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, 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.
-----
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]
-----
Footnote 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.
-----
“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.
-----
Footnote 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.
Footnote 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.
Footnote 80:
The county-town of Berks, in Pennsylvania, pleasantly situated on the
Schuylkill, about fifty-six miles, north-westward, from Philadelphia.
-----
“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.”
-----
Footnote 81:
A neighbouring township to Norriton, the place of Mr. Rittenhouse’s
country residence.
-----
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.
-----
Footnote 82:
This farm contained about one hundred and fifty acres. It was lately
sold by the heirs of Dr. Rittenhouse.
-----
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.
-----
Footnote 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.
-----
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]
-----
Footnote 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.
-----
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.
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.
-----
Footnote 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.”
Footnote 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.
Footnote 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.”
Footnote 85c:
“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.
-----
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.”
-----
Footnote 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, 5000_l._, if it determine the longitude to one degree or
sixty geographical miles,—7500_l._, if to forty miles,—and 10,000_l._,
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 5000_l._; 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 3000_l._
sterling, by an act of the British parliament, in consideration of
their great usefulness in finding the longitude at sea.
Footnote 87:
See Mr. de Zach’s great work, entitled, _Tabulæ Motuum Solis novæ et
correctæ_, &c.
Footnote 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.”
Footnote 88a:
Here is a reference, in the text, to note 89.
Footnote 88b:
Here is a reference, in the text, to note 90.
Footnote 88c:
Here is a reference, in the text, to note 91.
Footnote 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.
Footnote 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 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.
Footnote 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.
-----
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]
-----
Footnote 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.”
Footnote 92a:
His baptismal name was _John Truchet_.
-----
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 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.
-----
Footnote 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, 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 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.
Footnote 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.
Footnote 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.
-----
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 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.
-----
Footnote 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.
Footnote 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.”
Footnote 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.
Footnote 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 5^h 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.
Footnote 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.
Footnote 99:
See a description of this Chronometer, in the Appendix.
-----
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.”
-----
Footnote 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.
-----
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, 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]
-----
Footnote 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.”—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 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.”
-----
“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?”
Footnote 102:
-----
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.”
-----
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 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]
-----
Footnote 103:
This was about the year 1764.
Footnote 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.
Footnote 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.”
-----
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.”
-----
Footnote 106:
The Rev. Ebenezer Kinnersley, A. M. Professor of 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.
-----
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.
-----
Footnote 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.]
-----
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.
-----
Footnote 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.]
-----
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,” he adds, “happen so seldom, that there
cannot be more than two in one century, and in some centuries none at
all.”
-----
Footnote 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.]
Footnote 110:
Jeremiah Horrox and William Crabtree, two Englishmen, were the
observers of the Transit of Venus of 1639.
-----
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]
-----
Footnote 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.
-----
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.”
-----
Footnote 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.”
Footnote 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 400_l._ and praying
assistance to discharge that debt.
Footnote 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.
-----
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.
-----
Footnote 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.”
-----
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.
-----
Footnote 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.
-----
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]
-----
Footnote 117:
For some of the reasons which induced the writer to describe the
instruments used on that occasion, see Note 125.
-----
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]
-----
Footnote 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. 5^h 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.
-----
_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.