University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Influence of Benjamin Franklin on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

(USC Thesis Other)

Influence of Benjamin Franklin on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content IrôLUEÎTCE OP BEHJAMIH PRAÎOOLIÎT ON THE
FRAMING .AND ADOPTION OF
THE CONSTITUTION
b ï .
A Thesis
Presented to the Department of History
University of Southern California
In partial fulfillment
of the
Requirements for the
Degree of Master of Arts
By
Edith R. Sheridan
May 1931
UMI Number: EP59134
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduetion is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a eomplete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
OîsswtâtioM PüblisMng
UMI EP59134
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
This thesis, having been approved by the
special Faculty Committee, is accepted by the
Council on Graduate Study and Research
of the University of Southern C alifornia,
in p artial fulfillm en t of the requirements
fo r the degree of ......
3ùû
ho, I
fi Ù %
Secretary
D ean
D a te Jime 1951
Conunittee;
F.H. Garver, Chairman
U.C. Coy
B.A. hay ne r
COÎTTEMTS
CHAPTER Page
INTRODUCTION
I. CAREER OP BENJAMIN PRANKLIN............. 1
A. Early Life...... ;......... 1
B. Public Activities in Philadelphia ....... 3
C. Early Political Activities ............... 5
D. Colonial Agent to England ................ 8
E. Member of Continental Congress .......... 13
P. Commissioner to Prance .................. 16
II. PRANKLIN’S GENERAL ACTIVITIES IN THE PEDERAL CONVENE
TION ......................... 21
A. Attendance ....................... 22
B. Part played by Pranklin in the debates of
the Pederal Convention ..... 23
G. Committee Appointments...... 28
D. Party Affiliations .................... 30
III. PROPOSITIONS FAVORED ............. 32
A. General ................................ 32
B. Executive.......... 32
1. Character: single or plural .... 33
2. Manner of choice ............ 38
3. Term of office .................. 43
4. Executive council ............... 45
5. Powers ...... 33
il
Page
6. Impeachment of executive ..... 42
C. National legislature ............ 33
1. General character
a. Number of houses .......... 33
b. Principle of representation. 35
2. The Upper House ............... 36
3. The Lower House........... 38
D. Judiciary.............................. 34
IV. PROPOSITIONS OPPOSED........... 49
V. ESTIMATE AND INFLUENCE............................... 56
A. Activities ............................. 56
B. Direct propositions favored .............. 58
C. Direct propositions opposed .............. 60
D. Influence of his political views ......... 61
E. Personal influence ...................... 62
BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................... 65
INTRODUCTION
The part which Benjamin Franklin played in the drafting
of the American Gonstitntion may perhaps be compared with
that of the fifth wheel in machinery^ that unobtrusive wheel*
so vital in the smooth running of the entire mechanism.
The constitution did not spring full-fledged from the
brains of the **Fathers.** It was the result of many weeks of
sifting, comparing, discussing. They borrowed from many
sources, both ancient and of their own time: from American
and from the other side of the Atlantic; from countries far
removed in time and space. The Articles of Confederation*
first State constitutions, Colonial charters, all contribut
ed their quota of provisions. The old world* Great Britain
in particular, was freely borrowed from. Guidance was sought
from the constitutions for the German Confederation* the
Swiss Cantons, the Italian Republics, and the United Nether
lands. Principles which had long before been tried and test
ed, resulting in success or failure, were again brought to
light. Finally, from out of confusion, emerged the Constitu
tion of the united States of America. A step upward had been
taken in the slow evolution of government.
These framers of the constitution were men of strong per
sonalities; men of convictions* not easily swayed or influenced,
confident of themselves. Among them sat Benjamin Franklin*
diplomat and philosopher. He was eight-one years old at this
IV
time, shrewd and tactful by nature, mellowed by age and ripe
in experience, and with the welfare of his country at heart.
Highly regarded in literary, social, political and scientific
circles of both the old world and the new, he was the graduate
of no àçhool or college, a self-made man in every sense of the
term, holding a diploma only from the University of life.
He did not possess the sound judgment of Washington, the
scholarship of Wilson, the fire and eloquence of Hamilton,nor
the constructive genius of Madison. Some of his political
ideas were fallacious. He opposed several measures which were,
fortunately, finally included in the Constitution. Of the six
motions he made, only two were passed. Of the six he seconded,
only one was carried. But his humor, tact and common sense
saved many a critical situation. If the framers of the consti
tution occasionally shook their fists at one another in heated
controversy, it was Franklin who, in his homely "Poor Richard"
phraseology, reminded them that they were gathered not for
warfare but for peaceful discussion.
He had begun serving his apprenticeship in life years be
fore many members of the convention were bom. He had lived
through not only the Revolution, but the French and Indian
War, as well as early colonial wars. He had been one of the
signers of the Declaration of Independence. His nine years in
France and fourteen years in England had given him knowledge
of the working out of many of the principles under consideration.
For a large portion of his life he had sought peace and union
within the colonial borders; before the birth of the younger
members of the convention he had drafted a plan for the union
of the thirteen colonies. Benjamin Franklin brought to the
convention of 1787 the rare fruits of a vast experience and
a wide knowledge.
But more than his experience was the fact that these
strong and serious men listened to Franklin; they both admired
and respected him, listening to his views when they would have
turned deaf ears to those of others. Physically he had slowed
down; but this, if anything, added to the respect, almost
amounting to reverence, with which he was regarded. His plea
was always for harmony. He not only advised conciliation, but
he was ready himself to conciliate, to drop his own ideas if
essential to the cause of unity. It was Franklin who brought
back the revolting smaller states on the verge of disunion.
It was Franklin who urged the signing of the constitution,
suggesting the form which was followed by the members. This
form was drawn up by Governeur Morris and placed in the hands
of Franklin, "that it might have the better chance of success."
It was Franklin who poured oil upon the frequently troubled
and turgid waters of the convention of 1787.
Not that he by any means approved of all parts of the con
stitution, at the same time admitting that as he was not in
fallible he might change his mind, and citing the case of the
French lady who, in argument with her sister, said, "I don’t
know how it is, sister, but I meet with nobody but myself that
is always in the right." But the cause for which Franklin had
worked so long had in a measure been won. !ffefore he died, his
VI.
almost life-long dream of a strong union was to become reality^
The regard in which he was held outside the convention
was equally as great as within. Had he made no speeches,
offered no advice, attempted no conciliations during the con
vention of 1787, the mere appearance of his name as one of
the drafters of the constitution would have given confidence
to the American colonists. Franklin’s name above others would
have given added respect both in France and England for the
Constitution of the United States. For, says John T. Morse,
Jr., "It may be doubted whether any one man ever had so many,
such constant and such firm friends as in three different
nations formed about him a veritable host."
Benjamin Franklin’s outstanding contribution, then, to
the Convention of 1787 was that of a mediator, a harmoniser.
The very nature of this contribution makes it impossible to
estimate its true value.
This paper will (1) trace Franklin’s career through its
different stages, leading up to his final appearance at the
Philadelphia Convention; (2) outline his general activities
in the Federal Convention, taking up in detail the propositions
which he favored and those which he opposed; (3) endeavor to
make an estimate of the actual work which he accomplished and
of the subtle influence which he exerted in the framing of the
American Constitution.
CHAPTER I
THE CAREER OP BENJAMIN PRANKLIN
Benjamin Pranklin was the first of American diplomats, and
in his simple candor, his intellectual power, ardent patriot
ism, and the desire which dominated his practical service to
humanity, he has for all times set the standards for American
diplomacy.-^
Unlike his contemporaries, John Adams and Thomas Jef
ferson,^ Pranklin has left no carefully reasoned scheme of
politic8,1 philosophy to interpret and to justify the events
of which he was a part.
He reflected the changing aspects of American public
opinion throughout the entire course of the revolutionary
period. In a public cause he did not hesitate to shift his
forces to a more tenable position, and the evidences of his
political generalship are clearly to be seen in his writings.
It has been said many times that Benjamin Pranklin was ver
satile. He was a genius, scientist, and philosopher, busi
ness man, diplomat, humorist, economist and statesman. He
had many outstanding characteristics which promoted his suc
cess in each field. He was industrious, humble, frugal,
temperate, sincere, just, honest, modest in manner, self-
reliant, diligent and a lover of peace and serenity,
Pranklin was born January 17, 1706, in a house on Milk
Street opposite the old South Church, Boston, Massachusetts.
^J. Henry Smythe, The Amazing Benjamin Pranklin, 1.
. 2
He could not remember when he learned to read and write, as
he began his education at home. When he was eight yea,rs old
he was sent to the Boston Grammar School, being destined by
his father for the church as the tithe of his sons. As ed
ucating him for the church was too great for his father’s
small means, at the age of ten he was taken from school to
assist his father in his business of tallow-chandler and
soap-boiler.
In his thirteenth year, due to the fact that Benjamin
was very discontented with his father’s work, and had a hanker
ing for the sea, he was apprenticed to his half-brother, James
Pranklin, who had a shop in Boston. The father signed the in
denture in 1718, which bound him to his master until he was
twenty-one. During this time he helped his brother publish
the "New England Courant", one of the earliest newspapers in
America. His success in reproducing articles he had read in
the "Spectator" led him to write an article for his brother’s
paper which he slipped under the door of the shop with no
name attached. The piece was printed and attracted some at
tention. After repeated successes, he threw off his disguise
and became a regular contributor. When, after various journal
istic indiscretions, James Pranklin in 1722 was forbidden to
publish the "Courant", it appeared with Benjamin’s name as
the publisher and was received with much favor, chiefly be
cause of its clever style. Due to Benjamin’s management of
the paper and particularly his free thinking, and "indiscreet
disputations about religion" he had come to be "pointed at
3. .
with horror by good people as an infidel and atheist, there
by displeasing the authorities. The two brothers gradually
grew unfriendly, the indenture was broken, and Benjamin Prank
lin left New England,
He journeyed first to New York and later to Philadelphia,
where he secured a printing position with Samuel Helmer. Later
Keimer offered to help him get started in business, but Prank
lin’ s father refused to furnish him the capital, and he gave
up the idea. In 1728 Pranklin and Hugh Meredith, a fellow
worker at Keimer’s set up in business for themselves, the
capital being furnished by Meredith’s father. The partnership
was dissolved in 1730 and Pranklin, through financial assist
ance of two friends, secured the sole management. In the pre
vious year, 1729, he had bought at a merely nominal price "The
Pennsylvania Gazette," a weekly newspaper which Keimer had
started nine months before in competition with Pranklin, and
which the latter conducted until 1765.
His first quasi-public work began in 1736 when he was
chosen clerk of the General Assembly "without opposition," a
place of little value aside from its salary, he states, but
it gave "a better Opportunity of keeping up an interest among
the members which secured the business of printing the votes,
laws, paper money, and other occasional jobs for the public,
that, on the whole, were very profitable." The year follow
ing he was reappointed, but not unanimously, as he had strong
opposition. Nevertheless he was re-elected for the following
^John Morse, Benjamin Pranklin, 5.
4
fourteen years.^
In 1737 Pranklin became deputy Postmaster-general for
the Colonies and was glad of this appointment, as he states,
"I accepted it readily and found it of great advantage, for
though the salary was small, it facilitated the correspond
ence that improved my newspaper.....I began to turn my
O
thoughts to public affairs."
In 1732 he published the first Almanack, under the pseudo
nym of Richard Saunders. These "Poor Richard’s Almanacks"
were issued for the next twenty-five years with remarkable
success, having an average sale of 10,000 copies annually,
until the non-de-plume became as renowned as any in literature.
The wit and humor, the practical tone and shrewd maxims, the
worldly honesty, the morality, continued to add prestige to
this national character, and spread rapidly throughout the
colonies.^
In 1743 Pranklin drew up a scheme for establishing an
academy, but financial conditions in Pennsylvania were such,
that he let the scheme lie for a time dormant. Later he re
sumed the project in earnest.
He wrote and published a pamphlet entitled ’Proposal Relat
ing to the Education of Youth in Pennsylvania.’ In this he
suggested the outline of courses and suggested that the
studies should be everything that is useful and everything
^Paul L. Pord, Many Sided Benjamin Pranklin, 421.
^Jared Sparks, Life and Works of Benjamin Pranklin, I, 133.
%
Morse, op. cit., 21-22.
that is ornamental.^
In 1751 the academy opened its doors and was chartered
in 1753, eventually becoming the University of Pennsylvania.
He was a member of the board for forty years and he stated he
"had the pleasure of seeing a number of youths who have re
ceived their education in it, distinguished by their improved
abilities, serviceable in public station, and ornaments to
their country.
In 1746-47 Pranklin turned his interest to that of science
and the study of electricity. Probably he would have been one
of the foremost scientists if politics and the duties of pub
lic life had not claimed him and turned his energies into
other channels.
In 1751 he became a member of the General Assembly in
which he served for thirteen years. There was an ill-feeling
between the body and the proprietaries^ of the province. They
ruled the colonies and the assembly could do nothing without
the Penn’s permission. This led to endless disputes as the
proprietaries were more concerned in preserving their own in
terests than in advancing those of the province. In 1752
Pranklin was appointed a member of the commission to meet the
^Sparks, op. cit.. I, 161.
^rbid., I, 161.
^IMd., J, 157.
These proprietaries as they were called were Thomas and Rich-
ard Penn, sons of William Penn, founder of the colony. Upon
their father’s death they had succeeded to huge estates in
Pennsylvania, and were rulers of colony. They lived in Eng
land but had a govèrrtbf to represent them in Pennsylvania.
6
Indians to form a new treaty with them. The meeting took
place at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, and through Pranklin*s adroit
ness and tact the treaty was made to the satisfaction of both
the Indians and the colonists.
A year later he and William Hunter were put in charge of
the postal service of the colonies, which he brought to a
high state of efficiency and made a finsineial success. While
he was still perfecting his mail system war with the Prench
was again threatened. It was to be a final contest for the
supremacy of Prance or England in America. Both nations had
begun their settlement at the same time; the first English
settlement was Jamestown in 1607 and the first Prench settle
ment at Quebec in 1608. The prospect of a Prench war and the
hostile attitude already assumed by tribes of Indians on the
frontier induced the British Government to seek for the means
of providing for an efficient resistance in the colonies.
With this idea in view, an order was sent over by the
Lords of Trade, directing that commissioners should be appoint
ed in several of the provinces to assemble at Albany in New
York. The object of this conference was to form some plan
for mutual defense against the Prench.
The day appointed for the assemblying of the commission
ers was the 14th of June, 1754, but they did not convene until
the 19th. The first few days were spent in holding inter
views with the Indians. The chief speaker of the Mohawk
Sachem was Henderick, renowned for his boldness. The delegates
soon saw that an agreement with the Indians must be supplemented
by some plan of the colonies. A committee was appointed, one
from each state, to consider the several plans of union which
had been drawn up by the various commissioners, and Franklin’s,
with a few amendments, was the plan which was accepted.
The plans from the various commissioners were read and
debated on by Congress. Although many difficulties and ob
jections arose, they were all overcome after twelve days of
argument. The commissioners from all the provinces were in
favor of the plan, except the Connecticut representatives,
who strongly opposed it. The plan as accepted was basically
that of Franklin and was copied and sent to the provinces and
Board of Trade for ratification. As Franklin states, its
fate was singular.
The colonies condemned it; there was too much prerogative in
it, they thought, and on the other hand, the Board of Trade
in England did not approve of it because it had ’too much of
the Democratic.
After much debate it was rejected by the colonies and
the Board of Trade did not see fit even to present it to the .
king. The uniting of the colonies through some specific plan
would have strengthened them greatly. This was the reason
for Franklin’s endeavors, as he states that "the one main ad
vantage of the plan would be for the colonies not to consider
themselves as a number of independent states, but as a mem
ber of the same body; and thence be more ready to afford as
sistance and support each other.
^Sparks, op. cit.» 2, 24.
%îorse, op. cit., 45.
8 .
Soon after the Albany Congress came the formal outbreak,
of the Seven Years* War. So great was the confidence in Prank
lin in this emergency that early in 1756 the governor of Penn
sylvania placed him in charge of the north-western frontiers
of the province with power to raise troops, issue commissions
and erect blockhouses.
In February, 1757, the assembly and governor were once
more at sword’s points and the old quarrel was renewed and as
the governor was anxious for Franklin to attend, he left the
army in charge of Colonel Clapham, and returned to Philadel
phia. They found the proprietors obstinately persistent in
manacling their deputies with instructions inconsistent not
only with the privileges of the people, but with the service
of the crown, and resolving to petition the king against them,
appointed Franklin for this work.
He arrived in London on the 27th of July, 1757, and
shortly afterwards conferred with Earl Granville, president
of the council. Wrote Franklin,^
His Lordship received me with great civility, and after some
questions respecting the present state of affairs in America
and discourse thereupon, he said, ’You Americans have the
wrong idea of the nature of your Constitution; you contend that
the King’s instructions to his governors are not laws, and
think yourselves at liberty to regard or disregard them at
your own discretion. But these instructions are not like the
pocket instruction given a minister going abroad for regulat
ing his conduct on some trifling point of ceremony. They are
first drawn up by judges learned in laws; they are then con
sidered, debated, and perhaps amended, in Council, after which
they are signed by the King. They are then as far as they re
late to you the law of the land, for the King is the legislator
of the colonies.
^Morse, op. cit.. 65.
g
Franklin disagreed, believing that the laws of the colonies
were to be made by their assemblies, to be passed upon by the
king, and when once approved, were no longer subject to re
peal or amendment by the crown. This opposition of views
> :distinctly raised the issue between the home government and
the colonies.
The proprietors ignored and even insulted Franklin, and
made further delay by sending a message to the Assembly of
Pennsylvania, wherein they complained of his "rudeness" and
professed themselves "willing to accommodate matters if a per
son of candour" should be sent to treat with them. The reply
was in the shape of an act "taxing the proprietary estate in
common with the estates of the people."^ The Penns were en
raged at their governor’s act, and employed lawyers to oppose
the law. Franklin also engaged lawyers to defend it. The
matter was argued for two years before the committee, and in
the meantime Governor Denny was replaced by Hamilton, in 1769.
In their instructions to Mr. Hsunilton, they still refused to
have their estates taxed, though they consented that in case
the exigency of the times demanded it, a tax might be laid on
their rents and qultrents only, provided their "tenants should
be obliged to pay the same," the amount being deducted when
payments were made by the tenants to their receiver in Penn
sylvania.^
In June, 1760, after three years of litigation, Franklin
^Morse, op. cit., 67-68.
2
Sparks, op. cit., I, 249.
10
brought to a close the immediate controversy with the pro
prietors, and secured an understanding that the assembly should
pass an act exempting from taxation the unsurveyed lands of the
Penn estate, the surveyed waste lands being assessed at the
usual rate for other property of that description. . Thus the
proprietors finally acknowledged the right of the assembly to
tax their estate.
The success of Franklin’s first foreign mission was, there
fore, substantial and satisfactory. During his sojourn of five
years in England, he had made many valuable friends outside of
court and political circles, among whom Hume Robertson and Adam
Smith were conspicuous. In 1759, for his literary and more
particularly scientific attainments, he received the degree of
doctor of law from the University of St. Andrews. He had been
made Master of arts by Harvard and Yale in 1753, and by the
College of William and Mary in 1756; and in 1762 he received
the degree D.C.L. at Oxford.
Franklin sailed for America August, 1762, hoping to be
able to settle down in quiet and devote, the remainder of his
life to experiments in physics. But his forecasting of a
tranquil, scientific career in Philadelphia was still to be
a day-dream, as he found himself once more immersed in public
affairs. The Governor of Pennsylvania had been changed in
October, 1763. Governor Hamilton was superseded by John Penn,
nephew of the proprietary Thomas Penn. The instructions of
the new governor differed in no substantial particular from
those of his predecessor. The question of taxing the estates
11
of the proprietors came up in a new form, and a petition from
the assembly was drawn by Franklin, requesting the king to re
sume the government of Pennsylvania. This antagonized the pro
prietors, so in the autumn of 1764, at the election for a new
assembly, great efforts were made by his opponents to prevent
Franklin’s being chosen, and they succeeded. By a small ma
jority he lost his seat in the assembly, which he had held
for fourteen years, having been annually elected even during
his absence in England as one of the delegates from the city
of Philadelphia. But, notwithstanding this defeat, when the
assembly met, it was found that his friends and the friends
of his measure outnumbered the proprietary party, and he was
again appointed to resume his agency in England, to take
charge of a petition to the king.
In 1765 the English government passed the Declaratory
Act which asserted absolute supremacy of parliament over the
colonies, and in the succeeding parliament by the Townshend
Act of 1767, duties were imposed on paper, paints, glass, etc.,
imported by the colonists. ITie imposition of these taxes was
bitterly resented in the colonies, where it quickly crystal
lized public opinion around the principle of "no taxation with
out representation." The governors and chief justices, most
of whom were already appointed by the king, but who got their
pay by vote of the colonial assemblies, were hereafter to
have fixed salaries, to be paid by the king from this American
revenue. Two days later, the resolutions were passed, direct
ing the introduction of bills to carry out these several
12
propositions, and a month later the bills themselves were
1
passed, Franklin was the agent, not only of Pennsylvania,
but also of New Jersey, of Georgia and of Massachusetts. Hills
borough, who became Secretary of State for the colonies in
1768, refused to recognize Franklin as agent of Massachusetts,
because the governor of Massachusetts had not approved the
appointment, which was by resolution of the assembly, Frank
lin contended that the governor, as a mere agent of the king,
could have nothing to do with the assembly’s appointment of
its agents to the king. Frauiklin’s influence helped to oust
Hillsborough. Later Dartmouth, whose name Franklin suggested,
was made Secretary, and promptly recognized Franklin as the
agent of Massachusetts,
In the same year occurred the famous episode of the
Hutchinson Letters. These were written by Thomas Hutchinson,
Governor of Massachusetts, Andrew Oliver, his Lieutenant-Gov
ernor, and others to William Whately, a member of Parliament
and private secretary to George Grenville, suggesting an in
crease of the power of the governor at the expense of the
assembly, "an abridgment of what are called ’English libert
ies’, and othe5 measures more extreme than those undertaken
by the government," The correspondence was shown to Franklin
by a mysterious "member of Parliament" to back up the conten
tion that the quartering of troops in Boston was suggested
not by the British ministry, but by Americans and Bostonians,
Upon his promise not to publish the letters, Franklin received
^Morse, op. cit., 149.
15
permission to send them to Massachusetts, where they were much
passed about and were soon republished in English newspapers.
The Massachusetts Assembly, on receiving the letters, resolved
to petition the crown for the removal of both Hutchinson and
Oliver. The petition was refused, and was condemned as scan
dalous, and Franklin took the blame upon himself for the pub
lication of the letters in the hearing before the Privy Coun
cil at the Cockpit on January 29, 1774. He was insulted and
was called a thief by Alexander Wedderburne, the Solicitor-
general who appeared for Hutchinson and Oliver. Dr. Franklin
was immediately dismissed from his office bf deputy Postmaster-
general for the colonies. The whole proceeding was not more
insulting and oppressive than it was impolitic.^
Satisfied that his usefulness in England was at an end,
Franklin again set sail for Philadelphia on March 21, 1776,
entrusting his duties to the care of Arthur Lee. On May 6,
the day after his return, he was elected by the Assembly of
Pennsylvania as a delegate to the Continental Congress in
Philadelphia. In all that came before the Congress, Frank
lin was obliged to undertake his full share. He seems to have
been upon all the busy and important committees. One of the
first committees he served on was that to devise a postal sys
tem. The plan which he suggested was approved by Congress,
and he was unanimously elected Postmaster-general of the colon
ies. Dickinson and his followers wanted to petition the king,
a scheme which was ridiculed almost with anger by the more
^Sparks, op. cit.. IV, 441-445.
14
resolute of the party. But Franklin’s counsel was to give way
to their wishes, as being the best policy for bringing them
later into full accord with the party which was for war. In
the like direction was a clause in his draft of a declaration
intended to be issued by Washington in the summer of 1775.^
Franklin’s duties in Congress were ample to consume his time
and strength.
On July 21, 1775, Franklin presented some plans to take
care of the army. The commissioners met Washington and his
officers and sat for four days, during which time the plans
for establishment and support of the army were successfully
drawn up and completed. After spending six weeks, they re
turned to Philadelphia.
In November, 1775, he was appointed with Benjamin Har
rison, John Dickinson, and Thomas Johnson, as a committee to
carry on a secret correspondence with the friends of America
in Great Britain and Ireland. He planned an appeal to the
King of France for aid, and wrote the instructions to Silas
Deane, who was to convey it. The object was to find out how
the foreign governments felt toward the American government.
Franklin gave a plan for a union of colonies, which:is known
toi be the first sketch of a plan for confederation to have
been presented to Congress. Ho action was ever taken upon it.
It contained a provision that Ireland, the West India Islands,
the Canadian possessions, and Florida mights^ upon application,
^Morse, op. cit., 204,
15
be received into the confederation.^
In October, 1775, he was elected a member of the Penn
sylvania Assembly, but, asked to take an oath to the crown,
he refused to serve. He was made Chairman of the Provincial
Committee of Safety,
In April, 1776, he was a member of the commission that
went to Montreal with Charles Carroll, Samuel Chase, and John
Carroll. They attempted without success to gain the coopera
tion of Canada. Immediately after his return from Montreal he
was made a member of the committee of five appointed to draw
up the Declaration of Independence. It was written by Jeffer
son, and Franklin took no actual part in the drafting of the
instrument aside from suggesting the change or insertion of
a few words. He was in favor of an immediate declaration,
and his name is signed to the famous instrument.^
From July 16 to September 28 he acted as President of
the Constitutional Convention of Pennsylvania. The constitu
tion which it presented to the people provided for only one
house, a feature which Franklin approved and defended. He
worked hard and at the close of the deliberations thanks were
unanimously voted to him for his services as presiding officer,
and for his "able and disinterested advice."^
^Morse, op. cit., 206.
^Ibid.. 209,
^Sidney George Fisher, Benjamin Franklin. 269.
^Morse, op. cit., 209,
In the spring of 1776, together with John Adams and Ed
ward Rutledge he was appointed by Congress to confer with
Admiral Howe,^ September, 1776, at Staten Island. Lord Howe
had expressed His Majesty’s earnest desire for a permanent
peace and for the happiness of his American subjects, but the
discussion was fruitless, as the American commissioners re-
p
fused to consider forfeiting the independence already secured.
At this time Congress had under consideration the subject
of foreign alliances. Aids in money and all kinds of mili
tary supplies were needed. It was decided to make the first
application to the court of France and to proffer a commercial
treaty, which should be mutually advantageous to the two coun
tries. So on September 26, Franklin was chosen a commissioner
to France to join Arthur Lee, who was in London, and Silas
Deane, who had arrived in France in June, 1776.5
Franklin’s position in France was a difficult one from
the start, because of the delicacy of the task of getting
French aid at à time when France was unready openly to take
sides against Great Britain. But after the news of the de
feat and surrender of Burgoyne had reached Europe, a treaty
Lord Howe. Head of the fleet with troops from Europe. The
two brothers had been appointed commissioners. Lord Howe sent
on shore a dispatch, containing a circular letter to the
colonial governors, and a "Declaration stating the nature of
his mission and his powers," and requesting that the Declara
tion should be published.
lorse, op. cit., 214.
^Sparksgi op. cit.. I, 415-416.
17
X ?
of alliance and a treaty of annuity and coiomerce between
France and the United States was signed at Paris by Franklin^
Deane and Lee on February 6, 1778* They were sent to America
by a special, messenger, and immediately ratified by Congress.
On October 28, this commission was discharged and Frank
lin was appointed sole plenipotentiary to the French court.
From the beginning of the mission to Paris, Lee seems to have
been possessed of a mania of Jealousy toward Franklin, or of
misunderstanding of his acts, and he tried to undermine his
influence with the Continental Congress.
Even greater than Franklin’s diplomatic difficulties were
his financial straits. Drafts were being drawn on him by all
American agents in Europe and by the Continental Congress at
home. He acted ascAmerican naval agent for the many success
ful privateers who harried the .English Channel, and for whom
he skilfully got every bit of assistance possible, openly and
covertly, from the French government. Franklin besides was
constantly called upon to meet the indebtedness of Lee and
Ralph Izard and „of John Jay who, in Madrid, was being drawn
on by the American Congress.
In 1781 Franklin, with John Adams, Jay, Laurens, and Jef-
* 1
By the Treaty of Alliance the United States secured the very
great advantage of the whole power of France on their side,
until their independence should be confirmed by a treaty of peace.
^The commercial treaty granted reciprocal privileges of trade;
and each party was at liberty to grant the same privileges to
any other nation.
^Sparks, op. cit.. I, 434.
18
ferson, was appointed on a commission to make peace with Great
Britain. In the spring of 1782, Franklin had been informally
negotiating with Shelburne, Secretary of State for the home -
department through the medium of Richard Oswald, a Scotch mer
chant, and had suggested that England should cede Canada to
the United States in return for the recognition of loyalist
claims by the States. When the formal negotiations began,
Franklin held closely to the instructions of Congress to its
commissioners that they should maintain confidential relations
with French ministers and not to undertake anything in the
negotiations for peace or truce without their knowledge and
concurrence. After some time the British government had au
thorized its agents to treat with the commissioners as repre
sentative of an independent power, thus recognizing American
independence before the treaty was made.
The provincial Treaty of Peace was signed by the commis
sioners on November 30, 1782. There were many other articles
suggested, but none of them was accepted, and the definite
treaty was signed at Paris, September 3, 1783.^
Franklin then desired to come home and petitioned Cong
ress for his recall, but his letters were unanswered for months.
In August, 1784, Jefferson arrived in France to assist in the
commercial business, and in March, 1785, Congress voted that
Franklin might “return to America as soon as convenient.
^Sparks, op. cit., I, 501.
^orse, op. cit., 392.
19
His last official act, Just before his departure from Paris,
was the signature of a treaty with Prussia in which it was
agreed to abolish privateering.^ He had also made a commer
cial treaty with Sweden in 178B,
On September IB, 1785^ he was welcomed to Philadelphia.
A multitude, filling the air with huzzas of salntatlon,
greeted his landing emd escorted him to his door*^ Immediate
ly he was chosen a member of the Municipal Council of Phila
delphia, becoming its chairman, and was also elected Presi
dent of the Supreme Council of Pennsylvania, serving from
October, 1785, to October, 1787.
In May, 1787, he was elected a delegate to the convention
which drew up the Federal Constitution^ At this time he was
considered one of the outstanding men of the times. In his
sketches of the members of the convention Pierce says of him;
Dri. Franklin is well known to be the greatest phylosopher of
the present age..Î.all the operation of nature seems to un
derstand ,— the very heavens obey him, and the clouds yield
up their lightning to be imprisoned in his rod...^He is a
most extraordinary man, and tells a story in a style more
engaging than anything I have ever heard...♦He is BE years
old, and possesses an activity of mind equal to a youth of
£5 years of age#^
Nevertheless, this does not determine his real activity In
the convention. He was very anxious to have the members of
the convention see the need of a stronger government. After
^William Hartley, Franklin’s Works, Till, E87.
%torse, op. cité, 397.
^Charles C. Tansill, Formation of the Union of the American
States, 100.
20
the convention he returned to Philadelphia as President, al
though not a member of state ratifying convention. The con
stitution having been adopted Franklin was in favor of General
Washington for president, saying, “General Washington is the
man whom all our eyes are fixed on for president, and what
little influence I may have is devoted to him.“
Franklin, serving in the position of president of the
Pennsylvania Society for promoting the abolition of slavery,
signed a petition to Congress, February 12, 1790, for immediate
abolition of slavery. This was his last public act. He died
in his own house, April 17, 1790, the immediate cause being
an abscess in the lung. Although he suffered much, his last
days were marked by a fine serenity and calmness.
CHAPTER II
FRANKLIN’8 GENERAL ACTIVITY IN THE
FEDERAL CONVENTION
The Federal Convention which framed the Constitution of
the United States began its sessions in Philadelphia on May
25, 1787. The delegates chosen to represent their respective
states constituted one of the most remarkable bodies of men;
many of them had already won distinction, having served their
colonies in Congress and had experience in political affairs.
Therefore, they were well adapted to the work which they were
to undertake.
The delegation from Pennsylvania was appointed Saturday,
December 30, 1786, the group selected consisting of Thomas
Mifflin, Robert Morris, George Clymer, Jared Ingersoll, Thom
as Fitzsimons, James Wilson and Gouverneur Morris, Esquires,
or any four of them. Still the honorable Benjamin Franklin,
who was .now President of Pennsylvania, was not appointed.
This many of the people could not understand. He had served
them, and gained their confidence, and yet was not chosen to
represent them. According to an oft-repeated story it was
due to the doubt whether Washington would attend, or in the
event of his possible absence, that Franklin’s name was added
to the group, March 28, 1787, so that there would be someone
whom all could agree upon in calling to the chair.^ It was
^John T. Morse, Benjamin Franklin, 401.
22
fortunate that even such an unnecessary reason led to his
being chosen for all future generations would have felt that
an unpardonable void had been left in that famous assemblage
had this sage of America not been there. Certainly the “fit
ness of things,“ the pictureequeness of the event, imperative
ly demanded Dr. Franklin’s venerable figure in the Constitu
tional Convention.
Franklin did not play a very conspicuous part in the con
vention, but his kindly humor and his national spirit were of
value. One of his outstanding traits was that of harmoniser.
He reminded the members that they were sent to consult, and
not to contend. In doing this he was like Mr. Ellsworth and
Mr. Sherman, who, by their tact on more than one occasion,
prevented the assembly from breaking up in confusion.
The convention was to have assembled on May 14 but due
to the absence of a quorum, regular work did not begin until
May 25. At this time Washington was selected president upon
motion of Robert Morris. This came with particular grace
from Pennsylvania, as Dr. Franklin alone could have been con- .
sidered as a competitor. It has often been asserted that
Franklin himself was to have made the nomination for General
Washington, but the state of the weather and his health con
fined him to his home on the opening day.^ This was the only
day of the entire convention that he missed, the records show.
As he states in a letter to Mrs. Jane Mecom, “The Convention
^Charles Tansill, Documents Illustrative of the Formation of
the Union. 110. Edited by James Madison.
23
finished on the 17th. I attended the business of its five
hours in every day from the which is something
more than four months....
He was present the last day, and signed the Constitution.
During this time Mr. Madison kept an accurate account of the
debates which took place. Franklin, although he was not as
active as a number of the other delegates, was referred to by
Mr. Madison about fifty times. Two of these references, in
which his name or initials were not used, were indirect, and
forty-eight direct.
In any assembly there are usually two types of delegates:
those who take a real active part and do most of the talking;
and those who do not say much but still have quite an in
fluence. In the latter group we find Franklin. He was out
standing throughout the convention for being a conciliator,
and yet he only spoke twenty-seven times. Of these it is
known, however, that Franklin himself seldom, if ever, spoke
from the floor. His feebleness made it impossible for him
to stand long, so he wrote out his speeches beforehand, and
usually his colleague, Mr. Wilson, read them for him. Three
of these speeches seem to have been long ones. He also made
six motions, two of which were passed; six seconds, one of
which was passed, and he received two committee appointments.
It may be of interest to note that, in all his speeches, he
would give examples to prove his point regarding a certain
proposition which he favored or opposed. The first of his
^James M. Beck, Making of the Constitution, 64.
24
long speeches was in regard to the Executive receiving com
pensation, to which he seriously objected, feeling that it
should be a position of honor, and that this should be suf
ficient reward. He feared that if a compensation be paid it
would offer too corrupting a temptation, and instead of re
maining a source of generous aspiration “to the wise and mod
erate, the lovers of peace and good order, the men fittest
for trust,“ it would be scrambled for by the “bold and the
violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activ
ity in their selfish pursuits.His second long speech was
conciliatory, in which he reminded the delegates that they
were sent to “consult and not to contend with each other;
declaration of a fixed opinion and of determined resolutions,
never change it, neither enlighten or convince us.“ He made
this speech in reference to one of the most difficult ques
tions of the convention--that of representation in the Nat
ional Legislature. The proposition had been brought up pre
viously j and had to be postponed, due to the hard feelings
which it created. But due to its importance, it was a ques
tion which had to be settled; so when it was brought up for
the second time, Franklin made this speech, although he was
in favor of a unicameral legislature with equal representa
tion. But when the group decided on a legislature of two
houses, the great question came up as to whether or not the
large and small states should stand upon terms of equality,
or whether some proportion should be established. Franklin
^Morse, op. cit., 402,
25
referred to the government in Great Britian in relation to
Ireland, and stated that he could not see any reason why the
large states would try to rule the smaller. He then proposed
a compromise which he thought would he fair and just to both,
Franklin’s third long speech was at the end of the con
vention, in which he urged the members to sign the constitu
tion. He did not believe it to be a perfect document, but
still felt that some constitution was imperative and that this
probably was the best that any such group of men could formulate.
As he states, “Thus I consent, Sir, to this Constitution, be
cause I expect no better, and because I am not sure that it
is not the best.The speech was not without its effect, as
shown by Mr. Randolph, who felt called upon to explain to the
convention his refusal to sign the constitution.
The short speeches consisted mainly in giving his views
on the questions as they were suggested. They were all quite
brief, and to the point. Franklin was not a fluent speaker,
as Mr. Pierce states, “It is certain that he does not shine
much in public council,is no Speaker, nor does he seem
to let politics engage his attention.As we noted, he spoke
only twenty-seven times throughout the entire four months of
the convention and yet he was present every day after the
first session.
The two motions made by Franklin which were successfully
^Tansill, op. cit., 739.
. 100.
26
passed were of little importance. The first was concerned
with the powers of the national legislature. After the clause
to negative all state laws contravening in the opinion of
national legislature, he wished to add the phrase “or any
treaties subsisting under the authority of the union.“ This
motion was passed without any debate or dissent. The other
motion, made at the close of the convention after the speech
regarding the value of the constitution, was to the effect
that it be signed under the convenient form: “Done in conven
tion by unanimous consent of the states present, the 17th of
September, etc. In witness whereof we have hereunto sub
scribed our names.“
One can see the respect paid by all the members, as Mr.
Madison remarked,^
This ambiguous form had been drawn up by Mr. G. M. (Gouver
neur Morris) in order to gain the dissenting members, and
put into the hands of Dr. Franklin, that it might have the
better chance of success.
Although a number was opposed to accepting the constitution
and a debate was ensued nevertheless it was: signed 4>y All
members except Mr. Randolph, Mr. Mason and Mr. Gerry.^ The
other four motions made by Franklin were postponed. The
first of these related to compensation for the services of
the executive. Franklin moved to substitute “whose necessary
expenses shall be defrayed, but who shall receive no salary,
stipend, fee or reward whatsoever for their services.“ The
motion was seconded by Mr. Hamilton, with the view, he said
^Tansill, op. cit., 740
27
of “merely bringing so respectable a proposition before the
committee.“ No debate ensued, and the proposition was post
poned for the consideration of the members. It was treated
with great respect, but rather for the author of it, than any
apparent conviction of its expediency or practicability.^
A motion for prayers in the convention was made by Frank
lin and seconded by Sherman. Due to the opposition of Messrs.
Hamilton, Sherman and others, Mr. Randolph proposed in order
to give a favorable aspect to the measure that a sermon be
preached at the request of the convention on the 4th of July.
The proposition was seconded by Franklin. But this motion as
well as that of Franklin’s was silently postponed when they
P
moved to adjourn, and it was never taken up again. The other
two motions were both modified, and one was passed, the other
rejected. Of these two, one was for representation in the
houses, which later on was revised and passed; and the other
was one giving the legislature power to provide for cutting
of the canals where deemed necessary. This, although mod
ified, was rejected. Therefore of the six motions made by
Franklin only two were passed, one was lost, leaving three to
be determined at a later time.
Of the six motions made by Franklin, only one was passed.
This had been made by Mr. Rutledge and was “that the Pres
ident should not receive within that period any other emol
ument from the U. S. or any of them.“ Two of the six were
^Tansill, op. cit., 745.
^IWd., 296-7.
28
lost while three were undecided; one being referred to the
committee, one divided and the other postponed.
Therefore, we see that Franklin did not have such a con-
structive influence as one would believe. As Moran states :
“Some of his political ideas were entirely mistaken ones, but
his rare tact and wonderful good sense and kindly humor prob
ably saved the convention on more than one occasion.“
Of the two committees on which he served only one was of
any importance. This was the committee on representation of
the different states in the national legislature. The ques
tion as to the constitution of the second branch was before
the convention. Hitherto on this question the vote of Mary
land was divided and not counted; but now, in the absence of
his colleagues, Martin cast the vote of the state for equal
representation. On the other hstnd, the delegation from Georg
ia, thus far acting with the larger states, was divided. Bald
win had possibly influenced his delegation to vote for equal
representation. The states were evenly divided— five to five.^
Therefore General Pinckney moved that a Grand Committee be
appointed, which was passed. It was appointed on the same day,
and consisted of Gerry, Ellsworth, Yates, Paterson, Bedford,
L. Martin, Mason, Davie, Rutledge, Baldwin and Dr. Franklin.^
The convention adjourned while this committee was in ses-
^T. F. Moran, Foundation and Development of the Constitution,
77, 78.
^Andrew C. Me Laughlin, Confederation and Constitution. 233.
^Tansill, op. cit., 323.
29,
sion. It drafted what is called the "Great Compromise" which
became the basis for the constitution. By this committee
Franklin’s idea was made the basis for discussion, and was
reported to the convention. Mr. Madison states that the re
port of the committee was founded on a motion in the committee
made by Dr. Franklin. It was barely acquiesced in by the mem
bers from states opposed to an equality of votes in the second
branch and the members considered they had gained a point on
the other side;^ so probably the compromise suggested by Frank
lin on June 30 did have some effect in the drawing up of the
final draft of the report which was presented to the conven
tion on July 5. This report provided for equal representation
of the states in the Senate, while the number of members which
each might send to the House of Representatives should be de
termined by its population. This at first was not entirely
approved by a number of delegates, and Franklin often spoke
in justification of the proposition.
Toward the end of the convention Franklin was appointed
on a second committee which was considering matters of a minor
nature. It was appointed in September, and was to report
Articles of Association in order to encourage, by the advice,
the influence and the examples of the members of the con
vention, economy, frugality, and American manufactures.^ It
consisted of five members: Col. Mason, Mr. Dickinson, Dr.
Johnson, Mr. Livingston and Dr. Franklin. This commiiitee
^Tansill, op. cit., 324.
^It>ld.. 718.
30
never made any report.
Throughout the convention we note such party groups as
New Constitution or the Confederation; Large State of Small
State; The Free State or Slave State; the Northern group or
Southern group; Agricultural or Commercial; and Democratic
group or Aristocratic group. Although Franklin did not take
any real active part as a leader, he was affiliated with a
number of these groups. In the first place we find that he
was aligned with the revisionists in that he favored revis
ing the Articles of Confederation rather than a new constitu
tion. Franklin was opposed to slavery on moral grounds,
therefore, he may be placed in the Free State Party. His
last public act was that of signing a petition to Congress
asking the prohibition of slave trade.
He was also affiliated with the democratic party rather
than the aristocratic. Throughout the entire discussion in
the convention he opposed all forms of aristocracy as incon
sistent with human equality. One of his strongest objections
to the bicameral legislative system was that wealth and priv
ilege customarily enjoyed a disproportionate influence in one
house. Another example was that he opposed having the legis
lature elected by the few as that would debase the spirit
of the common class. Franklin always believed in being fair.
When the question came up of fourteen year citizenship for
representatives Franklin stood for a more reasonable term.
So it may be seen Franklin was a self-made man, believed
in democracy, and doubted the efficacy of the constitution
31
unless it was like a pyramid, broad-based upon the will of
the people.^
Although Franklin did not do much real constructive work
in the convention, he held the confidence of the people, and,
as George Ticknor Curtis says2^
His great age, his venerable and benignant aspect, his wide
reputation, his acute and sagacious philosophy— which was
always the embodiment of good sense— would have given him a
controlling weight in a much more turbulent and far less
assembly.
He was ranked among the five greatest men of the con
vention— “Washington, Hamilton, Madison, Wilson and Franklin
were the five of greatest ability and poise in the convention."^
He is considered by many second only to Washington, as Elson
states:^
First among the formers of our Constitution stands Washing
ton, the soldier, statesman, and next to him we place Frank
lin, the philosopher, diplomat, and the oldest member of the
Convention.
But Franklin was unique in his individual way, serving as a
conciliator and harmonizer at all times.
^Beck, op, cit., 208,
^George Ticknor Curtis, Constitutional History of the United
States, I, 293.
^Moran, op. cit., 78.
^H. W. El8on. History of U. S., II, 152,
CHAPTER III
PROPOSITIONS FAVORED BY FRANKLIN
It was noticeable during the sessions that Franklin spoke
only a moderate number of times. While the Pennsylvania del
egation as a whole were for a new constitution it cannot be
said that Franklin personally was favorable to the idea but
seemed rather to take the position of a compromiser.
Shortly before the convention assembled, Franklin enter
tained the early arrivals at a dinner. The guests consisted
mainly of delegates from Virgiania and Pennsylvania. On the
suggestion of Mr, Madison they decided to ignore the existing
government and create a new one in its place. “To do this
will be no easy task, and its successful accomplishment is
one of the greatest achievements in the history of Free Gov
ernment, “
The method of procedure taken by this group was by per
suasion and to convince a large majority that the convention
should not only create a new government, but should give it
powers that no one had previously suggested,^ They believed
that a national government should be set up, for in the dis-
p
cussion of representation Franklin states, “It would be bet
ter if every member of Congress.....were to consider himself
rather as representative of the whole, than as an agent for
^James M. Beck, Constitution of the United States, 75,
^Franklin, Smythe, Writings of Benjamin Franklin. 9, 196,
33
the interest of a particular State."
Virginia was the first to present a plan of union. Accord
ing to it provision was made for the separation of the three
branches of government; legislative, executive and judicial*
It suggested that the executive was to be single; the legis
lative bicameral and a national judiciary. This was con
sidered important as it furnished the initial start which after
the amendments had each been carefully considered it became
known as the Constitution of the United States.
Although Franklin was in favor of the plan as a whole,
there were certain phases which he disagreed with. One of
the most characteristic was that the national legislature
should consist of bne house. As we note one of the outstanding
characteristics of the Pennsylvania State Constitution was
that the legislature consisted of a single house, thus vest
ing in it all the power. On the proposition that the legis
lature should consist of two houses, it was passed without
any debate or dissent. The Pennsylvania delegation voted in
the negative in deference to Franklin.^
In reference to the powers delegated the legislative
department Franklin made the motion to add "or any treaties
subsisting under the authority of the Union" after the clause
to negative all state laws contravening in the opinion of the
o
national legislature. This passed without debate or dissent,
although on the whole Madison felt that this was giving too
^Charles Tansill, Formation of the Union, 130.
^IMd.. 130.
34
much power to the states and, due to the objections of many
members of the convention, the clause was postponed to a
future date.
It was decided that there should be a national judiciary.
The Confederation had found, it to be entirely impractical to
rely on the tribunals of the state for the execution of laws.
The whole history of our Confederation evinces the futility
of laww requiring the obedience of states, and proceeding up
on expectation that they will enforce that obedience upon them
selves. The need for a judiciary department in the general
government was therefore one of the most important. One of
the first questions which afos#ewas the method of selecting
the judiciary. Two methods were suggested; first that they
be chosen by the legislature, and second that they be selected
by the executive. Franklin then proposed a third method,
that they be selected by lawyers. He referred humorously to
the method successfully being used in Scotland, in .that the
ablest of lawyers was chosen in order that the others could
secure his practice and divide it among themselves. He said
it was to the interest of the electors to make the best choice,
which would always be made the case if possible. To this Mr.
Madison objected in that he thought they might show partial
ity. He objected to the selection of judges by any large body
and proposed that they be chosen by the Senate. So he moved that
"the appointment by the legislature" might be struck out and
a blank left to be thereafter filled out on maturer reflection.
This was apparently satisfactory to Franklin, and the motion
55
was passed,^
Then came the discussion of probably the most vital and
crucial question of the entire convention, that which had to
do with the representation of the states in the national legis
lature. Here is where Franklin probably did his greatest work
in suggesting a method of representation of the states.
The smaller states wanted equal representation while the
larger ones held that representation should be proportioned
to the population. Mr. Read of Delaware took the lead for
the smaller states, and in a speech on June 30th, he reminded
the delegates from his state that, in case any change were
made in the present method of representation, it might become
their duty to retire from the convention.^ So rather than
cause trouble, the matter was postponed to a future date.
Due to its vital nature it was brought up again on June
9, and once more there was a tension felt throughout the
convention. It was at this time that Franklin made a speech
pleading for harmony and declared himself in favor of propor
tional representation. He believed that the decisions should
be by the majority of the members, and not states. This was
objected to in that the greater states would swallow up the
smaller, but to this he answered, "I do not atypresent see
what advantage the greater states could propose to themselves
in swallowing up the smaller, and therefore do not apprehend
they would attempt it." He then showed a similar instance.
^Tansill, op. cit., 154
12S.
36.
when Scotland was united to England. The Scottish patriots
were full of fears, that unless they had an equal number of
representatives in parliament, they would be ruined by the
superiority of the English. It was finally decided that a pro
portion should take place in which there.were to be forty mem
bers in the House of Commons and sixteen in the House of Lords,
and to this day he could not remember anything that the par
liament of Great Britain had done to prejudice Scotland. He
states in the method now employed in voting it is in the pow
er of the lesser to swallow up the greater.
Franklin then proposed a plan which he believed would
solve the problem. This proposition as proposed to the com
mittee provided as follows;^
Let the weakest state say what proportion of money or force
it is able and willing to furnish for the general purposes
of the Union. ,
Let all others oblige themselves to furnish each an
equal proportion.
The whole of these joint supplies to be absolutely in
the disposition of Congress.
The Congress in this case to be composed of an equal
number of delegates from each state.
And their decisions to be by the majority of individual
members voting.
If these joint and equal supplies should on particular
occasions not be sufficient, Let Congress make requisitions
on the richer and more powerful states for futher aids, to
be voluntarily afforded, leaving to each state the right of con
sidering the necessity and utility of the aid desired, and of
giving more or less as it should be found proper.
Franklin agreed with Mr. Wilson that the method estab
lished in the.Articles of Confederation, which provided aC
follows: "Resolved; that in determing questions in this
^Tansill, op. cit., 188.
. 189.
57
Congress each colony or province shall have one vote,“ was
unequal and unjust. So he believed that the right of suffrage
in the first branch of national legislature ought not to be
according to the rule in the Articles of Confederation, but
according to some equitable ratio of representation.?*
Peeling that the convention was not progressing as fast
as it should after four or five weeks, Franklin thought that
they should have daily prayers, asking the assistance of God
rather than continuing groping in the dark any longer. He
referred to his experiences in Great Britain, where, when
they felt there was danger, they had daily prayers in the room,
asking for divine protection. “Sir," he states, “they were
heard, and they were graciously answered." He then moved to
have prayers in the convention. As he states, "I have lived.
Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing
proofs I see of this truth— that God governs in the affairs
of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without
His notice, is it possible that an Empire can rise without
His aid? We have been assured. Sir, in the Sacred Writings,
that ’Except the Lord build the house they labor in vain that
build it’. This Franklin believed sincerely, and felt that
if the convention would have prayers each morning before start
ing, that things would work out more successfully.
This motion was offset by that of Mr. Randolph, to have
sermons on the Fourth of July, which Franklin seconded. But
^Tansill, op. cit., 185.
^rbid., 296.
58
the members of the convention were opposed to it, and post
poned it by adjourning. The discussion was never renewed, no
action taken on it.^
The method by which the second branch of the legislature
was to be chosen we see again the great question as to whether
it should be one from each state or proportional, quite nat
urally it caused once more a series of discussions between the
smaller and larger states. Mr. Wilson felt that proportional
representation for the large states and one from each small
state the senate would be too numerous. The smaller states
contended that if proportional rej^resentation were to take
place, their liberties would be iq danger. The larger states
said that if they had equality of votes, their money would be
in danger. So Franklin stated, "When a broad table is to be
made, and the edges of the planks do not fit, the Artist takes
a little from both, and makes a good joint. In like manner
here both sides must part with some of' their demands, in order
2
that they may join in some accountable proportion,"
Franklin then presented a proposition which he thought
would be suitable to both the larger and the smaller states,
* > %
It was more or less of a compromise. The proposition was:
That the Legislatures of the several States shall choose &
send an equal number of Delegates, namely who are to
compose the 2d branch of the General Legislature^
^Tansill, op. cit., 297,
^rbld., 312.
^Ibid.. 313.
That in all cases or questions wherein the Sovereignty
of individual States may be affected, or whereby their author
ity over their own Citizens may be diminished, or the author
ity of the General Government within the several States aug- .
mented, each State shall have equal suffrage.
That in the appointment of all Civil officers of the
General Government in the election of whom the 2d branch may
by the Constitution have part, each State shall have equal
suffrage.
That in fixing the Salaries of such officers, and in all
allowances for public services, and generally in all approp
riations & disposition of money to be drawn out of the Gen
eral Treasury; and in all laws supplying that Treasury, the
Delegates of the several States shall have suffrage in pro
portion to the Sums which their respective States do actually
contribute to the Treasury,,,,
This proposition as presented caused much debate. The
various members of the convention could not agree entirely with
Franklin’8 suggestions. Mr. Madison believed that the plan
in its present form would make the Senate absolutely depend
ent on the states, thus making the Senate only another edition
of the existing Congress,
Mr. King was also strongly opposed to Franklin’s propo
sition,^ declaring
That the simple question was whether each State should have
an equal vote in the 2d branch; that it must be apparent to
those gentlemen who liked neither the motion for this equal
ity, nor the report as it stood, that the report was as
susceptible of melioration as the motion; that a reform would
be nugatory & nominal only if we should make another Congress
of the proposed Senate,,,,
Throughout the entire period there was a feeling of dissen
sion. After much debate it was decided that a committee
should be appointed to make some kind of compromise. The com
mittee was representative, as it consisted of one member from
each state, namely, Gerry, Ellsworth, Yates, Paterson, Frank-
^Tansill, op, cit., 313,
40
lin, Bedford, L. Martin, Mason, Davie, Rutlege and Baldwin*^
The report as given by Mr. Gerry was practically that
suggested by Franklin in his previous proposition. It was as
follows:^
1. That in the 1st branch of the Legislature each of the
States now in the Union shall be allowed 1 member for every
40,000 inhabitants of the description reported in the 7th
Resolution of the Committee of the Whole House; that each of
the States not containing that number shall be allowed 1
member; thaï all bills for raising or appropriating money,
and for fixing the Salaries of the officers of the Govern
ment of the States shall originate in the 1st branch of the
Legislature, and shall not be altered or amend in the 2nd
branch: and that no money shall be drawn from the public
Treasury but in pursuance of appropriations to be originated
in the 1st branch.
2. That in the 2nd branch each State shall have an equal
vote.
This report was founded on a motion made in the committee by
Franklin.
This caused much more debate for how not only did many
bitterly oppose equal representation, but also the clause
providing that the money bills should be originated in the
first branch. The committee itself had been of different opin
ions, but felt that the report would be some basis for the con
vention to work on. Some of the members of the convention
felt that the committee had exceeded its pov/ersi Nevertheless
the report was broken into sections, and discussed. Franklin
believed that the whole should be taken rather than in parts,
for when it came to voting on the first section, he said that,
the committee having reported several propositions as mutual
^T^ansill, op. cit., 323.
323, 324.
41
conditions of each other, he could not vote for It if separ
ately taken, but should vote the whole together#^ Neverthe^
less the report was not considered fair by the large states,
so was discussed as parts rather than the whole. Many of the
delegates believed the second house should be restrained from
meddling with money bills, and as Br. Franklin did not mean
to go Into justification of the Report but said that the rea
son was ’ ’that people should know who had disposed of their
money, and how It had been disposed of.” It was a maxim that
those who feel, can best judge# This end would, he thought,
be best attained if money affairs were to be confined to the
Immediate representation of the people. As to the danger or
difficulty that might arise from a negative In the second,
where the people would not be proportionally represented, it
might easily be got over by declaring that ”there should be
no such negative,” or If that will not do, by declaring there
z
shall be no such branch at all.
The whole report was postponed and a number of commit^
tees appointed to go over the various parts and make new sug
gestions. But in the final draft we see a number of clauses
which Franklin had suggested were adopted at least gave the
beginning to final measures.
A motion was made, as follows; ”In which (salaries of
judges! no increase or diminution shall be made so as to affect
the persons at the time of office.” Mr. Morris moved to strike
^Tansill. op. clt., 334.
%bid. É 3 m
4Z
out m o mo that the legislature would he at lib
erty to increase the salaries as circumstances might require#
Franklin was in favor of the proposition that the compensa
tion should be adjusted, as he thought that the business of
the department would increase as the country became more popu—
1
lous, al^ough money would not necessarily Increase♦
Franklin was In favor of the proposition that the execu
tive be removable on impeachment and conviction for malprac
tice or neglect of duty.^ He thoroughly believed that one
should be given the opportunity through the examination to de
fend himself. He believed that there should be some way pro
vided in the constitution for the punishment of the executive
where his misconduct should deserve it, and for his honorable
3
acquittai when he should be unjustly accused. He gives an
example of that of the Prince of Orange during the late war#
4n agreement was made between France & Holland; by which
their two fleets were to unite at a certainLtime & place. The
Dutch fleet did not appear. Every Wdy began to wonder at
it. At length it was suspected that the Statholder was at
the bottom of the matter. This suspicion prevailed more &
more. Yet as he could not be impeached and no regular exami
nation took place, he remained in his office, and strengthen
ing his won party, as the party opposed to him became formid
able, he gave birth to the most violent animosities and con
tentions. Had he been impeachable, a regular & peaceful en
quiry would have taken place end he would if guilty have been
duly punished, if innocent restored to the public#^
Charles G# Tansill, op. oit.. 4Q4.
418, , , 418,
. . . 418,
• t
43
He also gave another illustration where a magistrate had lost
the confidence of the people and did not have the opportunity
to prove his innocence. So Franklin believed that the United
States Constitution should provide the executive an opportun
ity to prove his innocence, thus regaining the confidence of
the people. When voted upon, this passed by the decision of
eight to two.
Seven years was considered by Franklin a justifiable
length of term of the President, and that he should be inelig
ible for the second term. This raised quite a question of be
ing ineligible for the second time because it was considered
by some to be degrading to the magistrate to have to return
to the people, but Franklin believed this to be against and
contrary to the republican principles. As he says,^ " In full
government the rulers are the servants and the people their
superiors and sovereigns. For the former therefore to return
would be imposing an unreasonable burden on them, to keep them
always in a state of servitude, and not allow them to become
again one of the masters.'* So Franklin was in favor of a
seven year term and to be ineligible the second time.
The origin and purpose of that definition of treason
which is found in the constitution, and which was placed there
in order, on the one hand, to defend the supremacy of the nat
ional government, and oû the other, to guard the liberty of
the citizen against the mishhiefs of constructive definitions
of that crime. Ho instruction had been given to the committee
^Tansill, op. cit., 457.
44
of detail on this subject. When they gave their report on the
constitution, Article VII, Section II, provided "Treason again
st the United States shall consist only in levying war against
the United States, or any of them; and in adhering to the
enemies of the United States, or any of them...."
But here, it was perceived, two errors were committed.
The first was that the levying of war against a State was de
clared to he treason against the United States. This opened
a very intricate question, and loaded the definition for, how
ever true it might be, in some cases that an attack on the
sovereignty state might tend to subvert or endanger the Gov
ernment of the United States, yet concerted resistance to
the laws of a state, which is one of the forms of "levying
war" within the meaning of that phrase, might have in it no
element of an offence against the United States, and might
have no tendency to injure their sovereignty.
The other error of the committee consisted in omitting •
from the definition the qualifying words of the Statute of
Edward III, giving them "aid and comfort", which determine
the meaning of adhering to the public enemy. So Mr. Gover-
neur Morris and Mr. Randolph wished to substitute words of the
British statute—
Whereas it is essential to the preservation of liberty to de
fine precisely and exclusively what shall constitute the
crime of Treason, it is therefore ordained, declared^ estab
lished, that if a man do levy war against the U. S., within
their territories, or to be adherent to the enemies of the U.S.
within the said territories, giving them aid and comfort within
their territories, pr'elsewhere;iandUhereof be provably attainted
of open deed by the people of his condition, he shall be adjudged
45
guilty of Treason.^
With respect to the nature of the evidence of this crime, the
committee of detail provide that no person should be convicted
of treason^unless on the testimony of two witnesses. ‘ But to
make this more definite, it was provided by an Amendment,
that the testimony of "two witnesses should be to the same
overt act" which Franklin favored because he believed that
prosecution for virulent perjury too easily made use against
innocence. Here again appears one of his outstanding charac
teristics. Throughout the Constitution he wanted each clause
to be just to the people.
Dr. Franklin seconded the motion made by Colonel Mason
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the States to
prepare a clause or clauses for establishing an Executive
Council, as a Council of State, for the President of the United
States, to consist of six members, two of which from the East
ern, two from the middle, and two from the Southern States,
with a Rotation and duration of office similar to those of
the Senate; such Council to be appointed by the Legislature
or by the Senate.^
As Madison believes, so does Franklin, that an Executive
Council would be advisable. Franklin was of the opinion that
we placed too much confidence in one, but fears cabals in <
appointing a Council.^
He believed that
The Steady Course of public Measures is most probably to be
expected from a Humber.
A single Person’s Measures may be good. The successor.
^Tansill. op. cit., 577,
^Tbid.. 687.
®rbid., 687.
46. .
often differs in opinion of those Measures, & adopts others.
Often is ambitious of distinguishing himself, by opposing them,
and offering new Projects. One is peaceably dispos’d. Another
may be fond of War, etc. Hence foreign States can never have
Confidence in the Treaties or Friendships of such a Government
as in that which is conducted by a Humber.
The single head may be Sick. Who is to conduct the Public
Affairs in that Case? When he dies, who are to conduct, till
a new Election?— If a Council, why not continue them? Shall
we be harrass’d with Pactions for the Election of Successors?
become like Poland, weak from our Dissensions?^
He believed that an executive council would strengthen
our power and also would serve either as a check or an aid on
the President. As he states, it would he a "check on a bad
President, or a relief to a good one."^ As an aid it would
be able to discuss the things before they came into the hands
of the President, and giving their suggestions as to the value
of a measure.
Mr. Randolph’s opinions did not fully coincide with those
of Mr. Hamilton in regard to the method of deciding on the
Constitution. Mr. Hamilton’s plan was to
Refer the Constitution for final ratification by refer
ring the same to the consideration of a Convention of Deputies
in each State, to be chosen by the people thereof, and that it
be recommended to the said Legislatures in their respective
acts for organizing such convention to declare, that if the
said Convention shall approve of the said Constitution such
approbation shall be binding and conclusive upon the State and
further that if the said convention shall be of the opinion
that the same upon the assent of any nine states hereto, ought
to take effect between the states so assentive, such opinion
shall thereupon be also binding upon such State, and the said
Constitution shall take effect between the States assenting
thereto.5
^Max Parrand, The Records of the Federal Convention, I, 102.
^Tansill, op. cit., 687.
Sibid., 701.
47
But Mr. Randolph objected, and stated:
.....The only mode in which his embarrassments could be re
moved, was that of submitting the plan to Congress to go from
them to the State Legislatures, and from these to State Con
ventions having power to adopt, reject or amend; the process
to close with another General Convention with full power to
adopt or reject the alterations proposed by State conventions,
and to establish finally the Government. He accordingly
proposed a Resolution to this effect.%
So this Proposition, moved by Mr. Randolph, was seconded by
Franklin.
In the powers delegated to Congress by the Constitution
in Article One, Section 8, provided that "Congress may by
joint ballot appoint a treasurer; they shall have power to
establish post offices and post roads." Franklin also believed
that Congress should be given the power to make internal im
provements. Thus he moved to insert the words "a power to
P
provide for cutting canals where deemed necessary," after
the words "post roads." This motion was discussed, modified
and then passed.
After the Constitution was completed, Franklin urged the
members to sign it. He did hot^ think that all parts were
satisfactory, but felt that some sort of a government w^as
necessary, so made a speech to the Convention in behalf of
it. He felt that they could never come to an agreement in
which all would be perfectly satisfied. So he states: "Sir,
I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if there
^Tansill, op. cit., 701.
759.
48
are such; because I think a general government necessary for
us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a
blessing to the people if well administered."^ He felt per
fectly satisfied that the Convention as a whole had done its
best and doubted whether any other Convention would be able
to do better. He then asked the question,
.....From such an assembly can a perfect production be ex
pected? It therefore astonishes me. Sir, to find this system
approaching so near to perfection as it does; and I think it
will astonish our enemies, who are waiting with confidence to
hear that our councils are confounded like those of the Build
ers of Babel; and that our States are on the point of separa
tion, only to meet hereafter for the purpose of cutting one
another’s throats. Thus I consent. Sir, to this Constitution
because I expect no better, and because I am not sure, that it
is not the best. The opinions I have had of its errors, I
sacrifice to the public good. I have never whispered a syl
lable of them abroad. Within these walls they were born, and
here they shall die. If every one of us in returning to our
Constituents were to report the objections he has had to it,
and endeavor to gain partisans in support of them, we might
prevent its being generally received, and thereby lose all the
salutary effects & great advantages resulting naturally in our
favor among foreign Hâtions as well as among ourselves, from
our real or apparent unanimity. Much of the strength & ef
ficiency of any Government in procuring and securing happin
ess to the people, depends, on opinion, on the general opin-
ioh of the goodness of the Government, as well as of the wis
dom and integrity of its Governors. I hope therefore that
for our own sakes as a part of the people, and for the sake
of posterity, we shall act heartily and unanimously in re
commending this Constitution (if approved by Congress & con
firmed by the Conventions) wherever our influence may extend,
and turn our future thoughts & endeavors to the means of hav
ing it well administred,*
^Tansill, op. cit., 724.
740.
CHAPTER IV
PROPOSITIONS OPPOSED BY FRANKLIN
Franklin was not as active as many of the other members,
and although he opposed some measures which should have been
put into the Constitution and which finally were put in, he
opposed more measures which did not belong in the Constitu
tion and which were fortunately left out. The same general
plan, as far as possible, will be followed in this section
as used for the previous chapter in the discussion of propo
sitions favored.
Franklin was opposed to the proposition of the executive
receiving compensation. In the paying of the executive, he
felt that many difficulties might arise, but none in refus
ing— instead, many advantages. So he made a motion that the
compensation for the services of the executive be postponed
in order to substitute "whose necessary expenses shall be de
frayed, but who shall receive no salary, stipend, fee, or re
ward for their services.In this office he thought that
honor should be placed before nominees as the outstanding fac
tor. In this case we would avoid having money seekers aspire
to the position of President, as he states, "Sir, there are
two passions which have powerful influence on the affairs of
men. There are Ambition and Avarice; the love of power and
the love of money." He was not thinking of the present only.
^Charles Tansill, Formation of the Union, 157.
50,
"but also of the future. It was not the moderate salaries at
the beginning, but the fact that they would continue to get
bigger throughout. There would always be a group that would
give more to the rulers so that the rulers v/ould give more to
them, thus making continuous warfare between the governing and
governed. Through the increasing of salaries the people would
be heavily burdened with taxes; through heavy taxation the
people would become oppressed and discontented. Franklin
thought that in some future time the government would end in
a monarchy, but if a system was worked out carefully, and so
devised that it would not sow the seed of contention, faction
and tumult, by making places of profit out of our posts of
honor.^
He gives as an example of this the office of the high
sheriff of a county in England which is considered an honor
able office, but is not a profitable one. It is an expensive
office, and therefore not sought for. But it is executed well
p
and by some outstanding citizen.
Hot only in England, but in other countries, such as
France, there is the office of counsellor, where the office
is purchased at a high price, and it was considered a great
honor to be allowed to hold this office.
These examples were not expected by Franklin to be fol
lowed in our system, but were set up to show the pleasure of
doing a service for the country, without receiving some means
Madison, Debates in Federal Convention, 93
^Tansill, op. cit.. 137-139.
51'
of inducement of pecuniary satisfaction. In our own country
we have had men serve us faithfully in times of war, and felt
that in any other office they would do likewise for their coun
try. He felt that we could secure men who would serVe faith
fully in the office of President without having a fee paid.
It was postponed. Although Mr. Hamilton had seconded the mo
tion, he had done this more or less in great respect for the
author, rather than from any apparent conviction of its ex
pediency or practicability.^
On the proposition of giving the executive an absolute
veto on the laws, a number of the members believed that
this would be exercised too much. Franklin opposed an ab
solute veto as he had some experience with this check of the
executive on the colonial legislature under the proprietary
government of Pennsylvania. As he states, the executive was
constantly trying to extort money. Ho good law whatever could
be passed without private bargains with him. An increase of
his salary, or some donation was always made a condition, till
at last it became the regular practice to have orders in his
favor on the treasury, presented along with the bills to be
signed, so that he might actually receive the former before
he should sign the latter. He was afraid that if a negative
should be given as proposed," that more power and money would
be demanded, till at last enough would be gotten to influence
and bribe the legislature into a complete subjection to the
will of the executive. He did not think it would be wise un
^Tansill, op. cit., 141
52
less the executive was to have a council. Mr. Sherman agreed
with Franklin in that he did not believe that one man should
be able to stop the will of the whole,^ But Mr. Wilson dis
agreed in that he did not believe that Pennsylvania was a
good example as the executive was not appointed by the Pres-
2
ident. This question aroused a great deal of debate and
Colonel Mason believed that the experience was the real test.
He was opposed to giving the President the absolute veto. He
did not want a monarchy to be attempted in this country. So,
like Franklin, he opposed the executive beihg allowed an ab
solute negative. When this clause was voted on, it failed to
%
pass.
Although Franklin believed that the legislators should
receive some compensation, he was opposed to giving them a
"liberal" compensation. He preferred to have the word "mod
erate" replace the word "liberal." He gives the example;^
He remarked the tendency of abuses in every case, to grow of
themselves, when once begun, and related very pleasantly the
progression in ecclesiastical benefices, from the first de
parture from the gratuitous provision for the Apostles, to
the establishment of the papal system.
The word liberal was struck out,
Nevertheless, the report was not considered as a whole.
One of the most debated clauses was that of money bills. In
^Tansill, op. cit.. 148.
^Ibid.. 149.
^Ibid.. 151.
^Ibid.. 194.
53
the dealing with financial matters he opposed the clause provid
ing that hills for appropriations should originate in the
first branch and shall not be altered by the second. As he
did not believe in restraining the second branch from meddling
with money bills. Feeling the best could be attained, if the
money matters were confined to the immediate representative
of the people. As he considered it important that the people
know who had disposed of their money, and how it had been dis
posed. Thus the second branch who were the true representa
tives, would be the better judge.
He opposed the election of members in Congress by Free
holders, believing we should not depress the virtue and pub
lic spirit of our common people. He did not believe we had
the right to narrow their public spirit, "which they dis
played a great deal during the war, and which contributed
principally to the favorable issue of it. He did not be
lieve that the elected had any right in any case to dictate
as to the privileges of the electors. He quoted as arbitrary
the British Statute setting forth the danger of tumultuous
meetings, and under that pretext, narrowing the right of suf
frage to persons having freeholds of a certain value; observ
ing that this Statute was soon followed by another under the
succeeding Parliament, subjecting the people who had no votes
to peculiar labors and hardships.^ Unlike Mr. Madison, he
believed that everyone should be given the vote.
^Tansill, op. cit., 490.
^Ibld.. 490.
54
Mr. Madison maintained that there should be some régula-
1
tion. He stated that
The right of suffrage is certainly one of the fundamental
articles of the republican Government..... A gradual abridge
ment of this has been the mode in which Aristocracies have
been built on the ruins of popular form. Whether the Constitu
tional qualification ought to be a freeholder, would, with
him depend much on the probable reception such a change
would meet with in States where the right was now exercised
by every description of people Viewing the subject in its
merit alone, the freeholders of the Country would be safest
depositories of Republican liberty,
Mr. Madison believed that in the future the great majority of
the people would own property, thus giving practically every
one the vote. But Franklin maintained there were a number
who were not freeholders who would feel displeased at being
disfranchised, such as q, substantial farmer’s son, who would
not necessarily hold land of his own, and many others in a
similar position.
He believed that by confining the privileges of voting
to the freeholders, it would be injurious to the lower class,
and if we denied them the right of suffrage it would debase
their spirit and detach their interest from the' country.^ Hé
expressed his dislike of everything that tended to.debase
this spirit of the common people:
If honesty was often the companion of wealth, and if poverty
was exposed to peculiar temptation, it was not less true that
the possession of property'increased the desire for more prop-
èrty. Some of the greatest rogues I was ever acquainted with,
were the richest rogues,....This Constitution will be much
read and attended to in Europe, and if it should betray a
great partiality to the rich, will not only hurt us in the
esteem of the most liberal and enlightened men there, but will
^Tansill, op, cit.. 489,
^Max Farrand, op. cit., II, 208.
65
discourage the common people from removing into this country.
As many of the natives took part and helped us during the Rev
olution, serving us faithfully, thus showing their preference
to this country, we should give them our affection and con
fidence. Therefore I would be sorry to see any illiberality
inserted into the Constitution.
Although many of the members believed that a certain
property qualification of a definite number of years be placed,
Franklin thought that the common people should have as many
privileges as the others.
^Tsmsill, op. eit.t 512,
CHAPTER Y
ESTIMATE OF THE WORK AND INFLUENCE
OF BENJAMIN FRANKLIN
Each member of the convention in some way contributed
his part to the formation of the constitution, although some
did not play as important a part as others. According to
historians, Washington and Franklin stand out from the others,
each being unique in his own specified way. McLaughlin has
divided the delegates into three groups: there were a few
great constructive statesmen like Madison, Wilson and Ham
ilton, who had thorough knowledge of history and politics and
were at the same time original, profound and practical think
ers. These men took the initiative. They were ably support
ed by a class of delegates, of whom Washington was the most
conspicuous example, who proposed very little but whose
steady conservatism and powerful influences were indispensa
ble. "Wo less useful were a few compromisers or conciliators,
like Ellsworth, Sherman and Franklin, who, by their tact on
more than one occasion, prevented the Assembly from breaking
up in confusion.So we see Washington and Franklin, al
though in different groups, still had great influence on the
framing of the Constitution. As stated above, Elson has said
that "First among the framers of our Constitution stands Washing-
^Thomas F. Moran, The Formation and Development of the Con
st ituti on. 63,
67.
ton, the soldier statesman, and next to him we must place
Franklin, the philosopher and diplomat, and the oldest man in
the convention.At the time of the convention, he was eighty,
one and his life had been full of activity. He had rare judg
ment, wide knowledge of men and profound insight into human
motives, and a capacity for generous appreciation of the sen^ -
timent of his fellow-men. He spent his early life working
for the freedom of the colonies. In 1754 he drafted one of
the first plans for uniting the colonies and presented it to
the Albany Congress. Although this was not the final draft
presented, it apparently was the basis for it. He spent four
teen years in England endeavoring to solve the problems of the
provinces. In 1757-1762 he represented the Pennsylvania As
sembly and subsequently extended the agency to include Georgia,
New Jersey, and Massachusetts. When he returned, he was
a member of the Second Continental Congress and was a mem
ber of the committee which drew up the Declaration of Independ
ence and also one of the signers. He then became a minister
to France in which capacity he served from 1776-1785 and by
his diplomacy did more than any other one man to secure the
French alliance! When the Constitution had been finally
adopted it seemed like his hard work and patience had been
well repaid and his idea of union for which he had been work
ing since 1754 had been at last realized. At first the people
of his state felt keenly disappointed that he failed to be
elected as a delegate to the convention, but before it met he
^H. W. Elson, History of the United States. II, 152.
58
had been chosen one of the delegates.
Although he spoke but seldom, his influence was always
exerted to cool the ardor of debate, and to check the tendency
of such discussion to result in irreconcilable differences.
His views were treated with utmost respect. Due to his poor
memoryf his remarks were carefully written out and read by
one of his colleagues. He made no pretensions as a speaker,
and thus disposed of every question with extraordinary brev
ity, sometimes by a songle sentence.^ Nevertheless, he did
state his opinions from which I have drawn my conclusion as
to his attitude toward the articles which were brought up for
discussion.
The Articles of Confederation had become weakened and
there was a necessity of either amending the old articles or
forming a new constitution. At first Franklin favored amend
ing the Articles of Confederation. When sentiment in favor
of a new constitution seemed to prevail he acquiesced because
he desired that the central government be efficient. He ad
vocated a simple government rather tha,n a complex one.
Franklin believed in a plural executive as he did not
want to vest too much power in one person. He believed that
a single executive would be a stepping stone upon the road to
monarchy. Therefore, he felt the executive department should
be composed of two or three members. This was rejected and
it was decided that the executive should consist of one person.
^Hampton L. Carson, One Hundredth Anniversary of the Framing
of the Constitution of the United States, 163.
69
On this decision Franklin suggested that he serve for
a term of seven years and he ineligible for re-election. When
it was decided that the presidential term was to be four years
and eligible for re-election, he did not raise serious object
ions. He thought that if the executive was to be made up of
one person, a council should be appointed to aid him, feeling
that it would serve as a check on a bad president and aid to
a good president. He also believed that there should be
established an impeachment system whereby the executive might
be impeached for malpractice or neglect of duty.
Franklin preferred a single-house legislature, the num
ber of representatives being determined by population. In
the convention the only vote against the bicameral legisla
ture was that of Pennsylvania in deference to Franklin. He
accepted the verdict of the convention of a bicameral leg
islature without debate.
Although Franklin would have approved proportional
representation in both houses, when the debate came up he
suggested a compromise. In this he suggested having pro
portional representation in one house and equal representa
tion in the second. Members of the legislature were to be
apportioned according to the population of the states re
spectively; and all bills for raising and spending money,
the decision was to be made in the second branch, as it
really represented the people. Franklin believed that all
matters relating to money should be made public. He believed
that the members of the legislature should be elected by the
people rather than by a few electors and that'the election be
60'
open to everyone rather than the few holding land. The leg
islature in his opinion, should receive compensation, hut it
should be moderate rather than liberal. He also favored the
judges receiving compensation and that it ought to be reg
ulated by Congress according to their work. Although it was
generally considered that the judges should be appointed by
an act of the legislature, Franklin was of the opinion that
they should be chosen by eminent lawyers.
He opposed a number of propositions which were brought
up for discussion in the convention. The first of these was
the president receiving compensation. Likewise, he opposed
giving the president an absolute veto, which he thought could
readily be converted into a weapon of coercion and oppression.
Franklin apparently was fair in all his dealings and
wanted to be of service to the people. He opposed property
qualification for representatives, judges and the president.
Likewise, he opposed the requirement of a residence of four
teen years as a preliminary to naturalization, thinking a
four year period sufficient. Throughout his discussion, he
always was democratic in his measures.
Although he did not consider the constitution a perfect
document, he urged that it be accepted due to the fact that
he felt a more efficient government than that of the Confedera
tion was absolutely necessarj'’ and therefore besought the mem
bers to accept it, as he considered that it was as near per
fect as could be drawn up by a body of men.
He attended the convention regularly, missing only the
first session, yet he was not what one could consider a con-
61
structive influence. Of the six motions he made, only two •
were passed and neither of these were very important. Of the
six motions he seconded, only one was passed. He served on
two committees, one, the committee on representation in the
second branch, being of importance. This committee drew up
the "Great Compromise" which, when modified, had been adopted.
The other was to report Articles of Association for encourag
ing by advice, influence and the example of members, economy,
frugality, and American manufactures. Of the twenty-seven
speeches he made, only three were of a long duration. These
were all conciliatory, urging the members to consult rather
than to contend.
Although Franklin was not a real constructive influence
and as Moran states, "most of his ideas were mistaken ones,"
still we must remember that he influenced the convention
greatly as a harmoniser* When the small states were ready
to withdraw from the convention, Franklin presented the com
promise and urged them to take part. The key note is that
Franklin was greatly respected and almost reverenced. On
the motion made by Franklin that the executive should re
ceive no salary other than his necessary expenses, we must
recall that it was seconded by Mr. Hamilton in due respect to
Franklin rather than because of the real value of the motion.
Another instance may be recalled. At the end of the convention
the resolution read by Franklin had been formerly drawn up by
Gouveneur Morris, and put into Franklin*s hands knowing it
would be passed more readily. Throughout Madison * s notes we
discern the respect shown Franklin by the members in relation
62r
to his motions, speeches, and opinions. He brought to the
convention the prestige of a great name and rare fund of know
ledge. The members of the convention admired him for what
he was and what he had already done. It is probably true
that some things he stressed were Franklin’s own originality,
but he preferred to follow rather than to lead, and, in a
number of cases, turned from his original belief to that of
another rather than to cause unpleasantness. Nevertheless,
as Moran says:^
His great age, his venerable and benignant aspect, his wide
reputation, his acute and sagacious philosophy would have
given him controllong weight in a much more turbulent and
far less intelligent assembly.
He was called by Curtis the "American Socrates." He
was second to Washington in reputation and popularity.^ He
was a great scientist, philosopher and a great diplomat.
He was cosmopolitan in character and appealed to all men of
all nationalities. Morse states:^
It may be doubted whether any one man ever had so many, such
constant, such firm friends as in three different nations
formed about him. In States and in France he was loved and
as he grew into old age he was revered, not only by those
who knew him. Even in England where for years he was arch
rebel of all America, he was generally held in respect and
esteem, and had many friends whose confidence no event could
shake....
The chief motive of his life was to promote the welfare of
^Moran, op. cit., 78,
^ax Farrand. Making of the Constitution, 22
^Morse, on. cit.. 414.
63
mankind. This is shown to be fully carried out in the demo
cratic measures which he presented in the convention and
throughout his political career. Bancroft calls him "the
greatest diplomat of his century." This was probably due to
his knowledge and interest in human affairs.
When Congress heard of his death a resolution was moved
by Mr. Madison that the members should wear the customary
badge of mourning for one month. A similar resolution was
passed by the executive council of Pennsylvania. Not only
was his loss mourned in the United States but in many coun
tries on the two Continents,
Thus we see an eminent patriot loved by everyone and
one who had gained the fame of the whole land through his
high moral and intellectual standing. He was considered a
great genius, scientist, philosopher, statesman, and, above
all, a great American.
This study has shown that Franklin entered the Constitu
tional Convention with a great reputation and that much was
expected of him. It has also shown that his greatest con
tribution was probably radically different from that which
was anticipated. Because of his advanced age and great
feebleness he did not take a very active part in work of the
convention and because of the uniqueness of his ideas, prac
tically all of which the delegates rejected, his constructive
influence was small.
Franklin’s role was rather that of harmoniser and com
promiser. He may be given the credit of holding the convention
64
together several times when it was about to be disrupted*
To him also may be given great credit for some of the com
promises adopted without which no agreement would have been
secured. He was largely responsible for the so-called "Great
Compromise" without which there would have been no Constitu
tion of the United States drafted by the Convention of 1787.
BIBLIOGRAPHY ■
Source
Annals of the Congress of the United States, vol. II Com
prising with vol. I, the period from March 3, 1789 to
March 3, 1791, inclusive. Printed and published by Gales
and Heaton, Washington, 1834,
Appleton, Cyclopedia of American Biography, Revised edition,
edited by James G. Wilson and John Fiske. D. Appleton
Company, Mew York, 1899.
Bigelow, John, Complete Works of Franklin, 12 volumes., G. P, ^
Putnam’s Sons, Mew York, 1904,
Carson, H. L., The One-Hundredth Anniversary of the Constitu
tion of the United States, Princeton Historical Associa-
tion, Princeton, Mew Jersey, 1909.
Documentary History of the Constitution of the United States
of America, 5 vols,, Published by the Department of State,
Washington, 1894,
Elliot, Jonathan, editor. The Debates in the Several State
Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution,
5 vols., Lippincott and Company, Phi1adelphia, 1836-1845.
Ellsworth, Oliver, "Letters of a Landholder." Printed in Far-
rand’s Records of the Federal Convention, vol. Ill, Yale
University Press, Mew Haven, 1911.
Farrand. Max, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787,
3 vols., Yale University Press, Mew Haven, 1911.
Farrand. Max, "The Records of the Federal Convention," The
American Historica,l Review, vol. 13, pp. 44-65 October,
1907, “
Ford, Paul Leicester, editor. Pamphlets on the Constitution of
the United States, Published during its discussion by
the People, 1787-88. Brooklyn, Mew York, 1888.
Franklin, William Temple, Works in Philosophy, Politics and
Morals, 6 vols,. The Macmillan Company, Mew York, 19ÜS,
Hale, Edward E., Franklin in France, 2 vols. Roberts Brothers,
Boston, 1887,
66
Hamilton, Alexander, "Motes in the Federal Convention,"
American Historical Review, vol. 10. no. 97-109. OcYFber.
1904.
Hamilton, Alexander, James Madison, and John Jay, The Feder
alist, edited by Henry Cabot Lodge, G. F. Putnam’s Sons,
Mew York, 1888.
Hart, A. H., jWerican History told by Contemporaries, 4 vols.
The Macmillan Company, Mew York, 1902,
Madison, James, Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787
Which Framed the Constitution of the United States of
America, edited by Gaillard Hunt and J. B. Scott, Oxford
University Press, American Branch, Mew York, 1920.
McHenry, James, "Papers on the Federal Convention of 1787,"
American Historical Review, vol. II, pp. 595-624, April,
1906.
Parton, James, Life and Times of Benjamin Franklin, 2 vols., ^
Houghton, Mifflin Company, Boston, 1864.
Paterson, William, "Motes on the Federal Convention of 1787,"
American Historical Review, vol. 9, pp. 310-340, January,
1904.
Pierce, William, "Motes on the Federal Convention of 1787,"
American Historical Review, vol. 3, pp. 310-334, January,
1898.
Sparks, Jared, The Works of Benjamin Franklin, 10 vols.,
Child and Peterson, Philadelphia, 1840.
Smyth, A. H., Writings of Franklin, 10 vols., The Maemill^
' Company, Mew York, 1894.
Tansill, Charles, C., Compiler, Documents Illustrative of the
Formation of the Union of American States, House Document
Mo'. 398, 69th Congress, first session.. Government Print
ing Office, Washington, D. C., 1927.
Secondary Works
Adams, R. G., Political Ideas of the Revolution, Trinity
College Press, Durham, Morth Carolina, 1922.
Arnold, Howard Payson, Benjamin Franklin, Harper Brothers,
new york, 1899.
Avery, E. M., History of the United States and Its People,
6 vols., Burrow Brothers, Mew York, 1909.
67
> Histoyÿ of the United Btates of America
From the BlsQovery of the Continent> 6 vola>> ABPleton
and Company y New York# 1895 ♦
Banoroft, George, History of the Formation of the Constitua
tlon of the uSItedi States of America» a vole.. Annieton
and Company, New IforlcV 1895»
Beard, Charles A*, An Beonomlc Interpretation of the Const 1-
tlon of the United States» The Ma^lllan Gomnany_ New
York, 1913#
Beard, Charles A## and Mary, Bise of American Civilization»
E vols», f"he Macmillan Company, New York,
Beck, James M», %e Constitution of the United States, George
H* Doran Company, New York, 1924*,
Brace, William Cabell, Benjamin Franklin 8e1f*^revealed, 2
vols#. G# F# Fntnam*s Bons, New York, 1917# ^
Channlng, Edward, A History of the United States, 6 vols*,
"5ie Macmillan Gbmpany, New York, 1905-1925
Curtis, George T#, History of the Origin» Formation# and
Adoption of the Constitution of the IJniied States,Har-
per and! Brothers, New York, 1858*
Dwight, N., The Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of
Independence, A# S# Barnes and Company, New York, 1876#
Farrand, Max, The Fathers of the Constitution* Yale Unlver- ^
slty. Fress, New Haven, 1921.
____ , The Framing of the Constitution» Yale Univer-^ y/
slty Press, Hew Haven, l921# '
Fisher, George Sidney, The True Benjamin Franklin, The Llp^
plneott Company, Philadelphia, 1889*
, The Evolution of the Constitution of the
United States, J» B# Llpplncott company, Fhiladeiphla,
Flske, John, The Critical Period of American History, Hough
ton Mifflin and Company, New York, ÏÔÔ^*
Ford, Paul Leicester, The Many-Sided Benjamin Franklin#
Franklin, Benjamin, Autobiography> edited by John.
G. P. Putnam*s Sons, New York, *^n.d.»»
68.
, Autobiography, edited by Percy Boynton,
Barcourt Company, New York, 1926*
Hildreth, Richard, History of the United States of America,
6 vols*, Harper Brothers, Hew York, 1877*
Hudson, W* H. and Guernsey, I* S., The United States* Fred
erick A* Stokes and Company, New York, "n*d*"
Jameson, Jolui, "Studies in the History of the Federal Con
vention of 1787," Annual report of the American Histor
ical Association, vol. I, "n. p." 1902*
Johnston, Alexander, American Political History, 2 vols.,
edited by James Woodburn, G. P. Putnam’s Sons, Hew York,
1905.
Kasson, John, The Evolution of the Constitution of the United
States of America, Houghton Mifflin and Compa,ny, Hew
' York, 1904“
Landon, Judson S., The Constitutional History and Government
of the United States, Houghton Mifflin, and Company,
Hew York, 1889.
Latane, John, "Review of an Economic Interpretation of the
Constitution of the United States by Charles A. Beard,"
The American Political Science Review, pp. 697-700,
November 1913.
Long, Breckinridge, Genesis of the Constitution of the United
States of America* The Macmillan Company, Hew York, 1926*
Martin, Charles, E., An Introduction to the Study of the
American Constitution, Oxford University Press, Hew York,
1Ô2Ô.
McLaughlin, Andrew, The Confederation and the Constitution,
Harper and Brothers, Hew York, 1905*
McMaster, John Bach, Benjoin Franklin, American Men of
Letters, Houghton Mifflin Company, Hew York, 1096*
Growth of the Constitution in the F<
Tf87. Lippincott and Company, Philadelphia,
Meigs, William, The Growth of the Constitution in the Federal
Convention oT
1900.
Moran, Thomas Francis, Foundation and Development of the Con
Btitution in the History of Worth America, edited by (juy
Carleton Lee and Francis Hewton Thorpe, 20 vols., George
Barrie and Son, Philadelphia, 1904-09*
.
Morse, John Torey, Benjamin Franklin, Houghton Mifflin Com- i/
pany, Hew York, 1889.
Schuyler, Robert L., The Constitution of the United State's,
The Macmillan Company, New York, 1823.
Smith, Edward, "The Movement Toward a Second Constitutional
Convention in 1788," Essays in the Constitutional His
tory of the United States, edited by J. F. Jameson.
Houghton Mifflin, and Company, New York, 1889,
Thorpe, Francis N., The Constitutional History of the United
States. 3 vols., Callaghan and Company, Chicago, 1901,
________________, "The Origin of the Federal Constitution,"
Magazine of American History, pp. 131-141, August, 1887.
Von Holst, H., The Constitutional and Political History of
the United States, vol. I, Translated by John Laior and
Alfred Mason, Callaghan and Company, Chicago, 1877.
Walker, Francis, A., The Making of the Nation, Charles Scrib
ner’s Sons, New York, 1895.
Warren, Charles, The Making of the Constitution, Little,
Brown, and Company, Boston, 1928.
_________ , Congress, the Constitution and the Supreme
C ourt. Lit tie. Brown, and Company, Boston, 1925.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The influence of Pennsylvania on the framing of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of North Carolina on the framing and adoption of the Constitution of 1787

PDF

The influence of South Carolina on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of New York on the framing and adoption of the federal Constitution

PDF

The influence of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of Massachusetts on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of Maryland on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of Connecticut on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of Virginia on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of Edmund Randolph on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of John Rutledge on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of George Mason on the framing and adoption of the Constitution of the U.S

PDF

The influence of New Jersey on the framing and adoption of the federal constitution

PDF

The influence of Oliver Ellsworth in the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of Hugh Williamson upon the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of Roger Sherman in the framing and adoption of the Constitution

PDF

The influence of James Madison upon the adoption and ratification of the constitution

PDF

The influence of Georgia in framing the Constitution

PDF

The influence of John Dickinson on the making and adoption of the Constitution of the U.S

PDF

Influence of Delaware on the adoption of the federal Constitution

Asset Metadata

Creator Sheridan, Edith Roberta (author)

Core Title Influence of Benjamin Franklin on the framing and adoption of the Constitution

Degree Master of Arts

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,Social Sciences

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c37-422186

Unique identifier UC11657830

Identifier EP59134.pdf (filename),usctheses-c37-422186 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier EP59134.pdf

Dmrecord 422186

Document Type Thesis

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Sheridan, Edith Roberta

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA