Part 44

Dr. Ramsay, who published his History of the American Revolution at the close of the year 1789, after observing that the policy of Great-Britain, in throwing the inhabitants of her ancient colonies on the American continent out of her protection, induced a necessity of establishing independent constitutions for themselves, makes these judicious remarks:—“The many errors that were at first committed by unexperienced statesmen, have been a practical comment on the folly of unbalanced constitutions and injudicious laws.”

-----

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: 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.

-----

Footnote 186:

The articles of confederation were not finally ratified by congress until the 9th of July, 1778. “After eleven years experience,” as Dr. Morse has observed, “being found inadequate to the purposes of a federal government,” the present constitution of the United States was formed at Philadelphia, in the summer of 1787, by that wise, liberal and patriotic assembly, in which the illustrious Washington presided.

-----

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. 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.

-----

Footnote 187:

“War never fails,” as Dr. Ramsay has justly observed, “to injure the morals of the people engaged in it. The American war in particular,” continues that historian, “had an unhappy influence of this kind. Being begun without funds or regular establishments, it could not be carried on without violating private rights; and in its progress, it involved a necessity for breaking solemn promises, and plighted public faith. The failure of national justice, which was in some degree unavoidable, increased the difficulties of performing private engagements, and weakened that sensibility to the obligations of public and private honour, which is a security for the punctual performance of contracts.”

This is a melancholy but faithful representation of some of the injurious impressions made on the moral sentiments and feelings of the people of this country, by the revolutionary war: evils inseparable from warfare; and such as necessarily spring from a state of things, alike destructive of social order and the refinements of society, as repugnant to the precepts of religion, the dictates of natural justice and the mild suggestions of benevolence.

-----

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; where he was busily employed in the duties of his office of treasurer of the state. 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.

-----

Footnote 188:

This large and thriving borough, said to be the greatest inland town in the United States, was, for a short time, (though very short, indeed,) the seat, or rather place of refuge, of the American congress; the members of which, having separated on the near approach of the British army, eight days before their occupation of the capital, re-assembled at Lancaster the 27th day of the same month. Lancaster, which is situated at the distance of sixty-four miles from Philadelphia, in a direction nearly west, was at first conceived to be a place of safety: but, for their more perfect security, congress convened, three days afterwards, at York in Pennsylvania, a considerable county-town about twenty-two miles westward from Lancaster, and from each of which places, the intervening great river Susquehanna is about equidistant.

Footnote 189:

His active mind derived much of its happiness from its continual employment. It appears, that, while engaged in the duties of his office, at Lancaster, in the latter part of the year 1777, he made the calculations for an Ephemeris, called “Father Abraham’s Pocket-Almanack, for the year M.DCC LXXVIII;” the late Mr. John Dunlap, the publisher, (who was, during many years, an eminent printer in Philadelphia,) having, in his advertisement of it, announced to the public, that “The Astronomical Calculations of this Almanack were composed by David Rittenhouse, A. M.” Mr. A. Ellicott made calculations for Pennsylvania and Maryland Almanacks, several years after Mr. Rittenhouse declined to continue them.

It is believed that our Astronomer made the calculations for “Father Abraham’s Almanack,” and probably some others, for several years: but mostly in the earlier part of his life. And, as it was no disparagement to the talents of a Franklin to publish “Poor Richard’s Almanack,” (which the Doctor long continued to print,) so it was none to the genius and abilities of a Rittenhouse, that he employed himself, occasionally, in making calculations of an useful nature for these Ephemerides.

Footnote 189a:

Not only the astronomical calculations of this once well-known and highly esteemed Ephemeris, but its poetry also, (which is said to have possessed a considerable share of merit,) were the productions of Jacob Taylor, Esq. an old English gentleman, who, for some time, executed the office of Surveyor-General of Pennsylvania. Franklin was the printer and publisher of this Ephemeris: but many of the productions of his pen, which appeared in it, and, among the rest, his “Way to Wealth,” contributed towards rendering it a very popular publication, of its kind. Franklin commenced the publication of “Poor Richard’s Almanack,” in the year 1732, when he was but twenty-six years of age.

-----

This separation of Mr. Rittenhouse from his wife and children—attended too, as it was, by the most 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.

-----

Footnote 190: