The Humphreys Family

PUBLICATIONS OF THE GENEALOGICAL SOCIETY OF PENNSYLVANIA. Vol. VIII. MARCH, 1922. No. 2. THE HUMPHREYS FAMILY. BY THE HONORABLE HAMPTON L. CABSON. AN ADDRESS DELIVERED BEFORE THE GENEALOGICAL SOCIETY OF PENN¬ SYLVANIA, AT THE ANNUAL MEETING, MARCH 6, 1922. Ladies and Gentlemen: Your Presiding Officer’s introduc¬ tion is embarrassing, because I noted that he was uncertain as to the particular subject he wished me to talk upon. I recollect being at a University gathering, where the Reverend George Dana Boardman proposed as a subject, “The Found¬ ing of the University of Bologna in the Eleventh Century, with Personal Reminiscences by Mr. Carson.” You, Sir, have saved me from such a situation by carrying notes which, though in your pocket, commit me to a definite theme. I do not know who it was, perhaps it was your Secretary, who suggested that I should talk about the HUMPHREYS Family. At all events that is my subject. I am not going to give a genealogical table nor attempt to draw a genealogical tree. We all know what such trees look like, and there are only certain particular buds on distant branches which can be of interest to each individual in an audience. I shall confine myself to representatives of six generations of the Humphreys Family, illustrating the stur- 122 The Humphreys Family. diness of the parent stock and the character of the achieve¬ ments in each generation of that remarkable family. In order that you may have before you in a general way a picture of the Humphreys Family, it occurs to me that I can appeal to the recollection of everybody in the room of the old house which long stood on the east side of Thirteenth Street just above Spruce, and which gave way but eighteen months ago to a garage. For many years, prior to its occupation by the Junkers, Miss Boric lived there. Prior to Miss Borie’s occupancy, an old gentleman of the name of Charles Hum¬ phreys, who died in the year 1873, had lived there for over fifty years. It was an old-fashioned three-story brick dwel¬ ling house, with dormer garret windows, somewhat moderate in its rooms and but two rooms in depth, with a low twostory back building, all bordered on the south by a garden of exceeding beauty. When you passed along Thirteenth Street and looked through the perforated iron grill that was set in the gate, you would observe old-fashioned flower-beds bor¬ dered by box-wood, a clinging and fragrant yellow jasmine vine on the southern wall, grape vines and trellis-work of wistaria, in the rear; in the spring, beautiful beds of tulips, succeeded by flowers in season, and a bit of turf that was kept closely cropped, rivaling any of our finest lawns. That garden was a source of perpetual delight to those who were privileged to enter it. My own childish recollection runs back to it with affection. I have seen there not only Mr. Humphreys, who was a flour merchant, and his genial wife, a dame of the olden school, but his guests who frequently were his opponents in a game of backgammon, Commodore Dale, a son of Richard Dale who was first lieutenant under Paul Jones on the deck of the Bon Homme Richard as she grappled with the Serapis; Admiral Turner of the Civil War, General Humphreys and General Isaac J. Wistar; so that, during my boyish days, I would hear stories of the sea and of the land, of the Army and of the Navy. Mr. Hum¬ phreys would drive twice a week, on Sundays and on Thurs¬ days, out to his father’s place, the Humphreys farm on the Haverford Road directly back of Ardmore, with an oldfashioned pebble-dashed house which many of you have ad- The Humphreys Family. 123 mired, where the Tilghmans have been in residence for so many years that it is almost thought to he a Tilghman pos¬ session, but it still belongs to the Humphreys’ Estate. Be¬ tween the house on Thirteenth Street and the old pebbledashed house on the Haverford Road Mr. Humphreys spent his life. He had there a model farm, with a wonderful herd of cattle, whose cows and calves were curried twice a day as though they had been horses. Not a weed was permitted to grow in any spot of the place. Crops were exceedingly fine, the clover crops particularly so. There was a wonderful semicircle of great beech trees in a dense woods which even now cuts the western sky like a half-moon, presenting to our State Forester, if he should go there at this hour, a specimen of an old Colonial grove still flourishing in its primeval strength. All through the Township of Haverford, as it was called in Delaware County, the Humphreys were numerous. The old name of Bryn Mawr was Humphreyville, many of the family residing in that neighborhood, and if you should ascend the hill of the Quaker Meeting House, which was the second Meeting House erected in this part of the State, the first being at Merion, you will find along the wall of the burying ground the gravestones of members of the Humphreys family, extending in double rows. There they sleep, still ruling our spirits with their sceptres from their urns. You cannot enter that old Quaker burying-ground without being impressed by the fact that in former days the Humphreys family domi¬ nated that section of Delaware County. It is of that family that I shall speak. You, Mr. Chairman, well remember certain members of the family. Old Miss “Patty” Humphreys, was within your recollection. I am getting back, you see, somewhat to the last century. I belong to the last century myself, that is the greater part of me. Miss Patty Humphreys was the maiden sister of the old gentleman whom I have described. I am quite sure that if Mr. Sayres ever tasted her scrapple, her sausages and her pumpkin pies he would be more anxious to leave this earth in search of where she now is and repeat his experiences than his present quiet attitude indicates. 124 The Humphreys Family. The name of Humphreys is of Norman origin and can be traced for a thousand years. In Domesday Book it appears as Humfridus, with a Latin termination, afterwards spelled H-u-m-f-r-e-y and sometimes H-u-m-p-h-r-y. I have seen it also “i-e-s”, but the particular branch of the family I am speaking of to-night spells it “e-y-s”. About the year 1340, when the Herald’s College was established, there were at least six coats-of-arms relating to branches of the Humphreys Family registered. One of those, a lion rampant with dexter paw on the head of a nag, represented the Conquest of Wales by one branch of the family, and there for six hundred years the family held possession of lands which their ancestors had got by force of arms and by valor. The first ancestor to whom I intend to allude was Samuel Humphreys, the son of Hugh Ap Humphreys, who in 1606 had married Elizabeth Powell, daughter of John Powell and Sibill Gwyn of Llanwdlwn. Samuel Humphreys died in Merionethshire in Wales. He had married Elizabeth Rhys or Rees, according to a difference in spelling. They had six or seven children, the oldest son being Daniel, whose line of de¬ scent is the only one that I intend to illustrate because, al¬ though the family has had numerous branches, it is only in running down the direct line of Daniel that I find public services rendered by members of the family. The other branches, while estimable in private life, were not prominent in the affairs of the world. Daniel Humphreys, in 1682, his father being dead five years, came to this country. He carried with him a certificate of good character from the Quarterly Meeting in Wales. In the following year, 1683, he was fol¬ lowed by his widowed mother, Elizabeth, with her remaining children, and they all settled in the Township of Haverford, the name Haverford being derived from Aher Ford, which means above the ford or above the confluence of streams. The township in South Wales which bears that name had a castle dating back as far as 1113, which was visited by Bishop Baldwin in the year 1152, so it appears that they were people of substance and character as well as of achievement. Daniel welcomed his mother, his brothers and his sisters and established them about seven miles west of our City Hail The Humphreys Family. 125 To get the exact position in your minds: go directly south of Ardmore and strike the Haverford Road; turn down to the left and find this old pebble-dashed house standing on the north side of Cobb’s Creek, below the new Golf Grounds which have been placed there in recent years. Daniel mar¬ ried Mary, the daughter of Thomas Wynne, the first Speaker of the First Provincial Assembly of Pennsylvania and the ancestor of Hugh Wynne, about whom Doctor S. Weir Mit¬ chell has written so charmingly. He built a very substantial house, long known as “The Mansion House,” of brick and of stone with a hipped roof, with windows scattered about in very irregular fashion, with small glass panes in leaden frames. That house stayed in the possession of the family until 1810, when Dennis Kelly, a miller, who had mills along the line of Cobb’s Creek, purchased it, and about the year 1860 or 1862 the house was tom down and that memorial of the Humphreys Family vanished. Daniel and Mary had six or seven children. One of them, Edward, was particularly distinguished as a doctor, who practiced physics and surgery with much success and public approval. He left no de¬ scendants. Before alluding to the son who carried the line down into the next generation, which is the one on which I particularly wish to dwell, let me call your attention to another childless son of Daniel who reached great distinction, a man of high integrity, character and purpose, free from the arts of the politician, but, differing in judgment from many of his coun¬ trymen, abruptly terminated his public career. I refer to Charles Humphreys, who in 1763 was chosen a member of the Provincial Assembly and remained such until 1776. He was one of the seven delegates chosen to represent Pennsylvania in the first Continental Congress, which met in Old Carpen¬ ter’s Hall in September, 1774. He served also in the Conti¬ nental Congress of 1775 and the early one of 1776, with John Dickinson, Edward Biddle, Thomas Willing, Andrew Allen, Robert Morris and James Wilson. He participated actively in all the measures which the Continental Congress found it necessary to adopt. He signed with others the Declaration of Rights representing the grievances of which the Colonies 126 The Humphreys Family. complained. He also signed the Non-intercourse Proclama¬ tion, and in every way participated until it came to the crucial point of voting for the Declaration of Independence. Those of you who have read the records will recall that, in November 1775, the Pennsylvania Legislature by express resolution instructed its members in Congress not to sanction or support any measure which looked towards a separation of the Colonies from the Crown, and that restriction was not removed until the 8th of June, 1776. I cannot stop to go into the niceties of Pennsylvania history, but Pennsylvania’s position in the matter of the Declaration of Independence is entirely misunderstood and misapprehended by people out¬ side of the State and sometimes by people within it. They forget that the battle for popular rights had been waged and won in the long struggle between the people, represented by David Lloyd and Benjamin Franklin, on the one side, and on the other by the representatives of governors appointed by the Penns who owned the soil in fee as well as possessing limited sovereignty under the charter. That battle had raged for over seventy years on our soil. We had won in Pennsyl¬ vania a recognition of popular rights which the other Colo¬ nies did not possess, so we had not the same grievances the other Colonies had and were not suffering from weight of oppression in the same sense. Besides that, there was in the charter of William Penn a distinct reservation which did not exist anywhere else, of the right of the Crown to tax the colonists without their consent. With that background, you can easily understand the attitude of a man like John Dick¬ inson, who happened to be Charles Humphreys’ third cousin because his mother traced back descent from Thomas Wynne. John Dickinson expressly stated the reason why he did not vote for the Declaration. So did Edward Biddle, and Mr. Thomas Willing Balch explained this matter last November when talking about Thomas Willing in this hall. These men were not unpatriotic, not at all. They gave everything they had to the cause, but they differed in judgment from the majority as to the time or necessity for the act of Independ¬ ence. They said that without a French alliance, without some preparation on the part of the Colonies for an effective The Humphreys Family. 127 resistance to the power of the Crown, it was an act of mad¬ ness to sever precipitately the tie of the Colonies to the Throne. Therefore they declined to sign. Bancroft declares that it was an act of the highest moral courage. Charles Humphreys was one of that kind. He erred in judgment you may say, because the tide of popular opinion went the other way, but he was not a politician and refused to surrender his convictions. For this reason he was left out of Congress on a new election. I ought to say also that Robert Morris and James Wilson, both of them signers of the Declaration of Independence, originally agreed in sentiment with Dickinson, Willing, Allen, Humphreys and Biddle. Charles Humphreys passed from the public service, but lived a long life highly respected. I have seen some of his books and read some of his letters but he did not enter upon the discussion of the question I have touched. The family has always cherished a high regard for his memory, and his grave is in the old Haverford burying ground. His elder brother, Joshua, was not remarkable for any act of public service, though highly esteemed in private life. I mention him because he was the father of Joshua Humphreys, bom in 1751, who lived until 1838, dying at the ripe age of eighty-seven. The younger Joshua is the man to whom we are indebted for the American Navy, for he was the first naval constructor in the United States, the man who made it possible for our seamen to carry the flag unashamed and victorious on the sea. His was the house that old pebbledashed house now standing on Haverford Road and it was to that house that his son Charles went, leaving his garden gate at Thirteenth and Spruce Streets to drive out to Haverford Road. Joshua Humphreys as a young man was apprenticed to a shipbuilder and displayed remarkable talent even in the early years of the Revolutionary War. He planned the frigate Randolph, that gallant little American ship which, carrying the flag under Captain Nicholas Biddle, in September, 1777, was attacked by the Yarmouth, a British ship twice her size. In a desperate battle when Biddle found himself doomed to defeat, because overpowered by a more powerful adversary, rather than strike his flag he blew up — — 128 The Humphreys Family. his ship and perished with all his crew. Humphreys also designed many of those little ships commanded by the first of our American admirals, Esek Hopkins, who carried the Rattlesnake Flag with Paul Jones as one of his subordinate officers. Think of what that little fleet did, designed in part by this Philadelphia Quaker who was put out of Meeting because of the support he was giving to the cause of the Colonies. The American fleet captured 800 British vessels of all kinds during the War of the Revolution, with five thousand prisoners. What splendid exploits! When the Revolution was over, the French Revolution soon followed, and later the Berlin and Milan Decrees were beginning to agitate the world; the Tripolitan War hung like a dark cloud over us. At this time Humphreys foresaw the absolute neces¬ sity for building up an American navy. He addressed a letter to Robert Morris in which he sketched out his plans. I have facsimiles of all his letters, and his correspondence in this book which I have on the desk beside me; the originals are upstairs in our treasury vaults. His letters justify the claim that is made for him as being the founder of the Amer¬ ican Navy. Without going into technical niceties I am not a naval man nor a ship carpenter, so I can only explain the general idea his thought was this, a bold thought and one characteristic of his genius. He knew perfectly well that the English navy was the most powerful afloat, that it could overpower us in any part of the world. We could not build ships fast enough 'to match them ship for ship, so Hum¬ phreys’ thought was this: build six frigates and let each one of those frigates be more than a match for any two English ships that she can meet. Let them also have special sailing qualities so that if chased or overpowered by more powerful squadrons they can “show their heels”, in nautical phrase, or sail right away, or else, if obliged to face the guns of British men-of-war, let them be capable of so acting in roll¬ ing seas or in blowing weather, that when the English gundeck is half-submerged, the American deck will be steadily above water and can rake the English ship with its fire. Those were his three objects, fast sailing qualities, steadiness of gun-deck, and heavier armament for the raking of hostile — — The Humphreys Family. 129 In effect he said, “If we can accomplish that as builders, then we can safely leave it to our captains to do the rest.” Such was his genius. The Act of 1794, passed by the Congress of the United States in Washington’s Administra¬ tion, authorized Henry Knox, the Secretary of War, because in those days there was no Secretary of the Navy, to have Humphreys plan those frigates. He planned them, The Con¬ stitution or Old Ironsides, The Congress, The United States, The Constellation, The Chesapeake and The President. Hear what those six ships did. The War of 1812 had not yet opened, but those ships carried Decatur, Truxton, Bainbridge, Hull, Stewart and Jones through the glories of 'the war with Tripoli, and later crowned themselves with victory in the War of 1812, although ten or fifteen years old. They were built of live oak and red cedar, bolted and riveted together, and were not brittle shells, as ships had been prior to that time. They were a little over-weighted as to their guns. It was found necessary to diminish the number of guns on their decks because they rolled too heavily in a rough sea, and hogbacked the ships. In the War of 1812 there was captured 1500 British ships and 12,000 prisoners. When I was a boy I saw over the entrance to the old din¬ ing room in the rear of Joshua Humphreys’ house a model that he had carved with his own penknife of one of his model ships. The exquisite curvature of lines was such that below the water the ship ’s keel cut the water like a knife. Hence they were as swift as they could be. Above, they were steadied against rolling by bulging sides which gave them a steady gun-deck, and they carried a weight of metal which the British did not expect. In other words, the British imag¬ ined that they were going to fight eighteen-pound guns and found 'they were really fighting twenty-fours. They thought they were fighting thirty-five guns. In point of fact they were fighting fifty, and the crushing effect on the British Navy was a surprise. When the ships first appeared in the Mediterranean, modelled on the Humphreys’ plan, Nelson said, ‘‘Those American ships will cost the British Navy very anxious thought in the future.” Nelson did not live to be engaged in the War of 1812 and face those ships, but his ships. prophecy came true. 130 The Humphreys Family. Just an instance or two I will take of their behavior. Old Ironsides was the most glorious ship in the Navy as to her sailing and fighting qualities. You often see pictures of her in her fight with the Ouerriere. When the Constitution first encountered the Ouerriere, the Ouerriere was part of an Eng¬ lish squadron of six large ships. Captain Isaac Hull, who then commanded her, saw at a glance that he could not fight a squadron, so he determined to put the sailing qualities of his vessel to the test. He drew off and ran away from them. They pursued in line. Soon they were spread out. He saw then that he could pick his antagonist if he could get the British ships at a sufficient distance from each other so as to give him the advantage of the wind. Think of what it was to command a ship in those days. I am talking of sailing vessels, not of steam. There is comparatively little merit now in selecting positions for a battleship because steam will put a ship against wind and waves in any position desired, but before the days of steam, when the wind blew hard and a captain had to get the weather gauge of his enemy and manoeuvre in such a way as to rake him with a broadside and not be raked in turn, it required the supremest degree of seamanship. Hull had it, and he had the ship, and he had the builder of Philadelphia behind him who had planned it all. The result was that he was drawing away from the British squadron just to his own taste, when a dead calm fell upon him. Of course, even swift ships cannot sail in a calm, and the difficulty was double, for the calm had not struck the pursuing squadron; the British began to overtake him. Hull, with quick thought, looked ahead and saw rough water, indicating a breeze, ahead of him a mile away; instantly he put out his boats, put strong men in them carrying anchors and long ropes; the boats were rowed until the lines were taut, anchors were dropped, and the ship was then kedged or pulled right up to the anchors; the operation was repeated and the ship was drawn through the smooth water before the British got on to the device. Hull got into the ruffled water and began to recover the wind. By that time the British squadron was becalmed. Later, when the Ouerriere was far ahead, Hull wheeled and in less than an hour knocked the 131 The Humphreys Family. British frigate all to pieces. The Constitution, “Old Iron¬ sides, ’’ had achieved her first victory. Under Bainbridge she scored again by capturing The Java. Her greatest exploit was, when commanded by Captain Charles Stewart, she fought two British ships The Cyane and The Levant at the same time, and was manoeuvered in such a way that she sailed between them, raking first one and then the other be¬ fore they could wheel and rake her. All that was due to the sailing qualities of the vessel, and the seamanship that directed her. The other ships had glorious records. Decatur’s ship, the United States, conquered the Macedonian, after bitter battle. The President, commanded by Truxton, conquered the In¬ surgent. I need not dwell on these, but these achievements are largely to be credited to Joshua Humphreys, the first naval constructor of the United States. He remained in office until President Jefferson came in, and Jefferson, being strongly opposed to the Navy, practically asked him to retire. Robert Smith, Secretary of the Navy, wrote a letter of regret to Humphreys on his retirement couched in graceful terms, especially so considering that it came from a reluctant Secre¬ tary. I will not stop to read this letter, but I will now read one of Humphreys’ own letters, to indicate the dignity of the man and how he insisted on his claim to be recognized as the Constructor of the Navy. I dwell on this for the reason that occasionally there springs from some other part of the coun¬ try a claim that Josiah Fox was the real constructor of the Navy of the United States and that Humphreys was not en¬ titled to priority. Here is a letter which Humphreys ad¬ dressed to Josiah Fox on the 25th of July, 1797. Fox was a clerk in the Marine Department. He was under orders from Humphreys. Being a bumptious individual, he undertook to usurp authority that did not belong to him, and wrote a letter to Humphreys, which was answered in this way: “Sir, I received your letter of yesterday purporting to tell me that the Secretary of War is very desirous that the frigate Con¬ stellation should be launched in the safest manner and with as little expense to the United States as possible. Judging that your [my] advice may be necessary to assist Mr. Stod- — — 132 The Humphreys Family. dard, acting for the Navy, in the performance of that service, “I have waited on the Secretary. he desires me,” etc. It is with pleasure and with alacrity I shall always receive and obey while in the service of the United States any orders of the Secretary of War, but, Sir, I cannot receive hereafter or attend to any directions from you, although directed by the Secretary of War, while you style yourself nmal con¬ structor. You must know that my station in the service of the United States requires no direction from a naval construc¬ tor. You also know that I am the head of that Department. When you direct a letter hereafter to me let it he done in your own proper style as clerk in the Marine Department.” Listen to the closing sentence: “Whenever the Secretary deems my services no longer necessary, you may then, to other persons, assume such title as your vanity may suggest. I am. Sir, Joshua Humphreys.” I return to the old house in which Mr. Humphreys after his retirement (he retired in 1803) lived until 1838. The house, which is on Haverford Road, as I have already said, is an exceedingly interesting one, built in three parts. The rear consisted of the original cabin dating back to about 1730. The second part was of later date, about the time of the Revolution, and the pebble-dashed front, which is three stories high with a garret beneath the roof, was built in the year 1812. The stairways, the walls, and the deep window panelings are of curled maple, beautifully polished. All the doors are of solid curled maple. The house itself was furnished with exquisite mahogany highboys, lowboys, pie-crust tables and mirrors, which latter were brought from France by Clement Humphreys, the elder brother of Joshua, who had been sent by John Adams on a mission to France, and who later perished at sea. As I have mentioned Clement, let me give you one little instance of his spirit when a boy. While the frigate United States was building, the editor of the Aurora, a newspaper in Philadelphia, came out with a furious attack on President Washington. Clement Humphreys, who was but nineteen years of age at that time, finding the editor of the paper, Mr. Duane, walking about the shipyard, caned him for the libel. He was prosecuted, brought into court ... The Humphreys Family. 133 and tried for assault and battery. He said, “Yes, I am guilty. I caned the editor, undoubtedly.” A verdict was rendered against him, and a fine imposed. Citizens of Phila¬ delphia paid it for the boy, and you will find a glowing ac¬ count of the incident in the papers of the day. It is said that he was sent later to France by John Adams out of ad¬ miration for a young Federalist who had courage enough to cane a Democratic editor. While Joshua Humphreys lived in the old house until 1838, he had a son Samuel, who was the Chief of Construc¬ tion in the Navy Yards of the United States from 1816 until 1846. Samuel Humphreys inherited all the talents of his father for shipbuilding. He planned many of the successful ships of the period, one of them the famous fighting frigate Franklin, which at the time was the largest fighting craft afloat. Let me give a sample of the character of Samuel. The morning after one of the Wistar parties (and we all know what Wistar parties are) in the year 1824, Mr. Richard Peters, the son of Judge Peters, and Reporter of the de¬ cisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, with his office on South Sixth Street, was visited in his office by a young law student in somebody else’s office. I wish I knew who the young law Student was. He has not disclosed his personal identity but he wrote a most remarkable account of this visit. He was sent by his preceptor to Mr. Peters and found with him Judge Hopkinson of the United States Dis¬ trict Court and Mr. Izakoff, the Russian Ambassador. After talking over some unfinished conversation which had been started the night before at the Wistar party, the Ambassador said to Mr. Peters, “How is it that American ships are superior to those of any other navy in the world so far as their sailing qualities are concerned?” Mr. Peters replied, “Better built, and better planned.” “Well,” said the Am. bassador, “the Czar, Alexander, who sent me here, is very anxious to build up a navy, and has commissioned me to find the finest shipbuilder in the world. Do you know who the builder of those ships happens to be?” “Yes,” said Mr. Peters. “He is a client of mine, Sam Humphreys.” “Can I meet him?” “Yes, you can meet him, if you wish to.” 134 The Humphreys Family. Won’t you make an appointment, Mr. Peters?” “What hour will suit you?” “Ten o’clock to-morrow morning. The student was asked to carry a note to Sam Humphreys. He begged to be permitted to be present at the time the in¬ terview took place, and he says he was there. At ten o’clock Mr. Humphreys came in. A minute or two afterwards came the Ambassador. They were introduced to each other. The Ambassador said: “Mr. Humphreys, I am commissioned to employ a shipbuilder for the Russian Government. I can offer you a salary of sixty thousand dollars a year, a town house, a country house, a coach and all supplies.” Hum¬ phreys said: “This is a very great surprise to me. Let me think it over until to-morrow morning,” and he bowed his way out. The Ambassador thought that was a favorable omen. Mr. Peters remarked, “Perhaps, you think so.” The next morning Humphreys returned, bowed very politely to the Ambassador and said: “The salary is far larger than I could earn. It is beyond my desires. I have but one house. That is where I do my work at the Navy Yard. I always walk and have no need of a coach. I do not know whether my talents are as great as my friend Mr. Peters has de¬ scribed, but I do know, that whether they be great or small, they belong to my country and I will not sell them.” The writer asks, “In the history of dazzling offers, where is there a match for this patriotic and dignified refusal ? ’’ Remember that it was in a time of peace. There was no international objection to acceptance. Had Humphreys been an ordinary commercial contractor, he would have said, “Yes, I can build ships for a foreign nation. We are not at war.” The Ambassador was staggered. Mr. Peters mentioned it to Judge Hopkinson. Judge Hopkinson said, “I knew it. He would not have been his father’s boy if he had accepted that offer.” Such was Samuel Humphreys. Up to this time the successive generations of the Hum¬ phreys Family had been represented by men and women of pure Welsh blood, men of Welsh descent but of Norman l l origin, transmuted through the conquest of Wales and by long residence in Wales and intermarriage with Welsh women into pure Welsh blood. A new strain now appears. The Humphreys Family. 135 Samuel Humphreys married Letitia Atkinson, a rather strik¬ ing name. The circumstances of the marriage are romantic. Andrew Atkinson, the father of Letitia, was of Irish blood. His father was Thomas Atkinson of Cavan Garden, Bally Shannon, County Donegal, who had married Jean Murray, a descendant of Sir Archibald Murray of Scotland, the Seventh Baron in line from that James Murray who had been of the Black Barony that adhered to the Pretender. It is said that young Thomas Atkinson, then an ensign in the British ser¬ vice, as he marched past Edinburgh Castle saw Jean Murray on the battlements, a girl of sixteen, he a boy of nineteen, and instantly fell in love with her. They were introduced. They eloped in less than six months. He brought his bride to this country. He worked his way up. He purchased a plantation on the banks of the St. John’s River in Florida following the cession of Florida by Spain to this country. He had a daughter Letitia, who was at Dungenness, the house of the widow of General Nathaniel Greene, on Cumber¬ land Island outside of Savannah, where young Sam Hum¬ phreys had been sent by his father Joshua to inspect live-oak timbers for battleships. Later she became his bride. Thus it was that Letitia Atkinson and Samuel Humphreys became the parents of the last representative of the family that I shall mention, Andrew Atkinson Humphreys. You see the origin of his name. He was born in the year 1810 and died in the year 1883. You may notice the remarkable longevity of the various people I have referred to. I will be brief about General Humphreys. I could talk about him indefinitely. I think he had the strongest and handsomest face I ever saw on a soldier. His sword is on exhibition in yonder hall. He had, as you now observe, a mixture of blood which his for¬ bears did not possess. They had a pure Welsh strain with some Norman. He had Norman, Welsh, Irish and Scotch a pretty good mixture, and it asserted itself in his character. He was educated at the Germantown Academy, the old build¬ ing which stands on School House Lane just below Green Street at the present time. He was caned there, was too spirited to submit to indignity, and would not go back to school, so he was sent to a boys’ school at Nazareth under the — 136 The Humphreys Family. tuition of the Moravians. From there he went to West Point and graduated as an officer, thirteenth in his class of thirty-five. He then became attached to the Army in various capacities as an engineer, served in the Florida Seminole War with dis¬ tinction, and was in two battles in the Seminole War. But his great service, prior to the Civil War, was as an engineer, and his great achievement, which cannot be dwelt upon in too emphatic terms, was the exploration and mapping of the Valley of the Mississippi and the devising of means by which the destructive floods of the Mississippi and Missouri should not desolate that vast valley. When we think that the Valley of the Mississippi is as extensive as all Europe, cutting out Russia alone, and that it is the seat of future empire, using the word empire in the sense in which Bishop Berkley used it, as representing not imperial or political power but a field of authority embracing grandeur and strength then can we realize the value of the work; he rescued that region from the devastation of floods and performed a service which was afterward carried out by the Eades jetties about the mouths of the Mississippi and the Gulf of Mexico. That work has been written of, spoken of, and translated into many lan¬ guages ; the engineers of the world have exhausted the vocabu¬ lary of praise upon it. Then came the Civil War. He com¬ manded first in a subordinate position, but his great strength lay in his engineering capacity. He was a topographical en¬ gineer. He had an eye for topography, and could place troops in position and mark out lines of strategy. He closed the lines at the Battle of Malvern Hill in such a way as to prevent the retirement of the Army of the Potomac from the Peninsula from being a disastrous rout. He afterwards commanded the Second Division of the Third Corps under Sickels at the Battle of Gettysburg, and rescued that corps from disaster by the masterly way in which he changed front under fire. You remember that Sickels, by mistake, got so far out in the Peach Orchard, when the fighting of the second day took place, that there were more men killed on the second day than on the first and third combined. Sickels took up an advanced position. On the left was Little Round Top, on the right the Borough of Gettysburg, behind it Ceme- — The Humphreys Family. 137 tery Ridge, the rear of Meade’a Army guarded by Gregg’s Cavalry to protect it from assault. The position of Sickels was so far in advance as to be in danger of being flanked and cut off by Longstreet’s advance, which would have annihi¬ lated the whole Third Corps. Humphreys manoeuvred in such a way that under hot fire and flank attack he drew back, without breaking, the whole line until he brought it into con¬ tact with the right and left and closed up the gap. That was his great merit. His mind worked under fire with a pre¬ cision that is indescribable. His personal gallantry was of the old-fashioned kind. Read the description of his charge on Maxyes’ Heights at the First Battle of Fredericksburg. Five divisions had attempted to carry that hill. A sixth division was called for. Humphreys led it in person. Shot through the hat, with two horses killed under him, he mounted a third, rallied and led his men, losing a larger percentage in forty minutes than the Light Brigade in an hour and a half. That charge, though unsuccessful, was one of the glorious achieve¬ ments of the war. I have never talked to a soldier on either side, Confederate or Federal, without his telling me that Humphreys was the most remarkable scientific soldier the Army of the Potomac contained. The reason he did not reach the very top was that he had not the slightest trace of the politician about him. He was no newspaper soldier. He drove reporters absolutely out of the camp because they did not belong there, and he would not tolerate being questioned about plans. He could swear like a trooper, gentleman though he was, refined and exquisite in all his tastes; it is said the words blew out in such a way that reporters took their tickets from his camp straight back to Washington. But however choleric, his scientific mastery of himself and of his science was complete. After the Battle of Gettysburg he became chief-of-staff to General Meade. When Hancock was wounded in the Battle of the Wilderness, Humphreys commanded the Second Corps and clung so closely to Lee’s retreating flank that Lee could not escape. He was like a wolf-hound cling¬ ing to the flank of a deer. His tirelessness enabled Sheridan to ride around Appomattox and head Lee off. Had there been a less tenacious pursuer, Lee might have escaped into 138 The Humphreys Family. the mountains near Lynchburg, Virginia, and guerilla war¬ fare would have ensued. It was Humphreys who held Lee back, and it was through Humphreys’ lines that the proposi¬ tion was first made for Lee’s surrender. After the war he became Chief of Engineers of the United States, and for thirteen years served in that capacity. One of his sons reached the rank of colonel and served creditably in the Civil War. He also served as a staff officer on his father’s staff. He also served in the Indian Wars, during 1870, and later out in the far west. A second son served with great credit and fidelity in the artillery. In conclusion, it gives me pleasure to say to this audience, that his only surviving child, a daughter, has been a generous benefactress of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania and has committed to its ownership the precious documents on which I have relied for this story. We have in our posses¬ sion the originals, through the gift of Miss Humphreys, of the Humphreys’ papers, and for that reason I have talked of the Humphreys Family.