134 HAMILTON'S REVISION, THE EXEMPLAR OF AUTOGRAPH.

pearance. If it shall be found, it will supersede this conjecture as to the immediate exemplar of the autograph copy; but there is quite enough in the original draught of Hamilton, compared with the autograph copy, to convert all the conjectures, which the recovery of that revision would supersede, into most reasonable certainty at the present time.

I assume, therefore, as reasonably well proved, that Washington wrote that autograph copy from the revision by Hamilton of his original draught, amended or corrected, which was sent to Washington on the 6th of September; and that Washington copied the whole of that revision in extenso, as it was obviously his intention to do, when he wrote his letter to Hamilton of the 25th of August; and that afterwards he cancelled and altered, as the cancelled passages and altered words, now restored by Mr. Lenox, or by his direction, will show. This, I repeat, is mere hypothesis; but the appearances will be found to sustain it strongly; and if they do not, the main question will stand as it did before the suggestion was made.

There are one or two facts or appearances noticed by the proprietor of the autograph copy, which seem to cross this theory of a complete transfer of the revision into that copy in the first instance, before parts were cancelled. But, perhaps, for want of access to the original of the printed copy, they do not appear to me to be decisive; and there are also several facts or appearances which seem to be irreconcilable with any other hypothesis, or with the actual condition of the autograph copy, as the printed copy from it shows it to be. I will consider the appearances or facts of each description.

There is nothing decisive in the fact which is noticed by the proprietor of the autograph copy, that some of "the altera“tions were evidently made during the writing of the paper, as "in these instances, a part and even the whole of a "sentence is struck out, which afterwards occurs in the body "of the Address."

These changes are certainly few and partial, and they may have been made in the course of the writing, without conducing materially to the proof that this was generally the case with the other alterations.

The only instances of this nature which I have discovered, though there may be others, are two, one on page 359 in Mr. Irving's Appendix, and the other on page 360. The last will be noticed in another place. On page 359, two lines are transferred from an earlier part of a sentence to the end of a paragraph, which is the end of the same sentence. It would probably require close inspection of the autograph to determine that this change had been made "during the writing of the paper," and not afterwards. I do not mean to question the fact, for I have not examined the autograph in reference to this point; but little if any more space would have been necessary for the insertion of the two lines cancelled, than is commonly left between paragraphs.

66

But supposing that in this, and in the other instance to be noticed presently, Washington did transpose parts of a paragraph" in the course of writing," and even cancel a short paragraph, and write another leaving out a line or two of the first, there is strong countervailing evidence against this as being the general course.

There are ten clauses in small type at the foot of the pages in Mr. Irving's Appendix which, by the Preface, are indi

cated as having been "struck out," I presume cancelled, in the body of the autograph, and now restored by careful examination, and placed at the bottom of the respective pages.

One of these clauses on pages 362, 363, contains nineteen lines and a fraction in the small type. Another of them on pages 366, 367, contains nearly fifteen lines. A third on page 363, contains nearly eleven lines; and the aggregate of all the lines of the clauses referred to as having been so struck out, and now restored and placed at foot, is a large fraction of a line more than sixty lines. All these lines were written in the body of the autograph, and then struck out or cancelled. If they had been printed in the Appendix in the same type with the body of the Address, they would have filled three full pages of it, or nearly one-fifth of the whole Address, as it now stands in Mr. Irving's Appendix. Of course, I do not mean to be understood as speaking with technical accuracy, for I have not asked the opinion of a printer in regard to this fact. It cannot be supposed, I think, that such masses as these were first written, and then cancelled in the course of the writing.

There are two other clauses of like description in pages 361, 366, which might be added to the ten, but I distinguish them to make a subsequent remark of my own more intelligible.

The natural and most probable, if not certain course, of Washington, if it is regarded in the light of these clauses, was to write over the whole draught he was copying, including all of the clauses referred to, and then to go back and alter words, or strike out paragraphs, as he should think fit. To write out, and then to cancel, every part of these twelve

paragraphs," in the course of writing," or "during the writing," is a much less reasonable supposition.

One striking fact in regard to all the clauses at the foot of the pages, is, that but one of them bears a trace of verbal alteration by Washington; which is less than the most facile and felicitous writer must have made in the first draught of such long paragraphs. This only exception is on page 366 of Mr. Irving's Appendix, where constitution is substituted for order, and adherents for retainers. There must, I think, have been some intention of Washington to retain these paragraphs at the time these words were changed. The rest must all have been fairly transcribed by Washington into his autograph Address from the exemplar that was before him. It can be shown demonstrably that Washington did not compose any of the ten clauses referred to; and therefore, if the supposition of his having made the cancellation "during the writing," is suggested to give a more usual appearance of authorship in Washington, it is of no avail; for, except in a few of the rather self-justifying thoughts, Washington's authorship is not there, wherever else it may be. It was his further consideration of these thoughts that probably induced him to cancel more than one of these paragraphs; and the rest, only because they added to the length of the Address.

Another fact equally worthy of notice, is, that when the ten clauses first referred to were written and then struck out, nothing was substituted in their place, except in two instances, one on page 369, and the other on page 375. On page 369, a clause which was written on a separate piece of paper, is wafered on or over the passage that had been written in the autograph copy and then cancelled, and is now printed

66

66

at foot. That wafered paper bears a clause which Washington, by his letter of September 1st, requested Hamilton to introduce into his revision in regard to education generally, in connection with the subject of a university particularly; and suggested that a section comprehending both subjects "would come in very properly after the one which "relates to our religious obligations; or, in a preceding part, as one of the recommendatory measures to counteract the "evils arising from geographical discriminations." Hamilton, in his reply of September 4th, said, that "the idea of "the university" would be most properly reserved for Washington's speech at the beginning of the session. "A general suggestion," he said, "respecting education will very fitly "come into the Address." He introduced it, no doubt, in his revision, in the very place which Washington first pointed out, "after the clause which relates to our religious obliga"tions;" and there Washington has wafered it over a clause in recommendation of industry and frugality, which had been cancelled by him, and is now found at the foot of the printed page in Mr. Irving's Appendix. As Washington was specially concerned in this education clause, and could not have intended to omit it, the natural explanation of the wafered paper is, that in copying the revision into his autograph, perhaps from the education clause being written in the margin of Hamilton's rough revision, and only referred to by a mark of some kind in the place where it was to go, Washington overlooked the clause in copying, and had left no place in his copy-book for it, except by wafering it over a very good and rather necessary paragraph on the subject of industry and economy.

This little fact is very significant in regard to the manner