E 202 .1 .R7 C6 Copy 1 LETTERS {July 4, i8g4) {July 4, iSgs) Gen'l JOHN COCHRANE, PRESIDENT c INCINNATI OOCIETY S OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, TH E NEW YORK CINCINNATI. Revised, Corrected axd Enlarged. LETTERS {July 4, 1894) {July 4, 189s) Genl JOHN COCHRANE, PRESIDENT Cincinnati Society OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK CINCINNATI Revised, Corrected and Enlarged. CONTEXTS Page Preface, ......... 3 I. No Society of the Cincinnati in France, . 7 II. Origin and Nature of the Institution of the Cincinnati Society, .... 44 III. Parallel between the States of the Old Confederacy and the State Societies of the Cincinnati, ..... 46 IV. The State Societies of the Cincinnati — THE EXTENT OF THEIR POWER, 50 V. The joint jurisdiction of the General Meeting and the State Societies, of the Principles, Maxims and General Rules of the Society, .... 54 The Supervisory Office of the Gen- eral Meeting, ...... 54 VI. Virtual ultimate control by the State Societies, 56 VII. Confirmative annals of the General Meeting, 57 VIII. Delinquent State Societies, . . -57 IX. The Meeting of the Cincinnati in France NOT AUTHENTIC — ADDITIONAL PROOFS, . 58 X. The Circular of the Rhode Island Society, 66 XI. The General Meeting, .... 89 XII. Report to the New York Society of the Cincinnati by Gen'l Cochrane for the Committee, Messrs. Wm. Linn Keese, Talbot Olyphant and John Cochrane, adopted, 1890, ...... 98 Kf U PREFACE Discrepancies between the results of early researches and those of late investigation, together with corrobo- rative proofs of anterior positions, were the occasion of Addenda to the Letters previously addressed to the Cincinnati of New York. The redress of those errors and the incorporation of the Addenda at their appro- priate places, is the purpose of this revision. To cursory as well as to official confusion of the terms "The General Society" and "The General Meeting," is traceable the source of an error of first magnitude in the construction of the " Institution " on which the Society rests. They are essentially two different bodies — the one, that of the one Society of the Cincinnati in its primary capacity of distinct State Organizations, sovereign and independent, with limited joint functions — the other, a representative body dele- gated by the General Society to represent it at intermittent periods, with joint powers definitively prescribed and functions limited to advice. (Note *.) Instead of the right accorded to the State Societies, to judge of the qualifications required by the " Insti- tution," of those proposed for membership, the substi- tution by most of them of qualifications of their own device, is a challenge of defiance to the vital principle of the Society, and a license of judgment at once hostile to the " Institution," and destructive of the dis- tinction between the Cincinnati of the Revolution, ami the novel organizations of recent extraction from it. (Note §.) The power to expel a member of the Society, con- ferred on th.e Societies of the States, is doubtless limited to those residing within their respective local jurisdic- tions. (Note %.) It is a generally prevalent, though a natural error, to suppose that the primogenitive right of membership Note *. See pages 48-79-80 ; note * page 81. Note §. See page 52 and its note *. Note X- See pages 26-27-52 and its note 4. in the Society, is offensive to the principles of democ- racy. The domain of neither encroaches on the other. It were unreasonable to stigmatize a Society instituted " to perpetuate the mutual friendships" of its Founders with antagonism to a polity of State ; and the appoint- ment by the ancestral Cincinnati of their eldest male posterity, hereditary tributaries to their memory and depositaries in succession of their right, was no less their prerogative, than if they had selected for the pious office, those only of them rejoicing in cane colored beards, or rubescent in heads of red hair. Departure from the directions of the " Institution " forfeits the difference which discriminates between the Society of the Cincinnati and the Sons of the Revolu- tion — this, the self appointed factor of remembrance — that, its testamentary executor, constituted by the Offi- cers of the Army of the Revolution, its repository forever. The significance of the power of dissent in any one State Society, consisting of its right to veto any pro- posed change in the principles, maxims or general rules of the " Institution," is apt either to be overlooked or misunderstood. In the compact between the thirteen States under the Articles of Confederation, each State was invested with a similar power. Though neither in the Articles of Confederation, nor in the " Institution " of the Cincinnati, is the power expressed, yet the universal law governs both, that the terms of a compact cannot be varied, any one of the parties to it dissenting. Thus the repeated dissent of single States, from a change in the terms of the Articles, caused its defeat : and the recognition by the Founders that, as the unanimous assent of the thirteen States under the Articles of Confederation on which the " Institution " of the Cincin- nati was modeled, was required to alter them, so also a unanimous assent of the thirteen State Societies was required to effect a change in the " Institution," is their registered admission that the veto power of each State Society is its inalienable and irreversible right under the " Institution," signed in mutual compact by them all. (Note ".) Note*. See note S, page 48. 5 That a Society of the Cincinnati ever existed in France — that the appointment of honorary members by the General Meeting is authorized ; and that the State Societies are its financial servitors, are myths irrevocably consigned to the Limbo of exploded errors. (Note *.) The supposition is groundless that attributes to the General Meeting the power of reviving a State Society. The State Societies never die. Their life is perpetual ; coordinate and concurrent with genealogical lines : the life of the General Meeting is vicarious and intermit- tent ; delegated and dependent on the will of the State Societies. In the State Societies alone exists para- mount, the Society of the Cincinnati. Of inherent vitality, they are self existent. Through them, the perennial life of the General Society reaches in in- defeasible entail, the remotest degree of hereditary succession. The General Meeting is the product of their breath. Their life-giving power to it, stifles its assumption to resurrect them. If excluded from its deliberations, still their separate negative would frus- trate any change in the " Institution," it attempts; and though by the withdrawal of their triennial breath, its temporary suspension as heretofore, or its final ex- tinction would ensue, yet in the State Societies, would the Society of the Cincinnati live on forever. (Note §.) With this prefatory explanation, these Letters are again offered for perusal, not in the spirit of polemical controversy, but as the means of instruction, where instruction is needed. The vicissitudes of the Society have been many. Established by the Officers of the Army of the Revo- lution to perpetuate the remembrance of its friendly associations, and of the Government it achieved, they appointed their eldest male posterity, the depositaries of their memory. Though an institution commemora- tive of the past, it was assailed by the clamor of popular prejudice as a menace to the future; and unless sus- tained by its members in the State Societies, it had been extinguished by its General Meeting. The Soci- Note *. Pages 7-58, note 5 pages 52-53. pages 86-87-88. Note §. See note 8, page 53. eties however in most of the thirteen States, bent to the storm. In the rest they maintained a precarious existence. In none did they perish ; but in all awaited within their respective spheres, the opportunity of revival. To their survivors, other fortunes befell. They sought for their segmentary life, the muster of numbers ; and, forsaking the Society instituted by the Founders in 1783, for a Society instituted by their kinsmen in 1856, divided the testamentary duties of the eldest male issue of the Fathers, with an auxiliary influx of their miscel- laneous posterity, and became a Society of the Cincin- nati under " the rule of '54." (Note $.) Two of them, — of New York and Pennsylvania, — are loyal to the "Institution" that ordained them Societies; but the remainder, unmindful of the lesson involved in the Sibylline enigma of increased value in decreased bulk, not only have imported members of features in common with many of those of the modern organizations of Revolutionary derivation, but have abandoned to the private agreement of individuals the sacred duty en- joined unalienably upon them, of judging of the quali- fications of applicants for membership. Numerical aggrandizement has never been considered compensation for legitimacy, nor a traffick in birth-rights the antidote of decay : but the degeneracy unhappily predicable of both, will not fail to be confirmed, when the Cincinnati shall have become the shadow of a name. — J. C. Note §. See page 57 and its note * ; page 84. LETTER, July 4, 1SQ4 To the Cincinnati of New York:. Bret hern : A cursory examination of the Institution of the Society had produced an impression that its inten- tion was to recognize as full members certain high officials of France and the officers named of her Army and Navy. That impression contributed to a concur- rence with the General Meeting of 1887, in its recog- nition of a Society in France, with plenary power. A subsequent and careful examination of the question, having resulted in a change of opinion, I am induced by the importance of the subject, to submit my reasons to the Cincinnati of New York. I. No Society of the Cincinnati in France Intention of the Founders. When the officers of the American Army, from the Cantonment of the Army on Hudson's River, on the 13th of May, 1783, announced to the world that " to perpetuate as well the remembrance of the sepa- " ration under the direction of the Supreme Govenor "of the Universe of the Colonies of North America " from the dominion of Great Britain, after a bloody "conflict of eight years, and their establishment as " free and independent States, as well as the mutual " friendships which have been formed under the pres- " sure of common danger, and in many instances " cemented by the blood of the parties " they did " in "the most solemn manner associate, constitute and " combine themselves into one SOCIETY OF FRIENDS " to endure as long as they shall endure, or any of their " eldest male posterity, and in failure thereof, the " collateral branches;" they coincidently invoked as the tutelar spirit of the principles of their Society, its endurance forever in the continuity through time, of a procession of the right heirs male of their bodies. Subsequently they declared that the " Society" they had founded," deeply impressed with a sense of the " generous assistance this country has received from " France, and desirous of perpetuating the friendships "which have -been formed and so happily subsisted " between the allied forces in the prosecution of the " war," directs " that the President-General transmit as "soon as maybe to each" of certain French high officials and to certain of the officers of the French Navy, and to his Excellency the Count de Rochambeau and the Generals and Colonels of his army " a medal containing the Order of the Society," and " acquaint " them that the Society do themselves the honor to " consider them as members." It cannot fail of observation that the language of the " Institution " discriminates between the " mutual friend- ships " of the American officers "formed under the "pressure of common danger" and the " friendships" formed between them and the French officers in " the " prosecution of the war;" and that a separate recog- nition is bestowed on each. To the first, as that of primary regard, they promise a perennial durability, when appointing to their posterity an inheritance of endless duration ; while to the second they present but a life-long possession — a distinction significant of the difference between members in whose lineage ex- clusively the Society subsists, and members to whose names is accorded simply the honor of a place on its Rolls — the difference in fine, between a structural membership prolific of succession, and a titular mem- bership of barren growth. The intent of the American officers may be fairly extracted from the words with which they direct the President-General to " acquaint " the French Gentlemen "that the Society do themselves the honor to consider them as members." To consider, strictly is but a pro- cess of deliberative thought, without executive force, and destitute of the power of appointment. Honorary Membership invariably has been understood as an honor reflected on the recipient : but here, the Ameri- can officers, with a delicate courtesy of high military grade, refer to themselves the distinction of their con- sideration of the high officials of France, and of the Generals and Colonels of the Army of his Excellency the Count de Rochambeau. The medal proposed in the draft by General Knox of the Original Institution to be transmitted to Count de Rochambeau, was avowedly the expression of an assurance to the French Officers, of " the perpetual " rule of the Society " to entitle them " to all the civil- " ities and friendships of the Society : " and when these words were on revisal, more euphoniously paraphrased, " desirous of perpetuating the friendships which have "been formed, and so happily subsisted between the " officers of the allied forces," the motive of the Society was as truly declared ; and the extension of its bene- faction from the Count de Rochambeau, to the civil and military representatives of France, and to the Generals and Colonels of the Count de Rochambeau's army, was but the expansion of a gratitude which culminated in doing " themselves the honor to consider them as " members." Hence, they became members of the Cincinnati Society, not as officers of the American Army, in whose virility the Society had been conceived, but as officers of the Army of France, endowed in token of " civilities and friendships," with a membership sterile and impotent of American heirs, in succession of American Officers, to whom alone the future of the Society was appointed. But inference though irresistible, and conjecture inevitable, must be for the present abandoned for recourse to the explicit evidence of the honorary membership of the French gentlemen, furnished by the Founders, embodied by themselves and recorded in the Institution itself. The Society of the Cincin- nati, whose members were to be " the officers of the American Army," was devised by General Knox at West Point, April 15, 1783. The "Proposals" for its IO establishment having first been submitted to the regi- ments of the respective State lines, and " an officer "from each" having been "appointed who, in con- " junction with the General Officers, should take the " same into consideration," were debated under the direction of their President and senior officer General the Baron von Steuben, at three separate meetings ; at the last of which on the 19th of June, 1783, its present organization was completed. The " Proposals " having been amended and submitted at the first of these meetings on the 10th of May, 1783, to a committee of revision, at the second of them, on the 13th of that month, were adopted as the " Institution " of the Society. The President, General Steuben, having applied by letter of May 20th to Major L'Enfant, an accomplished draughtsman and artist, then at Philadelphia, and an orig- inal member of the Cincinnati Society, (a) for a design of the medal inscribed with the emblems, by which the Institution prescribed the " members should be known and distinguished," and having received an answer of the 10th of June, unfavorable to the order in the form of a medal, and enclosing two preferable designs, recon- vened the constituent body, the record of which shows these entries. "Cantonment of the American Army 19th June, 1783." At a meeting of the General Officers and the gentlemen delegated by the respective regiments, as a Convention for establishing the Society of the Cincin- nati held by request of the President, at which were present (here follow their names). The President having communicated the " accept- ance " by the Chevelier de la Luzerne "of the vote "respecting his Excellency" and others, a resolution was adopted expressive of a sense " of the honor done "to the Society by his becoming a member thereof." The President having then submitted the letter received from Major L'Enfant, together with the de- signs enclosed, (b) the letter was read from which the following relevant extracts are made — (a) Appendix A, page 29. (b) Appendix B, page 29. II " I send you two essays which I have made, and I "desire one of them may be adopted instead of the "medal. In one I make the eagle supporting a star " with thirteen points, in the centre of which is the " figure of the medal with its inscriptions, as well in " front as on the reverse. A legend might be added in " the claws, and go round the neck of the eagle with a "particular inscription, or the contour of the medal " transferred there. In the other, I have simply the " eagle supporting on its breast the figure of the medal, " with a legend in his claws and about the neck, which " passes behind and sustains the reverse. I prefer the " latter, as it does not resemble any other order, and " bears a distinct character, nor will it be expensive in " the execution " * * * * * * " So far from proposing to change the " oval medal into an eagle on which shall be impressed " the medal, I do not pretend to say medals cannot be " made. On the contrary, my idea is that silver medals " should be struck at the common expense of the Society, " and distributed one to each member, as an appendage to "a diploma of parchment, whereon it would be proper to "stamp the figure of the medal, the eagle or star in its "full dimensions and properly coloured, enjoining the " members to conform to it, though leaving thou at liberty, "provided it be at their oxvn expense, of having it made " of such metal, and as small as they please, without " altering any of the emblems. It seems to me by no " means proper that the HONORARY MEMBERS should " wear the order in the same manner as THE ORIGINAL " MEMBERS ; it would be necessary that they should wear " the medal, the star, or the eagle, round their necks, and " the original members, at the third button holey " N. B. The head and tail of the eagle should be " silver, or enamelled in white, the body and wings gold, " the medal on its breast and back enamelled in the same " colour as the legend ; sprigs of laurel and oak might be " added in the tvings enamelled in green ; the star should " be pointed in gold or enamelled in blue or white ; 12 " those who would be at the expense might instead of " white, have diamonds. The riband, as is customary " in all orders, should be watered." "A medal, whether round or oval, is considered, in " the different states of Europe, only as a reward of the " laborer and the artist, or as a sign of a manufacturing " community, or religious society ; besides, the abusive " custom prevailing, particularly in Germany and Italy, " of sending to France mountebanks, dancers and mu- " sicians, ornamented in this manner, renders it neces- " sary to distinguish this order by a form which shall " be peculiar to itself, &c. ****** «a gentleman already invested " with any European order would be unwilling to carry " a medal, but if, flattered by receiving a mark of dis- " tinction from a respectable society, he should do it, " the manner of it would by no means increase the " value of the order. On the contrary, giving it a new " and particular form, will be adding a recommendation " to its real value, and engage those invested with it to " wear it in the same manner as their other military " orders, which is the surest means of putting it at once "on a footing with them." The record proceeds: "Resolved. That the bald " eagle carrying the emblems on its breast, be established " as the order of the Society, and that the ideas of Major " L'Enfant respecting it, and the manner of its beingworn " by the members, be adopted. That the order be of the " same size, and in every respect conformable to the said " design, which for that purpose is certified by the Baron " de Steuben, President of this convention, and to be " deposited in the archives of the Society as the original " from which all copies are to be made. Also that silver " medals, not exceeding the size of a Spanish milled dollar, "with the emblems as designed by Major L'Enfant, and " certified by the President, be given to each and every " member of the Society,* together with the diploma on "parchment , whereon shall be impressed the exact * The medal containing the order of the Society, given to every member, and referred to as having been received by the French gentlemen, in the letter of Gen'l Washington to the Count d'Estaing May 17th, 1783. See note b post page 24 and Minutes General Meeting 1887, page 19. 13 " figures of the order and medal as above mentioned; "any thing in the original institution respecting gold " medals, to the contrary notwithstanding." After thanks returned to Major L' Enfant, with a request that he continue his assistance, and a minute of routine business, the record of the Convention closes with these words: — "The principal objects of its ap- " pointment, being thus accomplished, the members of "this Convention think fit to dissolve the same, and it " is hereby dissolved accordingly." (a) f Here, both by language and act indelibly impressed by the Founders themselves upon the " Institution," is the infallible record of the indisputable distinction ordained between the Officers of the American Army as constituent members of the Cincinnati Society and the Officers of the French Army as its honorary members. This is not all. Having distinguished be- tween them, and dictated to each, as an outward sign of their difference, a different mode of their wearing the Insignia, they directed that a silver medal contain- ing the order of the Society, minutely described, with a Diploma on parchment, should be given indiscrimin- ately to all.* The possibility that the Founders by " members " referred to a membership of the Society without ex- istence at the time, or that Major L'Enfant, in distin- guishing their different grades, referred to a membership of the Society without existence when he wrote, is opposed to the recorded event of its birth. An association of persons being its essential pre- requisite, the law they appoint defines the Society ; and the American Officers who. on the 13th of May, 1783, (a) Appendix C, page 33. + The word "members, 1 " where used by the Convention, in the Institution, in the correspondence of the Society, or elsewhere, was applied indiscriminately to both or either of its varities. * See letter of Col. Aaron Ogden, President-General of the General Society, and an eminent jurist replying May 22, 1837 (after the recorded rejection of the Amended Institution), to an inquiry by the New York Society, whether a person was admissible as a member of the Society, who applied in the right ot his father, who had served with the Duke de Luzerne, in which he says: — "Besides, " there is no provision that the right of membership should descend to the posterity " of the persons designated in the enclosed provision " — (an extract from the Orig- inal Institution, naming with others the Chevalier de Luzerne and certain French Officers of the Count de Rochambeau's Army, to whom the medal was to be sent, and who were considered as members) "and the adoption of such a rule now, " might place the Society in great future difficulties; but if otherwise, this right ''can only be proved by the production of the medal, which was doubtless sent to " every officer in the French A rmy who was entitled to it, or accounting for its loss." See Appendix E, page 40. 14 adopted at the Cantonment of the Army on Hudson's River the Institution of the Cincinnati, assumed the prerogatives of members of the Society they created. As " the Society, " they did " themselves the honor to consider as members" certain of the representatives and officers of the Army and Navy of France ; they prescribed to the respective State lines the requisites of membership, and provided that a copy of the " afore- " g° m g Institution " should " be given to the senior offi- " cer of each," and that " the proceedings thereon " be transmitted " to the commanding officer of the South- " ern Army, and the senior officers in each State from " Pennsylvania to Georgia, inclusive, and to the com- " manding officer of the Rhode Island line " ; and they solicited by committee his Excellency the Com- mander-in-Chief, " to honor the Society by placing " his name at the head of a copy of the Institu- tion." Having previously considered absolute the membership of the representatives and officers of the Army and Navy of France, that the signatures of the American Officers in assertion of their own, were inscribed on the charter of the Society they had framed, the contemporary list headed with the name of General Washington attests. On the 19th of the following June, at the call of the President, they reassembled as " a Convention for establishing the " Society of the Cincinnati " ; and having in that capacity substituted another, for one of the chief features of the Institution, and added others thereto, as members they clothed his Excellency the Com- mander-in-Chief with the authority of President-Gen- eral, and by the election of a Treasurer-General and a Secretary-General, completed the temporary organiza- tion of the Society. Thus were the vital functions of an organized Society employed by its members on the 13th of May and the 19th of June, 1783, in the creation of commit- tees, in the nomination of members, in measures of ex- tension through the establishment of State Societies, and in the appointment and election of a full official staff. i5 Nor is there this evidence only that membership in the Cincinnati was coincident with the adoption of its Institution. The Societies of some of the States were instituted at the Cantonment of the Army. Of these, the Society of New York had its inception in the sig- natures of the officers of the New York line to the Institution, on the days contemporary with its adop- tion. Its first meeting was held on the 9th of June following, and consisted, as the record shows, of the officers of the 1st and 2nd New York Regiments of Infantry, who having previously signed the institution, were members of the Cincinnati Society. The letter itself bears no uncertain sense. * When defining the disadvantages of the medal as an order, in the estimate of "the different States of Europe" ; its dislike by " a gentleman already invested with any Eu- ropean order" ; and the congruity of its opposite with ''other military orders" of Europe, it establishes Euro- peans the arbiters of selection. The French gentlemen were the only Europeans then admitted, or by the Institution admissible as members of the Society; and the reasons for adopting a different order therefore, being pertinent to them alone, designate them as the members of the Society between whom and the Am- erican Officers, the distinction was drawn. Plainly, then, when Major L'Enfant, in his letter of June 10th, I/83, distinguished between the "Original" and the "Honorary" members of the Society, its actual members consisted of both classes. Nor can it be doubted that he, an original member cognizant of their existancc, referred to the realities of an adult present, and not to the possibilities of an embryonic future. The reference in the resolution of the constituent Convention of June 19th, 1783, to "the members" of the Society, obviously includes those "considered "as members" on the 13th of the previous month, and its designation of the different modes in which the order should be worn, not only recognizes Major * See extract from letter, page 12. i6 L'Enfant's discrimination between the original and honorary members of the Society at the date of his letter, but applies it unmistakably to them. That this action was predicable of the members of which the Society then consisted, is supported by the author- ity of the American Cyclopaedia (vol. iv, p. 596), which represents its Founders to have organized the Society concurrently with the adoption of its Institution ; and states that " the honors of life membership were con- " f erred upon a number of French Officers"; it is supported by the authority of Col. Aaron Ogden, an Original Member, who as a delegate to the first General Meeting in 1784, to repair the omission in the Original Institution, proposed to establish by the Amended Institution, a Meeting in France, when as President-General of the Society, he in 1837 substan- tially decided that its members at the inception of the Society, were composed of its Founders and of the gentlemen of France, whom they created members for life ;* it is supported by the authority of the General Meeting, which affirmed in effect the French Officers to have been for their own lives only, members contem- porary with the Institution of 1783, when adopting the report of the Secretary-General that the members of the Society consisted, under the original Institu- tion, exclusively of the officers of the American Army, and of those of them who were foreigners, with their eldest male posterity of lineal descent and in the col- lateral branches judged worthy, and of honorary members for their own lives only ; and which pronounced the final extinction of these very French Officers by its refusal to enumerate either them or their descendants among the members of the Society in I S48 ; "f" it is not only sup- ported, but maintained by the authority of the Mar- quis de la Fayette, the illustrious Chief of the Original Members of the Cincinnati in France, who recognized the Founders of the Society as members at its forma- tion, and distinguished between them and their coevals, the French life members, when in 1825 he applied to * See Appendix E, page 40. + See Appendix F, page 42. 17 the Society in New York for the admission of a French officer, the Baron D'Aurier, who had served during the War of the Revolution in the French Army under the command of the Count de Rochambeau, as an honorary member. % The spirit which animates the Society of the Cincin- nati is purely American. Its " Institution " is a perennial plant indiginous to American soil, vigorous and fruitful in its native bed, but languid and lifeless in an alien clime. The objection of the American officers to the " Amended Institution," lay not in its direction to the officers of France of a membership for life which previously had been theirs, but in its restriction to their own lives only, of a memorial they designed in the Society they had founded, should endure in the lives of their posterity forever. The purpose of the constituent meeting of 1783, is obvious in the contrast of its omission either to create or provide for an organization of the French Officers, or for their incorporation in the General Society, with the authority with which they were expressly empow- ered by the " Amended Institution " of 1784, to erect a separate Meeting in France, and to regulate and govern it by rules in conformity with " the objects of the Insti- " tution, and the spirit of their government" (1). This purpose was persistently withstood by the agreement of the meeting of May, 1784, that the " Amended Institu- tion " then reported should be "the Institution by " which the Cincinnati shall in future be governed (2) ;" by the resolution " that the officers of his Most Christian " Majesty's Army and Navy, who have served in " America, and who were promoted to the rank of " colonel for special services, are comprehended in ''the Institution of the Cincinnati as altered and " amended (3) ; " by a recognition of the title of cer- tain named French gentlemen to become members of the Society under the Institution as amended (4); X See Appendix D, page 39. (1) Minutes General Meeting 17S4, page 14. (2) Minutes General Meeting 1784, page 12. (3) Minutes General Meeting 1784, page 16. 14) Minutes General Meeting 17S4, page 20, i8 by the resolution "that a Committee of three be " appointed to report the extracts from the proceed- " ings of the meeting" " necessary to be sent to the " Society in France (5) ;" by the declaration of their pos- session of various papers from foreign gentlemen," which " ought to be referred to the Society in France (6) ; " by the direction of 1787 that diplomas of member- ship shall be transmitted to the marines, and the naval and land officers of the Armies of France which co-operated with the Armies of America during the Revolution (7) ; and by the resolution of the Triennial Meeting in 1790, to the effect that the claims of French gentlemen then before them in general meeting, for admission as members of the Society, be referred to the Count d'Estaing and de Rochambeau and the Marquis de la Fayette to decide thereon, and " that " on their certificate of approval diplomas be trans- " mitted to them." (8) Understanding of the French Officers identical with that of the Founders. That the action of the Society, in making the officers of the Army and Navy and the high officials of France named in its proceedings, Honorary Members thereof, was in that sense by them understood and entertained, appears by the fact that in response to their notification of it, instead of an acceptance of membership, and a tender of the requisite initiation fee of one month's pay, they express in a letter written in their name and behalf, by the Count de Rochambeau, January 19th, 17S4, their thanks for the honor conferred, their proposal to cement in perpetuity the union achieved between America and France, and their sympathy with the charitable objects of the Society ; and enclosed " a unanimous and voluntary subscription " of the sums set to their respective names, for the relief and "benefit of the unfortunate officers of the American Army," (5) Minutes General Meeting 1784, page 21. 1,6) Minutes General Meeting 1784, page 15. (7) Minutes General Meeting 1787, page 30. (8) Minutes General Meeting 1790, page 43. 19 accompanied with the hope that the " moderate " sums sent for such a praiseworthy object " will not be disapproved (i). (a) That this letter was transmitted by the Count, and received in the interval between the meeting in May, 1783, and that in May, 1784, may be inferred from the fact that among the letters and papers reported at the meeting in 1784 to have been received from the Count de Rochambeau, the Count d'Estaing, the Baron de Viomenil, the Marquis de la Fayette and other French gentlemen, necessary to be acknow- ledged and answered, appears on its minutes, to have been this letter of the Count de Rochambeau of the 19th of January, 1784, "with enclosures (2);" while the letter of General Washington in reply, as President- General of the Society, " signed in the General Assem- bly " under date of May 15th, 1784, wherein he declares the reception of the sums subscribed by the French Officers and transmitted by the Count, " to be incom- " patible with the confederation of the United States," and declines to receive them " as contrary to the "Original Institution of this Society to receive sums " of money from foreign nations though in alliance " (3) is conclusive that neither by the Founders of the Cincinnati in their action under the "Original Insti " tution " in 1783, nor by the French Officers when notified of it, was it intended by the one to make any than Honorary Members of the French Officers, nor by the other was it understood that they had received a superior right. That the subscriptions of the French Officers for- warded by the Count de Rochambeau are referable exclusively to the action of the Society under the Institution of 1783, and were construed purely as a benevolence, responsive to the honor implied in a nominal membership, may be reasonably presumed from their official direction in 1784 to the funds of the French Meeting then first instituted with power to re- (1) See letter in Baron Girardot's Book. Minutes Gen'l Meeting 1887, p. 19. (a) The Chevalier de la Luzerne also signified simply an acceptance. New York Book of the Cincinnati (Schuyler) page 21. Appendix C, page 34. (2) Minutes of Triennial Meeting of 1887, page 19, and see Minutes General Meeting 1784, page 8. (3) Minutes of Triennial Meeting of 1887, page 19. Baron Girardot's Book. 20 ceive them (i) and is inflexibly enforced by the words of General Washington that their reception " is contrary to " the Original Institution of the Society," which forbid their reference to any right granted by the " Amended Institution," and imperatively restrict it to the ac- knowledgment of an honor, which the French Officers were informed, had been conferred on them by the Institution of 1783. To the notification of the distinction extended to them by the " Original Institution," the French Officers responded with their sympathy in its charitable objects, and contributed a donative to them ; but when notified of the adoption of-the " Amended Institution " and that they had become regular members of the Society, the names of the officers, forthwith were transmitted from France by the Count de Rochambeau to the Society in America (2). In this contrast there is ample evidence that the Officers of France understood their prefer- ment by the " Original Institution," to be only an honorary distinction ; but that by the " Amended Institution," they were invested with full membership in the Society, (a) Confirmatory Proceedings of the General Meeting and its Correspondence from ij8j to 1800 inclusive. But the letters prepared by a Committee (Messrs. Smith, Williams and Knox), laid before the meeting, (3) and with its approval, signed by General Washington, President-General of the Society, in reply to those of the Counts de Rochambeau and d'Estaing, the Baron (1) Minutes General Meeting 1887. page 19. (2) Letter of Count de Rochambeau, Aug. 23d. 1784, Baron Girardot's Book. (a) Long alter the formal announcement by the General Meeting in 1800 of the failure of ihe Amended Institution, and its official Exequatur of the unimpaired au- thority of the Original Institution, the nature of the membership with which it in- vested the French Officers, was recognized and observed by General the Marquis de la Fayette when, on his visit to this country in 1825, representing to the New York Society (near fifty of its original members surviving) that Baron D'Aurier, a Lieu't-General in the Armies of France had served during the war of the Revolu- tion as an officer of distinguished merit in the French Army commanded by the Count de Rochambeau, he applied to it for his admission as an honorary member of the Cincinnati Society, and became on request, the bearer to the Baron of a copy of the resolution ot his admission, and of a diploma as such (.New York Book of the Cincinnati (Schuyler) page 107) see Appendix D, page 39. (3) Minutes of General Meeting 1784. pages 15-20. 21 de Vomenil and the Marquis de la Fayette (i) herein- before referred to, cast a stronger light upon the nature of the relations between the General Meeting and the Officers of France, as they subsisted at the respective periods before and after the adoption of the "Amended Institution" in 1784. Under their respective dates of May 15th and 17th, they were signed by General Washington in his official capacity, and transmitted each to its particular address. Together with the minutes of the General Meeting, (2) they reveal that the gentlemen of France, whom the founders of the Cincinnati Society did " themselves the honor to con- sider as members," had organized a "meeting" or "society," supposed to be destitute of power by " the claims" and "the memorials, petitions and letters rela- " tive to those claims," they preferred to the General Meeting for succor and relief. These appeals, though properly directed to the General Meeting when made, were neither entertained nor discussed at its meeting in 1784, but were remitted to the French Meeting, with the intelligence of its accession under the " Amended Institution," to the power of self relief. The letters are uniformly expressive of a distinction between " the meeting" in France under the "Original Institution" of 1783, and the "meeting" under the " Amended Institution " of 1784; by the last of which it was assumed, the first had been superseded. There being no inherent authority in a meeting of honorary members, no remedial power was predicated of it ; and the questions propounded, and the claims preferred, were therefore returned to the meeting in France, then first provisionally enabled by the " Amended Institu- tion," with the functions of primary membership. The uniformity of tenor to this effect, of these several letters is observable in all, and plainly pronounced in that to the Marquis de la Fayette. " The meetings of the Society " in France being nozv, distinctly considered in all " respects, of the same authority as the State meetings, " no claims will in future be determined in the general (1) Minutes of General Meeting 1887, pages 19-20. (2) Minutes of General Meeting 1784, passim. 22 " meeting, and all claimants must apply to the meeting " of the state or country where they reside. Those "meetings alone are to judge of the qualifications of "members of the Society, and to execute the benevo- " lent intention of our institution." Nor should the fact be forgotten that these letters to the Counts de Rochambeau and d'Estaing, the Baron de Vomenil and the Marquis de la Fayette, are in reply to theirs, sent from France in the interval between the notice conveyed to the officers of France, of the honorary distinction conferred on them by the institution of 1783, and the adoption of the " Amended Institution" in 1784. As theirs is the vehicle of '" memorials and petitions " for relief, and of " claims " presented, each of them attests the inability of the Meeting it represents. Surely no stronger testimony than this admission of incompetency is needed of the abnormal character of the Meeting in France under the " Original Institution." Yet, that no membership in the Society was understood by its constituents to have been conferred on the high officials and officers of France originally named, still stronger evidence is at hand, not only in the fact that no French Society is included among the State Societies appealed to by the General Meeting in the Circulars of 1784, 1788 and 1796, or in the resolutions of 1784, 1 790-1 791 and 1793, (1) as necessary to ratify the "Amended Institution," but in the fact of its more significant exclusion, in the Circular of 1788, from the list of Societies whose "unanimous vote" was asserted by them, to be necessary to the establishment of " a permanent constitution (2)." These, together with the ascription in 1800, of the rejection of the " Amended Institution " to the refusal exclusively of the State Societies to accept it, (3) form a cohesive chain of irrefutable proof. Anterior to the circular letter of 1784, and but once, was the meeting in France named among the meetings to which it was directed to be sent ; while in two instan (1) Minutes of General Meeting 17S4, 1788, 1790, 1791, 1793, 1796. (2) Minutes General Meeting 1788, page 40. (3) Minutes General Meeting 1800, page 65. z 3 ces, contemporary therewith, its absence is notable of a design to exclude it from the list of those to which ultimately it was thought necessary to submit for ratifi- cation, " the Institution as altered and amended" (i). Its occurrent association with the State meetings, in the letter of General Washington to the Marquis de la Fayette (2), recommending to them the Amended Institution " for concurrence and ratification," is dis- armed by the contiguous declaration pregnant with the knowledge of its previous impotence, that the Meeting in France is " notv distinctly considered in all respects "as of the same authority as the State meetings." Service in "the American Army," the animating principle of the Cincinnati Society, was an attribute, neither of the officers of the "cooperating" French Army and Navy, nor of their Excellencies, the Chev- alier de la Luzerne and the Sieur Gerard, Plenipoten- tiaries of France ; and their conjunctive distinction indicates strongly the considerate design to bestow upon them, (grateful for their "generous assistance,") the honorable hospitality of nominal membership. The General Meeting represents acceptably the integrity of the Cincinnati and in its Triennial recur- rence is the legitimate expression of their unity. The INSTITUTION therefore, which confines the one ex- clusively within the circuit of the State Societies, and restricts the other to delegates from them alone, bears intrinsic assurance that no Society in France is compre- hended an integrant part of the Society in America, (a) (1) Minutes of General Meeting 1784, pages 15-20. See page 60, note 4. (2) Minutes General Meeting 1887, page 20 (a) To the fact that the " Original Institution " comprised no French Society among the components of the General Society and admitted no delegates from one to its Triennial Meeting, it may be objected that neither was the French Meeting of the " Amended Institution" recognized by it in its structure of the Society, nor authorized to send delegates to its Triennial Meeting ; and therefore, that its want of representation under the " Original Institution," in proof of there having been no French Society is without avail. It is answered that the letters of General Washington, President-General, by order of the Triennial Meeting which enacted the " Amended Institution," to the Baron de Viomenil, the Count d'Estaing, and to the Marquis de la Fayette, (Minutes General Meeting 1887, pp. 19-20) show that the French Meeting was understood to have, and was accordingly conceded by the constituent meetings, all the powers of the State Societies. Says the letter to the Baron de Viomenil, " The members of the Society in " France, will in future, hold meetings there, as we do in these States." Says the letter to the Count d' Estaing, " The meeting of the Society in France, " is conceived to be in a situation similar to those in the States in America." Says the letter to the Marquis de la Fayette, " The meetings of the Society in " France being now distinctly considered in all respects^ of the same authority as " the State meetings." 24 It is not to be supposed that the authors of the Amended Institution, had they been conscious of the existence of a French Society of powers coordinate with those of the States, would, when including those who had been admitted to the State Societies, have rejected those who had been admitted to the Society in France. It is palpable therefore, that the Amended Institution, by defining its membership to include " such " other persons who have been admitted to the re- spective State meetings (i); " furnishes inherent evi- dence that a French Society was a thing unknown to the Founders of the Cincinnati, (b) In this connection it should be observed that, in addition to the several cases cited by my distinguished predecessor, in his letter to the Society of May 13th, 1892, of the assumption by the General Meeting in 1784 of the extinction of the Institution of 1783; supple- mented as they may be by the resolution of 1790, by which the claims of the " French gentlemen now before " the meeting for admission as members" (2) are refer- red to the Counts de Rochambeau and d'Estaing and the Marquis de la Fayette with power, and supported as they are by the agreement of 1784 that the " Amended Institution" then reported should be "the Institution " by which the Cincinnati shall in future be governed," (3) each of the letters quoted of General Washington ascribes to the "Amended Institution," an absolute jurisdiction. 1 1 1 Minutes General Meeting, page 13. (b) A silver medal containing the Order of the Society had, by the direction of the " Original Institution," been transmitted as a testimonial of '" the generous assistance " ol France, among others, to certain of the officers of her army, com- manded by the Count de Rochambeau. in attestation of their admission as honorary members.* To dispel any doubt whether such officers "already " members of the •honorary grade, were designed to be included among the officers of the French "land forces," described by the "Amended Institution." as those only of the French Army invested by it with full membership in the Society, the letter of General Washington to the Count d'Estaing (Minutes of General Meeting 1887, p. 19) declares that "the Society, careful that those gentlemen who had already •' received the Order, should not be omitted through any mistake, had added "and '• 'such other persons as had been admitted. &c ' " See note * page 12. The impossibility of a construction different from this, is exemplified by a reference to the "Amended Institution " to which the "&c " refers, and from which the phrase is extracted. The words standing there " and such other persons as had been admitted by the State Societies " comprehend those only admitted by them to full membership ; and as no French officer could be or ever had been admitted to full membership by the State Societies, inclusion among those admitted by them could not, as was designed, in any sense, either secure or reinforce the membership of the gentlemen of France. * The medal referred to by Col. Aaron Ogden, President-General, in his letter to the New York Society of May 22, 1837 (see note * page 13 and Appendix E, p. 40), in the passage : — " Besides * * * this right can only be proved by the " production of the medal, which was doubtless sent to every French Officer who " was entitled to it, or accounting for its loss." (2) Minutes of General Meeting 1790, page 43. (3) Minutes of General Meeting 1784, page 12. 25 The paramount power of the State Societies conceded by the General Meeting. Other evidence of no doubtful import in the ser- ies, that the " Amended Institution " by which the General Meeting in 1784 agreed that "the Cincinnati should in future be governed," was subjected to the condition of its acceptance by the State Societies alone, appears not only in the resolution of that meeting that a copy of the Circular letter, " together with the Insti- " tution as altered and amended," be signed by the President-General " and forwarded to every State "Society;" but in the part of their Circular of that year which appeals to "the liberality, the patriotism "and magnanimity" of the State Societies "for the ratification of their proceedings." (1) This evidence, with the words of their Circular of 1788, " the cstablish- " ing a permanent constitution which requires a unani- " mous vote of the representatives of all the State " Societies " (2) completes the record of their capitula- tion to the paramount power of the State Societies. Repeated appeals were at recurrent General Meetings addressed to the recalcitrant State Societies until the year 1800, when for want of their confirmation, the dissent of the State Societies to the proposed " Amen- " ded Institution," was announced, and their refusal to ratify the same. It would seem that no further proof of the per- sistence of the General Meeting in its purpose can be required, than its relentless expression of the demise of the Original Institution, in a record of fifteen years from 1784, to its remission in 1799, by the election of a Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer required by the " Original Institution," but renounced by the "Amend- ed " — followed by the registry in 1800 of its final repu- diation through the refusal of the State Societies to unite in the celebration of the obsequies. {1) Minutes of General Meeting 1784, pages 16-19-20. (2) Minutes General Meeting 1788, page 40. 26 It is unquestionably true that the "Amended Insti- tution " assumed to make certain high officials, and cer- tain of the officers of the Army and Navy of France members of the Society ; to authorize their separate organization in France ; and that an organization was accordingly effected, and subsequently recognized in various ways by the General Meeting. But, as has been shown, such an organization was not known from the adoption of the Institution in 1783, to the alleged adoption of the "Amended Institution" in 1784. The evidence of its existence is confined between the date of the first Triennial Meeting in May, 17S4, at which the Amended Institution was proposed, and of that in May, 1800, at which its defeasance was declared by "a unanimous vote" that the Institution of the " Society remains as it was originally proposed and " adopted by the officers of the American Army at "the Cantonment on the banks of the Hudson River "in 1783" (1). The effect of its recognition, in either the proceedings of the General Meeting or in its official correspondence must be limited cx-vi-termini to this definite period of time. Thus it is plain that the Life of the " Amended Institution," depended solely on the concurrence of the State Societies; in the failure of which, the Meeting in France was summarily bereft of a hypothetical existence. The exceptional power of the State Societies under the " Original Institution " and by impriscriptiblc right. It may not be thought irrelevant here to remark the exceptional power conferred on the State Societies of the Cincinnati, by the " Original Institution." They are the sole judges of the qualification of applicants, and are empowered to admit them to membership in the Society at large. They may expel, for cause, any (,1) Minutes of General Meeting 1800, page 65. 2? member of the Cincinnati resident within their re- spective local jurisdictions. To them alone is entrusted the power of appointing Honorary Members of the Society, and each is invested with the inalienable and irreversible charter right of a Tribunitial negative on any alteration of the " Institution," from which it dissents. Indeed, the extent of their power cannot be more forcibly exemplified than by the unquestionable mag- nanimity with which they unanimously included the officers of the Navy of the Revolution, within the pale of a Society the exponent of chartered rights to the officers of the Army of the Revolution alone. To the rejection of the "Amended Institution" by the State Societies is due the existence at this day, of the Cincinnati Society. This inventory of powers is a singular instance of a part, endowed with the attributes of the whole. Singular though it be, fortunately, to it the Society is indebted for its existence. The dissent of the State Societies from the " Amended Institution," saved to its members the Society they enjoy. What would have been the consequence of their compliance, may now not unprofitably be considered. The consequence of an acceptance of the "Amended Institution " by the State Societies. A glance shows us, that under the " Institution " as proposed with Amendments, no Americans were members except " the commissioned and brevet offi- " cers of the Army and Navy of the United States, "who (13th of May, 1784) had served three years, " and who had left the service with reputation ; the " officers who were in actual service at the conclusion "of the war; and all the principal staff officers of 28 " the Continental Army." There were also made mem- bers, "the late and present (May 13th, 1784) ministers " of his most Christian Majesty to the United States, " and the Generals and Colonels of regiments and " legions of the land forces, and all Admirals and " Captains of the Navy ranking as Colonels, who have " co-operated with the Armies of the United States in " their exertions for liberty ; and such other persons " who have been admitted by the respective State "meetings" (1). It is evident that a Society thus constituted, must have expired with its members, for the want of successors ; and as the last of them must have died many years since, the Society of the Cincin- nati must have perished with them. To the rejection, therefore, of the "Amended Institution " by the State Societies, is justly attributable the existence at this day of a Society, whose endurance in perpetuity was the inspiration of its Founders. Conclusion. From this retrospective view may be derived the conclusion that if the "Amended Institution" had been ratified, there had now been no Society of the Cincinnati ; and that it exists, is due alone to the re- jection by the State Societies of the alterations and amendments proposed to the Institution of 1783 — a conclusion upon which logically rests the irrefutable proposition, that if the "Original Institution " survives, there never has been a full panoplied Society of the Cincinnati in France ; but that if, annulled by the "Amended Institution," the Cincinnati Society is dead, and the French Society died with it. On which- ever horn therefore, of the dilemma it is placed, the fate of the " French Society " is the same. Fraternally yours, JOHN COCHRANE. New York, July 4th, 1894. (1) Minutes of General Meeting 1784, page 13. 2 9 Appendix A. (See page 10) Pierre Charles L'Enfant of France — enlisted in the service of the United States, 1778 — Captain of the Corps of Engineers, 1779 — Wounded at Savannah, October 9th, 1779 — Taken prisoner at Charleston, 12th May, 1780 — Exchanged November, 1780 — Brevetted Major, May 2d, 1783 — Served to the end of the war — Died June 14th, 1825 — His name appears on the En- gineers Roll as an original member of the Cincinnati Society. New York Book of the Cincinnati (Schuy- ler) page 365. Appendix B. (See page 10) Translation of Major L'Enfant's letter. New York Book of the Cincinnati (Schuyler) pages 92, 93. Philadelphia^ 10th June, ijSj. My General-. Immediately on receiving your letter of the 20th May, which I met by accident at the post office, on the 7th inst., I set myself about the plan of the medal. I send you both faces of the design, which I have made large, so that you may better judge of them. In the execution they can be reduced to a convenient size, which, on account of the precision required in the design, ought not to be less than a dollar, the subject being too complex to admit of its being properly detailed in a smaller compass. I have not made it oval, agreeably to your desire, as such a form is not proper for a medal ; besides, it can be done in the execution, if the idea should be persisted in of having the order in that form, to which, however, I think any other preferable. I also believe and hope that you will be persuaded of this, and endeavor to 30 convince the gentlemen of it who compose the com- mittee for forming the Institution, and to whom I beg you to communicate the following observations: A medal, whether round or oval, is considered in the different states of Europe, only as a reward of the laborer and the artist, or as a sign of a manufacturing community, or religious society ; besides, the abusive custom prevailing, particularly in Germany and Italy, of sending to France montebanks, dancers and musicians, ornamented in this manner, renders it necessary to distinguish this order by a form which shall be peculiar to itself, and which will answer the two-fold purpose of honoring those invested with it, and making itself respected for its simplicity, by such as may be in a situation minutely to examine its different parts. Not that I suppose one form or another will. change the opinion of a republican people, accustomed to think; I only say, that in an institution of this sort the main design should be to render it respectable to everybody, and that it is only in appealing to the senses that you can engage the attention of the common people, who have certain habitual prejudices which cannot be de- stroyed. A gentleman already invested with any Euro- pean order, would be unwilling to carry a medal, but if, flattered by receiving a mark of distinction from a respectable society, he should do it, the manner of it would by no means increase the value of the order. On the contrary, giving it a new and particular form will be adding a recommendation to its real value, and engage those invested with it, to wear it in the same manner as their other military orders, which is the surest means of putting it at once upon a footing with them. The bald eagle, which is peculiar to this continent, and is distinguished from those of other climates by its white head and tail, appears to me to deserve attention. I send you two essays which I have made, and desire one of them may be adopted instead of the medal. In one, I make the eagle supporting a star with thirteen 3* points, in the centre of which is the figure of the medal, with its inscriptions, as well in front as on the reverse. A legend might be added in the claws and go round the neck of the eagle, with a particular inscription, or the contour of the medal transferred there. In the other, I have made simply the eagle, supporting on its breast the figure of the medal, with a legend in his claws and about the neck, which passes behind and sustains the reverse. I would prefer the latter, as it does not resemble any other order, and bears a distinct character ; nor will it be expensive in its execution. The first device, although more complex, would not be so dear as people may imagine, especially if the execution of it should be committed to skillful persons, which would not be the case any more than with the medal, but by sending it to Europe, where it would not take up a great deal of time, nor be so expensive as to trust the execution of it here to workmen not well acquainted with the business. A medal is a monument to be transmitted to pos- terity ; and, consequently, it is necessary that it be executed to the highest degree of perfection possible in the age in which it is struck. Now, to strike a medal well, is a matter that requires practice and a good die ; and as there is not here cither a press proper for this work, nor people who can make a good die, I would willingly undertake to recommend the execution of the medal, the eagle, or the order, to such persons in Paris as are capable of executing it to perfection. So far from proposing to change the oval medal into an eagle, on which should be impressed the medal, I do not pretend to say medals cannot be made. On the con- trary, my idea of the subject is, that silver medals should be struck, at the common expense of the Society, and distributed, one to each member, as an appendage to a diploma of parchment, whereon it would be proper to stamp the figure of the medal, the eagle, or the star, in its full dimensions, and properly colored, enjoining 32 on the members to conform to it, though leaving them the liberty, provided it be at their own expense, of having it made of such metal and as small as they please, without altering any of the emblems. It seems to me by no means proper that the honorary members should wear the order in the same manner as the orig- inal members ; it would be necessary that they should wear the medal, the star, or the eagle, round their necks, and the original members at their third button-hole. These remarks, I beg you, my General, to have trans- lated and submitted to the gentlemen concerned. I shall be obliged to you to let me know the issue of this letter, and their decision upon it. I have, etc., etc., etc., L'ENFANT. N. B. — The head and tail of the eagle should be silver, or enamelled in white, the body and wings gold, the medal on its breast and back enamelled in the same color as the legend ; sprigs of laurel and oak might be added in the wings enamelled in green ; the star should be pointed in gold, or enamelled in blue and white ; those who would be at the expense might, instead of white, have diamonds. The riband, as is customary in all orders, should be watered." 33 Appendix C. (See pages 13-19) Record of the proceedings of the Founders of the Cincinnati Society in the Constituent Convention, June 19th, 1783 — 'New York Book of the Cincinnati (Schuy- ler) pages 21, 22, 23, 24. Cantonment of the American Army, ipt/i June, 1783. At a meeting of the General Officers, and the gen- tlemen delegated by the respective regiments, as a Convention for establishing the Society of the Cincin- nati, held by the request of the President, at which were present, Major-General Baron de Si 1 UBEN, President, Major-General Howe, Major-General KNOX, Brigadier-General Patters* in, Brigadier-General Hand, Brigadier-General HUNTINGTON, Brigadier-General Putnam, Colonel Webb, Lieutenant-Colonel HUNTINGTON, Major PETTENGILL, Lieutenant WHITING, Colonel H. Jackson, Captain Shaw, Lieutenant-Colonel Hull, Lieutenant-Colonel MAXWELL, Colonel COURTLANDT. General Baron de STEUBEN acquainted the Conven- tion that he had, agreeably to their request, at the last meeting, transmitted to his Excellency the Chevalier de la LUZERNE, Minister Plenipotentiary from the Court of France, a Copy of the Institution of the Society of the Cincinnati, with their vote respecting his Excellency, and the other characters therein mentioned ; 34 and that his Excellency had returned an answer, declar- ing his acceptance of the same, and expressing the grateful sense he entertains of the honor conferred on himself, and the other gentlemen of the French nation, by this act of the Convention. Resolved, That the letter of the Chevalier de la LUZERNE be recorded in the proceedings of this day, and deposited in the archives of the Society, as a testimony of the high sense this Convention entertains of the honor done to the Society by his becoming a member thereof. The Letter is as follows : (See page 19, note.) Philadelphie, le j Jtiin, 17S3. " Monsieur le Baron, "J'ai recu avec beaucoup de reconnoissance les statuts de l'ordre respectable que messieurs les officiers de l'armee Americaine viennent de fonder : si le courage, la patience, et toutes les vertus que cetta brave armee a si souvent deployees dans le cours de cetta guerre, pouvoient jamais etre oubliees, ce monument seul les rapelleroit. " J'ose vous assurer, monsieur, que tous les officiers de ma nation, que vous avez bien voulu admettre dans votre societe, en seront infin- iment honores ; je vous prie d'etre bien persuade que je sens, en mon particulier, bien vivement l'honneur que m'ont fait messieurs les offi- ciers de l'armee, en daignant penser a moi dans cette occasion. Je compte aller rendre mes devoirs a son excellence le General Wash- ington, aussitot que le traite definitif sera signe, et j'aurai l'honneur de les assurer de vive voix de ma respectueuse reconnoissance. "Je saisis avec un grand empressement cette occasion de vous renouveller ks sentiments du ties parfait et ties respectueux attach- ment avec lesquels j'ai l'honneur d'etre, Monsieur le Baron, votre tres humble, et tre's obeissant serviteur, LE CHEVALIER DE LA LUZERNE. 1 de Steuben, Major au service des Etats Unis, au Quartier General. Monsieur, Monsieur le Baron de Steuben, Major-General) The Baron having also communicated a letter from Major L' ENFANT, enclosing a design for the medal and order, containing the emblems of the Institution, 35 Resolved, That the bald eagle, carrying the emblems on its breast, be established as the order of the Society, and that the ideas of Major L'ENFANT respecting it, and the manner of its being worn by the members, be adopted. That the order be of the same size, and in every other respect conformable to the said design, which for that purpose is certified by the Baron de STEUBEN, President of this Convention, and to be deposited in the archives of the Society as the orig- inal, from which all copies are to be made. Also, that silver medals, not exceeding the size of a Spanish milled dollar, with the emblems as designed by Major L' ENFANT, and certified by the President, be given to each and every member of the Society, together with a diploma, on parchment, whereon shall be impressed the exact figures of the order and medal, as above mentioned ; any thing in the original institution, re- specting gold medals, to the contrary notwithstanding. Major L'ENFANT'S letter is as follows: Philadelphia, le 10 Juin, i~Sj. " Mon General, Aussitot apres la reception de votre lettre en date du 20 Mai, laquelle ne m'est parvenu que le 7, ayant etc par hazard a la poste, je me suis occupe des projets de la medaille. Je vous envoye les desseins de deux faces, que j'ai faits, en grand, a fin qu'on puisse mieux juger de l'ensemble. Lors de l'execution on la reduira a la grandeur convenable qui pour peur que Ton exige de precision dans le dessein, ne doit pas etre plus petite pu'un dollar, le sujet se trouvant trop complique pour que les details puissent etre appercus sous une plus petite dimension. " Je ne l'ai point fait ovale, ainsi que vous me le demandez, vu que cette forme est peu propre a une medaille ; d'ailleurs, on pourra tou- jours la faire au moment de l'execution, si on persiste absolumcnt a vouloir porter l'ordre sous cette forme, a laquelle je crois que tout autre seroit preferable ; ainsi que je crois et espere que vous en serez bien persuade, et ferez en sorte d'en convaincre les personnes qui composent le comite ralatif a cette institution, auxquelles je vous prie le communiquer les observations suivantes. "La medaille, ronde ou ovale, n'est considered dans les differents stats de l'Europe que comme une recompense d'artiste, d'artistant, ou comme un signe de communaute de fabriquants, ou societe religieuse — ■ 36 en outre, l'usage abusif que Ton en fait, particulierement en Allemagne et en Italie, d'ou il arrive en France, des baladins, des musiciens, decores de cette maniere, rend ne'cessarie de distinguer cet ordre par une forme qui lui soit particuliere, et puisse, en honorant celui qui en sera decore, remplir le double objet de se faire respecter par son simple aspect, de ceux raeme qui en seront apporte's d'en detailler les differentes empreintes. " Ce n'est pas qne je croye qu'une forme, ou une autre changera l'opinion d'un peuple republicain accoutume a penser, mais je dis, que dans une institution pareille, le premier but doit etre de se rendre re- spectable a tous les peuples du monde ; et que ce n'est qu'en parlant aux yeux qu'on attire l'attention du vulgaire, qu'il y a des pre!uges d'habitude pui ne peuvent etra de'truits — qu'un homme qualifie et deja decore en Europe ne portera pas une medaille, ou, si flatte de recevoir une marque de distinction d'une socie'te respectable, il la portoit, ce seroit d'une maniere pen propre a faire accre'diter la valeur de i'ordre. Qu'au contraire, en lui donnant une forme nouvelle en particulier, ce sera ajouter a sa valeur reelle, celle de la rendre recommendable, en engageant ceux qui en seront decores a. en faire parade de pair avec les autres orders militaires, ce qui est le plus siir moyen de la mettre d'abord de niveau avec eux. " Le bald eage qui est particulier a ce continent et qui se distingue a celui des autres climats, par sa tete et sa queue blanches, m'a paru meriter de l'attention. " Je vous envoye deux essais que j'ai faits ; je desire que 1'un des deux puisse etre adopte au lieu et place de la medaille. Dans l'un, je fais l'aigle supportant une e'toile, a treize pointes, dans le centre de laquelle est renfermee la figure de la medaille avec les inscriptions, tant sur la face qne sur le reverse. On pourroit ajouter une legende clans les serres et autour du col de l'aigle, avec une inscription partic- uliere, oil bien y transferre celle du contour de la medaille. Dans l'autre, j'ai fait l'aigle simplement portant s-ur sa poitrine la figure de la medaille, avec une legende dans ses serres et autour du col, laquelle lui repasse par derriere le dos pour soutenir le revers. Je prefererois le dernier, en ce qu'il n'a rapport a aucun ordre et porte avec lui un caracte're distinctif, et ne seroit pas fort dispendieux a faire executer. Le premier menee, quoique plus complique, ne reviendroit pas aussi cher qu'on pourroit le penser, toute fois qu'on en chargeroit des per- sonnes capables de l'executer ; ce qui ne pent avoir lieu non plus que relativement a la medaille qu'en l'envoyant en Eupope, ce qui n'exige- roit pas beaucoup de terns, et ne seroit pas si dispendieux, que d'en confier l'execution a des personnes incapables. " Une medaille est un monument qui passe a la posterite ; et par consequent il est ne'cessaire qu'elle soit portee au degre de perfection possible dans le siecle ou elle est frappee. Or, bien fiapper une me- daille est une chose qui demande de l'habitude et un bon coin, or il n'y a ici ni balancier propre a cette besogne ni gens capables be faire un 37 bon doin, je me chargerois volontiers de recommender l'execution de la medaille, de l'aigle ou ordre, a gens capables de l'executor a Paris. " Bien loin que je propose de changer la medaille ovale et un aigle sur lequel seroit empreint cette medaille, je ne pretends pas dire qu'ils ne scavent pas frapper des me : daille. Au contraire, voici quelle est mon idee a ce sujet. "On pourroit faire frapper ici des medaijles d'argent anx frais com- muns de la societe, et en distribuer une a chacun de ses membres, comme un titre adapte a la patente cle parchemin, sur laquelle il sera aussi a propos de graver la figure de la medaille, la forme de l'aigle ou de l'etoile, avec sa plus grande dimension, detaillant les couleurs, en soignant de s'y conformer, laissant la liberte anx chevaliers que s'en pourvoyeront a leurs depens, de la faire de tel metal, et aussi petite que possible, sans alteration d'aucun des emblemes. II ne me parroit pas non plus a propos que les chevaliers honoraires poitassent l'ordre pareille aux chevaliers de droit. II faudroit qu'on signifiat qu'ils portassent la medaille, on l'etoile, ou l'aigle en sautoir, et les chevaliers a la 3me bouttoniere. " Mon General, ce sont les remnrques que je vous prie de faire traduire, et de les soumettre a l'opinion general. Je vous semis oblige de me faire savoir quelle issue cette lettre aura, et quelle sera la decision qu'on en donnera. J'ai, &c. &c, L'ENFANT. " N. B. La teete et la queue de l'aigle seroient d'argent ou emaillees en blanc, le corps et les ailes d'or, la medaille sur sa poitrine et sur son dos, emaillee en couleur de meme que la legende. Ou pourroit y ajouter des branches de laurier et de chene dans les ailes, pour lors qu'on emailleroit en verd l'etoile du niedaillon seroit pointee en or, ou emaillee bleu et blanc, ceux qui voudroient faire le depense pourroient avoir en diamant tout ce qui est blanc. Le ruban seroit moire comme celui de tous les autres ordres." Resolved, That the thanks of this Convention be transmitted, by the President, to Major L'ENFANT, for his care and ingenuity in preparing the afore-mentioned designs, and that he be acquainted that they cheerfully embrace his offer of assistance, and request a con- tinuance of his attention in carrying the designs into execution, for which purpose the President is desired to correspond with him. Resolved, That his Excellency the Commander-in- Chief be requested to officiate as President-General, until the first general meeting, to be held in May next. That a Treasurer-General, and a Secretary-General be balloted for, to officiate in like manner. 3» The ballots being taken, Major-General M'DOUGALL was elected Treasurer-General, and Major-General Knox, Secretary-General, who are hereby requested to accept said appointments. Resolved, That all the proceedings of this Conven- tion, including the Institution of the Society, be re- corded (from the original papers in his possession) by captain Shaw, who at the first meeting was requested to act as Secretary, and that the same, signed by the President's Secretary, together with the original papers, be given into the hands of Major-General KNOX, Secretary-General to the Society; and that Captain NORTH, aid-de-camp to the Baron de STEUBEN, and acting secretary to him as President, sign the said records. The dissolution of a very considerable part of the army, since the last meeting of this Convention, having rendered the attendance of some of its members impracticable, and the necessity for some temporary arrangements, previous to the first meeting of the General Society, being so strikingly obvious, the Con- vention found itself constrained to make those before mentioned, which they have done with the utmost diffidence of themselves, and relying entirely on the candor of their Constituents to make allowance for the measure. The principal objects of its appointment being thus accomplished, the members of this conven- tion think fit to dissolve the same, and it is hereby dissolved accordingly. True copy from the records of the Society. W. NORTH, Secretary to the President. 39 Appendix D. (See pages 17 and 20) New York Book of the Cincinnati (Schuyler) page 187. 1825. General La Fayette having represented to the Society that the Baron D'Aurier, a lieutenant-general in the armies of France, had served in the United States during the war of the Revolution as an officer of distinguished merit, in the division of the French troops then commanded by General the Count Rochambeau, and as allies of the American Army under the immedi- ate command of His Excellency General Washington at the capture of Yorktown, in October, 1781, and that the said Baron D'Aurier is a gentleman of very es- timable and fair character, and is in his sentiments a patroit, and worthy of being enrolled as a brother among the surviving officers of the Army of the United States of the Revolution, and that the Baron is desirous of becoming an honorary member of the Society of the Cincinnati. On the 4th July this Society, in testimony of the high sense it entertains of the political principles, the fair character and talents, and the meritorious services of the Baron D'Aurier in the War of the Revolution for the Independence of the United States of America, do admit him, and he is hereby admitted an honorary member of the Society of the Cincinnati : Resolved. That a copy of the preceding resolution, together with a diploma, with the usual certificate en- dorsed theron and signed by the President of this Society, be delivered to our friend and brother, General La Fayette, with a request that he will be pleased, on his return to France, to present the same in due form to the Baron D'Aurier. 40 Appendix E. (See pages 13, 24 and 16) Letter of Col. Aaron Ogden, President General of the General Society of the Cincinnati, in reply to a letter of inquiry by the New York Society — New York Book of the Cincinnati (Schuyler), pp. 114-115. 1837. An application being made for admission by Count Gabrowski, claiming in right of his father, Count Gabrowski, as having served under the Duke de Luzer- ne, the Secretary addressed a letter to the President- General, requesting information with respect to the succession from the officers of the French Army who were admitted members of the Society, and received the following reply : Jersey City, May 22, 1837. Chas. Graham, Esq., Secretary. Sir, — Yours under the post-mark of May 5th, 1837, has been duly received, and on examination I find from the minutes of the General Society that the Society was established by the officers of the American Army who signed the Institution, and at the same time (gave) a draft on the Paymaster-General for one month's pay according to their several grades, who combined themselves into one Society of Friends, to endure as long as they shall endure, or any of their male posterity. There is in the original Institution a provision, of which I now enclose a copy.* From this provision it would seem that the extension of the order should be confined to the persons designated therein, for other- wise there can be no limit, and it cannot be presumed that the President-General, without authority so to do, transmitted a medal to any not named in the provision, * This enclosure was the extract from the original Institution, naming the Chevalier de Luzerne and others, including the Count Rochambeau, and other Generals and Colonels of his army to whom the medal was to be sent, and who were considered as members. 41 or who had not been a General or Colonel in the army commanded by Count Rochambeau. Besides, there is no provision that the right of membership should descend to the posterity of the persons designated in the enclosed provision, and the adoption of such a rule now, might place the Society in great future difficulties ; but if otherwise, this right can only be proved by the production of the medal, which was doubtless sent to every officer in the French Army who was entitled to it, or accounting for its loss. I know of no list of the names of the officers of the French Army who were admitted members of the Society other than as contained in the enclosed pro- vision, nor of any such prepared by General Knox, but if such an one was prepared at the time, it must have been confined to the Generals and Colonels in Count Rochambeau's army. I am, sir, very respectfully, Your most obedient servant, AARON OGDEN. 42 Appendix F. (See page 16) Minutes of General Meeting (1848), p. 95. November 29, iS^8. — At a General Meeting held in Philadelphia, the Secretary-General, in conformity with the resolution of a previous meeting (1844) request- ing him to " collect from the minutes and proceedings of the Society, the different rules and regulations that have been from time to time adopted in regard to the election and tenure of members and officers," presented the following Report, which was adopted, and ordered to be printed for the use of members of the State Societies : " The Secretary-General reported : "That he has carefully examined all the minutes and proceedings of the Society in his possession, and respectfully submits the following as the result : " The Constitution, accepted by the Society in 1783, provides that the members shall consist of the officers of the American Army, as well those who have resigned with honor, after three years' service in the capacity of officers, or who have been deranged by the resolutions of Congress, upon the several reforms of the Army, as those who shall have continued to the end of the war. Those officers who are foreigners, not resident in any of the States, to have their names enrolled by the Secretary-General. And declares the Society shall endure as long as they endure, or any of their eldest male posterity, and in failure thereof, the collateral branches, who may be judged worthy of becoming its supporters and members. " This last provision is extended in like manner to the descendants of such officers as had died in the service. " The admission of honorary members for their own lives only is also provided for by the Constitution ; but they are not to exceed in number, in each State, a ratio of one to four of the officers or their descendants. 43 " The same instrument directs that ' in the General Meeting, the President, Vice-President. Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Treasurer, and Assistant Treasurer General, shall be chosen to serve until next meeting.' " At the first General Meeting of the Society, held on the 4th of May, 1784, and continued by adjournment un- til the 18th of said month, it was unanimously resolved " that the manner of voting be by the representation of each State Society." Subsequently, at said meet- ing, material alterations in the Constitution were agreed to, affecting (inter alia) the election and tenure of members and officers. These alterations, however, never received the sanction of the State Societies, as appears by the unanimous adoption, in General Meet- ing, in May, A. D. 1800, of the following report of a committee appointed to examine the records of the Society, and report to said meeting the state of the Institution, viz. : "That the Institution of the Society of the Cin- cinnati remains as it was originally proposed and adopted by the officers of the American Arm}-, at their Cantonments on the banks of the Hudson, in 1783." " Since the re-acknowledgment of the original In- stitution, the Secretary-General finds nothing touching the election or tenure of members, except the follow- ing, extracted from the minutes of a General Meeting:, held on the 4th of May, 1829, viz. : "A question having arisen, whether in case of the death of a member having no male issue except a grandson, the issue of a daughter, such grandchild shall be preferred to collaterals. The Society con- ceives the true construction of the Constitution to be, that the grandchild shall be preferred, he being in the direct line of descent." " And in relation to the officers of the Society, he finds that since the substitution of special for stated Triennial Meetings, the officers have been chosen for three years, and thenceforward until a new election takes place. A. W. Johnson, Secretary-General. 44 LETTER, July 4, iSgj. To the Cincinnati of New York: BrctJiren : The investigation in my former letter of the claims to authenticity of a Society of the Cincinnati in France, having occasioned other and relevant in- quiries, I am disposed by their nature to lay their result before you. II. Origin and Nature of the Institution of the Cincinnati Society. The rule that in literary construction allows resort to the exigency felt or the object proposed, is very generally recognized and accepted. Individual habi- tudes, contemporary customs and prevalent opinions are the frequent means of elucidating a passage other- wise obscure. The divergent constructions of the " Institution " of the Society of the Cincinnati, doubtless are in a measure due to a want of consideration of the circumstances which influenced the author who conceived it, or of attention to the affinities of the men who created it. It cannot be supposed that all were not conversant with the principles, and imbued with the spirit of the govern- ment in whose defense they had imperilled their lives ; especially when their words. "To perpetuate there- " fore as well the remembrance of this vast event, {the "establishment of Free, Independent and Sovereign States) " as their mutual friendships," in the " Institution " they framed, explicitly declare their intention that the Free- dom, Independence and Sovereignty of the States of the Confederation, should ever be reflected in the State Societies of the Cincinnati. (Note*.) When Gen'l Knox conceived the Society of the Cincinnati in 1783, there is reason therefore to suppose that he modeled its Insti- tution upon the Articles of Confederation of 1778. A careful examination will not fail to reveal their striking resemblance. Gen'l Knox, during his early life was Note *. Institution, see Appendix A. p. 91. 45 conversant with public affairs, and a diligent use of his opportunities, doubtless contributed in no incon- siderable degree to his subsequent successful conduct of them. It is not unreasonable to believe him to have been familiar with the features of the govern- ment in whose support he was engaged. That the similitude observable between the State Societies of the " Institution," and the States of the Articles of Confederation was designed, a comparison of the two instruments furnishes proof to the degree technically termed a violent presumption. (Note I.) The ascription however, by the Rt. Rev. Wm. Stevens Perry, Bishop of Iowa, of the original idea of the Society of the Cincinnati, to Dr. Wm. Smith, when in Philadelphia, on the 28th of December, 1778, he publicly alluded to Gen'l Washington, then present, as the Cincinnatus of America, attests that the Tree of Knowledge is not indigenous to the soil of that State. (Note?)/ Trite as is the oratorical trope, its incongruity of comparison, deprives it of its asserted effect. The announcement to CINCINNATUS that he had been appointed Dictator of Rome, found him at the plough in his Sabine fields — that to Washington, of his com- mand of the American Armies, found him in public life, a delegate from his native state of Virginia to the Continental Congress ; while even the clerical prescience cannot be said to be faultless, which is claimed to have transferred to Gen'l Washington in 1778, the intent of his Officers in 1783, to justify by returning, like CINCIN- NATUS, to their citizenship, their application of his name- to their Society ; In the events of the day however, is to be found the true origin of the idea of the Society of the Cincinnati. Hostilities had ceased, and the American Army lay in its Cantonment at Newburgh on Hudson's River, when the arrears of pay due its officers, after an unsuccessful application to Congress, and the half-pay promised those, who should serve during the war, occasioned great anxiety. Then appeared the celebrated Newburgh Addresses of Major, afterward General John Armstrong, written at the request of many of his fellow officers, exhorting them to refuse to perform during the war, further military duty, or to lay down their arms on the return of peace, unless they were granted their just demands. Note 1. See Parallel, Appendix A. page 91. Note §. American Historical Register. July, 1895, p. 1208. Note 2. 46 A meeting of officers was anonymously called for the 1 1 th of March, 1783, to discuss their grievances. Whereupon Washington called a similar meeting for the ensuing 15th, for the consideration of their claims; at which his strenuous and pathetic appeal effectually allayed their mutinous discontent, and replaced in its largest reactionary force, that self sacrificing patriotism which had previously characterized the American Army. One month thereafter, on the 15th of April, General Knox drew up his " Proposals " for establishing a Society modeled upon that very government, against which the complaints of the officers to whom the pro- posals were addressed, had been recently directed with menacing violence. The proposals and their accept- ance evidently were the kindly fruit of the renewed and invigorated patriotism of the Army : and thus on the 13th of May, 1783, out of the nettle danger implied in the incendiary Nevvburgh Addresses, was plucked the flower safety, consummate in THE SOCIETY OF THE Cincinnati. III. Parallel between the powers of the States under the articles of confederation, and those of the state societies under the "Institution" of the Cincinnati. The delegates from each State formed the Articles : the officers from the regiments of each State adopted the Institution. The people in the one, are represented by the United States: the Cincinnati in the other, are repre- sented by the united State Societies. The delegates from the States form the Congress of the United States: the delegates from the State Societies form the Congress of the Society. The States retain their sovereignty, freedom and independence and every power, jurisdiction and right not delegated to the United States in Congress assem- bled : the State Societies possess the power, jurisdiction and right not delegated to the General Meeting in Congress assembled. The power of the United States was the constituent power of the States whose delegates composed it : the power of the General Meeting is the constituent power of the State Societies whose delegates compose it. 47 The "denomination" of the Society in the text of the Institution corresponds topically with the " Style " of the Confederacy in that of the articles of Confed- eration. " Perpetuity''' is invoked by each. The assurance of the one government to the citizens of each State of "the immunities and privileges" of the citizens of every other State, is repeated by the one Society in the assurance to its members in each State, of equal privileges in all. To State, and to State Society is allotted each, its numerical representation ; and the rule which appor- tions the suffrage to each, corresponds with the unit of power accorded to both. Each State reserves its independent rights, and each State Society preserves its autonomy. Each State maintains its own delegates; and while each State Society incurs the expense of its own, the dependence of the General Meeting upon the State Societies for financial support is a faithful reflection of that of the Confederacy upon the States it represented. (Note 2.) Note 2. The fiscal system of the Society has been but little understood, and has been practically neglected by both the General Meeting and the State Socie- ties. The paragraphs of the Institution relating to it are as follows: " All the Officers of the American Army * * * have the right to " become parties to this Institution ; provided that they subscribe one month's pay, " and sign their names to the general rules in their respective State Societies.' " Those officers who are foreigners, not resident in any of the States, will have their names enrolled by the Secretary-General, and are to be considered as mem- be> s in tin- Societies of any of the States in which they may happen to be, " In order to form funds which may be respectable, and assist the unfortunate, each officer shall deliver to the Treasurer of the State Society, one month's pay, which shall remain for ever to the use of the State Society ; the interest only ot which, it necessary, to be appropriated to the relief of the unfortunate. " Donations may be made by persons not of the Society, and by members of the Society, for the express purpose of forming permanent Hinds for the use of the State Society ; and the interest of these donations to be appropriated in the same manner as that of the month's pay. " It is probable that some persons may make donations to the General Society, for the purpose of establishing funds for the further comfort of the unfortunate ; in which case, such donations must be placed in the hands of the Treasurer-Gen- eral, the interest only of which to be disposed of, if necessary, by the General Meeting." These provisions may be fairly said to bear the following construction— The right of any of the officers, either native or foreign, of the American Army,' within the thirteen States, to become a member of the Society, depends on two conditions — First— that he sign his name to the Institution within the Society of the State of his residence ; or if a non-resident foreign officer that his name be enrolled by the Secretary-General — in which case he is to be considered a member of the Society of the State in which he dwells. Secondly— that each officer, native or foreign of the American Army, resident and non-resident, subscribe one month's />av and deliver the same to the Treasurer of the Society of his State,— the non-resident foreign officer to the Treasurer of the Society of the State where he dwells, and to which he is considered as belonging. The aggregate of the one month's pay forms a fund of which the State Societies are the dispensers, devoted inviolably forever, to the assistance of the unfortunate. The donations that are permitted to both the General Meeting and the State Societies are subjected to the same limitation. Of the monthly pay. the 4 8 The negative of any one of the States in league under the Articles of Confederation forbade alteration of its terms: the negative of any one of the State Societies in compact under the Institution forbids alteration of its terms. (Note §.) The laws of the Congress of the Confederation had merely the force of recommendations : the action of the General Meeting of the Cincinnati has merely the force of recommendations; and as the stipulation in the Articles of Confederation that " each State retains " its sovereignty," restricted the power of the Congress to advice, so the impress by the Institution of sover- eignty on the State Societies, restricts the sole powers of the General Meeting to advice. State Societies are the depositories exclusive of the General Meeting, the deposi- tory only of the donations to it for the same purpose. It is observable that the fund of each thus devoted to the Charities of the Society, leaves both unprovided with the means of defraying their appropriate expenses, in the event that the interest of the fund does not exceed the sum of the charities charged upon it. These, it may have been expected, were to be provided by the voluntary contri- butions of their members, till the fees affixed by the State Societies to the admis- sion of the hereditary successors of the Founders, should constitute a fund for the purpose. Doubtless many of the foreign officers of the Army '" not resident in any of the States," when having "their names enrolled by the Secretary-General," paid their one month's pay to the Treasurer-General, instead of delivering it as required to the Treasurer of the Society of the State where they "happened to be," and of which they were members Yet, in the event of their improper re- ception, their inviolable eleemosynary character adhered to them in the hands of the Treasurer-General, and constituted them equally with the donations he re- ceived, sacred to the Charities of the Society. If the General Meeting has in any measure, by appropriating these funds, impaired them, in that degree has it crippled the efforts of the Society to relieve the unfortunate. The sum in the Treasury of the General Meeting is probably the accumulation of the one month's pay and of desultory donations bestowed. The constitutional restraint of its use "for the further comfort of the unfortunate," renders it in- violate for any other purpose ; and the consequent want of pecuniary resources by the General Meeting, exclusive ot the interest of its funds unexpended in charity, constrains its financial dependence on the State Societies. Hence the appeal of the General Meeting of 1829 (Minutes Gen'l Meeting 1829. p. 82) to the State Societies to contribute a fund " for the purpose of defraying the expenses of "the Society " ; and hence the direction of the General Meeting in i860 (Minutes Gen'l Meeting i860, p. 151), since disregarded, that "no portion of the invested funds or the accruing interest thereof should be applied to the current or ordi- nary expenses, but that the same shall be met by the State Societies." Note §. The Congress of the Confederation of 1778, dependent on the States for the means of paying the debts of the United States, submitted to the States an amendment to the Articles of Confederation, allowing the Congress to impose a duty of 5 per cent, on imports. Rhode Island alone dissented, and the amendment failed. Again the same proposition was, for a somewhat different purpose, sub- mitted to the States in 1783, when in 1786 it was practically again rejected by the sole negative of the State of New York. Hence our present national Constitution to avert the impending bankruptcy of the Government, consequent upon the refusal of the States to contribute to the liquidation of its debts. The power of one State to defeat the proposed amendment by its single negative, rested on the impossibility of changing or adding to the terms of a treaty or league without the assent of all the parties to it, even though as in the Articles of Confederation and in the Institution of the Cincinnati no such power is expressed. It has always been conceded and is undisputed now that no change can be made in the Institution of the Cincinnati, any one State Society dissenting. The Institution having been understood and held by the Founders to be a compact between the State Societies whose members subscribed to it, instead of a majority of them being required to its alteration or amendment, the negative 0/ but one was understood and held to be sufficient for its defeat. In this consists the strongest of the parallels between the Articles of Confederation and the Institution of the Cincinnati, and decisive proof of the relations between them. 49 As the several States in 1778 entered " into a league of friendship" with each other, the officers of the regi- ments of the American Army in the several States "combined themselves" in 1783 into " one Society of friends ;" and as the several States of the Union were confederated in the " sole " government of " the United States of America" in 1778, the several State Societies were confederated in 1783, in the "one Society of the Cincinnati." Obviously this parallel was not without design ; nor was the independence of the State Societies unintended. Convincing however as it is, the Institution itself testifies that the plan of the Society was projected upon that of the United States Government, under the Articles of Confederation of 1778, in these precise terms. — "To "perpetuate therefore, as well the remembrance of this "vast event, [the establishment of free, independent and "sovereign States) as their mutual friendships, * " the officers of the American Army do hereby in the " most solemn manner associate, constitute and combine "themselves into One Society of Friends," etc : and having been thus actuated to form a Society, for their "high veneration of the character of that illus- "trious Roman LUCIUS QuiNTIUS ClNCINNATUS, and " being resolved to follow his example by returning to " their citizenship, they think they may with propriety "denominate themselves The Society of the Cin- cinnati." Here were two distinct objects meditated and accomplished, for two separate and distinct purposes — the one the institution of a Society whose constituent State Societies should reflect the freedom, independence and sovereignty of the States of the old Confederation ; and the other, the selection of a name which they intended for their exemplar " in returning to their citizen- ship" — the venerated name of LUCIUS QuiNTIUS ClNCINNATUS. 5o IV. The State Societies of the Cincinnati — The extent of their power. The presence of the respective States as efficients of the Institution is averred by the consecration in the trinity of its " immutable principles" of " an unalterable " determination to promote and cherish between the " respective States that union and national honor so " essentially necessary to the happiness and the future " dignity of the empire ;" is declared in the words of the Institution, that "all the officers of the American Army " * have the right to become parties to this " Institution, provided that they subscribe one month's " pay, and sign their names to the general rules in their "respective States;" and is enforced by the resolution first adopted by the eliminated Society, which, when directing that " a copy of the Institution be given to the " Senior Officers of the respective State lines," recog- nizes, in the method ordered by " the Society " for their separate organization, the intended independence of the State Societies. The Institution in its own language speaks its own meaning. Preposterous error lies in the assumption that the State Societies are the progeny of the General Meeting. They are the intersecting branches of no parent stock : as the tree rises from the roots on which it rests, the General Meeting rests upon the State Societies that support it. Instead of a division separating the whole into parts, the respective States represented by the officers of the regiments of each, were the parts that constituted the whole. (Note §.) " For the sake "of frequent communications" between the sovereign components of the confederated Society, the Founders resolved it by the chorographical lines of the thirteen States, into thirteen geographical organizations. Of this significance is the Institution, whose language is descriptive not of State Societies IN the States — Note §. This order, however, was intended to be reversed by the Amended Institution, by which "The Society of the Cincinnati," having first been con- stituted of the Officers of the American Army, and certain of the military and civil Officers of France, with periodical meetings prescribed to it, was divided into "State Meetings," to which alone funds were appointed, the interest of which was made contributory to the expense of " The Society " and its officers, on demand. (Amended Institution, Sec. 4, 5. 10, 12. Minutes Gen'l Meeting, 1784, pp. 13, 14.) 5i fractions of a Society including them ; but of integral Societies " OF the State " where organized. Nor did contemporary opinion diverge from this judg- ment when Chief Justice Marshall, the Biographer of Washington, pronounced that " The military gentlemen "of each State were to constitute a distinct Society; " deputies from which were to assemble triennially in " order to form a general meeting for the regulation " of general concerns." (Note 3.) These State Socie- ties the Institution irrevocably pronounces the Society of the Cincinnati in these explicit terms : " From the " State lists the Secretary-General MUST make out at " the first general meeting, A COMPLETE LIST OF THE "WHOLE OF THE SOCIETY." That the purpose of the communications between the State Societies is exclusive of the General Meeting is evident First — from the difficulty under the pressure of personal privations, of communications between the distant parts of a new country of indefinite extent, sparsely populated, and destitute of facilities for interior intercourse. Secondly — from the power of the State Societies to organize District Societies — implements of inter-com- munication. Thirdly — from the impossibility of "frequent com- munications" with a body of an intermittent triennial existence : and Last — from the provision for communication be- tween the State and the General Meetings, elsewhere in the Institution specifically made. (Note *.) Of the delegates from the State Societies the Founders created a body which, as the representative of the Societies, they called the General Meeting. They directed it to be convened either annually or every three years. They constituted its "meetings" and the " meetings " of the State Societies A JOINT PROTECTOR- ATE of "the principles" of the Institution. This con- current jurisdiction, they separated distinctly from the supervision of the general interests of the Society, which was confided to the General Meeting alone. Its deriva- tive power thus restricted to conjunctive exercise with Note 3. Marshall's Life of Washington, p. 26. Note *. " Each State meeting shall write annually, or oftener if necessary, a circular letter to the other State Societies, noting whatever they ma}^ think worthy of observation, etc. * * * * Copies of these letters shall be regularly transmitted to the Secretary-General, who will record them in a book to be assigned for that purpose." "The circular letters which have been written by the respective State Societies to each other, and their particular laws, shall be read and considered" (in the General Meeting), etc. (Institution). 52 the State Societies, its only other office appointed by the Institution, is the care of those interests extrinsic of its associate jurisdiction, comprehended within "the " general intendment of the Society." Instead therefore, of the negative of the State Societies being, as has been erroneously supposed, a right resting in prescrip- tion, it is an indefeasible right, the radical product of the Institution itself. Certain important powers belong to the organi- zations of the State Societies. They alone are the supreme judges of the qualification of applicants for the membership of the Society, and they alone are authorized to admit them members. The requisites of membership are prescribed by the Institution. This prescription is the instrument of that perpetuity which underlies the enumerated principles of the Society, and without whose support, their immutability were incon- ceivable. Pervasive of the organization, it is its prime principle, and necessarily the basis of the whole super- structure. When therefore, to the State Societies was entrusted the vital function of arbiters of the qualifi- cation of " the members who may be proposed," they were invested with the supreme prerogative of the Society. (Note *.) A member admitted, they may for specific cause expel ; and a member residing within the local jurisdic- tion of any one State is subject to its expulsive power. (Note 4.) The election of honorary members is exclu- sively theirs. (Note 5.) They meet at their option. Their doors open to the ingress and egress of members of the Cincinnati from and to sister States. They are- Note *. Theirs is a power to determine whether the applicant possesses the qualifications named by the Institution, and not a license to supplant them with devices of their own. Note 4 " Ample powers are given to the State Society for the management ot its internal police (so to speak) extending even to the expulsion of a member who by conduct inconsistent with a gentleman or a man of honor, or by opposition to the interests of the country in general, or the Society in particular, may render himself unworthy to continue a member " (North American Review, Oct., 1853 — •'The Cincinnati," by Winthrop Sargent). Note 5. In the report of the Secretary-General to the triennial meeting ot 1890, at page 62 of its " Proceedings " occurs this passage : " On the 17th of May, "1787, the General Society at its first triennial meeting admitted his Exellency " Lieutenant-General M. le Marquis de Bouille, Commander-in-Chief of the •• French Military forces, as an honorary member, and directed that he be duly " invested with the Order. The right to admit honorary members may therefore " be considered an inherent one " The meeting of 1787 was the second triennial Meeting, the Society of the Cincinnati not having originated as implied with the Amended Institution in 1784, but with the Original Institution in 1783, when the Founders as " the Society " directed the fii sr General Meeting to be holden on the 1st Monday in May, 1784,— when it accordingly met and was first organized as "a meeting " The minutes of the meeting of 1787 declare that instructions should be '•transmitted to the President or Senior Officer of the Society in France to offer to "invest the Marquis itilla appears in its behalf. The documents cited to its support condemn it. It is a figment of the imagination — a bantling of the brain, for whose paternity the General Meeting is pilloried as the putative father. A Society proposed May ioth, 1783, "whose mem- " bers shall be the officers of the American Army," and " the plan for establishing a Society whereof the officers " of the American Army are to be members," accepted on the following 13th, testify that none but American Officers were designed to be members in regular standing. None but "officers of the American Army" com- bined themselves "into the one Society of Friends;" nor when they " denominated themselves The Society of the Cincinnati," was the preclusion of the French Officers any the less apparent. With this conclusion concurs the highest contemporary authority. Says Chief Justice Marshall " The insignia of the order were "to be presented (to the French Officers) and they " were to be invited to consider themselves members " of the Society, at the head of which the Commander- " in-Chief was respectfully requested to place his name." (Note 1.) The Institution itself makes no mention either of the Notables of France or of the officers of her Army and Navy. Very generally it is confounded with the proceedings of the Society immediately upon its adop- tion. With the delineation and establishment of its Note 1. Marshall's Life of Washington, p. 26. 59 " Order " the Institution was complete. " The Society " of its creation, having then directed " the President- " General (when appointed ) to transmit to them as "soon as may be a medal containing the Order of the " Society" and " acquaint them that the Society do them- " selves the honor to consider them as members," forth- with prescribed " the manner and form " in which " the " officers of the respective State lines * * * of the " American Army" should sign " the aforegoing Insti- tution " to " become parties to it." The restriction to the American Officers of the ceremonial of induction into the membership of the Society, demonstrates that the French gentlemen were not understood to be included within its corporate precincts; and that the transmission to them of the Order of the Society, was intended to be the sensible token of their honorable consideration as nominal, but effete members. (Note §.) A selection of French Officers as the guardians of " the union and national honor of the respective States" had been unique; in a burden of charity im- posed on a French Society unprovided with funds, the superlative of satire had been attained ; and consum- mate folly committed in a permanence of the mutual affection of American Officers, buttressed by a company of gentlemen in France. (Note *.) There was no Circular letter addressed to the " Soci- " ety in France." A circular to a single Society had been a solecism of which the Founders were incapable. In the printed minutes of the General Meeting of 1784, the resolution is recorded " that the Institution as Amended "and Altered be forwarded to each State meeting and " to the meeting in France, and that it be accompanied " with a Circular letter to each explanatory of the " reasons which produced the amendments and altera- Note §. This conclusion, corroborated by the aforegoing opinion of Chief Justice Marshall, (ante page 58) is confirmed by the following words in the letter addressed by the General Meeting of 1784 to the Senior Land and Naval Officers and others, members of the Cincinnati in France. " P'or us then it is enough * * ■' that our Friendships should be an immutable as they are sincere, and that you "have received thb token of them with such tender sensibility ;" (Appendix B, pp. 96-97) as well as by the following words in the letter of Major L' Enfant to the Baron von Steuben from Paris, Oct. 29, 1783 — "Here in France, they are more "ambitious to obtain the Order of the Cincinnati, than to be decorated with the "Cross of St. Louis; and daily 1 receive application for it." — Knapp's Life of Baron von Steuben, p. 564. Note*. See Institution, p. 94. 6o " tions, and recommending the same to their observ- " ance." (Note 2.) This resolution followed immedi- ately after the adoption of the Amended Institution, on the 13th of May, and of the agreement that "it should be the " Institution by which the Cincinnati " shall in the future be governed." (Note 3.) As the resolution and the minutes import, their reference to "a French Society," and that of all of the subsequent proceedings, communications and correspondence of the General Meeting for fifteen years, was to no other than to the French Meeting of the Amended Institution. (Note 4.) The Journal of the proceedings of the meeting by Governor Sargent, does not include " the meeting in France " in this resolution : but in both the minutes and the Journal it is stated that on the follow- ing 17th of May, " a draft of a letter to the Senior land "and naval officers and other members of the Society " in France was read and approved, and a transcript " thereof ordered to be signed and transmitted by the " President." (Note 5.) Though neither the letter nor its tenor is disclosed by the minutes, they appear in the Journal. (Note 6.) The following extract from the letter is explanatory of both— " From the General Meeting held in Philadelphia " on the first Monday in May, 1784. To the Senior " land and naval officers and other members of the " Cincinnati in France— Gentlemen : We, the delegates "of the Cincinnati, having judged it expedient to make " several alterations and amendments in our Institution "and having thought it our duty to communicate the " reasons upon which we have acted, in a Circular ad- " dressed to the State Societies, do now transmit for " YOUR INFORMATION, a transcript of that letter, to- " gether with a copy of the Institution as revised and " corrected," &c. Note 2. Minutes General Meeting, 1784. p. 15. Note 3. Minutes General Meeting, 17S4. p. 12. Note 4. In mv letter of July 4, 1894, to the New York Cincinnati it was stated that but once, and that in the resolution cited, was a French Society named, but not that it referred to the Society of that name authorized by the Amended Institution. See pages, 22-23. Note 5 Minutes General Meeting, 1784, p. 21. Sargent's Journal. Memoirs, Penna. Hist. Society, Vol. VI, pp. 111-112. Note 6. Winthrop's Journal Supra., pp. 111-112. For letter in full see Appendix B, p. 96. 6i Thus it appears that no Circular, but a copy of the Circular containing "the reasons" for "the several alterations and amendments" in the Institution, made and addressed by the General Meeting to the State Societies, was transmitted to the Senior land and naval officers, and other members of the Cincinnati in France, "for their information" together " with a copy "of the Institution as revised and corrected." Upon this evidence may be securely rested the alle- gation, that no Society of the Cincinnati was authorized in France by the Original Institution, and that no Circular was addressed or transmitted to such a Society ; but, that after the alterations and amendments of the Original Institution had been adopted, a letter to the Meeting in France then authorized, together with a transcript of the Circular to the State Societies, and a copy of the A ///ended Institution which chartered them a Meeting, was transmitted to its members "for their information." The minutes of the General Meeting of 1887 which record the petition of the French applicants and the privilege granted them to " revive " " the French Society of the Cincinnati," disclose the grave fault of mistaking the French Meeting organized under the Amended Institution of 1784, for a French Society organized under the Original Institution of 1783. Until authorized by the Amended Institution, no Meeting of the Cincinnati existed in France. The letters of the General Meeting with the sanction of Gen'l Washington (Note 7) the President-General and its presiding officer, are to that elfect, when returning to the French gentlemen their "petitions" and "claims" addressed to its favor for relief, as" now" within compass of the power, which a French Meeting permitted by the Amended Institution, placed in their hands. The claimants who as " the hereditary " representatives of the Original Members of the Society " of the Cincinnati in France," demanded "an approval " by the General Meeting of 1887," °f ^ ie " reconstitu- tion " of the "Society in France," under the denomi- nation of "the French branch of the Society of the Note 7. Minutes General Meeting, 1887, pp 19, 20. 62 " Cincinnati," evidently confused the spurious Institu- tion of the Cincinnati which provided for one, with the genuine Institution of 1783 which provided for none. A similar error occurs in the statement of the Sec- retary-General (Note 8) that the " original French Society," the evidence of whose existence he derives from a signature of Louis XVI in 1792, and whose final disappearance he imputes to the " Reign of Terror," was an " original French branch of the Society of the Cincinnati" organized under the Institution of 1783, and not the original French Meeting of the Cin- cinnati organized under the Institution of 1784, as significantly denoted by the unimpeded sequence of the royal signature of 1792, directly from the organiza- tion under the Amended Institution of 1784, the only Meeting of the Cincinnati ever organized in France. Into this blunder the General Meeting of 1887 was plunged bodily — nemine dissentient c. The error which mistakes a Meeting of the Cin- cinnati in France of synchronous birth and decease with the lifeless Institution of 1784, for a French Society appointed by the Institution of 1783, is the cardinal error which infects every effort to revive an ephemeral Meeting long since extinct. The Society, from its institution in 1783, was coveted by the French Officers. In France it was held in higher distinction than here. (Note 9.) Though generally favored by the American Officers, some refrained be- cause of its anti-democratic tendency. Far different however was its consideration by the foreign officers who eagerly solicited its insignia. (Note 10.) Note 8. Minutes General Meeting, 1887, p. 20. Note 9. ''The French Officers bore about the mark of their distinguished " gallantrv * * In fact our allies looked upon the Society as created entirely "for their own distinction; and such is the account that Rochambeau himself "gives in his Memoirs." Alex. W. Johnson, Sec'y-Gen'l. Memoirs, Penna Hist'l Soc, vol. VI, p. 34. Note 10. By the Original Institution the French Officers became life members, and by the Amended Institution regular members, without matriculation on the Rolls of either. They applied not for admission to the Society, but for its '' Order." which signified in the then current diction, its Eagle and Ribbon. Thus, Viscomte de Noailles, a violent Jacobin, and presumably the ancestor of the Viscomte rie Noailles, who as one of the French representatives, applied to the General Meeting of 1887 " for the reconstitution of the French branch Society of the Cincinnati," urged Gen'l Washington April 24, 1790, for the favor of " the order " of the Society for the French Officers under his (the General's) command, and that those who served under Rochambeau. and those of l.auzun's Legion be permitted to bear the Order. Alexander W. Johnson, Sec'y-Gen'l. Memoirs, Penna. Hist'l Soc, vol VI, p. 48. 63 On the breasts of the most distinguished nobles of the French Army gleamed the Eagle of the Cincinnati at the side of the Grand Cross of the Military Order of St. Louis. In Europe the badge of the Order was con- stantly worn in public, but in this country, in accord- ance with " the sense " of the members of the Triennial Meeting of 1784, only on occasions commemorating the Society, or at the funeral of a deceased member . (Note §.) The numerous applications from abroad which pre- vious to the Amended Institution beseiged the Society in America with "claims" and " petitions,"' were re- turned with the information that " no claims will in " future be determined in the general meeting "the meeting of the Society in France being now dis- " tinctly considered in all respects as of the same au- thority as the State Societies. (Note 1 1.) A conclusion quite at variance with that of the General Meeting of 1887, is borne on the record of the General Meeting of 1863. (Note 12.) " The Committee " on the descendants of French Officers who served in " the Army of the Revolution now asking to be admitted " members of the Society made a verbal report. On " motion of Col. Sever the subject was indefinitely " postponed." The appeal to the General Meeting in America by the descendants of the French Officers, who having served- in the Army of the Revolution, were eligible as regular members, is instinct with a knowledge that the defunct Society in France was incapable of resuscitation, strangely in contrast with the ignorance of the descendants of the French Officers who had served in the Army of Rochambeau, that the Society they asked to be revived, had been placed beyond reach of resurrection by the extinction of the Amended Institution, on which its life depended. Note §. Memoirs, Penna. Hist'l Soc. Supra, p. 115. Note 11. Minutes General Meeting, 1S87, pp. 19-20. The archives of the Gen- eral Meeting are understood to be replete with a correspondence with the piincipal characters of the time in this country and in France. The members of the Society are as ignorant of it, as they were of the history of the Society till the publication of its minutes. They are entitled to this knowledge; and should see that a com- mittee be charged with the examination of the correspondence and other papers, with a view to their publication. Note 12. Minutes General Meeting, 1863, p. 166. 6 4 The transfusion of Cincinnati membership through the State Societies of America, by their inter-State migratory members, denotes them in their unity " the one Society of the Cincinnati," to the exclusion of an assumed Society in France. The consideration by "the Society" of the French genltemen as members, was its grateful gratuity of generous compliment to invaluable auxiliaries. The constituent Convention having made the control of the membership of the Society, the supreme prerogative of the State Societies, to impute to its members as a Society the exercise forthwith, of a power by them as a Convention but a moment before conferred exclusively on another, were to convict the Founders of flagrant self-stultification . This sequence of enumerated instances was effect- ively summarized and definitievly affirmed by the General Meeting, when in i860, at the written request of the Comte Maurice du Pare '' to be received a '' member, in right of his uncle the Comte du Pare " Coatrescar, one of the French Officers of the rank of " Colonel, whom the Society considered as members," five states in Triennial Meeting " Resolved — That " a respectful amswer be made by the Secretary- " General to M. du Pare, stating that the applicant is " not according to the Institution of the Society, "entitled to membership." (Note §.) Decisive however, as are the facts, and imperative the circumstances which expose the chimera of a Society of the Cincinnati in France, disquisition must cease and discussion end, in the presence of the mandate of the Institution which, in the words: "From the " State lists the Secretary-General must make out at "the first General Meeting, a complete list of the whole "Society," inexorably precludes a French Society from the components of the Cincinnati, and forbids to the French Officers the right of regular membership. (Note 13.) But to defective authority has been summoned ex- traneous aid. What the Institution denies the General Meeting affirms. The mistake of recognizing a Society of the Cincinnati in France by the General Meeting of 1887, has been enforced by an effort to convert it into a State Society. (Note 14.) The conversion, if harmless as the act of a scribe, when officially approved, assumes the guise of a precedent. Hut precedents, though of Note S- Minutes General Meeting, 1S60. p. 154. Note 13. The revival of a Society that never existed, entered upon the Journal of the General Meeting tarnishes its fair escutcheon and should be rescinded. Note 14. Proceedings General Meeting, 1887, p. 17, 1890, p. 62. 1893, pp. 109,142. 65 avail in the absence of written Constitutions, are of none when opposed to charter rights. Nugatory there- fore when in conflict with the authority of the Institu- tion, the proceedings of the General Meeting never- theless thwart the effort. On the ioth of May, and previous to the adoption of the Amended Institution, letters were read in the General Meeting of 1784 from Brig. -General Armand, from Major L'Enfant and from other French Officers original members of the Society (Note 15), requesting that a representation be given them in the Meeting. The letters having been, on the 14th referred to a Com- mittee of three corresponding with three of the Com- mittee who reported the Amended Institution, and with two of the Committee "who reported the Circular to the States; and these Committees having reported concur- rently on the 15th, unquestionably the reply bore the answer to their request, signified by a Meeting in France recently authorized by the Amended Institution with representation coordinate with that of the State Soci- eties in America, — as was evidently intended by the order of the Meeting when the letter of General Ar- mand was read, that it lie on the table till the report of the Committee to whom the report of " the Com- " mittee of revision of the Institution is committed, "shall be received." (Note 16.) While exposing the heresy of identifying a Meeting in France with a Society of one of the States in America, the request establishes that not even a French Society was under- stood by the French Officers who were original mem- bers of the Society, to be authorized by the Original Institution. That a State Society in France was contemplated by the Founders, or recognized by the Institution, is an error. The State Societies are native to the States of the Union. Their duties to the unfortunate of their members, practicable to them, are simply im- possible to a Society in France. A sketch of its con- sequences is not destitute of alarm. Within its pre- rogative, foreigners admitted and Americans expelled. Note 15. Sargent's Journal. Penna. Hist'l Soc, Memoirs, Vol, p. 98. Minutes General Meeting, 1784, p. 11. Note 16. Minutes General Meeting, 17S4, p. n. 66 would doubtless be embraced. Not only would its representation impress the councils of the General Meeting, but its constitutional negative would effect a Gallic control. The Institution of American Fathers would fall under European sway; and the halls of the Society, garnished with the Coronets of a titled nobility, would resound to the roll call of Comtes, Viscomtes and Marquises, radiant with the heraldic blazon of armorial ensigns. X. The Circular of the Rhode Island Society. It was not till long after its date and distribution, that I was honored with a copy of the Circular Letter of the Society of the Cincinnati of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, issued from the State House at Providence, June 13, 1893. Though attested by the hand of its Assistant Secretary, its utterance unmistakably is the voice of its Secretary. It is trusted therefore, that where no slight is intended, no affront will be felt, if regardless of the hand, the Society be respectfully recognized by its voice. The mistakes of the Secretary are many. The correction apposite to each will be effectively facilitated by a recurrence to the facts whose misconception con- stitutes the source nearly of them all. On the 4th of May, 1784, the General Meeting first convened at the City Hall in Philadelphia. Its proceedings thence at its various adjourned ses- sions, were under the Original Institution, by whose direction they had assembled, until the 13th of the month, when they avowedly discarded the Institution under which they had been acting, and agreed that the Amended Institution which they had adopted, should be " the Institution by which the Cincinnati shall in future be governed." From that date their proceed- ings to the year 1 800 conformed to that agreement when its repudiation by the State Societies constrained its official recantation in the recorded declaration " that $7 " the Institution of the Society of the Cincinnati re- " mained as it was originally proposed and adopted by " the Officers of the American Army at their Canton- " ment on the banks of the Hudson River in 1783." From the 19th of June, 1783, General Washington by request officiated as President, to the 4th day of May, 1784, when by similar request, he presided over the first General Meeting ; nor was it till the 15th of the month that he was formally elected President-General under the Amended Institution. Though to the 13th of May, 1784, he acted officially under the Original Institution, from that time through the term of his life in 1799, all his official acts are referable directly to the Amended Institution, whose adoption he urged, and on which his acceptance of the Presidency depended. The affiliated members of the Society, cither regular, honorary, or for life, are accurately styled members. As such, till recently, they have indiscriminately been certified by the Diplomas of the Society ; and as such have they been indiscriminately appointed to the com- mon duties of all. Neither time nor space suffices for a prolonged dis- cussion of the faults and fallacies with which the Cir- cular of the Rhode Island Society abounds. Sundry of them nevertheless, are entitled to notice. The statement that the Institution was adopted either "May 10th, 1783," or "May 10-13, 1783," is erroneous. The record reads : " The proposals being " fully considered paragraph by paragraph, and the " amendments agreed to," a committee was named " to "prepare a copy (of the Proposals and Amendments) " to be laid before this assembly at their next meeting " to be holden at Major-General Baron de Steuben's '' quarters on Tuesday, May Ijih inst." At that Meet- ing " the copy " of the Proposals modified in accord- ance with "the amendments previously, agreed to," was laid before the assembly, and was accepted by them as " the plan for establishing a Society." It is a rule familiar to those conversant with the Law of Public Assemblies, that the vote in favor of an 68 amendment offered to a proposition, is but an agree- ment that the proposition thus amended instead of its original form, shall be the question to be considered, and which if affirmed, constitutes the passage of the proposition as amended. The Institution conceived by Gen'l Knox, April 15, 1783, having been by him submitted to the General Officers of the American Army, and to the officers who represented " the several regiments of the (State) lines " to whom it had been previously " communicated " ; and the amendments proposed thereto, after full considera- tion, having been " agreed to," a committee was ap- pointed to "prepare" a copy thereof with the Amend- ments incorporated, for the consideration of the As- sembly at its next meeting at General Steuben's quar- ters, where the Institution as amended was ADOPTED on the 13th oe May, 1783. (Note §.) The Baron von Steuben as presiding officer of the Constituent Convention, reconvened the Convention on June 19th, 1783, and not as stated " the general meet- ing" which was not organized till a year afterwards on the 4th of May, 1 784. It was not " the general meeting " but " the Convention for establishing the Society of the "Cincinnati" which "at the request of its President." assembled on the 19th of June, 1783 ; and which having "accomplished" the principal objects of its appointment, its monbers dissolved "the same." It is self evident that " the General Meeting " of the Society, has no power to alter or amend the Institution which created it. The misstatement therefore, that the body reconvened by its President-General Steuben, June 19th, 1783, was the "general meeting" is not only exposed by the immediately ensuing words of the Secretary, " That this meeting is particularly noticeable, because it " altered and amended the Institution as adopted May " 10th, 17S3," but is contradicted by the record that de- clares it " a Meeting of the General Officers and the " gentlemen delegated by the respective regiments AS "A Convention for establishing the Society of the " Cincinnati held by request of the President." Note §. See Knapp's Life of the Baron von Steuben, pp. 555-556. 6 9 The " New Public Building" to which the Secretary refers as the place of assembly of the Constituent Convention, was the building at New Windsor on Hudson's River designated "the Temple." "The Temple " having been struck by lightning a few days previous to the 19th of June, 1783 (Note 1), it was impossible that Gen'l Steuben could have reconvened the Convention on that day at " the New Public Build- ing." (Note 2.) It is erroneously alleged that "the Institution thus "established provided that it should be subscribed to " by the General Officers, and by the Officers who had "been delegated to represent the several corps of the "Continental Army." It is not a provision of the Institution, but a direction of " the Society " subse- quent to the adoption of the " aforegoing Institution." The effort is fruitless to supersede the paramount authority of the Organic Law, with the appearance among its subscribers of names not entitled to its franchise and unadapted to its exactions. Whether to comrades in arms, or to whatever other consideration this breach of the Institution is due, it is of as little effect, as is the admission by State Societies of appli- cants to the Roll of regular membership in succession of honorary members; as ineffectual to annul it, as have been its violations by the General Meeting; and as absurd as would be a contention that the infraction of a law is its practical recission. (Note 3.) The reasoning is erroneous which, in the names of two officers of the " French Corps of Engineers " sub- Note 1. Winthrop Sergent. Memoirs, Penna. Hist'l Soc. Vol VI, p. 66. Note 2. A Monument has been erected on Temple Hill, New Windsor, on Hudson's River, on a Tablet of which an inscription furnished by tne New York Society of the Cincinnati records that "On this site the Society of the Cincinnati "was born May 10, 1783." On that day, and at that place the Institution of the Cincinnati was considered and prepared. On the following 13th of May, 1783, it was adopted at M ajor-General Baron von Steuben's quarters. It were as well to refer nativity to conception or gestation, as to designate the place where the con- sideration of the Institution of the Cincinnati proceeded, the place where the Society was bokn. Note 3. On Thursday, May 13th 1784, the report of the Committee on the alterations and amendments of the Institution being under consideration, the Gen- eral Meeting affirmed the officers of the individual State troops to be parties to the Amende 1 Institution, nothwithstanding that part of the first clause of the second paragraph, which limited the right to officers of the Army and Navy of the United States. (Sargent's Journal. Memoirs, Penna. Hist'l Soc. Vol. VI., p. 104. Min- utes General Meeting, 1784, p. 12.) But the restriction by the Original Institution of the members of the Society to the officers of the American Army, constituted of the regiments of the respective State lines, to the exclusion of the officers of the individual States, has never been altered or released. 70 scribed to the Original Institution, among those of offi- cers of the American Army, suggests the inference that officers of the French Army were recognized as regular members of the Society. That foreign officers "con- sidered by "the Society" as life members, were per- mitted to sign among the regular members of the Society, is the only significance which attaches to the signatures of all members alike. The record asseverates that the Institution was established by the representative " officers of the re- spective lines of the several States" of which "the " American Army " was composed, to the confusion of the dogma that " Therefore the Society of the Cincin- " nati was not established by the Continental lines of "the States;" and in verification of the fact that it tons thus established, Surely size is not the measure of representation ; but if so, the American Officers who in numbers, sub- sequently ratified its acts, sufficiently authenticate it. Therefore, if " in the formation of the Society of the " Cincinnati " " * * out of the thirteen State lines " of troops on the Continental establishment," instead of "four,'" but one had "assisted," its representative action would have been obligatory on all, especially when ratified by all. If it is true that "State Societies of the Cincinnati " had nothing to do with the organization of the Gen- " eral Society," the converse is equally true that the General Meeting had nothing to do with the organiza- tion of the State Societies. They both within the casus Foederis, or terms of compact, were synchronous creations of " the officers of the American Army " of " the several State lines," with specific rights conferred on both, but none reserved to either. In neither, anterior to its creation, as in the States of the Union prior to their Confederacy, did rights inhere, but in both, their inception was connate with the Societies that claim them. It may therefore be thought derogatory 7i to a State Society, with jurisdiction of " the principles " of the Institution joint and coordinate with that of the General Meeting, to proffer itself, a subordinate " branch " of the Society. It may or may not be true that " there is no analogy " between the organization of the government of the " United States under the Constitution, and the organi- " zation of the General Society under the Institution ; " but between the organization of the government of the United States under the Articles of Confederation of 1778, and the Institution of the Cincinnati Society of 1783, the analogy is strong and binding. The Secretary, when attributing to " the (General) meeting " the sole jurisdiction of the principles of the Society, apparently regards as of little importance the fact that the power is jointly and indissolubly blended with that of " the meetings " of the State Societies ; and that measures to promote them must invariably be joint. The office claimed for the General Meeting " to " SUPERVISE the several branches or State Societies," is a definite claim of the office of a superintendent to look into the conduct of others, with power only to see that order is preserved ; and to report delinquency, without the power of correction. But if otherwise, and as contended, an office of sole executive power of approval and reversal, under the grant of a power to adopt " the "best measures that shall conduce to the general " intendment of the Society " expressed in its joint jurisdiction with the State Societies, — the proposition that one of two joint depositaries of a power, may subject its coparcener to its sole control, requires an ability to maintain, more vigorous even than the dial- ectics summoned to its support ; or if admitted, would reduce the Institution to a glaring contradiction in terms. The first "General Meeting" was ordered by the Society on the 13th of Ma)', 1783, immediately after the adoption of the Institution, when the Society forth- with adjourned sine die. Certainly, it was not then 72 thought by the Founders that their work was unfin- ished. No evidence is yet discovered, in contradiction of the completeness of the work of the Convention asserted by its words " That the principal object of " its appointment being thus accomplished," besides the Secretary's statement, that it "was contemplated "and intended to recast the Institution in the general "meeting of 1784, so as to incorporate the resolves of "June 19, 1783." Though these resolves were adopted as stated, " under the necessity of some temporary " arrangement," a sense of their permanent sufficiency was impressed upon the appeal made by the members of the Convention " to the candor of their Constituents," to make allowance for the "measure" — an appeal answered by the ratification of "the measure" by every State Society subsequently organized. But independently of these considerations, the assumption that it was contemplated and intended to " recast the " Institution in the meeting of 1784 so as to incorporate "the resolves of June 19th, 1783," adopted under " some temporary arrangement," is refuted by the declaration of the Meeting itself in its Circular to the State Societies (Note *) that " the alterations and "amendments" agreed to and thought material were " That the hereditary succession should be abolished ; " that all interference with political subjects should be " done away ; and that the funds siiould be placed " under the immediate cognizance of the several " legislatures who should also be requested to grant " Charters for more effectually carrying our humane " designs into execution ; " it is resisted by the " in- " expressible pleasure " of the General Meeting of 1790, conveyed by its Circular to the State Societies (Note f) " to find that the unreasonable and illiberal " clamor which at one moment had been excited " against our institution has totally subsided ; " it is rejected in their letter to the Senior officers and others of the Cincinnati in France, — " Our decision was in- " fluenced by a conviction that something contained in Note *. Minutes General Meeting. 1784, p. 17. Note t. Minutes General Meeting, 1790. p. 45. 73 " our original system, might eventually be productive "of consequences which we had not foreseen, as well " as by the current of sentiments which appears to pre- " vail among our fellow citizens " (against Primogeni- ture) ; (Note *) and it is contradicted by Gen'l Wash- ington who, when opening the business of the Meeting, directed its attention to the " exceptionable parts " of the Institution that summoned them together, and " that required alteration in their very essence," viz. — "the hereditary part— interference with politics — " honorary members — increase of funds from dona- "tions." (Note 4.) The official action of the Constituent Convention on the 19th of June, 1783, was confined first, to a Resolution of acknowledgement to his Excellency the Chevalier de la Luzerne " of the honor done to the Society by his becoming a member thereof." Secondly, to a Resolution substituting for the " medal of gold " "the Eagle," as "the Order of the Society; "and, Thirdly, to a Resolution requesting his Excellency the Com- mander-in-Chief to officiate as President-General of the Society until the first General Meeting to be held in May, 1784; and appointing and requesting Major-General McDougall, as Treasurer-General, and General Knox, as Secretary-General, "to officiate in like manner." While the first of these acts — in need of no recasting — derides codification; and the second, as a rescript of the Con- stituent Convention exceeds the power of the General Meeting either to " codify " " remodel " or " recast ; " the request by the third, of a President-General, a Treasurer- General, and a Secretary-General to officiate as officers of the General Meeting, until the time of its organiza- tion in the succeeding May, denotes unmistakably " the " necessity of some temporary arrangement previous to "the first Meeting of the General Society," to have Note *. See Letter, p. 96-97. Note 4 Washington "proposed as the most exceptionable parts and that "required alteration in their very essence the following viz. — the hereditary part " — interference with politics — honorary members — increase of funds from dona- "tions." If not for connection with distinguished Foreigners, he would have proposed to abolish the order altogether. But considering that connection, "if " a middle course could be adopted, which he doubted to be possible, and on full "investigation it should appear so, he was determined at all events to withdraw " his name from amongst us."— Sargent's Journal. Memoirs, Penna. Hist'l Soc, Vol. VI. pp. 81, 82. See also James Fairlie to Benj. Walker in Note 5 on p. 53 — Knapp's Life of the Baron von Steuben, p. 567. 74 been understood by the Convention to be the single necessity of supplying temporarily with officers, a body whose organization was appointed for the future. That the " necessity of some temporary arrangement " re- ferred to this appointment of ad interim officers, is corroborated by the opinions subsequently of Commen- tators (Note *). When General Washington, the officiating Pres- ident of the meeting of 1784, opened its proceedings with an expression of the opposition of Virginia and of other States to the right of primogeniture, and with a proposal of radical alterations in the Institution, the first order of business was a roll-call of the States present, for a report of their attitude towards the So- ciety, when it appeared that in all, save New York and Georgia, public opinion was substantially adverse to it (Note f). As it is impossible that any business could have preceded the first order of busiiicss transacted, the allegation of the Secretary is gratuitous, that " when " the General Meeting began, however, to remodel or " codify the Institution, so as to make it exact in " detail, and thus more clearly express the intent of " the Founders * * * , General Washington pro- " posed organic a/terations and amendments, changing "the character of the Institution, etc." Neither is it strictly true that the general meeting of 1784 " was brought with reluctance to acquiesce in the proposals " of Gen'l " Washington to effect organic Note*. "Under its (the Institution) regulations, the first General Meeting " was not to be held until May, 1784, and a meeting of persons properly author- " ized, was therefore held on June 19, 1783, to choose temporary officers." (Me- moirs, Penna. Hist'l Soc , vol. VI, pp. 65-66.) Note t. "General Washington, President-General, and General Knox, "Treasurer, begged leave to resign their offices. The President was then re- " quested to resume his seat, as a temporary appointment for the whole business •' of this General Meeting : and Major Turner was desired to attend to the duty as " Secretary— after which we resolved ourselves into a committee of the whole •' Colonel Ramsay in the Chair, and the Institution was read agreeably to the ••general resolution. The President then arose— expressed the opposition of the " Mate of Virginia and other States — observed that it had become violent and " formidable, and called for serious consideration — desired of the members of the "several States to declare the ideas which prevailed in their countries with regard " to our Institution, and the various manners which they had pursued to obtain " this knowledge * * (Roll call of States) * * The President-General arose " and acknowledged the information from all the States — endeavored to prove the " disagreeable consequences which would result to the members of the Cincinnati "from preserving the Institution in its present form— illustrated the force and "strength of opposition to it in a variety of examples, supported by his own "knowledge, and information from confidential friends— proposed as the most " exceptionable parts and that required alteration in their very essence the folio w- "ing, viz. : — the hereditary part — interference with politics — honorary members — " increase of funds from donations," etc. Gov'r Sargent's Journal. Memoirs. Penna. Hist'l Soc, Vol. VI, pp. 78-79-81- 82-83. Minutes General Meeting 1784, pp. 6-7. 75 " alterations and amendments" in the Institution. The Meeting assembled beneath the fury of a popular tem- pest raging against the Society. Gen '1 Knox wrote Gen'l Washington February 21, 1784, "The idea is it " (the Cincinnati Society) has been erected by a for- " eign influence to change our government " " The Hereditary principle is obnoxious." (Note f.) The pressure against the Society forms no inconsiderable page in the annals of the time. The opinions of both Washington and Lafayette were unfavorable. A hostile Congress threatened its extinction. Both this country and France reverberated with the peal of the storm. It beat upon the closed doors of the Meeting, and fell upon its members in alarm. Their first order of business was a roll call of the States, upon which it appeared that public opinion in all, except New York, and Georgia (Rhode Island not being then represented) was opposed to the principle of primogeniture. (Note \.) Under a precipitation of unexampled menace and appre- hension notoriously was it, that the first General Meeting of 1784 abandoned the principle of primogeniture, and agreed to " be governed " by an emasculated Institution. The General Meeting of May 15, 1784, did not as alleged " cause to be signed in open meeting by " President-General Washington and transmitted by "him to the several State Societies and to the Society " in France " the Circular Letter alluded to by the Secretary ; nor did General Washington " on behalf of the general meeting" appeal to "the several State Societies and the Society in France, for the ratification " of " the altered and amended Institution of 1784" and recommend its "adoption." No Circular was addressed to a French Society. The only Circular letter ap- proved, was addressed to the State Societies a/one, and was ordered to them alone for their ratification of the amendments and alterations proposed to the Institution. On the 17th of May "a draft of a letter to the Senior Land and Naval Officers and others, members of the Cincinnati in France, reported by the Committee who Note t. Sargent's Journal. Memoirs. Penna. Hist'l Soc, Vol. VI.. p. 72. Note %. Sargent's Journal, Supra, pp. 82, 83. on the 15th had reported the Circular to the State Societies, was read and approved, and a transcript thereof ordered " to be signed and transmitted by the President." Both the minutes of the meeting and the Journal of Gov'r Sargent bear this record. (Note §.) The letter however, omitted in the minutes, appears in the Journal. That the Circular communicating the reasons of the meeting of 1784 for the amendments and alterations of the Institution, for " the ratification " of which they appealed to the State Societies, and whose "adoption " by them they recommended, was addressed to them alone, and that but a copy thereof was transmitted to the Meeting in France "FOR THEIR INFORMATION," accompanied with a copy of the Amended Institution, the letter discovers in the following words :• — " From " the General Meeting in Philadelphia on the first "Monday in May, 1784: To the Senior Land and " Naval Officers, and others, members of the Cin- " cinnati in France, — Gentlemen : We, delegates of " the Cincinnati, having judged it expedient to make " several material alterations and amendments in " our Institution, and having thought it our duty to " communicate the reasons upon which we have acted " in a Circular addressed to the State Societies, do now " transmit FOR YOUR INFORMATION a transcript of that " letter, together with a copy of the Institution as re- " vised and amended." (Note 5.) We have the authority of the Secretary-General at page 109 of "The Proceedings" of 1893 of the General Meeting, that the Count D'Estaing was the President of " the French State Society of the Cincinnati " — a distinction appropriate in an assembly of Honorary members of the Cincinnati, to an Admiral of the French Navy, himself an honorary member of the Society ; but anomalous and quite improbable in a Society of its regular members including among them the chief of them all — the Marquis de la Fayette. Note 5. .Minutes General Meeting, 17S4, pp 15, 16, 21. Sargent's Journal. Memoirs, Penna. Hist'l Soc, Vol. VI, pp. 105, in. 112. Notes. Gov. Sargent's Journal. Memoirs, Penna. Hist'l Soc. Vol. VI, pp. 105, in, 112. See Appendix B for letter, p. 96. 77 The words of General Washington, the President- General, cited from his communication of May ij, 1784, to the Comte de Barras, " The Institution as NOW a molded and published" ; and the words cited from his letter of June 2, 178+, to the Marquis de Chastellux referring to the Circular letter sent by him to the Count d'Estaing, which "he expected would be submitted to " the members of the Cincinnati in France," furnish in their dates additional evidence that from the 13th day of May, 1784, the time from which it was agreed that the Amended Institution should govern the Cincinnati, not only all the proceedings of the General Meeting till May 7th, 1800, but all the official action of General Washington during his life its President-General, was under and by virtue of its authority and direction ; and that during that time, every reference made to a Society in France, was to a Society of an assumed existence. The officers of the American Army combined into "one Society of Friends" who "denominated them- selves" and their eldest male representatives in succes- sion forever, " The Society of the Cincinnati ;" and their registered aggregate in their respective States are " The Society." The State lists of the members, the Institu- tion declares to be "a complete list of THE whole OF " THE SOCIETY." They form the State Societies, which in turn are represented every three years in a General Meeting of vicarious power, and of intermittent dura- tion. It is a misconception that the Cincinnati Society is represented exclusively by " the General Meetings." Before "the General Meetings" were, "the Society" was. Immediately upon the adoption of the Institution in 1783, the Founders proceeded as "The Society;" and when they appointed the time for " the first general meeting* of delegates from State Societies not yet in existence, they designated the first Monday in May, 1784, as the day of its birth. Its members are " the Society," organ- ized under two forms ; the one the State Societies, and the other the General Meeting — the first primary, in structure of the members themselves, and the last secondary, of derivative power from them. Each organ- 78 ization, in its designated form, represents the Society of the Cincinnati — the General Meeting, in the sole super- vision of its general interests, and the State Societies in their joint jurisdiction with the General Meeting, of its fundamental principles. The Officers of the American Army, represented by The Societies of the States, and not " The Meeting of the General Society" the Institution pronounces " The General Society of the Cincinnati." The following paragraphs of the Institution define in their ordinal sequence the two different organic bodies of the Society. First. — " To perpetuate therefore the remembrance " of this vast event {the establishment of free, independ- " cut and sovereign states) as the friendships which "have been formed, etc. * * * the Officers of the " American Army do hereby in the most solemn manner " associate, constitute and combine themselves into one " Society of Friends, to endure as long as they shall " endure, or any of their eldest male posterity, and in " failure thereof, the collateral branches, who may be "judged worthy of becoming its supporters and mem- " bers. " The Officers of the American Army, having gener- ally been taken from the citizens of America, possess " high veneration for the character of that illustrious " Roman, LUCIUS OuiNTlUS ClNCINNATUS; and being "resolved to follow his example by returning to their " citizenship, they think they may with propriety de- " nominate themselves the Society of the Cincinnati." Second, and before the creation of " The General Meeting." — "The General Society will, for the sake of " frequent communications, be divided into State "Societies, and these again into such districts as shall "be directed by the State Society." Third. — " The Meeting of the General Society shall " consist of its officers and a representation from each " State Society, in number not exceeding five, whose "expenses shall be borne by their respective State " Societies." 79 Fourth. — " In the General Meeting the President, " Vice-President, Secretary, Assistant-Secretary, Treas- urer, and Assistant-Treasurer-General, shall be chosen "to serve until the next meeting." In but two instances prescribing the time of its annual meeting, and appointing the use of its probable donations, is the Meeting of the General Society referred to by the Institution as the General Society — the " Meet- ing of the General Society" in its six applications, and the " General Society " in its two, interchangeably used by the Founders to designate the one body of the mem- bers of the State Societies, as " The General Society of the Cincinnati." Thus, doubtless, originated the ambi- guity of the terms, and their consequent confusion in both cursory and technical phrases. The words, how- ever, which reflect the sense and express the meaning of the Institution, are the dominant words of the two enacting paragraphs which institute the body, and direct it to be organized as " The Meeting of the General Society." When the Constituent Convention denominated " themselves the Society of the Cincinnati ; " and as " The Society," upon their adoption of the Institution May 13, 1783, having prescribed directions for the organization of the State Societies, Resolved, " That the General Orfi- " cers, and the Officers delegated to represent the several " Corps of the American Army, subscribe to the Institu- " tion of the General Society for themselves and their con- " stituents, in the manner and form before prescribed," they unequivocally pronounced themselves The General Society; and distinguished it as "The Society," from the first " General Meeting" of delegates from the State Societies which they appointed to be held on the first Monday in May, 1784; and when, on the 19th day of June thereafter, the same body in Convention "Resolved, That " his Excellency the Commander-in-Chief be requested " to officiate as President-General until the first General " Meeting to be held in May next ;" and " under the " necessity of some temporary arrangement previous So " to the first Meeting of the General Society," ballottcd for and appointed a Treasurer-General and Secretary- General ad interim officers, they exercised the functions of " The General Society." Here, plainly, are two different bodies of two different names : the one, the body of American Officers the members of the Society of the Cincinnati residing in America, designated "The General Society ; " the other, a convocation of their representatives, designated " The Meeting of the General Society." The Officers of the American Army, having estab- lished themselves " The Society of the Cincinnati" became the General Society, or the Society at Large. For the sake of frequent communications they divided themselves into Societies of the States; and "to per- petuate the remembrance of the vast event " of the "free independent and sovereign States" of America, they constituted them, in the words of Chief Justice Marshall, " distinct Societies" and invested them with independent and sovereign powers. Possessing the attributes of Sovereignty, their necessary unity of action was provided for and secured in a subsequent paragraph. Hence, the appointment of a Meeting of their representatives, and its organization as " The Meeting of the General Society." i. e. of the State So- cieties, into which the General Society of the Officers of the American Army had been divided, with indepen- dent and sovereign powers. Though destitute of the plenary powers of the State Societies, yet as a meeting of their representatives the Meeting of the General Society was admitted to a joint care with them of the principles of the Society, and was charged with the supervision of its general interests, according to the " general intendment" of the Institution. While the feasibility of a division of the aggregate members of the Society of the Cincinnati into Societies of the States in -which they resided, affirms it ; the impos- sibility of a division of five representatives from each of the State Societies, into the Societies that delegated them exposes the absurdity of the contention. The analogy is not therefore illusory, between the members of the General Society, or Society at Large of the Cincinnati, in conjunctive legislation within their Sovereign State Societies, with their representatives in " the Meeting of the General Society" and the represen- tative body of the United States Government in co- operative legislation with its Senate of Sovereign States — the People, the Government in the one, and in the other, its members, the Society. Nor may the con- jecture be thought extravagant, that as the Society of the Cincinnati was inspired by the Articles of Confed- eration of 1778, so the Senate of the present Federal Constitution representing the States of the Union, is, however remotely, traceable to that feature of the Institution of the Cincinnati, which supplies in " The Meeting of the Genera/ Society" a representative body of the State Societies. (Note *.) The allegation is untrue that " the General Society " was denominated "the Society, ''and the societies in the several States, with their " prescribed officers, were designated ' State Meetings.' " " The Society'' is resolved by the Institution into two conjugate organizations — the General Meeting and the State Societies ; and the bodies, by the Secretary termed " Societies " which, with their prescribed, officers are averred to have been desig- nated "State Meetings," the Institution thoroughly furnishes as " State Societies," and uniformly nominates them such. (Note §.) The Journal of the General Meeting is a repertory so replete with conflicting and contradictory measures, and with expedients so various of meetings uniformly in want of a quorum, to avert danger either fancied or real, that it invalidates the allegation that " The General " Society, under the plenary power just mentioned, has " always exercised the right to construe and interpret Note *. The body of the Institution composed of delegates from the State Societies, instead of "The General Society," should be entitled either '