A Benjamin Franklin Reader (45 page)

As the days grew even hotter, so again did the dispute over representation.

Once again it was time for Franklin to try to restore equanimity, and this time he did so in an unexpected way. In a speech on June 28, he suggested that they open each session with a prayer.

Franklin was a believer, even more so as he grew older, in a rather general and at times nebulous divine providence, the principle that God had a benevolent interest in the affairs of men. But he never showed much faith in the more specific notion of providence which held that God would intervene directly based on personal prayer. So the question arises: Did he make his proposal for prayer out of a deep religious faith or out of a pragmatic political belief that it would encourage calm in the deliberations?

There was, as usual, probably an element of both, but perhaps a bit more of the latter. Franklin was never known to pray publicly himself, and he rarely attended church. Yet he thought it useful to remind this assembly of demi-gods that they were in the presence of a God far greater, and that history was watching as well. In order to succeed they had to be awed by the magnitude of their task and be humbled, not assertive.

Alexander Hamilton warned that the sudden hiring of a chaplain might frighten the public into thinking that “embarrassments and dissensions within the convention had suggested this measure.” Franklin replied that a sense of alarm outside the hall might help rather than hurt the deliberations within. Another objection was raised, that there was no money to pay a chaplain. The idea was quietly shelved.

T
HE
C
ONSTITUTIONAL
C
ONVENTION
, J
UNE
28, 1787

Mr. President,

The small progress we have made after 4 or 5 weeks close attendance and continual reasonings with each other, our different sentiments on almost every question, several of the last producing as many
noes
as
ayes,
is methinks a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the human understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own want of political wisdom, since we have been running all about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of government, and examined the different forms of those republics, which, having been originally formed with the seeds of their own dissolution, now no longer exist. And we have viewed modern states all round Europe, but find none of their constitutions suitable to our circumstances.

In this situation of this assembly, groping, as it were, in the dark, to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, sir, that we have not, hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the father of lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for the divine protection! Our prayers, sir, were heard; and they were graciously answered. All of us, who were engaged in the struggle, must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need its assistance?

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 probable 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. I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel: we shall be divided by our little partial local interests, our projects will be confounded and we ourselves shall become a reproach and a byword down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter, from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing government by human wisdom, and leave it to chance, war and conquest. I therefore beg leave to move,

That henceforth prayers, imploring the assistance of heaven, and its blessing on our deliberations, be held in this assembly every morning before we proceed to business; and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate in that service.

Note by Franklin: The Convention except three or four Persons, thought Prayers
unnecessary!!

The convention did finally compromise on a proportional House and a Senate with equal votes per state, a motion that was formally made by Franklin. It was a triumph of conciliation and humility and the respect for other opinions that undergirds a democracy.

Franklin’s final triumph was to express these sentiments, with a wry but powerful charm, in a remarkable closing address to the convention. The speech was a testament to the virtue of intellectual tolerance and to the evil of presumed infallibility, and it proclaimed for the ages the enlightened creed that became central to America’s freedom. With his deft and self-deprecating use of double negatives—“I am not sure I shall never approve it,” “I am not sure that it is not the best”—he emphasized the humility and appreciation for human fallibility that was necessary to form a nation. They were the most eloquent words Franklin ever wrote—and perhaps the best ever written by anyone about the magic of the American system and the spirit that created it. Compromisers may not make great heroes, but they do make great democracies.

C
ONSTITUTIONAL
C
ONVENTION
,
CONCLUDING SPEECH
, S
EPTEMBER
17, 1787

Mr. President,

I confess that I do not entirely approve this Constitution at present, but sir, I am not sure I shall never approve it: for having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged, by better information or fuller consideration, to change opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others. Most men indeed as well as most sects in religion, think themselves in possession of all truth, and that wherever others differ from them it is so far error. Steele, a Protestant, in a dedication tells the pope, that the only difference between our two churches in their opinions of the certainty of their doctrine, is, the Romish church is infallible, and the Church of England is never in the wrong. But though many private persons think almost as highly of their own infallibility, as of that of their sect, few express it so naturally as a certain French lady, who in a little dispute with her sister, said, I don’t know how it happens, sister, but I meet with no body but myself that’s
always
in the right.
Il n’y a que moi a toujours raison.

In these sentiments, sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general government necessary for us, there is no
form
of government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered; and I believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other. I doubt too whether any other convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution: for when you assemble a number of men to have the advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those men all their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests, and their selfish views. From such an assembly can a perfect production be expected? 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 builders of Babel, and that our states are on the point of separation, 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 syllable 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 and great advantages resulting naturally in our favor among foreign nations, as well as among ourselves, from our real or apparent unanimity.

Much of the strength and efficiency of any government in procuring and securing happiness to the people depends on opinion, on the general opinion of the goodness of that government as well as of the wisdom and integrity of its governors. I hope therefore that for our own sakes, as a part of the people, and for the sake of our posterity we shall act heartily and unanimously in recommending this Constitution, wherever our influence may extend, and turn our future thoughts and endeavors to the means of having it well administered.

On the whole, sir, I cannot help expressing a wish, that every member of the convention, who may still have objections to it, would with me on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility, and to make
manifest
our
unanimity
put his name to this instrument.

Franklin’s closest sibling was his sister Jane Franklin Mecom. His letters to her were always informative and affectionate, and he lamented that he was unlikely ever to see her again. He could, however, still chide her for her sloppiness in keeping post office accounts and make fun of the edgy qualities of their relatives.

T
O
J
ANE
M
ECOM
, A
UGUST
3, 1789

Dear Sister,

I have received your kind letter of the 23rd past, and am glad to learn that you have at length got some of those I so long since wrote to you. I think your post office is very badly managed. I expect your bill, and shall pay it when it appears. I would have you put the books into cousin Jonathan’s hands who will dispose of them for you if he can, or return them hither. I am very much pleased to hear that you have had no misunderstanding with his good father. Indeed if there had been any such, I should have concluded that it was your fault for I think our family were always subject to being a little miffy. By the way, is our relationship in Nantucket quite worn out? I have met with none from thence of late years who were disposed to be acquainted with me, except Capt. Timothy Foulger. They are wonderfully shy. But I admire their honest plainness of speech. About a year ago I invited two of them to dine with me. Their answer was that they would if they could not do better. I suppose they did better, for I never saw them afterwards; and so had no opportunity of showing my miff, if I had one. Give my love to cousin Williams’s, and thank them from me for all their kindess to you, which I have always been acquainted with by you, and take as if done to myself. I am sorry to learn from his son, that his health is not so firm as formerly. A journey hither by land might do him good, and I should be happy to see him. I shall make the addition you desire to my superscriptions, desiring in return that you would make a subtraction from yours. The word excellency does not belong to me, and dr. Will be sufficient to distinguish me from my grandson. This family joins in love to you and yours, with

Your affectionate Brother,

B. Franklin

To Noah Webster, the famous lexicographer who had dedicated his
Dissertations on the English Language
to him, Franklin lamented the loose new word usages infecting the language, a common complaint of curmudgeonly writers but a bit atypical of the jovial Franklin, who had once taken pleasure in inventing new English words and, with even more pleasure, amusing the ladies of Paris with new French ones.

T
O
N
OAH
W
EBSTER
, D
ECEMBER
26, 1789

Dear Sir,

I received some time since your
Dissertations on the English Language.
(The book was not accompanied by any letter or message, informing me to whom I am obliged for it; but I suppose it is to yourself.) It is an excellent work, and will be greatly useful in turning the thoughts of our countrymen to correct writing. Please to accept my thanks for it, as well as for the great honor you have done me, in its dedication. I ought to have made this acknowledgment sooner, but much indisposition prevented me.

I cannot but applaud your zeal for preserving the purity of our language, both in its expressions and pronunciation, and in correcting the popular errors, several of our states are continually falling into with respect to both. Give me leave to mention some of them, though possibly they may already have occurred to you. I wish however that in some future publication of yours, you would set a discountenancing mark upon them. The first I remember is the word
improved.
When I left New England in the year 23, this word had never been used among us, as far as I know, but in the sense of
ameliorated
or
made better,
except once in a very old book of Dr. Mather’s entitled
remarkable providences.
As that eminent man wrote a very obscure hand, I remember that when I read that word in his book, used instead of the word
employed,
I conjectured that it was an error of the printer, who had mistaken a too short
l
in the writing for an
r,
and a
y
with too short a tail for a
v,
whereby
employed
was converted into
improved;
but when I returned to Boston in 1733, I found this change had obtained favor, and was then become common; for I met with it often in perusing the newspapers, where it frequently made an appearance rather ridiculous: such, for instance, as the advertisement of a country-house to be sold, which had been many years
improved
as a tavern; and in the character of a deceased country-gentleman, that he had been, for more than 30 years,
improved
as a justice-of-peace. This use of the word
improve
is peculiar to New England, and not to be met with among any other speakers of English, either on this or the other side of the water.

During my late absence in France I find that several other new words have been introduced into our parliamentary language; for example, I find a verb formed from the substantive
notice, I should not have
noticed this, were it not that the gentleman &c. Also another verb, from the substantive,
advocate, the gentleman who
advocates, or
who has
advocated that motion, &c. Another from the substantive
progress,
the most awkward and abominable of the three,
the committee having
progressed resolved to adjourn. The word
opposed,
though not a new word, I find used in a new manner, as,
the gentlemen who are
opposed to this measure, to which I have
also myself always been
opposed. If you should happen to be of my opinion with respect to these innovations you will use your authority in reprobating them…

I congratulate you on your marriage of which the newspapers inform me. My best wishes attend you, being, with sincere esteem sir,

Your most obedient and most humble Servant,

B. Franklin