[i-227]C. Gide and C. Rist,A History of Economic Doctrines, 4 note.[i-228]Writings, V, 155.[i-229]As anexperimentalagriculturist Franklin has been given too little honor. He performed many valuable services in introducing Old-World plants, trees, and fruits to the New, and in encouraging others to carry on practical botanical experiments. Particularly from 1747 to 1757 he experimented in agriculture and was in constant communication with that pioneer scientific husbandman, Jared Eliot. See E. D. Ross's "Benjamin Franklin as an Eighteenth-Century Agriculture Leader,"Journal of Political Economy, XXXVII, 52-72 (Feb., 1929).[i-230]Although no scholarly substitute for the works of Quesnay, Mirabeau, Mercier de la Rivière, Dupont de Nemours, Le Trosne, Abbé Bandeau, Abbé Roubaud, and some pieces of the occasional physiocrat Turgot, the following will enable the student to derive adequately for general purposes the thought of the Économistes: H. Higgs,The Physiocrats(1897); Gide and Rist, op. cit.; L. H. Haney,History of Economic Thought(1911), 133-57; G. Weulersse,Le mouvement physiocratique en France (de 1756 à 1770); A. Smith,Wealth of Nations, Bk. IV, chap. IX; J. Bonar,Philosophy and Political Science(1893); in addition see critical and interpretative writings of Oncken, Stem, Kines, Hasbach, Schelle, Bauer, Feilbogen, De Lavergne.[i-231]An integral idea of the French school was its advocacy of theimpôt unique—a single tax on land. It is difficult to find evidence to controvert Mr. Carey's assertion that Franklin seems never to have advocated this tax (op. cit., 154). However, in marginalia on a pamphlet by Allan Ramsay, Franklin held: "Taxes must be paid out of the Produce of the Land. There is no other possible Fund" (cited by Carey, 155). Another reference is found in a letter of 1787 to Alexander Small: "Our Legislators are all Land-holders; and they are not yet persuaded, that all taxes are finally paid by the Land" (Writings, IX, 615). It is probable that he felt that a land tax would be dubiously effective in view of the difficulties of collection in sparse settlements.[i-232]Writings, II, 313 (July 16, 1747). See alsoNote Respecting Trade and Manufactures, London, July 7, 1767 (Sparks, II, 366):"Suppose a country, X, with three manufactures, ascloth,silk,iron, supplying three other countries. A, B, C, but is desirous of increasing the vent, and raising the price of cloth in favor of her own clothiers.In order to do this, she forbids the importation of foreign cloth from A.A, in return, forbids silks from X.Then the silk-workers complain of a decay of trade.And X, to content them, forbids silks from B.B, in return, forbids iron ware from X.Then the iron-workers complain of decay.And X forbids the importation of iron from C.C, in return, forbids cloth from X.What is got by all these prohibitions?Answer.—All four find their common stock of the enjoyments and conveniences of life diminished."[i-233]Writings, IV, 469-70.[i-234]Ibid., V, 155.[i-235]Passy, May 27, 1779 (Writings, VII, 332).[i-236]Ibid., IV, 242-5 (April 30, 1764). As Mr. Carey notes. Franklin in several places.On the Labouring Poorand in a letter (IX, 240-8), suggests that private vices—demands for luxuries—make public benefits, hence resembling, if not ultimately derived from, Mandeville'sFable of the Bees. Franklin's sanction of free trade is, however, antithetical to Mandeville's 'dog eat dog' basis. (See Kaye's Intro. toThe Fable of the Bees, xcviii ff.) Franklin in no uncertain terms looks upon trade restrictions definitely as the result of "the abominable selfishness" of men (VII, 332). As long as selfishness is the rule, mercantilism, not economic laissez faire, will be king. It is theoretically probable also that belief in man's innate altruism could furnish emotional if not logical sanction for laissez faire—but this abstraction is in Franklin's case futile, since like Swift he was not blind to man's malevolence![i-237]Writings, IV, 245; see alsoibid., VIII, 107-8, 261, 19.[i-238]Ibid., IX, 41; also 63, 578, 588.[i-239]Cited in Carey,op. cit., 160-1.[i-240]See Gide and Rist,op. cit., 7 note.[i-241]Ibid., 7 note.[i-242]Ibid.[i-243]Mercier de la Rivière, cited inibid., 8 note.[i-244]Ibid., 9-10.[i-245]"Economics and the Idea of Natural Law,"Quarterly Journal of Economics, XLIV, 16 (1929). See also O. H. Taylor's valuable dissertation, "The Idea of a 'Natural Order' in Early Modern Economic Thought," summarized in Harvard UniversitySummaries of Theses, 1928, 102-6, and available in manuscript at the Harvard University Library.[i-246]Taylor, "Economics and the Idea of Natural Law,"loc. cit., 16.[i-247]Even this fragmentary view of the more obvious economic principles held by Franklin offers convincing evidence that had he been less incidentally an economist he would have been at least a lesser Adam Smith. Mr. Wetzel, inBenjamin Franklin as an Economist, offers a convenient summary of Franklin as an economist, some items suggesting aspects of his views which, had space permitted, we should have included in this study: "1. Money as coin may have a value higher than its bullion value. 2. Natural interest is determined by the rent of so much land as the money loaned will buy. 3. High wages are not inconsistent with a large foreign trade. 4. Population will increase as the means of gaining a living increase. 5. A high standard of living serves to prolong single life, and thus acts as a check upon the increase of population. 6. People are adjusted among the different countries according to the comparative well-being of mankind. 7. The value of an article is determined by the amount of labor necessary to produce the food consumed in making the article. 8. While manufactures are advantageous, only agriculture is truly productive. 9. Manufactures will naturally spring up in a country as the country becomes ripe for them. 10. Free trade with the world will give the greatest return at the least expense. 11. Wherever practicable, State revenue should be raised by direct taxes."[i-248]Writings, II, 110.[i-249]Ibid., II, 295. In 1736 Franklin wrote: "Faction, if not timely suppressed, may overturn the balance, the palladium of liberty, and crush us under its ruins" (cited in R. G. Gettell,History of American Political Thought, 149).[i-250]W. R. Shepherd,History of Proprietary Government in Pennsylvania(New York, 1896), 5.[i-251]Writings, II, 351.[i-252]Ibid.[i-253]Ibid., II, 352.[i-254]Ibid., II, 347.[i-255]Shepherd,op. cit., 222. In 1764 Penn thought that Franklin was one "who may lose the government of a post office by grasping at that of a province" (ibid., 564). In turn one of the proprietors wrote to him: "Franklin is certainly destined to be our plague" (ibid., 566). Penn professed not to fear "your mighty Goliath." For proof that Franklin's fear expressed inPlain Truthwas not idle seeExtracts from Chief Justice William Allen's Letter Book, 17, 22-3, 25, 31-2.[i-256]Plain Truthinspirited the colonists to defend themselves, even if it failed in its larger purpose; seeWritings, II, 354, 362.[i-257]To James Parker, March 20, 1750/51 (Writings, III, 40-5). L. C. Wroth, inAn American Bookshelf, 1755 (Philadelphia, 1934), 12 ff., reviews A. Kennedy'sThe Importance of Gaining the Friendship of the Indians to the British Interest(1751), to which was appended a letter, prefiguring the Albany Plan of Union. This letter, Mr. Wroth observes, was by Franklin. C. E. Merriam states that "The storm centre of the democratic movement during the colonial period was the conflict between the governors and the colonial legislatures or assemblies" (A History of American Political Theories, 34). Also see E. B. Greene,The Provincial Governor in the English Colonies of North America.[i-258]Writings, III, 71.[i-259]Cited in G. L. Beer,British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, 17.[i-260]Writings, III, 197.[i-261]For a suggestive source study see Mrs. L. K. Mathews's "Benjamin Franklin's Plans for a Colonial Union, 1750-1775,"American Political Science Review, VIII, 393-412 (Aug., 1914).[i-262]Cited in Beer,op. cit., 49.[i-263]Writings, III, 242.[i-264]Ibid., III, 226. As Beer has pointed out (op. cit., 23 note), since the plan was not ratified, it never went before the Crown; hence Franklin's retrospective glance is misleading: "The Crown disapproved it, as having placed too much Weight in the Democratic Part of the Constitution; and every Assembly as having allowed too much to Prerogative. So it was totally rejected" (Writings, III, 227).[i-265]Ibid., III, 233.[i-266]To Peter Collinson, Nov. 22, 1756 (Writings, III, 351).[i-267]As A. H. Smyth says, this was probablyinspiredby Franklin although not written by him; at any rate "it undoubtedly reflects" his opinions (III, vi). Isaac Sharpless observes that Franklin "had sympathy with their [Quakers'] demands for political freedom, but none for their non-military spirit" (Political Leaders of Provincial Pennsylvania, New York, 1919, 178).[i-268]Writings, III, 372.[i-269]A. Bradford,Memoir of the Life and Writings of Rev. J. Mayhew(Boston, 1838), 119.[i-270]See for capable studies: B. F. Wright,American Interpretations of Natural Law; C. F. Mullett,Fundamental Law and the American Revolution; D. G. Ritchie,Natural Rights(London, 1895), and his "Contributions to the History of the Social Contract Theory,"Political Science Quarterly, VI, 656-76 (1891); C. Becker,The Declaration of Independence, chap. II; C. E. Merriam,op. cit., chap. II; H. J. Laski,Political Thought in England from Locke to Bentham(New York, 1920).[i-271]Becker,op. cit., 24.[i-272]Ibid., 27.[i-273]Burke said that nearly as many copies of this work were sold in the colonies as in Great Britain. It will be remembered that Hamilton leaned heavily on Blackstone inThe Farmer Refuted(1773).[i-274]Cited in Wright,op. cit., 11.[i-275]The Farmer Refuted.For discussion of changes in Hamilton's political theory see F. C. Prescott's Introduction toHamilton and Jefferson(American Writers Series, New York, 1934).[i-276]Franklin acknowledges his close reading of Locke'sEssay Concerning Human Understanding(Writings, I, 243). In 1749 he urges that Locke be read in the Philadelphia Academy (II, 387) and refers again to the great logician inIdea of the English School(III, 28). He is supposed to have defended in spirited debate Locke's treatise on Toleration (I, 179). The catalogues of the Philadelphia Library Company disclose that by 1757 all of Locke's works had been obtained. One may ask how an alert eighteenth-century mind could have escaped the impact of Locke's thought.It is more difficult to establish satisfactorily a nexus between Rousseau's and Franklin's minds. Mr. George Simpson Eddy has kindly allowed us to consult his "Catalogue of Pamphlets, Once a Part of the Library of Benjamin Franklin, and now owned by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania" in which are included Rousseau'sPreface de la Nouvelle Hélöise ...(1761) andDiscours sur l'économie politique ...(1760). Even if Rousseau's mistress, Countess d'Houdetot, feted Franklin in 1781, and Franklin was acquainted with Rousseau's physician, Achille-Guillaume le Bègue de Presle, and directly in 1785 mentions Rousseau on child-education (Writings, IX, 334), one can not be sure to what extent Rousseau's writings may have aided Franklin in formulating notions similar to the social contract theory (IX, 138).[i-277]Cited in A. M. Baldwin,The New England Clergy and the American Revolution, 6.[i-278]Ibid., xii. See also C. H. Van Tyne's able study, "The Influence of the Clergy, and of Religious and Sectarian Forces, on the American Revolution,"American Historical Review, XIX, 44-64 (Oct., 1913). He takes issue with the economic determinists and concludes that of all the causes of the Revolution, religious causes are "among the most important" (p. 64). The Revolution was in large measure caused by a conflict of political ideas, and these were disseminated mostly by the clergy.[i-279]An Oration, Delivered March 5, 1773(Boston, 1773), 6.[i-280]Ibid., 10-11.[i-281]Ibid., 8. Also see S. Stillman,Election-Sermon, May 26, 1779 (Boston, 1779); J. Clarke,Election-Sermon, May 30, 1781 (Boston, 1781).[i-282]Although Franklin denied having written it (Writings, IV, 82), Mr. Ford (Franklin Bibliography, III) asserts that "this work must still be treated as from Franklin's pen." He sent 500 copies to Pennsylvania consigned to his partner, David Hall, for distribution.[i-283]To Joseph Galloway, April 11, 1757 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection). For a description of the unpublished Franklin-Galloway correspondence see W. S. Mason's article inProceedings of the American Antiquarian Societyfor Oct., 1924.[i-284]To Joseph Galloway, Feb. 17, 1758 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection).[i-285]June 10, 1758 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection).[i-286]April 7, 1759 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection).[i-287]The Works of Benjamin Franklin(Philadelphia, 1809), II, 147.[i-288]Ibid., II, 7.[i-289]Ibid., II, 1.[i-290]Ibid., II, vii.[i-291]Ibid., II, xvi.[i-292]Apropos of many colonial ferments, not unlike the one we have considered above, Carl Becker writes: "Throughout the eighteenth century, little colonial aristocracies played their part, in imagination clothing their governor in the decaying vesture of Old-World tyrants and themselves assuming the homespun garb, half Roman and half Puritan, of a virtuous republicanism.... It was the illusion of sharing in great events rather than any low mercenary motive that made Americans guard with jealous care their legislative independence" (The Eve of the Revolution, New Haven, 1918, 60). Also see C. H. Lincoln,The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania, 1760-1776.[i-293]Writings, III, 408-9.[i-294]Ibid., III, 457.[i-295]V. W. Crane, "Certain Writings of Benjamin Franklin on the British Empire and the American Colonies,"Papers of the Bibliographical Society, XXVIII, Pt. 1, 6 (1934). Also see W. L. Grant, "Canada vs. Guadaloupe,"American Historical Review, XVII, 735-43, (Oct., 1911-July, 1912).[i-296]Beer,op. cit., 313.[i-297]Writings, IV, 224.[i-298]Ibid., IV, 229.[i-299]The massacre led by the "Paxton boys."[i-300]Writings, IV, 314.[i-301]Writings, IV, 418.[i-302]Ibid., IV, 419. See Beer,op. cit., 294 f.[i-303]A History of American Political Theories, 46.[i-304]Writings, IV, 445-6.[i-305]To Joseph Galloway, May 20, 1767 (photostat of unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection; original in W. L. Clements Library).[i-306]To Joseph Galloway, Aug. 20, 1768 (photostat of unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection; original in W. L. Clements Library).[i-307]To Joseph Galloway, April 14, 1767 (photostat of unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection; original in W. L. Clements Library). Cf. also letter to the same, Jan. 11, 1770,ibid.[i-308]See, for example,An Edict by the King of Prussia(1773)—for its effect seeWritings, VI, 146—andRules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One(1773). Crane,op. cit., concludes that Franklin appears as "the chief agent of the American propaganda in England, especially between 1765 and 1770" (p. 26). For treatment of American propagandists see P. G. Davidson, "Whig Propagandists of the American Revolution,"American Historical Review, XXXIX, 442-53 (April, 1934), and hisRevolutionary Propagandists in New England, New York and Pennsylvania, 1763-1776(unpublished dissertation, University of Chicago, 1929); summarized inAbstracts of Theses, Humanistic Series VII, 239-42; F. J. Hinkhouse,The Preliminaries of the American Revolution as Seen in the English Press(New York, 1926).[i-309]Writings, V, 297.[i-310]See R. G. Adams,Political Ideas of the American Revolution, 35, 62-3.[i-311]Oct. 2, 1770 (Writings, V, 280). See alsoCauses of the American Discontents before 1768(V, 78 f., 160-2). An aspect of his loyalty to the crown may be seen in his hatred of French desire to separate the colonies from England (V, 47, 231, 254, 323). The printing of theExaminationand other of Franklin's pieces in Europe buttressed the predisposition of France to hate Great Britain (V, 231). The best comprehensive treatment of backgrounds is C. H. Van Tyne'sThe Causes of the War of Independence.[i-312]Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, XXV, 311 (1901). See alsoibid., 307-22, and XXVI, 81-90, 255-64 (1902). SeeWritings, VI, 144.[i-313]Writings, VI, 173.[i-314]Ibid., VI, 319. His unpublished letters of 1775 in the Original Correspondence of Benjamin Franklin with the Bishop of St. Asaph (in the W. S. Mason Collection) emphasize his progressive apathy toward a reconciliation. Especially see letters of May 15 and July 7.[i-315]Ibid., VI, 460.[i-316]Cited in Davidson,op. cit., 442.[i-317]Hugh Williamson claimed that he actually gave Franklin the letters. Apparently another person went to the office where the letters were archived and posing as an authorized person secured the desired correspondence (D. Hosack,Biographical Memoir of Hugh Williamson, New York, 1820, 37 ff.).[i-318]For an interesting account of this episode see Parton,op. cit., 1, chap. IX.[i-319]Writings, V, 134. Franklin and Burke were friendly; see their correspondence. The best exposition of Burke's doctrines is that by John MacCunn,The Political Philosophy of Edmund Burke(London, 1913).[i-320]Ibid., V, 439; see also 527.[i-321]London, April 20, 1771; unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection. Compare with Abbé Raynal's opinion that "society is essentially good; government, as is well known, may be, and is but too often evil" (The Revolution of America, Dublin, 1781, 45).[i-322]M. Eiselen (Franklin's Political Theories, Garden City, N. Y., 1928) observes that Franklin as presiding officer had actually little to do with casting the instrument. From his later paper on the Constitution it is possible, however, to see that he accepted most of its major ideas (pp. 57-8). See S. B. Harding, "Party Struggles over the First Pennsylvania Constitution,"Annual Report of the American Historical Association for 1894, 371-402.[i-323]That Franklin "had more to do with the phraseology of the Declaration of Independence than has been recognized up to now" (J. C. Fitzpatrick,Spirit of the Revolution, Boston, 1924, 11) has been shown by Becker,op. cit.[i-324]See text in S. E. Morison,Sources and Documents Illustrating the American Revolution, 1764-1788, and the Formation of the Federal Constitution(Oxford, 1923, 162-76).[i-325]C. H. Lincoln,The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania, 1760-1776, 277.[i-326]Cited in N. G. Goodman,Benjamin Rush(Philadelphia, 1934), 62. Another wrote that the unicameral form is good "if men were wise and virtuous as angels" (Lincoln,op. cit., 282; see also 283). The American Philosophical Society, of which Franklin was president, declared against it.[i-327]T. F. Moran,The Rise and Development of the Bicameral System in America(Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, 13th ser., V [Baltimore, 1895]), 42. The legislative Council (upper chamber) had been destroyed by the 1701 constitution. See B. A. Konkle,George Bryan and the Constitution of Pennsylvania(Philadelphia, 1922), 114. P. L. Ford ("The Adoption of the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776,"Political Science Quarterly, X, Sept., 1895, 426-59) observes: "The one-chamber legislature and the annual election were hardly the work of the Convention, for they were merely transferred from the Penn Charter; having yielded such admirable results in the past, it is not strange that they were grafted into the new instrument" (p. 454).[i-328]Defending (in 1789) the Pennsylvania constitution, Franklin wrote, "Have we not experienced in this Colony, when a Province under the Government of the Proprietors, the Mischiefs of a second Branch existing in the Proprietary Family, countenanced and aided by an Aristocratic Council?" (Writings, X, 56.)[i-329]In 1775 he submitted to the Second Continental Congress hisArticles of Confederation(Writings, VI, 420-6) which called for a "firm League of Friendship" motivated by a unicameral assembly and a plural executive, a Council of twelve. It was democratic also in its "basing representation upon population instead of financial support" (Eiselen,op. cit., 54).[i-330]Writings, VII, 48.[i-331]Ibid., VII, 23. No dull sidelight on the quality of Franklin's radicalism during this period is the fact that he brought Thomas Paine to the colonies and was partly responsible for the writing ofCommon Sense. It is alleged that Franklin considered Paine "his adopted political son" (cited in M. D. Conway'sLife of Thomas Paine, 3d ed., New York, 1893, II, 468). For explication of Paine's political theories see C. E. Merriam, "Political Theories of Thomas Paine,"Political Science Quarterly, XIV, 389-403.[i-332]Hale and Hale,op. cit., I, 70; see also 75.[i-333]Ibid., I, 32.[i-334]Cited in J. B. Perkins,France in the American Revolution, 140.[i-335]Ibid., 127.[i-336]See D. J. Hill, "A Missing Chapter of Franco-American History,"American Historical Review, XXI, 709-19, (July, 1916).[i-337]Ibid., 710.[i-338]Writings, IX, 132. The Due de la Rochefoucauld translated them into French (IX, 71). Franklin thought they would induce emigration to the colonies. See the scores of requests (on the part of notable Frenchmen) and thanks for copies of the constitutions of the United States listed inCalendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin in the Library of the American Philosophical Society.[i-339]J. S. Schapiro,Condorcet and the Rise of Liberalism, 79-81 andpassim.
[i-227]C. Gide and C. Rist,A History of Economic Doctrines, 4 note.
[i-227]C. Gide and C. Rist,A History of Economic Doctrines, 4 note.
[i-228]Writings, V, 155.
[i-228]Writings, V, 155.
[i-229]As anexperimentalagriculturist Franklin has been given too little honor. He performed many valuable services in introducing Old-World plants, trees, and fruits to the New, and in encouraging others to carry on practical botanical experiments. Particularly from 1747 to 1757 he experimented in agriculture and was in constant communication with that pioneer scientific husbandman, Jared Eliot. See E. D. Ross's "Benjamin Franklin as an Eighteenth-Century Agriculture Leader,"Journal of Political Economy, XXXVII, 52-72 (Feb., 1929).
[i-229]As anexperimentalagriculturist Franklin has been given too little honor. He performed many valuable services in introducing Old-World plants, trees, and fruits to the New, and in encouraging others to carry on practical botanical experiments. Particularly from 1747 to 1757 he experimented in agriculture and was in constant communication with that pioneer scientific husbandman, Jared Eliot. See E. D. Ross's "Benjamin Franklin as an Eighteenth-Century Agriculture Leader,"Journal of Political Economy, XXXVII, 52-72 (Feb., 1929).
[i-230]Although no scholarly substitute for the works of Quesnay, Mirabeau, Mercier de la Rivière, Dupont de Nemours, Le Trosne, Abbé Bandeau, Abbé Roubaud, and some pieces of the occasional physiocrat Turgot, the following will enable the student to derive adequately for general purposes the thought of the Économistes: H. Higgs,The Physiocrats(1897); Gide and Rist, op. cit.; L. H. Haney,History of Economic Thought(1911), 133-57; G. Weulersse,Le mouvement physiocratique en France (de 1756 à 1770); A. Smith,Wealth of Nations, Bk. IV, chap. IX; J. Bonar,Philosophy and Political Science(1893); in addition see critical and interpretative writings of Oncken, Stem, Kines, Hasbach, Schelle, Bauer, Feilbogen, De Lavergne.
[i-230]Although no scholarly substitute for the works of Quesnay, Mirabeau, Mercier de la Rivière, Dupont de Nemours, Le Trosne, Abbé Bandeau, Abbé Roubaud, and some pieces of the occasional physiocrat Turgot, the following will enable the student to derive adequately for general purposes the thought of the Économistes: H. Higgs,The Physiocrats(1897); Gide and Rist, op. cit.; L. H. Haney,History of Economic Thought(1911), 133-57; G. Weulersse,Le mouvement physiocratique en France (de 1756 à 1770); A. Smith,Wealth of Nations, Bk. IV, chap. IX; J. Bonar,Philosophy and Political Science(1893); in addition see critical and interpretative writings of Oncken, Stem, Kines, Hasbach, Schelle, Bauer, Feilbogen, De Lavergne.
[i-231]An integral idea of the French school was its advocacy of theimpôt unique—a single tax on land. It is difficult to find evidence to controvert Mr. Carey's assertion that Franklin seems never to have advocated this tax (op. cit., 154). However, in marginalia on a pamphlet by Allan Ramsay, Franklin held: "Taxes must be paid out of the Produce of the Land. There is no other possible Fund" (cited by Carey, 155). Another reference is found in a letter of 1787 to Alexander Small: "Our Legislators are all Land-holders; and they are not yet persuaded, that all taxes are finally paid by the Land" (Writings, IX, 615). It is probable that he felt that a land tax would be dubiously effective in view of the difficulties of collection in sparse settlements.
[i-231]An integral idea of the French school was its advocacy of theimpôt unique—a single tax on land. It is difficult to find evidence to controvert Mr. Carey's assertion that Franklin seems never to have advocated this tax (op. cit., 154). However, in marginalia on a pamphlet by Allan Ramsay, Franklin held: "Taxes must be paid out of the Produce of the Land. There is no other possible Fund" (cited by Carey, 155). Another reference is found in a letter of 1787 to Alexander Small: "Our Legislators are all Land-holders; and they are not yet persuaded, that all taxes are finally paid by the Land" (Writings, IX, 615). It is probable that he felt that a land tax would be dubiously effective in view of the difficulties of collection in sparse settlements.
[i-232]Writings, II, 313 (July 16, 1747). See alsoNote Respecting Trade and Manufactures, London, July 7, 1767 (Sparks, II, 366):"Suppose a country, X, with three manufactures, ascloth,silk,iron, supplying three other countries. A, B, C, but is desirous of increasing the vent, and raising the price of cloth in favor of her own clothiers.In order to do this, she forbids the importation of foreign cloth from A.A, in return, forbids silks from X.Then the silk-workers complain of a decay of trade.And X, to content them, forbids silks from B.B, in return, forbids iron ware from X.Then the iron-workers complain of decay.And X forbids the importation of iron from C.C, in return, forbids cloth from X.What is got by all these prohibitions?Answer.—All four find their common stock of the enjoyments and conveniences of life diminished."
[i-232]Writings, II, 313 (July 16, 1747). See alsoNote Respecting Trade and Manufactures, London, July 7, 1767 (Sparks, II, 366):
"Suppose a country, X, with three manufactures, ascloth,silk,iron, supplying three other countries. A, B, C, but is desirous of increasing the vent, and raising the price of cloth in favor of her own clothiers.In order to do this, she forbids the importation of foreign cloth from A.A, in return, forbids silks from X.Then the silk-workers complain of a decay of trade.And X, to content them, forbids silks from B.B, in return, forbids iron ware from X.Then the iron-workers complain of decay.And X forbids the importation of iron from C.C, in return, forbids cloth from X.What is got by all these prohibitions?Answer.—All four find their common stock of the enjoyments and conveniences of life diminished."
"Suppose a country, X, with three manufactures, ascloth,silk,iron, supplying three other countries. A, B, C, but is desirous of increasing the vent, and raising the price of cloth in favor of her own clothiers.
In order to do this, she forbids the importation of foreign cloth from A.
A, in return, forbids silks from X.
Then the silk-workers complain of a decay of trade.
And X, to content them, forbids silks from B.
B, in return, forbids iron ware from X.
Then the iron-workers complain of decay.
And X forbids the importation of iron from C.
C, in return, forbids cloth from X.
What is got by all these prohibitions?
Answer.—All four find their common stock of the enjoyments and conveniences of life diminished."
[i-233]Writings, IV, 469-70.
[i-233]Writings, IV, 469-70.
[i-234]Ibid., V, 155.
[i-234]Ibid., V, 155.
[i-235]Passy, May 27, 1779 (Writings, VII, 332).
[i-235]Passy, May 27, 1779 (Writings, VII, 332).
[i-236]Ibid., IV, 242-5 (April 30, 1764). As Mr. Carey notes. Franklin in several places.On the Labouring Poorand in a letter (IX, 240-8), suggests that private vices—demands for luxuries—make public benefits, hence resembling, if not ultimately derived from, Mandeville'sFable of the Bees. Franklin's sanction of free trade is, however, antithetical to Mandeville's 'dog eat dog' basis. (See Kaye's Intro. toThe Fable of the Bees, xcviii ff.) Franklin in no uncertain terms looks upon trade restrictions definitely as the result of "the abominable selfishness" of men (VII, 332). As long as selfishness is the rule, mercantilism, not economic laissez faire, will be king. It is theoretically probable also that belief in man's innate altruism could furnish emotional if not logical sanction for laissez faire—but this abstraction is in Franklin's case futile, since like Swift he was not blind to man's malevolence!
[i-236]Ibid., IV, 242-5 (April 30, 1764). As Mr. Carey notes. Franklin in several places.On the Labouring Poorand in a letter (IX, 240-8), suggests that private vices—demands for luxuries—make public benefits, hence resembling, if not ultimately derived from, Mandeville'sFable of the Bees. Franklin's sanction of free trade is, however, antithetical to Mandeville's 'dog eat dog' basis. (See Kaye's Intro. toThe Fable of the Bees, xcviii ff.) Franklin in no uncertain terms looks upon trade restrictions definitely as the result of "the abominable selfishness" of men (VII, 332). As long as selfishness is the rule, mercantilism, not economic laissez faire, will be king. It is theoretically probable also that belief in man's innate altruism could furnish emotional if not logical sanction for laissez faire—but this abstraction is in Franklin's case futile, since like Swift he was not blind to man's malevolence!
[i-237]Writings, IV, 245; see alsoibid., VIII, 107-8, 261, 19.
[i-237]Writings, IV, 245; see alsoibid., VIII, 107-8, 261, 19.
[i-238]Ibid., IX, 41; also 63, 578, 588.
[i-238]Ibid., IX, 41; also 63, 578, 588.
[i-239]Cited in Carey,op. cit., 160-1.
[i-239]Cited in Carey,op. cit., 160-1.
[i-240]See Gide and Rist,op. cit., 7 note.
[i-240]See Gide and Rist,op. cit., 7 note.
[i-241]Ibid., 7 note.
[i-241]Ibid., 7 note.
[i-242]Ibid.
[i-242]Ibid.
[i-243]Mercier de la Rivière, cited inibid., 8 note.
[i-243]Mercier de la Rivière, cited inibid., 8 note.
[i-244]Ibid., 9-10.
[i-244]Ibid., 9-10.
[i-245]"Economics and the Idea of Natural Law,"Quarterly Journal of Economics, XLIV, 16 (1929). See also O. H. Taylor's valuable dissertation, "The Idea of a 'Natural Order' in Early Modern Economic Thought," summarized in Harvard UniversitySummaries of Theses, 1928, 102-6, and available in manuscript at the Harvard University Library.
[i-245]"Economics and the Idea of Natural Law,"Quarterly Journal of Economics, XLIV, 16 (1929). See also O. H. Taylor's valuable dissertation, "The Idea of a 'Natural Order' in Early Modern Economic Thought," summarized in Harvard UniversitySummaries of Theses, 1928, 102-6, and available in manuscript at the Harvard University Library.
[i-246]Taylor, "Economics and the Idea of Natural Law,"loc. cit., 16.
[i-246]Taylor, "Economics and the Idea of Natural Law,"loc. cit., 16.
[i-247]Even this fragmentary view of the more obvious economic principles held by Franklin offers convincing evidence that had he been less incidentally an economist he would have been at least a lesser Adam Smith. Mr. Wetzel, inBenjamin Franklin as an Economist, offers a convenient summary of Franklin as an economist, some items suggesting aspects of his views which, had space permitted, we should have included in this study: "1. Money as coin may have a value higher than its bullion value. 2. Natural interest is determined by the rent of so much land as the money loaned will buy. 3. High wages are not inconsistent with a large foreign trade. 4. Population will increase as the means of gaining a living increase. 5. A high standard of living serves to prolong single life, and thus acts as a check upon the increase of population. 6. People are adjusted among the different countries according to the comparative well-being of mankind. 7. The value of an article is determined by the amount of labor necessary to produce the food consumed in making the article. 8. While manufactures are advantageous, only agriculture is truly productive. 9. Manufactures will naturally spring up in a country as the country becomes ripe for them. 10. Free trade with the world will give the greatest return at the least expense. 11. Wherever practicable, State revenue should be raised by direct taxes."
[i-247]Even this fragmentary view of the more obvious economic principles held by Franklin offers convincing evidence that had he been less incidentally an economist he would have been at least a lesser Adam Smith. Mr. Wetzel, inBenjamin Franklin as an Economist, offers a convenient summary of Franklin as an economist, some items suggesting aspects of his views which, had space permitted, we should have included in this study: "1. Money as coin may have a value higher than its bullion value. 2. Natural interest is determined by the rent of so much land as the money loaned will buy. 3. High wages are not inconsistent with a large foreign trade. 4. Population will increase as the means of gaining a living increase. 5. A high standard of living serves to prolong single life, and thus acts as a check upon the increase of population. 6. People are adjusted among the different countries according to the comparative well-being of mankind. 7. The value of an article is determined by the amount of labor necessary to produce the food consumed in making the article. 8. While manufactures are advantageous, only agriculture is truly productive. 9. Manufactures will naturally spring up in a country as the country becomes ripe for them. 10. Free trade with the world will give the greatest return at the least expense. 11. Wherever practicable, State revenue should be raised by direct taxes."
[i-248]Writings, II, 110.
[i-248]Writings, II, 110.
[i-249]Ibid., II, 295. In 1736 Franklin wrote: "Faction, if not timely suppressed, may overturn the balance, the palladium of liberty, and crush us under its ruins" (cited in R. G. Gettell,History of American Political Thought, 149).
[i-249]Ibid., II, 295. In 1736 Franklin wrote: "Faction, if not timely suppressed, may overturn the balance, the palladium of liberty, and crush us under its ruins" (cited in R. G. Gettell,History of American Political Thought, 149).
[i-250]W. R. Shepherd,History of Proprietary Government in Pennsylvania(New York, 1896), 5.
[i-250]W. R. Shepherd,History of Proprietary Government in Pennsylvania(New York, 1896), 5.
[i-251]Writings, II, 351.
[i-251]Writings, II, 351.
[i-252]Ibid.
[i-252]Ibid.
[i-253]Ibid., II, 352.
[i-253]Ibid., II, 352.
[i-254]Ibid., II, 347.
[i-254]Ibid., II, 347.
[i-255]Shepherd,op. cit., 222. In 1764 Penn thought that Franklin was one "who may lose the government of a post office by grasping at that of a province" (ibid., 564). In turn one of the proprietors wrote to him: "Franklin is certainly destined to be our plague" (ibid., 566). Penn professed not to fear "your mighty Goliath." For proof that Franklin's fear expressed inPlain Truthwas not idle seeExtracts from Chief Justice William Allen's Letter Book, 17, 22-3, 25, 31-2.
[i-255]Shepherd,op. cit., 222. In 1764 Penn thought that Franklin was one "who may lose the government of a post office by grasping at that of a province" (ibid., 564). In turn one of the proprietors wrote to him: "Franklin is certainly destined to be our plague" (ibid., 566). Penn professed not to fear "your mighty Goliath." For proof that Franklin's fear expressed inPlain Truthwas not idle seeExtracts from Chief Justice William Allen's Letter Book, 17, 22-3, 25, 31-2.
[i-256]Plain Truthinspirited the colonists to defend themselves, even if it failed in its larger purpose; seeWritings, II, 354, 362.
[i-256]Plain Truthinspirited the colonists to defend themselves, even if it failed in its larger purpose; seeWritings, II, 354, 362.
[i-257]To James Parker, March 20, 1750/51 (Writings, III, 40-5). L. C. Wroth, inAn American Bookshelf, 1755 (Philadelphia, 1934), 12 ff., reviews A. Kennedy'sThe Importance of Gaining the Friendship of the Indians to the British Interest(1751), to which was appended a letter, prefiguring the Albany Plan of Union. This letter, Mr. Wroth observes, was by Franklin. C. E. Merriam states that "The storm centre of the democratic movement during the colonial period was the conflict between the governors and the colonial legislatures or assemblies" (A History of American Political Theories, 34). Also see E. B. Greene,The Provincial Governor in the English Colonies of North America.
[i-257]To James Parker, March 20, 1750/51 (Writings, III, 40-5). L. C. Wroth, inAn American Bookshelf, 1755 (Philadelphia, 1934), 12 ff., reviews A. Kennedy'sThe Importance of Gaining the Friendship of the Indians to the British Interest(1751), to which was appended a letter, prefiguring the Albany Plan of Union. This letter, Mr. Wroth observes, was by Franklin. C. E. Merriam states that "The storm centre of the democratic movement during the colonial period was the conflict between the governors and the colonial legislatures or assemblies" (A History of American Political Theories, 34). Also see E. B. Greene,The Provincial Governor in the English Colonies of North America.
[i-258]Writings, III, 71.
[i-258]Writings, III, 71.
[i-259]Cited in G. L. Beer,British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, 17.
[i-259]Cited in G. L. Beer,British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, 17.
[i-260]Writings, III, 197.
[i-260]Writings, III, 197.
[i-261]For a suggestive source study see Mrs. L. K. Mathews's "Benjamin Franklin's Plans for a Colonial Union, 1750-1775,"American Political Science Review, VIII, 393-412 (Aug., 1914).
[i-261]For a suggestive source study see Mrs. L. K. Mathews's "Benjamin Franklin's Plans for a Colonial Union, 1750-1775,"American Political Science Review, VIII, 393-412 (Aug., 1914).
[i-262]Cited in Beer,op. cit., 49.
[i-262]Cited in Beer,op. cit., 49.
[i-263]Writings, III, 242.
[i-263]Writings, III, 242.
[i-264]Ibid., III, 226. As Beer has pointed out (op. cit., 23 note), since the plan was not ratified, it never went before the Crown; hence Franklin's retrospective glance is misleading: "The Crown disapproved it, as having placed too much Weight in the Democratic Part of the Constitution; and every Assembly as having allowed too much to Prerogative. So it was totally rejected" (Writings, III, 227).
[i-264]Ibid., III, 226. As Beer has pointed out (op. cit., 23 note), since the plan was not ratified, it never went before the Crown; hence Franklin's retrospective glance is misleading: "The Crown disapproved it, as having placed too much Weight in the Democratic Part of the Constitution; and every Assembly as having allowed too much to Prerogative. So it was totally rejected" (Writings, III, 227).
[i-265]Ibid., III, 233.
[i-265]Ibid., III, 233.
[i-266]To Peter Collinson, Nov. 22, 1756 (Writings, III, 351).
[i-266]To Peter Collinson, Nov. 22, 1756 (Writings, III, 351).
[i-267]As A. H. Smyth says, this was probablyinspiredby Franklin although not written by him; at any rate "it undoubtedly reflects" his opinions (III, vi). Isaac Sharpless observes that Franklin "had sympathy with their [Quakers'] demands for political freedom, but none for their non-military spirit" (Political Leaders of Provincial Pennsylvania, New York, 1919, 178).
[i-267]As A. H. Smyth says, this was probablyinspiredby Franklin although not written by him; at any rate "it undoubtedly reflects" his opinions (III, vi). Isaac Sharpless observes that Franklin "had sympathy with their [Quakers'] demands for political freedom, but none for their non-military spirit" (Political Leaders of Provincial Pennsylvania, New York, 1919, 178).
[i-268]Writings, III, 372.
[i-268]Writings, III, 372.
[i-269]A. Bradford,Memoir of the Life and Writings of Rev. J. Mayhew(Boston, 1838), 119.
[i-269]A. Bradford,Memoir of the Life and Writings of Rev. J. Mayhew(Boston, 1838), 119.
[i-270]See for capable studies: B. F. Wright,American Interpretations of Natural Law; C. F. Mullett,Fundamental Law and the American Revolution; D. G. Ritchie,Natural Rights(London, 1895), and his "Contributions to the History of the Social Contract Theory,"Political Science Quarterly, VI, 656-76 (1891); C. Becker,The Declaration of Independence, chap. II; C. E. Merriam,op. cit., chap. II; H. J. Laski,Political Thought in England from Locke to Bentham(New York, 1920).
[i-270]See for capable studies: B. F. Wright,American Interpretations of Natural Law; C. F. Mullett,Fundamental Law and the American Revolution; D. G. Ritchie,Natural Rights(London, 1895), and his "Contributions to the History of the Social Contract Theory,"Political Science Quarterly, VI, 656-76 (1891); C. Becker,The Declaration of Independence, chap. II; C. E. Merriam,op. cit., chap. II; H. J. Laski,Political Thought in England from Locke to Bentham(New York, 1920).
[i-271]Becker,op. cit., 24.
[i-271]Becker,op. cit., 24.
[i-272]Ibid., 27.
[i-272]Ibid., 27.
[i-273]Burke said that nearly as many copies of this work were sold in the colonies as in Great Britain. It will be remembered that Hamilton leaned heavily on Blackstone inThe Farmer Refuted(1773).
[i-273]Burke said that nearly as many copies of this work were sold in the colonies as in Great Britain. It will be remembered that Hamilton leaned heavily on Blackstone inThe Farmer Refuted(1773).
[i-274]Cited in Wright,op. cit., 11.
[i-274]Cited in Wright,op. cit., 11.
[i-275]The Farmer Refuted.For discussion of changes in Hamilton's political theory see F. C. Prescott's Introduction toHamilton and Jefferson(American Writers Series, New York, 1934).
[i-275]The Farmer Refuted.For discussion of changes in Hamilton's political theory see F. C. Prescott's Introduction toHamilton and Jefferson(American Writers Series, New York, 1934).
[i-276]Franklin acknowledges his close reading of Locke'sEssay Concerning Human Understanding(Writings, I, 243). In 1749 he urges that Locke be read in the Philadelphia Academy (II, 387) and refers again to the great logician inIdea of the English School(III, 28). He is supposed to have defended in spirited debate Locke's treatise on Toleration (I, 179). The catalogues of the Philadelphia Library Company disclose that by 1757 all of Locke's works had been obtained. One may ask how an alert eighteenth-century mind could have escaped the impact of Locke's thought.It is more difficult to establish satisfactorily a nexus between Rousseau's and Franklin's minds. Mr. George Simpson Eddy has kindly allowed us to consult his "Catalogue of Pamphlets, Once a Part of the Library of Benjamin Franklin, and now owned by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania" in which are included Rousseau'sPreface de la Nouvelle Hélöise ...(1761) andDiscours sur l'économie politique ...(1760). Even if Rousseau's mistress, Countess d'Houdetot, feted Franklin in 1781, and Franklin was acquainted with Rousseau's physician, Achille-Guillaume le Bègue de Presle, and directly in 1785 mentions Rousseau on child-education (Writings, IX, 334), one can not be sure to what extent Rousseau's writings may have aided Franklin in formulating notions similar to the social contract theory (IX, 138).
[i-276]Franklin acknowledges his close reading of Locke'sEssay Concerning Human Understanding(Writings, I, 243). In 1749 he urges that Locke be read in the Philadelphia Academy (II, 387) and refers again to the great logician inIdea of the English School(III, 28). He is supposed to have defended in spirited debate Locke's treatise on Toleration (I, 179). The catalogues of the Philadelphia Library Company disclose that by 1757 all of Locke's works had been obtained. One may ask how an alert eighteenth-century mind could have escaped the impact of Locke's thought.
It is more difficult to establish satisfactorily a nexus between Rousseau's and Franklin's minds. Mr. George Simpson Eddy has kindly allowed us to consult his "Catalogue of Pamphlets, Once a Part of the Library of Benjamin Franklin, and now owned by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania" in which are included Rousseau'sPreface de la Nouvelle Hélöise ...(1761) andDiscours sur l'économie politique ...(1760). Even if Rousseau's mistress, Countess d'Houdetot, feted Franklin in 1781, and Franklin was acquainted with Rousseau's physician, Achille-Guillaume le Bègue de Presle, and directly in 1785 mentions Rousseau on child-education (Writings, IX, 334), one can not be sure to what extent Rousseau's writings may have aided Franklin in formulating notions similar to the social contract theory (IX, 138).
[i-277]Cited in A. M. Baldwin,The New England Clergy and the American Revolution, 6.
[i-277]Cited in A. M. Baldwin,The New England Clergy and the American Revolution, 6.
[i-278]Ibid., xii. See also C. H. Van Tyne's able study, "The Influence of the Clergy, and of Religious and Sectarian Forces, on the American Revolution,"American Historical Review, XIX, 44-64 (Oct., 1913). He takes issue with the economic determinists and concludes that of all the causes of the Revolution, religious causes are "among the most important" (p. 64). The Revolution was in large measure caused by a conflict of political ideas, and these were disseminated mostly by the clergy.
[i-278]Ibid., xii. See also C. H. Van Tyne's able study, "The Influence of the Clergy, and of Religious and Sectarian Forces, on the American Revolution,"American Historical Review, XIX, 44-64 (Oct., 1913). He takes issue with the economic determinists and concludes that of all the causes of the Revolution, religious causes are "among the most important" (p. 64). The Revolution was in large measure caused by a conflict of political ideas, and these were disseminated mostly by the clergy.
[i-279]An Oration, Delivered March 5, 1773(Boston, 1773), 6.
[i-279]An Oration, Delivered March 5, 1773(Boston, 1773), 6.
[i-280]Ibid., 10-11.
[i-280]Ibid., 10-11.
[i-281]Ibid., 8. Also see S. Stillman,Election-Sermon, May 26, 1779 (Boston, 1779); J. Clarke,Election-Sermon, May 30, 1781 (Boston, 1781).
[i-281]Ibid., 8. Also see S. Stillman,Election-Sermon, May 26, 1779 (Boston, 1779); J. Clarke,Election-Sermon, May 30, 1781 (Boston, 1781).
[i-282]Although Franklin denied having written it (Writings, IV, 82), Mr. Ford (Franklin Bibliography, III) asserts that "this work must still be treated as from Franklin's pen." He sent 500 copies to Pennsylvania consigned to his partner, David Hall, for distribution.
[i-282]Although Franklin denied having written it (Writings, IV, 82), Mr. Ford (Franklin Bibliography, III) asserts that "this work must still be treated as from Franklin's pen." He sent 500 copies to Pennsylvania consigned to his partner, David Hall, for distribution.
[i-283]To Joseph Galloway, April 11, 1757 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection). For a description of the unpublished Franklin-Galloway correspondence see W. S. Mason's article inProceedings of the American Antiquarian Societyfor Oct., 1924.
[i-283]To Joseph Galloway, April 11, 1757 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection). For a description of the unpublished Franklin-Galloway correspondence see W. S. Mason's article inProceedings of the American Antiquarian Societyfor Oct., 1924.
[i-284]To Joseph Galloway, Feb. 17, 1758 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection).
[i-284]To Joseph Galloway, Feb. 17, 1758 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection).
[i-285]June 10, 1758 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection).
[i-285]June 10, 1758 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection).
[i-286]April 7, 1759 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection).
[i-286]April 7, 1759 (unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection).
[i-287]The Works of Benjamin Franklin(Philadelphia, 1809), II, 147.
[i-287]The Works of Benjamin Franklin(Philadelphia, 1809), II, 147.
[i-288]Ibid., II, 7.
[i-288]Ibid., II, 7.
[i-289]Ibid., II, 1.
[i-289]Ibid., II, 1.
[i-290]Ibid., II, vii.
[i-290]Ibid., II, vii.
[i-291]Ibid., II, xvi.
[i-291]Ibid., II, xvi.
[i-292]Apropos of many colonial ferments, not unlike the one we have considered above, Carl Becker writes: "Throughout the eighteenth century, little colonial aristocracies played their part, in imagination clothing their governor in the decaying vesture of Old-World tyrants and themselves assuming the homespun garb, half Roman and half Puritan, of a virtuous republicanism.... It was the illusion of sharing in great events rather than any low mercenary motive that made Americans guard with jealous care their legislative independence" (The Eve of the Revolution, New Haven, 1918, 60). Also see C. H. Lincoln,The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania, 1760-1776.
[i-292]Apropos of many colonial ferments, not unlike the one we have considered above, Carl Becker writes: "Throughout the eighteenth century, little colonial aristocracies played their part, in imagination clothing their governor in the decaying vesture of Old-World tyrants and themselves assuming the homespun garb, half Roman and half Puritan, of a virtuous republicanism.... It was the illusion of sharing in great events rather than any low mercenary motive that made Americans guard with jealous care their legislative independence" (The Eve of the Revolution, New Haven, 1918, 60). Also see C. H. Lincoln,The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania, 1760-1776.
[i-293]Writings, III, 408-9.
[i-293]Writings, III, 408-9.
[i-294]Ibid., III, 457.
[i-294]Ibid., III, 457.
[i-295]V. W. Crane, "Certain Writings of Benjamin Franklin on the British Empire and the American Colonies,"Papers of the Bibliographical Society, XXVIII, Pt. 1, 6 (1934). Also see W. L. Grant, "Canada vs. Guadaloupe,"American Historical Review, XVII, 735-43, (Oct., 1911-July, 1912).
[i-295]V. W. Crane, "Certain Writings of Benjamin Franklin on the British Empire and the American Colonies,"Papers of the Bibliographical Society, XXVIII, Pt. 1, 6 (1934). Also see W. L. Grant, "Canada vs. Guadaloupe,"American Historical Review, XVII, 735-43, (Oct., 1911-July, 1912).
[i-296]Beer,op. cit., 313.
[i-296]Beer,op. cit., 313.
[i-297]Writings, IV, 224.
[i-297]Writings, IV, 224.
[i-298]Ibid., IV, 229.
[i-298]Ibid., IV, 229.
[i-299]The massacre led by the "Paxton boys."
[i-299]The massacre led by the "Paxton boys."
[i-300]Writings, IV, 314.
[i-300]Writings, IV, 314.
[i-301]Writings, IV, 418.
[i-301]Writings, IV, 418.
[i-302]Ibid., IV, 419. See Beer,op. cit., 294 f.
[i-302]Ibid., IV, 419. See Beer,op. cit., 294 f.
[i-303]A History of American Political Theories, 46.
[i-303]A History of American Political Theories, 46.
[i-304]Writings, IV, 445-6.
[i-304]Writings, IV, 445-6.
[i-305]To Joseph Galloway, May 20, 1767 (photostat of unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection; original in W. L. Clements Library).
[i-305]To Joseph Galloway, May 20, 1767 (photostat of unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection; original in W. L. Clements Library).
[i-306]To Joseph Galloway, Aug. 20, 1768 (photostat of unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection; original in W. L. Clements Library).
[i-306]To Joseph Galloway, Aug. 20, 1768 (photostat of unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection; original in W. L. Clements Library).
[i-307]To Joseph Galloway, April 14, 1767 (photostat of unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection; original in W. L. Clements Library). Cf. also letter to the same, Jan. 11, 1770,ibid.
[i-307]To Joseph Galloway, April 14, 1767 (photostat of unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection; original in W. L. Clements Library). Cf. also letter to the same, Jan. 11, 1770,ibid.
[i-308]See, for example,An Edict by the King of Prussia(1773)—for its effect seeWritings, VI, 146—andRules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One(1773). Crane,op. cit., concludes that Franklin appears as "the chief agent of the American propaganda in England, especially between 1765 and 1770" (p. 26). For treatment of American propagandists see P. G. Davidson, "Whig Propagandists of the American Revolution,"American Historical Review, XXXIX, 442-53 (April, 1934), and hisRevolutionary Propagandists in New England, New York and Pennsylvania, 1763-1776(unpublished dissertation, University of Chicago, 1929); summarized inAbstracts of Theses, Humanistic Series VII, 239-42; F. J. Hinkhouse,The Preliminaries of the American Revolution as Seen in the English Press(New York, 1926).
[i-308]See, for example,An Edict by the King of Prussia(1773)—for its effect seeWritings, VI, 146—andRules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One(1773). Crane,op. cit., concludes that Franklin appears as "the chief agent of the American propaganda in England, especially between 1765 and 1770" (p. 26). For treatment of American propagandists see P. G. Davidson, "Whig Propagandists of the American Revolution,"American Historical Review, XXXIX, 442-53 (April, 1934), and hisRevolutionary Propagandists in New England, New York and Pennsylvania, 1763-1776(unpublished dissertation, University of Chicago, 1929); summarized inAbstracts of Theses, Humanistic Series VII, 239-42; F. J. Hinkhouse,The Preliminaries of the American Revolution as Seen in the English Press(New York, 1926).
[i-309]Writings, V, 297.
[i-309]Writings, V, 297.
[i-310]See R. G. Adams,Political Ideas of the American Revolution, 35, 62-3.
[i-310]See R. G. Adams,Political Ideas of the American Revolution, 35, 62-3.
[i-311]Oct. 2, 1770 (Writings, V, 280). See alsoCauses of the American Discontents before 1768(V, 78 f., 160-2). An aspect of his loyalty to the crown may be seen in his hatred of French desire to separate the colonies from England (V, 47, 231, 254, 323). The printing of theExaminationand other of Franklin's pieces in Europe buttressed the predisposition of France to hate Great Britain (V, 231). The best comprehensive treatment of backgrounds is C. H. Van Tyne'sThe Causes of the War of Independence.
[i-311]Oct. 2, 1770 (Writings, V, 280). See alsoCauses of the American Discontents before 1768(V, 78 f., 160-2). An aspect of his loyalty to the crown may be seen in his hatred of French desire to separate the colonies from England (V, 47, 231, 254, 323). The printing of theExaminationand other of Franklin's pieces in Europe buttressed the predisposition of France to hate Great Britain (V, 231). The best comprehensive treatment of backgrounds is C. H. Van Tyne'sThe Causes of the War of Independence.
[i-312]Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, XXV, 311 (1901). See alsoibid., 307-22, and XXVI, 81-90, 255-64 (1902). SeeWritings, VI, 144.
[i-312]Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, XXV, 311 (1901). See alsoibid., 307-22, and XXVI, 81-90, 255-64 (1902). SeeWritings, VI, 144.
[i-313]Writings, VI, 173.
[i-313]Writings, VI, 173.
[i-314]Ibid., VI, 319. His unpublished letters of 1775 in the Original Correspondence of Benjamin Franklin with the Bishop of St. Asaph (in the W. S. Mason Collection) emphasize his progressive apathy toward a reconciliation. Especially see letters of May 15 and July 7.
[i-314]Ibid., VI, 319. His unpublished letters of 1775 in the Original Correspondence of Benjamin Franklin with the Bishop of St. Asaph (in the W. S. Mason Collection) emphasize his progressive apathy toward a reconciliation. Especially see letters of May 15 and July 7.
[i-315]Ibid., VI, 460.
[i-315]Ibid., VI, 460.
[i-316]Cited in Davidson,op. cit., 442.
[i-316]Cited in Davidson,op. cit., 442.
[i-317]Hugh Williamson claimed that he actually gave Franklin the letters. Apparently another person went to the office where the letters were archived and posing as an authorized person secured the desired correspondence (D. Hosack,Biographical Memoir of Hugh Williamson, New York, 1820, 37 ff.).
[i-317]Hugh Williamson claimed that he actually gave Franklin the letters. Apparently another person went to the office where the letters were archived and posing as an authorized person secured the desired correspondence (D. Hosack,Biographical Memoir of Hugh Williamson, New York, 1820, 37 ff.).
[i-318]For an interesting account of this episode see Parton,op. cit., 1, chap. IX.
[i-318]For an interesting account of this episode see Parton,op. cit., 1, chap. IX.
[i-319]Writings, V, 134. Franklin and Burke were friendly; see their correspondence. The best exposition of Burke's doctrines is that by John MacCunn,The Political Philosophy of Edmund Burke(London, 1913).
[i-319]Writings, V, 134. Franklin and Burke were friendly; see their correspondence. The best exposition of Burke's doctrines is that by John MacCunn,The Political Philosophy of Edmund Burke(London, 1913).
[i-320]Ibid., V, 439; see also 527.
[i-320]Ibid., V, 439; see also 527.
[i-321]London, April 20, 1771; unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection. Compare with Abbé Raynal's opinion that "society is essentially good; government, as is well known, may be, and is but too often evil" (The Revolution of America, Dublin, 1781, 45).
[i-321]London, April 20, 1771; unpublished MS letter in W. S. Mason Collection. Compare with Abbé Raynal's opinion that "society is essentially good; government, as is well known, may be, and is but too often evil" (The Revolution of America, Dublin, 1781, 45).
[i-322]M. Eiselen (Franklin's Political Theories, Garden City, N. Y., 1928) observes that Franklin as presiding officer had actually little to do with casting the instrument. From his later paper on the Constitution it is possible, however, to see that he accepted most of its major ideas (pp. 57-8). See S. B. Harding, "Party Struggles over the First Pennsylvania Constitution,"Annual Report of the American Historical Association for 1894, 371-402.
[i-322]M. Eiselen (Franklin's Political Theories, Garden City, N. Y., 1928) observes that Franklin as presiding officer had actually little to do with casting the instrument. From his later paper on the Constitution it is possible, however, to see that he accepted most of its major ideas (pp. 57-8). See S. B. Harding, "Party Struggles over the First Pennsylvania Constitution,"Annual Report of the American Historical Association for 1894, 371-402.
[i-323]That Franklin "had more to do with the phraseology of the Declaration of Independence than has been recognized up to now" (J. C. Fitzpatrick,Spirit of the Revolution, Boston, 1924, 11) has been shown by Becker,op. cit.
[i-323]That Franklin "had more to do with the phraseology of the Declaration of Independence than has been recognized up to now" (J. C. Fitzpatrick,Spirit of the Revolution, Boston, 1924, 11) has been shown by Becker,op. cit.
[i-324]See text in S. E. Morison,Sources and Documents Illustrating the American Revolution, 1764-1788, and the Formation of the Federal Constitution(Oxford, 1923, 162-76).
[i-324]See text in S. E. Morison,Sources and Documents Illustrating the American Revolution, 1764-1788, and the Formation of the Federal Constitution(Oxford, 1923, 162-76).
[i-325]C. H. Lincoln,The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania, 1760-1776, 277.
[i-325]C. H. Lincoln,The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania, 1760-1776, 277.
[i-326]Cited in N. G. Goodman,Benjamin Rush(Philadelphia, 1934), 62. Another wrote that the unicameral form is good "if men were wise and virtuous as angels" (Lincoln,op. cit., 282; see also 283). The American Philosophical Society, of which Franklin was president, declared against it.
[i-326]Cited in N. G. Goodman,Benjamin Rush(Philadelphia, 1934), 62. Another wrote that the unicameral form is good "if men were wise and virtuous as angels" (Lincoln,op. cit., 282; see also 283). The American Philosophical Society, of which Franklin was president, declared against it.
[i-327]T. F. Moran,The Rise and Development of the Bicameral System in America(Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, 13th ser., V [Baltimore, 1895]), 42. The legislative Council (upper chamber) had been destroyed by the 1701 constitution. See B. A. Konkle,George Bryan and the Constitution of Pennsylvania(Philadelphia, 1922), 114. P. L. Ford ("The Adoption of the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776,"Political Science Quarterly, X, Sept., 1895, 426-59) observes: "The one-chamber legislature and the annual election were hardly the work of the Convention, for they were merely transferred from the Penn Charter; having yielded such admirable results in the past, it is not strange that they were grafted into the new instrument" (p. 454).
[i-327]T. F. Moran,The Rise and Development of the Bicameral System in America(Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, 13th ser., V [Baltimore, 1895]), 42. The legislative Council (upper chamber) had been destroyed by the 1701 constitution. See B. A. Konkle,George Bryan and the Constitution of Pennsylvania(Philadelphia, 1922), 114. P. L. Ford ("The Adoption of the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776,"Political Science Quarterly, X, Sept., 1895, 426-59) observes: "The one-chamber legislature and the annual election were hardly the work of the Convention, for they were merely transferred from the Penn Charter; having yielded such admirable results in the past, it is not strange that they were grafted into the new instrument" (p. 454).
[i-328]Defending (in 1789) the Pennsylvania constitution, Franklin wrote, "Have we not experienced in this Colony, when a Province under the Government of the Proprietors, the Mischiefs of a second Branch existing in the Proprietary Family, countenanced and aided by an Aristocratic Council?" (Writings, X, 56.)
[i-328]Defending (in 1789) the Pennsylvania constitution, Franklin wrote, "Have we not experienced in this Colony, when a Province under the Government of the Proprietors, the Mischiefs of a second Branch existing in the Proprietary Family, countenanced and aided by an Aristocratic Council?" (Writings, X, 56.)
[i-329]In 1775 he submitted to the Second Continental Congress hisArticles of Confederation(Writings, VI, 420-6) which called for a "firm League of Friendship" motivated by a unicameral assembly and a plural executive, a Council of twelve. It was democratic also in its "basing representation upon population instead of financial support" (Eiselen,op. cit., 54).
[i-329]In 1775 he submitted to the Second Continental Congress hisArticles of Confederation(Writings, VI, 420-6) which called for a "firm League of Friendship" motivated by a unicameral assembly and a plural executive, a Council of twelve. It was democratic also in its "basing representation upon population instead of financial support" (Eiselen,op. cit., 54).
[i-330]Writings, VII, 48.
[i-330]Writings, VII, 48.
[i-331]Ibid., VII, 23. No dull sidelight on the quality of Franklin's radicalism during this period is the fact that he brought Thomas Paine to the colonies and was partly responsible for the writing ofCommon Sense. It is alleged that Franklin considered Paine "his adopted political son" (cited in M. D. Conway'sLife of Thomas Paine, 3d ed., New York, 1893, II, 468). For explication of Paine's political theories see C. E. Merriam, "Political Theories of Thomas Paine,"Political Science Quarterly, XIV, 389-403.
[i-331]Ibid., VII, 23. No dull sidelight on the quality of Franklin's radicalism during this period is the fact that he brought Thomas Paine to the colonies and was partly responsible for the writing ofCommon Sense. It is alleged that Franklin considered Paine "his adopted political son" (cited in M. D. Conway'sLife of Thomas Paine, 3d ed., New York, 1893, II, 468). For explication of Paine's political theories see C. E. Merriam, "Political Theories of Thomas Paine,"Political Science Quarterly, XIV, 389-403.
[i-332]Hale and Hale,op. cit., I, 70; see also 75.
[i-332]Hale and Hale,op. cit., I, 70; see also 75.
[i-333]Ibid., I, 32.
[i-333]Ibid., I, 32.
[i-334]Cited in J. B. Perkins,France in the American Revolution, 140.
[i-334]Cited in J. B. Perkins,France in the American Revolution, 140.
[i-335]Ibid., 127.
[i-335]Ibid., 127.
[i-336]See D. J. Hill, "A Missing Chapter of Franco-American History,"American Historical Review, XXI, 709-19, (July, 1916).
[i-336]See D. J. Hill, "A Missing Chapter of Franco-American History,"American Historical Review, XXI, 709-19, (July, 1916).
[i-337]Ibid., 710.
[i-337]Ibid., 710.
[i-338]Writings, IX, 132. The Due de la Rochefoucauld translated them into French (IX, 71). Franklin thought they would induce emigration to the colonies. See the scores of requests (on the part of notable Frenchmen) and thanks for copies of the constitutions of the United States listed inCalendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin in the Library of the American Philosophical Society.
[i-338]Writings, IX, 132. The Due de la Rochefoucauld translated them into French (IX, 71). Franklin thought they would induce emigration to the colonies. See the scores of requests (on the part of notable Frenchmen) and thanks for copies of the constitutions of the United States listed inCalendar of the Papers of Benjamin Franklin in the Library of the American Philosophical Society.
[i-339]J. S. Schapiro,Condorcet and the Rise of Liberalism, 79-81 andpassim.
[i-339]J. S. Schapiro,Condorcet and the Rise of Liberalism, 79-81 andpassim.