Philadelphia. The view of the city, Fort McHenry, the light-house on
North Point, and of the Chesapeake Bay, with its numerous vessels
spreading their canvas to the winds just as the sun was sinking below
the horizon, was animating and enlivening, majestic and sublime. From
the prow of the vessel, I contemplated this interesting scene as long as
the light enabled me to enjoy its beauties. Soon after dusk a pealing
bell summoned us to the supper table, where we were surprised to find a
sumptuous repast spread out. We had not anticipated such variety or
delicacy of food. After partaking of the good cheer, we drew lots for
our berths. I was unlucky--my berth was so warm, not to say hot and
stuffy, that before I could get any sleep our arrival at French town was
announced. Turning out at 12 o'clock at night, but with no regrets, we
shortly after continued our journey, and at 3 o'clock in the morning,
found ourselves at New Castle. Here we re-shipped in a steamboat without
berths. This I did not regret after my recent experience of them, and
Benjamin and myself essayed to secure a half-hour's sleep stretched upon
two pine benches. How long we might have courted sleep on these hard and
narrow couches, I know not. We were not left to make the experiment any
length of time, but were shortly roused up by the bustle among the
seamen and passengers preparatory to landing at Philadelphia. The
breakfast table, when we entered the so-called saloon, was smoking with
coffee and steak, and about the time we had paid our respects to both,
the boat was at Chestnut street wharf. Landing here we proceeded
immediately to Campbell's, and it was a glad surprise to find him astir,
thanks to the business habits of the city of brotherly love.
Under his guidance, after another cup of coffee and a hot roll, we
proceeded to attend to the numerous commissions with which we were
charged. This occupied us something over four hours, when we bade our
friends adieu and went aboard the New York steamer. About 6 o'clock p.
m. we reached Princeton, where I spent four of the happiest years of my
youth, and which I had not seen since taking my degree in 1797. The
stages were running with such rapidity, however, that it was impossible
to call, as I wished, upon my old friends, Dr. Alexander and Prof.
Comfort, or deliver the letter for Miss Waddell, but I chanced to meet
a young gentleman of my acquaintance from Washington, who stopped at
Princeton, by whom I sent it to her.
I shall make it a point to stay over a day at Princeton on my return. In
due time we arrived here. Benjamin is perfectly well, does not regard
either the fatigues or loss of sleep, but I am worse for the wear and
tear. And I would not advise those to take the trip whose only business
is pleasure.
On yesterday I dined with Mr. Gallagher, where I met Mr. Reid, who, you
may remember, preached some time since at the Presbytery in Staunton. He
is to preach in New York to-day, and I hope to hear him. He is highly
esteemed here as a preacher and man. In the evening I took tea with Mrs.
Murray, mother of my brother Rowze's wife, where all the family were
collected round me making enquiries after their relatives and friends in
Virginia. For the most part I was unable to gratify their curiosity,
having recently neither seen nor heard of the kith and kin in Richmond
or the Northern Neck.
At 10 o'clock tomorrow I shall set out for West Point with Gen. Huston,
of Tennessee, to whom I was introduced on yesterday by Gen. Scott. [Gen.
Winfield Scott.] I requested Miss Heiskell of Philadelphia, to execute
Jane and Lynn's commissions, which she promised to do against my return.
Give my love to all the family,
Yours affectionately, though in much haste,
JOHN H. PEYTON.
ANECDOTE OF JOHN H. PEYTON IN A CRIMINAL CASE.
Shortly after his eldest son, William, entered upon the practice of law
in 1823, when attending court at the Warm Springs, Bath Co., he
mortified his father, John Howe Peyton, exceedingly by a piece of
off-hand levity, which the latter regarded as a most undignified
proceeding, unworthy of the profession. Young Wm. Peyton was employed to
defend a man charged with horse stealing, and as there was only
circumstantial evidence to prove his guilt, W. M. Peyton, who was much
exhilarated, for it must be remembered that the case came on after
dinner, set up the defence that according to the principles of science,
and of a new science likely to prove both useful and ornamental, it was
impossible his client could be guilty. He then referred to and explained
the theories of Gall and Spurzheim, and declared that according to the
phrenological bumps on the head of his client, theft was a crime he was
incapable of committing. He argued with much gravity and ingenuity in
this direction, amidst the suppressed giggling of the bar, to the great
chagrin of his father, who was the public prosecutor, and to the
thorough mystification of the county court. This body was composed of
country gentlemen unacquainted with law, and it was one of their boasts
that they made up their decisions, not so much in accordance with the
principles of common law, as of common sense. W. M. Peyton went on, and
drawing from his desk a copy of Combe's phrenology, illustrated it with
plates, exhibited it to the jury, and declared that at the point on the
pericranium of his client, where there should be a protuberance if he
were capable of robbery, there was not the slightest development, and
asked, what is the value of science, if we discard its teachings? He
then made an animated and eloquent appeal to the feelings of the jury,
based upon the humane principle of the common law, that it is better
that ninety-nine guilty men should escape than that one innocent person
should suffer, and declaring his conviction of the prisoner's innocence,
asked them to give him the benefit of every doubt and lean to the side
of mercy.
His father, in reply, commented severely upon the airiness of his son,
as inconsistent with the administration of justice and the dignity of
the profession. He ridiculed Gall and Spurzheim's far-fetched theories,
which he declared were not scientific deductions, but only speculative
opinions, and brought the whole defence into contempt, by referring to
the human skeleton, saying, "If you run your eye down the spine it
alights upon the _oscoccygis_." Neither the court nor the jury
understanding what these words meant, but overcome by the ludicrous
manner of Mr. Peyton, both burst into a hearty laugh. "Now," he
continued, "this oscoccygis is nothing more nor less than a rudimentary
tail, as Lord Monbeddo has well said, and I suppose we shall have some
modern philosopher startling the world again with the proposition that
man once flourished a tail, but of which the civilized use of a chair
has, in process of time, deprived him." He continued, somewhat in this
style, "I say nothing against philosophers nor tails, both are useful in
their way. What would a cow do without her tail, especially on our
fly-pestered prairies, or the Pampas of South America? What would a
monkey do without this caudal appendage and its prehensile quality? With
him it takes the place of hands. And shall we have philosophers telling
us we received our hands when we lost our tails, and that the monkey
lost the use of his hands because of his peculiar facility of using a
tail? A beautiful science," said he, "is the phrenology, according to
the theory of the learned counsel for the prisoner. To all standing in
the unenviable position of his client, it will prove, if the learned
gentleman be correct, not only a thing of beauty, but a source of
comfort and a joy forever. To the murderer, the burglar, the highwayman,
to all in fact, who wish to be rid of the responsibility which attaches
to their actions, it will become a positive blessing. Not to these only,
but to the entire community--it opens a brilliant prospect of life, of
life as it should be in this enlightened age, at this advanced period in
the progress of the world. Upon the ruins of our present immature
civilization it will uprear a charming state of society. Under the
vivifying influence of this new system, mankind will be happy, perfectly
happy; and until the auspicious day when the new order commences, this
'consummation so devoutly to be wished,' need not be anticipated.
Throughout the world, at least so much of it as is illuminated by the
light of phrenology, perfect liberty will obtain, and the present
generation will wonder at the darkness in which their ancestors groped.
Justice will reign supreme, and our statute books will be no longer
disgraced by those dreadful laws founded in ignorance, superstition and
cruelty, which consigns a helpless and irresponsible man, criminal you
call him, to the merciless hands of the executioner. It will be clear as
the noon-day sun, that law and liberty cannot co-exist, that they are
natural enemies. Along with this knowledge will come a resolution to
demolish the whole system of our jurisprudence, to cart off the rubbish
and substitute in the place thereof a new, nobler, and higher
civilization. Poor weak man will no longer be held accountable for his
actions. The infirmities of his nature will become a recognized
principle, that men are but men, will be evident to all men. It will be
understood that from the foundation of the world it was determined,
pre-destined, and fore-ordained that he should act thus and thus, and
that, therefore, he cannot be justly rewarded for any action however
meritorious, nor punished for any crime, as we term it, how atrocious
soever. Men will stand aghast that laws should have existed, and for so
many ages, for afflicting a human being for actions, over which it is
clear, according to the prisoner's counsel, he had no control--actions,
in fact, which they were bound to perform, by an irresistible law of
human nature. Then will it be seen that men commit murder, perpetrate
rape, and apply the torch because they cannot help it. Gentlemen of the
jury; no line of argument would be shorter. I leave you to determine its
soundness."
"But to be serious," said Mr. Peyton, who though cheerful in his
disposition, had a manner so tempered with gravity as to check the
indecent levity, "I must refer, before closing, to the conduct of the
prisoner's counsel, and remark that some speakers are more anxious to
display their eloquence, than to promote the public good. Now when this
is the case, as I must charitably suppose it to be on this occasion,
oratory is a useless gift, and such fine speeches as we have had to-day
are simply disgusting. When great talents are employed to support a bad
cause, perhaps from selfish motives, I trust and believe that this is
not the case now, they are objects of universal contempt. Oratory, with
all its pleasing charms becomes an instrument of mischief, when used by
an unprincipled man as, when resorted to by a good man, its happy
influences almost exceed belief. An orator, who thus uses his talents,
without reference to his personal interests, if he do not succeed in his
efforts, at least enjoys self approbation and that of his God."
In this manner Mr. Peyton threw the defence into ridicule and disrepute.
This sound sense and keen sarcasm was too much for Wm. Peyton's after
dinner eloquence, and from a brief consultation, the jury returned and
delivered a verdict condemning the prisoner to the penitentiary for two
years.
The Hon. David Fultz, of Staunton, recently judge of the circuit
superior court of Augusta county, who was present on this occasion, told
the writer twenty years ago that he had never, during his career at the
bar, been so much interested or amused by any trial as this. The disgust
of my father at such a defence being set up, the elation of his son at
the probable success of his ruse, the bewilderment of the court and
jury, both of whom seemed lost in a fog, the suppressed merriment of the
audience, which did not comprehend exactly all that was transpiring, but
which to some extent entered into the fun, rendered the whole scene
inimitable.
MR. PEYTON'S VIEWS AS TO A FIDDLING LAWYER.
"Music," said Mr. P., "is out of place in a court house, I never knew a
fiddling lawyer to succeed, especially if nature designed him to play
that useful, yet much despised instrument, the 'second fiddle,'--a good
enough instrument for a duet, but one on which no successful _solo_ was
ever played."
MR. PEYTON ON RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL TOPICS.
In 1840, Mr. P. and his brother-in-law, Colonel Wm. L. Lewis, met at
the home of a mutual friend. In religion Col. L. was a Roman Catholic
and in politics a disciple of John C. Calhoun. Discussion arose between
them and became so warm on the part of Col. Lewis, that their friends
feared they might result in a feud. Not so, however. Mr. P.'s moderation
was equal to his vigor, and he soothed his brother's discomfitures by
his logical reasoning.
"There is no necessity, William," he would say, "for difference of
opinion creating hostility. It must be admitted by all that there is
great variety in the tastes, habits and opinions of mankind, and it is
necessary that it should be so. That partial discord tends to general
harmony is more than poetically true, for, if all men were to set their
minds upon living in the same climate, or under the same government; or,
if all the people of a country had an unconquerable desire to live in
the same town; if all the inhabitants of a town were to have a good
opinion of only one physician, or of only one preacher, or lawyer or
mechanic, or could only relish one article of food, or fancy only the
same dress; or, if all men were to fall in love with the same woman, or
all the women with the same man, what would be the consequence? Why from
a feeling of seeming agreement, universal discord would result.
"Even the value of truth is best appreciated by the opposition it meets
with, and falsehood and error are detected by the discriminating powers
of opposite sensations and feelings. That there should not be uniformity
upon many important subjects, such as the theory of government, etc.,
must be the stamp of heaven. For myself, I claim freedom of opinion as
an inherent right, provided it does not disturb the established order of
society. I fear your nullification views go this length. However, let me
proceed: No man has a right to be offended at my opinion, or hold me in
contempt for entertaining it, for it does him no injury; and what I
claim for myself, common justice requires that I should allow to others;
and did we well consider, that this disparity of an over-ruling
Intelligence, we surely should not suffer it to be the cause of feelings
of animosity to our fellow human beings, though their political or
religious opinions should be the opposite of our own--still less such
old friends as ourselves. For," continued Mr. Peyton, "unless we had been
subjected to the same involuntary impressions and sensations that other
persons have been, which is, perhaps, impossible, we can be no judges of
the merits of their opinions, or how they have outraged truth and
reason, even admitting that they are in error. If it should be contended
that truth and reason are immutable, and when two differ upon a
fundamental truth, there must be deviation from reason and truth in one
of the parties. I would admit it to be so, if the question was
susceptible of mathematical demonstration.
"This is rarely the case--were I to meet a man who should contend that
two and two do not make four, or that the amount of degrees in three
angles of a triangle are not equal to the amount of degrees in two right
angles, I must justly charge him with folly or wilful falsehood; but, in
whatever does not admit of demonstration, our convictions are our
feelings; and our feelings depend more upon involuntary impressions than
we are often willing to allow. Certainly truth and reason are the most
likely to prevail with cultivated minds, for truth and reason are the
most likely to make the right impression, but we are too apt to
over-value our own kind of knowledge, while we underrate that of others.
"In point of real utility, the knowledge of the man who is skilled in the
breeding and feeding of cattle is more valuable to society than is the
knowledge of him who is skilled in mathematics, yet the latter will look
down upon the former, when, perhaps, the only advantage he has over him
is the being able to convey his knowledge in more correct and
perspicuous language; and unless we possessed all kind of knowledge in
an equal degree, we are liable to be imposed upon in some things, either
by thinking too much upon them, or too much, to the exclusion of other
branches of knowledge, the possession of which, though seemingly foreign
to the subject, may be necessary to its clear elucidation; for it is by
possession of general knowledge only that we can claim a superior title
to correctness in every particular. A may be able to solve a difficult
problem in mathematics; B can not do this, but B can make a plow upon
true mechanical principles which A can not; if C can do both, C must be
superior to A or B; but all mankind are in the situation of A or B, as
possessing only partial knowledge. We should all, therefore, be
indulgent to each other's deficiencies. Still, my superior in general
knowledge and learning, may be the dupe of a weak prejudice, without
justifying an impeachment of either. I have a brother-in-law," he would
look askant at Colonel Lewis when getting off this kind of fillip, "of
whose cleverness and general knowledge I have a very high opinion, yet
in politics we are quite opposite. We indeed worship different idols,
and the only superiority I can pretend to claim over him is, that I can
bear for him to adore his idol, even in my presence, and yet keep my
temper--a compliment he can not always repay."
"Fudge!" exclaimed the Colonel, jumping to his feet and walking hastily
to and fro across the room, "I may warm with the subject, but as to
being offended with you it is out of the question. I never have and
never will so far forget myself."
"Come, come, be seated," Mr. Peyton would rejoin, giving him a friendly
tap on the shoulder. "Let me proceed. Of course you will not think I
wish to depreciate the value of truth and reason, I only wish to urge
that the seeming want of them in others may be deceptions, and should
not be the cause of contempt, acrimony or ridicule. All are enamoured
with even the shadow of truth, and should see the substance, if in their
power, but placed in a variety of lights and shades, some can only see
the shadow, and mistake it for the substance." Thus their fraternal
discussions proceeded and terminated in the discomfiture of Col. Lewis,
who though a clever man, an eloquent talker, full of confidence, and
abundance of zeal, was no such logician as Mr. Peyton, and left not the
slightest pain rankling in his bosom.
"Now, William," said Mr. Peyton, "I cannot flatter myself that I shall
convince you of any errors, which, in my opinion, you have been guilty
of in this respect. That is no reason, however, why I should not attempt
to make you entertain a disbelief of all foolish impossibilities. For
example, there is the fallacious science of astrology--it has been the
game of a few designers in all ages, for sordid interest, to have duped
others and been duped themselves. In ancient times they were, in
Alexandria, compelled to pay a certain tax, which was called the 'Fool's
Tax,' because it was raised on the gain that these impostors made from
the foolish credulity of those who believed in their powers of
soothsaying. Well may believers in this science be called 'fools,' when
they do not seem to consider that if the principles of judiciary
astrology were correct, and its rules certain, the hands of the Almighty
would be tied, and ours would be tied also. All our actions, all our
most secret thoughts, all our slightest movements: would be engraven in
the heavens in ineffaceable characters, and liberty of conduct would be
entirely taken away from us. We should be necessitated to evil as to
good, since we should do absolutely what was written in the conjectured
register of the stars, otherwise there would be falsehood in the book,
and uncertainty in the science of the astrologer. How we should laugh at
a man who thought of settling a serious matter of business by a throw of
the dice. Yet the decision of astrology is just as uncertain. Our fate
depends upon places, persons, times, circumstances, our own will; not
upon the fantastical conjunctions inspired by charlatans.
"Suppose two men are born on our planet, at the same hour and on the same
spot. One becomes a hewer of wood and a drawer of water, and the other
an emperor, or a commander-in-chief of an army. Ask an astrologer the
cause of the difference. In all probability he will reply, 'It was so
willed by Jupiter.'
"Pray what is this Jupiter? Why it is a planet, a body without
cognizance, that acts only by its influence. How comes it then that
Jupiter's influence acts at the same moment and in the same climate in
so different a manner? How can that influence differ in its power? How
can it take place at all? How can it penetrate the vast extent of space?
An atom--the most minute molecule of matter would stop it, or turn it
from its course, or diminish its power. Are the stars always exercising
an influence, or do they exercise it only on certain occasions? If they
exercise an influence only periodically, when the particles which, it is
intended, are detached from them, are moving to our sphere, the
astrologer must know the precise time of their arrival in order to
decide rightly upon their effect. If on the other hand, the influences
are perpetual, with what wonderful speed they must rush through the vast
extent of space! How marvelous too must be the alliance they form with
those vivacious passions which originate the principal actions of our
lives! For if the stars regulate all our feelings and all our
proceedings, their influence must work with the same rapidity as our
wills, since it is by them our will is determined."
HIS RELIGIOUS BELIEF.
Mr. Peyton was a firm believer in the doctrines of Christianity, and the
experience of his life was that true happiness is only found in the
observance of her precepts. He held that man must have some religion and
the most perfect was that handed by Christ to his Apostles. He did not
attach great importance to sects, and when asked whether he was a
Catholic, Presbyterian or Episcopalian, answered that he did not find
such words in the Testament--he was merely a Christian; he believed in
what was revealed to us in the Bible and submitted himself with humility
to the Almighty power. He was brought up in the Episcopalian church and
died a member of it.
MR. PEYTON'S ORIGINALITY AND POWER OF ILLUSTRATION.
"I recall a conversation," says one of Mr. P.'s biographers, "just after
a protracted term of the Augusta Circuit Court, in which the late Judge
Lucas P. Thompson and Gen. B. G. Baldwin bore the leading parts. Gen. B.
was paying generous tribute to Mr. Peyton's force and originality. Judge
Thompson remarked in substance, that he had never seen Mr. Peyton go
through a cause deeply interesting and moving him, in which he did not
utter some view or sentiment illuminated by genius, or at the least,
some illustration marked by a bold originality; and he instanced two
causes, tried at the last term--one a civil suit and a very heavy will
case, in which he made a novel and scorching application of a familiar
fable of AEsop. I forbear to give its details, because both the critic
and his subject have passed from earth.
"In the same cause three signatures were to be identified and
proved--that of the testator and also of the attending witnesses--all
three having died since their attestation. Many witnesses were called to
prove the genuineness of the three names. Opposing counsel sought to
badger the witnesses by urging them to specify what peculiar marks there
were in the handwriting and signatures, whereby they could speak so
positively as to their identity and genuineness. This of course for the
most part they could not do, and in the argument of the cause before the
jury the same counsel strove to throw discredit and contempt upon those
witnesses (all men of good character) for their failure and inability so
to describe the quality and peculiar marks in the calligraphy of the
signers as to show they were familiar with their handwriting. In his
reply to those sallies of his opponents, Mr. Peyton swept away the whole
airy fabric by a single happy illustration:
"'_Gentlemen,' he said, 'You have often been assembled in crowds on some
public or festive occasion. Your hats have been thrown pell-mell in a
mass with perhaps a hundred other hats, all having a general
resemblance. Suppose you had attempted to describe your hat to a friend
or servant, so that he might go and pick it out for you. It has as many
points for accurate description as a written signature--its color,
height of crown, width of brim, its band, lining, &c. Do you think that
friend or servant could by any possibility have picked out your hat for
you? And yet when you went yourself, the moment your eye would light
upon it, you instantly recognize it amongst a hundred. Familiarity with
it has stamped its picture on your mind and the moment you see it, the
hat fills and fits the picture on your mind as perfectly as the same hat
fits your head_.'