”—Dr. Rush’s appointment was made at the next meeting of the society.
The following resolutions passed by them, after the delivery of the oration, will evince the high sense they entertained of the merit of this performance; viz.
“Philosophical Hall, Dec. 17, 1796.—In Meeting of the American Philosophical Society,
“Resolved, unanimously, That the thanks of this society be presented to Dr. Benjamin Rush, for the eloquent, learned, comprehensive, and just Eulogium, which he has this day pronounced, upon the character of our late respected President, Dr. David Rittenhouse.
“Resolved, unanimously, That Dr. Rush be requested to furnish the society with a copy of the Eulogium, to be published under their direction.
“An extract from the minutes:—Samuel Magaw, Robert Patterson, W. Barton, John Bleakley, Secretaries.”
It may not be thought superfluous, to add, that Dr. Rush well knew Mr. Rittenhouse. A personal friendship of an early date subsisted between them: it probably originated when the latter established his residence in Philadelphia, about six and twenty years before his death. In the summer of 1772, Mr. Rittenhouse (in a letter to the Rev. Mr. Barton) expressed his friendly estimation of the doctor in these few words—“The esteem I have for Dr. Rush is such, that his friendship for Mr. —— would, alone, give me a very good opinion of that gentleman.”
[54]. “Biography, or the writing of Lives,” says Dr. Hugh Blair, “is a very useful kind of composition; less formal and stately than history; but to the bulk of readers, perhaps, no less instructive; as it affords them the opportunity of seeing the characters and tempers, the virtues and failings of eminent men, fully displayed; and admits them into a more thorough and intimate acquaintance with such persons, than history generally allows. For, a writer of lives may descend, with propriety, to minute circumstances and familiar incidents. It is expected of him, that he is to give the private, as well as public life, of the person whose actions he records; nay, it is from private life, from familiar, domestic, and seemingly trivial occurrences, we often receive most light into the real character.”—Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres, sect. 36. In addition to so respectable an opinion as that of Professor Blair, respecting the utility and characteristic features of biographical works, the writer of these memoirs hopes he will be excused for giving the sentiments on the same subject, contained in the following extracts from Dr. Maty’s Memoirs of the Life of Lord Chesterfield, “tending to illustrate the civil, literary, and political history of his own time.”
“Besides the great utility which general history derives from private authorities, other advantages no less important,” says this learned and ingenious biographer, “may be obtained from them. It is from observing individuals, that we may be enabled to draw the outlines of that extraordinary, complicated being, man. The characteristics of any country or age must be deduced from the separate characters of persons, who, however distinguishable in many respects, still preserve a family-likeness. From the life of almost any one individual, but chiefly from the lives of such eminent men as seemed destined to enlighten or to adorn society, instructions may be drawn, suitable to every capacity, rank, age or station. Young men, aspiring to honours, cannot be too assiduous in tracing the means by which they were obtained: by observing with what difficulty they were preserved, they will be apprized of their real value, estimate the risks of the purchase, and discover frequent disappointment in the possession.”
“It is from the number and variety of private memoirs, and the collision of opposite testimonies, that the judicious reader is enabled to strike out light, and find his way through that darkness and confusion in which he is at first involved.”
“Who does not wish that Cæsar had lived to finish his Commentaries; and that Pompey’s sons, instead of fighting their father’s cause, had employed themselves in writing his life?—What a valuable legacy would Cicero have left us, if, instead of his philosophical works, he had written the memoirs of his own times! Or how much would Tyro, to whom posterity is so much indebted for the preservation of his master’s letters, have encreased that obligation, if, from his own knowledge, he had connected and explained them! The life of Agricola, by his son-in-law Tacitus, is undoubtedly one of the most precious monuments of antiquity.”
[55]. The duchy of Guelderland formerly belonged to the Spanish monarchy; but by the peace of Utrecht, in 1713, part of it was ceded to Austria, part to Prussia, and guaranteed to them by the treaty of Baden, in 1714: that part which became subject to Prussia was, in exchange for the principality of Orange, ceded to France. By the barrier-treaty, in 1715, the states general of the United Provinces likewise obtained a part of it. But the Upper and Lower Guelderland have no connexion with each other: Lower Guelderland is (or was, until very lately) one of the Seven United Provinces: it is the largest of them all, and the first in rank. Arnheim, which is the capital of the whole province, is a large, populous, and handsome town: it was formerly the residence of the dukes of Guelderland, and the states of the province held their meetings there.
[56]. The writer of these memoirs having been in Holland in the summer of the year 1778, adverted, while in Amsterdam, to the circumstance of the Rittenhouses, of Pennsylvania, having come into America from some part of the United Provinces; and his curiosity being excited, by his consanguineous connexion with that family, to obtain some information concerning them, the following was the result of his enquiries. He found a Mr. Adrian Rittinghuysen, (for so he himself wrote his name,) residing in that city. This venerable man, who was then eighty-five years of age, appeared to be at least independent in his condition; and had, probably, retired from business, the part of the city in which he resided (the Egelantier’s Gracht, or Canal,) not exhibiting the appearance of a street of trade.
The information derived from this respectable old man, was, that his forefathers had long been established at Arnheim; that his father, Nicholas, was a paper-manufacturer in that city, as others of the family had been; and that his father’s brother, William, went with his family to North America, where he some time afterward, as he had understood, established the paper-mills near Germantown. He further stated, that he had only one child, a daughter, who was married, and resided at the Hague; and that he was, himself, as he believed, the last of his family-name, remaining in the United Provinces.
Although plain in his dress and manners, and in the general appearance of his household, this person seemed to be pleased in shewing the writer a family-seal, on which was engraved a coat of arms. The armorial device represented a castellated house, or chateau; on the left side of which was a horse, standing on his hind feet and rearing up, with his fore feet resting against the wall of the house: and this house very much resembled the chateau in the armorial bearing of the Spanish family “de Fuentes, señores del Castillio,” as represented in Dubuisson’s French Collection of Arms: The seal having been much worn, the lines, &c. describing the several tinctures of the bearing, could not be discerned; and, therefore, it cannot be properly blazoned. At the same time, the old gentleman did not omit to mention, that his mother was a De Ruyter; and that her arms were, a mounted chevalier armed cap-à-piè.
These facts, relative to the origin of the American Rittenhouses, did not appear to the writer to be unworthy of notice. They are correctly stated, being taken from a memorandum made by him, immediately after his interview with Adrian Rittinghuysen.
The introduction of this slight sketch of the occupation and condition of some of the European ancestors of our Philosopher, into his Life, may be the more readily excused, since the great Newton himself was not inattentive to such objects. There is, indeed, implanted by nature in the human mind, a strong desire to become acquainted with the family-history of our forefathers. Hence, Sir Isaac Newton left, in his own hand-writing, a genealogical account or pedigree of his family; with directions, subjoined thereto, that the registers of certain parishes should be searched, from the beginning to the year 1650; and he adds—“Let the extracts be taken, by copying out of the registers whatever may be met with, about the family of the Newtons, in words at length, without omitting any of the words.” This investigation and enquiry of Sir Isaac, was made in the sixty-third year of his age; and he himself caused the result to be entered in the books of the herald’s office.
Such, also, was the curiosity of Dr. Benjamin Franklin. While the Doctor was in England, he undertook a journey to Eaton, in Northamptonshire, (a village situated between Wellingborough and Northampton,) the residence of his forefathers, for the purpose of obtaining information, as he tells us himself, concerning his family.—“To be acquainted with the particulars of my parentage and life, many of which are unknown to you,” (said Dr. Franklin in his Life, which he addressed to his son,) “I flatter myself, will afford the same pleasure to you as to me—I shall, relate them upon paper.”
[57]. See the preceding note.
[58]. Conradus Rittershusius was a learned civilian of Germany. He was born at Brunswick in the year 1560, and died at Altorf in Switzerland, in 1613. Two of his sons, George and Nicholas, also distinguished themselves in the republic of letters. The writer of the present memoirs is too little acquainted with the genealogies of either German or Dutch families, to pretend to claim any consanguinity between this C. Rittershuysen (or, as latinized, Rittershusius,) and our Rittenhouses. But the name appears to have been, originally, the same; and the ancestors of both, it may be presumed, were of the same country: In giving a latin termination to the name, the y is omitted, not being a Roman letter.
[59]. The Dutch were early and long distinguished for the superior quality of the paper manufactured in their country. It excelled, in its whiteness and the closeness of its texture, as well as its goodness in other respects, the paper made elsewhere; and it was an article of great importance to the republic, both for the internal consumption and for exportation, until the Hollanders were rivalled in this manufacture by the perfection to which it was afterwards brought in other parts of Europe.
Paper, made from linen rags (for that made from cotton, silk, and some other substances, was of a much elder date,) is said to have been originally introduced into Germany from Valencia and Catalonia, in Spain, as early as the year 1312, and to have appeared in England eight or ten years afterwards. But the first paper-mill in Great Britain was erected at Dartford in Kent, by Mr. Speelman, a German, jeweller to queen Elizabeth, in the year 1558: and it was not until more than a century after, that any other paper than of an inferior quality was manufactured in England. Little besides brown paper was made there, prior to the revolution in 1688: yet, soon after that period, the English were enabled to supply themselves with much the greater part of the various kinds of paper used in their country, from their own mills; and the perfection to which the manufacture of this important article has since been carried, not only in England, but in France, Italy and Germany, has greatly diminished the consumption of Dutch paper.
It is a fact worthy of notice, that the establishment of paper-mills in Pennsylvania, by the Rittenhouses, was nearly co-eval with the general introduction of the manufactory of white paper in the mother country. This appears from the following circumstance:—There is now before the writer of these memoirs a paper in the hand-writing of the celebrated William Penn, and subscribed with his name, certifying that “William Rittinghousen and Claus” (Nicholas) “his son,” then “part owners of the paper-mill near Germantown,” had recently sustained a very great loss by a violent and sudden flood, which carried away the said mill, with a considerable quantity of paper, materials and tools, with other things therein, whereby they were reduced to great distress; and, therefore, recommending to such persons as should be disposed to lend them aid, to give the sufferers “relief and encouragement, in their needful and commendable employment,” as they were “desirous to set up the paper-mill again.”—This certificate is without date: but Mr. Penn was twice in Pennsylvania. He first arrived in the year 1682, and returned to England in 1684; his second arrival was in 1699, and he finally left the province in 1701. It was probably during the latter period of his residence in his proprietary-dominion, though, perhaps, in the first, that the Germantown paper-mills were destroyed.
The William Rittinghousen (so Mr. Penn writes the name) here mentioned, is supposed to be the same named in the text, and to have been the great-grandfather of our astronomer. In Mr. Penn’s certificate he is called an old man, and is stated to have then been “decrepid.”
In order to shew the present importance of that article, as a manufacture, in the United States, and which was first fabricated in this country by the Rittenhouses, the reader is presented with the following view of the quantity of paper, of various descriptions, annually made at one hundred and eighty-five paper-mills, within the United States; taken from the latest information furnished on this subject.
| Tons. | Reams. | Value. | |
| For Newspapers,[[59a]] | 500 | 50,000 | $150,000 |
| Books, | 630 | 70,000 | 245,000 |
| Writing, | 650 | 111,000 | 333,000 |
| Wrapping, | 800 | 100,000 | 83,000 |
| —-— | —-—-— | —-—-— | |
| 2580 | 331,000 | 811,000 |
[59a]. The number of Newspapers, printed annually in the United States, is estimated at twenty-two and an half millions.
[60]. Mr. Benjamin Rittenhouse, a younger brother of David, speaking of his paternal ancestors, in a letter addressed to the writer of these memoirs, says: “The family originally settled in the state of New-York, while a Dutch colony; and were, undoubtedly, the first paper-makers in America.” This fact was also communicated to the writer, by Dr. Franklin, some years before.
[61]. At the peace of Breda, in 1667, the Dutch colony of New Netherlands was confirmed to the English, to whom it had been ceded in 1664. But the Dutch having reduced the country in the years 1672 and 1673, it was finally restored to the English by the peace of Westminster, on the 9th of February, 1674. The Rittenhouses are supposed to have seated themselves, before this latter period, in that part of the colony afterwards called East-Jersey. Some of the name reside in the state of New-Jersey, at this day; but it is not known that any of them are inhabitants of the state of New-York. Those in New-Jersey, with most of those of the name in Pennsylvania, are descendants of Nicholas.
[62]. The Rittenhouses who first settled in America, are supposed to have leaned towards the religious tenets of (if they did not belong to) that peaceable branch of the Anabaptists, denominated Mennonites. Simon Menno, the founder of this sect, was one of the first reformers: he was born at a village called Witmarsum, in the Batavian province of Friesland, in 1505; the same year in which John Knox was born, and four years before the birth of Calvin.
Menno had been a priest of the Roman Catholic Church, and some have endeavoured to stigmatize him, as one who was “a notorious profligate.” This, however, may be attributed to his having left the communion of the church of which he was originally a member: for, he is represented to have been “a man of probity, of a meek and tractable spirit, gentle in his manners, pliable and obsequious in his commerce with persons of all ranks and characters, and extremely zealous in promoting practical religion and virtue, which he recommended by his example as well as by his precepts.” He was, moreover, a man of genius and eloquence, and possessed a considerable share of learning. This extraordinary man died in the duchy of Holstein, in the year 1561.
The fundamental principles of the followers of Menno are, in some respects, similar to those of the people called Quakers: They use, likewise, great plainness in their apparel, and adhere to some of the practices of the primitive Christian church. But this peaceable sect baptize adults, and celebrate the eucharist in a manner peculiar to themselves.
Some of Menno’s disciples came into Pennsylvania from New-York, in the year 1692. The principal congregation of this sect was established at Germantown, soon after the Rittenhouses had settled themselves there; and this may be considered as the mother of the sect, in America. The Mennonites have since become a numerous body in Pennsylvania, principally in the county of Lancaster; and this religious society comprehends, among its members, many intelligent worthy men, and valuable citizens.
[63]. In the Preface to a printed copy of the celebrated Speech delivered in the House of Assembly of Pennsylvania, on the 24th of May, 1764, by the late John Dickinson, Esq. the Merits of the Founder of Pennsylvania, as they were declared at various times, in the proceedings of the Legislative Body of the colony, and in some other public Documents, are thus summed up by the writer.
“WILLIAM PENN,
A Man of Principles truly humane;
An Advocate for
Religion and Liberty;
Possessing a noble Spirit,
That exerted itself
For the Good of Mankind;
was
The great and worthy Founder
of
Pennsylvania.
To its Inhabitants, by Charter,
He granted and confirmed
Many singular Privileges and Immunities,
Civil and Religious,
Which he continually studied
To preserve and defend for them;
Nobly declaring,
That they had not followed him so far,
To lose a single tittle
Of the Great Charter,
To which all Englishmen were born.
For these Services,
Great have been the Acknowledgements
Deservedly paid to his Merit;
And his Memory
Is dear to his People,
Who have repeatedly confessed,
That,
Next to Divine Providence,
Their Happiness, Prosperity, and Increase
Are owing
To his wise Conduct and singular Goodness;
Which deserve ever to be remembered
With
Gratitude and Affection,
By
Pennsylvanians.”
For the materials of which the foregoing Eulogy is composed, its author[[63a]] has referred his readers to the Minutes of Assembly, for the years 1719 and 1725, to those from the year 1730 to 1740, both inclusive, excepting only 1736, 1737 and 1739; also, for 1745, 1755 and 1756; to other proceedings of the assembly, in the years 1730 and 1738; and to their Address to Governor John Penn, in 1764.
A very respectable Memorial of another nature, in honour of the justly celebrated Penn, decorates the edifice of a noble public institution in the capital of his former domain; an institution devoted to the purposes of charity, humanity and benevolence. It is a finely executed metallic statue, in bronze, of that great man; representing him in his appropriate attire, and holding in his right hand The Charter of Privileges.[[63b]] The statue stands on an elegant pedestal of marble, in an handsome area on the south front of the Pennsylvania Hospital: and the four sides of the pedestal contain these modest inscriptions; viz.
“William Penn—Born, 1644—Died, 1718.”
(And underneath, the Family-Arms, with his Motto; viz.)
“Mercy—Justice.”
“Pennsylvania Granted by Charles II. to William Penn,
1681.”
“The Proprietary arrived in 1682; made a just and amicable arrangement with the Natives, for the purchase of their Lands; and went back to England in 1684.”
“Returned to Pennsylvania, 1699; and finally withdrew to his Paternal Estate, 1701.”
The public in general, with the Pennsylvania Hospital more particularly, are indebted for this Memorial of true Greatness, to the munificence of a Grandson of the Founder of the extensive Dominion that bears his name; John Penn, of Stoke-Poges in Buckinghamshire, Esquire; by whom the statue was presented, in the year 1804.
[63a]. In the continuation of the Life of Dr. Franklin, (written by the late Dr. Stuber, of Philadelphia,) it is said that the Preface to Mr. Dickinson’s Speech was drawn up by the late learned Provost Smith, and that Dr. Franklin wrote the Preface to Mr. Galloway’s, in reply.
[64]. The Charter of Privileges, granted and solemnly confirmed to the freemen of Pennsylvania and territories belonging to the province, by the proprietary, on the 28th of October, 1701, was, after being approved and agreed to by the legislative body of the province, accepted by them the same day; in lieu of the Frame of Government originally stipulated between Mr. Penn and the Planters, in the year 1683. The first article of this charter provided for a full enjoyment of the Liberty of Conscience, by all persons who should acknowledge “One Almighty God, the Creator, Upholder, and Ruler of the World.” It also declared to be capable of holding any office or place, under the government, all persons professing faith in “Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the World,” and who should, when required, attest their allegiance, &c.
[65]. Incorporated with that edition of the Laws of Pennsylvania, which was published in the year 1810, “under the authority of the legislature,” with Notes and References, by Charles Smith, Esq. is an article that bears a respectful testimony to the justice and clemency of the founder of that state: It is an important and very interesting Note to an act of assembly passed the 1st day of April, 1784, (entitled, “An act for opening the Land-Office, for granting and disposing of the unappropriated Lands within this State,”) containing “a connected view of the land-titles of Pennsylvania from its first settlement to the present time.” In this document the learned editor speaks of the integrity and virtuous policy manifested by Penn, with respect to his conduct towards the Indian natives of the country, to which he had acquired the dominion under his sovereign, in these terms.
“William Penn, although clothed with powers as full and comprehensive as those possesed by the adventurers from Portugal and Spain, was influenced by a purer morality and sounder policy[policy]. His religious principles did not permit him to wrest the soil, by force, from the people to whom God and nature gave it, nor to establish his title in blood; but, under the shade of the lofty trees of the forest, his right was fixed by treaties with the natives, and sanctified, as it were, by incense smoking from the calumet of peace.”
The note from which this extract is made, (and which comprizes 156 large 8vo. pages, printed on a small type,) forms a valuable treatise, historical as well as legal, of the territorial rights of the former proprietaries, and of the land-titles deduced from them by the citizens of Pennsylvania.
[66]. Germantown was settled in the year 1682. It was so called by its founders, a small colony of Germans from the Palatinate, mostly from the vicinity of the city of Worms, who are said to have been converted while in their own country, to the principles of the people called Quakers, by the preaching of William Ames, an Englishman. Germantown is now a populous village, of considerable extent; and by reason of its proximity to the capital, this place furnishes an agreeable residence to many respectable families from thence. See also Note [62].
[67]. This township derives its name (which it gave also to Mr. Rittenhouse’s patrimonial farm and his original observatory,) as does likewise the neighbouring town of Norriston, the county-town of the (now) county of Montgomery, from the respectable Pennsylvania family of Norris; of which Isaac Norris, Esq. was eighteen times chosen Speaker of the General Assembly of Pennsylvania, during the term of half a century from the time of his first election, in the year 1713. Mr. Norris held many public offices in Pennsylvania with great reputation and honour. He is represented as having been “an ornament to his country;” and this gentleman, who died in the year 1735, then held the Chief-Justiceship of the Province.
[68]. In the year 1683, Enoch Flower undertook to teach English in the town of Philadelphia. Six years afterwards, originated the Friends’ Public School in the same town, then in its infancy; and in 1697, this school was incorporated, on the petition of Samuel Carpenter, Edward Shippen, Anthony Morris, James Fox, David Lloyd, William Southby, and John Jones, in behalf of themselves and others. In the year 1708, this corporation was enlarged and perpetuated by a new charter, under the name of “The Overseers of the Public School, founded in Philadelphia, at the request, cost, and charges of the people called Quakers.” It was further extended in the year 1711; when the three first named gentlemen, together with Griffith Owen, Thomas Story, Richard Hill, Isaac Norris, Samuel Preston, Jonathan Dickinson, Nathan Stanbury, Thomas Masters, Nicholas Waln, Caleb Pusey, Rowland Ellis and James Logan, were appointed Overseers.
As this was the earliest considerable school established in Pennsylvania, as well as the first institution of the kind, in the province, the names of its promoters deserve to be held in remembrance, among the Patrons of learning and useful knowledge in this country.
From this view of the origin of schools in the capital of Pennsylvania, it will be perceived, that the means of acquiring even the rudiments of literary instruction must have been difficult of access in country places, for some considerable time after the periods just mentioned. This is one of the most serious grievances to which the settlers in new and unimproved countries are subjected.
[69]. Margaret, who intermarried with Edward Morgan; Esther, with the Rev. Thomas Barton; David, the subject of these Memoirs; Andrew, who died in his minority; Anne, who intermarried with George Shoemaker; Eleanor, who intermarried with Daniel Evans; Benjamin, yet living; Jonathan, who died in his minority; and Mary and Elizabeth (twins,) of whom the latter died in her minority, unmarried: Mary, who is living, has been twice married, but without issue; her first husband was Thomas Morgan. David had no sons; and two of his three brothers having died young and unmarried, the only persons, descended from our philosopher’s father, Matthias, who now bear the name of Rittenhouse, are the surviving brother of David, namely, Benjamin, and his sons. Benjamin has been twice married; first, to a daughter of General John Bull; and, secondly, to a daughter of Colonel Francis Wade: By both marriages he has male issue; and, as it is believed, two of the sons by the first wife are married.
[70]. “There is,” says a late ingenious writer,[[70a]] “a strong propensity in the human mind to trace up our ancestry to as high and as remote a source as possible.” “This principle of our nature,” he observes, “although liable to great perversion; and frequently the source of well-founded ridicule, may, if rightly directed, become the parent of great actions. The origin and progress of individuals, of families, and of nations, constitute Biography and History, two of the most interesting departments of human knowledge.”
The pride of ancestry is, indeed, “liable to great perversion,” and is too frequently “the source of well-founded ridicule:” yet the experience and the history of mankind, in every age and country, have shewn, that it is connected with and derived from principles of our nature, which are not only laudable in themselves, but such as, if “rightly directed” and properly applied, become eminently useful to society.
[70a]. See a “Discourse delivered before the New-York Historical Society, at their anniversary meeting, December the 6th, 1811: By the Hon. De Witt Clinton, one of the Vice-Presidents of the Society.”
[71]. It is not this occupation that, in itself, usually attaches to those who follow it, the idea of clownishness: but it is the ignorance that, unfortunately, too generally characterizes persons employed in it, which, by an association of ideas, is apt to derogate from the worthiness of the employment itself. If the profession of husbandry be an honourable one, and every rational consideration renders it such, then one of the most important operations in conducting the great business of the agriculturist, cannot be destitute of dignity. To follow the plough is not a servile labour: it is an employment worthy of a freeman; and if the person, thus engaged, be a man of native talents, aided by some improvement of mind, scarcely any occupation can afford him greater scope for philosophic reflection.
While, therefore, the reader contemplates the celebrated Rittenhouse, such as he was in his maturer years; and then takes a retrospective view of the embryo-philosopher in the period of his youth, directing the plough on his father’s freehold; let it be recollected, that the sovereigns of a mighty empire, in the Eastern world, occasionally guide this truly important machine with their own hands, in honour of agriculture: let him recal to his mind, that, in the proudest days of the Roman republic, consuls, dictators, senators, and generals, were not unfrequently called forth from the actual occupancy of this implement of husbandry, by the voice of their country; and, seizing either the civil or the military helm of its government, with hands indurated by the toils of the peaceful field, have by the wisdom of their counsel, or by their valour, supported the tottering fabric of the state and saved the commonwealth: let them remember, in fine, that—
“In ancient times, the sacred plough employ’d
The kings and awful fathers of mankind;”[[71a]]
and that Washington, himself, the pride and boast of his age as well as country, disdained not to engage himself, personally, in agricultural pursuits.
[71a]. Thomson’s Spring.
[72]. This gentleman was commissioned by Governor Mifflin, in the year 1791, to be one of the associate judges of the court of common pleas, in and for the county of Montgomery: but his tenure of this office was afterwards vacated, by his removal to Philadelphia.
[73]. “Astronomy,” says Mr. B. Rittenhouse, in the letter before referred to, “appeared at a very early day to be his favourite study; but he also applied himself industriously to the study of opticks, the mechanical powers,” &c.
[74]. The zeal and attention with which our young philosopher pursued his early studies, and such mechanical objects as are more intimately connected with those branches of natural philosophy to which he was most devoted, will appear from the following extract of a letter, addressed by him to Mr. Barton, on the 20th of September, 1756, being then little more than twenty-four years of age; viz. “I have not health for a soldier,” (the country was then engaged in war,) “and as I have no expectation of serving my country in that way, I am spending my time in the old trifling manner, and am so taken with optics, that I do not know whether, if the enemy should invade this part of the country, as Archimedes was slain while making geometrical figures on the sand, so I should die making a telescope.”
[75]. It[It] is observable, that, in like manner, an accidental circumstance seems to have given the first impulse to the philosophical researches of that eminent mathematician, Colin Maclaurin, the friend and disciple of Newton. His biographer, Mr. Murdoch, relates, that “his genius for mathematical learning discovered itself so early as at twelve years of age; when, having accidentally met with a copy of Euclid in a friend’s chamber, in a few days he became master of the first six books, without any assistance: and thence, following his natural bent, made such a surprising progress, that very soon after we find him engaged in the most curious and difficult problems.”
It is not ascertained at what age Rittenhouse obtained access to his uncle Williams’s little collection of books and papers; though it was, probably, before his twelfth year. But it is to be observed, that at the early age of twelve, Maclaurin had been a year at the University of Glasgow, where he was placed under the care of one of the most eminent and learned professors of the age; while Rittenhouse, for some years after that period of life, had his time occupied in agricultural pursuits, and was almost entirely uneducated.
One particular in which similar merit attaches itself to these two distinguished philosophers, is, that all their more serious studies were directed towards objects of general utility.
Having introduced the name of Maclaurin more than once into these Memoirs, the author of them cannot refrain from presenting to his readers the following epitaph upon that great mathematician. It is attributed to the late Dr. Johnson: the delicacy and chasteness of the sentiment, as well as the classical purity of the language, certainly render it a specimen of this species of composition worthy of the pen of that justly-admired writer.—
H. L. P. E.
Non ut nomine paterno consulat;
Nam tali auxilio nil eget;
Sed, ut in hoc infelici campo,
Ubi luctus regnant et pavor,
Mortalibus prorsus non absit solatium:
Hujus enim scripta evolve,
Mentemque tantarum rerum capacem,
Corpori caduco superstitem crede.
The writer of the Adversaria, in a respectable periodical publication,[[75a]] observes, that “it would not be easy to do justice to this elegant and nervous sentence, in English.” But, as he has given a very good prose translation of it into our language, the subjoined versification of this was attempted by a young lady, at the request of the writer of these memoirs:—
Not to perpetuate his father’s praise,
For no such aid his lofty fame requir’d,
Did filial piety the marble raise;
But other thoughts the friendly deed inspir’d.
Here, in this tearful vale, where sorrow dwells
And trembling mortals own the reign of fear,
At his command, the sculptur’d tablet tells,
Where hope exists, to dry the wand’rer’s tear.
For, read his works, O man! and then believe,
The mind that grasp’d at systems so sublime,
Beyond the mortal part must ever live,
And bloom, in sacred heav’n’s ethereal clime.
[75a]. The Port-Folio.
[76]. In order to gratify the curiosity, if not to remove the doubts, of such persons as are not disposed to believe in the reality of any thing like an hereditary power, bias, or propensity of the mind, the following memorable instances are selected from many others which might be adduced; to shew that mental faculties, as well as corporeal qualities and even mental and bodily diseases, are sometimes inherited by children from their parents: perhaps cases of this kind exist more frequently than is either observed or imagined.
Mr. James Gregory, the inventor of the reflecting telescope in common use, called the Gregorian, was one of the most distinguished mathematicians of the seventeenth century. This eminent man, who was born at Aberdeen in Scotland in the year 1638, was a son of the Rev. Mr. John Gregory, minister of Drumoak in the same county: his mother was, moreover, a daughter of Mr. David Anderson, of Finzaugh, a gentleman who possessed a singular turn for mathematical pursuits.
Mr. David Gregory, a nephew of the foregoing, was some time Savilian professor of astronomy at Oxford. This Subtilissimi Ingenii Mathematicus, as he is styled by his successor Dr. Smith, was born at Aberdeen, in the year 1661. Of the four sons of this celebrated mathematician,—
David, a mathematician, was regius professor of modern history, at Oxford;
James was professor of mathematics, at Edinburgh; and
Charles was also professor of mathematics, at St. Andrew’s.
Besides these men of genius in the same family, was the late Dr. John Gregory, professor of medicine in the University of Edinburgh; who had previously held the philosophical chair in the University of St. Andrews, from which he delivered lectures on the mathematics, experimental philosophy, and moral philosophy. This gentleman was grandson of the inventor of the Gregorian telescope, son of Dr. James Gregory, professor of medicine at Aberdeen, and father of another James, successor of Dr. Cullen, in the medical chair at Edinburgh.
A mathematical genius was hereditary in the family of the Andersons; and, from them, it seems to have been transmitted to their descendants of the name of Gregory. Alexander Anderson, cousin-german of David abovementioned, was professor of mathematics at Paris, in the beginning of the eighteenth century; and published there in 1712, Supplementum Apollonii redivivi, &c. The mother of the James Gregory, first named, inherited the genius of her family; and observing in her son, while yet a child, a strong propensity to mathematics, she herself instructed him in the elements of that science.
Margaret, the mother of the late Dr. Thomas Reid, professor of moral philosophy in the University of Glasgow, was a daughter of David Gregory, Esq. of Kinnardie in Banffshire, elder brother of the James Gregory first mentioned. It is remarked by a celebrated writer, that “the hereditary worth and genius which have so long distinguished[distinguished], and which still distinguish, the descendants of this memorable family, are well known to all who have turned their attention to Scottish biography: but it is not known so generally, that in the female line, the same characteristical endowments have been conspicuous in various instances; and that to the other monuments which illustrate the race of the Gregories, is to be added the philosophy of Reid.”—(See Dugald Stewart’s Account of the Life and Writings of Dr. Reid.)
The great mathematical genius of the celebrated astronomer, John Dominick Cassini, descended to his great-grandson. John-James, the son of John-Dominick, who inherited the genius of his father, succeeded him as professor of astronomy in the Royal Observatory at Paris, a place which the father had filled more than forty years: John-James’s son, Cæsar-Francis Cassini de Thury, (who died in the year 1784, at the age of seventy years,) was an eminent astronomer: and his son, the Count John-Dominick de Thury, was also a distinguished astronomer.
The eldest of these Cassini’s was a native of Italy, and born in 1625. He died in the seventy-seventh year of his age; and in the year 1695, a medal was struck to honour his memory, by order of the king of France.
These instances of genius in three families, afford striking examples of its being sometimes hereditary. It is further observable, that, in the case of the great professor Simson, his mathematical endowments were said to be derived from his mother’s family; as Mr. Rittenhouse’s were likewise supposed to have been from that of his mother.
[77]. Mr. Barton resided on a farm, near what are called the Sulphur Springs (now comprehended within the limits of the new county of Adams,) from some time in the year 1755, until the spring of 1759; during which period he officiated as a missionary from “the society,” established in England, “for the propagation of the gospel in foreign parts,” for the counties of York and Cumberland. While he resided in that then remote settlement of Pennsylvania, he was greatly instrumental, both by his precept and example, in stimulating the people to avenge the numerous barbarities perpetrated on the inhabitants and their property in that frontier, by their French and Indian enemies. In the expedition against Fort Du Quesne (now Pittsburg,) undertaken in the year 1758, under the orders of brigadier-general Forbes, he served as a chaplain to the forces then employed, by virtue of a commission from governor Denny: and in that campaign he became personally acquainted not only with the commander in chief, but, among others, with colonel (afterwards general) Washington; colonel (afterwards general) Mercer; colonel Byrd of Virginia; colonel Dagworthy; colonel James Burd of Pennsylvania; all provincial officers of great merit; besides colonel (afterwards general) Bouquet, sir John St. Clair, sir Peter Hacket, major Stewart, and other gentlemen of worth and distinction, who held commands in the British regiments engaged in that service. With most of these very respectable military characters Mr. Barton occasionally corresponded, afterward; and his services, during a residence of between three and four years in that part of Pennsylvania, were honourably acknowledged, as well in England as among his fellow-citizens, in various instances.
After Mr. Barton left the county of York, he became established in Lancaster, where he officiated as rector of St. James’s church in that borough, and missionary to the large and respectable country-congregations of Caernarvon and Pequea, nearly twenty years.
[78]. Although commonly called Dunker’s-Town, the proper name of this once noted village is Ephrata. The little community which formerly resided there, usually styled Dunkers, date the origin of their sect about the year 1705. The original members of this religious society, in Germany, Switzerland, and some other parts of Europe, having been persecuted and banished from their homes, assembled themselves in the duchy of Cleves, under the protection of the king of Prussia: and from thence they migrated to Pennsylvania, mostly between the years 1718 and 1734, a few of them only remaining behind. See also the next note.
[79]. The proper name of this place is Ephrata; and the very singular religious society to whom it belongs, are denominated Seventh-Day Baptists.
The society is said to have originally consisted of about twenty families who migrated from Germany to Pennsylvania, about the year 1718 or 1719; part of whom settled at this place, and founded the village of Ephrata (the head-quarters of the sect,) which is situated about thirteen miles, north-eastward, from Lancaster, on a little stream called the Cocolico-creek. These people hold the doctrine of an universal redemption, ultimately, denying the eternity of future punishment; that war and judicial oaths are unchristian; and that it is not justifiable to take interest, for money lent. They keep the seventh day of the week as their sabbath, and baptize by submersion; whence they derive their name: they also inculcate the propriety of celibacy, and of maintaining a community of goods; but when any of them marry, and acquire property independent of the society in Ephrata, they are obliged to retire from thence and reside elsewhere. The men generally wear their beards, and clothe themselves in a habit not unlike that of the Carmelites or White Friars: the women dress like nuns. Both men and women observe great abstemiousness in their diet, living chiefly on vegetables, and submit to some privations and corporal severities, besides, in their religious discipline; they lie upon benches, with a wooden block instead of a pillow: but though meek, humble, and even timid, in their deportment, they are very civil to strangers who visit them.
The society of Ephrata is supported by cultivating their lands, conducting a printing-press, a grist-mill, a paper-mill, a saw-mill, a tan-yard, &c. and the women are employed in spinning, knitting, sewing, making paper-lanterns and other toys, &c.
The village consists of about ten or a dozen buildings; and is mostly composed of the cloisters and convent, two churches, and the mills. One of their places of worship adjoins the sisters’ apartments, as a chapel; another belongs to the brothers’ apartments: and to these churches, the brethren and the sisterhood respectively resort, every morning and evening, sometimes, too, in the night, for the purpose of worshipping; much of which is made up of soft and melodious chanting, by the females. There is said to be one other place of worship, wherein all the members of the society, within the bounds of the settlement, meet once a week to celebrate worship publicly.
Such, indeed, was the pleasant, sequestered little village of Ephrata, at the time our then very young philosopher visited it; and such was the condition of that little-known sect of Christians, while the society continued under the direction of their second and last president, the late Mr. Peter Miller. This venerable old German, who had been bred to the priesthood in some one of the Protestant churches of his native country, became a convert to the principles of this obscure ascetic sect, over which he long presided with much reputation, after the death of its reputed founder, Conrad Beixler, his patriarchal predecessor. But, though possessing a good share of the old scholastic learning, with a large portion of piety, the mind of Mr. Miller was strongly tinctured with many mystical notions in divinity; such as well comported with the “whimsies” of the religious society he governed.
Since the death of this good man, the ancient discipline of the religious community at Ephrata, which had become greatly relaxed during the revolutionary war, has almost wholly disappeared. The chief seat of the Seventh-Day Baptists is no longer what it was: for, in lieu of the solemn devotional stillness of the secluded cloysters and cells of its once monastic inhabitants, and which, at this time, are nearly deserted, are now substituted various occupations of industry, amidst “the busy haunts of men.”
A letter from lady Juliana Penn to the second and last worthy president of this little religious society, has a place in the Appendix. It is indicative of the goodness of her ladyship’s heart.
[80]. The county-town of Berks, in Pennsylvania, pleasantly situated on the Schuylkill, about fifty-six miles, north-westward, from Philadelphia.
[81]. A neighbouring township to Norriton, the place of Mr. Rittenhouse’s country residence.
[82]. This farm contained about one hundred and fifty acres. It was lately sold by the heirs of Dr. Rittenhouse.
[83]. “Omnium autem rerum, ex quibus aliquid acquiritur, nihil est agriculturâ melius, nihil uberius, nihil dulcius, nihil homine, nihil libero dignius,” Cic. De Offic. ii. 42.
[84]. The opinion, that Mr. Rittenhouse was, in his youth and the first years of his manhood, “without literary friends or society, and with but two or three books,” though erroneous in fact, was propagated pretty early; and that opinion has, since, generally prevailed. About twenty-two years before his death, a book was published in Philadelphia, under the title of Caspipina’s Letters; of which the Rev. Mr. Duché, then assistant-minister of Christ-church and St. Peter’s in that city, was the writer. In that pleasant little work, its amiable and worthy author (who has been dead many years) has thus mentioned our philosopher. “After taking a few turns in the garden, we walked back again to the college, where we had appointed to meet the modest and ingenious Mr. Rittenhouse, who, without one single advantage from a private tutor, or public education, by the mere force of genius and industry, may now justly be reckoned the first astronomer and mathematician in the world.”
Under such circumstances as these, it is by no means a matter of surprise, that Dr. Rush should have been led into a similar mistake.
It is, nevertheless, truly astonishing to find an American writer (the late Rev. Mr. Linn,) who, five years after Dr. Rittenhouse’s death, published in Philadelphia, where both resided, a poem entitled, “The Powers of Genius;” but, in which the name of Rittenhouse is not once noticed! And yet that gentleman had not omitted to introduce, in one of his notes, an observation which shews, that an European philosopher, also of sublime genius, was present to his mind’s eye!—“From the exhibitions of American talents,” said Mr. Linn, “I indulge the warmest expectations. I behold, in imagination, the Newtons, the Miltons, and the Robertsons, of this new world; and I behold the sun of genius” (likewise “in imagination,” it is presumed,) “pouring on our land his meridian beams.”
The writer of these memoirs believes Dr. Linn to have been a very worthy, as well as an ingenious man: as such, he regrets his premature death, and entertains a respect for his memory. But he could not, in justice to the merit of Dr. Rittenhouse’s character, pass unnoticed so unaccountable an omission as the one just mentioned, in Dr. Linn’s Poem.
[85]. Dr. Herschel, by means of his admirable telescopes, the most powerful that have ever been constructed, discovered on the 13th of March, 1781, a new planet without the orbit of Saturn, called the Georgium Sidus. The newly discovered star was thus named by Dr. Herschel himself, in honour of his patron King George III. by whose bounty he was enabled to construct, and to make incessant and laborious observations with those wonderful telescopes, by which this astronomer has extended our knowledge of the planetary and sidereal system, far beyond its former limits.[[85a]]
Some astronomers on the continent of Europe, and in America likewise, have affected to call this new planet Herschel; while others have endeavoured to give it the name of Uranus. Would it not be well, in order to avoid the perplexity and confusion arising from various names for the same thing, that astronomers of eminence should designate this planet, in future, by the name which the discoverer—who, it may be presumed, was best entitled to give it a denomination—chose to apply to it? It is a strange kind of compliment to Dr. Herschel, if it could have been intended as a mark of respect to him, to refuse an adoption of that name which he had assigned to his own discovery; even by changing it for that of the Doctor himself! He wished this planet, no doubt, to retain the appellation of Georgium Sidus, as a memorial of his grateful respect for his royal benefactor; and in this object of his wish he would be disappointed, by changing it for any other.
The name Uranus is also objectionable, and on another ground. Uranus was a fabulous personage. It is pretended, that in the isle called Panchay,[[85b]] to the east of Africa, is to be seen on a column of gold, a recital of the principal actions of Uranus, together with those of Saturn and Jupiter. It is said that the former was the most ancient king in the world; and that, having been a just and beneficent man, well versed in the knowledge of the stars, he was the first who offered sacrifices to the gods of heaven. We are also told, that in the island just named is a mountain, where Uranus, holding the sceptre of the world, took great pleasure in contemplating the firmament and the stars. Among the sons of this monarch, according to the same fiction, the two most distinguished were Atlas and Saturn, who partitioned between them their father’s kingdom; and Atlas, who in the division acquired the sea-coasts, is said to have excelled in astrology: his reign is placed about sixteen hundred years before the Christian era, and he is therefore ranked as a co-temporary of Moses.
Such is the fabulous history of Uranus! whose name some Christian philosophers seem desirous to perpetuate, with honour, by attaching it to a newly-discovered world! It would be extremely difficult if not impracticable (and, perhaps, even if practicable, the attempt would not be advisable at this time of day,) to abolish such of the names of the heavenly bodies as are derived from the appellations of the false gods of antiquity. But it appears very questionable, whether it be consistent with propriety and a due regard to truth, to connect fable, in any manner, with established and important realities; or whether it be right to dignify the heathen mythology and the preposterous annals of fabulous ages, by unnecessarily associating any thing relating to them, with objects of genuine and useful science.
Baron Bielfeld seems to entertain similar sentiments on this head, when (treating of the mathematics, in his “Elements of Universal Erudition,”) he observes, that “the fables of ancient poets concerning the stars, and,” he adds, “the fancies of some modern Christian astronomers, who have given them names borrowed from the holy scriptures, do not deserve the least attention, when we would treat seriously on this science.” There is much justness in this observation of the learned and ingenious baron: But if the application of names derived from sacred writ, to the stars, be censurable; how much to be condemned among Christians is the practice of giving, even in our day, and in a science which has philosophical truth for its object, the names of heathen deities, and fabulous persons of antiquity, to the celestial bodies! Is it proper, can it, in any way, promote the interests of true science or the attainment of useful knowledge, thus to commemorate any of the absurdities of a false and impious mythology; or any of those traditional personages of the early ages, whose history, as handed down to us in the reveries of the ancient poets and other profane writers, are either enveloped in fable or inexplicable mystery? But to return from this digression:—
Mr. Lalande remarks in his great work on astronomy, which was published in the year 1792, that Louis XIV. gave to astronomers unceasing marks of the interest he took in their labours; and that George III. occupied, with great delight, much of his time in his Observatory at Richmond, as well as in Herschel’s at Slough. In his own, in Richmond Gardens, the king of England has noble and beautiful instruments; among which are a mural arch of 140° and 8 feet radius, made by Sisson, a sector of 12 feet, a transit telescope of 8 feet, made by Adams, and a telescope of 10 feet of Herschel. This grand Observatory was erected in the year 1770, under the direction of Dr. Bevis: it is 140 feet in front, and consists of two stories.
Such princes, then, as Louis XIV. and George III. deserve to be honourably mentioned in the records of astronomical science: and it was meritorious in Dr. Herschel, to dedicate to so munificent a patron and promoter of astronomy as the latter sovereign, in the way he has done, his important discovery of a new planet.
It is noticed by the writer of the article “Astronomy,” in Dr. Brewster’s New Edinburgh Encyclopædia, (the first volume of which has been very lately reprinted in Philadelphia,) that the venerable Herschel,[[85c]] at the advanced age of seventy-two years, still continued to observe the heavens with the most unwearied assiduity: and that his contemplated “successor,” who, it is presumed, is his son, “promises to inherit the virtues and the talents of his father.”
[85a]. Herschel, in calling his newly-discovered planet by the name of his patron, was not without illustrious precedents for so doing. When Galileo discovered the four Satellites of Jupiter, in the year 1610, he named them the Medicea Sidera, in honour of the family of Medici, his patrons. And Cassini, who, in the years 1671, 1672, and 1684, successively, discovered the fifth, the third, and the first and second Satellites of Saturn, denominated these stars, Sidera Lodoicea, in honour of Louis XIV. in whose reign, and observatory, they were first discovered. The fourth Satellite of Saturn (but the first of them, in the order of time, that was known) had been previously discovered by Huygens, sixteen years before any one of the others was known to exist.
[85b]. So written by Lalande. There is an Asiatic island called Panay: it is one of the Philippines, and lies, as Panchay is said to do, “to the east of Africa.”
“Herschel, with ample mind and magic glass,
Mid worlds and worlds revolving as they pass,
Pours the full cluster’d radiance from on high,
That fathomless abyss of Deity.”
Purs. of Lit. dial. the fourth.
[86]. Philip III. king of Spain, first offered a reward for the discovery of the longitude, about two centuries ago; and the States of Holland, soon after, followed his example. The Regent of France, during the minority of Louis XV. also promised a great reward to any person who should discover the longitude at sea.
In the year 1714, the parliament of Great Britain offered a reward for a like discovery; and if the method, to be proposed, should determine the longitude to twenty geographical miles, the premium was to be twenty-thousand pounds sterling. The act of parliament established a board of Commissioners of the Longitude. Several other acts were passed, in the reigns of Geo. II. and III. directed to the same purpose. Finally, in the year 1774, all those acts were repealed, by one offering separate premiums for finding the longitude; either by the lunar method, or by a watch keeping true time,—or by any other method practicable at sea. This act proposes as a reward for a time-keeper, 5000l., if it determine the longitude to one degree or sixty geographical miles,—7500l., if to forty miles,—and 10,000l., if to thirty miles. If the method be by improved Solar and Lunar Tables, constructed upon Sir Isaac Newton’s theory of gravitation, the author is to receive 5000l.; provided such Tables shall show the distance of the Moon from the Sun and Stars within fifteen seconds of a degree, answering to about seven minutes of longitude, after making an allowance of a half a degree for the errors of observation. The Commissioners have the power of giving smaller rewards, at their discretion, to persons making any discovery for finding the longitude at sea, though it may not be within the above limits.
The set of Solar and Lunar Tables which were sent to the Board of Longitude, about the year 1763, by the widow of the celebrated astronomer, Tobias Mayer, were honoured with a reward of 3000l. sterling, by an act of the British parliament, in consideration of their great usefulness in finding the longitude at sea.
[87]. See Mr. de Zach’s great work, entitled, Tabulæ Motuum Solis novæ et correctæ, &c.
[88]. For the use of such readers as may not be acquainted with the Latin language, the following translation of the above is given, from the original of Mr. de Zach.
“Concerning the means of determining the longitude, this is not the proper place to treat: of one, however, the marine or nautical time-keeper, it will not be foreign to our purpose to say something.
“It is now about thirty years, since those very ingenious makers of time-keepers, Harrison, Cummings, Kendal, Arnold, and Mudge, among the English,—Le Roy, and Berthoud, among the French,—devised various and excellent ones for the use of navigators, and brought to a great degree of perfection those marine watches, called by the English, Time-keepers. As every one knows their use in ascertaining the longitude, on a sea-voyage, I shall not say any thing more of them here.—A similar time-piece, made by the celebrated watch-maker Mr. Thomas Mudge, and often referred to in the royal observatory of Greenwich, was, in 1784, made use of by the Hon. Vice-Admiral (John) Campbell, commander of the naval squadron[[88a]] on the Newfoundland station,—going thither and returning; and from that time was diligently examined, at the observatory of his Excellency Count Bruhl, in Dover street London.
“This very marine time-piece was confided to my charge, in the year 1786, for the purpose of determining the longitudes of my journey by land; when, called from London by his Serene Highness the Duke of Saxe-Gotha,—the patron of all the sciences and liberal arts, but more especially favouring astronomy,—I returned to Germany; where the erecting of a complete and splendid Observatory, at Gotha, was placed under my direction.[[88b]] I then took with me, by the command of his Serene Highness, a watch of a smaller size, which he usually carried in his fob,—called by the English a Pocket-chronometer,—made by a London artist, Mr. Josiah Emery:[[88c]] which, being made with the greatest accuracy and ingenuity, yielded nothing in point of correctness to the larger nautical time-keepers, as may be seen from three tables of their movements by the illustrious Count Bruhl, and also of others, by Dr. Arnold, lately established by authenticated certificates.
“About the end of the year 1786 and the beginning of 1787, I accompanied His Serene Highness, in a tour through Germany, France and Italy. In this journey, the longitudes of several places and astronomical observatories were determined, from a comparison of the time of a nautical time-keeper (which was set by the solar mean time in Dover street, London,) with the mean time of the place; which appears by the altitudes of the sun, by Hadley’s sextant—those which we call corresponding, or by a comparison with it, as transmitted to us in observatories, by those astronomers. By the same instruments, therefore, when I arrived at Gotha, I ascertained the longitude of the future observatory there, with the greatest care and attention; which the Duke, going to London a few days after, taking with him his chronometer, at length fully verified.”
[88a]. Here is a reference, in the text, to note [89].
[88b]. Here is a reference, in the text, to note [90].
[88c]. Here is a reference, in the text, to note [91].
[89]. Sundry astronomical observations were made by this officer, while a captain in the British navy, in the years 1757, 8, and 9; which were reported to the admiralty on the 14th of April, 1760, by Dr. Bradley, then astronomer-royal. See Dr. Bradley’s letter of that date, to the Secretary of the Admiralty; published (among other papers) in the year 1770, by order of the board of longitude, at the end of T. Mayer’s Tables and Method of finding the Longitude; edited by Dr. Maskelyne.
[90]. The Observatory, a very handsome and respectable one, was constructed at Gotha in the year 1788, under the auspices of the then reigning Duke of Saxe-Gotha, a zealous patron of astronomy. It is placed on an eminence, a league from the city, and is built entirely of hewn stone. Mr. de Zach, a native of Hungary, an experienced astronomer, was appointed by the duke its director.
The instruments with which the Gotha Observatory is furnished are chiefly English, as are those of most of the celebrated European observatories. Among these, is a transit telescope, by Ramsden; and Mr. Lalande mentions, in his Astronomie (in the year 1792,) that there were to be added, two murals of eight feet radius, an entire circle of eight feet diameter, a great zenith-sector, &c. but that Mr. Ramsden, who was employed to make them, found great difficulty in supplying all the demands for instruments, which his great reputation occasioned.
It is well known, that the first improvements in astronomical instruments took place in Great-Britain; and both Lalande and de Zach, as well as other foreign astronomers of eminence, have done ample justice to the superior ingenuity and skill of the artists of that country, in this department of mechanism. The ingenious Mr. Edmund Stone, in his Supplement to the English Translation of Mr. Bion’s Construction and Use of Mathematical Instruments, (published in 1758, nearly forty years after he translated Mr. Bion’s work into English,) observes—that, having set about the business (the translating of this latter work,) he soon perceived that many French instruments were excelled by some of the English of the same kind, in contrivance; and that, as to workmanship, he never did see one French instrument so well framed and divided as some English have been. “For example,” says Mr. Stone, “Mr. Sutton’s quadrants, made above one hundred years ago,” (before the middle of the seventeenth century,) “are the finest divided instruments in the world; and the regularity and exactness of the vast number of circles drawn upon them, is highly delightful to behold. The mural quadrant at the Royal Observatory, at Greenwich, far exceeds that of the Royal Observatory at Paris. Also, the theodolites of Messrs. Sisson and Heath, the clocks and watches of Messrs. Graham, Tompion and Quare, the orreries of Mr. Graham and Mr. Wright, and many more curiously contrived and well executed mathematical instruments which I could mention, far exceed those of the French, or indeed any other nation in the world.—The making good[making good] mathematical instruments,” continues Mr. Stone, “is almost peculiar to the English; as well as their skill in all branches of the mathematics and natural philosophy has been generally superior to that of other nations.”
Without wishing to derogate from the justly acquired fame of British artists, for the excellence of their mathematical and astronomical instruments, M. Rittenhouse’s skill and accuracy, displayed in such as he made, stand unsurpassed by similar works of their most celebrated mechanicians: while his profoundness in astronomical science, and his wonderful ingenuity of invention and contrivance, manifested in the construction of his Orrery, leave him without a rival, in the two-fold character of an Astronomer and a Mechanic. The idea of the fine planetarian machine constructed by Mr. Rowley, under the name of the Orrery, and supposed to have been invented by Mr. Graham, is said to have been taken from a very similar machine, of which that eminent philosopher, Dr. Stephen Hales, had the credit of being the original contriver. But Mr. Rittenhouse was, incontrovertibly, the Inventor, as well as the Maker, of that sublimely-conceived and unrivalled machine, which bears the name of the Rittenhouse-Orrery: and Dr. Morse, in noticing some of the more prominent productions of scientific ingenuity and skill, in America, observes, with good reason, that “every combination of machinery may be expected from a country, a native son of which,” (referring in a note to “David Rittenhouse, Esq. of Pennsylvania,”) “reaching this inestimable object in its highest point, has epitomised the motions of the spheres that roll throughout the universe.” See Morse’s American Geography, first published in 1789.
[91]. The accuracy of some of the fine pocket-chronometers constructed by the celebrated artists named by Mr. de Zach, and by some others, such, for instance, as the one made by Emery for the count de Bruhl, mentioned in the text, has rendered them, on some occasions, useful assistants in making astronomical observations on land. Dr. Rittenhouse occasionally used one for such purposes, many years. It was an excellent pocket-watch, made by Le Roy of Paris for the late Matthias Barton, Esq. who was induced to let Dr. Rittenhouse have it. After his decease, this watch was gratuitously restored to its former proprietor, by Mrs. Rittenhouse’s desire, and as a testimonial of what she knew to have been her late husband’s regard for his nephew. Mr. M. Barton bequeathed it, by his last will, to his brother and physician, Dr. Benjamin S. Barton.
[92]. The Memoirs of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris, for the year 1729, contain an article that furnishes additional evidence of the extraordinary skill and ingenuity manifested by English artists in the construction of watches, as well as other pieces of mechanism which require great accuracy in the workmanship: it forms a pleasant little narrative in an eulogium on Father Sebastian,[[92a]] a Carmelite Friar of singular mechanical ingenuity; and it indicates, at the same time, that the repeating-watch was invented in England. The story is thus told:—
“Charles II. roy d’Angleterre, avoit envoyé au feu roi deux Montres à Repetition; les premieres qu’on ait vues en France. Elles ne pouvoient s’ouvrir que par une secrete précaution des ouvriers Anglois, pour cacher la nouvelle construction, et s’en assurer d’autant plus la gloire et le profit. Les montres se dérangérent, et furent remises entre les mains de M. Martineau, horloger du roi, qui n’y put travailler faute de les sçavoir ouvrir. Il dit a M. Colbert, et c’est un trait de courage digne d’etre remarqué, qu’il ne connoissoit qu’un jeune Carme capable d’ouvrir les montres, ques’il n’y réussissoit pas, il falloit se resoudre à les renvoyer en Angleterre. M. Colbert consentit qu’il les donnât au P. Sebastien, qui les ouvrit assez promptement, et de plus les raccommoda sans sçavoir qu’ elles étoient au roi, ni combien étoit important par ses circonstances l’ouvrage dont on l’avoit chargé.”
[92a]. His baptismal name was John Truchet.
[93]. This great man, who was the son of Christian Huygens lord of Zuylichem, a counsellor of the prince of Orange, was born in the year 1629, at Zuylichem, in the province of Guelderland, the country of the ancestors of Rittenhouse. Having resided for some time in France, he quitted that country on account of his religion, in 1684, in consequence of the revocation of the edict of Nantes. He died in Holland in 1695, at the age of sixty-six years.
Galileo[Galileo], who was a native of Florence, lived to the age of eighty-seven years. He died fifty-three years before Huygens; and about fourteen before Huygens’s application of the pendulum to clocks, so as to effect an isochronal regulation of their movements. Galileo’s[Galileo’s] use of the pendulum, for the purpose of measuring time, seems to have been nothing more than the annexation of a short pendulum to clock-work.
[94]. This celebrated naturalist and physician, who was styled by Boerhaave, Monstrum Eruditionis, was born at Zurich in 1516: He was, probably, of the same family as that of the late Solomon Gesner the poet, who was a native of the same city, and appeared more than two centuries afterwards. Conrad Gesner was so distinguished a writer, as a naturalist, that he was called the Pliny of Germany. A splendid edition of Pliny’s Natural History, under the title of the Historia Mundi of Caius Plinius Secundus, with a dedication by Erasmus to Stanislaus Turzo, bishop of Olmutz, was printed at Basil, by Froben, so early as 1525. This copy of Pliny (which is now very rare) having been published in the vicinity of Conrad Gesner, during his youth, that circumstance may have prompted him to direct his attention to those pursuits in science, which distinguished this learned Swiss.
[95]. About two centuries after that period when the sciences had begun to revive and the mechanical arts to flourish, the construction of clocks appears to have been much improved. And in the reign of Henry VIII. a stately clock was made by an artist, the initials of whose name are “N. O.” in the year 1540, and placed in the royal palace at Hampton-Court. This not only shewed the hour of the day, but an orrery-part, connected with it, exhibited the motion of the sun through all the signs of the zodiac, and also of the moon, with other matters depending on them. A similar one, in the cathedral of Lunden in Denmark, is mentioned by Heylin: But Martin, in his Philosophia Britannica, speaks of a piece of clock-work in the cathedral of Strasburg, in Alsace; “in which, besides the clock-part, is the celestial globe or sphere, with the motions of the sun, moon, planets and fixed stars, &c.” This was finished in the year 1574, and is represented as being much superior to a pompous clock at Lyons, in France, which also has an orrery department.
[96]. The first pendulum-clock made in England, was in the year 1662, by Mr. Fromanteel, a Dutchman.
In the library-hall of the Philadelphia Library-Company, is one of the clocks made by that artist, having this inscription engraven on its face, “Johannes Fromanteel, Londini, fecit;” but without any date. This clock was a donation to the library-company, in the year 1804, by Mr. Samuel Hudson, of Philadelphia, whose ancestor purchased it at an auction in London, after the restoration of king Charles II. The traditional account of it is, that it belonged, originally, to the Cromwell family; and, when presented, was said to be one hundred and forty years old: but it could not have been the property of the protector, Cromwell, the time of whose death was between three and four years anterior to Fromanteel’s construction of a pendulum-clock.
[97]. Besides the testimony of so distinguished an astronomer as Mr. de Zach, already given, respecting the very great accuracy to which time-keepers have been brought, the following translation, taken from what the celebrated Lalande has said in his treatise Des Horloges Astronomiques, (in the second volume of his Astronomie,) furnishes some curious and interesting facts on that subject.
“Short (the mathematical instrument maker,) upon the occasion of the transit of mercury over the sun observed in 1753, assures us that he had found by many observations, that his clock had not varied more than one second, from the 22d of February to the 6th of May (Philos. Trans. 1753, p. 200;) so that, with a like pendulum, it is possible to obtain an exactness which, till this time, was thought incredible. There are English astronomers who have assured me,” continues Lalande, “that pendulum-clocks have been made which did not vary more than five″ in a year:[[97a]] but that does not appear to me to be yet established as a fact; the oils that one is obliged to use in them are sufficient, by the change of consistency they undergo, to prevent such preciseness. The count de Bruhl, a great amateur and a perfect connoisseur also, on the subject of time-pieces, shewed me in London a diary of the going of two pendulums of Mudge, one of the most celebrated clock-makers in London: in one, there was a difference of half a second a day, between winter and summer; and in the other a second. Mr. Aubert has a pendulum made by Shelton, which varies also nearly a second in the day, in extreme seasons. Picard, in 1671, had a clock which did not lose a second in two months. But, whatever may have been, since that period, the skill of the clock-makers of Paris, we cannot obtain such exactness, but by mere accident and an equality of temperature in the atmosphere that is very rare: now, the correctness of our clocks is a necessary consequence of their principles; but these do not go so far. Mr. Emery has observed two clocks beat the same second, during three months; they were, however, very near to each other, and probably had some influence on one another by means of their foot-board or support.”
[97a]. Even watches have been already brought to an inconceivable degree of exactness. Mr. Arnold and Mr. Emery made some, in the year 1786, which did not vary one second in a voyage of an hundred leagues.
[98]. This gentleman’s name is connected with another circumstance in relation to Mr. D. Rittenhouse, which deserves to be noticed. He is in possession of a finely-graduated thermometer, made by our Philosopher; on the scale of which is engraved, by him, the record of a memorable fact concerning the climate of Pennsylvania, referring by a mark to 22° below 0, of Fahrenheit’s scale; viz.—“Jan. 2. 1762—Great Cold in Pennsylvania.” This fact was ascertained by Mr. Rittenhouse, from a reference to the accurate Messrs. Masons and Dixon’s Journal; in which, such was stated to have been the degree of cold in the forks of the Brandywine (about thirty miles westward, and very little to the southward, from Philadelphia,) on the day mentioned.
Mr. Rittenhouse had noticed, that, at his Norriton Observatory, (in lat. 40° 9′ 31″ N.) the mercury in Fahrenheit’s thermometer, not exposed to the sun-shine but open to the air, was at 94½°, on the 5th of July 1769; “which,” says he, “was the greatest height it had ever been observed to rise to, at that place.” But the writer is informed by a judicious and attentive observer, that at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, which is in lat. 40° 2′ 39″ N. (the long. of this borough-town is 5h 1′ 4″ W. from Greenw.) the mercury rose by Fahrenheit’s scale, on the 7th of July, 1811, to 97½°. Admitting this to be correct, if 1½° be then deducted, for the extra heat of so large a town as Lancaster in comparison with a country-situation, there is in this case the great range of 118° by Fahrenheit’s scale, for the extremes of heat and cold in Pennsylvania.
The writer brought with him, from England, a meteorological diary kept in London, during the severe frost there, from the 7th day of January, 1776, to the 28th of the same month, both days inclusive. The greatest cold, during that period, was 15° and it is thus noted, in respect to the state of the atmosphere at the time; “Clear sky—intense cold—wind west.” The mercury rose on one day, within that time, to 34°. The mean degree of cold, in the same period, was there 26¾°.
The greatest cold at Philadelphia, during the same days of January, 1776, was at 17°, but the mercury rose there, on one of those days, to 48°. The mean degree of cold at Philadelphia, in this corresponding period of time, was 29⅓°; being about 2½° warmer (or rather, less cold,) than the general temperature of the weather in London, at the same time, in what was there called a “severe frost.” Eighty-five degrees of Fahrenheit’s scale is considered as a very extraordinary heat, in London: consequently, a range of 68° may be presumed to reach the extremes of heat and cold in England, in the latitude of nearly 52° N.[[98a]]
Notwithstanding the extremes of heat and cold, which thus appear in the climate of Pennsylvania, Mr. Jefferson remarks (in his Notes on Virginia,) that these extremes are greater at Paris than at Williamsburg, the hottest part of Virginia. Yet Williamsburg, which is only about 2¾° to the southward of Philadelphia, is nearly 11¾° further south than Paris.
[98a]. Since writing the above, the author has ascertained, that in London, during the four last years of the last century, Six’s thermometer, out of doors, averaged 49.6; that on the hottest day within that period, the mercury rose to 86; and that it fell, on the coldest day, to 4.
[99]. See a description of this Chronometer, in the Appendix.
[100]. Mr. Stanton died at Philadelphia, the 28th of June, 1770, aged sixty-two years. He was, for above forty years, a distinguished preacher among the people called Quakers; and is reputed to have been a man, “who, from his youth, had been a conspicuous example of Christian meekness, humility, and self-denial; a zealous promoter of the cause of religion, and the essential good of mankind.”
Some elegiac verses, under the title of a “poetic tribute” to the memory of this worthy man,—from the pen of a lady in Philadelphia,—were published in the Port Folio, for April 1813.
[101]. This letter contains, likewise, a short narrative of an occurrence which excited much feeling, and claimed a considerable portion of the public attention, at the time. As Mr. Rittenhouse’s account of the transaction referred to, will serve to shew that he was not an indifferent spectator of the political events of that early day; and, further, that he was zealously disposed to support the legitimate authority of the government, in order to suppress illegal and disorderly proceedings, subversive of the laws and dangerous to the public peace and safety; this part of his letter to Mr. Barton (of the 16th of February, 1764,) is also presented to the reader.
It will be recollected that what was called the Paxton Riot in Pennsylvania, in the year 1763, was occasioned by an attempt made by many of the inhabitants of a district in the upper end of Lancaster (now Dauphin) county, called Paxton, with some of their neighbours, to destroy a number of Indians resident in and near that county; who were extremely obnoxious to the Paxton people, by reason of the supposed treachery, if not actual hostility, of these Indians to the settlers on the Paxton frontier, in the war that had then recently terminated. These unfortunate Indians had, nevertheless, uniformly professed themselves to be friendly to the English, in that war; and were so reputed by the government of Pennsylvania: but finding themselves, notwithstanding, threatened with extermination by “the Paxton Boys” (as they were then called,)—by whom a few old men, women, and children had been destroyed, shortly before, at their homes,—they sought the protection of the government. Part of them were, accordingly, placed in the public prison in Lancaster, and the remainder at the barracks in Philadelphia, as places of security. Those in Lancaster, to the number of fourteen or fifteen, were soon after, as is well known, killed by the Paxton people, one of the prison doors having been forcibly broken open by them. The remnant of these persecuted Indians, who were in Philadelphia, were more fortunate than their brethren; they escaped the horrors of assassination: And it is to the expedition against these wretched fugitives—a mere handful of men, unarmed, and claiming from Christians an asylum from massacre,—that Mr. Rittenhouse refers in his letter.
“You are no doubt, long before this time, well acquainted,” said our young philosopher, “with every particular of the Paxtonian expedition to Philadelphia: nor need I tell you, that whatever information you may have through the channel of ——, will be abominably corrupt. About fifty of the scoundrels marched by my work-shop—I have seen hundreds of Indians travelling the country, and can with truth affirm, that the behaviour of these fellows was ten times more savage and brutal than theirs. Frightening women, by running the muzzles of their guns through windows, swearing and hallooing; attacking men without the least provocation; dragging them by the hair to the ground, and pretending to scalp them; shooting a number of dogs and fowls;—these are some of their exploits.
“I received a letter from sister E. soon after the alarm at Philadelphia was over, and will give you a part of it, which I doubt not will be agreeable to you.”—It is as follows.
—“On Monday morning between one and two o’clock, an express came to the governor, informing that the rebels were on their way, and that a great number of them were on this side the White Horse. There was one express after another, till there was certain intelligence that some of them were at Germantown. When the first express came, the bells were rung, the drums beat, and the constables were ordered to go from house to house, to knock up the inhabitants, and to bid them put candles at their doors: it had the appearance of all the houses being illuminated. Before day, there were above twenty men met at J. J.’s, and chose their officers. Before night they were increased to nearly an hundred; as were likewise most of the other companies: E—— and all our men were in captain Wood’s company. They all appeared to be in high spirits, and desirous to meet the rebels. On Tuesday, when the mayor and the other gentlemen set off for Germantown, the heads of the companies begged of them not to comply with any dishonourable terms, and told them—“Gentlemen, we are ready to go wherever you may command us; and we had much rather you would let us treat with them (the rebels) with our guns.”[guns.”]—On their return, there was a general murmur among the companies against the proceedings of our great men; they knew it, and there was a long harangue made by Mr. Chew: but it did not answer the end. On Wednesday morning I went to —-—, as usual; and on my return home, I stopped at our friend H. J.’s; when, on a sudden, the alarm-gun was fired, the bells began to ring, and the men called “to arms,” as loud as possible. I cannot describe, my dear brother, how I felt: we ran to the door, when to add to my fright, I saw E——, amidst hundreds of others, run by with his gun. They met at the court-house, formed themselves into regular companies, and marched up Second-street as far[far] as the barracks; when they found it was a false alarm.
“It was a pleasing, though melancholy sight, to view the activity of our men. In less than a quarter of an hour, they were all on their march,—it is supposed above a thousand of them; and by all accounts, there were not ten —— among them. It was the common cry, while our men were parading—“What! not one —— among us!”—Instead of joining with others, they would sneak into corners, and applaud the “Paxton-boys.” Their behaviour on this occasion has made them appear blacker than ever.”
Concerning these extraordinary transactions, to which much importance was attached in their day, and which, moreover, constitute a curious and interesting occurrence in the history of Pennsylvania, in the time of our philosopher, the testimony of another respectable witness is added; a person, besides, who bore a principal part in arresting the progress of the insurrection referred to. On the 2d of June, 1765, Dr. Franklin, who was then in London, wrote a letter to the celebrated Henry Home, lord Kames, in which the following interesting circumstances are related, respecting what was called the Paxton Expedition: this letter is inserted entire in lord Woolhousie’s Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Lord Kames. The Doctor therein says—“In December (1763,) we had two insurrections of the back inhabitants of our province, by whom twenty poor Indians were murdered, that had from the first settlement of the province lived among us, under the protection of our government. This gave me a good deal of employment; for, as the rioters threatened further mischief, and their actions seemed to be approved by an increasing party, I wrote a pamphlet, entitled A Narrative, &c. to strengthen the hands of our weak government, by rendering the proceedings of the rioters unpopular and odious. This had a good effect: and afterwards, when a great body of them with arms marched towards the capital in defiance of the government, with an avowed resolution to put to death one hundred and forty Indian converts, then under its protection, I formed an association at the governor’s request, for his and their defence, we having no militia. Near one thousand of the citizens accordingly took arms: Governor Penn made my house for some time his head-quarters, and did every thing by my advice; so that, for about forty-eight hours, I was a very great man, as I had been once some years before, in a time of public danger. But the fighting face we put on, and the reasonings we used with the insurgents, (for I went, at the request of the governor and council, with three others, to meet and discourse them,) having turned them back, and restored quiet to the city, I became a less man than ever; for I had, by these transactions, made myself many enemies among the populace.”
[102]. .fm rend=t The writer of these memoirs well remembers to have heard Mr. Rittenhouse, when fully matured in years, speak of the pleasure he derived from the reading of John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress, while a youth. It is, certainly, no faint compliment to the “well-told tale” of that “ingenious dreamer,” that it engaged the attention of David Rittenhouse, even at a very early period of his life: and that compliment is greatly enhanced by the following beautiful invocation, addressed to the long-since departed spirit of the humble, yet persecuted, the pious, yet fanciful Bunyan, by the amiable Cowper:—
“Oh thou, whom, borne on fancy’s eager wing,
Back to the season of life’s happy spring,
I pleas’d remember, and, while mem’ry yet
Holds fast her office here, can ne’er forget;
Ingenious dreamer, in whose well-told tale
Sweet fiction and sweet truth alike prevail;
Whose hum’rous vein, strong sense, and simple style;
Witty, and well-employ’d, and, like thy Lord,
Speaking in parables his slighted word;
I name thee not, lest so despis’d a name
Should move a sneer at thy deserved fame:
Yet, ev’n in transitory life’s late day,
That mingles all my brown with sober gray,
Revere the man, whose Pilgrim marks the road,
And guides the Progress of the soul to God.”
Cowper’s Tirocinium.
The celebrated Benjamin Franklin too, in the account of his Life written by himself, informs us, that the Pilgrim’s Progress (which Franklin there, inadvertently, calls “Bunyan’s Voyages,”) was a favourite book of his, in his earlier years. “I have since learned,” says the Doctor, “that it has been translated into almost all the languages of Europe; and, next to the Bible, I am persuaded, it is one of the books which has had the greatest spread.”
[103]. This was about the year 1764.
[104]. In the earlier part of this interval of time, and before he became more seriously engaged in those great works and researches, the construction of his Orrery, and the Observation of the Transit of Venus with the operations preparatory to it, which about that time engrossed his attention, he occasionally amused himself with matters rather speculative than practical: though he very seldom devoted any considerable portion of his time to things which he did not consider as being in some degree useful.
The following is one of those instances in which his active mind was diverted from severer studies, to some objects of a more playful nature.
In the year 1767, some ingenious country-gentleman published in Messrs. Hall and Sellers’s paper, under the signature of T.T. the result of calculations he had made on Archimedes’s famous vaunting assertion, Δος που στω, και την γην κινησω. Mr. Rittenhouse published, some short time after, calculations (or rather the result of calculations) of his own, on the same problem. This appeared in a piece under the signature of “A Mechanic,” dated the 8th of October, 1767: and a reply to it, by T. T. dated October the 29th, appeared in the same paper. These little speculations will be found in the Appendix. It is not improbable that Mr. Rittenhouse, under the disguise of “A Mechanic,” appeared in print on this occasion, for the purpose of drawing the attention of ingenious men to subjects of this nature.
[105]. It was between the years 1766 and 1770—the interval of time above mentioned,—that the two important circumstances occurred, which gave great celebrity to the reputation of Mr. Rittenhouse, as an astronomer: these were the Construction of the Orrery invented by him, and the admirable result of his observations of the Transit of Venus, as published in the Philosophical Society’s Transactions.
Amidst those objects of importance in which he was principally occupied, he occasionally amused himself with matters of minor consequence. Among other things, he contrived and made, in the beginning of the year 1767, an ingeniously contrived thermometer, constructed on the principle of the expansion and contraction of metals, by heat and cold, respectively. This instrument had, under glass, a face upon which was a graduated semi-circle: the degrees of heat and cold corresponded with those of Fahrenheit’s thermometer; and these were also correspondently designated, by an index, moving on the centre of the arch. Its square (or rather parallelogramical) form, its flatness and thinness, and its small size—together with its not being liable to the least sensible injury or irregularity, from any position in which it might be placed,—rendered it safely portable; insomuch, that it could be conveniently carried in the pocket.
He presented one of these metaline Thermometers to Dr. Peters, in June 1767: Another, which he made for himself, was a considerable time in the hands of Mr. Barton, at Lancaster. They were found to agree very well with Fahrenheit’s. In a letter to Mr. Barton, dated the 26th of July 1769, he said—“You will oblige me by sending the metaline thermometer by..., and let me know the greatest height you have seen it, this season, Fahrenheit’s thermometer, in my Observatory, not exposed to the sunshine but very open to the air, was 94½° on the 5th of this month, at 3 in the afternoon; which is the highest I have ever seen it.”
[106]. The Rev. Ebenezer Kinnersley, A. M. Professor of English[English] and Oratory in the college of Philadelphia. This venerable and worthy man, who was a clergyman of the Baptist church, was a very eminent Electrician. In this branch of philosophy, he was an able lecturer and ingenious experimentalist: and perhaps to no person—at least in America,—were his cotemporaries more indebted, than to him, for the light which he shed, at a very early day, on this interesting and pleasing science.
[107]. According to the American historian, Marshall, Lord Berkeley assigned his interest in the Jersies to Penn and his three associates, in the year 1674; and they, soon perceiving the inconvenience of a joint property, divided the province, in 1676, with Carteret, who still retained his interest: to him they released East-Jersey; and received from him, in return, a conveyance for the western part of the province. The Duke of York resigned the government of East Jersey to the proprietor, retaining that of West-Jersey as an appendage to New-York, until August 1680; when, on a reference to Sir William Jones, the title was decided against the Duke: after which, he formally released all claim upon East-Jersey. Soon after this, Carteret transferred his rights to Penn, and eleven other persons of the same religious persuasion, who immediately conveyed one half of their interest to James Drummond, Earl of Perth, and eleven others; and these, in March 1683, obtained a conveyance from the Duke of York directly to themselves.—During these transactions, continual efforts were made to re-annex the Jerseys to the province of New-York. [See Marshall’s Introduction to the Life of Washington, ch. vi.]
[108]. There will not be another transit of Venus over the Sun’s disk, until the 8th of December, 1874; which, it is probable few persons now living will have an opportunity of observing, astronomically: And from that time, down to the 14th of June, A. D. 2984, inclusively,—a period of upwards of eleven centuries,—the same planet will pass over the Sun only eighteen times. There will be one other such transit of this planet, within the present century; after which there will not be another, during the term of one hundred and twenty-one years and an half. [See Table of the Transits of Venus over the Sun, in Lalande’s Astronomie; vol. ii.]
[109]. There had been but one of these transits of Venus over the Sun, during the course of about one hundred and thirty years preceding the transit of 1769; and, for upwards of seven centuries, antecedently to the commencement of that period, the same planet had passed over the Sun’s disk no more than thirteen times. [See Lalande’s Table, before referred to.]
[110]. Jeremiah Horrox and William Crabtree, two Englishmen, were the observers of the Transit of Venus of 1639.
[111]. It was not until the year 1786, that Mr. Rittenhouse built the house at the north-west corner of Arch and (Delaware) Seventh streets, in Philadelphia, where he resided during the remainder of his life: but probably it was some few years earlier that he erected his Observatory, a small but pretty convenient octagonal building, of brick, in the garden adjacent to his dwelling-house. Its situation was not an ineligible one, when the building was first put up: but its commodiousness and utility were probably much diminished, by the erection, not long afterwards, of some large houses near it; and it is presumable, that its usefulness in any degree, for the purposes of an Observatory, could have continued but a little while beyond the duration of its late proprietor’s life, by reason of the rapid increase of the number of lofty houses in the vicinity. Indeed it lately became extremely probable, on considering the great enlargement of Philadelphia within the last twenty-five years, that the future augmentation of the population and extension of improvements in this beautiful and hitherto flourishing city, would, in a very few years, render the late Observatory of Mr. Rittenhouse wholly useless for astronomical purposes; and, in the event of the surrounding ground and adjacent buildings being alienated from his family, improper for any other.
This was the Observatory noticed by Mr. Lalande, when (in his Astronomie, published in 1792,) he made this remark, treating of the numerous Observatories in different parts of the world—“In America, I know of no Observatory but that of Mr. Rittenhouse at Philadelphia.”
The Observatory at Norriton, mentioned in the text, was a temporary erection; and was disused on his removal to Philadelphia, soon after. The one put up in the State-House Gardens in that city on the same occasion, was likewise a temporary edifice, constructed of wood.
[112]. On an address of the Philosophical Society to the general assembly, dated the 15th of October, 1768, the latter “Resolved, That a sum, not exceeding one hundred pounds sterling, be provided and appropriated for purchasing a reflecting telescope with a micrometer, for the purpose mentioned in the said address” (observing the Transit of Venus, then near at hand,) “and, afterwards, for the use of the house; and that the speaker do write to Benjamin Franklin, Esq. in London, to purchase the same.”
[113]. On a similar address of the Philosophical Society, dated the 7th of February, 1769, the assembly granted them one hundred pounds, “to be laid out towards defraying the expenses necessary for observing the (then) ensuing Transit of Venus.” This grant was made on the 11th of February, 1769.
But the sum then granted proving very inadequate to the object, the society petitioned the assembly on the 11th of February, 1773; stating, that the erecting the different observatories, fitting up instruments, engraving various plates, and publishing the different transit papers alone, cost the society near 400l. and praying assistance to discharge that debt.
[114]. Mr. Lalande, in the preface to his Astronomie (3d edit. 1792,) mentions, that he did not then know of any other observatory in America than that of Mr. Rittenhouse.
[115]. This was one instance among many of the munificence of Mr. Penn to the College of Philadelphia, and of his zealous wish to promote the interests of science in Pennsylvania. The trustees of the college say, in a letter written to Mr. Penn the 1st of August, 1769, thanking him for his donation of the fine instrument above mentioned, together with a pair of “Adams’s new-invented Globes;” “We have likewise the pleasure to acknowledge a fresh instance of your benevolence, in sending us a chemical apparatus under the care of Dr. Rush.” “The many great and valuable favours this College has received at your hands, have always been conferred in a manner which has rendered them peculiarly acceptable; and cannot fail to leave the most lasting impressions of gratitude and esteem in the heart of every person concerned in the institution.”
[116]. Mr. Lalande (in his Astronomie) has been careful to mention, that the celebrated astronomer Hevelius possessed a similar merit. He constructed, himself, the very large telescopes and other instruments, described (with plates) in his great work entitled, Machina Cœlestis, and with which he furnished the Observatory that he established at his own residence, in the year 1641. Hevelius (whose true name was John Hoelké.) was the son of a brewer; but was well educated. He was born at Dantzic the 28th of January, 1611: and after having made the tour of England, France and Germany, from 1630 to 1634, he was, on his return to his native city, occupied for some time in the affairs of that little republic; of which he officiated as consul, in 1651. He died on the anniversary of his birth-day, at the age of seventy-six years.
[117]. For some of the reasons which induced the writer to describe the instruments used on that occasion, see Note [125].
[118]. In addition to this publicly declared testimony of Dr. Smith, to the merits of Mr. Rittenhouse on that occasion, are the following extracts of a letter from the Dr. to Mr. Barton, dated July the 8th, 1769.
“Mr. Jesse Lukens left my house on Tuesday evening, at half an hour past six, where he waited till I scrawled out a pretty long letter to Mr. Rittenhouse, for whom my esteem encreases the more I see him; and I shall long for an opportunity of doing him justice for his elegant preparations to observe the Transit, which left Mr. Lukens and me nothing to do, but to sit down to our telescopes. This justice I have already in part done him, in a long letter to the proprietor” (Thomas Penn, Esq.) “yesterday, and I hope Mr. Rittenhouse will not deprive us of the opportunity of doing it in a more public manner, in the account we are to draw up next week.”
“I did not chuse to send Mr. Rittenhouse’s original projection of the Transit, as it is a society paper, to be inserted in our minutes: but I have enclosed an exact copy. Pray desire him to take the sun’s diameter again carefully, and examine the micrometer by it. The mean of our diameters come out, Hor. Diam. 31′ 34″, 3—Polar Diam. 31′ 32″, 8—Ven. Diam. 57, 98.—The Sun’s is bigger than the Naut. Almanac gives: That of Venus very well. The diameters of the State-house micrometer come out less. I have compared some of our” (the Norriton) “micrometer-observations with those made in town, and do not find a difference of one second: but all theirs do not seem to have been taken with equal care, and differ from each other sometimes; a fault I do not find among ours. Our nearest distance of the centres comes out, I think, 10′ 3″, in which we agree within about one second with their nearest distance: and our time of the nearest approach of the centres, viz. 5h 20′ 32″, reduced to mean time, is within one minute of the time marked for their nearest approach.”
“With my compliments to Mr. Rittenhouse and family, I am, in great haste,” &c.
Mr. Barton was then at Norriton, and Dr. Smith wrote from Philadelphia.
[119]. On the 26th of the same month he thus addressed Mr. Barton on the subject:—
“I have at last done with astronomical observations and calculations for the present, and sent copies of all my papers to Dr. Smith, who, I presume, has drawn up a complete account of our Observations on the Transit of Venus: this I hope you will see, when you come to Philadelphia. I have delineated the Transit, according to our observations, on a very large scale, made many calculations, and drawn all the conclusions I thought proper to attempt, until some foreign observations come to hand, to compare with ours; all of which have been, or will be laid before the Philosophical Society. The Doctor has constantly seemed so desirous of doing me justice, in the whole affair, that I suppose I must not think of transmitting any separate account to England.”
[120]. The first volume of the Society’s Transactions contains (p. 125,) among other observations of the transit of Venus in 1769, those made at Baskenridge in New-Jersey, by the late Earl of Sterling. William Alexander, the gentleman referred to, and who held this title, was (it is believed) a native of New-York. It is presumable that the title he bore was one to which he had an equitable right: It was recognized in America, the country of his birth, from the time of his first assumption of it until his death, although his claim to that honour was not juridically established in Great Britain, where, in official acts of that government, he was styled “William Alexander, Esq. claiming to be Earl of Sterling.” He was descended from Sir William Alexander, in the reign of James I., to whom that monarch made a grant of the province of Nova Scotia, on the 20th of September, 1621. On the 12th of July, 1625, Sir William obtained from King Charles I. a grant of the soil, lordship and domains, of that province, which, with the exception of “Port-Royal,” (Annapolis, on the Bay of Fundy,) formerly the capital of the province, he conveyed on the 30th of April, 1630, to Sir Claude de St. Etienne, lord of la Tour and Uarre, and to his son Sir Charles de St. Etienne, lord of St. Deniscourt, on condition that they should continue subjects to the crown of Scotland. This Sir William was appointed by Charles I. commander in chief of Nova-Scotia. Soon after the institution of the order of Baronets of Nova-Scotia, he had been advanced to that dignity by Charles I. viz. on the 21st of May, 1625; when the king conferred on him the privilege of coining copper-money. In 1626, he was created Viscount Sterling: and on the 14th of June, 1633, he was further promoted by the same king to the Earldom of Stirling.
The late Lord Stirling, who was seated at Baskenridge in New-Jersey, inherited his Baronetage and titles of Nobility, as heir-male to Henry, the fourth Earl. He married Sarah, daughter of Philip Livingston, Esq. of New-York, by whom he had issue two daughters; Lady Mary, married to —— Watts, Esq. of New-York, and Lady Catharine, first married to William Duer, Esq. of New-York, and after his decease to William Nelson, Esq. of the same city.
This nobleman appears to have been in some degree skilled in astronomy, and was reputed a good observer. In the first volume of the Transactions of the American Philosophical Society there is contained, besides his lordship’s observations of the transit of Venus, a letter from him to Dr. Smith, communicating an account of his having discovered, on the 28th of June, 1770, a comet, which he observed astronomically on that and the three succeeding nights; being the same that Mr. Rittenhouse first saw on the 25th of that month; and respecting which, there are two letters from him to Dr. Smith, in the same volume.
Immediately before the American revolution, lord Sterling was one of the king’s council in New-Jersey; and held also, under the crown, the appointment of surveyor-general for the eastern division of that province. With the talents of a philosopher, he united those of the soldier: On the 1st of March, 1776, his lordship was appointed a brigadier-general in the continental army, and was afterwards promoted to the rank of major-general. He was esteemed a brave and faithful officer, and served with reputation; but he died before the close of the war.
In the same volume of the Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, with lord Stirling’s observations, there are, independent of those made under the direction of that society, the observations of the transit of Venus in 1769, made at Cambridge in New-England, by John Winthrop, Esq. F. R. S. and member of the American Philosophical Society, Hollisian Professor of Mathematics in Harvard-College—(see p. 124;) likewise, the result of those made by captain Holland and Mr. St. Germain, at and near Quebec; and by other skilful observers, at sundry places in Europe and the West-Indies; all reported (p. 120) by a committee of the American Philosophical Society.
[121]. Afterwards Dr. Maskelyne.—“To the abilities and indefatigable attention of this celebrated astronomer,” says the Rev. Mr. Vince (in his great work on astronomy,) “nautical astronomy is altogether indebted for its present state of perfection. Of our (the English) Nautical Almanac, that great astronomer, M. de la Lande, thus writes: “On a fait á Bologne, á Vienne, á Berlin, á Milan; mais Le Nautical Almanac de Londres, est l’ephemeride la plus parfaite qu’il y ait jamais eu.” He has established the Newtonian doctrine of universal attraction upon the firmest foundation, by his experiments upon Schehallien.[[121a]] His regular observations of the sun, moon, planets, and fixed stars, which are every year published, are allowed to possess an unrivalled degree of accuracy; and we may consider them as the basis of future improvements of the tables of the planetary motions. M. de la Lande, in his Astronomie (vol. ii. p. 121. last edit.) speaking of astronomical observations, says—“Le recueil le plus moderne et le plus précieux de tous est celui de M. Maskelyne, Astronome Royal d’Angleterre, qui commence á 1765, et qui forme déja deux volumes in folio jusqu’ á 1786. La precision de ces observations est si grande, qu’on trouve souvent la même second pour l’ascension droite d’une planete dédecite de différentes étoiles, quoiqu’on y emploie la mesure du temps.”[temps.”]; His catalogue of fundamental stars is an invaluable treasure. These, and his other various improvements in this science, entitle him to the most distinguished rank amongst astronomers, and will render his name illustrious, as long as the science of astronomy shall continue to be cultivated.”
Of Lalande himself, whose name often occurs in the following pages, Mr. Vince thus speaks:—“To that celebrated astronomer, M. de la Lande, the world is indebted for the most important improvements in the science of astronomy. Through so extensive a field, he has left no track unbeaten; almost every part has received improvements from him. His system of astronomy is invaluable, and has tended far more to the general promotion of that science than all other works which ever appeared upon the subject. The labours of this great astronomer will perpetuate his name.” See Vince’s Complete System of Astronomy, vol. ii. p. 288 and 289.
[121a]. The Schehallien is a mountain in Scotland, being one of the highest points in that range of mountains called the Grampian-Hills. The elevation of the Schehallien above the surface of the sea is about 1760 feet. W. B.
[122]. Mr. Vince observes, in his Complete System of Astronomy, (vol. i. p. 419) that the Transit of Venus affords a very accurate method of finding the place of the node; and this he verifies expressly by calculations founded on the observations made by Mr. Rittenhouse at Norriton, in the year 1769.
[123]. To so honourable a testimony, in favour of the merits of the Pennsylvania observers of this Transit, as that of Mr. Maskelyne, the acknowledgments of many other eminent foreign astronomers might be superadded: And the Rev. Dr. Smith, addressing himself to the American Philosophical Society, observes, “that societies of the first reputation in Europe are not ashamed to place our labours on a footing with their own; freely acknowledging, that we have been chiefly instrumental in ascertaining that great desideratum in astronomy, the sun’s parallax; and, consequently, the dimensions of the solar system.” See his Oration, delivered before the society, Jan. 22, 1773.
[124]. The compliment here paid by the Astronomer-Royal to the Hon. T. Penn, proprietary of the late province of Pennsylvania, for the zeal he manifested in promoting the Pennsylvania Observations of the Transit of Venus, was well merited,—as the detailed accounts of that highly interesting phænomenon abundantly shew.
Nor was that the only instance in which Mr. Penn discovered his attachment to the reputation and prosperity of that extensive American territory, which continues to bear the name of his family. He was, on various occasions, a liberal and disinterested benefactor to public institutions in Pennsylvania: as a proof of which, his aggregated donations to the College of Philadelphia, prior to the American war, amounting to about twelve thousand dollars—besides a grant of the manor of Perkessie in Bucks county, containing upwards of 3000 acres,—need alone be mentioned.
But it is within the knowledge of many persons in the midst of whom these memoirs are penned, that even the Juliana Library Company, in Lancaster (an inland and secondary town of Pennsylvania) experienced repeated proofs of the munificence of Mr. Penn, and also of his late truly noble and excellent consort, after whom that institution was named. The writer himself, well knows, from the tenor of numerous letters, not only from Mr. but Lady Juliana Penn, (who honoured the Rev. Mr. Barton with their friendship and correspondence, for the space of twenty years,—a patronage which was continued to a member of his family, long after Mr. Penn’s death,) the generous and unremitted attention of both, to whatever seemed likely to promote the honour or the interest of Pennsylvania.
Thomas Penn, Esq. died on the 21st of March, 1775, when he had just completed the seventy-fourth year of his age. He was the survivor of all the children of the illustrious founder of Pennsylvania; “whose virtues, as well as abilities, he inherited in an eminent degree,”—as was justly observed in an obituary notice published soon after his decease. Lady Juliana, his widow, survived him many years.
In the Pennsylvania Gazette (then published by Messrs. Hall and Sellers, but originally by Franklin and Hall,) for May 17, 1775, appeared the following just tribute to the memory of Mr. Penn.
“He had the principal direction of the affairs of this government for half a century, and saw such an increase of population, arts, and improvements in it, as during the like period, perhaps no man, before him, ever beheld in a country of his own. He rejoiced at the sight, was a kind landlord, and gave a liberal, often a magnificent encouragement, to our various public institutions. The Hospital, the College, our different Libraries and Religious Societies, can witness the truth of this: For he did not confine himself to sect or party; but, as became his station, and the genius of his father’s benevolent policy, he professed himself a friend to universal liberty, and extended his bounty to all. In short, as the grave, which generally stops the tongue of flattery, should open the mouth of Justice, we may be permitted to conclude his character by saying,—that he was both a great and a good man.”
The writer of these Memoirs hopes he will not be censured by any Pennsylvanian of generous feelings, for introducing, in the Appendix, some elegiac verses (by an unknown hand,) in commemoration of the virtues of this worthy man; who was not only a munificent benefactor to this country, and a bountiful patron of the Memorialist himself, as well as his family; but who, also, took a very friendly interest in the reputation and prosperity of Mr. Rittenhouse. These verses were published in The Pennsylvania Magazine, for Oct. 1775.
[125]. In addition to the honourable testimony of the Astronomer-Royal, in favour of the Pennsylvania Observers of the Transit of Venus, is the following eulogy of another eminent English astronomer,—as communicated by Dr. Franklin to Dr. T. Bond, one of the Vice-Presidents of the Philosophical Society, in a letter from London dated the 5th of Feb. 1772. The Rev. Mr. Ludlam, the gentleman referred to, and whom Dr. Franklin styles “a most learned man and ingenious mechanic”—in a paper published in the Gentleman’s Magazine (and a copy of which, subscribed by himself, was sent by him to the Society,) giving an account of the Society’s Transactions, more especially their Observations of the Transit of Venus,—applauds both the General Assembly and the late Proprietaries of Pennsylvania, for the countenance and assistance they gave to the making those Observations.——“No astronomers,” said Mr. Ludlam, “could better deserve all possible encouragement; whether we consider their care and diligence in making the Observations, their fidelity in relating what was done, or the clearness and accuracy of their reasonings on this curious and difficult subject.” He then mentions, in very honourable terms, the papers of Mr. Rittenhouse, Dr. Smith, Dr. Ewing, and Mr. Biddle, who drew up the several accounts of the Observations made at Norriton, Philadelphia, and Cape-Henlopen; and adds, that “they have very honestly given not only the Result of their Observations, but the Materials also, that others may examine and judge for themselves; an example worthy of imitation by those European astronomers, who are so very shy of giving particulars, and vouch for their Instruments and Observations in general terms.”
The same gentleman, in a letter dated at Leicester (in England,) January the 25th, 1772, and transmitted to the Philosophical Society by Dr. Franklin, wrote thus:—“The more I read the Transactions of your Society, the more I honour and esteem the members of it. There is not another Society in the world, that can boast of a member such as Mr. Rittenhouse: theorist enough to encounter the problems of determining (from a few Observations) the Orbit of a Comit; and also mechanic enough to make, with his own hands, an Equal-Altitude Instrument, a Transit-Telescope, and a Time-piece. I wish I was near enough to see his mechanical apparatus. I find he is engaged in making a curious Orrery. May I ask,” &c.
As further evidence of the high estimation in which the Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, and particularly of the Observers of the Transit, were held abroad, Dr. Wrangel, an eminent and learned Swedish clergyman, wrote thus to Dr. Smith from Stockholm, under the date of Oct. 18, 1771:—“I have been agreeably surprised to observe the rapid progress of your American Society, of which I esteem it a great honour to be counted a member,” &c.—“Your accurate Observations of the Transit of Venus have given infinite satisfaction to our (Swedish) astronomers; as will the rest of your Transactions, to the literary world, when they come to be further known.”
[126]. According to Mr. Lalande, (in his Astronomie, vol. ii.) the transit of Venus over the Sun, in 1639, observed by only Messrs. Horrox and Crabtree, two Englishmen, and which was the first ever observed, was seen in consequence of a fortunate accidental circumstance. He says, that Horrox had been occupied in making calculations for an almanack, from the Tables of Lansbergius, which are much less perfect than the Rudolphine[Rudolphine] Tables: that these Tables of Lansbergius were in an error of 16′ for the latitude of Venus, while the Rudolphine[Rudolphine] Tables had an error of only 8′; but the one of Lansbergius made Venus pass on the sun in such a way, as that the transit ought to be visible; whereas the tables of Kepler represented the planet as passing below him; and thus it was, remarks Lalande, that bad tables occasioned a good observation. Relying on these tables, which Lansbergius had extolled with a confidence likely to produce imposition, Horrox prepared himself to observe that transit; and on the 24th of November, it took place at the time he expected, Venus being about half an hour on the sun when he set. He had sent on the occasion to his friend Crabtree, who was at Manchester, some miles from Hoole: and he observed the transit, likewise; though very imperfectly, by reason of intervening clouds. W. B.
[127]. Flamsted, Halley, Bradley and Bliss, successively occupied the royal observatory at Greenwich, from the time of its institution by Charles II.; and, in the year 1765, the last of these eminent men was succeeded in the place of Astronomer-Royal, by Nevil Maskelyne, B. D. a man who, in the words of the profound French astronomer, Lalande, “has sustained perfectly the reputation of that famous observatory.”
The scientific world are indebted to this excellent practical astronomer for the publication of the Nautical Almanack; and, in a great measure, for the perfection of the lunar method of ascertaining the longitude at sea. “His unwearied exertions in this great cause of humanity and science,” as the compilers of the New Edinburgh Encyclopedia (in the article Astronomy) observe, “entitle him to the gratitude of the remotest posterity.”
[128]. It appears that the difference of the meridians of the Greenwich and Paris Observatories, is 9′ 20″ as assumed by Lalande. This was ascertained by the result of the measurement of the distance between those Observatories, made sometime about the year 1786 or 1787, under the sanction of the British and French governments, respectively; and this difference of meridians corresponds with what Dr. Maskelyne had before stated it to be. The last mentioned astronomer shewed, in 1787, that the latitude of Greenwich is 51° 28′ 40″.
[129]. In relation to Paris, Mr. Lalande calculates the longitude of Philadelphia at 5h 9′ 56″, according to Mr. Rittenhouse; and its latitude, as being 39° 5′7 10.
[130]. In Mr. Rittenhouse’s “Delineation of the Transit,” &c. published in the first volume of the Philosophical Society’s Transactions, it appears that he assumed the latitude of the Norriton Observatory to be 40° 9′ 56″.
[131]. See Martin’s Philosophia Britannica, lect. xi. note 141. Though “Orrery” be a modern name, the invention of such machines as it is now applied to, is of a very early date. The first planetarium or orrery, of which we have any account, was the famous machine of Archimedes. This consisted, as Cicero (in his Tusculan Questions) asserts, of a sphere, of an hollow globular surface, of glass, within which was some ingenious mechanism, to exhibit the motions of the moon, the sun, and all the planets then known. Very imperfect as it must necessarily have been in other respects, it was radically erroneous, in being adapted to the Ptolomaic system. This is described in Latin verse, by the poet Claudius Claudianus, of Alexandria, who flourished about four centuries after the Christian era, and more than six centuries after the Syracusean philosopher.
Cicero, in his book De Naturâ Deorum, mentions one invented by Posidonius the Stoic, in his time, and about eighty years before the birth of Christ. He describes it as a “sphere,”—“in every revolution of which, the motions of the sun, moon, and five planets were the same as in the heavens, each day and night.”
Nothing further is heard of orreries or spheres, until about five hundred and ten years after Christ, when Anicius Manlius Torquatus Severinus Bœthius, the Roman Consul, (who was also a Christian, and a Peripatetic Philosopher,) is said to have contrived one. Theodoric, king of the Goths, calls it “Machinam Mundo gravidam, Cœlum gestabile, Rerum Compendium”: But Bœthius was, nevertheless, put to death by this Gothic king, A. D. 524. A long and dismal reign of barbarism and ignorance having succeeded this period, no further mention is made of any thing in the nature of a planetarium, for about one thousand years. See Note [95].
[132]. In the work, entitled, “A new and general Biographical Dictionary,” &c. published in 1761, the Invention of Graham’s Planetarium is attributed to the celebrated Charles Boyle, Earl of Orrery; and the compilers of that work cite this supposed Invention of Lord Orrery, “as an indubitable proof of his mechanical genius.” On this authority, the compilers of the British Encyclopædia (reprinted in Philadelphia by Mr. Dobson,) in the very words of the Biographical Dictionary, make the nobleman from whom the first English Orrery derives its name, the Inventor. But it seems to be now pretty generally admitted, that his lordship was only the Patron of the machine, made for George I. by Mr. Rowley.
[133]. This accomplished nobleman, who was also the fourth Earl of Cork, in Ireland, and the third Earl of Burlington, in England, was born in the year 1695, and died in 1753. He was a great encourager of the liberal arts, possessed an extraordinary taste and skill in architecture, and was animated by a most exalted public spirit.
[134]. Mr. Martin (in his Philosophia Britannica) says: “The Orrery, though a modern name, has somewhat of obscurity in respect to its origin; some persons deriving it from a Greek word, which imports to see or view:” “But others say, that Sir Richard Steele first gave this name to an instrument of this sort, which was made by Mr. Rowley for the late Earl of Orrery, and shewed only the movement of one or two of the heavenly bodies. From hence many people have imagined, that this machine owed its invention to that noble lord.” This Orrery was a large one; and, although it is represented by Mr. Martin as a very defective machine, it was purchased by King George I. at the price of one thousand guineas.
[135]. Besides the Orrery here referred to, as the invention of the celebrated mechanic and watchmaker, Mr. George Graham, a like machine was afterwards contrived by Mr. James Ferguson, an eminent Scotch mechanic and astronomer, and another planetarium of the same kind, by Mr. William Jones, an ingenious mathematical instrument maker, of London. From the planetarium or orrery of Graham, however, as a model, all the modern orreries, prior to Mr. Rittenhouse’s, appear to have been taken. The one constructed by Mr. Rowley is said to be very similar to that invented by Dr. Stephen Hales.
But the idea of a planetarium, somewhat similar to the Rittenhouse-orrery, seems to have been conceived by Huygens, who died in 1695. A collection of this celebrated philosopher’s works was printed at Leyden in the year 1724 and 1728: and in these will be found the description of a planetarium; “a machine” (says Lalande, in speaking of the one contemplated by Huygens,) “which represents, by wheel-work, the revolutions of the planets around the sun and of the moon around the earth, in their durations and natural dimensions; with their excentricities, their inequalities, and their inclinations towards the ecliptic.” See Lalande’s[Lalande’s] Astron.
[136]. Mr. Jefferson remarks, in his Notes on Virginia, that “Mr. Rittenhouse’s model of the planetary system has the plagiary appellation of an Orrery.” This was, undoubtedly, a plagiary name, in its relation to Graham’s Planetarium, of which Lord Orrery was the supposed inventor: but the charge of plagiarism does not properly apply to the same name, when bestowed by Mr. Rittenhouse himself, on the grand machine of his own invention and construction. How improper soever this name may have been in its first application to a planetarium, it has since been generally applied to similar machines; and it has thus acquired an appropriate signification in relation to them. Mr. Rittenhouse did not choose to depart from the appellation in common use, in naming a machine for surpassing, in ingenuity of contrivance, accuracy and utility, any thing of the kind ever before constructed; yet, in all those points of excellence, he was the inventor of that admirable machine, which has been generally denominated, by others, “the Rittenhouse Orrery.”
[138]. See A Compendious System of Natural Philosophy, &c. by J. Rowning, M. A. part iv. chap. 15.
[139]. The Hon. Thomas Penn, of Stoke-Poges, in Buckinghamshire, heretofore one of the Proprietaries of the former province of Pennsylvania. This gentleman was then usually styled, in Pennsylvania, “The Proprietor.”
[140]. This design was, however, finally abandoned.
[141]. One of these valuable clocks, which is of a large size, with an accurate little planetarium attached to its face and placed above the dial-plate,[[141a]] was made for the late Mr. Joseph Potts, of Philadelphia county, who paid for it, as the writer is informed, six hundred and forty dollars. In the spring of the year 1774, it was purchased by the late Mr. Thomas Prior, of Philadelphia; to whom, it is said, general Sir William Howe made an offer of one hundred and twenty guineas for it, shortly before the evacuation of that city, in 1778. It is also said, that Don Joseph de Jaudenes, late minister of Spain to the United States, offered Mr. Prior eight hundred dollars for this clock, with a view of presenting it to his sovereign. Mr. Prior, however, retained it until his death, in the spring of the year 1801: after which, it passed through two other hands, successively, into the possession of Professor Barton, of Philadelphia, whose property it now is.
[141a]. The area of the face of the dial plate is twenty inches square, and the motions and places of the planets of our system are represented on a circular area of eight inches in diameter.
[142]. It appears that Mr. Barton must have transmitted to the honourable Mr. T. Penn, in London, a description of the Orrery, very soon after it was publicly communicated to the Philosophical Society in Philadelphia; for, a letter from Mr. Penn to that gentleman, dated July 22, 1768, contains this remark—“The account you give me of Mr. Rittenhouse’s Orrery, is what I could not have imagined could be executed in Pennsylvania; and I shall be much pleased to see a copper-plate of it, for which I would make that gentleman a present, for his encouragement; or, perhaps he may be induced to bring it hither, and exhibit it, by publicly lecturing on it.”
Had Mr. Rittenhouse taken an Orrery to England, and it appears by his letters of March 15, 1771, and Feb. 3, 1772, quoted in the text, that he had seriously intended going thither, he would, very probably, have derived great emolument, as well as fame, by delivering lectures on astronomy, adapted to his orrery; and it is probable, that, in addition to the public encouragement he might reasonably have calculated upon, Mr. Penn would have patronised him, with his usual liberality. Of the disposition of that worthy gentleman to befriend him, Mr. Rittenhouse seems to have been fully sensible: for, in a letter of the 11th of December, 1768, to Mr. Barton, he said—“I am very desirous to send Mr. Penn something: as the orrery is not finished, perhaps a description of it, with draughts of the clock I have just made, may answer the purpose, together with some little instrument: I shall be glad to have your thoughts on the matter.” It may be proper here to remark, that no engraving, or drawing, could give an adequate idea of the orrery: and that the clock, mentioned by Mr. Rittenhouse, was one of those of which a short notice is introduced, immediately after the original description of the orrery, in the text.
[143]. The glass-house mentioned in the text, was erected several years prior to the American revolutionary war, at the village of Manheim, about twelve miles from the borough of Lancaster, by Mr. Henry William Stiegel, an ingenious and enterprising German gentleman. Glass of a very good quality and workmanship[workmanship], was made at that glass-house; as will appear by the following extracts from a letter of Mr. Rittenhouse to Mr. Barton, written in the summer of 1771, and acknowledging the receipt of a barometer-tube executed there. He says—“I am obliged to you for the glass tube; it will make a pretty barometer, though the bore is somewhat too small. I have compared it with an English tube, and do not think the preference can, with any reason, be given to the latter.” And in the same letter, he requests Mr. Barton to procure for him, from the glass-house, “some tubes of a size fit for spirit-levels.” “The bore,” says he, “must be half an inch in diameter, and from four to eight inches in length; as straight as possible, and open at one end only.”
While Mr. Stiegel was thus early and meritoriously carrying on the manufacture of glass, he was also engaged in manufacturing iron at Elizabeth-Furnace in the vicinity, which then belonged to him. But he proved unfortunate in his extensive undertakings, and the glass-works[glass-works] have not since been in operation. The foundery of Elizabeth, together with the great establishment of iron-works connected with it, and of which Robert Coleman, Esq. of Lancaster, is now the proprietor, are well known.
[144]. Dr. Franklin is said to have first met with the Pulse-Glass in Germany, and to have introduced it into England with some improvement of his own.
MEMOIR
OF THE
LIFE OF DAVID RITTENHOUSE;
CONTINUED,
FROM THE TIME OF HIS SETTLEMENT IN PHILADELPHIA.
In the autumn of 1770, our Philosopher changed the place of his residence; removing, with his family, into the city of Philadelphia. To this exchange of his beloved retirement, at his Norriton farm, for the scene of noise and activity presented by a great town, he must have been induced by the flattering prospects of advantage to himself and usefulness to the public, pointed out to him by his friends: and among these, Dr. Smith was one of the most urgent for the measure. The following extract of a letter, dated the 27th of January, 1770, and addressed to the Rev. Mr. Barton by that gentleman, will explain his motives, and at the same time exhibit Mr. Rittenhouse’s views, on that occasion: it will also afford strong evidence of the Doctor’s friendship for our philosopher.
“As my esteem for Mr. Rittenhouse increases, the more I know him,” said Dr. Smith, “I set on foot a project, assisted by my neighbours, the Wissahickon millers, to get him recommended to the Assembly, to be put in as a trustee of the loan-office, in the bill now before the house. I first broke the matter to the speaker;[[145]] telling him, Mr. Rittenhouse ought to be encouraged to come to town, to take a lead in a manufacture, optical and mathematical, which never had been attempted in America, and drew thousands of pounds to England for instruments, often ill finished; and that it would redound to the honour of Philadelphia to take a lead in this, and of the Assembly, to encourage it. The speaker took the proposal well, and, in short, so did every person applied to; and when the vote passed, the day before yesterday, for the three trustees, the whole house rose for Rittenhouse’s name; so that Mr. Allen,[[146]] who was hearty among the rest for him, observed—“Our name is Legion, for this vote,”—though Dr. M—— got in only by the speaker’s casting vote.
“This will give you pleasure, as it shews that a good man is capable of sometimes commanding all parties; and it will be creditable for Mr. Rittenhouse, even if the bill should not succeed for the present. The salary to each of the trustees is 200l.[[147]] Both the Mr. Ross’s,[[148]] Mr. Biddle,[[149]] and Mr. Carpenter,[[150]] were hearty in their interest for Rittenhouse,—so was Minshull;[[151]] and I hope you will thank them all. The governor[[152]] declared (and with more frankness than usual,) when I waited on him,—“Mr. Rittenhouse’s name shall never be an objection with me, in this or any other bill: on the contrary, I shall rejoice if the bill come to me in such a form, as that I can shew my regard for him.”
“Yet, my dear friend,” adds Dr. Smith, “I fear this bill will not pass; and the Governor may be reduced to the hard dilemma, of even striking out the name he would wish in, if he had the nomination himself. The house insist on putting the names in the bill, before it goes up: the Governor contends, that he ought to have at least a share in the nomination. This matter has been long litigated. The governor, to maintain his right, always strikes out some names—even though he approves of them, and puts in others. This he did last year, and put in the name of Dr. M——, and the other trustee now in the bill. The house would not admit his amendment, then; but now, this year, they take two of the very men the governor had appointed last year, vote them in themselves, and join Mr. Rittenhouse with them. The governor cannot well negative any of those approved by him, before; yet he must negative some one, to assert his right;—and I believe it would really give him pain, if that one should be David.
“I am thus particular,” continues the Doctor, “that you may understand the whole, and not think our friend slighted by the government, even if this thing should not succeed. All the council[[153]] are hearty for Mr. Rittenhouse; and if he does not get this matter, he will not be long without something else. But I hope some expedient may be hit upon, to compromise the matter, should the bill not have faults in itself, that may set it aside.”
The warm and sincere interest which Mr. Barton took in every thing that seemed likely to promote the welfare of his brother-in-law, was manifested on this occasion. In his answer to Dr. Smith’s letter, written a week after, he says: “Your letter by Mr. Slough was so truly obliging and friendly, that I cannot think of words strong enough to express my gratitude. Rittenhouse, I trust, will always be sensible of the favours you have shewn him, and of the uncommon pains you have taken to serve him on this occasion, which have been represented to me, fully, by Mr. Slough.[[154]] Accept then, dear sir, my most hearty thanks for your kind offices in behalf of Mr. Rittenhouse. Accept of my wife’s best thanks, also — —. She shed tears of gratitude, when she read your letter, (for her attachment to her brother David is very great,) and declared, in a high strain of enthusiasm, that Dr. Smith was the most steady friend and obliging man that ever lived; that she should honour and respect him, while living, and, should she survive him, would always revere his memory. Thus it was, that the sister of your ‘optical and mathematical’ friend expressed herself on the occasion.”
Notwithstanding the fair prospects which Mr. Rittenhouse thus had, in the beginning of the year 1770, of being enabled to establish himself in Philadelphia, with a handsome salary of 200l. per annum from the government, in addition to such funds as he might reasonably calculate on acquiring, in that capital, by his professional occupation, both he and his friends were disappointed, in regard to the contemplated official station: The assembly rose, as Dr. Smith seemed to have anticipated a very short time before, without passing the loan-office bill.
Mr. Rittenhouse’s actual removal into the city, in the succeeding autumn, appears to have been made in pursuance of a previous determination more recently formed;[[155]] one founded on some plan, not liable to be affected by such contingencies as have been just noticed. Prior to that period, his Orrery was nearly if not quite completed: for it appears by a letter which he wrote to Mr. Barton from Norriton, on the 12th of May preceding his removal to the city, that the trustees of Nassau-Hall, in New-Jersey, had then agreed on some terms with him, as the inventor, maker, and proprietor, for the purchase of it.[[156]] The trustees of the College of Philadelphia had likewise been in treaty with him, for the same purpose: but the Princeton College succeeded in their negociation, and thus acquired the property of the Orrery first constructed.
This circumstance gave, at the time, some dissatisfaction to the more immediate friends of the Philadelphia institution; though it is confidently believed that no degree of censure, whatever, could be justly imputed to Mr. Rittenhouse, on the occasion; perhaps, none was fairly chargeable on any of the parties. Mr. Rittenhouse, however, experienced some unpleasant sensations; although, in order to avoid any suspicion of his having been actuated by an undue partiality towards the College of Princeton, he had made such a stipulation in favour of its sister-institution, as could not fail, when made known, to remove any imputation of impropriety of conduct on his part, in the transaction. This is explained by the following passage in the letter to his brother-in-law, last referred to,—evidently penned without any reserve. After noticing the dissatisfaction just mentioned, he says—“I would not, on any account, incur the imputation of cunning; nor are there, probably, many persons living who deserve it less: yet I am greatly mistaken if this matter” (his transfer of the Orrery to Princeton College) “does not, in the end, turn out to my advantage, and consequently, to your satisfaction. At present, the point is settled as follows: I am to begin another” (Orrery) “immediately, and finish it expeditiously, for the College of Philadelphia. This I am not sorry for; since the making of a second will be but an amusement, compared with the first: And who knows, but that the rest of the colonies may catch the contagion.”[[157]]
The second Orrery was soon completed: for, on the 15th of March, 1771, only ten months after the date of his last quoted letter to the Rev. Mr. Barton, he wrote to that gentleman, on the subject, in these words. “Dr. Smith bids me to tell you he will write by your son William. He is fully employed, at present, with his Lectures, and has great success, having raised upwards of two hundred pounds.[[158]] I am sure you would afford me some additional compassion, if you knew the drudgery of explaining the Orrery to two hundred persons,[[159]] in small companies of ten or twelve, each: the satisfaction they universally express, makes however some amends.”[[160]]
The italicised words, in the foregoing paragraph, have reference to a great domestic calamity Mr. Rittenhouse had experienced, only a very few months before,—the death of an affectionate wife, whom he tenderly loved. This afflicting event appears to have overspread, for some time, the highly sensible and delicate mind of our Philosopher, with a considerable degree of gloominess. In this mood, then, he thus commenced the letter just quoted: “You are not unacquainted with the dismal apprehensions of losing what is most dear to you” (alluding, here, to a dangerous fit of illness from which Mrs. Barton, the writer’s sister, had recently recovered;) “and therefore you can better judge, than I can describe, what I feel at present. I do, indeed, endeavour to bear my loss in the manner you recommend: but how irksome does every thing seem! Nothing interesting, nothing entertaining! except my two little girls; and yet my reflecting on their loss sinks me the deeper in affliction. What adds to my misfortune, is the hurry of business I am engaged in, and know not how to get rid of. My design, at present, is to keep the children with me, until I can conveniently take a ramble to Europe.” And, in the same strain of melancholy reflections, he concluded this letter to his friend and brother-in-law: “I suppose,” said he, “you have been informed, that the Assembly have made me a donation of three hundred[hundred] pounds. This would have been very agreeable to me, if my poor Eleanor had lived: but now, neither money—nor reputation—has any charms; though I must still think them valuable, because absolutely necessary in this unhappy life.”
Although such was the keen sensibility of this amiable man, on so distressing an occasion, his numerous avocations of business and studies, aided by the correctness of his own reflections, gradually dispelled these over-shadowings of his dejected mind; and ere long, he very naturally regained his usual serenity and cheerfulness of temper.
A new phænomenon in the heavens soon after engaged his attention: this was the Comet which appeared in June and July, 1770. His Observations on this Comet, with the elements of its Motion and the Trajectory of its Path, were communicated to the American Philosophical Society, through his friend Dr. Smith, on the 3d of August, soon after the Comet’s disappearance, and were dated at Norriton the 24th of the preceding month. The letter to Dr. Smith, that covered this communication, and in which he says, “Herewith I send you the fruit of three or four days labour, during which I have covered many sheets, and literally drained my ink-stand several times”—will demonstrate how completely his mind was occupied in those researches.
About the close of the following autumn, some accounts of Observations of this Comet in England and France, respectively, reached this country,[country,] when a further correspondence on the subject took place between Dr. Smith and Mr. Rittenhouse. These communications are published, entire, in the first volume of the Philosophical Society’s Transactions; and, with those already noticed, complete the list of our Astronomer’s papers in that volume. It is here worthy of remark, that a comparison of Mr. Rittenhouse’s Observations of this Comet with those of M. Messier in France and Mr. Six in England, confirmed the theory of the American Observer.
Before this subject is dismissed, however, it may not be deemed uninteresting to subjoin an extract of a letter which Mr. Rittenhouse addressed to the Rev. Mr. Barton (from Norriton,) on the 30th of July, respecting the same Comet: it will, at least, serve to shew the zeal of our Astronomer, on the occasion.
“I told you,” said Mr. Rittenhouse, “that some intricate calculation, or other, always takes up my idle hours” (he seems to have considered all his hours as “idle” ones, which were not occupied in some manual employment,) “that I cannot find time to write to my friends as often as I could wish: a new object has lately engrossed my attention. The Comet which appeared a few weeks since was so very extraordinary, that I could not forbear tracing it in all its wanderings, and endeavouring to reduce that motion to order and regularity, which seemed void of any. This, I think, I have accomplished, so far as to be able to compute its visible place for any given time: and I can assure you, that the account from York, of its having been seen again near the place where it first appeared, is a mistake. Nor is Mr. Winthrop of Boston happier, in supposing that it yet crosses the Meridian, every day, between twelve and one o’clock, that it has already passed its perihelion, and that it may, perhaps, again emerge from the Southern Horizon. This Comet is now to be looked for no where but a little to the North of, and very near to, the Ecliptic. It rises now a little before day-break; and will continue to rise sooner and sooner, every morning. Yet perhaps, on account of its smallness, we may see it no more; though I rather think we shall: But I must stop, for fear of tiring you.”
The subjects of all Mr. Rittenhouse’s philosophical papers, comprised in the first volume of the Society’s Transactions, having been now noticed, some public acts connected with two of the objects to which those papers relate, and which took place about the time to which these memoirs are brought down shall, at present, be adverted to.
The Orrery had attracted a very general attention, among learned, ingenious, and well-informed persons, in this country: it could not, therefore, escape the notice of the then Legislature of Pennsylvania. Accordingly, the honourable testimony borne by that very respectable body, to the merits of Mr. Rittenhouse, is thus expressed in the Journal of the House, under the date of March the 8th, 1771.
“The members of assembly, having viewed the Orrery constructed by Mr. David Rittenhouse, a native of this Province, and being of opinion that it greatly exceeds all others hitherto constructed, in demonstrating the true Situations of the celestial Bodies, their Magnitudes, Motions, Distances, Periods, Eclipses, and Order, upon the principles of the Newtonian System:
“Resolved, That the sum of three hundred pounds be given to Mr. Rittenhouse, as a Testimony of the high sense which this House entertain of his Mathematical genius and Mechanical abilities, in constructing the said Orrery. And a Certificate for the said sum, being drawn at the table, was signed by the Speaker and delivered to Mr. Evans.
“Ordered, That Mr. Evans, Mr. Rhoads, Mr. James, Mr. Rodman, Mr. Morton, Mr. Carpenter, Mr. Montgomery, and Mr. Edwards, with the Speaker,[[161]] be a Committee to agree with and purchase from Mr. Rittenhouse a new Orrery, for the use of the Public, at any sum not exceeding four hundred pounds, lawful money of this Province.”[[162]]
Unfortunately, the important object designed to have been obtained “for the use of the Public,” by the Order which closes this legislative resolution was not executed. This disappointment of the liberal intentions of the Legislature arose, probably, from the many and arduous employments in which Mr. Rittenhouse was almost constantly engaged, in the short period which intervened between that time and the commencement of the troubles in America. But, whatever may have been the cause, the consequence is much to be regretted.
In January, 1771, Mr. Rittenhouse was elected one of the Secretaries of the American Philosophical Society; and on the 22d of February following, an Address was presented to the General Assembly by that Society, requesting the acceptance, by each Member of the House, of the first volume of the Society’s Transactions, then recently published. This Address, which was signed by order and in behalf of the Society, by Dr. Smith, Dr. Ewing, and Mr. Robert Strettel Jones, together with Mr. Rittenhouse, as the Secretaries, was favourably received by the Assembly.
Some short time prior to this, viz. on the 22d of September, 1770, Dr. Thomas Bond and Samuel Rhoads, Esq. two of the Vice-Presidents of the American Philosophical Society, had, by their Order and in their behalf, transmitted to the General Assembly the Observations on the Transits of Venus and Mercury, then unpublished; not only those which had been made under the directions of that Society, but such as had, in the intermediate time, been received from the other American Colonies and from England: the Society expressing, at the same time, a due sense of the obligations they were under to the Assembly, “for the countenance and encouragement they had given them, in carrying on the designs of the Institution; and, that they were particularly thankful for the generous assistance granted to them, for making those Observations.” They say further: “We have the pleasure to find they have been highly acceptable to those learned Bodies in Europe, to whom they have been communicated;” and, that they were “likely to be of great service, in settling that important point in Astronomy, which was proposed from the Transit of Venus.”
It is evident from these proceedings, that there was, at that day, a reciprocation of good will between the Legislature of Pennsylvania, and a most valuable Scientific Institution, established within the bounds of their jurisdiction. While the legislative body, on the one hand, encouraged such institutions, and extended a liberal patronage to persons of genius and useful talents; men of learning and abilities, on the other, were stimulated by a sense of gratitude, and a laudable desire of honourable fame, to exert themselves for the public welfare.
Among the Members of the then General Assembly of Pennsylvania, were John Dickinson, William Allen, George Ross, Edward Biddle, Charles Humphreys, John Sellers, John and Israel Jacobs, and James Wright, besides the very respectable characters named in the foregoing resolution and order of the House.[[163]]
The various agitations which the public mind underwent in this country, in the succeeding four years, in consequence of its disputes with the parent state, and until the commencement of hostilities between the two countries, seem to place Mr. Rittenhouse more out of view for some time, with respect to any public employments. Then, all classes of people appeared to have become Politicians. The interests of Literature were neglected; Science, abstracted from Politics, was little cultivated; and all other considerations were, in general, apparently absorbed in the views which the American people entertained of their public affairs, and in the prosecution of measures, adapted either for the obtaining a redress of the then existing grievances, or to meet the possible contingency of an adverse event. There was, in fact, for about four years preceding the year 1775, a great interruption, sometimes an almost total suspension, in the American colonies of Great Britain, of all pursuits, except the ordinary and indispensable ones of Industry and Commerce. Yet about the commencement of this period, (viz. in the summer of 1771,) Mr. Rittenhouse was engaged with Mr. Kinnersley and some other gentlemen, several days successively, in making a series of experiments at Philadelphia, on the Gymnotus Electricus, or Electric Eel; for the purpose of ascertaining the nature of the faculty by which this fish is enabled, on being touched, to impart a shock, very similar in sensation to that produced by the electric fluid. An account of these experiments was long afterwards communicated by Mr. Rittenhouse to Professor Barton of Philadelphia, and will be found in the first volume of his Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal.
It was during this interval that Mr. Rittenhouse experienced a long course of exemption from any very conspicuous public employments, which could interfere with his favourite studies; an interval, in which he was disposed to have enjoyed a kind of dignified leisure, amidst the tranquillity of domestic employments; so far as the existing state of things in the political world would permit a man, solicitous for his country’s happiness, to participate in any sort of gratification, that might be deemed incompatible with a due degree of interest in the public weal. He possessed too enlightened and patriotic a mind not to be keenly sensible of the delicate, as well as alarming situation, in which his country was then placed. But nature had fitted him for the quiet station of domestic life, and the delightful pursuits of natural science; rather than for the bustle of official situation, and for those speculative projects in politics, wherein specious theories often terminate in the most deceptive results.
He had been investigating principles founded in Truth, from his childhood; this object was always near to his heart; and he set little value on any thing that did not lead to its attainment. This predominating disposition of his mind is indeed plainly evinced by a single sentence, contained in a letter which he addressed to Mr. Barton, so early as the 16th of February, 1764. Having had a personal interview with an eminent and worthy clerical gentleman, well disposed to befriend him, but who was more a metaphysical than a natural philosopher, he thus expressed himself on the occasion: “I had a good deal of conversation with Mr. ******, not, perhaps, greatly to the satisfaction of either of us; for he appears to me to be a Mystical Philosopher, and you know I care not a farthing for any thing but sober Certainty in Philosophy.”
Fifteen years elapsed between the publication of the first and second volumes of the Transactions of the American Philosophical Society; and there is an interval of about ten years between the latest of Mr. Rittenhouse’s communications, contained in the first volume, and the earliest in the second. These facts, alone, are sufficient to demonstrate to what a state of depression all philosophical pursuits had sunk, not only during the war of the revolution, but for some years preceding it. It is true, that long before the close of that war, an attempt was made by a few individuals to revive the long interrupted meetings of the Society, at the stated times of their convening; and that, for this purpose, a Charter of Incorporation was granted to the members of that Institution, by an act of the Pennsylvania Legislature, passed the 15th of March 1780: but that act itself contains an acknowledgment of the truth, that, “The Society, after having been long interrupted in their laudable pursuits by the calamities of war and the distresses of our country,” had “found means to revive their design,”—“in hopes of being able to prosecute the same with their former success.”
But, at the date of Mr. Rittenhouse’s letter to Mr. Barton, of the 3d of February, 1772,[[164]] he appears to have been chiefly engaged in his domestic concerns and professional employment. He remained, even then, very sensible of the loss he had sustained in the death of his wife: and his reflections on that circumstance, together with the serious aspect of the times and his frequent indisposition, depressed his mind, occasionally, much below its natural state of cheerfulness. It must have been in one of these hours of mental gloom, that he penned the succeeding passage, in the letter last referred to.
“I do not doubt, my dear Brother, but that you condemn me, as usual, for not writing: but much writing ill suits a Mechanic. After the comfortless toil of the day, when evening comes, I am glad to sooth my mind with a favourite poet, or some other book of amusement. That you may not be disappointed, I would have you to expect nothing of me, in future. I no longer feel any inducement to exert myself: every thing—even life itself—is insipid. Yet you will be told, I suppose, that I am paying my addresses to some one:—I sincerely wish sad experience may never teach you to reconcile these contradictions.”
“It is still my intention to go to England, as soon as my business will permit. I have had my health as well as usual, until the last fortnight; but have now a violent cold.”
The tenor of this quotation manifests, that our Philosopher did not, at that time, enjoy his accustomed serenity of mind. Some of the causes of his depression of spirits appeared to his friend and correspondent to be of such a nature, as might, perhaps, be removed by a little pleasantry. Under this impression, Mr. Barton, in his answer, thus rallied him:
“I am extremely sorry,”—said this gentleman, after replying to some other parts of Mr. Rittenhouse’s letter—“to find your Ambition so low, as to render you indifferent to that Fame to which you might justly aspire; and your Spirits so sunk, as to put you out of humour with the world. My dear Brother, what can this be owing to? You have, indeed, received a severe blow: but I am sure that your Philosophy has taught you, with the Poet,—that,
“To be from all things that disquiet, free,
Is not consistent with Humanity.”
“Your case is not singular;—nay, it is favourable in comparison with that of thousands. Though you have been deprived of one comfort, yet many have been continued to you; such as, a tolerable share of health—-your children—the means of subsistence—the esteem of your friends—the applause of your countrymen, &c. &c. Banish therefore, I beseech you, this serious sadness—these melancholy reflections; which, if Dr. Cadogan[[165]] is to be credited, must be more injurious to your health than any other cause can be.”
“I know not, indeed, what kind of Melancholy yours can be. To use the words of the immortal Shakespeare,—
“You have neither the Scholar’s Melancholy,
Which is Emulation; nor the Musician’s,
Which is fantastical; nor the Courtier’s,
Which is Pride; nor the Lawyer’s, which is politic;
Nor the Lady’s, which is nice; nor the Lover’s,
Which is all these: but it is a Melancholy
Of your own,—compounded of many simples,
Extracted from many objects,—and, indeed,
The sundry Contemplation of the”——Stars.
“If you will promise to pardon your saucy niece, I will tell you what she attributes it to. She says you are in Love; and, really, you seem to insinuate as much, yourself: If it be so, I sincerely wish you success in your “Addresses;” or a happy deliverance from the effects of Love.”
“It would give me great pleasure to hear, that you had fairly resolved upon going to England;[[166]] because it would be the means not only of cheering your spirits, but of establishing your interest as well as reputation. You give me some hopes of seeing you soon: your Sister and I would be extremely glad, indeed, to see you at Lancaster.[[167]]
Although no doubt can be entertained, that, in the early part of the year 1772, Mr. Rittenhouse had it very seriously in contemplation to visit England, as soon, to use his own words, as his business would permit, his intention in that particular was eventually frustrated: but it is now uncertain, to what cause was owing a change of his views or the disappointment of his plan.[[168]] He married, however, in the month of December following, Miss Hannah Jacobs, of the city of Philadelphia.[[169]]
By an act of the legislature of Pennsylvania, passed the 26th of February, 1773, Mr. Rittenhouse was appointed one of the Commissioners for making the river Schuylkill navigable;[[170]] and by two subsequent laws, passed on the 24th of March, 1781, and the 15th of March, 1784, he was again appointed a Commissioner, at those two periods, for the same purpose. And by a list of the incidental expences of the government, for the first mentioned of those years, it appears that he received 41l. 15s. 11d. for his services in that business. In these several appointments of commissioners, during a term of eleven years, Mr. Rittenhouse was uniformly first-named; and, consequently, became president of their board.
The last important business of a public nature, in which Mr. Rittenhouse was engaged, prior to the American war, was in fixing, jointly with a Commissioner on the part of New-York, the beginning of the 43° of North latitude, and to establish a Line, thence Westward, as the Boundary between Pennsylvania and New-York.
Mr. Rittenhouse was appointed the Commissioner for this purpose, on the part of the then province of Pennsylvania, by Gov. John Penn, on the 24th of October, 1774; and Samuel Holland, Esquire, was the Commissioner on the part of New-York, appointed by Lieutenant-Governor Colden. As Captain Holland’s[[171]] commission was not made out until the 8th of November, these Joint-Commissioners could not proceed on the business of their appointment, before that late period. It appears, however, by the duplicate returns made by these gentlemen to their respective governments, under the date of December the 14th in the same year, that they “ascertained and fixed the beginning of the forty-third degree of North latitude on the Mohawk or Western branch of the Delaware; and there, in a small island of the said river, planted a stone, marked, &c.”[[172]]—“but that the rigour of the season prevented them from proceeding further in running the said line, &c.”[[173]]
[171]. Mr. Holland was an able engineer in the British service, and held the military rank of captain.
This Line remained thus unsettled, until after the conclusion of the American war. Mr. Rittenhouse and Captain Holland having previously established the North-Eastern Corner of Pennsylvania, on that boundary, by ascertaining and marking thereon the beginning of the 43° of North latitude, the Pennsylvania Legislature, on the 31st of March, 1785, enacted a law, authorizing the Executive of the State to appoint a Commissioner, in conjunction with one or more on the part of New-York, to run and complete the Line. The person selected for this service by Pennsylvania, in addition to Mr. Rittenhouse, was Andrew Ellicott, Esq. an able Mathematician and Astronomer, and well qualified also, by his practical knowledge of Surveying or Land-Mensuration: this gentleman was accordingly commissioned[[174]] by the hon. Charles Biddle, Esquire, then Vice-President of the Supreme Executive Council of Pennsylvania, on the 16th of June, 1786.[[175]] The Commissioners on the part of New-York, were James Clinton and Simeon De Witt, Esquires: And by these gentlemen, appointed on behalf of their respective governments, this business was prosecuted; but it was not then completed.[[176]]
The following letter, addressed by Mr. Rittenhouse to his wife, while he was engaged in this service, will not only furnish the reader with some idea of the manner in which the commissioners, with their attendants, were obliged to live in the wilderness, and the nature of their accommodations; but it will also present him with an interesting little story, illustrative of the manners and condition, in our day, of some of that unfortunate race of men, who were once the independent lords of that vast territory, over which the descendants of a grant transatlantic people now exercise all the rights of sovereignty and ownership. This letter is dated the 6th of August, 1786.
“It is,” says Mr. Rittenhouse, “six long weeks since I have had the happiness of seeing you or hearing from you; and this is the first opportunity I have had of conveying a letter to you, since I left Wyoming. As I cannot hope to receive a line from you until we approach nearer to the habitable world, my next greatest pleasure is to inform you of the favourable state of my health: this pleasure is indeed damped in some degree, by my fears that you will not give full credit to what I say, though I mean to abide strictly by the truth. The head-ach has been unknown to me, almost ever since I left you; my cough, though much better, is not quite removed; and I have no other complaint, except, that which will never leave me in this world: this, however, far from being worse than usual, is certainly something less troublesome; which I attribute to my being more at liberty to use moderate exercise, and less exposed to summer heats than I should be at home. This seems to be a different climate from that you are in; the weather is constantly cool, but not cold. We are at present situated on a pleasant bank of the Susquehanna, about fifteen miles above the mouth of the Chenango, one of the principal branches of this river. From this place to Middletown in Lancaster county, is, by estimation, 270 miles along the river: much of the road is very bad, so that we had a tedious journey.
“At Chenango, there are a few Indian families settled, amounting to forty souls. Some of these people frequently visit us, and bring us fish and venison; in return for which, they are very desirous to have flour or salted provisions: and we live in the greatest harmony with them. Five or six days ago, one of the Onondago Sachems with his family came up in three canoes, and encamped in the evening, just below us. Next morning, we received a message from them, requesting an audience for two young ladies of the family. To this, a proper answer was returned, (General Clinton having prudently brought an interpreter with him,) and at the time appointed they were introduced to us in our tent, unattended by any other Indians. After a draught of punch, and a decent silence, our visitors were told that we were ready to hear what they had to say. The eldest of the two, a fine girl of about twenty, and extremely well dressed, with a becoming modesty made a short speech; concluding with an handsome apology for acquitting herself no better, on account of her youth and sex. The purport of her speech was, that thinking it would not be disagreeable to us, they were come to spend a few days in our company: that they were poor, and in want of provisions, especially flour; and hoped we would furnish them with a small portion of our stores,—at least for present use, whilst they staid with us. We encouraged them to bring us fish and other fresh provision; in return for which, they should have salt meat and some bread. Business being over, some cheerful conversation ensued: and we had reason to think our interpreter went much further than he was warranted to do; for he made some proposition which the young lady negatived strongly, though we are ignorant of what it was. He was then bid to assure them, that no insult should be offered, and that they might visit us at our tents whenever they pleased: to this one gentleman added, that we would treat them as we would our own country women.
“It seems the old interpreter mistook the word treat, and construed it, the giving them victual and drink: in consequence of this mistake, the ladies expected to dine with us every day. They then departed, seeming well satisfied; but in the afternoon we received a message from them, complaining that we had already broken the treaty, in not sending for them to dinner. To this we sent a verbal answer, with an apology, and letting the ladies know we should expect them to tea. To my great surprise, we then received a written note, thanking us for our kindness and promising to drink tea with us,—signed, Jacowe and Sally: it was in the Indian language, and written by Miss Sally herself. We now thought it our duty to return a written compliment likewise; and this intercourse ended with a verbal message from Miss Sally, assuring us, that she thought herself honoured by our letter and would carefully preserve it. The ladies did not fail to come; and have drank tea every day, and sometimes dined with us. They are cheerful and agreeable; but cannot, or will not, speak one word of English. Mr. De Witt draws prettily, and is taking a very good picture of the young princess, which I hope to have the pleasure of shewing you in a few weeks. I have mentioned their writing, which you will be surprised at: but these Indians are in some measure civilized; many of them have learned to read;—they have the Common Prayer Book of the Church, printed in their own language, which is the Mohawk.[[177]] The family now with us have several books with them; likewise paper, pens and ink. Every evening, the females jointly sing several religious hymns, and their music is at least equal to any of this kind I have heard: the old mistress is very devout, and sometimes says her prayers with great fervency. They are, nevertheless, still but Indians; and Miss Sally will sit, with all her finery about her, flat on the ground for hours together, under a miserable bark shed, making buckskin shoes, until her eyes are almost smoked blind; then, by way of relaxation, she and her cousin will step into a little tottering canoe, where, standing upright, they row away with incredible swiftness.
“You will excuse me for entertaining you so long with an account of these poor wretches. But your news, and your politics, are almost forgotten. Still, my principal happiness is, that not only waking but frequently in my dreams, I feel all that esteem and affection for you, which I hope will never end. My companions are agreeable enough; but as every one has his own humours, it is by no means a desirable thing to be cooped up in a little tent, night and day, for weeks together, with any one. I want something to employ my leisure hours. This I could do by writing, but here is no privacy: I am at present obliged to write badly and in a small hand, to prevent its being overlooked. I cannot think of taking my departure for Philadelphia, until we approach nearer the inhabited country: our next station, but one, will be at or near Tioga, and from thence I shall return.”
* * * * * * * * * *
“God grant you health and spirits,” &c.
In 1787, Mr. Ellicott’s associates, in completing this line, were Col. Andrew Porter of Pennsylvania, and Abraham Hardenberg and William Morris, Esquires, of New York; Mr. Rittenhouse, who was engaged the same year in a similar occupation, being unable to attend the finishing of this boundary. It was then finally run and marked, by the other commissioners here named; and, in conformity to the return of these commissioners, their proceedings were ratified by a confirmatory law of Pennsylvania, passed on the 29th of September, 1789.
Thus did the labours of a great work,—of one which employed the talents of Mr. Rittenhouse towards the close of the year 1774—which were resumed by him in 1786, and were afterwards continued and completed by Mr. Ellicott and his associates,—receive the legislative sanction of Pennsylvania, fifteen years after the commencement of this arduous undertaking.
His studious habits, and zealous investigation of the works of nature, led Mr. Rittenhouse to devote as much of his time, as the delicate state of his health permitted him to retrench from occasional public employments and his private occupations, to those objects for the promotion of which the American Philosophical Society was instituted. After he fixed his residence in Philadelphia, the established seat of that Society, he attended their Meetings pretty regularly; and by that means had an opportunity of forming a more intimate acquaintance with many persons, most conspicuous, at that time, for talents, knowledge, and learning. His great abilities had then become almost universally known; and these, in connexion with the suavity of his deportment, his great modesty, and exemplary moral character, had not only procured him the esteem and respect of all good men; but confirmed the friendship of his old acquaintances, and attached to him the high and sincere regard of many new ones.
As one instance, among many, of the distinguished estimation in which Mr. Rittenhouse was held by his fellow-citizens, after a residence of between four and five years in Philadelphia; the American Philosophical Society petitioned the legislature, on the 6th of March, 1775, fer pecuniary aid, to enable them to erect an Observatory; and to allow Mr. Rittenhouse an annual salary, as the “Public Astronomical Observer.”
The objects of this application were important, in a public view; and its whole tenor was alike honourable to the enlightened patriotism of the Philosophical Society, and the merit of the person to whom, more particularly, it had reference.[[178]] Indeed, such a public act of so respectable a body as that society, is a testimonial reflecting great honour on the character of Mr. Rittenhouse; insomuch, that it would be doing injustice to his memory, not to insert it in these Memoirs of of his Life. It is as follows:
“To the honourable the Representatives of the Freemen of the province of Pennsylvania, in General Assembly met:
“The Representation and Petition of the American Philosophical Society, held at Philadelphia, for promoting useful knowledge.
“Gentlemen,
“It must yield a sensible satisfaction to the good people of this province, whom you represent, to find, that although it be among the youngest of our American settlements, its reputation has risen high among the sister colonies, and has extended even to the remotest part of Europe, on account of our many public-spirited institutions, and our rapid improvements in all useful arts. This satisfaction is also greatly increased, when we consider, that notwithstanding these institutions, through the necessity of the case, were generally obliged to derive much of their first support from the benevolence of individuals; yet a liberal spirit, for their encouragement and final establishment, has gone forth among our Representatives, in proportion to the increase of our provincial funds. And indeed the savings of public money, after supplying the exigencies of the state, are never more laudably directed, than towards the promoting whatever is useful and ornamental in society.
“It is with unfeigned gratitude that your petitioners recollect the repeated occasions[occasions] you have given them, of acknowledging your bounty and protection, in carrying on their designs ‘for the advancement of useful knowledge;’ and it is their firm resolution never to abuse your former indulgence, by any future unnecessary or unimportant applications. By the means now in their own power, they hope, in general, to be able to prosecute their plan; except so far as they may sometimes find it incumbent on them humbly to suggest to you the encouragement of useful inventions, and the patronizing undertakings beneficial to the whole community: And it is in this last view, that they presume to address you at this time.
“Amidst the variety of fields, which, in this new world, lie open to the investigation of your petitioners, they have, for several years, turned their views towards one, wherein they hope to gather some of their chief laurels, and to make discoveries alike honourable to their country and themselves. Our distance from the chief Observatories in the world, the purity and serenity of our atmosphere, invite us, nay loudly call upon us, to institute a series of regular Astronomical Observations; the comparison of which with those made in Europe, and elsewhere, might settle some very important points, and contribute greatly to give a last perfection to Geography and Navigation. The advantages derived to those noble and useful sciences, from such observations, are so obvious, that there is scarce a civilized nation in the world that has not made some provision for prosecuting them; and your petitioners have been honoured with repeated solicitations from some of the greatest men in Europe, to join with them in this great work, and in a mutual communication of our labours.
“It would be inexcusable, therefore, in your petitioners to neglect the present opportunity of endeavouring to set such a design on foot, when we have a Gentleman among us, whose Abilities, speculative as well as practical, would do Honour to any Country, and who is, nevertheless, indebted for bread to his daily toil, in an occupation the most unfriendly both to health and study. Under his auspices, the work may now be undertaken with the greatest advantages; and others may be bred up by him, to prosecute it in future times: but if the present opportunity is neglected, perhaps whole centuries may not afford such another. To rescue such a Man from the drudgery of manual labour, and give him an occasion of indulging his bent of genius, with advantage to his Country, is an Honour which crowned heads might glory in,—but it is an Honour also, which it is hoped, in the case of a native, Pennsylvania[Pennsylvania] would not yield to the greatest prince or people on earth!
“The design, which your petitioners have projected, and now humbly beg leave to lay before your honourable House, is as follows, viz.
“First, That the Honourable Proprietaries be petitioned to grant a Lot of Ground, for erecting a Public Observatory, and to give such other encouragement to the design as they may think proper. And from their known attachment to the interest of this country, as well as their professed readiness to serve the Gentleman who is proposed to conduct the design, your petitioners cannot have any doubt of their kind compliance with this humble request.
“Secondly, That the assistance of your honourable House be requested, agreeably to the concluding prayer of this petition.
“Thirdly, That a subscription be promoted for erecting a Public Observatory, and furnishing it with such instruments as may be wanted, in addition to those valuable ones now in the province. Of the success of this subscription among our benevolent fellow-citizens, there can be no doubt; and the expense of the additional instruments will not be great, as the Gentleman proposed to conduct the design, is capable of constructing them all with his own hand, in the most masterly manner.
“Fourthly, That the Observatory shall be at all times open to the curious; and, particularly, that captains and mates of vessels, and young gentlemen desirous of obtaining a practical knowledge in Astronomy, shall have admittance, and (under proper rules, to be framed for that purpose,) be taught the use of Instruments, and the method of making Observations, especially the new method of ascertaining the longitude at sea; for the perfecting of which, the Parliament of Great Britain has of late given such ample rewards, to the singular advantage of trade and navigation.
“Fifthly, That the Observations to be made by the Public Observer, shall be annually published, under the inspection of the American Philosophical Society, and communicated to the learned Societies in Europe, with such remarks as may render them generally useful and entertaining.
“Sixthly, That the same person might also be appointed Surveyor of the high roads and waters; in order that when any public proposals are to be made, for improving navigation, and shortening the communications between capital trading places, there be always a person who has leisure, and is skilled in measuring and reducing distances, taking heights and levels, and who may be employed in conjunction with others, when necessary, to make report on all such matters, either at the expence of those who request such service, or at the public expence, as the case may require.
“Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray, that your Honourable House would take the premises into your consideration, and allow a yearly salary for such person, at least as a Public Astronomer, if you should not view the additional office of Surveyor of the high roads and waters in the same important light as it is viewed by your petitionors; and they further pray, that you would give them leave to bring in a bill for the legislative appointment of such Public Observer, and for regulating his duty in the execution[execution] of his trust: and your petitioners shall ever pray, &c.
Signed in behalf and by order of the American Philosophical Society, at Philadelphia, March 6th 1775.
Thomas Bond, V. P.”[[179]]
Nothing was done, in pursuance of this application to the legislature; although there is not any reason whatever to doubt, that there was the most favourable disposition in that enlightened and liberal assembly, to promote the laudable views of the Philosophical Society, both as they regarded the public interest, and the personal advantage of Mr. Rittenhouse. But the period was then close at hand, and its arrival had been for some time before anticipated, when the public voice was expected to proclaim, in a tone of awful solemnity, “Cedant Armis Togæ:” and, in fact, the calamatous appeal to arms which soon after succeeded, seemed almost wholly to absorb all other considerations, than such as were connected with the defence of the country and a new organization of its internal polity.
Mr. Rittenhouse was among those, who early yielded to the call of their fellow-citizens to serve them in a civil capacity. Dr. Franklin and Major (afterwards General) Mifflin had been respectively appointed by the continental congress, in the year 1775, to be post-master general of “the United Colonies of North-America,” and quartermaster-general of the American army: and, in consequence of these appointments, both these gentlemen resigned, in the early part of the ensuing year, the seats they had occupied in the general assembly of Pennsylvania, as burgesses for the city of Philadelphia. To supply this vacancy in the representation of that city, Colonel (afterwards General) Joseph Reed and David Rittenhouse, Esq. were elected, in March 1776. Mr. Rittenhouse took his seat on the 5th day of the same month, and continued an useful member of that body until the termination of its legislative functions. But, although he was a valuable and highly respectable member of that house, he did not possess that species of talent which often enables a man of even moderate abilities, to make a prominent figure in popular assemblies: his perception was extremely quick; in deliberative powers he excelled; and all his reasoning faculties were most accurate: yet, an insuperable native diffidence—pursuits which precluded opportunities of public speaking—and, perhaps, a peculiar structure of his mind—all forbad his being an orator.
Notwithstanding the agitating and highly important public events which occupied men’s minds, in the memorable year 1776, Mr. Rittenhouse could not entirely abandon, even then, his darling pursuits. His ardent attachment to the Newtonian philosophy led him, on various occasions, to vindicate it against new-fangled theories which sometimes appeared against it: for there still remained a few speculative men, and, among these, some persons of considerable learning, who continued to adhere to the visionary principles of Descartes and his followers.[[180]] Of this, an instance occurred in the year 1776. A writer under the signature of M. W. (and who is supposed to have been the late Rev. Matthew Wilson, a respectable presbyterian clergyman, of Lewes,[[181]] in the county of Sussex on Delaware,) published in The Pennsylvania Magazine, for March and April in that year, (conducted by the late Mr. Robert Aitken of Philadelphia,) some speculations, under the head of “A proposal for reducing Natural Philosophy to a System, with Remarks on the Cartesian and Newtonian Theories.” In his lucubrations, this writer discovered a decided partiality for the doctrine of Descartes, in preference to those of Newton. Nor did this admirer of the justly exploded philosophy of the former long want a coadjutor: for, in the same Magazine, for the succeeding month, appeared another reverend gentleman of the same religious persuasion, and known to possess a copious fund of scholastic learning; who, under the signature of J. W. approved, in the main, of the opinions of his precursor, on this occasion. After acknowledging that the Newtonian system prevailed universally in Great Britain, and pretty generally throughout the rest of Europe, he asks—“Shall we then hear any thing against the Newtonian principles, in Answer?” He adds—“I answer, yes.” After rendering a constrained kind of compliment to the great Newton, for his “inexpressible service to Philosophy”—“so far as he adhered to his own plan,”—he proceeds with introducing “A few Thoughts on Space, Dimension, and the Divisibility of Matters in infinitum.”
Much as Mr. Rittenhouse was averse to controversy of any kind, he could not content himself without publicly pointing out one palpable fallacy, among the many mistakes which the last mentioned writer had fallen into: for he did not notice the preceding production of ‘M. W.’ not deeming it, probably, worthy of his attention. Accordingly, having been shewn ‘J. W.’s’ essay, with some remarks on it by his ingenious friend Mr. Ellicott (then quite a young man,) Mr. Rittenhouse drew up some observations, very concisely, on the errors of this Anti-Newtonian essayist.[essayist.] This piece will be found in the same periodical work, for June 1776. Being addressed to Mr. Aitken, the publisher of the Magazine, our Philosopher concludes his strictures thus: “I wish the gentleman would be more cautious, for the future; as well on your own account as for the sake of your readers, some of whom may be misled by the weakest reasoning, on a subject which they do not understand[[182]] and I will venture to assure him, that the whole doctrine of Infinites, which he is pleased to call a sophism, will not produce one contradiction in a mathematical head. Those of another[another] cast[[183]] need not meddle with it, since there is a sufficient variety of literary subjects to engage every man, according to the bent of his genius.”
A further proof of Mr. Rittenhouse’s unremitting attachment to the interests of science, even “amidst the calamities of an unhappy war,” will be found in the following circumstances; a written memorial of which, is preserved in the family of his friend, the late Dr. W. Smith.
On the 2d day of November, 1776, Mr. Rittenhouse was engaged, in the city of Philadelphia, jointly with Dr. Smith and Mr. John Lukens, in observing the transit of Mercury over the Sun, which appeared that day. On the 9th of January, following, the Doctor and Mr. Rittenhouse employed themselves at the same place, in like Observations on an eclipse of the Sun, which then occurred. And, on the 24th of June, 1778, just one week after the evacuation of that city by the British army, the three gentlemen here named, together with Mr. Owen Biddle, were busied in making observations, there, on another eclipse of the Sun. The results of these several Observations, in the hand-writing of Dr. Smith, having been bound up by him with a copy of T. Mayer’s Lunar Tables, the writer of these Memoirs was obligingly permitted by Mr. Charles Smith, the Doctor’s son, to transcribe them, for publication in this work. A true copy of them is accordingly given in the Appendix.
But, to return to some political events of the year 1776: In the month of September of that year, Mr. Rittenhouse was one of twenty-four persons who were appointed justices of the peace, for the whole State of Pennsylvania; in their capacity of members of the then existing council of safety.
This appointment was made by virtue of an ordinance of the convention of Pennsylvania, which passed the first constitution of the state, on the 28th of September, 1776, of which he was also a member, for the city of Philadelphia. That convention could boast of possessing, among their members, two distinguished philosophers, Franklin[[184]] and Rittenhouse: but it cannot be ascertained, whether the opinions of these two eminent men, on the subject of government, had any decided influence on the deliberations of that assembly. Certain it is, however, that the Constitution framed and promulgated by the convention, was predicated on too many new and untried principles of civil polity; that it contained too many aberrations from maxims founded on a knowledge of human nature, to have warranted a reasonable expectation, that it could long prove practically beneficial. Hence, after an experiment of fourteen years continuance, it was succeeded by the present constitution of the state; one admirably well suited to secure the rights and liberties of its citizens, individually, and to promote the prosperity of the whole community, so long as it shall be faithfully and wisely administered.[[185]]
The thirteen British Colonies, which, on the memorable fourth day of July, 1776, had declared themselves free and independent States, assumed at the same time a national character, under the denomination of “The United States of America,” in the articles of confederation and perpetual union between the states, then published:[[186]] and by these articles it was agreed, that each state should retain its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every power, jurisdiction and right, not expressly delegated to congress by the confederation. As soon, therefore, as Pennsylvania had adopted her state-constitution, measures were pursued for organizing her government, in conformity to its provisions. The right of appointing the treasurer of the state by annual election, was vested in the immediate representatives of the people, when assembled in their legislative capacity. This policy had been invariably pursued in the proprietary government of Pennsylvania, while she continued to be a British province: after the abrogation of the first constitution of the state, the same mode of appointing that important officer, the state-treasurer, was continued, and will probably long remain a constitutional provision.
The person first appointed to that high trust, under the republican government of Pennsylvania, was David Rittenhouse: a man whose stern integrity, numerous public services, and uniform adherence to those principles which gave rise to the American revolution, were well calculated to inspire a general confidence in his character; more especially, in times when virtue and talents were considered as meritorious qualities in public men, by those who elevated them to office. The first legislative body of the State, after the declaration of independence, assembled at Philadelphia in October, 1776; and, on the 14th day of January, in the following year, they chose Mr. Rittenhouse to be the state-treasurer, without a dissenting voice. In like manner, he was unanimously continued in that station, during twelve succeeding years; in the last of which, he sent to the legislature his resignation of that office: this event shall be more particularly noticed in its proper place in the order of time.
In consequence of the possession of the city of Philadelphia by the British army, from the latter end of September, 1777, until the beginning of the ensuing summer, the session of the state-legislature which intervened, was held at Lancaster. The compulsory removal from the capital, not only of the government of Pennsylvania but of congress also, and all the offices attached to the seat of the national government, produced an high degree of agitation and resentment in the public mind; more especially in Pennsylvania, where the evils occasioned by the occupancy of their capital by an hostile army, were more keenly felt by the citizens.
Under these impressions, the general assembly of that state passed a law on the 13th of October (only seventeen days after the British forces entered Philadelphia,) entitled “An act for constituting a council of safety, &c.” By this act, twelve persons therein named, of whom David Rittenhouse was one, were constituted that council: and to this body, jointly with the supreme executive council of the state, great and extraordinary powers were given, to punish (even capitally) offenders, “traitors or others, who from their general conduct, or conversation, should be deemed inimical to the common cause of liberty and the United States of North-America.” The irritation, that could have provoked such a measure, must have been extreme! for, surely, nothing less than an extremity of necessity could be urged as any sort of justification, in a free country, of a legislative act, whereby the constitution was grossly violated, laws were dispensed with, and a summary authority of the highest nature, vested in a tribunal unknown to the laws and unwarranted by the constitution.[[187]] It is believed, however, that no proceedings were had under this strange legislative act: and the writer is firmly persuaded, that neither Mr. Rittenhouse, nor some others of the gentlemen who constituted the tribunal erected by that act, would have undertaken to exercise some of the powers required of them, thereby.
Daring the occupancy of Philadelphia by the British forces under Sir William Howe, the commander in chief, from the 26th of September, 1777, until the evacuation of that city on the 18th of June, in the following year, Mr. Rittenhouse resided at Lancaster;[[188]] where he was busily employed in the duties of his office of treasurer of the state.[[189]] Before his removal from Philadelphia, he had placed his family at or in the vicinity of his farm in Norriton, distant about twenty miles in a north-westwardly direction from the capital; then conceiving that situation to be a place of safety from any hostile excursions. While he himself continued in the borough of Lancaster, he made his home at the house of the late William Henry, Esq. at that time treasurer of the rich and populous county of the same name; a situation which was very commodious for the business of his office, from its connexion with that of the county-treasurer, and one which was also rendered the more agreeable, by reason of Mr. Henry being a person of very considerable mechanical ingenuity.
This separation of Mr. Rittenhouse from his wife and children—attended too, as it was, by the most embarrassing[embarrassing] circumstances, and great uncertainty with respect to the extent of its continuance—produced, in such a disposition as his, the most poignant feelings. His lot, it is true, was that of thousands of his fellow-citizens: nor were the opposite party exempt from similar evils; many of whom were obliged to abandon their homes, and, after making great sacrifices, to seek an asylum among strangers. These were a part of the miseries inseparable from a state of war; and some of them were of that nature which necessarily resulted from a war of so singular a character; considerations, however, which could not afford much alleviation to the anxious feelings of our Philosopher, in his exile: those sensations were in his mind, extremely acute; aggravated as they were, by the almost hopeless condition of his native country at that time.[[190]]
A letter which he wrote to his wife, from Lancaster, on the 26th of January, 1778, strongly bespeaks his inquietude and distress, at that alarming period; and is, besides, so very expressive of his purity of heart and the delicacy of his conjugal and parental affections, that the following extracts from it will, it is presumed, be strikingly indicative of his principles and temper.
“One of your last,” says Mr. Rittenhouse to his wife, “convinces me, that the fears I expressed in a former letter are well-founded; I mean, that you will write, when writing is painful to you: Indeed, my dear H. I am not so unreasonable as to desire it.”—“Your letters, my dearest H. give me mingled pleasure and pain. There is nothing in this world I value so much, as your esteem and affection: Your very kind expressions of regard, and concern for my health, would therefore make me happy, if it were not for our unfortunate situation. But we have long since talked of the necessity of reconciling ourselves to the prospect of a separation,—perhaps for years: this, I fear, you have still made little progress in doing, if I may judge from your letters. Nevertheless, the dismal prospect still continues. I cannot, indeed, boast of much more resolution myself. If providence has espoused the cause of our enemies, for wise reasons unknown to us,—Heaven, nevertheless, is my witness, with what integrity I have acted; and, that the virtue and happiness of my fellow-creatures has always been my principal object. I am, therefore, not at all distressed on my own account, confident of being happy, in whatever part of the world my lot may be thrown: but how to leave you exposed to the frowns of fortune; to leave you to the mercy of an unfeeling world, rendered more callous by general distress; to leave you thus, confiding only in the goodness of Providence, is what I have still to learn. May kind Heaven render it unnecessary!
“I shall perhaps, before I seal this, appoint a time to meet you. In my last, I partly promised to come and stay a fortnight with you: but I do not now think it so safe, as I did then. In our present situation, I should not think it prudent to stay above one night with you, as parties of horse are employed to pick up particular persons. For this reason, I would rather meet you at one of your brothers’,[brothers’,] or at sister’s;[[191]] but I apprehend the Schuylkill is, at present, difficult—if not dangerous—to cross, on account of the ice.
“Tuesday morning.—I am now nearly determined to appoint next Saturday week, in the evening, to meet you at brother John’s;[[192]] and yet I fear it may expose one or both of us to a very uncomfortable ride. I will, however, be there, if the weather be tolerable and health permit; but do not come, my dear H. if the weather should be bad; because if I do not find you there, I shall proceed to brother Israel’s,[[193]] where I shall be glad to find you on Sunday, in order to accompany you home. If you can find any opportunity to write before then, I shall be glad to receive a line.”
After experiencing the numerous and distressing privations incident to a nine months banishment from his home and separation from his family—during a period, too, of great calamity and suffering among his countrymen, Mr. Rittenhouse most joyfully returned to Philadelphia, soon after its abandonment by the hostile army; and there, once more, enjoyed the solace of a reunion with his wife and children; amidst whose tender embraces, and the mutual congratulations of his friends and fellow-citizens, especially of the returning exiles, he participated largely in those delightful sensations with which such an occasion, and such scenes, must have inspired a virtuous heart.
In Philadelphia, Mr. Rittenhouse resumed the discharge of his official functions, as treasurer of the state; an office, in the execution of which there were very numerous and complicated duties, arising out of the novel system of finance and paper-credit, pursued by both the general and state governments during the war: consequently, his attention to this business engrossed so much of his time, as to leave him little leisure for pursuits more congenial to his mind.
In a very short time after Mr. Rittenhouse’s return to Philadelphia he received a letter from Mr. Jefferson, congratulating him on that happy event: and expressing, in very forcible terms, the exalted sense that gentleman entertained of our Philosopher’s genius, talents, and usefulness. It indicates, also, the solicitude felt by its writer, lest the Orrery of Mr. Rittenhouse’s invention and construction, belonging to the College of Philadelphia, had been either removed or injured by the British forces, while they occupied that city. On this head, however, the apprehensions conceived by Mr. Jefferson proved to be groundless: for, not only was the Orrery not removed from its proper station; but, at the instance of the Rev. Dr. Smith, the provost of the College, the apartment in the College edifice which contained the invaluable machine, was closed up by order of Sir William Howe, to prevent its being injured; and no person was permitted to enter that apartment to view the Orrery, without the Provost’s consent; on which occasions he uniformly attended in person, with the keys kept in his possession. The means thus used, to secure from any injury property so inestimable to the friends of science, is a circumstance that certainly reflects much honour upon the parties by whom they were effected,—even though one of them was, at that time, necessarily viewed in the character of an “enemy.”
But, in order that the reader may be enabled to form his own judgment, on Mr. Jefferson’s estimate of genius, and concerning the rank and privileges to which the distinguished writer conceives men of great philosophical talents are entitled, the letter, just referred to, is now presented to him: it is as follows.
“Monticello in Albemarle, Virginia, July 19, 1778.
“Dear sir,
“I sincerely congratulate you on the recovery of Philadelphia, and wish it may be found uninjured by the enemy. How far the interests of literature may have suffered by the injury or removal of the Orrery (as it is miscalled), the public libraries, and your papers and implements, are doubts which still excite anxiety. We were much disappointed in Virginia generally, on the day of the great eclipse,[[194]] which proved to be cloudy in Williamsburg, where it was total. I understand, only the beginning was seen at this place, which is in Latitude 38° 8′ and Longitude West from Williamsburg, about 1° 45′ as is conjectured; eleven digits only were supposed to be covered. It was not seen at all till the moon had advanced nearly one-third over the sun’s disc. Afterwards, it was seen at intervals through the whole. The egress particularly was visible. It proved, however, of little use to me, for want of a time-piece that could be depended on; which circumstance together with the subsequent restoration of Philadelphia to you, has induced me to trouble you with this letter, to remind you of your kind promise of making me an accurate clock, which being intended for astronomical purposes only, I would have divested of all apparatus for striking, or for any other purpose, which by increasing its complication might disturb its accuracy. A companion to it, for keeping seconds, and which might be moved easily, would greatly add to its value. The theodolite, for which I spoke to you also, I can now dispense with, having since purchased a most excellent one.
“Writing to a Philosopher, I may hope to be pardoned for intruding some thoughts of my own, though they relate to him personally. Your time for two years past has, I believe, been principally employed in the civil government of your country. Though I have been aware of the authority our cause would acquire with the world from its being known that Yourself and Doctor Franklin were zealous friends to it, and am myself duly impressed with a sense of the arduousness of government, and the obligation those are under who are able to conduct it; yet I am also satisfied there is an order of geniuses above that obligation, and therefore exempted from it. Nobody can conceive that nature ever intended to throw away a Newton upon the occupations of a crown. It would have been a prodigality for which even the conduct of Providence might have been arraigned, had he been by birth annexed to what was so far below him. Co-operating with nature in her ordinary economy, we should dispose of and employ the geniuses of men according to their several orders and degrees. I doubt not there are in your country many persons equal to the task of conducting government: but you should consider that the world has but one Rittenhouse, and that it never had one before. The amazing mechanical representation of the solar system which you conceived and executed, has never been surpassed by any but the work of which it is a copy. Are those powers then, which, being intended for the erudition of the world, are, like air and light, the world’s common property, to be taken from their proper pursuit to do the common-place drudgery of governing a single state, a work which may be executed by men of an ordinary stature, such as are always and every where to be found? Without having ascended Mount Sinai for inspiration, I can pronounce that the precept, in the decalogue of the vulgar, that they shall not make to themselves the ‘likeness of any thing that is in the heavens above,’ is reversed for you, and that you will fulfil the highest purposes of your creation by employing yourself in the perpetual breach of that inhibition. For my own country in particular, you must remember something like a promise that it should be adorned with one of them. The taking of your city by the enemy has hitherto prevented the proposition from being made and approved by our legislature. The zeal of a true whig in science must excuse the hazarding these free thoughts, which flow from a desire of promoting the diffusion of knowledge and of your fame, and of one who can assure you truly that he is with much sincerity and esteem your most obedient and most humble servant.
Th. Jefferson.
“P. S. If you can spare as much time as to give me notice of the receipt of this, and what hope I may form of my Clock, it will oblige me. If sent to Fredericksburg, it will come safe to hand.”
In the commencement of the year 1779, our benevolent Philosopher had an opportunity of testifying the friendly interest he took in the prosperity of his brother-in-law the Rev. Mr. Barton, and his family. This gentleman was then, with Mrs. Barton,[[195]] in the city of New-York; to which they went towards the close of the year 1778, in pursuance of a permission granted for that purpose by the government of Pennsylvania, under certain conditions. All Mr. Barton’s children excepting the eldest, (the writer of these Memoirs), who was then abroad, remained in Pennsylvania; those in their minority, being six of the seven so remaining, having been previously placed under the charge of suitable persons. After a long absence of the eldest son from his native country, he returned to Pennsylvania the beginning of the year 1779. Immediately after his arrival at Lancaster, he received a letter from Mr. Rittenhouse, dated in Philadelphia, January 24th 1779, in which he says—“I most sincerely congratulate you on your safe arrival, and impatiently expect the pleasure of seeing you here. I received yours from Baltimore, ten days after the date, and immediately wrote to your father,[[196]] supposing him to be still at New-York;[[197]] though we cannot be certain as to that matter.” The Rev. Mr. Barton, on the 15th of February, acknowledged the receipt of his brother-in-law’s letter to him, which, although dated the 16th of January, did not reach him until the 13th of the succeeding month. In this answer, Mr. Barton says;—“To see, and to be united with my children, is my most earnest wish; but how that happy event is to be obtained, I know not: If my son should choose to come to Elizabeth-Town, perhaps I might be indulged with a flag, to have an interview with him there.”[[198]]