CIRCULAR LETTER 
 
 OF 
 
 The Society of The Cincinnati 
 
 IN THE 
 
 State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations 
 
 JULY 4, J 906 
 
CIRCULAR LETTER 
 
 OF 
 
 The Society of The Cincinnati 
 
 IN THE 
 
 State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations 
 
 JULY 4, 1906 
 
^fjg&gj** 
 
 "W'XIIOH 
 
 
 a 
 
 y»VVAX-v/5A2iU. JOl>VVvvm.Hi. ioMvwuuDti, 
 
01 < SERV, fi£ 
 
 % 
 
 Senate Chamber, 
 State House, Newport, R. I., J- 
 July 4, 1906. 
 
 Proceedings of the Society of the Cincinnati in the State of Rhode 
 Island and Providence Plantations in Annual Meeting convened on the 
 One Hundred and Thirty-first Anniversary of the Independence of the 
 United States of America. 
 
 (Extract.) 
 
 Brevet Brigadier General Hazard Stevens, Chairman Special 
 Committee on certain publications received from the Treasurer* of 
 the Society of the Cincinnati in the State of Virginia, submitted the 
 following report : 
 
 * At the Annual meeting of the Society of the Cincinnati in the State of Vir- 
 ginia held in Richmond, Va., on July 4, 1906 — this Officer was elected Secretary 
 of that State Society and relinquished the office of Treasurer. 
 
"Senate Chamber, 
 State House, Newport, R. I. J. 
 July 4, 1906. 
 To the Honorable 
 
 SOCIETY OF THE CINCINNATI, 
 In the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations: 
 
 The undersigned, heretofore duly appointed a Special Committee to 
 consider and report, with recommendations, upon certain printed documents 
 received from the Treasurer of the Honorable Society of the Cincinnati in 
 the State of Virginia, respectfully report that said documents appear to 
 have been widely disseminated and your Special Committee accordingly 
 recommend that the Circular Letter herewith submitted in relation thereto 
 be approved, printed and transmitted to said State Society and to the 
 General Society and to the other State Societies. 
 
 Respectfully submitted: 
 
 HAZARD STEVENS, 
 EDWARD ABORN GREENE, 
 CHARLES CROOKE EMOTT, 
 
 Committee."* 
 
 On motion of General Stevens, the report was then, by unani- 
 mous vote, accepted, approved and ordered spread on the Minutes, and 
 the Circular Letter, by unanimous vote, approved and ordered to be 
 published and transmitted to the Society of the Cincinnati in the State 
 of Virginia and to the General Society and several State Societies. 
 * * * * * -::- -x 
 
 Attest: 
 
 Geobge W. ( )lk ey, 
 
 Secretary. 
 
 *Bvt. Brig. Genl. Hazard Stevens. A.M., iTft 1b., Admitted 1887. Great-grandson of Major and brevet 
 Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Lyman. Aide de Camp Continental Army, Original Member. 
 
 Mr. Edward Aborn Greene, Ph. B., Admitted 1893. Great-great grandson of Colonel Christopher Greene, 
 1st Regiment Rhode Island Continental Infantry, killed in Bkirmish at Pine's Bridge, N. Y., May 14, 
 17M. Great-grandson of Lieutenant Job Greene, 3d Regiment Infantry, Rhode Island State Brigade in 
 Continental Service, Original Member. 
 
 Mr. Charles Crooke Emott, A. B., LL. B., Admitted 1887. Great grandson of Colonel Archibald Crary, 
 3d Regiment Infantry, Rhode Island State Brigade in Continental Service, Original Member. 
 
i 7 8 3 
 The Society of the Cincinnati 
 
 IN THE 
 
 State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. 
 
 Senate Chamber, 
 State House, Newport, E,. I., V 
 July 4, 1906. J 
 To the 
 
 Soi iety of the Cincinnati 
 
 IN THE 
 
 State of Virginia : 
 
 Under the Institution of 1783 a State meeting may, as often as 
 necessary, write a circular letter, " noting whatever it may think worthy 
 of observation respecting the good of the Society or the general union 
 of the States." 
 
 During the past Cincinnati year several printed documents have 
 been received by this Society purporting to have come from you, 
 although none of them have been authenticated by your Secretary, as 
 customary under the Institution, and as exemplified in resolves of your 
 State Society when its business was conducted by Veteran Original 
 members. 
 
 These printed documents are; 
 
 I. — A series of preambles and resolutions concerning the Institu- 
 tion of the Cincinnati and the action heretofore taken thereunder by 
 State Societies. 
 
These preambles and resolutions appear to have been proposed to 
 your Society by your Treasurer, and it is stated that they were adopted 
 at a special meeting of your Society held in Richmond, Va., on Decem- 
 ber 15, 1905. 
 
 This document is entitled "A Circular Letter," to which replies 
 are requested from State Societies, to be addressed to the Treasurer of 
 your Society as Chairman of a Committee of Three of your members, 
 whose names are mentioned. 
 
 II. — An address purporting to have been delievered by the Treas- 
 urer of your Society, at said alleged special meeting of December 
 15, 1905. 
 
 III. — A series of By-Laws proposed by the Treasurer of your 
 Society and purporting to have been adopted at said alleged special 
 meeting of your Society on December 15, 1905. 
 
 These have also been transmitted by the Treasurer of your Society. 
 
 IV. — A subsequent printed address, of sixteen pages, by the Treas- 
 urer of your Society in seeming explanation and defense of the above- 
 recited action alleged to have been taken on December 15, 1905. 
 
 This address, it is stated, has been transmitted by him " by direc- 
 tion of the Standing Committee" of your Society. Tt is dated March 
 15, 1906. 
 
 The several documents mentioned having, as apparently intended 
 by their author, been special/;/ submitted for our consideration, remark 
 and action on particular subjects and reply requested, to be directed to 
 him, we shall, in the language of His Excellency, President General 
 Washington, when replying on March 1, 1799, to Major General 
 William Heath, who had sent, him a copy of his " Military Memoirs," 
 " avail ourselves of the liberty allowed us to express our sentiments with 
 the utmost candor and freedom,'' without being liable, in any degree, 
 to the imputation of intrusion into the affairs of a co-ordinate State- 
 Society. 
 
 Preliminary to any discussion of special matters, it is essential to 
 consider the organization, powers and limitations of the General Society 
 and of the several State Societies, and to point out the erroneous con- 
 clusions in relation thereto as shown in the before-mentioned documents. 
 
I. 
 
 THE GENERAL SOCIETY AND STATE SOCIETIES. 
 
 Your Treasurer has said as follows, viz.: 
 
 That the General Society is only an " advisory conference " and its 
 authority limited to " surest ions " which " can have no legal or binding 
 effect whatever until ratified by the. several State Societies," and that 
 State Societies are the sole repository of executive power, and that the 
 General Society " may bave assumed powers and authority, but the 
 
 State Societies do not r< gnize such assumed authority under the laws 
 
 of the Institution " and that " the General Society has no legal authority 
 under the Institution to revive a dormant ( ?) State Society, as that 
 power is inherent in the State Societies themselves," and that the Gen- 
 eral Society ■■ is merely a shadow without a substance, and <i mry poor 
 shadow at thai." 
 
 If the General Society is, as now asserted by your Treasurer', 
 merely a shadow without a substance, it is, nevertheless, certain that 
 His Excellency, President General Washington, believed quite dif- 
 ferently, when lie called it to meet, in Philadelphia, Penn., on May 4, 
 1784, and journeyed there in his carriage from Mount Vernon, Va., 
 and presided for thirteen days oxer the deliberation- of one of the most 
 distinguished assemblies which ever met in America. 
 
 It is equally certain that the General Officers and delegates from 
 thirteen State Societies, who then met, and whose patriotic deeds and 
 public services are treasured records in American history, as well as the 
 eminent men who have since, to 1905 inclusive, participated in meetings 
 of the General Society, including Signers of the Declaration of rude 
 pendence and Presidents of the Continental Congress, nil helieved 
 
 when they adopted ordinances and resolves for the g 1 of the Society, 
 
 other than resolves whose expressed object was a proposed alteration 
 of the Institution, that the General Society had jurisdiction in tic 
 premises. 
 
 Your Treasurer's theory that the State Societies are the soli reposi- 
 tory of executive authority in the Society of the Cincinnati makes it 
 accessary, in order to demonstrate it- fallacy, to give the history of its 
 formation at the Cantonments of the American Army on Hudson River, 
 near Newburgh, on May 10, 1783, and. in doing so, it is pertinent to 
 observe, at the outset, thai there is no analogy between the origin of the 
 Institution of the Cincinnati and the origin of the Constitution of the 
 United States, although there is found in the latter methods of adminis 
 tration which may have Keen derived from the former. 
 
The Institution of the Society of the Cincinnati was not formed 
 by State Societies, but by Commissioned Officers of the Main Conti- 
 nental Army of the War of the Revolution, a number of whom were 
 not citizens of any of the States and never became members of the State 
 Societies which were all after-ward organized. 
 
 When the Convention of Officers met in Cantonments on May 10, 
 1783, it was composed as follows, viz. : 
 
 First — General Officers holding their commissions from the Con- 
 tinental Congress and not belonging to any State Continental Line. 
 
 These attended of their own motion and not by election because they 
 were General Officers, and among them were the Adjutant General, 
 Inspector General, Chief of Artillery and Chief of Engineers. 
 
 Second — Officers of the Continental Corps of Engineers and Con- 
 tinental Sappers and Miners. 
 
 These were wholly Continental and respectively elected their own 
 representation to the Convention. 
 
 Most of them were foreign officers — some holding commissions in 
 the French army. 
 
 They had nothing to do with the States. 
 
 Third — Officers of the Continental Corps of Artillery and Cavalry 
 and Continental Legionary Corps. 
 
 These organizations had been raised by the Continental Congress 
 wholly irrespective of State Lines, and many of the officers, particularly 
 in the Legionary Corps, were foreigners. 
 
 They elected their respective representations to the Convention. 
 
 Fourth — Officers of the Canadian Regiment Continental Infantry, 
 which was wholly Continental, and had been originally raised in 
 Canada, whence most of the officers came. 
 
 These officers sent their representation. 
 
 Fifth — Officers of the Invalid Regiment Continental Infantry, 
 which was wholly Continental, and raised by Congress, irrespective of 
 State Line-. 
 
 These officers sent their representation. 
 
 Sixth — Officers of the Provost Troop of Continental Light Dra- 
 goons, which was an independent organization wholly Continental. 
 These officers also sent their representation. 
 
 Lastly — The few Continental Regiments or reduced battalions of 
 Infantry still in service from the States of Massachusetts, Connecticut, 
 
 8 
 
Xew York, New Jersey, and battalion of four companies from .Mary- 
 land, the officers of each of which senl a representation. 
 
 The officers there of the New Hampshire Continental Line appear, 
 however, to have taken no part in forming the Society — nor did they 
 become members — probably out of deference to the wishes of Brigadier 
 General Johm Stakk. their brigade < !ommander, who did not favorably 
 consider the proposition for a Military Society. 
 
 As a consequence, in order to organize that honored Slate Society, 
 the Institution had to be sent by President General Washington to 
 Major General John Sullivan, then in civil life, at Exeter, N. II.. 
 where that State Society was duly organized, on November 23, 1783. 
 
 In .Major General IIkxky Knox's proposed Institution, which was 
 submitted to the Convention and formed the basis of the Institution, it 
 was provided that " the General Milling of the Society shall consist of 
 all the members who may find it convenient to attend," and also that the 
 officers of the several Slate Societies " shall consider themselves under 
 indispensable obligations to attend." 
 
 The underlying theory of this proposition was that the General 
 Society was the collective Society of the "one Society of Friends " in 
 General meeting assembled to concert measures for the good of the whole 
 Society other than those which were exclusively of local State conceru. 
 
 If was deemed, however, too uncertain a method of securing gen- 
 eral attendance and equable representation from all quarters, consider- 
 ing the difficulties and expense of traveling as then prevailed, and, 
 accordingly, the proposition was amended and the Institution, as then 
 adopted, provided that 
 
 "the meeting of the General Society shall isist of its 
 
 " Officers and a representation from each State Society, in 
 '" number not exceeding five, whose expenses shall be borne 
 " li\ their respective State Societies." 
 
 The General Officers thus designated as forming an integral part 
 of the Genera] Society, just as much so as the representations from the 
 respective State Societies, were the President General, Vice-President 
 General. Secretary General, Treasurer General, Assistant Secretary 
 General and Assistanl Treasurer General. 
 
 No State Societies were in existence when the Institution was 
 formed. That instrument, however, provided thai 
 
 the General Society irill. for the sake of frequent eommuni- 
 cations, be divided into State Societies." 
 
 9 
 
The Institution also provided that a copy should lie given to the 
 senior officer of each State Line in ( Jantonments so that the officers of the 
 respective State Lines might sign their names to the same and assemble 
 as soon as may be in order to organize their respective State Societies. 
 
 As to " the General Officers ami the officers delegated to represent 
 the several Corps of the Army" they were required to " subscribe t<> tin 
 Institution- of tin- General Society, for themselves and their constituents, 
 in the manner ami form prescribed." 
 
 The rolls subscribed by these General Officers ami officers thus dele- 
 gated, in order to become members of the Society of the Cincinnati, 
 were deposited with the Secretary General and were not the rolls from 
 which the respective State Societies were formed. 
 
 They might thereafter become members of Stale Societies if they so 
 desired, but they paid their required mouth's pay to the Treasurer Gen- 
 eral and not to the Treasurer of a State Society, and thisiund, thus con- 
 stituted, became the basis of the General Society fund since administered 
 by the Treasurer General. 
 
 By the Institution, as adopted [May 10, 1783, His Excellency, Gen- 
 eral Geokge Washington, Commander-in-Chief, was chosen President 
 Genera], and a committee of three .Major Generals was appointed to 
 notify him. 
 
 On June lb, 1783; the Convention of Officers having reassembled 
 in Cantonments, elected Major General Henrt Knox to be Secretary 
 General and Major Genera] Alexandeb MacDougall to lie Treasurer 
 Genera], all the General Officers of the Society of the Cincinnati having, 
 at the outset, been Genera] Officers of the Continental Army, and, at 
 the General Society Meeting, held in Philadelphia on May 1.'., 1784, 
 all the General Officers of the Society then unanimously chosen were 
 also Continental General Officers. 
 
 Meanwhile, on June '.», 1783, the officers of tin- Massachusetts and 
 New York Continental lines, who had already become member- of the 
 Order, preliminarily organized their respective State Societies at the 
 Cantonments near Newburgh, ami, in like manner, the officers of the 
 New Jersey Continental Line on June 11. 1783, organized their State 
 Society in camp at Elizabethtown, X. .1., to which station they had been 
 ordered after the Institution had been adopted. 
 
 All other State Societies were organized later, the next being our 
 own. which was preliminarily organized at Saratoga Barracks on Upper 
 Hudson River, on June 2-1, 1783, where the "Rhode Island Continental 
 Lino was guarding the Northern Frontier. 
 
 10 
 
Aside from the respective Continental Slate Lines, those members 
 who were foreigners, not resident in any of the States, had their names 
 enrolled by the Secretary General, as required by the Institution. 
 
 Some of these never joined any State Society but went abroad as 
 soon as honorably discharged from service, while others became members 
 in America or in France. 
 
 This historical review demonstrates that the General Society was 
 not formed by the Slate Societies into which, under the Institution, it 
 is divided for the sake of frequent communications, and that but very 
 few Continental Stale Lines had any part in the formation of the Insti- 
 tition, and that State Societies, when finally organized, did not include 
 all the members of the Order. 
 
 It is pertinent to note, in this connection, that, at the so-called meet- 
 ing of your Society, held on December 15, 1905, the several State Socie- 
 ties of the Cincinnati are admittedly termed " Slate Branches," which 
 is in accordance with the terms of the Institution which prescribes that 
 the Genera] Society shall, for certain purposes, be divided into State 
 Societies. 
 
 The history of the formation of the Institution having been given, 
 the next subject to lie considered is its scope and intent, ami the powers, 
 delegated and implied, conferred thereby on the General Society and 
 on the several State Societies. 
 
 These cannot lie ascertained from its mere perusal, and hence, 
 when the precedents of the Society and settled rules of construction 
 and interpretation are not known, erroneous conclusions are reached 
 which, it is hoped, will now he rectified 
 
 The Institution adopted on May 10, 17^:1, was, as stated by Presi- 
 dent General Washington in a communication of date May 15, 1784, 
 '■lit' necessity drawn up in a hasty manner at an epoch as 
 '• extraordinary as it will be memorable in the annals of man- 
 " kind, when the mind, agitated by a variety of emotions, was 
 '•'not at liberty to digest our ideas in so correct <t form 'if 
 " could have been wished." 
 In another letter, President General Washington wrote that 
 "' it was inh tided to comprehend in the original Institution of 
 "the Cincinnati many officers who, through want of better 
 "information and a peculiarity of circumstances, were 
 " omitted." 
 Even within a few weeks after the adoption of the Institution it 
 bad to l>e altered on June 19, 1783, by the Convention of Officers who 
 
 11 
 
had framed it on May 10, 1783, so as to substitute the Bald American 
 Eagle as the Order of the Society instead of a mere medal and to 
 authorize the General Society to issue diplomas of membership. 
 
 When the General Society met in Philadelphia in May, 1784, it 
 consisted, as required by the Institution, of the General Officers and 
 a distinguished delegation from every State Society except France. 
 
 The Society in France would also have been represented if Presi- 
 dent General Washington had believed that that State Society could 
 lawfully delegate to him its power to designate three of its members 
 from among French officers then in the United States, to represent it. 
 
 One of the first acts of the General Society, on May 5, 1784, was 
 to "go into a Cominitte of the Whole to take into consideration the 
 Institution of the Society," and, on the following day, the Committee 
 lit' the Whole reported that it was 
 
 unanimously of Hie opinion that sundry matters and thine/* 
 therein contained ought to be em-reefed." 
 
 Had the Institution then merely been rewritten to express more 
 clearly the actual intent of the Founders, as enunciated in many 
 resolves of interpretation passed from day to day at that General 
 Meeting, the rewritten Institution would have been recognized nemino 
 contra diecnle, but it was decided at the same time to idler it in funda- 
 mental particulars, which, as no method was prescribed in that instru- 
 ment for alteration, could only be effected by unanimous consent of all, 
 including the General Officers and delegates to the General Society and 
 thr several State Societies. 
 
 The General Society, in its communication to every State Society, 
 including the Society in France, distinctly specified what the altera- 
 tions were which made unanimous consent necessary, not only by the 
 General Society but by every State Meeting. 
 
 In all other particulars (except said alterations), as for example, 
 the description of the American Bald Eagle as the Order of the Society 
 (instead of a medal), and that Continental Navy and Marine Officers 
 and officers of State Regiments who had been in Continental service for 
 three years of the War of the Revolution, and certain French Army 
 and Navy Officers were comprehended among those qualified for origi- 
 nal membership, and that every member should ho given a diploma, 
 the amended Institution was, and always has been, accepted as inter- 
 preting nnl expressing the true intent of the Founders of the Insti- 
 tution. 
 
 12 
 
In the language of Hon: Charles Stewart Daveis, LL.D., Vice- 
 President General, in his report on July 5, 1858, to the Massachusetts 
 Slate Society, of which he was President, the amended Institution of 
 17M (other than the alterations), was "only a recast, with a few 
 verbal or virtual variations." 
 
 Every Siato Society lias since acted under the amended Institu- 
 tion in those particulars, although several such Societies had refused 
 io approve the proposed organic alterations, which "alterations, conse- 
 quently, failed to become effective. 
 
 President General ELamiltom Fish, on May 7. L851, on behalf 
 of a committee, reported to (lie General Society thai the Original Insti- 
 tution was not framed 
 
 " with the precision and formalities usual in preparing legal 
 " documents. It looked to general results, well understood 
 ■• by those who were parties to its formation, bu1 not expressed 
 
 "with the precision which leaves no r n for doubt in the 
 
 "minds >d' those who are to obtain their knowledge of irs 
 " intention only [nun its perusal." 
 
 This fact explains why the Treasurer of your Society has. from 
 its mere perusal, concluded that " the rules of the Institution are not 
 being observed throughout the Society of the Cincinnati" because of 
 his want of knowledge of the intent of the Founders demonstrated in 
 many ways during a series of years and well understood in those State 
 Societies which have had continuous existence since 1783. 
 
 There is strong analogy in scope and intent, hut not in formation, 
 between the Institution of tin' Cincinnati and the Constitution of the 
 United States, which original members of the Society of the < lincinnati, 
 in their quality as members of the Constitutional Convention, look so 
 potential a part in framing, and of which nil the original members of the 
 Society look so active a part in their respective Siates in securing the 
 adoption. 
 
 Indeed, the only political principle found in the Institution of the 
 
 Cincinnati required the members to exert themselves unceasingly to 
 
 secure for themselves and their posterity thai union and national honor 
 
 which subsequently found expression in the Constitution of the United 
 
 es. 
 
 They hail no other political principle. 
 
 Keference may, therefore, properly be made to analogous decisions 
 of the Supreme Court of the United States and standard text writers 
 as indicating the plan and scope of the Institution. 
 
 13 
 
Chief Justice John Marshall, in McCulloch cs. Maryland, 
 said: 
 
 "A ('(institution, to contain an accurate detail of all 
 " the subdivisions of which its great powers will admit, and 
 " of all the means by which they may be carried into execu- 
 "' tion, would partake of the prolixity of a legal code, and 
 " could scarcely be embraced by the human mind * *. 
 
 "Its nature, therefore, requires that only its great out- 
 " lines should lie marked, its important objects designated. 
 " and the minor ingredients which compose those objects be 
 "deduced from the nature of the objects themselves." 
 
 The United States Supreme Court, in the Legal Tender cases, 
 also said : 
 
 •' 'We do not expect to find in a Constitution minute 
 '" details. It prescribes outlines, leaving the filling up to be 
 "' deduced from the outlines. It is necessarily brief and com- 
 '' prehensive." 
 
 Professor Joins NTokton Pomeeot, LL.D., in his great work on 
 Constitutional law, said : 
 
 •• Congress has an unlimited choice among all the means 
 "' and methods which tend to accomplish any end enumerated 
 •' in the general grants of the Constitution *. Iu 
 
 ■* this manner the United States Government, while pursuing 
 " the legitimate objects for which it was organized, may inter- 
 " fere with many subjects which are committed to the several 
 " States and which ordinarily fall under their exclusive 
 " jurisdiction." 
 
 This principle is well illustrated under the [nstitution of the Cin- 
 cinnati, where the General Society, pursuing the legitimate objects for 
 which it was organized, proceeded to revive your State Society, judge 
 of the qualifications of your members and admit them as Cincinnati, 
 including your Treasurer, and most, if not all. of the gentlemen who 
 are stated to have taken part in the alleged special meeting of Decem- 
 ber 1">. 1905, although the Institution specially devolves on the State 
 Societies the duty of judging of the qualifications of their members, 
 and nowhere specifically gives to the General Society the powers which 
 it thus exercised in your behalf iu organizing your State Society. 
 
 The General Society also required as a prerequisite to your admis- 
 sion as a component part of the Order, that every member admitted by 
 
 14 
 
ii. or by you thereafter during a fixed period, should contribute a pre 
 scribed sum to the Permanent Fund, and thai you should be governed 
 by the Rules and Regulations of the Massachusetts Cincinnati for the 
 same period, to all of which you had in consent as a condition precedent 
 to revival. 
 
 The authority to exercise these powers in "One Society of 
 Friend-" is not, as before remarked, conferred on the General Society 
 l>\ any specific provision of the [nstitution, but is found among the 
 implied powers inherent in that body ;is incident to the objects for 
 which it was created ami for the perpetuation of the Institution as 
 intended by the Founder-. 
 
 Thus, at the Triennial meeting id' the General Society, held in 
 Philadelphia May 19, ITsT, it was 
 
 •• Ordered, That the several State Societies he punctual 
 "hereafter in communicating to the General Meeting fair 
 "and accurate returns of their respective members, properly 
 '•authenticated; and that Hi<' said Societies 'In. in nil things, 
 " strictly conform In the principles of the Institution." 
 
 No State meeting, composed of Veteran Original Members ever 
 presumed to suggest that this order was not comprehended in the 
 implied powers of the General Society. Fair and accurate returns, 
 properly authenticated, have since then continuously been submitted. 
 
 \- further illustrative of this subject, the General Society, at its 
 meetings sinci L784, ha- assessed every State meeting equally for the 
 expenses thereof — an assessment never disputed as inequitable or as 
 not comprehended among the implied powers of the General Society 
 i" enable it to pursue legil imate objects. 
 
 This condition existed under the [nstitution, with Washington 
 as President General, and if the General Society had qo1 possessed the 
 implied sovereign power to act a- above stated, there would not now he 
 a Stale Society of the Cincinnati in Virginia. 
 
 A- before remarked, the Genera] Society is, under the Institution 
 of 1783, " for the sake of frequenl communications, divided into State 
 Societies." 
 
 \o part, therefore, can he greater than the whole. 
 
 It is not necessary now to go into extended exposition of the rea- 
 sons which, in 1783, rendered such subdivisions of the Genera] Society 
 necessary. 
 
 Mo-i of tin' Continental Officers, qualified for Original Mem- 
 
 15 
 
bership, had, at that time, already gone to their homes under one or 
 other of the several reductions of the American Army. 
 
 There was then no mail communication and hardly any carriage 
 roads in the country, and traveling was difficult, expensive, tedious 
 and fatiguing, and but for the expedient of State Meetings and author- 
 ity given to them to enroll those qualified for Original Membership 
 and to admit Hereditary and Honorary Members, the Order would 
 have been confined to the few who signed the Institution in one or ;he 
 other of the Cantonments of the American Army on the Hudson or in 
 the Harbor of Charleston, S. O, and would soon have ceased to exist. 
 
 The authority thus given to State Societies, into which the General 
 Society was divided, " to regulate everything respecting themselves," 
 was, however, coupled with the significant controlling limitation that all 
 such action by a State Society must, in order to be valid, lie " con- 
 sistent ivith the general maxims of the Cincinnati/ 1 
 
 The General Maxims of the Cincinnati, to which a State Society 
 must conform, are deducible from the context of the Institution and 
 the Ordinances and Resolves of interpretation of the General Society, 
 which represents the Order as one Society of Friends. 
 
 Many of these precedents or general maxims of the Cincinnati 
 were formulated when President General Washington presided in 
 General Meeting, and others were enunciated in subsequent General 
 Meetings when only Veteran Original Members still controlled the 
 destinies of the Order. 
 
 Let a State Society depart in any fundamental particular from 
 these General Maxims, and it would be the duty of the General Society, 
 under its implied powers, recognized in tin' reorganization of extinct 
 State Societies, to take such punitive or remedial action toward such 
 a State Society as departed from such General Maxims as would best 
 accomplish the object of insuring uniformity under aud observance of 
 the Institution. 
 
 This implied power in lb' 1 General Society in which every State 
 Society has equal representation, is supplemented by a controlling 
 expressed power, requiring that at every meeting of the General 
 Society, the Circular Letters, which have been written by the 
 
 " respective Stale Societies to each other, and their particular 
 " laws, shall be read and considered, "inl all measures con- 
 " certed" (i. e., adjusted and settled") "which may conduce 
 "to the genera] intendment of the Society." 
 
Thus is put upon the General Society the actual duty of super- 
 vision, to see that the State Societies, into which it is divided for the 
 sake of frequent communications, shall do nothing inconsistent with 
 the General Maxims of the Cincinnati, nor contrary to the require- 
 ments of the Institution, nor the general intendment of the Society. 
 
 So long as a State Society keeps within these limitations, it may 
 regulate everything respecting itself and judge of the qualifications of 
 its members, but let it do anything inconsistent with the General 
 Maxims of the Cincinnati, or, for example, adept a By-Law with an 
 eligibility clause as to membership different from that prescribed in 
 the Institution, or other act in derogation of the general intendment 
 of the Society, and the General Society may take such action as in its 
 judgment will host right the wrong thus attempted against the whole 
 Society. 
 
 There is no uncertainty in this grant of power, and, if reference 
 is made to the Amended Institution of May, 17 s 1. which was rewritten 
 in order to correctly express the intent of the Founders on this subject, 
 it i- found that pari of the business of the General Society was declared 
 
 " to conform the By-Laws of the State Meeting to the general 
 
 " objects of the Institution." 
 As already remarked, specific alterations, which were not mere 
 amendments for greater precision, in the rewritten Institution of May, 
 L784, made it aeeessary, in the absence of a prescribed method of 
 alteration, to submit the instrument for unanimous consent in order 
 that the proposed alterations should become effective, and the Virginia 
 Society, on October •">. 1784, unanimously approved it, thus recognizing 
 tin' authority of the General Society over the By-Laws of a State 
 Society which do not conform to the Institution. This action by the 
 Veteran Original Members of the Virginia State Society was never 
 n scinded. 
 
 n. 
 
 LEGALITY OF THE SPECIAL OR EXTRA MEETING, PURPORTING 
 TO HAVE BEEN HELD ON DECEMBER 15, 1905. 
 
 Xotice of such a meeting appears to have been given. by letter by 
 the President of your Society and not by publication in the news- 
 papers. 
 
 The Regulation adopted by the Virginia Society on November 16, 
 L786, put the duty of calling an extra meeting or special meeting on 
 the Standing Committee, instead of the President, and prescribed that 
 
 17 
 
" their business shall be to call extra meetings whenever they may deem 
 it necessary, giving at least thirty clays' notice thereof in the news- 
 papers.'' This Regulation was again declared on November 12, 1787. 
 
 No such procedure was taken for the alleged meeting of December 
 15, 1905. 
 
 If it is suggested that the old Regulation was abrogated by that 
 of the Massachusetts State Society, which your Society was required 
 to adopt as a condition precedent to revival and recognition by the 
 General Society, then it is found that, under the Massachusetts Rule, 
 a special or extra meeting could only be called " by publication of the 
 time and place of such meeting in two newspapers for fourteen days 
 before holding the same." 
 
 As this was not done, it follows, under well-settled judicial de- 
 cisions, that the extra or special meeting, so-called, of December 15, 
 1905, was illegal, and all action taken by it, including adoption of 
 so-called By-Laws, was coram noit judice. 
 
 If it is suggested that your Society had no By-Laws after 1899, 
 the answer is that your Society adopted the Massachusetts Rules before 
 your Representation was admitted to the General Society with the 
 limitation imposed by the General Society that they could not be 
 altered nor amended by your Society until after May, 1899. 
 
 No action was ever taken by your Society rescinding or altering 
 them, and they were, therefore, according to recognized rules of inter- 
 pretation, in force on December 15, 1905. 
 
 If the Massachusetts Rules never were adopted by your Society, 
 then the old Regulations would be in force until abrogated. 
 
 From this statement, it follows that, as the meeting was not 
 legally convened, it could do no lawful act. 
 
 Another and still graver question arises, however, as to the legality 
 of this meeting, even if it had been properly convened. 
 
 It is stated in the documents referred to that there were " present 
 twenty-five members in person and by proxy," and also that there were 
 but thirteen members actually present. 
 
 It is also known that voting on the several propositions submitted 
 by the Treasurer of your Society was not always unanimous. 
 
 At the meeting of the Virginia Society for organization at Fred- 
 ericksburg, on October 9, 1783, 109 Veteran Original Members were 
 present, and Regulations were adopted, of which the seventh was: 
 
 "That no voters be admitted, in this State Society by 
 proxy. 
 
 18 
 
This was the largesl meeting ever held in Virginia, the total num- 
 ber of Original Members having been about 265. At the meeting of 
 the following year, L784, bul 57 were present. No meeting was held 
 in 17S5 for want of a quorum. 
 
 At the next meeting in 1786, 3 1 were present, and in 1787, 30 were 
 present, and then the number in attendance at meetings subsequently 
 held rapidly dwindled below this number. 
 
 In 1792, 1793, 1794, 1795, 1796, 1797 and 1798 no meetings 
 were held, and the one held in December, 1799, was only to pass resolu- 
 tions on the decease of President General Washington. 
 
 No meetings were held in 1801, 1804, 1805, 1806, 1809, 1811, 
 1820, 1821. In 1812 there were only 13 members present, in 1813 
 but 1(1 present, in 1814 but 9 present, in 1818 but 12 present, in 1819 
 but 6 present, and at the last meeting of 1822 there were but 5 present. 
 
 On Decembn- 14. L802, the Virginia Society decided to donate 
 its Permanent Fund to the Washington Academy. 
 
 At this meeting, for the firsl time since 17s7, there were 30 
 Original Members present, and it was resolved thaf this appropriation 
 should be subject 
 
 " to confirmation by a majority of the whole members com- 
 " posing tlic Society at the next General Meeting, in person 
 "or by proxy, appointed in writing, or by letter to the 
 "President." 
 
 The objecl of this resolve of December 14, 1802, fur proxy voting 
 had reference to a presumed property right; nevertheless, as no Origi- 
 nal Member had a right to withdraw or dispose of his appropriation 
 to the Permanent Fund, the resolve itself for such disposal was u&tra 
 vires. 
 
 When the next meeting of the Virginia Society was held, on De- 
 cember 12. 1803, communications were read from several of the Origi- 
 nal Members, who, as appears from tin 1 record, were "opposed to any 
 appropriation of the funds other than that designed by the Constitution 
 of the Society." 
 
 Despite the fad thai many of the Original Veteran Members were 
 thus opposed of record to this misuse and diversion of the Permanent 
 Fund, and that the Institution prescribed that it "shall remain for 
 ever to the use of the State Society," nevertheless, the meeting of the 
 Virginia Society, "ii lie, •ember 1<i. 1807, voted that the whole of the 
 Permanent Fund should be presented to Washington Academy. 
 
 19 
 
The General Society, at the General Meeting held in Philadelphia, 
 August 9, 1S11, characterized such a proceeding as " the inconsiderate 
 act of a portion of the members in distributing those funds which had 
 long ceased to be individual property, or liable to any but their original 
 appropriation," and that " an act, such as this, most evidently involves 
 a departure from the solemn engagement entered into on the banks of 
 the Hudson, to perpetuate the Institution and to preserve, unalienated 
 and unimpaired, those funds, which had been sacredly devoted to the 
 relief of distressed members and their families." 
 
 When your State Society was revived by the General Society, in 
 the exercise of its implied powers, every member accepted by it was 
 required, as a condition precedent to membership, to make good to the 
 Permanent Fund of your 'Society a fixed commuted sum, representing 
 his ancestor's original contribution unlawfully withdrawn. 
 
 At the meeting of the Virginia Society, on December 7, 1812, a 
 resolution was offered and rejected, rescinding former resolves as to the 
 final distribution of the Permanent Fund. 
 
 At the meeting of the Virginia Society, on December 14, 1813, 
 it was resolved, " as the opinion of the meeting, that when any propo- 
 sition is made that may regard the final appropriation of the funds 
 of the Society, differing from the appropriation heretofore made, each 
 member residing in the State lie notified thereof and be required to 
 give a special vote by proxy, when he may be unable to attend in 
 person." 
 
 The object of the proxy, although illegal, was in reference to the 
 assumed property right a member had in the Permanent Fund, although 
 no such property right was vested in any member, but even on this 
 assumption, members absent from the State were not, by the resolution, 
 to be consulted. 
 
 On December 14, 1818, the Virginia State Meeting, 12 being 
 present, by resolution, declared that only a member could act as proxy, 
 and on the next day resolved that, when the meeting should adjourn, 
 each member present should sign the proceedings for himself and his 
 proxies. 
 
 In the whole of this business of voting by proxy in the Original 
 Virginia Society the sole object was in reference to disposing of its 
 Permanent Fund to purposes not sanctioned by the Institution, and 
 this, in despite of your Society's Regulation of October 9, 1783, for- 
 bidding proxy voting, and also in express opposition to the protests of 
 members against such diversion. 
 
 20 
 
The subject is one of too much importance to the well being of 
 the whole Society not to be further considered. 
 
 At common law, members could not vote by proxy in a member- 
 ship corporation, because the voting privilege in such an association 
 is of the nature of a personal trust committed to the discretion of 
 every member as an individual and hence no1 susceptible to exercise 
 through delegation. 
 
 In stock corporations, the righl to vote by proxy is conferred 
 directly by statute, and the general rule is that a person holding a 
 proxy may do all that a stockholder may do in the matter, and, accord- 
 ingly, may vote on all motions, including a motion to adjourn. 
 
 The reason statute law authorizes the use of proxies in business 
 and stock corporations is because the interests represented are wholly 
 materral and concern only property rights in which any stockholder 
 may have an attorney to represent him, and, therefore, unless restricted 
 by law, any person of full age may be designated as a proxy, whether 
 such proxy is or is no1 a member of the corporation. 
 
 In the Society of the Cincinnati, which the Institution of 1783 
 terms "one Society of Friends," the use of proxies is wholly unlawful: 
 
 1st. Because the Institution prescribes that the State Society shall 
 consist of its members — who shall meet on the 4th day of July, annu- 
 ally, and oftener, it' they shall find it expedient. 
 
 They are required, by the Institution, to subscribe to the same and 
 to bind themselves " to observe and be governed by the Principles 
 therein contained." 
 
 Xo one else can lawfully participate in a " State Meeting," except 
 the members who meet. 
 
 Concede the right to proxy voting, and any one can be appointed 
 a proxy, no matter how inimical he might be to the best interests of the 
 Society or to some individual member, and the Society, because of his 
 want of membership, would have no disciplinary control over him. 
 
 2nd. Because the officers of a State Society are required by the 
 Institution " to be chosen annually by a majority of vote- a1 the State 
 Meeting " of th< members prest nt. 
 
 3rd. Because every State Meeting is required by the Institution, 
 annually, to write a circular letter " to the State Societies, noting what- 
 ever they may think worthy of observation respecting the good of the 
 Society, etc." 
 
 21 
 
This is an act which requires the personal consideration of mem- 
 bers who vote, and cannot be delegated to any one else. 
 
 .'///i. Because every State Society is required by the Institution 
 to " judge of the qualifications of the members who may be proposed." 
 
 This is a personal trust which cannot, ex necessitate rei, be dele- 
 gated to any one, because it requires the exercise of quasi judicial func- 
 tions by a member in thus judging of qualifications upon which the 
 welfare and prosperity of the Society vitally depends. 
 
 The report of the Standing or Membership Committee to the Meet- 
 ing of the State Society on the qualifications of the applicant and the 
 proofs in support thereof, and as to his personal worthiness, must be 
 heard and maturely considered before the individual member can 
 " judge " thereon and understandingly cast his ballot. There can be 
 no proxy voting where a member has to " judge " of qualifications. 
 
 5th. Because every State Society is required by the Institution 
 " to expel any member who, by a conduct inconsistent with a gentleman 
 and a man of honor, or by an opposition to the interests of the com- 
 munity in general, or to the Society in particular, may render himself 
 unworthy to continue a member." 
 
 This is a judicial function, on evidence adduced, and decision 
 thereupon rendered after mature deliberation. 
 
 Judicial authority thus vested in a member cannot be delegated, 
 and, consequently, no outsider, nor even member, can lawfully vote 
 for one or more absentees on a question which affects the honor, repu- 
 tation and membership of a brother member in our " One Society of 
 Friends." 
 
 Under the Code of the State of Virginia, stockholders in banks 
 and monied corporations are expressly authorized by law to vote by 
 proxy, but in social, patriotic and other membership corporations, as 
 distinguished from property corporations, no such authority is given, 
 but, on the contrary, every qualified member is entitled by law " to one 
 vote in the meeting." it being a personal trust, which cannot, without 
 special legislation, be devolved on some one else. 
 
 If reference is made to the Massachusetts State Society Rules, no 
 proxy voting is authorized, nor indeed has proxy voting been attempted 
 in any State Society of the Cincinnati, except in Virginia, and then 
 for an illegal purpose or at an illegal meeting, and contrary to the gen- 
 eral intendment of the Institution. 
 
 For these cogent reasons, it follows that the so-called meeting of 
 
 22 
 
the Society of the Cincinnati in the State of Virginia, a1 Richmond, 
 Va., "ii December L5, L905, at which were present in person only thir- 
 teen members, with twelve absenl members represented by proxies, was, 
 for thai reason itself, an illegal meeting, ami the adoption of By-Laws, 
 by --ueli a vote, void. 
 
 If a duly convened legal meeting of your Society should ratify 
 
 mi- approve the pi :edings of the illegal meeting held December L5, 
 
 L905, such ratification and approval would he ultra vires. 
 
 The principle is settled by authoritative judicial decisions thai the 
 proceedings of an illegal meeting cannol in any degree he rendered valid 
 or effective h\ subsequenl ratification by a legal meeting. 
 
 We, therefore, respectfully protest against any repetition of such 
 regrettable proceedings a- being againsl " the general inti ndmenl of the 
 ( lincinnati." 
 
 in. 
 
 EAGLE OF THE ORDER. 
 
 The Institution, as adopted May 10, 1 7s:;, prescribed a Medal for 
 the ( >rder of the Society. 
 
 Major General Baros de Sim b i \ accordingly wrote to Brevet 
 Major l'li i.'i.'i Chakles I.'Kmavi', Continental Corps of Engineers, 
 then in Philadelphia, to make a drawing of the medal so thai a die 
 could be cut. 
 
 Major I.'Kxfaxt replied, giving reasons why a medal was not, 
 suitable, an. I suggested the American Bald Beaded Eagle for the Order 
 ami the manner of wearing it. 
 
 The Convention of General Officers and Representations from the 
 several Continental Corps, General Staff and State Lines, was recon- 
 vened .m dune l'.i. 1783, and the [nstitution altered accordingly, and pro- 
 vision was also made for issuance of Diplomas, and Major L'Enfant 
 was authorized to get a die for the Order cut in Paris. 
 It was also resolved : 
 
 " That tlie < >rder be of the same size and in every respecl 
 "conformable to the -aid design, and he deposited i in the 
 
 •' Archives of the Society, a- tl riginal from which all 
 
 '' copies are t.> he mad.-." 
 
 The original design, certified to by Baroh de Stei ben, was then 
 deposited in the Archives of the Society, and has never been removed 
 therefrom. 
 
Major L'Enfant did not have either a Bald American Eagle or 
 a book like "Audubon on Birds " to copy his design from, and his 
 drawing, therefore, being from memory, is neither artistic nor per- 
 fectly true to nature. 
 
 The die cut in Paris was even less accurate in delineation, but the 
 Eagles then procured by the General Society for the members who 
 sent their subscriptions to Major General Alexander MacDotjgall, 
 Treasurer General, are highly prized by their hereditary representa- 
 tives and would not be exchanged for new ones set in diamonds. 
 
 The General Society, on May 17, 1784, thanked "Major 
 L'Enfant for his great care and attention in the execution of tbe 
 business of the Society which was committed to him and transacted in 
 France, and, at the subsequent Triennial meeting of May 17, 1787, 
 it was resolved that the Eagles or Orders of the Cincinnati, in the pos- 
 session of Major L'Exfant. be taken on account of the General 
 Society. 
 
 It was also 
 
 " Resolved, That the Assistant Secretary General do 
 " dispose of the Eagles which may be received from Major 
 " L'Enfant and account for the proceedings thereof to the 
 " Secretary General." 
 
 On May IS, 1787, the General Society assessed upon every State 
 Society the proportionate amount it should pay to the Secretary Gen- 
 eral toward the sum to be paid to Major L'Enfaxt. 
 
 The State Society in Virginia, on November 12, 1787, in com- 
 pliance with this requisition of the General Society, ordered its Treas- 
 urer to transmit its quota. 
 
 On November- 13, 1788, the State Society in Virginia adopted this 
 resolve : 
 
 '• Ir appearing to this Society thai a number of Eagles 
 "are in possession of the General Society, the property of 
 " the Society at large, 
 
 " Resolved, That the Secretary of the General Society 
 " be requested to transmit without delay the quota of the 
 " Eagles belonging to the Society of this State to the Secre- 
 "' tary thereof, to be subject to the future disposal of this 
 " Society." 
 
 Every State Society recognized by its action this inherent implied 
 authority in the General Society to lay assessments, and it has done so 
 
 24 
 
continuously to the present time. Every State Society bas also 
 acknowledged the authority of the Convention, which altered the Insti- 
 tution, on June 19, 1783, and " established *' the American I Said Eagle 
 as the Order from the original design of Major [/Enfant instead of 
 a medal, and which authorized him to have the die made in Paris. 
 
 It was one die for the members of one " Society of Friends," nor 
 did any one of the thirteen State Meetings, when composed of Original 
 Members, ever suggest that it had a right to do as it pleased on so 
 important a matter. 
 
 The power exercised 1>,\ the General Society in this behalf since 
 1783 was not an implied power but one delegated to it. 
 
 President General Washington himself, and the General Society, 
 and every State Society for li'-'l years has recognized (hat the Bald Eagle 
 instead of a medal is the Order of the Society, and thai the Convention 
 of June 19, L783, had a right, to alter the Institution accordingly. 
 
 There were enough Eagles in custody of the Assistanl Secretary 
 General to supply members until well into the nineteenth century. 
 
 Meanwhile the French Revolution and blockade of the French 
 Coast from 1792 to 1815, except for a few months in 1803, interrupted 
 communicatioii between France and America, and during this period 
 the original die of the Order was lost. 
 
 But very few hereditary members were admitted during this time, 
 and most of these had their father's Eagles. 
 
 Until after the Restoration of 1815 in France, there was no regu- 
 lar mail communication between France and the United States. 
 
 In 1820, our own Society needed Eagles for newly admitted 
 hereditary members, but the venerable General Officer more immedi 
 ately charged with the matter was then in too infirm health to give it 
 attention. 
 
 The art of enamelling was not then known in this country, and 
 our Society accordingly- had plain gold Eagles made in Philadelphia, 
 some of which are worn to-day at our annual meeting by our hereditary 
 memb >•-. 
 
 Other State Societies, ex necessiiati rei, also had dies made, and 
 thus arose a diversity as to the design of eagle and even as to color of 
 ribbon, which became so noticeable that in the Triennial Meeting of 
 Mav 9, 1890, the General Society resumed its jurisdiction of the sub- 
 jest, and, by Ordinance, unanimously adopted, appointed a Foard of 
 Genera] Officers to fix upon a die as a standard for the Eagle of (he 
 Order. 
 
 25 
 
It is to be remarked that all Military Societies have a standard die 
 for their Orders, and in all Military Societies there is a controlling 
 authority on this subject. 
 
 The Board of General Officers had before it designs from the 
 principal jewelers in the country who made Eagles for several of the 
 State Societies, ami, after due deliberation, determined on a die sub- 
 mitted by one of the greatest goldsmith establishments in the world, 
 which is " conformable " to the certified design of Major L'Exi ant j 
 and also gives an artistic delineation of the Bald American Eagle in 
 every detail, even to the proportionate size of the wings. 
 
 To do this, we are informed that the draughtsman, from whose 
 drawing the die was cut, spent many hours in a public City park, 
 closely observing live Bald American Eagles so as to make a correct 
 drawing. 
 
 At the Triennial Meeting of June L8, L902, the General Society 
 unanimously, including your Treasurer as one of the Delegates from 
 your Society, approved the report of the Board of General Officers, 
 and provided, as in 1787, for the issxiance of Orders through a General 
 Officer and at a stated price, and fur a record i" he kept of every issue. 
 
 Your Treasurer, in the 4th or explanatory document above men- 
 tioned, says that " Virginia does not accept the 1902 Eagle nor recog- 
 nize the General Society's authority in the matter," and, in a preamble to 
 certain resolves purporting to have been adopted on December 15, 1905, 
 at the so-called meeting of your Society, it is declared that " any action 
 by the General Society on the matters is limited to suggestions to the 
 State Societies and can have no legal or binding effect whatever until 
 
 ratified liv the several State Societies." 
 
 We deplore such utterances, and hope they may not be repeated. 
 
 The Genera] Society, having acted on a subject within its com- 
 petency, ii is the duty of every member to respectfully recognize its 
 action. 
 
 The subject of an Order is one of general concern and not local, 
 and members should be thankful that the General Society resumed its 
 jurisdiction so as to restore uniformity. 
 
 The standard die determined by the General Society, while it is 
 " conformable " to the design of Major L'Enfaxt. is, at the same time, 
 much more artistic and true to nature. 
 
 However, as the decision of the General Society was conclusive, 
 we trust thai the few members of your Society who participated in the 
 meeting of December 15, 1905, and who owe their membership to the 
 
 2(5 
 
inherenl powers of the Genera] Society exercised in their behalf, will 
 graciously conform and be thankful that there is a General Society 
 representing and acting for the one " Society of Friends " in those 
 matters which are of general as distinguished from local concern. 
 
 As illustrative of express delegated powers conferred on the Gen- 
 eral Society, the same organic Convention of June 19, 1783, which 
 established the Bald American Eagle as the Order of the Society 
 instead of the medal — also directed thai a " Diploma on parchment; 
 whereon shall be impressed the exact figures of the Order," and certi- 
 fied li\ the President General, "be given to each and every member 
 of the Society." 
 
 Under this expressly delegated power, the General Society, on 
 May 17, 1784, settled upon and approved a form of Diploma, and a 
 Committee was appointed " to superintend the execution of engraving, 
 on copper, the form agreed upon for a Diploma." 
 
 The Diploma plate was duly engraved in that year in Paris, by 
 the great French hank note engraver, J. J. leVeat. and is in the cus- 
 tody of the Genera] Society, as required l>\ an order of the General 
 Society of date May 17, 1784. 
 
 'liaise Diplomas, struck from this plate, for Original, Eereditary 
 and Eonorary Members, and certified by His Excellency, I 'resident 
 Genera] Washington and Secretary General, the Honorable Major 
 Genera] Henry Knox, are deemed priceless heirlooms by their de- 
 scendants. 
 
 At the Triennial Meeting of the General Society, held in Balti- 
 more, M.&.. May 9, 1890, an ordinance was unanimously adopted, under 
 this delegated power, as to Diplomas, regulating the method of issu 
 ance and cosl thereof, so that any member can receive a Diploma, as 
 provided in the Institution. 
 
 IV. 
 
 RULE OF 1854. 
 
 Four Treasurer, in referring to certain resolves of the General 
 Society of the Cincinnati adopted in 1854, known as the " Kule of 
 
 1854," whicb were promulgated in L856 as a rule of ( 3truction, has 
 
 termed it, " an illegal rule " and " in direct conflict with the admission 
 
 rules laid down by the Institution," and as " a violation of th 'ganic 
 
 law of the Order." 
 
 '27 
 
These erroneous criticisms have arisen from lack of information 
 as to the reason for, as well as the object and scope of, the Rule as 
 finally settled upon. 
 
 In every of the older State Societies in continuous existence since 
 1783, as well as in the General Society in its action in reviving extinct 
 State Societies, the Rule, despite certain generic expressions, has re- 
 ceived an arbitrary and definite interpretation entirely in consonance 
 with the limitations of the Institution and in harmony with the intent 
 of the parties, nor has the General Society nor any of the older con- 
 tinuous State Societies ever consciously attempted to give it a broader 
 scope. 
 
 It is a principle of law that, in interpreting and construing a Rule 
 of action, the preliminary negotiations, if any, and surrounding cir- 
 cumstances, may be considered, and such a construction given as will 
 render it reasonable and for a legal rather than an illegal purpose. 
 
 The construction also which the parties have, by their acts, placed 
 on an ambiguous instrument, if uniform, unquestioned and fully con- 
 curred in by all, is of controlling authority, provided such construction 
 is not inhibited by an organic law. 
 
 It is to be further remarked in this connection that, on general 
 principles, greater regard should be paid to the clear intent of the 
 parties than to any particular words which they may have used in the 
 expression of their intent, because parties have the power to innovate 
 upon the meaning of words. 
 
 The history of the Rule of 1854 is pertinent to a knowledge of its 
 scope. 
 
 The venerable President General, 1 'revet ..Major William .Fop- 
 ham, last General Officer from the Continental Line of the Revolution, 
 died in September. 1847. 
 
 On November 29, 1848, the General Society met in Philadelphia, 
 and on the next day Brigadier General Henry Alexander Scammell 
 Dearborn j who was chosen President General to succeed him, called 
 attention to the necessity of some amendment to the rules of admission, 
 expressing the belief 
 
 " that unless such a measure is adopted, all the Societies 
 " must, within a few years, be extinguished by a law of 
 " nature that is making such fearful ravages in an Institution 
 " which the existing members cannot but be anxious should 
 " be perpetuated from the profound respect they entertain for 
 
 28 
 
" its patriotic and gallant founders, and the great benefit which 
 " lias resulted from the charitable object of its establishment." 
 
 General Deaebokn added that 
 
 '" unless such a method is adopted, this time-honored and glori- 
 " ous Association will cease to exist within less than- the third 
 " of a century, or be so reduced in numbers as to be unavailable 
 " for the purposes of its organization." 
 
 At that time there were surviving less than a dozen venerable Orig- 
 inal Members, while there were fewer hereditary members of the Order 
 than at any time before in a quarter of a century or since in its history. 
 
 A Committee was appointed to take the matter into consideration 
 and report at the next General Meeting. 
 
 This Committee brought in a long report at the Triennial General 
 Meeting, held in The City of Xew York, May 7, 1851, and submitted 
 therewith as an alteration of the Institution, "An Ordinance relative to 
 the succession and admission of members," by which, among other prop- 
 ositions, all male descendants of any officer of the Revolution could be 
 admitted on terms, and also providing that the General Society should 
 have power to admit honorary members at its discretion. 
 
 I'll' 1 prcmosed alteration, however, failed of ratification. 
 
 The Institution of 17S3 apparently confines membership to Com- 
 missioned Officers of the American Army, who served in time and man- 
 ner stated and signed the roll within six months after the Army w is 
 disbanded, " extraordinary cases excepted," and to officers of certain 
 grades in the French Army and Navy who served in America during the 
 War of the Revolution and to the proper descendants or representatives 
 of both classes. 
 
 Nevertheless, the General Society, in the exercise of its implied 
 powers, in 1784 and 1787, by resolves, interpreted and construed the 
 Institution as including Continental Navy and .Minim' officers, and 
 State troops who had been in Continental service and pay for not 
 than three years. 
 
 It, however, still remained undetermined whether or not the proper 
 descendants or representatives of Continental officers of the Revolution 
 who, by their services to their country, were qualified for original mem- 
 bership hut. had not siatied the Institution, could be admitted, in their 
 right, to hereditary membership. 
 
 Prior to the adoption of the Institution in' May. 1783, more thai] 
 two-thirds of the Continental officers, qualified for original member- 
 
 2fl 
 
ship, had gone to their homes in consequence of expiration of terms of 
 service of the enlisted men of their respective regiments or by reason 
 of one or other of the several reductions of the Continental Army which 
 rendered them supernumerary. 
 
 They had been promised by Congress half -pay for life but did 
 not get it, and many arrived at home with nothing to show for long, 
 faithful and gallant service but their faded uniforms and war-worn 
 swords. 
 
 Some of them died before the Institution was formed, and others 
 died within a few months afterward. 
 
 Congress gave to the Continental officers bounty lands in the Ter- 
 ritory Northwest of the Ohio, and, as most of the surviving officers of 
 the Revolution were ruined in fortune from the expenditures they had 
 been forced to make in order to keep in service in consequence of their 
 Continental pay being worthless, they were under the lamentable neces- 
 Mtv of emigrating to that then distant territory and put to the hard task 
 of clearing the land of its forests while fighting the Miami Indians and 
 enduring a precarious existence devoid of all comforts and luxuries. 
 
 Hard money was not then in circulation away from the seaboard 
 towns and bills of exchange were not to be had. As a consequence, the 
 Continental officers, thus residing in the West, were never able to con- 
 tribute the required month's pay to the Permanent Fund, nor could 
 they, by reason of their distance and the difficulty and time required 
 in travel, attend a State Meeting of the Society of the Cincinnati to 
 sign the Institution. 
 
 At the Triennial Meeting of the General Society, held in Balti- 
 more May 18, 1854, the following resolutions respecting the succession 
 and admission of members were unanimously adopted : 
 
 1. " Resolved, That, each State Society shall have the 
 " full right and power to regulate the admission of members, 
 " both as to qualifications of members and the terms of admis- 
 " sion. Provided, That admission be confined to the male 
 " descendants of original members (including collateral 
 "branches as contemplated by the original Constitution), or 
 " to the male descendants of such officers of the Army and 
 " Navy as may have been entitled to admission, but who failed 
 "to avail themselves thereof within the time limited by the 
 " Constitution ; or to the male descendants of such officers of 
 " the Army and Navy of the Revolution as may have resigned 
 " with honor, or left the service with reputation, or to the 
 
 30 
 
" male collateral relative of any officer who died in service 
 " without leaving issue." 
 
 2. " Resolved, That the male descendants of those who 
 " were members of State Societies which have been dis- 
 solved, may be admitted into existing State Societies upon 
 "such terms as those Societies may think proper and pre- 
 scribe." 
 
 .",. - Resolved, That the foregoing resolutions be pro- 
 posed to the several State Societies and their assent be re- 
 " quested thereto; and upon such assent being given by each 
 ■■ of the remaining Societies, the Secretary General shall issue 
 ■• notice thereof to each Society, and tin reupon the said reso- 
 " lutions shall become operative, and each State Society shall 
 " be <il liberty to act upon the power given thereby." 
 The effect of such Rule, in its broadesl sense, would have been to 
 abrogate the limitations on qualifications for original membership 
 which the officers, in Cantonments near Newburgh, deliberately inserted 
 in the Institution on .May 10, 1783, in lieu of Major General Hekev 
 Knox's "Proposals" on thai subject, to permil all Revolutionary 
 officers to become members, irrespective of length of service. 
 
 The resolutions having, however, failed of ratification, the General 
 Society met in Special Genera] Meeting at Trenton, X. J., on May '2:-', 
 L856, but without any representation present from our own Society oi 
 from the New York State Society. 
 
 It was then recognized that the < >rder was opposed to any alteration 
 of ill, Institution which would render eligible to hereditary member- 
 ship the proper descendant of every officer of the Armj and Navy of the 
 War of the Revolution for American Independence, irrespective of 
 length of service. 
 
 The conduct of the Continental Congress toward the American 
 officers in 1783, and for many year-, afterward, made it necessary to 
 interpret that clause of the Institution which, while inhibiting officers 
 from becoming parties thereto of their own motion after six months 
 from the disbandment of the Army, nevertheless qualified such inhibi- 
 lion bj the phrase " extraordinary cases excepted." 
 
 W'hal conditions were essential to constitute an "extraordinary 
 case" and did the right to membership descend, within the 3Cope and 
 intent of the Institution, to the proper representative of a qualified Con- 
 tinental officer who never had been able to join at all during his life- 
 time? 
 
 31 
 
So far as the Continental officers themselves were concerned, who 
 were qualified but who were at first prevented from joining by reason 
 of emigration to the Territory Northwest of the Ohio, or poverty result- 
 ing from their personal sacrifices during the War of the Revolution and 
 failure of the Continental Congress to keep plighted faith with them, 
 every one of the continuous State Societies had recognized such claims 
 to membership as " extraordinary cases " and admitted such of them as 
 asked for membership even forty years after the peace of 1783. 
 
 Still another condition presented itself. 
 
 Six State Societies had become extinct, having no surviving 
 members. 
 
 This had not been contemplated by the Founders, who had declared 
 1 1 Kit the Institution should ''endure as long as they should 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," and had also declared " Esto perpetua" as the motto of the 
 Institution. 
 
 The question therefore also arose for determination by the General 
 Society whether, within the scope and intent of the Institution, the 
 proper descendant of a propositus who had been a Veteran Original 
 member in a State Society which had become extinct could be admitted 
 to hereditary membership in an existing State Society, and if so, 
 whether pecuniary terms of admission could be imposed greater than 
 the original month's pay ami in commutation thereof for the lapsed 
 period. 
 
 Still another question also arose concerning Continental officers who 
 had died in the service of their country. 
 
 The Institution gave a claim of hereditary membership to "their 
 eldest male branches," but this indefinite phrase had never been con 
 -trued so as to determine whether it was limited to direct descendants 
 or whether it was intended to include, as in other cases, "collateral 
 branches who may be judged worthy." 
 
 Nearly all the officers who had been killed or had otherwise died 
 in service had been young men who had left no surviving issue, a fact 
 well known to the Founders. 
 
 It was reasonable to suppose, therefore, as to such officers, that 
 it was intended that their blood and services to their country should 
 not be forgotten, and the General Society was consequently called upon 
 to determine the scope and intent of the Institution on the subject. 
 
 Although not. drawn with legal precision, nevertheless the Resolves 
 
 32 
 
of 1854, taken in connection, with the specific limitations of the Lnstitu- 
 tion itself, did furnish reasonable rules of interpretation on these sub- 
 jects. 
 
 Accordingly, the General Society at this Special General Meeting 
 of May 22, 1856, 
 
 " Resolved, That the resolution adopted at the Last Tri- 
 " ennial Meeting requiring the assent of the several State 
 "' Societies to the resolutions in relation to the admission of 
 "' members, as the condition on which the said resolutions 
 " shall become operative, be, and the same is, hereby repealed." 
 Thereupon the Resolves of 185 I, constituting the " Eule of 185-1," 
 became merely resolves of interpretation and construction of the Insti- 
 tution, limited and controlled by the language of that instrument, and 
 not in derogation thereof. 
 
 These Resolves of 1854 began by declaring that " each State Society 
 shall have the full right and power to regulate the admission of mem- 
 bers both as to the qualifications <>i members and the terms of admis- 
 sion," as contemplated by the original Institution. 
 
 This was practically the language of that instrument, except that 
 it was subject to the limitation found therein that all acts of a Stale 
 Society under this delegated power must be consistent with the maxims 
 of the < 'incinnati, viz: 
 
 " The State : will regulate everything respecting 
 
 '• itself consistent with tfa g< ru ral maxims of the Cincinnati 
 
 " and judge of tin' qualifications of the members who may be 
 
 " proposed." 
 
 Under the Eule of L854, as if" 1 resolves are designated, the Geu- 
 
 eral Society construed and interpreted the Institution as follows: 
 
 First — That the proper male descendants or male collateral rela- 
 tives repn sentative of such Continental officers of the Army and Navy 
 of the War "f the Revolution as may have been entitled to admission 
 by reason of having been rendered supernumerary, or by reason of 
 having resigned with honor after no! I.-- than three years' service or 
 by reason of having left the service with reputation after not less than 
 three years' service, hut who did aol become members, are eligible to 
 hereditary membership. 
 
 Second Thai the p] >r, in failure of direel 
 
 issue, the proper male collateral relative- representative of such officers 
 of the Army and Navy of the War of the Revolution as served with 
 
 33 
 
reputation for not less than three years in State Troops in Continental 
 service, and who thereafter resigned with honor or were honorably dis- 
 charged, but were not able to become members, arc also eligible to heredi- 
 tary membership. 
 
 Third — That the proper male collateral relatives representative of 
 such officers of the Army and Navy of the War of the Revolution as 
 died iu service during thai War, are also eligible to hereditary member- 
 ship when there shall be no longer direct issue. 
 
 Fourth — That the proper male descendants or male collateral rela- 
 tives representative of Original Members in extincl State Societies are 
 also eligible to hereditary membership in existing Stale. Societies. 
 
 Fifth — That whenever the proper male descendants or, in failure 
 of direct issue, the proper male collateral relatives representative of 
 Original Members in extinct State Societies, shall apply to existing 
 State Societies for hereditary membership, the State Society to which 
 any such claim shall be made may prescribe such terms as to contribution 
 to the Permanent Fund as it may think proper, subject to the limitation 
 of the Institution. 
 
 These Eesolves of interpretation and construction, entitled the Rule 
 of 1854, have been authoritatively acted upon by the General Society 
 in the revival of extinct State Societies, when judging of the qualifica- 
 tions for membership, as in harmony with the scope and intent of the 
 Institution and limited by it. 
 
 All the continuously existing State Societies and all the revived 
 State Societies, including your Society, have recognized and acted 
 under this Rule in the admission of hereditary members whose claim- 
 were comprehended under such Rule. 
 
 Those heretofore admitted under it have had the particular regard 
 of their fellow members and proven equally loyal supporters of the 
 great Principles of the Institution. 
 
 By the revival by the General Society of all former extinct State 
 Societies the Fourth and Fifth provisions of the Rule have become 
 inoperative. 
 
 The Rule of 1854, as promulgated by the General Society, being, 
 therefore, neither " illegal " nor " in direct conflict with the admission 
 rules laid down by the Institution," as announced by the so-called 
 meeting of thirteen members of your Society on December 15, 1905, 
 nor a "violation of the organic law of the Order," nor "illegal," nor 
 an "assumed power and authority," as declared by your Treasurer, 
 continues, after upward of half a century, to constitute an authorita- 
 
 34 
 
- 
 
 tivc rule of action under the Destitution which cannot be altered except 
 Iiv unanimous consent. 
 
 CONTRIBUTION TO PERMANENT FUND UNDER RULE OF 1854. 
 
 This is wholly a mailer of State Society cognizance, provided the 
 requiremenl of the Institution is complied with as to month's pay of 
 grade. 
 
 The General Society, in reviving extinct State Societies, inter- 
 preted the Institution as authorizing a greater sum than a month's pay 
 to be required from an hereditary member mi admission whose ancestor 
 had never been a member or whose month's pay had been withdrawn 
 from the Permanent Fund, such contribution to be equably ascertainable 
 from that month's pay at interest l<> 'lair of admission. 
 
 Every State Society, under the delegated power to regulate every- 
 thing respecting itself, bases the required contribution on admission 
 under the Rule of 1854, to a greater or less degree, on the beneficial 
 interest thus acquired in the Permanent Fund by the newly admitted 
 member. 
 
 As even/ State Society, as well as the General Society, have acted 
 upon this interpretation of the Institution, no necessity is perceived, 
 under thi circumstances, for altering that Instrnmeuj on this subject. 
 
 VI. 
 MEMBERS RESIDING IN DIFFERENT STATES. 
 
 four Treasurer, who resides in the City and Stair of New York 
 and is an hereditary member in the State of Virginia, is troubled be- 
 cause this condition appears, in his view, repugnant to the language ol 
 the Institution which, if construed according to its text, would make 
 him, in a local sense, a mend. it of the New York State Society for State 
 Sociei\ purposes, and the so-called meeting of December 15, L905, ex- 
 pressed the same thought. 
 
 1 1 must ii"i he overlooked thai laws are frequently construed by 
 ihe courts i" mean quite differently from the context. A pertinent illus- 
 tration of this is the expression in the Constitution of the United States, 
 "natural born citizen," which Congress, in the Revised Statutes, has 
 construed to include children born nut, id' the limit- or jurisdiction of 
 die United States, whose fathers at the tin f their birth are citii 
 
 35 
 
thereof, and the courts have accepted this statute as a correct interpre- 
 tation. 
 
 The General Society and State Societies have always inter- 
 preted the clause of the Institution as to residence as referring to the 
 Founders of the Society, and that while hereditary and honorary mem- 
 bers are all members of one Society of Friends, yet, for local State 
 Society purposes, they are members of their respective State Socie- 
 ties and required to meet therein on July 4th in every year. 
 
 The Institution recognizes membership in but one State Society at 
 a time. 
 
 The Society has gotten along very happily under this rule of inter- 
 pretation ever since hereditary members were admitted, and its wisdom 
 has been exemplified. Your own State Society, when controlled by 
 Original members, would not admit an Original member from another 
 State Society who had become resident in Virginia, except by formal 
 resolve, no matter how long his residence. 
 
 In the By-Laws submitted by your Treasurer for your Society, 
 adopted at the so-called meeting of thirteen of your members on Decem- 
 ber 15, 1905, the interpretation here given is recognized in a clause that 
 "any member of the Society of the Cincinnati from another State Society 
 not acting with the same, removing to and residing within the State of 
 Virginia, may be admitted to membership in this State Society, on 
 application and election, as provided in these By-Laws, and on pay- 
 ment into the Treasury for the Permanent Fund of such assessment as 
 the Society or the Standi ny Committee may determine, but such sum 
 shall not be less than $150, and, provided, his own State Society is first 
 notified in writing of the intended transfer and no reasonable objection 
 is made thereto." 
 
 Under this so-called By-Law the application or request for trans- 
 fer to another State Society is recognized, as contemplated in the Insti- 
 tution, to be wholly a personal act which does not require any consent 
 of the State Society wherein the hereditary member may at the time lie 
 enrolled, but for mere courtesy's sake, although not required by the 
 Institution, the so-called By-Law provides that that Society shall be 
 " notified of the intended transfer." According to this proposed By- 
 Law, your State Society, however, to which the member may apply for 
 transfer, alone passes upon the question whether " reasonable objection " 
 has been submitted bvthc State Society wherein, at the time, the applicant 
 may be enrolled, and if it determines that the objection is not reason- 
 able and admits the member, the transfer becomes eo instanti effective 
 
 36 
 
and complete, and the other State Society cannot prevent it as the 
 application for the transfer is a personal one and requires no consent. 
 
 Under the Enstitution no person can be a member in more than one 
 State Society a1 a time because the imposed duties are incompatible 
 with any dual membership. 
 
 Tims, an Original member removing from one State to another 
 was to be considered, in all respects, as Ixdonging to the Society of the 
 State in which he should actually reside. His transfer was strictly a 
 personal act and of his own volition in removing to another State and 
 was not dependent in any way, directly or indirectly, on the consent of 
 the State Society in the State from whence he chose to remove. The 
 Secretary of such State Society accordingly, on notification from the 
 Secretary General, dropped the member's name from the roll of such 
 Society "by transfer," an official net which required no prior author- 
 ization from such State Society. 
 
 This has always been the Rule, recognized as well by your Society, 
 that when a member transfers from one State Society to another, (7 is 
 his personal act and requires im consent by or action of the State Society 
 from whence he transfers. 
 
 VII. 
 
 CIRCULAR LETTERS. 
 
 The Institution prescribes that "each State Meeting shall write 
 annually or oftener, if necessary, a Circular Letter to the State Socie- 
 ties, noting whatever they may think worthy of observation respecting 
 
 the good of the Society." 
 
 Slate Meetings have not found it necessary to write Circular Let- 
 ters every year because thej have had nothing to suggest respecting the 
 good of the Society. 
 
 They do, bowever, transmil annually to every other State Society 
 and to the General Society lists of their respective officers and members 
 as required by the General Society since 1787. # 
 
 Whenever ■■< State Society has found it necessary to write a Cir- 
 cular Letter, the [institution has authorized it in the above-quoted per- 
 missive and directory but not mandatory clause, and it is pertinent to 
 notice thai the qualifying word "necessary" was not found in Major 
 Genera] IIknky ElTOx's '' Proposals," but deliberately inserted by the 
 Convention of Officers which framed the Institution. 
 
 37 
 
Whether Circular Letters shall be written or not is wholly a matter 
 of State Society cognizance. 
 
 The directory character of the clause under consideration has ap- 
 parently not been understood by your Treasurer although such has been 
 its construction since 1783. 
 
 His suggestion, therefore, to alter the Institution in a matter thus 
 requiring no alteration presents nothing for favorable consideration. 
 
 VIII. 
 CIRCULAR LETTERS READ IN GENERAL SOCIETY. 
 
 The Institution is perfectly clear on this subject and requires no 
 amendment. 
 
 When there are Circular Letters, they arc either submitted in print, 
 which avoids necessity of public reading, or are read. 
 
 If your Treasurer, as a Delegate from your Society, has known of 
 a Circular Letter which was not submitted to the General Society and iie 
 did not call for it, he would be properly chargeable with inattention to 
 his duties as a Delegate. 
 
 IX. 
 
 EXPENSES OF DELEGATES. 
 
 The Institution prescribes that the expenses of every authorized 
 Representation from every State Society to the General Society " shall 
 be borne by their respective State Societies." 
 
 Your Treasurer, apparently not aware that this is a directory pro- 
 vision instead of mandatory and intended to relieve the General Society 
 from any such expenditure, iusisls that because several of the State 
 Societies do not pay such expenses, the Institution should be altered 
 to make discretionary a matter which is now and has been discretionary 
 since 1783. 
 
 One object of the clause was to sanction such expenditure even 
 if it trenched upon the Permanent Fund, in case enough interest thereon 
 was not available. 
 
 It is a matter wholly of State Society concern. 
 
 In our Society, in order to aid our Permanent Fund, our Delegates 
 lo the General Society have for many years cheerfully paid their own 
 expenses, and we fail to sec wherein such procedure can properly be 
 considered by your Treasurer. 
 
 38 
 
AMNUAL flEETINGS. 
 
 Your Treasurer asserts that one or more State Societies do not 
 meet on the Fourth day of July in every year, as specially required by 
 the [nstitution. 
 
 This would be within the cognizance of tin- General Society ti> 
 concert such, measures, under its delegated power, as may conduce I ■ 
 the general intendmenl of the Society and, if necessary, require the 
 particular laws of the State Society on this subject to be consistent with 
 the general maxims of the Cincinnati in such behalf. 
 
 The partial information we have on this subject is that one or more 
 of the revived Slate Societies may have, for local reasons, not fully 
 complied with this imperative provision of the Institution. 
 
 We trust, however, that if such be the ease. Independence Day will 
 hereafter be celebrated by everj State Society as our ancestors intended 
 it should lie. ami as a lesson to the rising generation and to the millionsof 
 foreigners coming to our land, who knovi nothing of the struggles, priva- 
 tions and sacrifices of our Ancestors and their Compatriots which, after 
 i ighl years of war, in which many gave up their lives or suffered from 
 wounds until their decease, gave us the immeasurable blessings of the 
 Constitutional liberty we now enjoy. 
 
 On this subjecl of Annual meet ings it is proper to notice that, from 
 the first meeting of the officers of the Virginia Line on Continental 
 Establishment at Fredericksburg, Va., on October 6, 1783, to subscribe 
 to the Institution and become members and then form the Society of 
 the Cincinnati in the State of Virginia as required by the Institution, 
 until the last meeting before prearranged dissolution, held at Rich- 
 mond, \ r a., on December 22, 1822, when but five members were p] 
 ent- no meeting whatsoever was ever held on the Fourth day of July in 
 any ; 
 
 In our own Society we have, for a number of years, as settled cus- 
 tom, held, after our Annual meetings, public Commemorative meetings 
 on that day. at which addresse have been delivered by representative 
 citizens and other exercises held, followed by a banquet, with invited 
 guests and patriotic toasts, with a view to celebrate Independence 
 our Ancestors desired and as it was celebrated in the early days of the 
 Republic. 
 
 39 
 
XI. 
 
 TRIENNIAL HEET1NGS OF UENERAL SOCIETY. 
 
 Your Treasurer says that " the Institution requires tlie General 
 Society to meet on the first Monday in May." 
 
 From lack of information of the rules of interpretation, which 
 have become settled in this behalf, this error has arisen. 
 
 The Institution provides that, beginning wiih the first Monday in 
 May, 1784, the General Society should meet "on the first Monday in 
 May, annually, so long as they should deem it necessary, and afterward 
 at least once in every three //ears. 
 
 No date was fixed for the meeting of the General Society after 
 annual meetings should be discontinued. 
 
 It was required, however, to meet at least once in every three 
 years. 
 
 This has been the controlling interpretation of the General Society, 
 and there is nothing on this subject which requires amendment. 
 
 XII. 
 SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THREE. 
 
 The suggestion of your Treasurer for a Special Committee of 
 Three from every State Society, excluding General Officers, and to be 
 called together by him " to concert measures for the good of the So- 
 ciety," we view as wholly incompatible with the Institution, which 
 nowhere sanctions such a revolutionary procedure. 
 
 Accompanied as it is by the unusual declaration that " any action 
 by the General Society is limited solely to suggestions to the State 
 Societies and can have no legal or binding effect whatever until ratified 
 In/ the several State Societies " and that the General Society is merely 
 " an advisory conference hut having no means of imposing its authority 
 upon the Slate Society meetings." and that " Virginia does not, as to the 
 Eagle, recognize the General Society's authority in the matter," and 
 that "the General Society is only a shadow without a substance/' we 
 regret that a member who owes his membership to the authority of the 
 General Society should in this one Society of Friends use language 
 having a tendency to impair recognition of due authority and that good 
 feeling which has characterized it since 17s:j and made its membership 
 
 40 
 
so delightful and harmonious and its friendships so very close and en- 
 
 during'. 
 
 Nor can we approve any suggestion claiming to be for the ''good 
 of the Society" which undertakes to prevent any State Society from 
 selecting any member for any duty because he chances to be a General 
 officer, or which would render ineligible any General officer to partici- 
 pate in any authorized meeting "for the good of the Society." 
 
 The suggestion for a Committee of Three being opposed to the 
 general intendmenl of the [nstitution does not receive our approval. 
 
 XIII. 
 HOLDING TWO OFFICES. 
 
 In one of his proposed By-Laws submitted by your Treasurer for 
 adoption at the so-called meeting of December 15, 1005, is a clause in 
 which, after naming State Society officers, it is provided that "each office 
 shall be held by a separate member of the Society and no two of the 
 above shall ever be held by one member." 
 
 This is followed by a drastic provision, namely, that the State 
 Society offices and positions as delegates and alternates to the General 
 Societv. " and member of the General Society Committee on Nomina- 
 tions of <; moral Officers shall not be filled by members of the Society 
 irim moi/ oi the time be General officers of the General Society of the 
 Cincinnati." 
 
 Your Treasurer excuses this departure, in this latter provision, 
 from the long-settled policy of the Cincinnati by urging that in the 
 Regulations adopted by the Virginia Original members on October 9, 
 1783, it was declared that " no person in this Society shall hold two 
 commissions at the same time." 
 
 He could not, however, but know that this Virginia Regulation of 
 1783 only had reference to State officers and never did apply, and never 
 
 intended to apply, to General officer-. 
 
 This was early exemplified in the Virginia State Society, when 
 Major General Horatio Gates, LL.D., was, on October 9, 1783, 
 elected President by the Virginia Original members, and was, while 
 holding such office, elected Vice-President General on May 15, 1784, 
 and was, on October 5, 1784, re-elected by the Virginia Original mem- 
 bers and continued as President of the Virginia State Society. 
 
 Some further early examples where officers of State Societies were 
 also General officers and executed both functions at the same time will 
 
 41 
 
illustrate the long-settled policy of the Cincinnati from which the 
 proposed By-Law is a radical departure and, in our judgment, not for 
 
 the good of the Society. 
 
 Major General Hexky Knox, A.M., became Vice-President of the 
 Massachusetts State Society in June 1783, and Secretary General in 
 the same month. 
 
 Subsequently, the Hon. Chables Stewakt Davies, LL.D., be- 
 came President of that State Society in 1853 and Vice-President Gen- 
 eral in 1854. 
 
 Still later, the lion. James Warrex* Sever. A.M., became Vice- 
 President of that State Society in 1865 and President thereof in 1866, 
 and Vice-President General in the same year. 
 
 Major General Alexander McDouuall became President of the 
 New York State Society in June, 1783, and Treasurer General in the 
 same month. 
 
 Major General Thomas Mifflin, A.M., who was President of 
 the Continental Congress when His Excellency, General Washington, 
 resigned his commission as General and Commander-in-Chief, became 
 Vice-President General in 1787 and President of the Pennsylvania 
 State Society in 1789, and exercised both functions until his decease 
 ten years later. 
 
 Prigadier General Otho Holland Williams, when Secretary of 
 the Maryland State Society, became Assistant Secretary General 
 in 1784. 
 
 Major General Charles Cotesworth Pixckxey, LL.D., when 
 Vice-President of the South Carolina State Society, became successively 
 Vice-President General in 1800 and President General in 1805. 
 
 Major General Thomas Pixckxey, A.M., when President of the 
 South Carolina State Society, became President General in 1825. 
 
 Major General Aaron Ogdex, LL.D., when President of the New 
 Jersey State Soeiety, became President General in 1829. 
 
 The Hon. Hamiltox Fish. LL.D., when Treasurer of the New 
 York State Society, became Vice-President General in 1S48 and Presi- 
 dent General in 1854, and, in the following year, became President of 
 his State Society and exercised,' as customary, both functions for many 
 years, until his decease in 1893. 
 
 The Hon. William Wayne, A.M., when President of the Penn- 
 sylvania State Society, became President General in 1896 and exer- 
 cised both functions until his decease in 1901. 
 
 Almost all the General Officers since 1783 have, at the same time, 
 
 42 
 
been officers in their respective State Societies, and at the Triennial 
 General Meeting in 1905, every General officer was President of a 
 State Society. 
 
 This proposed By-Law, that the State Society offices and positions 
 as Delegates and Alternates to the General Society, " and member of the 
 General Society Committee on Nominations of General Officers sliall 
 no/ In filled by members of the Society who may at the lime be General 
 officers of th General Society of llf Cincinnati" is, in other particu- 
 lars, also a departure from the long-settled policy of the Cincinnati. 
 
 Time and again General officers have represented their respective 
 State Societies in General Meeting. 
 
 In .May, 1784, at the First Genera] Meeting, Major General 
 Henry Knox, Secretary General, was a Delegate from the Massachu- 
 setts State Society, and acted as such. 
 
 It is wholly competent for a State Society to designate, if it may 
 so desire, as a Delegate, any member who may be a General officer. 
 
 It is proper here to remark that General officers are Gem nil 
 Officers of the Society of the Cincinnati, and they sit in General meet- 
 ing as componenl parts thereof, by reason of being General officers of 
 the one Society of Friends. 
 
 It is. therefore, incorrect to designate them as General officers of 
 the General Society, their duties having relation to the whole Society. 
 
 The provision in the proposed By-Law that any member of your 
 Society who may be a General officer shall not be eligible to member- 
 ship of the " General Society Committee on Nomination of General 
 Officers " is wholly without, the competency of your Society, or our 
 own. or any other State Society, to enact. 
 
 The General Society has but seldom had Committees on Nomina- 
 tion of General Officers, but' when it does decide to have a committee 
 for any purpose, it selects its own committee, and no State Society has 
 anything to do with it. 
 
 Furthermore, from the very beginning, by resolution of May 7, 
 1784, the President General has always been, e.v-officio, a member of 
 every committee, thus giving representation to General officers as well 
 as to representations from State Societies. 
 
 In a foot note to this proposed By-Law of exclusion and restriction, 
 your Treasun r says it is 
 
 " made with the view of stimulating and promoting the in- 
 " terest of the members of the Virginia Cincinnati in the 
 "Cincinnati Society generally, and to obviate the necessity 
 
 43 
 
" and practice of one member of the Society holding several 
 " important offices therein at any one time and to encourage 
 " and facilitate the distribution of offices among the Virginia 
 " members of the Cincinnati Society." 
 
 Before discussing this note, we must dissent to the expression 
 " Cincinnati Society " as applied to the Society of the Cincinnati. 
 
 In the Queen City of Ohio, named in 1790 by Major General 
 Abthub St. Clair, Governor of the Northwest Territory, and Presi- 
 dent of the Pennsylvania State Society of the Cincinnati, in honor of 
 the Society of the Cincinnati, there are a number of Cincinnati Socie- 
 ties, but no Society of the Cincinnati. 
 
 The above-quoted foot note as to distribution of offices is based on 
 a theory, wholly foreign to the Society of the Cincinnati, that office 
 is an object to be sought. 
 
 It is the glory of our one Society of Friends that whatever honor 
 may attach to connection with it is in being a member, the officers ever 
 having been deemed merely the agents of the Society. 
 
 Hence, almost invariably, a member, upon becoming an officer, 
 has been, and is continued as such, from year to year, as a matter of 
 course. 
 
 Seeking an office by any method is wholly foreign to the Society 
 of the Cincinnati and we should regret if any State Society should 
 depart from settled policy in order to hold before its members the idea 
 that the honor is in an office instead of membership, in order to 
 " stimulate and promote interest." 
 
 XIV. 
 
 THE STANDING EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. 
 
 Tour Treasurer seems disturbed over the existence of the Standing 
 Executive Committee, which he intimates 
 
 " has assumed powers and authority which it does not possess 
 " under the Institution, and attempted to do things which 
 " can be done legally only by concurrent action of the State 
 " Societies." 
 To this broad declaration, but without illustration of any assumed 
 violation of the Institution, he adds: 
 
 " The State Societies do not recognize such assumed 
 " authority under the laws of the Institution." 
 
 44 
 
in thus speaking for us, it was without authority. 
 The Standing Executive Committee has proven to be a wise and 
 valuable instrument for the good of the Society. 
 
 it had its origin in the Committee on "Rules and Ordinances," 
 of one member from every State Society, with the President General,' 
 ex-officio, constituted by resolve of the General Societv on May 
 12. 1ST.-.. 
 
 At the Genera] Meeting of April 14, 1881, it was resolved that the 
 members of this Committee, other than the President General, "be 
 chosen at the meetings of the State Societies en the -1th of July, the 
 one chosen, if unable to attend, to have the right, with the al of 
 
 the Society, to appoint a substitute. 
 
 1 ! ertain duties were imposed on the Committee, viz: 
 
 •' To revise and modify the old, and present any new, 
 
 ■' rules and ordinances that they may think best, with a view 
 
 " to make them a consistent and barmonious whole, that -hall 
 
 wrr, as far a- practicable, a greater uniformity in the 
 
 "action of the General and of the State Societies, that the 
 
 " whole Order may he henceforth conducted faithfully on 
 
 '• ih" ide;^ ami principles of the original Institution, and the 
 
 "said Committee he al-.. instructed to consider and report 
 
 '• whether, upon the original ideas and principles upon which 
 
 of the Cincinnati was established, it is practi- 
 
 .r any State Society that has deliberately committed 
 
 "suicide and voted to dissolve, disband and divide their 
 
 "funds, .-an be revived and re-established, and, if thej deem 
 
 practicable, then to consider and report further how 
 
 " this can be done, i. < .. upon what term- on the pari of the 
 
 "General Society, by what action, rules and proceedings on 
 
 those who would have a claim to become mera- 
 
 " bers of this defunct State Society were it still in existence, 
 
 ••and that this said Committee be instructed to report at the 
 
 "next Genera] Meeting of the Society.'' 
 
 At the Triennial Meeting of the Genera] Society, held in Prince- 
 ton. .V. J., May I.". 1884, the Committee on Rules and Ordinances 
 was continued by specially referring to it business for consideration 
 and report. 
 
 At the Triennial Meeting of the Genera] Society, held in Newport, 
 
 R. I, July 28, 1887, it was Voted " thai such Committee I* ntinued 
 
 until fnrth r order." 
 
 45 
 
This Committee, as constituted, not being sufficiently representa- 
 tive and authoritative, an Ordinance was introduced by unanimous 
 consent at the Triennial Meeting of the General Society held in Balti- 
 more, May 9, 1890, constituting a Standing Executive Committee, 
 which Ordinance was unanimously adopted, and is as follows, viz: 
 
 Ordinance. 
 
 " Be it ordained by the General Society of the Cincinr 
 " nati. That the members of the Committee on Rules and 
 " Ordinances shall constitute a Standing Committee, to con- 
 " sist of one delegate from every State Society, especially 
 " appointed by such State Society, together with the Presi- 
 " dent General e.v-ofp,cio. The Standing Committee shall be 
 " charged with the duties of an Executive Committee and 
 " be so designated, and in addition to the duties heretofore 
 " performed by the Committee on Rules and Ordinances, 
 " shall, at any time, previous to a General Meeting, receive, 
 " consider and report to the same all matters requiring any 
 " action by the General Society." 
 At the Triennial Meeting of the General Society, held in the Sen- 
 ate Chamber, State House, Boston, Mass., .Tune 16, 1893, it was unani- 
 mously 
 
 "Resolved, That, hereafter, as far as practicable, the 
 " Standing Committee prepare an Order of Business for 
 " every session of the General Society, subject to such 
 " changes in the same as may be ordered by the General 
 " Society." 
 
 At the same Triennial Meeting of the General Society, held June 
 16, 1893, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted, viz. : 
 
 " 1. Resolved, That the Assistant Secretary General 
 " shall hereafter act. as Secretary to the Standing Executive 
 " Committee, unless he shall be a member thereof, in which 
 " case, or in his absence, or for other cause, such Committee 
 "may designate a Secretary pro tempore." 
 
 "2. Resolved, That the Standing Executive Committee 
 "keep a record of its proceedings and make report of same 
 " at every General Meeting." 
 
 " 3. Resolved, That the actual expenses of this Com- 
 " mittee be paid by the Treasurer General." 
 
 46 
 
The Ordinance of May 9, 1890, baving been duly transmitted to 
 every existing State Society for its concurred action, every State 
 Society, at its next annua] meeing, and in compliance with such Ordi- 
 nance and in approval and acceptance thereof, especially appointed a 
 Delegate to represent it on the Standing Executive Committee and 
 transmitted his credentials, which were duly read in Genera] Meeting, 
 and, being found in due form, were ordered on file. Annually there- 
 after every one of the continuous Stale Societies has duly appointed a 
 Delegate thereto, and every revived State Society has, in like manner, 
 
 concurrently complied with such Ordinance and respectively r< gnized 
 
 its validity by appointing a Delegate to said Committee, and transmit- 
 ting his credentials to the General Society. 
 
 This unanimous concurrent action of the State Societies for sev- 
 enteen years since adoption of the Ordinance and the unanimous recog- 
 nition by the General Society at every Triennial .Meeting, since 1890, 
 of the Standing Executive Committee thus created by the unanimous 
 concurrent action of all the State Societies, has established the Ordi- 
 nance as an authoritative Standing Regulation of the Society of the 
 Cincinnati, denning with greater particularity the scope and intent of 
 certain delegated and implied powers. 
 
 It cannot, therefore, be abrogated without unanimous consent. 
 
 Under this Ordinance, the Standing Executive Committee acted 
 in the revival of your State Society, preliminary to final action by the 
 General Society, and it is to be noticed that since such revival your 
 Society has. by concurrent action, in compliance with said Ordinance, 
 been continuously, and still is, represented on said Executive Com- 
 mittee by a Delegate whom you have especially appointed and duly 
 accredited. 
 
 It is proper here to notice briefly two remarks of your Treasurer, 
 in the first of which he dissents from the " suggestion that any member 
 of the various revived Societies owes his standing to-day in the Society 
 of the Cincinnati by reason of the action of the General Meeting or its 
 Standing Committee," and in the second of which he asserts - that the 
 General Meeting has no legal authority, under the Institution to revive 
 a dormant i ?) State Society, as that power is inherent in the State 
 Societies themselves." 
 
 The ground of this dissent in the first remark he bases uj an 
 
 utterai never replied to of a venerable octogenarian member since 
 
 deceased, who also argued, with equal lack of information, that there 
 never was an organized Society of the Cincinnati in France nor any 
 
 47 
 
heritable succession in its honored French members, although several 
 descendants of such members had been duly admitted to hereditary 
 membership in his own State Society in recognition of such heritable 
 success ii'ii. 
 
 Thai there may be no doubt in the future as to whether this first 
 remark of your Treasurer has or not any validity, it is sufficient to say 
 that it is negatived by the fact that he owes his own membership in the 
 Society of the Cincinnati to the action of the Standing Executive Com- 
 mittee in examining into his proofs of descent and in judging of his 
 qualifications and claims for membership, and reporting favorably 
 thereon to the General Society, which, in accepting and approving the 
 report, as to him and others similarly situated, made a condition pre- 
 cedent to which they were obliged to assent, that every one of them 
 should contribute to the Permanent Fund a sum tixed by the General 
 Society, and, for at least three years, be governed by the .Massachusetts 
 State Society Rules. 
 
 After all these preliminaries, which were not completed for several 
 years, the General Society formally admitted your Treasurer and his 
 associates to membership in the Society of the Cincinnati, and this 
 course wis pursued with every revived State Society. 
 
 The jurisdiction, in the premises, of the General Society was 
 acknowledged so fully that it is nol necessary to discuss the matter. 
 
 None of the gentlemen of your Society whom the General Society 
 eventually admitted to membership in the Society of the Cincinnati, 
 upon reviving the same, were members thereof until thus admitted. 
 
 The second remark, therefore, of your Treasurer that the General 
 Society had no legal authority, under the Institution to revive an extinct 
 State Society, is contradicted by the facts as well as by the direct 
 acknowledgment of such jurisdiction by those who were admitted when 
 your Society was revived. 
 
 The jurisdiction of the General Society in reference to revival of 
 extinct. State Societies has been enunciated through a long period, be- 
 ginning with 1811, when Veteran Original Members still survived, 
 and subsequent resolves or ordinances in 1829, I860, 1863, 1872, 1878, 
 1884, 1887, L890, 1893, 1896, 1899, 1902 and L905. 
 
 In 1n72. when the question arose whether the reorganization of an 
 extinct State Society required the permission of the General Society, 
 it was referred to a Committee, whose report was agreed to and ordered 
 entered on the minutes, in which the Committee said : 
 
 48 
 
"We are fully convinced of the supreme authority of 
 "the General Society in such matters, and cannot, and do 
 •• not, admit the right of any Stair Society, which has once 
 •'had an existence and has since disbanded and distributed 
 " the fund which was the main basis of their original organ 
 " ization, to resume its original status." 
 
 As all the State Societies of the Cincinnati in America have 
 aowledged this supreme jurisdiction of the General Society in the 
 premises, the remarks of your Treasurer thereon present nothing- for 
 our favorable consideration. 
 
 XV. 
 
 REGULATIONS OF STATE SOCIETIES FOR ADMISSION 
 OF MEMBERS. 
 
 Yon- Treasurer, in a resolve proposed by him and adopted at the 
 so-called meeting on December 15, 1905, has declared, as to Regulations 
 of State Societies relative to admission of members, that some "seem 
 in direet conflicl with the lode- laid down by the Institution." 
 
 He has also declared in his explanatory, defensive communication 
 that " uniformity does not now exist, and cannot exist, under the present 
 conditions." 
 
 ddie Society lias now existed for upward of 123 years, performing 
 its allotted patriotic and benevolent duties, and ever growing more and 
 more in the esteem and regard of the American people. 
 
 The extreme eagerness to acquire membership and constant and 
 tsing inquiries to this end are a fair index that it has lived 
 I l<i llh spirit and intent of the Institution. 
 
 While local Regulations <>( State Societies as to qualifications for 
 membership may differ in language, the intent to conform to (lie Institu- 
 tion has not consciously been lost sight of and, as a consequence, the 
 General Society, under its expressly delegated power, has not yet found 
 it necessary to fake except ion to any By-Law on this subject. 
 
 In one Slate Society only, can it he -aid that qualifications for 
 nission to hereditary membership have been amplified though but 
 in a limited degree, for which there has been implied authority recog- 
 nized for over a century. 
 
 Before the Southern Continental Army, then in Cantonments in 
 and around Charleston, S. C, disbanded, the Continental officers met 
 there on Augusl l"->. 1783, and resolved " to accede to the invitation of 
 
 49 
 
becoming ;i branch of the Society of the Cincinnati," and, accordingly, 
 subscribed to the Institution, and that roll was used to form, on that 
 ' day, the South Carolina State Society. 
 
 Upward of forty of these officers belonged to other Continental 
 Lines or Corps than South Carolina, and most, if not all, of them after- 
 ward affiliated with their own State Societies. 
 
 On May 23, 1799, the South Carolina State Society addressed the 
 General Society and every State Society, including our own, asking 
 " countenance and approbation " of a Regulation for their State Society 
 declaring all the male descendants of Original Members qualified for 
 hereditary membership, in order to prevent their State Society from 
 becoming extinct. 
 
 The reasons given for this request tor " countenance and approba- 
 tion " were : 
 
 First — If is a melancholy truth that in a climate but 
 " too apt to increase the infirmities of human nature and sap 
 " the constitution of a man, that deaths have been particularly 
 " frequent among the soldiers of the Revolutionary War." 
 
 " Already enfeebled by the severity of service, the en- 
 " croaehments of disease have been rapid and fatally de- 
 structive, in so much that by far the greater proportion of 
 " Original Manlier* composing oar State Society hare been 
 " hurried by its progress to an untimely grave, and to the 
 "few who yet existed (without the application of some 
 effectual remedy) no prospect remained but its speedy and 
 total extinction." 
 
 " Second — That our funds, collected for the purposes 
 " of benevolence and humanity, and hitherto appropriated to 
 " the relief of such of our unfortunate Brethren as have sunk 
 " under the pressure of disease or misfortune, were likely to 
 " pass into other hands and be diverted into different 
 " channels." 
 
 Neither the General Society nor any State Society made objection 
 to or expressed disapprobation of this pathetic request. 
 
 No other State Society was in like situation. 
 
 The South Carolina State Society was threatened with speedy ex- 
 tinction by decease of its actual South Carolina members and not by 
 reason of emigration or other voluntary act of its members. 
 
 The surviving Veteran Members were most solicitous to perpetuate 
 it and saw, under the afflictive circumstances, but one way to do so. 
 
 50 
 
Their brethren in our own and other State Societies sympathized 
 with them, and the wisdom of the action taken under the local Regula- 
 tion of 1799 was exemplified in the preservation of that honored State 
 Society to the present time, respected and honored in its own State and 
 ever endeared to us in its membership. 
 
 Since then our Smith Carolina Brethren have limited hereditary 
 membership to lineal male descendants of Original Members and mem- 
 bers admitted under the Rule of 1854 prior to July 5, 1886, and to the 
 eldest lineal male descendant through the eldest male line of Continental 
 South Carolina officers qualified by the Institution to have been Origi- 
 nal Members, provided, such respective descendants reside in South 
 Carolina or in a State where there is no State Society, and. provided 
 further, that when there shall he no lineal descendants of a propositus, 
 the eldest lineal male descendant through the eldest collateral male 
 branch, shall be entitled. 
 
 The time may come when our dear South Carolina Brethren may 
 see their way to limitation of hereditary membership in every case to 
 the eldest male posterity of qualified Continental or French officers of 
 the War of the Revolution for American Independence, but so lone as 
 that State Society acts under the implied sanction to their request of 
 
 1799 the subject is one wholly of Stat ncern, which cannot properly 
 
 be excepted to either by the Genera] Society or by our own or by any 
 other State Society. 
 
 The Veteran Original Members in South Carolina desired to per- 
 petuate their Society, as contemplated by the Institution, while the 
 Veteran Original .Members in Virginia and North Carolina put a sure 
 and not remote termination to their respective State Societies by never 
 entertaining favorably applications for hereditary membership in suc- 
 cession to Original Members, nor admitting such as hereditary members. 
 
 It is our belief that all the State Societies endeavor, to the best of 
 their ability, to conform strictly to the Institution in all matters con- 
 corning admissions to membership. 
 
 If mistakes have been made in admission to hereditary member- 
 ship under the Rule of 1854, such infrequent instances, if any there 
 be, did not involve personal worthiness, and may be ascribed to inex- 
 perience in considering the evidi nee as to the length ami nature of 
 service and how terminated, id' a propositus of respectable character and 
 honorable record. 
 
 Anv error, if such should arise, could easily be corrected by requir- 
 ing further pi f and, in default thereof, giving back the contribution 
 
 51 
 
to the Permanent Fund and dropping the name from the roll, or declin- 
 ing to admit a successor. 
 
 No one can lawfully represent in the Cincinnati, in quality as an 
 hereditary member, an ancestor who, under the Institution, was not 
 qualified to become an Original Member. 
 
 To the existing State Societies is remitted the determination as 
 to who shall be admit led therein respectively as the properly qualified 
 representative of such duly qualified ancestor. 
 
 The nature and services of the ancestor is of record, and had he 
 chosen, if qualified for membership by his record, to siyn the Institu- 
 tion within the prescribed time, he had a right to do so, and no State 
 Society could interpose in order to pass on his qualifications. 
 
 Not so with hei'editary applicants vdiose claims as to personal 
 worthiness, descent and whether an intervening descendant shall be 
 excluded for unworthiness or other valid cause, are all matters for the 
 State Society, to which they may respectively apply, which " judges 
 of the qualifications." 
 
 For the reasons stated, we do not favorably consider the proposi- 
 tion to amend the Institution as to " Rules of Admission,'' there being, 
 in our judgment, no occasion for it. 
 
 In closing the consideration of the voluminous printed documents 
 submitted for our remarks, we deem it desirable to notice the statement 
 of your Treasurer, in which he says: 
 
 " There can be no doubt that the policy and management 
 " of the Society lias been for years controlled by a small group 
 " of its members. * * * One thing is certain, such a con- 
 " dition is no longer desirable or necessary in the Society of 
 "the Cincinnati, because all the original thirteen State Socie- 
 " ties are now fully revived and in active operation." 
 
 We regret this utterance, because it has no substantial basis, and 
 because it shows that the raison d'etre of the Society is not . under- 
 stood. 
 
 When His Excellency, President. General Washington, presided 
 over the deliberations of the General Society, its members were all dis- 
 tinguished officers of the War of the Revolution and representatives of 
 the old Colonial gentry. 
 
 The most punctilious courtesy and affectionate demeanor character- 
 ized the conduct of these gentlemen toward each other. 
 
 ISTo one offered a resolution unless he believed it would be accept- 
 able, and hence the apparent unanimity in all the proceedings. 
 
 52 
 
This pleasing condition has characterized all the deliberations and 
 proceedings of the Genera] Society to the present day, with one notable 
 exception in 1881, when a venerable member (heretofore alluded to 
 in this communication) made a traversable report, which was there- 
 upon laid on the table. 
 
 Conservatism and adherence to precedent have ever been marked 
 characteristics of the Society of the Cincinnati, and hence, much to 
 the advantage of the Society, particular respect has ever been paid in 
 the General Society and State Societies to the utterances of those mem- 
 bers of longest experience as delegates or members. 
 
 As a rule, what one may have suggested all have desired, and the 
 same rule of action has always obtained in our own Society and in all 
 the State Societies of continuous existence. 
 
 It is a delightful condition, truly exemplifying that the Society 
 of the Cincinnati is " One Society of Friends." 
 
 The existence of the Standing Executive Committee, upon which 
 every State Society has its special duly elected Representative, with the 
 President Genera] ex officio, fenders it impossible for the Society and 
 management of the Society at any time to be controlled by any : ' group 
 of its members." 
 
 In e, inclusion, we perceive no reason why the Institution of 1783 
 should be altered or amended. 
 
 The Snciety is first in the esteem of the American people, not only 
 from the character of its honored Founders and the Principles it rep- 
 resents, but from its extensive and long-continued charities, exemplified 
 in the expenditure of several hundred thousand dollars, and its patriotic 
 endeavors fittingly illustrated in the magnificent monument erected 
 by the Pennsylvania State Society in Fairmount Park, Philadelphia, 
 to His Excellency, President General Washington, and his com- 
 patriol 3. 
 
 We have hailed with great pleasure the revival in the past few 
 years of six Stare Societies to complete the original thirteen in America 
 and, while recognizing that they are not able as yet, in their local delib- 
 erations, to have such recourse to older members imbued with knowledge 
 of the precedents and conservative procedure of the Society which the 
 older State Societies are favored with, yet their appreciation of the 
 honor of membership and patriotic spirit will, we are persuaded, bring, 
 in time, this source of information in aid of their deliberations. 
 
 We feel especial interest in the welfare of your Society, because 
 in Colonial times the intercourse between Virginia and Rhode Island 
 
 53 
 
was naturally closer than with other Colonies, and there were many 
 intermarriages and permanent exchanges of domicile, in consequence 
 of which several of our members trace some of their ancestors to the 
 Old Dominion. 
 
 We wish you all success in upholding the Principles of our be- 
 loved Institution, and pray that the blessing of the Almighty may rest 
 on your endeavor. 
 
 By Order: 
 
 George W. Olney, 
 
 Secretary. 
 
 54 
 
; 
 
ERRATUM 
 
 Page 21 — In third tine from bottom after words "to Icorite" 
 insert •words "if necessary."