“DR. RITTENHOUSE, Pres. of the Am. Phil. Society.”
-----
Footnote 285:
The Right Hon. David Stewart Erskine, is the present Earl.
Footnote 286:
John Napier, called Baron of Merchiston, in Scotland, was the eldest
son of Sir Archibald Napier, of Merchiston, and was born in the year
1550. As Lalande, in his _Astronomie_, observes—“he deserves to be
celebrated in a book on Astronomy, for his invention of Logarithms,
which he published in 1614. He had,” continues Mr. Lalande, “at first
concealed the principle of this discovery: but Kepler soon penetrated
it; and the son of Napier, in an edition of his father’s work, which
he published, explained the ground of the principles.”
The son here mentioned, Sir Archibald, was promoted to the peerage by
Car. I. in the year 1657, and was ancestor of the present Lord Napier.
An account of the Life and Writings of the Inventor of Logarithms was
published by the Earl of Buchan. W. B.
Footnote 287:
See this Postscript, in the Appendix.
-----
This really “interesting piece of furniture” was viewed by Dr.
Rittenhouse and the Philosophical Society, in the light it was intended
to be,—as a mark of the Donor’s good-will towards this institution, and
of his respect for the character of its President. The Box has been
disposed of, agreeably to his Lordship’s desire: it is inserted in the
list of Donations to the Society, prefixed to the fourth volume of their
Transactions, under the date of May 15, 1795, and it is, at present,
deposited in their Hall.
The friendship that subsisted between Dr. Rittenhouse and Mr. Jefferson,
was produced, in a great measure, by the congeniality of these gentlemen
in the concerns of science. The correct and penetrating mind of the
former knew how to estimate at their just value, without over-rating
them, the literary and scientific acquirements of the latter; while, on
the other hand, this last was fully capable of discerning the sublime
genius and most extraordinary talents of that man whom he greatly
admired. While Mr. Jefferson resided in Philadelphia, as secretary of
State, he made frequent visits to Dr. Rittenhouse: he thus became
intimately acquainted with his character, for which he conceived the
highest respect; and, as a mark of his esteem for him, he presented him
with his own bust, in the costume of the day, cast in plaster, from one
in marble executed by Houdon, of Paris.
Mr. Jefferson has testified to the world the exalted opinion he
entertained of our Philosopher. In his refutation of the Count de
Buffon’s preposterous theory, “of the tendency of nature to _belittle_
her productions on this side the Atlantic,” he makes the following
remarks, on the assertion of another French philosopher[288]—that
America has not produced “one able mathematician, one man of genius in a
single art or a single science:”—“In war,” says Mr. Jefferson, “we have
produced a WASHINGTON, whose memory will be adored while liberty shall
have votaries, whose name will triumph over time, and will in future
ages assume its just station among the most celebrated worthies of the
world: when that wretched philosophy shall be forgotten, which would
have arranged him among the degeneracies of nature. In physics,“
continues Mr. Jefferson, “we have produced a FRANKLIN, than whom no one
of the present age has made more important discoveries, nor has enriched
philosophy with more, or more ingenious solutions of the phænomena of
nature.—We have supposed Mr. RITTENHOUSE second to no astronomer living:
that in genius, he must be the first, because he is self-taught. As an
artist he has exhibited as great a proof of mechanical genius, as the
world has ever produced. He has not indeed made a world; but he has by
imitation approached nearer its Maker, than any man who has lived from
the creation to this day.”[289]
-----
Footnote 288:
The Abbé Raynal. The Count de Buffon had conceived an opinion, which
he endeavoured to establish by ill-founded arguments, that the animals
common both to the Old and the New World, are smaller in the latter:
that those peculiar to the New World, are on a smaller scale: that
those which have been domesticated in both hemispheres, have
degenerated in America: and, that, on the whole, this portion of the
world exhibits fewer species. But Raynal went further: he has applied
this “new theory” (as Mr. Jefferson calls it) of the ingenious French
Naturist, to the race of men, descendants of Europeans, in America.
Mr. Jefferson has shewn the erroneousness of these theories, founded
on palpably mistaken facts.
Footnote 289:
See Jefferson’s _Notes on Virginia_, written in the year 1781.
-----
Mr. Jefferson retained the highest esteem for Dr. Rittenhouse, during
his life; and it is believed this sentiment was mutual. Letters of
friendship were occasionally interchanged by them: part of one of the
latest of these, is as follows:
“_Monticello, Feb. 24, 1795._
“Dear Sir,
....[290]
“I am here immersed in the concerns of a farmer, and more interested
and engrossed by them, than I had ever conceived it possible. They in
a great degree render me indifferent to my books, so that I read
little and ride much; and I regret greatly the time I have suffered
myself to waste from home. To this, indeed, is added another kind of
regret, for the loss of society with the worthy characters with which
I became acquainted, in the course of my wanderings from home. If I
had but Fortunatus’s wishing cap, to seat myself sometimes by your
fireside, and to pay a visit to Dr. Priestly, I would be contented:
his writings evince, that he must be a fund of instruction, in
conversation, and his character an object of attachment and
veneration.
“Be so good as to present my best respects to Mrs. Rittenhouse; and to
accept, yourself, assurances of the high esteem of, dear sir, your
sincere friend and humble servant,
“TH. JEFFERSON.
“DAVID RITTENHOUSE.”
-----
Footnote 290:
A considerable portion of this letter, in the beginning, is occupied
with matters of business.
-----
At this time, Dr. Rittenhouse still held the Directorship of the Mint,
though he resigned it a few months after; and from that period, his
health being then much on the decline, he seemed to be desirous of
passing the remainder of his days in tranquillity, and an abstraction
from all business and severe studies, in the society of his family and
a few particular friends. He now received numerous proofs of the
affectionate respect and high consideration, in which his person and
character were held; both among his own countrymen and in foreign
nations. Many of his fellow-citizens were assiduous in their
attentions to him: they frequently visited him; and, when he was
suffering in his health, he experienced repeated acts of friendship
and kindness:—President Washington often made calls upon him, and
enquiries concerning his health; and among his other friends, the late
Mr. Henry Hill and Mr. Robert Morris manifested towards him the
kindest attentions.
In the spring of the year 1795, our amiable Philosopher was admitted a
member of the Royal Society of London. He was apprized of this new mark
of distinction conferred on him, by the following note, addressed to him
by Phineas Bond, Esq. late the British Consul, resident in Philadelphia.
“_Chesnut Street, 15th June, 1795._
“Mr. Bond has the honour to inform Mr. Rittenhouse, that he has
received a letter from his friend Mr. George Chalmers, of the office
of the Lords of the Committee of Council for Trade, &c. at White-hall,
in which he requests him to apprize Mr. R. of his election as a Fellow
of the Royal Society of London, which took place on the 23d of April.
“Mr. B. begs leave to congratulate Mr. R. on this new honour, to which
his merits, as a Philosopher, so eminently entitle him.
“DAVID RITTENHOUSE, ESQ.”
It was not until towards the close of the summer, that Dr. Rittenhouse
received the certificate of his Fellowship, in the Royal Society. His
Diploma, for this honour, bears date the 16th of April, 1795;[291] and
was accompanied by the following letter:
“Sir,
“Having the honour to transmit to you the Diploma of your election
into the Royal Society, as a foreign Member, I beg leave to
congratulate you on this proof of the high esteem in which you are
held by that illustrious body. I have the honour to be, with the
greatest respect, Sir, your most obedient and very humble servant.
“CHARLES PETER LAYARD.
“R. Society’s Apartments, Somerset Place,
“London, July 3d, 1795.”
The Royal Society of London has dealt out the honour of Fellowship with
a sparing hand, to foreigners; and very few Americans have been admitted
into that body, at any time: the Writer does not recollect any others
than Dr. Franklin, Dr. Johnson, formerly of Connecticut, and the late
Dr. Morgan and Mr. John Bartram, of Philadelphia, who were Fellows of
the Royal Society before the American revolution; and since that period,
he believes Dr. Rittenhouse to have been one of but two or three native
Americans who have borne that mark of distinction.
-----
Footnote 291:
Mr. Bond must have been mistaken, in the date he has assigned to the
election of Dr. Rittenhouse; or, perhaps, the date of the diploma has
reference to the time of nomination: the variance in these dates is,
however, unimportant.
The diploma, which is in Latin, being done on copper-plate, is in the
usual form. It has the signatures of eight of the Fellows of the
Society, besides those of the President and one of the
Vice-Presidents.
-----
Soon after Dr. Rittenhouse became associated with that illustrious band
of scientific men, a letter was written to him by Mr. Lalande, the
celebrated Astronomer of France; of which the following translation is
given in this place, as it will be perused with interest by the reader
versed in astronomy.
“_Paris, at the College of France, May 14th, 1795._
“It is a long time, my dear Associate, since I have heard from you:
but Mr. Adet, our worthy ambassador, will probably procure for me that
satisfaction. You will see by the little history which I send you,
that the troubles of the revolution have not impaired my labours; and
that I have, now, twenty-seven thousand stars, observed.
“I have seen with great pleasure, in the transactions of your
Philosophical Society, the annular eclipse of 1791:[292] I have
calculated the conjunction 7^h 42′ 19″; but I have been obliged to
take one minute from the phases of the ring, and to suppose {6^h 49′
30″} / {6^h 53′ 47″}, in order to agree, either with your end of the
eclipse, or the difference of meridians, already known with sufficient
accuracy by the transit of Venus, which gives 9^h 10′ 6″; and your
eclipse gives, 9^h 10′ 3″, or 5^h 0′ 43″ in relation to Greenwich.
“What has given me still greater pleasure, is, that the duration of
the ring, as you observed it, agrees very well with the diameters of
the Sun and of the Moon, which T have adopted in the third edition of
my _Astronomy_ (1792), and the diminutions that I there propose for
eclipses; viz. 3″½ to be taken from the diameter of the Sun, and 2″
from that of the Moon.[293]
“I pray you to make many compliments for me, to the astronomers whom I
know, in your country, Mr. Willard at Beverley and Mr. Williams at
Cambridge: Is there any other astronomer, now, who applies himself
seriously to astronomy? I greet you with health and brotherhood.
“LALANDE.
“Professor of Astronomy, and Inspector of the
College of France,[294] Cambray Place.“
-----
Footnote 292:
The continuation of the 6th volume of the American Philosophical
Transactions (published in 1809) contains various observations on the
Annular Eclipse of the 3d of April, 1791, made at Greenwich, Paris,
Cambridge in New-England, Philadelphia, and George-Town in Maryland. A
recapitulation of the results of the longitudes of Philadelphia and
Cambridge, west from Paris, is made from the Transit of Venus, in
1769; the Transits of Mercury, in 1782 and 1789; this Annular Eclipse
of the Sun, in 1791, and a Solar Eclipse, in 1806; the mean results of
which, give
The Long. of Philadelphia, W. from Paris, 5^h 10′. 01″,2
Do. of Cambridge, Do. 4. 53. 53
These observations were communicated to the Philosophical Society by
Don Joseph J. Ferrer, of Cadiz, a very respectable astronomer, and a
foreign member of the Am. Philos. Society.
Footnote 293:
In the annular eclipse of the sun, on the 3d of April, 1791, as
observed at Philadelphia by Mr. Rittenhouse, the formation of the ring
is stated at 6^h 46′ 11½″ A. M. true time; and its rupture, at 6^h 50′
28″. “I have,” says Mr. Lalande (in his _Additions_, 1797,) “reduced
the conjunction of it to 7^h 41′ 19″, and the difference of meridians
5^h 10′ 3″, greater by 7″ than that given by Mr. Rittenhouse. This
duration of the ring, gives for the latitude in conjunction 44′ 57″,
which confirms the value of the diameters of the sun and of the moon,
that I have given in the 3d edition of my _Astronomy_, and the
diminution that I make in the eclipses, 3½″ for the ray of the sun,
and 2″ for that of the moon. I have subtracted one minute of the time
marked in the third volume of the Transactions of the Society of
Philadelphia, for the formation and the rupture of the ring; but this
correction was pointed out to me by the termination of the eclipse, as
well as by the difference of meridians, which was ascertained by the
Transit of Venus over the Sun.”
Footnote 294:
Mr. Lalande was first appointed to that station, in the year 1761.
“The College of France,” heretofore styled “The Royal College of
France,” was originally founded in the year 1530, by Francis I. but
letters patent were issued in favour of it in 1772, by the unfortunate
Louis XVI. The present edifice, finished in 1775, gave new activity to
the ancient establishment; and Lalande viewed it, when he wrote his
_Astronomie_, as having been one of the best schools in the world for
the sciences, but principally for astronomy.
-----
The mind of Dr. Rittenhouse, ever intent on doing, good, was always
zealously engaged on occasions which afforded him opportunities of
contributing to the rewards of merit and the promotion of beneficial
establishments, or useful undertakings of any kind.
Such an occasion presented itself, at the close of the year 1795. His
nephew Dr. B. S. Barton, to whom he was attached by the strongest ties
of friendship, then held the Professorship of Botany and Natural History
in the University of Pennsylvania: but a vacancy being at that time
expected in the chair of the Materia Medica, which branch of medicine
was then taught by Dr. Samuel Powell Griffitts, Dr. Rittenhouse exerted
himself to obtain that appointment for his nephew; upon whom it was
conferred soon after, in conjunction with the chair he already occupied.
With a view to the gratification of his anxious wishes, in the
attainment of this object, Dr. Rittenhouse addressed himself personally
to some of his colleagues in the board of trustees of the University:
and to Dr. M‘Kean, president of that board, he wrote the following
letter[295] on the subject.
-----
Footnote 295:
The original letter was politely presented to the author, by his
venerable friend, the profound Lawyer and distinguished Patriot to
whom it was addressed. On that occasion, Governor M‘Kean expressed
himself in terms of the highest respect and kindest regard for the
memory of Dr. Rittenhouse, as one of his friends, whom, while living,
he greatly valued for his talents and esteemed for his virtues.
-----
“_Philadelphia, Dec. 26th, 1795._
“Dear Sir,
“I am informed that Dr. Griffitts intends to resign his
Professorship in the University, sometime this winter. On this
occasion, I beg leave to recommend to your favourable notice my
nephew, Dr. Barton. He certainly has abilities sufficient to enable
him to be useful in any branch of medicine, and ambition enough to
induce him to make the greatest exertions: Besides, the Materia Medica
seems so nearly connected with Botany and Natural History, his
favourite studies, that I flatter myself he will be successful in his
intended application to the honourable Board of Trustees; yet I am
certain this will much depend on your interest. I am, Dear Sir, with
the sincerest affection and esteem, your most obedient Servant,
“DAVID RITTENHOUSE.[296]
(Superscribed.)
“Hon. Thomas M‘Kean, LL. D.
Chief Justice of Pennsylvania.”
-----
Footnote 296:
Dr. Rush has observed, in his _Eulogium_ on Rittenhouse, that “There
was no affectation of singularity in any thing he said or did. Even
his hand-writing,” said he, “in which this weakness so frequently
discovers itself, was simple and intelligible at first sight, to all
who saw it.” As a specimen of this, a _fac simile_ of the letter in
the text is presented to the reader.
-----
[Illustration: letter]
The affectionate regard and high respect which Professor Barton
uniformly cherished for the person and character of this worthy
relative,—who, on all occasions, evinced himself to be his sincere
friend,—cannot be better manifested, than by citing his own words. In
his dedication to Dr. Rittenhouse, of a dessertation, entitled, _A
Memoir concerning the fascinating faculty which has been ascribed to the
Rattle-Snake and other American Serpents_, is this passage—“In
inscribing this Memoir to you, dear sir, I follow the regular course of
my feelings, which, when I have received acts of friendship or kindness,
ever lead me to acknowledge them. Whilst your example early implanted in
me an ardent love of science, the assistance which you afforded me, by
removing many of the obstacles that have opposed my advancement in life,
has enabled me to devote a portion of my time to the cultivation of
science; and thereby to increase the quantity of my happiness:” This was
written just four months before the decease of our Philosopher. And in a
subsequent inscription by the same gentleman,—that of his _New Views of
the Origin of the Tribes and Nations of America_,—dedicated to Mr.
Jefferson, and dated about a year after that event, he says: “The only
dedications I ever wrote, were to two persons[297] whom I greatly
esteemed and loved; the last, to a common friend, whose virtues and
science endeared him to his country, and whose removal from us, we shall
long have reason to deplore.”
-----
Footnote 297:
The first of these, in the order of time, was his eldest brother, the
writer of these memoirs; the other was his uncle, Dr. Rittenhouse.
-----
Soon after Dr. Priestley’s arrival in Pennsylvania, our Philosopher
became personally acquainted with him, and presently conceived for his
fellow-labourer in science a sincere esteem. This was reciprocal; and,
therefore, while the celebrated English philosopher remained in
Philadelphia, and also when he occasionally visited that city after his
removal to the town of Northumberland on the Susquehanna, he passed much
of his time in Dr. Rittenhouse’s family. So far as the pursuits of these
gentlemen, in matters of science, were congenial—for, in some respects
they were very dissimilar,—their opinions appeared to harmonize with
each other: but, how far their sentiments accorded on other subjects, or
whether at all, the Writer cannot undertake to pronounce; not possessing
the necessary means to enable him to do so with a sufficient degree of
certainty. Dr. Rittenhouse’s intercourse with Dr. Priestley, either
personal or epistolary, was, however, of short duration; being
terminated by the death of the former, in little more than two years
after the latter first came to Philadelphia. One of the last interviews
which Dr. Rittenhouse had with his friend Priestley, was very shortly
before our philosopher’s death: he was one of a select few whom the
writer had the pleasure of meeting at Dr. Rittenhouse’s, to dine, on the
18th of March, 1796.
That learned and eminent foreigner,—for Dr. Priestley never became a
naturalized citizen of the United States,—died at Northumberland in
Pennsylvania, at an advanced age, on the 6th day of February 1804.
The scanty remnant of life that yet remained to the great American
Astronomer and Mathematician, was neither uselessly, nor altogether
unpleasantly employed. In this interval of time, short as it was, such
portions of it as afforded him some respite from sickness and pain, were
either devoted to the society of his family and friends, or occupied in
study. From these sources of rational enjoyment, be derived much
comfort; and the solace he drew from them, was greatly heightened by the
endearing attentions, which, amidst the rapid decline of his health and
strength, he experienced, in an eminent degree, in the bosom of his
affectionate family and some surrounding relatives. He was fully
sensible of the approaching crisis of his disease; and he appeared to be
quite prepared to meet the awful stroke, with the fortitude which a
retrospective view of a well-spent life would naturally inspire; as well
as with the resignation, which an entire confidence in the goodness, the
wisdom, and the mercy of his omnipotent Creator, taught him to be a
duty. His elevated conceptions of the Deity, together with his decided
belief of the immortality of the soul, according at the same time with
the doctrines of a pure religion, animated him with the stedfast hope of
an happy futurity, worthy of a Christian and a Philosopher. His intimate
knowledge of the sublimest works of creation, rendered him highly
sensible of the wisdom and power of the Great Supreme; while that
knowledge, aided by the lights furnished by the Christian dispensation,
led him to ascribe suitable attributes to the Author of Nature,—a Being
infinitely good, as well as perfect: for, as he once familiarly
expressed himself,[298] he was “firmly persuaded, that we are not at the
disposal of a Being, who has the least tincture of ill-nature, or
requires any in us.”[299]
-----
Footnote 298:
In a letter written to the Rev. Mr. Barton, in Sept. 1755, when the
writer was little more than twenty-three years of age.
Footnote 299:
The extract from a letter to one of his friends, which Dr. Rush has
quoted in his _Eulogium_ on Rittenhouse, furnishes additional
testimony, if, indeed, any were wanting, of the exalted sense of
Divine Goodness, that was entertained by our pious philosopher: “Give
me leave,” says he, “to mention two or three proofs of infinite
Goodness, in the works of Creation. The first is, possessing goodness
in ourselves. Now it is inconsistent with all just reasoning to
suppose, that there is any thing good, lovely or praiseworthy, in us,
which is not possessed in an infinitely higher degree by that Being
who first called us into existence. In the next place, I reckon the
exquisite and innocent delight, that many things around us are
calculated to afford us. In this light, the beauty and fragrance of a
single rose is a better argument for Divine Goodness, than a luxuriant
field of wheat. For, if we can suppose that we were created by a
malevolent Being, with a design to torment us for his amusement, he
must have furnished us with the means of subsistence, and either have
made our condition tolerable, or not have left the means of quitting
it at pleasure, in our own power. Such being my opinions, you will not
wonder at my fondness for what Mr. Addison calls _The Pleasures of
Imagination_: they are all, to me, so many demonstrations of Infinite
Goodness.”
That such were also the sentiments of one of the greatest philosophers
of the seventeenth century, a man alike celebrated as a profound
Mathematician, and a learned and pious Divine, is apparent from the
following passage, in the first of Dr. Barrow’s two _Discourses on the
Goodness of God_.
“Every pleasant object we view, every sweet and savoury morsel we
taste, every fragrancy we smell, every harmony we hear; the wholesome,
the cheering, the useful, yea, the innocent and inoffensive qualities
of every thing we do use and enjoy,” said this excellent person, “are
so many conspicuous arguments of Divine Goodness.”
-----
It is an observation of a judicious biographer,[A] that “nothing can
awaken the attention, nothing affect the heart of man, more strongly,
than the behaviour of eminent personages in their last moments; in that
only scene of life where we are all sure, later or sooner, to resemble
them.” The writer of these Memoirs feels a sort of pensive
gratification, in having it in his power to announce the manner in which
the great American Astronomer deported himself, during the closing scene
of his life: The following information on this head, was communicated by
the writer’s brother, Professor Barton, the deceased’s nephew and
friend,—for some years, also, his family-physician; and who, in his
medical capacity, attended him in the whole of his last illness.
-----
Footnote A:
Mr. Mallet, in his Life of Lord Chancellor Bacon.
-----
---
“The last visit I ever received from Mr. Rittenhouse was about the
middle of June, 1796. He called at my humble habitation in Fifth street,
to inquire about my health, and to learn from me the result of the
experiments and inquiries in which he knew I was, at this time engaged,
concerning the mode of generation and gestation of our opossum, an
animal to whose economy and manners he had himself paid some attention,
and whose history he justly considered one of the most interesting in
the whole range of zoology.
“It was on this occasion, that our excellent friend first informed me,
that he had received a diploma from the Royal Society. He observed, with
a tone of voice and with a certain expression of countenance, which were
not calculated to afford me any pleasure, “that a few years ago, such a
mark of respect from that illustrious body would have been received by
him with pleasure and with pride.”
“In fact, Mr. Rittenhouse, now and for some months past, was strongly
impressed with the idea, that his career of usefulness and virtue was
nearly at an end. He had several times, during the preceding part of the
spring and summer, intimated to me (and doubtless to others of his
friends) his impressions on this head. In what precise condition of his
system, whether physical or intellectual, these impressions were
founded, I have only been able to form a distant, and unsatisfactory
conjecture.
“A few days after this interview, viz. on the 22d of June, I was sent
for to visit Mr. Rittenhouse. I found him in his garden, where he loved
to walk, and soon learned that he laboured under a severe attack of
cholera, accompanied, however, with more fever than we generally find
with this disease; and with a great increase of that violent pain and
sense of oppression at the region of his stomach, to which he had been
subject for at least thirty years. Notwithstanding his age, the debility
of his system, and the unfavourable state of the season, I ventured to
flatter myself, that the attack would not prove mortal. On the following
day, however, finding him no better, but rather worse, I requested
permission to call in the aid of another physician; and having mentioned
the name of Dr. Adam Kuhn, that gentleman accordingly visited our
friend, in company with me, during the remainder of his illness.
His febrile symptoms being very urgent, it was thought necessary to
bleed our patient; and notwithstanding his great and habitual repugnance
to the practice on former occasions, he now readily consented to the
operation, on condition that I would perform it myself. The blood which
was drawn, exhibited a pretty strong inflammatory crust; and the
operation seemed to give him a temporary relief from his pain. Soon
after this, his strength gradually declined; and on the third day of his
illness, it was but too obvious, that our illustrious relative was soon
to be separated from his friends. He expired without a struggle, and in
the calmest manner, ten minutes before two o’clock on the morning of
Sunday the 26th, in the presence of his youngest daughter, Mrs. Waters,
and myself. His excellent wife, who had ever been assiduous in her
attention on her husband, both in sickness and in health, had retired
from his chamber about two hours before, unable to support the awful
scene of expiring genius and virtue.
“There can be no doubt, I think, that Mr. Rittenhouse, from the first
invasion of his disease, or at least from the day when he was confined
to his bed or room, entertained but little hopes of his recovery. He
signed his will in my presence. He discovered no more solicitude about
his situation, than it is decorous and proper in every good or great man
to feel, when in a similar situation. During the greater part of his
illness, he manifested the most happy temperament of mind: and it was
only in the last hour or two of his life, that his powerful intellects
were disturbed by a mild delirium. About eight hours before he died, the
pain in the region of his stomach being unusually severe, a poultice
composed of meal and laudanum was applied to the part. In less than two
hours after the application, I called to see him, and upon asking him if
he did not feel easier, he calmly answered, in these memorable words,
which it is impossible for me to forget,—for they were the last he ever
distinctly uttered, and they make us acquainted with the two most
important features in his religious creed,—“Yes, you have made the way
to God easier!”
“Such were the dying words, as it were, of our illustrious relative and
friend. He was dear to us both, to all his relatives and friends; and to
his country. To me, let me add, he was _peculiarly_ dear. The most happy
and profitable hours of my life were passed in the society of this
virtuous man. I followed his foot-steps in the wilderness of our
country, where he was the first to carry the telescope, and to mark the
motions and positions of the planets. In the bosom of his family, I
listened to his lessons, as an humble disciple of Socrates, or Plato.
Science mixed with virtue was ever inculcated from his lips.—But to me,
Mr. Rittenhouse was more than a friend and preceptor. He was a father
and supporter. He laid the foundation of what little prosperity in life
I now, or may in future, enjoy: and if it shall ever be my fortune,
either by my labours or my zeal, to advance the progress of science, or
to reflect any honour upon my country, I should be the most ungrateful
of men, if I did not acknowledge, and wish it to be known, that it was
DAVID RITTENHOUSE who enabled me to be useful.”
---
Such was the death of DAVID RITTENHOUSE,—soon after his entrance into
the sixty-fifth year of his age:—“Thus, with a heart overflowing with
love to his family, friends, country, and to the whole world, he
peacefully resigned his spirit into the hands of his God.”[300] Thus did
his immortal soul gently pass away, from this transitory but variegated
scene; from a theatre of mingled afflictions and comforts, of privations
and enjoyments, of absolute certainty with respect to the
non-continuance of this state, and of equal incertitude as to our
possible knowledge of the term of its duration:—And it is most
confidently believed, that his departed spirit, while yet hovering on
the confines of time, devoutly relied on being “promoted to a more
exalted rank among the creatures of God.”[301]
-----
Footnote 300:
Rush’s Eulog. on Ritt.
Footnote 301:
Ibid.
-----
THE CONCLUSION:
COMPREHENDING
A RETROSPECT OF THE LIFE
OF
DAVID RITTENHOUSE,