按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
independence； in which statement there is not one word of truth； and
where； bearing some resemblance to truth； it is an entire perversion
of it。 I do not charge this on Mr。 Galloway himself； his desertion
having taken place long before these measures； he doubtless received
his information from some of the loyal friends whom he left behind
him。 But as yourself； as well as others； appear embarrassed by
inconsistent accounts of the proceedings on that memorable occasion；
and as those who have endeavored to restore the truth have themselves
committed some errors； I will give you some extracts from a written
document on that subject； for the truth of which I pledge myself to
heaven and earth； having； while the question of independence was
under consideration before Congress； taken written notes； in my seat；
of what was passing； and reduced them to form on the final
conclusion。 I have now before me that paper； from which the
following are extracts： * * *
Governor McKean； in his letter to McCorkle of July 16th； 1817；
has thrown some lights on the transactions of that day； but trusting
to his memory chiefly at an age when our memories are not to be
trusted； he has confounded two questions； and ascribed proceedings to
one which belonged to the other。 These two questions were； 1。 The
Virginia motion of June 7th to declare independence； and 2。 The
actual declaration； its matter and form。 Thus he states the question
on the declaration itself as decided on the 1st of July。 But it was
the Virginia motion which was voted on that day in committee of the
whole； South Carolina； as well as Pennsylvania； then voting against
it。 But the ultimate decision in _the House_ on the report of the
committee being by request postponed to the next morning； all the
States voted for it； except New York； whose vote was delayed for the
reason before stated。 It was not till the 2d of July that the
declaration itself was taken up； nor till the 4th that it was
decided； and it was signed by every member present； except Mr。
Dickinson。
The subsequent signatures of members who were not then present；
and some of them not yet in office； is easily explained； if we
observe who they were； to wit； that they were of New York and
Pennsylvania。 New York did not sign till the 15th； because it was
not till the 9th； （five days after the general signature；） that their
convention authorized them to do so。 The convention of Pennsylvania；
learning that it had been signed by a minority only of their
delegates； named a new delegation on the 20th； leaving out Mr。
Dickinson； who had refused to sign； Willing and Humphreys who had
withdrawn； reappointing the three members who had signed； Morris who
had not been present； and five new ones； to wit； Rush； Clymer； Smith；
Taylor and Ross； and Morris and the five new members were permitted
to sign； because it manifested the assent of their full delegation；
and the express will of their convention； which might have been
doubted on the former signature of a minority only。 Why the
signature of Thornton of New Hampshire was permitted so late as the
4th of November； I cannot now say； but undoubtedly for some
particular reason which we should find to have been good； had it been
expressed。 These were the only post…signers； and you see； Sir； that
there were solid reasons for receiving those of New York and
Pennsylvania； and that this circumstance in no wise affects the faith
of this declaratory charter of our rights and of the rights of man。
With a view to correct errors of fact before they become
inveterate by repetition； I have stated what I find essentially
material in my papers； but with that brevity which the labor of
writing constrains me to use。
On the fourth particular articles of inquiry in your letter；
respecting your grandfather； the venerable Samuel Adams； neither
memory nor memorandums enable me to give any information。 I can say
that he was truly a great man； wise in council； fertile in resources；
immovable in his purposes； and had； I think； a greater share than any
other member； in advising and directing our measures； in the northern
war especially。 As a speaker he could not be compared with his
living colleague and namesake； whose deep conceptions； nervous style；
and undaunted firmness； made him truly our bulwark in debate。 But
Mr。 Samuel Adams； although not of fluent elocution； was so rigorously
logical； so clear in his views； abundant in good sense； and master
always of his subject； that he commanded the most profound attention
whenever he rose in an assembly by which the froth of declamation was
heard with the most sovereign contempt。 I sincerely rejoice that the
record of his worth is to be undertaken by one so much disposed as
you will be to hand him down fairly to that posterity for whose
liberty and happiness he was so zealous a laborer。
With sentiments of sincere veneration for his memory； accept
yourself this tribute to it with the assurances of my great respect。
P。 S。 August 6th； 1822； since the date of this letter； to wit；
this day； August 6th； '22； I received the new publication of the
secret Journals of Congress； wherein is stated a resolution； July
19th； 1776； that the declaration passed on the 4th be fairly
engrossed on parchment； and when engrossed； be signed by every
member； and another of August 2d； that being engrossed and compared
at the table； was signed by the members。 That is to say the copy
engrossed on parchment （for durability） was signed by the members
after being compared at the table with the original one； signed on
paper as before stated。 I add this P。S。 to the copy of my letter to
Mr。 Wells； to prevent confounding the signature of the original with
that of the copy engrossed on parchment。
THE VALUE OF CLASSICAL LEARNING
_To John Brazier_
_Poplar Forest； August 24； 1819_
SIR； The acknowledgment of your favor of July 15th； and
thanks for the Review which it covered of Mr。 Pickering's Memoir on
the Modern Greek； have been delayed by a visit to an occasional but
distant residence from Monticello； and to an attack here of
rheumatism which is just now moderating。 I had been much pleased
with the memoir； and was much also with your review of it。 I have
little hope indeed of the recovery of the ancient pronunciation of
that finest of human languages； but still I rejoice at the attention
the subject seems to excite with you； because it is an evidence that
our country begins to have a taste for something more than merely as
much Greek as will pass a candidate for clerical ordination。
You ask my opinion on the extent to which classical learning
should be carried in our country。 A sickly condition permits me to
think； and a rheumatic hand to write too briefly on this litigated
question。 The utilities we derive from the remains of the G