The Compleated Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin (1757-1790)

by Benjamin Franklin

  If our people who neither paid rents nor tithes would only pay honestly in taxes half what other nations paid in those articles, our whole debt might have been discharged in twelve months. But I conceived the difficulty lay in the collection of our taxes, thro’ the dispersed situation of our inhabitants, and the excessive trouble of going from house to house many miles to collect a few shillings from each, often obliged to repeat the calls.

  ALL PROPERTY IS THE CREATURE OF SOCIETY

  The problem is that our people in America were unwilling to pay taxes. I saw in some resolutions of town meetings, a remonstrance against giving Congress a power to take, as they call it, the people’s money out of their pockets, tho’ only to pay the interest and principal of debts duly contracted. They seemed to mistake the point. Money justly due from the people is their creditor’s money, and no longer the money of the people, who, if they withhold it, should be compelled to pay by some law. Private property is a creature of society and is subject to the calls of that society whenever its necessities shall require it, even to its last farthing. All property indeed, except the savage’s temporary cabin, his bow, his match coat, and other little acquisitions absolutely necessary for his subsistence, seems to me to be the creature of public convention. Hence the public has the right of regulating inheritances and all other conveyances of property, and even of limiting the quantity and the uses of it. All the property that is necessary for a man for the conservation of the individual and the propagation of the species is his natural right, which none can justly deprive him of. But of all properties of the public, who by their laws have created it, and who may therefore by other laws dispose of it, the welfare of the public shall demand their disposition. He that does not like civil society on these terms, let him retire and live among savages. He can have no right to the benefits of society who will not pay his club dues towards the support of it.

  TRADE WITH FRANCE: THE MORE UNRESTRAINED, THE MORE IT FLOURISHES

  Our merchants complained in general of the embarrassments suffered by the numerous internal demands of duties, searches, &c. that they were subjected to in France. In general I would only observe that commerce, consisting in a mutual exchange of the necessaries and conveniences of life, the more free and unrestrained it is, the more it flourishes; and the happier are all the nations concerned in it. Most of the restraints put upon it in different countries seem to have been the projects of particulars for their private interests, under pretence of good.

  We saw much in parliamentary proceedings, and in papers and pamphlets, of the injury the concessions to Ireland had done to the manufacturers of England, while the people of England seemed to have forgotten, as if quite out of the question. If the Irish could manufacture cottons, and stuffs, and silks, and clothes, and linens, and cutlery, and toys and books, &c &c &c, so as to sell them cheaper in England than the manufacturers of England sell them, was not this good for the people of England who are not themselves manufacturers? And will not even the manufacturers themselves share the benefit? If cottons are cheaper, all the other manufacturers who wear cottons will save in that article; and so of the rest. If books can be had much cheaper from Ireland (which I believe, for I bought Blackstone there for 24s. when it was sold in England at 4 guineas) is not this an advantage, not to English booksellers indeed, but to English readers, and to learning?

  In transactions of trade, it is not to be suppos’d that like gaming, what one party gains the other must necessarily lose. The gain to each may be equal. If A had more corn than he can consume, but wants cattle, and B has more cattle but wants corn, an exchange is a gain to each; hereby the common stock of comforts in life is increas’d. If restrictive laws were everywhere abandoned, trade would thrive in those countries. When princes make war by prohibiting commerce, each may hurt himself as much as his enemy. Traders, farmers and fishermen should never be interrupted or molested in their business, but should enjoy the protection of all in the time of war and peace. The source of wealth is land and industry, and the state must nourish both.

  NO NATION WAS EVER RUINED BY TRADE

  It would be better if government meddled no further with trade and let it take its course. Most of the statutes, acts, edicts, arets and placards of Parliaments, princes, and states, for regulating, directing, and restraining of trade have either political blunders or jobs obtain’d by artful men for private advantage under the pretence of public good. When Colbert assembled some wise old merchants of France and desir’d their advice and opinion how he could best serve and promote commerce, their answer was in three words only, Laissez nous faire. Let us alone. It is said by a very solid writer of the same nation, well advanced in the science of politics, who knows the full force of that maxim Pas trop gouverner: Not to govern too strictly, which perhaps would be of more use when applied to trade than in any other public concern. It is therefore wish’d that all commerce were as free between all the nations of the world as it is between the several counties of England: so would all, by mutual communication, obtain more enjoyments. Those counties do not ruin one another by trade; neither would the nations. No nation was ever ruin’d by trade; even, seemingly, the most disadvantageous.

  Let us now forgive and forget. Let each country seek its advancement in its own internal advantages of arts and agriculture, not in retarding or preventing the prosperity of the other. America will, with God’s blessing, become a great and happy country; and England, if she has at length gain’d wisdom, will have gain’d something more valuable, and more essential to her prosperity, than all she has lost, and will still be a great and respectable nation. Her great disease at present is the number and enormous salaries and emoluments of office. Avarice and ambition are strong passions, and separately act with great force on the human mind; but when both are united and may be gratified in the same object, their violence is almost irresistible, and they hurry men headlong into factions and contentions destructive to all good government.

  THERE NEVER WAS A GOOD WAR, OR A BAD PEACE

  It was certainly disagreeable to the English ministers that all their treaties for peace were carried on under the eye of the French court at Versailles. This began to appear especially toward the conclusion, when Mr. Hartley refused going to Versailles to sign our definite treaty with the other powers, and insisted on its being done at Paris, which we in good humour complied with. After a continued course of treating for nine months, the English ministry had at length come to a resolution to lay aside all the new propositions that they had made, and offered to sign again as a definitive treaty the articles of November 30, 1782. We agreed to this, and the Treaty between England and the United States was signed on Wednesday, the 3RD of September, 1783, and a general peace was at last establish’d.

  I rejoiced at the return of peace. We are now friends with England and with all mankind. I hope it will be lasting, and that mankind will at length, as they call themselves reasonable creatures, have reason and sense enough to settle their differences without cutting their throats. May we never see another war! For in my opinion there never was a good war, or a bad peace. What vast additions to the conveniences and comforts of living might mankind have acquired if the money spent in wars had been employ’d in works of public utility! What an extension of agriculture even to the tops of our mountains; what rivers render’d navigable, or join’d by canals; what bridges, aqueducts, new roads and other public works, edifices and improvements rendering England a compleat paradise, might not have been obtain’d by spending those millions in doing good, which in the great war were spent in doing mischief, and in bringing misery into thousands of families, and destroying the lives of so many thousands of working people who might have perform’d useful labour!

  Nevertheless, it is a pleasing reflection arising from the contemplation of our successful struggle and the manly, spirited, and unanimous resolves at Dungannon, that liberty, which had appeared in danger of extinction, is regaining the ground she had lost; that arbitrary governments are likely to become
more mild, and reasonable, and to expire by degrees, giving place to more equitable forms; and that despotism and priestcraft cannot keep the light from growing.

  AN ACCUSATION THAT FALLS LITTLE SHORT OF TREASON

  After the signing of the definitive treaty, I received a letter from a very respectable person in America that some heavy charges, written from Paris and propagated among people at home, had been made against me respecting my conduct in the treaty, viz.,

  “It is confidently reported, propagated and believed by some among us, that the court of France was at bottom against our obtaining the fishery and territory in that great extent in which both are secured to us by the treaty; that our minister at that court favoured, or did not oppose this design against us; and that it was entirely owing to the firmness, sagacity and disinterestedness of Mr. Adams, with whom Mr. Jay united, that we have obtained these important advantages.”

  It was not my purpose to dispute any share of the honour of that treaty which the friends of my colleagues might be dispos’d to give them; but having spent fifty years of my life in public offices and trust, and having still one ambition left, that of carrying the character of fidelity at least to the grave with me, I could not allow that I was behind any of them in zeal and faithfulness. I therefore thought that I ought not to suffer an accusation, which falls little short of treason to my country, to pass without notice, when the means of effectual vindication were at hand. Since Mr. Laurens and Mr. Jay had been witnesses of my conduct in that affair, I appealed to them as brother commissioners to send a letter that would do me justice and entirely destroy the effect of that accusation.

  WILLIAM PENN WAS A WISE AND GOOD MAN, BUT THOMAS WAS A MISERABLE CHURL

  Lady Dowager Penn, widow of Thomas Penn, was in France about the time of the treaty and made application to me with great complaints, begging my assistance in recovering her rights and possessions in Pennsylvania. But I found she was not well inform’d of the state of her affairs, and could not clearly show that she had suffer’d any injury by the public of Pennsylvania during the war. I understood that her husband’s lands had not been confiscated as represented; but the proprietary government having fallen with that of the crown, the colonial Assembly had taken the opportunity of insisting upon justice in some points, which they could never obtain under the proprietary government. A kind of compromise had then been made between the Assembly and the family, whereby all the vacant lots and inappropriate wilderness lands were to be thenceforth in the disposition of the Assembly, who were to pay £130,000 sterling to the family within 3 years after the peace, all other demands on both sides being thus abolish’d. I was told this arrangement had been satisfactory to most of them. But as the lady intended to send her son over to solicit her interests, I gave him a letter of recommendation to the governor, proposing it for consideration, whether it might not be advisable to reconsider the matter, and if the sum of £130,000 should be found insufficient, to make a proper addition.

  In my judgment, when I consider that for near 80 years, viz. from the year 1700, William Penn and his sons had receiv’d the quitrents which were originally granted for the support of government, and yet refus’d to support the government, obliging the people to make a fresh provision for its support all that time, which cost them vast sums; when I consider the meanness and cruel avarice of the late proprietor, in refusing for several years of war to consent to any defense of the frontiers, ravaged all the while by the enemy, unless his estate should be exempted from paying any part of the expense; not to mention other atrocities too long to list; I cannot but think the family well off, and that it would be prudent in them to take the money and be quiet. William Penn, the first proprietor, father of Thomas, the husband of the present Dowager, was a wise and good man, and as honest to the people as the extreme distress of his circumstances would permit him to be. But Thomas was a miserable churl, always intent upon griping and saving; and whatever good the father may have done for the province, was amply undone by the mischief receiv’d from the son, who never did anything that had the appearance of generosity and public spirit, but what was extorted from him by solicitation and the shame of backwardness in benefits evidently incumbent on him to promote, and which was done at last in the most ungracious manner possible.

  The lady’s complaints of not duly receiving her revenues from America became habitual; they had been the same during all the time of my long residence in London, being then made by her husband [before he died] as excuses for the meanness of his housekeeping and his deficiency in hospitality; tho’ I knew at the time that he was then in full receipt of vast sums annually by the sale of lands, interest of money, and quitrents. But probably he might have concealed this from his lady, to induce greater economy: as it is known that he ordered no more of his income home than was absolutely necessary for his subsistence, but plac’d it at interest in Pennsylvania and the Jerseys, where he could have 6 and 7 per cent, while money bore no more than 5 per cent in England. I us’d often to hear of these complaints and laughed at them, perceiving clearly their motive.

  Our rector of St. Martin’s Parish in London, Dr. Saunders, once went about during a long and severe frost, soliciting charitable contributions to purchase coals for poor families. He came among others to me, and I gave him something. It was but little, very little; and yet it occasion’d him to remark, “You are more bountiful on this occasion than your wealthy proprietor Mr. Penn; but he tells me he is distress’d by not receiving his incomes from America”! The incomes of the family must still be great, for they have a number of manors consisting of the best lands, which are preserv’d to them, and vast sums as interest well secur’d by mortgages; so that if the Dowager did not receive her proportion, there must have been some fault in her agents.

  AIR BALLOONS: WE THINK OF NOTHING BUT OF FLYING

  After the war, in 1783, all the conversation in France turned upon the balloons fill’d with light inflammable air, and the means of managing them so as to give man the advantage of flying.123 This is one of the most extraordinary discoveries that this age has produced, by which men are enabled to rise in the air and travel with the wind. Having been an eye witness twice of this amazing experiment, I communicated it to the Royal Society.

  The first balloon, invented by Messrs. Mongolfier of Annonay, was raised in Versailles. I was not present, but had been told it was filled in about ten minutes by means of burning straw. It was supposed to have risen about 200 toises:124 It was carried horizontally by the wind and descended gently as the air within grew cooler. So vast a bulk, when it began to rise so majestically in the air, struck the spectators with surprise and admiration. The basket contained a sheep, a duck, and a cock, who, except the cock, received no hurt by the fall.

  The next balloon was larger than that which went up from Versailles. Persons were plac’d in the gallery, which was made of wicker and attached to the outside near the bottom, where each had a port thro’ which they could pass sheaves of straw into the grate to keep up the flame, and thereby keep the balloon full. As it went over our heads, we could see the fire, which was very considerable. When they were as high as they chose to be, they made less flame and suffered the machine to drive horizontally with the wind, of which however they felt very little, as they went with it, and as fast. They said that they had a charming view of Paris and its environs, the course of the river, &c. Multitudes in Paris saw the balloon passing, but did not know there were men with it, it being then so high that they could not see them.

  THERE WAS A GOOD DEAL OF ANXIETY FOR THEIR SAFETY

  One of the courageous philosophers, the Marquis d’Arlandes, did me the honour to call upon me in the evening after the experiment with Mr. Montgolfier, the very ingenious inventor. I was happy to see him safe. He informed me that they lit gently without the least shock, and the balloon was very little damaged. As the flames slacken, the rarefied air cools and condenses, with the result that the bulk of the balloon diminishes and begins to descend. If those in the basket s
ee it likely to descend in an improper place, they can throw on more straw, and renew the flame, making it rise again, and the wind carries it farther.

  This method of filling the balloon with hot air is cheap and expeditious, and, it is supposed, may be sufficient for certain purposes, such as to give people an extensive view of the country, or elevating an engineer to take a view of an enemy’s army, works, &c, conveying intelligence into, or out of, a besieged town, giving signals to distant places, or the like.

  On several occasions, the new aerostatic experiment was repeated. In November, I intended to be present to witness the experiment of Mr. Charles and Mr. Robert, one of the very ingenious constructors of the machine. I declin’d going into the garden of the Tuilleries where the balloon was plac’d, not knowing how long I might be oblig’d to wait there before it was ready to depart, and chose to stay in my carriage near the statue of Louis XV, from whence I could well see it rise. The morning was foggy, but about one o’clock, the air became tolerably clear. Some guns were fired to give notice that the departure of the great balloon was near, and a small one was discharg’d which went to an amazing height. Means were used to prevent the great balloon’s rising so high as might endanger its bursting. Several bags of sand were taken on board before the cord that held it down was cut; and the whole weight then being too much to be lifted, such a quantity was discharg’d as to permit its rising slowly. Between one and two o’clock, all eyes were gratified with seeing it rise majestically from among the trees, and ascend gradually above the buildings a most beautiful spectacle! When it was about 200 feet high, the brave adventurers held out and wav’d a little white pennant to salute the spectators, who return’d loud claps of applause. When it arrived at its height, which I supposed might be 3 or 400 toises, it appear’d to have only horizontal motion. I had a pocket glass, with which I follow’d it, till I lost sight, first of the men, then of the car, and when I last saw the balloon, it appear’d no bigger than a walnut.