Chapter III: Part 3

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.

-----

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.

-----

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

-----

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.

-----

Footnote 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.

-----

Coeval with that sovereign, 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.

-----

Footnote 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.

Footnote 52:

He died in 1294, at the age of eighty years.

-----

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.

-----

Footnote 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.”

-----

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;” 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]

-----

Footnote 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.”

-----

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.

-----

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.”

Footnote 57:

See the preceding note.

Footnote 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.

-----

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.

-----

Footnote 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

Footnote 59a:

The number of Newspapers, printed annually in the United States, is
estimated at twenty-two and an half millions.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

-----

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.

-----

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 63b:

See Note 64

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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. 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.

-----

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]

-----

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

-----

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]

-----

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.”

-----

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]

-----

Footnote 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.

Footnote 71a:

Thomson’s Spring.

-----

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.

-----

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

-----

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.