Title: From Benjamin Franklin to Peter Collinson, 29 July 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Collinson, Peter

Dear Sir,
Philada. July 29. 1754
I am just return’d from Albany, where were Commissioners from seven Provinces to treat with the Indians of the Six Nations. I suppose the Treaty will be printed, and I shall send you a Copy. At present can only mention, that we brighten’d the Chain with them &c. and parted good Friends; but in my Opinion no Assistance is to be expected from them in any Dispute with the French, ’till by a compleat Union among our selves we are enabled to support them in case they should be attacked. The Commissioners agreed upon a Plan for such Union of Eleven Colonies, viz. from N. Hampshire to S. Carolina inclusive; which Plan they have recommended to the Consideration of the several Assemblies; and if approv’d, it is to be laid before the Government at home, in order to be established by Act of Parliament. By next Ship I will send you a Copy of it, and also a Copy of a Representation we drew up of the State of the Colonies, &c. My long Journey is postpon’d a while, on Account of Mr. Hunter’s Sickness.
Yesterday I receiv’d yours of May 2. per Capt. Joye, with the Box and Books in good Order. I have just had time to run thro’ Father Beccaria’s Piece Dell’ Elettricismo artificiale e naturale, which pleases me much; and the more, as I find his Experiments and Observations on Lightning have led him to the same strange Opinion with me, that Thunder-Strokes are sometimes Upwards from the Earth to the Cloud; so that I hope the Paper I sent you last Spring on that Subject, will now be kept a little in Countenance, till your Philosophers have Opportunity of verifying the Experiments therein related.
I am, with sincerest Affection, Dear Sir, Your most obedient humble Servant
B Franklin
P.S. As Mr. Dalibard had promised to send me that Italian Book, and I have no Letter from Mr. Delor, I imagine what you say the latter sent me, was only his Translation of Pere Beccaria’s Letter, so have acknowledg’d only the Receipt of that from him, and the Italian Book from M. Dalibard. Be pleased to forward my Letters to them per first convenient Opportunity.
I am much pleased with Mr. Beccarias Book on Electricity for his curious experiments, Clear Expression, and Excellent Methods. I beg the favour of you to present Him my sincere Thanks for the Countenance he has afforded my Opinions and the handsome defence he has made of some of them, against the Attacks of Mr. Nollet. Our Different experiments and Observations on Lightening have led us both to the same strange opinion vizt: that Thunder Strokes are frequently from the Earth to the Clouds —which Opinion I imagine will be found true by such as examine it with the requisite attention.


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to Jacques de Romas, 29 July 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Romas, Jacques de

Sir,
Philadelphia, July 29. 1754
Your most obliging Favour of Octob. 19 with your two very ingenious Memoirs on the subject of Electricity, came not to hand till yesterday. By this Vessel, which is just departing for London, I can only acknowledge the Receipt of them, and assure you that the Correspondence so kindly offer’d will be extreamly agreable to me. A more particular answer I must defer till the next Opportunity; in the mean time I send you a late Paper of mine on Lightning, which perhaps may not be published before this reaches your Hands.
I am very respectfully, Sir, Your most obedient humble servant
B. Franklin
M. Romas


Title: To Benjamin Franklin from Henry Melchior Muhlenberg, 3 August 1754
From: Muhlenberg, Henry Melchior
To: Franklin, Benjamin

Providence Augt. 3d. 1754
That he rejoiced much in hearing an illustrious Society at home had undertaken to sollicit a Charity and carry on a Scheme for promoting the Knowlege of God among the Germans in Pennsylvania &c. and for making them loyal Subjects to the sacred Protestant Throne of Great Britain; and that he was pleas’d the Managment of said Charity was entrusted to such impartial Persons. But, as by long Experience, he was acquainted with almost all the Corners of Pennsylvania, and with the Temper and Circumstances of his Countrymen, he much fear’d some ill-minded Persons would strive to defeat so just and noble a View, as they had of late done many others, to the Offence of many thousand ignorant, but well-meaning Souls, unless proper Measures were taken to prevent it.
The joyful News were no sooner heard than Mr. Sauer, who prints a German News-paper, which is universally read by the Germans all over Pennsylvania and the neighbouring Colonies, made haste to ferment them against the Scheme, as may be seen from the Extracts which are subjoin’d and literally translated from his Paper. Hence then it appears that such a Man has it much in his Power, and too evidently in his Disposition, greatly to retard this good work and stir up the People against their gracious Superiours and their inestimable Benevolence for the Welfare of poor ignorant Souls.
Mr. Muhlenberg further observes that Mr. Franklin having at great Expence set up another German Press, in order to rescue the Germans out of Sauer’s Hands, and the Hands of those whose Interest it is, by Sauer’s Means, to mislead and keep them in Ignorance; but that for Want of a German Printer with sufficient Skill and Correspondence, and a proper Interest made to support Mr. Franklin’s Undertaking, Sauer kept the Advantage, continuing to mislead the People, turn them against their Clergy and every Body that endeavoured to reduce them to Order in Church and State. That he (Mr. Muhlenberg himself) once attempted to buy a Press, on Purpose to rescue his ignorant Country, and instil sound Notions in them concerning the inestimable Privileges, spiritual and temporal, which they enjoy under the sacred protestant Throne of great Britain; but that by Reason of his large encreasing Family and narrow Circumstances, he had been obliged to drop his Design, and beheld his poor Countrymen as much poison’d as ever, with Notions that may produce unhappy Consequences in very remote Periods. That he saw no Way to cure this growing Evil, unless the honourable Society or their Trustees in Pennsylvania, should be at the Expence of bu[y]ing a Press, and make a proper Interest to support a News Paper, Almanack &c. That He would undertake the Direction of the said Press under the Trustees; that he would use his whole Influence among his People and Bretheren to support it, and that a Person might be got who could manage the Press and serve as a Schoolmaster at the same Time. He adds that he did not doubt of the Success of this Scheme, since he had a large Correspondence with pious German Ministers and Congregations, in Pensylvania, New-York, new England, Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, Carolina and Georgia, who could be engaged to support it, without putting the Society to any Expence, especially if the Printing house is in the Country, where there is no House-rent and where the same person might serve as Schoolmaster and chief printer.
He further laments the Riots, Disloyalty, and Irreligion which are nursed among his Countrymen by thus stirring them up against pious and regularly ordain’d Clergy, while vicious Vagabonds, coming in without Orders and Credentials are indulged, many of whom are justly suspected to be more in the French than British Interest. They marry People without Discretion, trade with the Sacraments and Ordinances, and sow Prejudices against the English Government. One, who names himself Charles Rudolph, Prince of Wirtenberg and Minister of the Gospel, is a Stroler of this Kind. Yet it can be proved that he made a Conspiracy with the Indians against the English and escaped the Gallows in Georgia, by stealing a Boat and running over to the Spaniards; and is infamous all over America for Riots and breaking of Goals, nevertheless he is followed as a Lutheran, and somtimes as a Calvinist Minister. Another, named Engelland, turned in Germany Roman Catholic, was under the hands of the Hangman, reprieved at the Intercession of the Jesuits, after receiving 80 Lashes at the Gallows, was banish’d the Spanish Netherlands for stealing and carrying off innocent Children, and now about Lancaster and York he breeds Dissensions &c. by passing as a Lutheran Minister. There are many more of the same Sort, which we shall never get rid of, nor reduce the People to Order, till our gracious Superiors are pleas’d to demand proper Credentials of all who exercise the Ministry, and not suffer Vagabonds to laugh at us, who are regular Clergymen, by saying it is a free Country and turning Liberty into Licentiousness.
In all this, such Vagabonds are supported by Mr. Sauer in his news-paper, who is a professed Adversary to all regularly ordain’d Clergy, and who by varnishing over the Crimes of these People, draws Conclusions a particulari ad Universale, and persuades ignorant People to Quakerism and even Heathenism; For he often tells the People that Clergy of all kinds are Rogues and Tools of tyrranical Government to awe the Mob.
I have no View but the Good of my poor Countrymen, and therefore I hope you’ll consider these Things and pardon my Boldness.
(sic subscribitur) Henry Mühlenberg


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to William Strahan, 8 August 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Strahan, William

Dear Sir
Philada. Augt. 8. 1754
The above is Copy of my last. Not receiving the Printing House as expected last Spring, has been a considerable Disappointment; but I am more concern’d to hear that you and yours have had so much Sickness. I hope before this time you are all perfectly recover’d. I inclose a Bill for £20 Sterling, drawn by Mrs. Mary Steevens on Alexr. Grant Esqr; which when paid you will pass to my Credit. With sincere Respect and Affection, I am, Dear Sir Your most humble Servant
B Franklin
 Addressed: To  Mr. William Strahan  Printer  London  Per the London  Capt. Shirley


Title: Jonathan Thomas: Burlington Post Office Records, 10 August 1754
From: Thomas, Jonathan
To:

This is a mutilated record of letters received in the Burlington, New Jersey, postoffice, by Jonathan Thomas, postmaster. Tears in the manuscript make some of the dates uncertain, but the period covered appears to be from July 20, 1748, through July 29, 1749. Letters are recorded as received from New York, Boston, and Philadelphia, and (once only) from London. These records fill two pages. On a third are the two following signed receipts:

[Received date missing] of Mr. Jonathan Thomas the [Sum of? Pou]nds Eight Shillings and Eight pence [on the Post-Off]ice Acct. Per me
B Franklin Postmaster

[Received] August 10, 1754. of Mr. Jonathan Thomas [the Sum of] Five Pounds, Two Shillings, and Five [pence], on Account of the Post-Office, having paid Ten per Cent on £14: 10: 1. Per us
B FranklinWm. Hunter


Title: Deed of Trust for the Loganian Library, 28 August 1754
From: Logan, James
To:

As early as March 1745 James Logan had decided to give his library to the people of Philadelphia, and executed a deed of trust for the purpose. Soon afterwards he began the erection of a suitable building on Sixth Street to house his collection. Later he became dissatisfied with some provisions of the deed of trust, canceled it, and began the preparation of a new one, which, however, he never completed because of serious illness. He died, October 31, 1751, and after some delay his heirs executed a deed of trust in which they named seven trustees, including Franklin, to carry out Logan’s intentions. This instrument, some 8000 words long, recites in detail and often verbatim several earlier documents which reveal Logan’s plans and make clear the sources of income he intended to provide for the library’s support. It bears, somewhat inaccurately, the title “Deed of Trust Respecting Land in Buck County, Granted for Supporting the Loganian Library.”

August 28, 1754
Abstract: An indenture, dated Aug. 28, 1754, between William Logan and James Logan, sons of James Logan deceased, and his son-in-law John Smith, Logan’s executors, together with Hannah Smith, his surviving daughter, all of the first part; and Israel Pemberton, Jr., William Allen, Richard Peters, and Benjamin Franklin, all of the second part. By his last will, dated Nov. 25, 1749, James Logan had reserved from his bequest of certain Philadelphia lots to his son James the land on which his library had been built; had provided that if either of his granddaughters, Mary and Sarah Norris, died before attaining her majority, his £1000 bequest to her was to be invested in rents for the maintenance of the library; and had requested Richard Peters to assist in arranging his books in it. By an instrument of settlement, dated March 8, 1745, he had assigned certain Philadelphia ground rents for library maintenance and had prescribed rules for its operation, but had later canceled this instrument and begun the preparation of a new one which remained unfinished when he was incapacitated by “the dead Palsy.” William Penn had granted to Logan, Nov. 3, 1701, a tract of 596¾ acres in Solebury Township, Bucks County, which Logan had in turn granted in two parcels to Jonathan Ingham and Jacob Dean, May 1 and 26, respectively, 1750, with elaborate provisions (here recited) for rents, which were to be revalued periodically forever. By 1761 these rents would amount to £35 sterling per annum.
By the unfinished new instrument of settlement he had proposed to convey the library building and land, his books, and the rents of the Bucks County tract to William and James Logan, Smith, Pemberton, Allen, Peters, and Franklin, as trustees. William Logan was to be the first librarian and upon his death the office was to pass to his eldest son and his male heirs “in priority of Birth and Seniority of Age.” In case of the failure of male issue, the librarianship was to pass to James Logan, the younger, and his male heirs, then to the male heirs of Hannah Smith, Mary Norris, and Sarah Norris, each in turn and all according to the same principle as in the case of William’s heirs. If the right of succession should devolve on a minor, the trustees were to appoint a substitute until he came of age, unless “by the pregnancy of his parts” he should be judged capable of officiating sooner. In case no qualified Logan heir should be found, the trustees might appoint a suitable “Proficient in Literature” as librarian. Since most of the above provisions of the unfinished document were the same as those of the canceled instrument of 1745, certain additional clauses of the latter, relating to the qualifications of the librarian and the rules for borrowing books, are recited.
Now, for the execution of Logan’s intention as expressed in the above instruments and in consideration of ten shillings paid by the parties of the second part, the parties of the first part convey to them and their heirs forever the piece of ground in Philadelphia beginning at a distance of 80 ft. north of the corner of Sixth and Walnut Streets, running northward along Sixth St. for 80 ft. for the full length thereof and containing in breadth 55 ft. from Sixth St., with all the buildings and appurtenances pertaining thereto; all the books mentioned in the catalogue of Logan’s library or added to it; and all rents mentioned in the last will and in the unfinished instrument of settlement and set forth verbatim hereinbefore—the library to be called The Loganian Library—to have and to hold for the benefit of the parties of the first and second parts (excepting Hannah Smith) and their survivors and heirs, in trust for the purpose of carrying out the intentions of the testator as expressed in the above instruments.
This indenture is to be recorded in the office for recording deeds and all the above documents are to be copied into a record book kept by the librarian or memorandum made of the locations of their official recordings. The parties agree that two-thirds of the trustees may make and alter rules for the library not inconsistent with the testator’s intent, and provision is made for the use of any increase in the rents from the Bucks County land and of unexpended funds from deposits forfeited by borrowers of books. To help determine the right of succession, the librarian is to keep a genealogical record of the Logan family. The legislature is besought to investigate and remedy any suspected breach of the trust. On the death of any trustee the survivors are to appoint his successor within thirty days and make legal conveyance to him; in the case of the death of one of Logan’s descendants in the group the successor is to be the descendant next of kin, if possible, with provision for the appointment of a temporary substitute in case the next of kin is a minor. The trustees agree that none of them will convey his title and interest to anyone so as to create a tenancy in common or otherwise sever the joint tenancy, without the consent of the other trustees. Signed: Willm. Logan, James Logan, John Smith, Hannah Smith, Isr. Pemberton, Will: Allen, Richard Peters, B. Franklin. Sealed and delivered in the presence of: Th Bond, Jams: Pemberton, Jn Reily.


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to Cadwallader Colden, 30 August 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Colden, Cadwallader

Dear Sir
Philada. Augt. 30. 1754
I have now before me your Favours of July 23. and August 5th.
I return Mr. Pyke’s Philosophia sacra. His Manner of Philosophizing is much out of my Way.
I am now about to proceed on my Eastern Journey, but hope to be at home in the Winter, the best Season for Electrical Experiments, when I will gladly make any you desire; In the mean time should be glad you would communicate the Thoughts you mention, that I may consider them. If you please, direct them to me at Boston.
There must, I think, be some Mistake in what you mention, of my having sent Mr. Collinson the Paper you wrote me on Waterspouts. I have the Original now by me, and cannot recollect that I ever copied it, or that I ever communicated the Contents of it to Mr. Collinson or any one. Indeed I have long had an Intention of sending him all I have wrote, and all I have receiv’d from others on that curious Subject, without mentioning Names; but it is not yet done.
Our Assembly were not inclin’d to show any Approbation of the Plan of Union; yet I suppose they will take no Steps to oppose its being established by the Government at home. Popular Elections have their Inconveniences, in some Cases; but in Establishing new Forms of Government, we cannot always obtain what we may think the best; for the Prejudices of those concern’d, if they cannot be remov’d, must be in some Degree comply’d with. However, I am of Opinion, that when Troops are to be rais’d in America, the Officers appointed must be Men they know and approve, or the Levies will be made with more Difficulty, and at much greater Expence.
It is not to be expected that a Quaker Assembly will establish any but Quaker Schools; nor will they ever agree to a Tax for Payment of any Clergy. It is intended by the Society that the Schoolmasters among the Germans shall teach English.
I am glad the Representation is agreable to your Sentiments. The Letter to Lord Halifax I suppose your Son sends from New York.
Since my Return I have received from Italy a Book in Quarto, entitled, Dell’ Ellettricismo artificiale e naturale, libri due, di Giambattista Beccaria de’ CC. RR. delle Scuole pie. printed at Turin, and dedicated to the King [of Sardinia]. The Author professedly goes on my [torn]; he seems a Master of Method, and has reduc’d to systematic Order the scatter’d Experiments and Positions deliver’d in my Papers. At the End of the first Book, there is a Letter address’d to the Abbé Nollet, in which he answers some of the Abbe’s principal Objections. This Letter being translated into French, I send the Translation for your perusal, and will send the Italian Book it self by some future Opportunity if you desire it. It pleases me the more, in that I find the Author has been led by sundry Observations and Experiments, tho’ different from mine, to the same strange Conclusion, viz. That some Thunder Strokes are from the Earth up[wards]. In which I fear’d I should for some time ha[ve been] singular.
With the greatest Esteem and Regard, [I am] Dear Sir, Your most humble [Servant]
B Fr[anklin]
Please to send me the French Piece per first Opportunity after you have perus’d it, directed to me at Boston.
Dr. Colden

 Addressed (in another hand): To  The Honble  Cadwallader Colden Esqr  Cold[engham]


Title: To Benjamin Franklin from John Franklin, 2 September 1754
From: Franklin, John
To: Franklin, Benjamin

Dear Brother
Boston Sepr 2d 1754
This may serve to Lett you Know that I expected to hear Complaints from Philadelphia of hot wether since we had hear about the Time of your Date about 10 Days of your ordinary sumer wether i.e. hot and moist which occasiond abundence of Complaints Like the Important subject of your Last.
Haveing some faith in Blanchards Remedea for the stone I had about a twelvemonth since spoke to a Gentelman to send for it for me and on Receiveing the Advertiser that you sent me I wrote to Mr. Collinson your Frind that If he thought from the Experience had of it in London it would be servisable in my disorder to procure and send it me, but this morning Mr. Williams Tells me that I have Got it Come in the ship that Came in on Saturday which when I wrote Mr. Collinson I did not Expect. If these Come to hand before you Leive Home have ocesion to write and have oppertunity Give him a hint that he may Refrain sending it; it will be some Considerable Time before a ship Goes from hence.
My wife and the Gerles Joine In Lov to you and sister and my wife perticulirly Thanks sister for her Letter and the perticuler Account it Contains of Mr. Whitefield with which shee has Entertaind severell of his and her frinds. I suppose youl meet these on the Rhoad If you Come out at the Time sister writes.
I am your affectionate Brother
John Franklin
PS The Enclosd is for Mr. Beachams son who he hears is sick. He’d be obligd to you to forward it as Directed as soon as you Can.
 Addressed: To  Benjamin Franklin Esq  Postmr  Philadelphia


Title: To Benjamin Franklin from Thomas Turner, 7 September 1754
From: Turner, Thomas
To: Franklin, Benjamin

Sir
River Virga. Septr. 7th. 1754.
At the Request of Col. Charles Carter I send you our Governors proroguing Speech. He and I came home last night late from the Assembly and having this Opportunity he was unwilling to lose it.
By the Speech it must appear to those who are unacquainted with our unhappy Difference, that We have refused to do any Thing for our Country in this Time of Danger. That is so far from being the case, that tho the Forces are now provided with three Months Wages and Provisions We chearfully voted Twenty Thousand Pounds. And to settle amicably our old affair of the Pistole Fee on all Patents issuing from the Secretaries office we proposed to fall into any Measure he would point out to Us, but without the least Hopes of Success. He lays heavy Charges against Us in his Speech, such as We think we do not deserve. When the Truth comes to be known We hope the World will much more blame him than Us who rather than give up a private Pike [pique] and Resentment refused to have so large a Sum. I am so hurried by this Bearer that I am obliged to conclude and am Sir your unknown humble Servant,
Thos. Turner
To Benjamin Franklin Esquire.
 Endorsed: Thomas Turner to Ben Franklyn with the Govr of Virginias Proroguing Speech 8ber 1754


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to Richard Peters, 17 September 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Peters, Richard

Dear Sir
New York, Sept. 17. 1754
The Bearer, Mr. Elphinston, has a secret Art, by which he teaches, even a veteran Scrawler, to write fairly in 30 Hours. I have often heard you laugh at the Secretary’s Writing, and I hope he will take this Opportunity of mending his Hand; for tho’ we are about to have a new Governor, and, they say, a new Assembly, I do not desire to see a new Secretary: I only think it convenient that what he writes may possibly be read.
But to be serious. Many Gentlemen and Ladies of this Place have improv’d their Hands exceedingly under this Gentleman’s Direction, and in a Time so short, as is really surprizing; the Testimonies will be produc’d to you. Mr. Elphinstone visits Philadelphia, hoping, from the Character of the Place, that so useful an Art will not fail to meet with Encouragement there. He bears the Character here of an honest worthy Man, and as such I beg leave to recommend him to your Patronage. With the greatest Respect, I am, Dear Sir, Your affectionate humble Servant
B Franklin
P.S. I have heard our good Friend Mr. Allen sometimes wishing for a better Hand; this may be a good Opportunity for him to acquire it easily. His Example and yours would be the Making of the Artist’s Fortune.
R. Peters Esqr.


Title: New Experiments and Observations on Electricity, Part III [September 1754]
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To:

The publication of Franklin’s reports of electrical experiments, communicated to the Royal Society through Peter Collinson, was continued in this pamphlet, published in September 1754. It was consecutively paged (pp. 111–54) with Parts I and II, which had appeared in 1751 and 1753 respectively (see above, IV, 125 and 458), and sold for a shilling; and the publishers inserted a leaf giving the contents of all  three parts. The letters and papers in Part III are listed here, together with the description of their contents as given on the inserted leaf, and a reference to the pages where they are printed in this edition.
Letter XII. Franklin to Collinson, September 1753. pp. 111–27.
Of the luminous Appearance of Sea-Water; how clouds become electrified; Experiments for shewing whether they are negatively or positively electrified; conjectures on this Occasion. What Thickness of a metalic rod [is] best for drawing Lightning from the Clouds, and securing Edifices, &c. [Above, pp. 68–79]
Letter XIII. Franklin to Collinson, April 18, 1754. pp. 128–9.
An account of Mr. Kinnersley’s Experiments on the positive and negative State of Electricity in the Clouds. [Above, p. 262]
David Colden, Remarks on the Abbé Nollet’s Letters on Electricity to Benjamin Franklin. pp. 130–42. [Above, pp. 135–43]
John Canton, Electrical Experiments, with an Attempt to account for their Phaenomena; together with some Observations on Thunder Clouds; made in London about the same Time Mr. Franklin’s were carrying on in America, December 6, 1753. pp. 143–52. [Above, pp. 149–54]
Appendix: Mr. Franklin’s Account of his killing a Turkey by an electrical Shock; and of the Sensations which he felt himself upon receiving accidentally another violent electrical Shock, without Detriment. pp. 153–4.
Franklin’s New Experiments was listed in the Gentleman’s Magazine in September 1754. Its contents were reviewed there in unusual detail.


Title: Scheme of the First Academy Lottery, 3 October 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To:

Scheme of a Lottery, for raising 3000 Pieces of Eight, for the Use of the Academy at Philadelphia.
The Purchase of Ground and Buildings for the Academy, the Alterations and Improvements that were necessary to accommodate the Scholars, and the furnishing of the several Schools, having, all together, prov’d an Expence far beyond their first Expectation, the Trustees, desirous as soon as possible to compleat their Plan, for the Good of the Publick and of Posterity, find themselves under a Necessity of obtaining some Assistance by way of Lottery: And as several Lotteries have, since the Founding of this Academy by Subscription, been carried on and encouraged here for the Benefit of Schools and Colleges in the neighbouring Provinces, ’tis hoped it will not be thought less reasonable that we should at length have one for the Benefit of our own. Those who in this way have lately contributed liberally to Matters of mere external Ornament to the City, will doubtless more chearfully encourage the Academy; an Undertaking which aims at adorning the Minds of our Youth with every Excellence, and rendering them really useful and serviceable Members of Society.

Prizes.

Dollars.

Dollars.

3
of
100
  each,
are
3000

6
of
  500

are
3000

12
of
  250

are
3000

24
of
  125

are
3000

48
of
62
   & a half,
are
3000

1000
of
  5

are
5000

1093
  Prizes,

3907
  Blanks,

5000
  Tickets, at Four Dollars each, are

20,000

The Money to be paid to the Possessors of Prizes as soon as the Drawing is finished, Twenty per Cent. being first deducted from the 93 larger Prizes; but the 1000 small Prizes to be paid without any Deduction, which reduces the Deduction on the whole to Fifteen per Cent.
The Drawing to begin punctually on Monday the 20th of January next, or sooner if sooner full. The Prizes to be published in this Gazette.
The following Persons are appointed Managers of this Lottery, viz. Messieurs William Allen, John Inglis, William Masters, Samuel M’Call, junior, Joseph Turner, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Leech, William Shippen, Philip Syng, Phineas Bond, Richard Peters, Abraham Taylor, William Plumsted, Joshua Maddox, Thomas White, and Thomas Cadwallader, who are to give Bond, and be on Oath for the faithful Performance of their Trust.
Prize-Money not demanded within six Months after the Drawing is finished, to be deemed as generously given to the Academy, and applied accordingly.
Tickets will begin to be sold by the Managers at their respective Dwellings on the 22d of October instant.


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to William Franklin, 14 October 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Franklin, William

Dear Son,
Boston, Oct. 14. 1754
I have yours of the 4th Inst. and find the Election has turn’d out as I expected. I am glad Rutherford has refus’d to undertake the Stage; for I did not like your proposing it to him. I admire Mr. Colden was so unready; I thought every thing had been fully explain’d to him.
Poor Mr. Hunter is relaps’d into his last Summer Fever; and has kept his Bed these 8 Days, frequently delirious, and Watchers attend him every Night. But to day he seems better; he is however extreamly weaken’d and emaciated. This has prevented our Journey to Piscataqua, and very much disconcerts our Measures. He desires to be kindly remember’d to you. It seems now as if we should not return so soon as expected, for I apprehend his Illness may be long, tho’ I hope not dangerous: So write me every thing relating to the Assembly and Governor, his Reception, &c. Your first Session will be over before this can reach you, or I should desire you to present my Respects to some of the Members my old Friends: Let me know particularly what pass’d at the Meeting.
I enclose Governor Shirley’s late Proceedings at the Eastward. He is particulary civil to me.
Your Relations here are all well, and remember their Love to you. Your Aunt Mecom says she wants to hear from you often, and that you ought to write to her. I am, Your loving Father
B Franklin

P.S. I have just receiv’d the enclos’d from Capt. Swaine. [Give] it to Mr. Allen or Mr. Mifflin. The other enclos’d Letters are from the [Ship’s] Company to their Wives &c. Don’t charge them Postage.
 Endorsed: B. Franklin Octr. 14, 1754


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to William Strahan, 4 November 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Strahan, William

Dear Sir
Boston, Nov. 4. 1754
I am favoured with yours of July 31. and Augt. 5. which came to hand since my Arrival here. I hear from Mr. Parker, that the Goods for Connecticut were safe arrived at New York, and that he had sent them to Newhaven: I thank you for your Care in that Matter. Inclosed you have a second Bill for £20 Sterling drawn by Mrs. Stevens on Alexr. Grant Esqr: the first I sent before I left home. On my Return shall remit farther, and am with great Respect and Affection, Dear Sir Your most humble Servant
B Franklin
P.S. I am glad to hear your Son Billy likes the Printing Business. If, with the Trade, you give him a good deal of Reading and Knowledge of Books, and teach him to express himself well on all Occasions in Writing, it may be of very great Advantage to him as a Printer. You have some Instances among you. My Daughter is now 11 Years old, grows finely, an honest good Girl, as dutiful and sweet-temper’d as one could wish. I promise my self much Comfort in her when I grow old, if we should live. But these things will be as God pleases.
 Addressed: To  Mr William Strahan  Printer in New Street Fetter Lane  London


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to Thomas Darling and Nathan Whiting, 25 November 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Darling, Thomas,Whiting, Nathan

Gentlemen
Boston, Nov. 25. 1754
I hoped to have had the Pleasure of seeing you at New Haven long before this time, but the Sickness of my Fellow Traveller Mr. Hunter, and various Accidents have hitherto prevented: I hope however to be there in three or four Weeks at farthest.
I suppose you long since received the Press, Types and Stationary I ordered into your Care. My Nephews that are Printers having one after the other changed their Minds, and chusing to continue where they are, the one at Antigua, and the other at Newport; I must provide another Hand for your Place. In the meantime, Mr. Parker of New York will come I believe and make trial this Winter. If he likes the Place, perhaps he may continue. So please to deliver him the whole when he arrives with you.
Please to present the enclos’d Sermon with my Respects to Mr. Clap. And I would farther request your Delivery of the enclos’d Letter to Mr. Holt, a Gentleman I suppose to be now in your Town.
With great Respect, I am, Gentlemen, Your obliged humble Servant
B Franklin
Messrs. Darling and Whiting
 Endorsed: Benja Franklin Letter


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to William Shirley, [4 December 1754]
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Shirley, William

Sir,
Boston. December 4. 1754
I mention’d it Yesterday to your Excellency as my Opinion, that Excluding the People of the Colonies from all Share in the Choice of the Grand Council would probably give extreme Dissatisfaction, as well as the Taxing them by Act of Parliament where they have no Representative. In Matters of General Concern to the People, and especially where Burthens are to be laid upon them, it is of Use to consider as well what they will be apt to think and say, as what they ought to think: I shall, therefore, as your Excellency requires it of me, briefly mention what of either Kind occurs at present, on this Occasion.
First, they will say, and perhaps with Justice, that the Body of the People in the Colonies are as loyal, and as firmly attach’d to the present Constitution and reigning Family, as any Subjects in the King’s Dominions; that there is no Reason to doubt the Readiness and Willingness of their Representatives to grant, from Time to Time, such Supplies, for the Defence of the Country, as shall be judg’d necessary, so far as their Abilities will allow: That the People in the Colonies, who are to feel the immediate Mischiefs of Invasion and Conquest by an Enemy, in the Loss of their Estates, Lives and Liberties, are likely to be better Judges of the Quantity of Forces necessary to be raised and maintain’d, Forts to be built and supported, and of their own Abilities to bear the Expence, than the Parliament of England at so great a Distance. That Governors often come to the Colonies meerly to make Fortunes, with which they intend to return to Britain, are not always Men of the best Abilities and Integrity, have no Estates here, nor any natural Connections with us, that should make them heartily concern’d for our Welfare; and might possibly be sometimes fond of raising and keeping up more Forces than necessary, from the Profits accruing to themselves, and to make Provision for their Friends and Dependents. That the Councellors in most of the Colonies, being appointed by the Crown, on the Recommendation of Governors, are often of small Estates, frequently dependant on the Governors for Offices, and therefore too much under Influence. That there is therefore great Reason to be jealous of a Power in such Governors and Councils, to raise such Sums as they shall judge necessary, by Draft on the Lords of the Treasury, to be afterwards laid on the Colonies by Act of Parliament, and paid by the People here; since they might abuse it, by projecting useless Expeditions, harrassing the People, and taking them from their Labour to execute such Projects, and meerly to create Offices and Employments, gratify their Dependants and divide Profits. That the Parliament of England is at a great Distance, subject to be misinform’d by such Governors and Councils, whose united Interests might probably secure them against the Effect of any Complaints from hence. That it is suppos’d an undoubted Right of Englishmen not to be taxed but by their own Consent given thro’ their Representatives. That the Colonies have no Representatives in Parliament. That to propose taxing them by Parliament, and refusing them the Liberty of chusing a Representative Council, to meet in the Colonies, and consider and judge of the Necessity of any General Tax and the Quantum, shews a Suspicion of their Loyalty to the Crown, or Regard for their Country, or of their Common Sense and Understanding, which they have not deserv’d. That compelling the Colonies to pay Money without their Consent would be rather like raising Contributions in an Enemy’s Country, than taxing of Englishmen for their own publick Benefit. That it would be treating them as a conquer’d People, and not as true British Subjects. That a Tax laid by the Representatives of the Colonies might easily be lessened as the Occasions should lessen, but being once laid by Parliament, under the Influence of the Representations made by Governors, would probably be kept up and continued, for the Benefit of Governors, to the grievous Burthen and Discouragement of the Colonies, and preventing their Growth and Increase. That a Power in Governors to march the Inhabitants from one End of the British and French Colonies to the other, being a Country of at least 1500 Miles square, without the Approbation or Consent of their Representatives first obtain’d to such Expeditions, might be grievous and ruinous to the People, and would put them on a Footing with the Subjects of France in Canada, that now groan under such Oppression from their Governor, who for two Years past has harrass’d them with long and destructive Marches to the Ohio. That if the Colonies in a Body may be well governed by Governors and Councils appointed by the Crown, without Representatives, particular Colonies may as well or better by so governed; a Tax may be laid on them all by Act of Parliament, for Support of Government, and their Assemblies be dismiss’d as a useless Part of their Constitution. That the Powers propos’d, by the Albany Plan of Union to be vested in a Grand Council representative of the People, even with Regard to Military Matters, are not so great as those the Colonies of Rhode-Island and Connecticut are intrusted with, and have never abused; for by this Plan the President-General is appointed by the Crown, and controlls all by his Negative; but in those Governments the People chuse the Governor, and yet allow him no Negative. That the British Colonies, bordering on the French, are properly Frontiers of the British Empire; and that the Frontiers of an Empire are properly defended at the joint Expence of the Body of People in such Empire. It would now be thought hard, by Act of Parliament, to oblige the Cinque Ports or Sea Coasts of Britain to maintain the whole Navy, because they are more immediately defended by it, not allowing them, at the same Time, a Vote in chusing Members of Parliament: And if the Frontiers in America must bear the Expence of their own Defence, it seems hard to allow them no Share in Voting the Money, judging of the Necessity and Sum, or advising the Measures. That besides the Taxes necessary for the Defence of the Frontiers, the Colonies pay yearly great Sums to the Mother Country unnotic’d: For Taxes, paid in Britain by the Land holder or Artificer, must enter into and increase the Price of the Produce of Land, and of Manufactures made of it; and great Part of this is paid by Consumers in the Colonies, who thereby pay a considerable Part of the British Taxes. We are restrain’d in our Trade with Foreign Nations, and where we could be supplied with any Manufactures cheaper from them, but must buy the same dearer from Britain, the Difference of Price is a clear Tax to Britain. We are oblig’d to carry great Part of our Produce directly to Britain, and where the Duties there laid upon it lessens its Price to the Planter, or it sells for less than it would in Foreign Markets, the Difference is a Tax paid to Britain. Some Manufactures we could make, but are forbid, and must take them of British Merchants; the whole Price of these is a Tax paid to Britain. By our greatly increasing the Consumption and Demand of British Manufactures, their Price is considerably rais’d of late Years; the Advance is clear Profit to Britain, and enables its People better to pay great Taxes; and much of it being paid by us is clear Tax to Britain. In short, as we are not suffer’d to regulate our Trade, and restrain the Importation and Consumption of British Superfluities, (as Britain can the Consumption of Foreign Superfluities) our whole Wealth centers finally among the Merchants and Inhabitants of Britain, and if we make them richer, and enable them better to pay their Taxes, it is nearly the same as being taxed ourselves, and equally beneficial to the Crown. These Kind of Secondary Taxes, however, we do not complain of, tho’ we have no Share in the Laying or Disposing of them; but to pay immediate heavy Taxes, in the Laying Appropriation or Disposition of which, we have no Part, and which perhaps we may know to be as unnecessary as grievous, must seem hard Measure to Englishmen, who cannot conceive, that by hazarding their Lives and Fortunes in subduing and settling new Countries, extending the Dominion and encreasing the Commerce of their Mother Nation, they have forfeited the native Rights of Britons, which they think ought rather to have been given them, as due to such Merit, if they had been before in a State of Slavery.
These, and such Kind of Things as these, I apprehend will be thought and said by the People, if the propos’d Alteration of the Albany Plan should take Place. Then, the Administration of the Board of Governors and Council so appointed, not having any Representative Body of the People to approve and unite in its Measures, and conciliate the Minds of the People to them, will probably become suspected and odious. Animosities and dangerous Feuds will arise between the Governors and Governed, and every Thing go into confusion. Perhaps I am too apprehensive in this Matter, but having freely given my Opinion and Reasons, your Excellency can better judge whether there be any Weight in them. And the Shortness of the Time allow’d me will I hope, in some Degree, excuse the Imperfections of this Scrawl.
With the greatest Respect and Fidelity, I am, Your Excellency’s most obedient and most humble Servant
B Franklin
 Endorsed: Copy of a Letter to Govr. Shirley, on the Proposal of excluding the American Assemblies from the Choice of the Grand Council, and taxing the People in America by Parliament.	To P Collinson


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to William Shirley, 22 December 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Shirley, William

Sir,
Boston, Dec. 22, 1754
Since the conversation your Excellency was pleased to honour me with, on the subject of uniting the Colonies more intimately with Great Britain, by allowing them Representatives in Parliament, I have something further considered that matter, and am of opinion, that such an Union would be very acceptable to the Colonies, provided they had a reasonable number of Representatives allowed them; and that all the old Acts of Parliament restraining the trade or cramping the manufactures of the Colonies, be at the same time repealed, and the British Subjects on this side the water put, in those respects, on the same footing with those in Great Britain, ’till the new Parliament, representing the whole, shall think it for the interest of the whole to re-enact some or all of them: It is not that I imagine so many Representatives will be allowed the Colonies, as to have any great weight by their numbers; but I think there might be sufficient to occasion those laws to be better and more impartially considered, and perhaps to overcome the private interest of a petty corporation, or of any particular set of artificers or traders in England, who heretofore seem, in some instances, to have been more regarded than all the Colonies, or than was consistent with the general interest, or best national good. I think too, that the government of the Colonies by a Parliament, in which they are fairly represented, would be vastly more agreeable to the people, than the method lately attempted to be introduced by Royal Instructions, as well as more agreeable to the nature of an English Constitution, and to English Liberty; and that such laws as now seem to bear hard on the Colonies, would (when judged by such a Parliament for the best interest of the whole) be more chearfully submitted to, and more easily executed.
I should hope too, that by such an union, the people of Great Britain and the people of the Colonies would learn to consider themselves, not as belonging to different Communities with different Interests, but to one Community with one Interest, which I imagine would contribute to strengthen the whole, and greatly lessen the danger of future separations.
It is, I suppose, agreed to be the general interest of any state, that it’s people be numerous and rich; men enow to fight in its defence, and enow to pay sufficient taxes to defray the charge; for these circumstances tend to the security of the state, and its protection from foreign power: But it seems not of so much importance whether the fighting be done by John or Thomas, or the tax paid by William or Charles: The iron manufacture employs and enriches British Subjects, but is it of any importance to the state, whether the manufacturers live at Birmingham or Sheffield, or both, since they are still within its bounds, and their wealth and persons at its command? Could the Goodwin Sands be laid dry by banks, and land equal to a large country thereby gain’d to England, and presently filled with English Inhabitants, would it be right to deprive such Inhabitants of the common privileges enjoyed by other Englishmen, the right of vending their produce in the same ports, or of making their own shoes, because a merchant, or a shoemaker, living on the old land, might fancy it more for his advantage to trade or make shoes for them? Would this be right, even if the land were gained at the expence of the state? And would it not seem less right, if the charge and labour of gaining the additional territory to Britain had been borne by the settlers themselves? And would not the hardship appear yet greater, if the people of the new country should be allowed no Representatives in the Parliament enacting such impositions? Now I look on the Colonies as so many Counties gained to Great Britain, and more advantageous to it than if they had been gained out of the sea around its coasts, and joined to its land: For being in different climates, they afford greater variety of produce, and materials for more manufactures; and being separated by the ocean, they increase much more its shipping and seamen; and since they are all included in the British Empire, which has only extended itself by their means; and the strength and wealth of the parts is the strength and wealth of the whole; what imports it to the general state, whether a merchant, a smith, or a hatter, grow rich in Old or New England? And if, through increase of people, two smiths are wanted for one employed before, why may not the new smith be allowed to live and thrive in the new Country, as well as the old one in the Old? In fine, why should the countenance of a state be partially afforded to its people, unless it be most in favour of those, who have most merit? and if there be any difference, those, who have most contributed to enlarge Britain’s empire and commerce, encrease her strength, her wealth, and the numbers of her people, at the risque of their own lives and private fortunes in new and strange countries, methinks ought rather to expect some preference.
With the greatest respect and esteem I have the honour to be Your Excellency’s most obedient and most humble servant.


Title: Benjamin Franklin and William Hunter: Commission to Thomas Vernon, 24 December 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin,Hunter, William
To:

[December 24, 1754]
Benjamin Franklin, and William Hunter, Esquires, D.
Post-Masters-General of all His Majesty’s Provinces and Dominions on the Continent of North-America.
To All to whom these Presents shall come, Greeting, Know Ye, That Wehaving received good Testimony of the Fidelity, and Loyalty to His Majesty, of Mr. Thomas Vernon of Newport in Rhodeisland, Gent. and reposing great Trust and Confidence in the Knowledge, Care, and Ability of the said Thomas Vernon to Execute the Office and Duties required of a Deputy Post-Master, have Deputed, Constituted, Authorized, and Appointed, and by these Presents do Depute, Constitute, Authorize, and Appoint the said Thomas Vernon to be our lawful and sufficient Deputy, to Execute the Office of Deputy Post-Master for the Town of Newport aforesaid to have, hold, use, exercise and enjoy the said Office, with all and every the Rights, Privileges, Benefits and Advantages, to the same belonging, from the twenty-fifth Day of December. 1754 for the Term of three Years, unless sooner removed by us, under such Conditions, Covenants, Provisoes, Payments, Orders and Instructions, to be faithfully observed, performed, and done, by the said Deputy, and Servants, as he or they shall, from Time to Time, receive from Us, or by our Order. In Witness whereof, We the said Benjamin Franklin, and William Hunter, have hereunto set our Hands, and caused the Seal of our Office to be affixed: Dated the 24th Day of December 175 4 in the twenty-eighth Year of His Majesty’s Reign.
B FranklinWm. Hunter


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to Peter Collinson, 29 December 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Collinson, Peter

Dear Sir
Boston, Dec. 29. 1754
I wrote a few Lines by a Vessel that went from hence about 2 Weeks since, acknowledging the Receipt of your several Favours of July 30. Augt. 6, and 23. and Sept. 18. Sundry Affairs have retarded my Return home, but tomorrow I purpose to set out.
I am much oblig’d to you for the favourable Light you put me in, to our Proprietor, as mention’d in yours of July 30. I know not why he should imagine me not his Friend, since I cannot recollect any one Act of mine that could denominate me otherwise. On the contrary, if to concur with him, so far as my little Influence reach’d, in all his generous and benevolent Designs and Desires of making his Province and People flourishing and happy, be any Mark of my Respect and Dutyful Regard to him, there are many who would be ready to say I could not be suppos’d deficient in such Respect. The Truth is, I have sought his Interest more than his Favour; others perhaps have sought both, and obtain’d at least the latter. But in my Opinion, great Men are not always best serv’d by such as show on all Occasions a blind Attachment to them: An Appearance of Impartiality in general, gives a Man sometimes much more Weight when he would serve in particular Instances.
I am very thankful to the Society for their favourable Reception of my last Paper. I wish it had been more worthy of their Attention. I long since promis’d you a philosophical Pacquet consisting of many Particulars, but as it contains some Oddities, and some Novelties which I have not had time to dress so as to be fit for the View of your ingenious Friends, I must defer it a while longer, and beg your Excuse.
As to the State of the Colonies, a pretty full Representation of it was drawn up by the Commissioners at Albany, and was sent home to the Ministry with the Proceedings. However, as you perhaps have not seen it, I send you herewith the whole Treaty, [and] as, I have no other Copy, I must beg you would return it after Perusal. All the Assemblies in the Colonies have, I suppose, had the Union Plan laid before them; but it is not likely, in my Opinion, that any of them will act upon it so as to agree to it, or to propose any Amendments to it. Every Body cries, a Union is absolutely necessary; but when they come to the Manner and Form of the Union, their weak Noddles are presently distracted. So if ever there be an Union, it must be form’d at home by the Ministry and Parliament. I doubt not but they will make a good one, and I wish it may be done this Winter.
I send you withal the Remainder of Douglas’s Summaries. He did not live to finish his Work.
My Respects to Mr. Watson, to whom I shall write after my Return.
With the Treaty at Albany, I send you a Paper I drew up containing the Motives on which the Commissioners at Albany proceeded in forming their Plan. A Gentleman here had a Copy of me to send to Lord Halifax, which if receiv’d you need not show his Lordship this; but may communicate it to our Friend Jackson. Some Things in the Plan may perhaps appear of too popular a Turn, the Commissioners from the 2 popular Governments, having a considerable Weight at the Board: When I give the Reasons on which each Article was settled as it stands, I would not be understood as expressing every where my own Opinion: For tho’ I projected the Plan and drew it, I was oblig’d to alter some Things contrary to my Judgment, or should never have been able to carry it through.
With great Esteem and Affection, I am, Dear Sir, Your most obedient humble Servant
B Franklin
 Addressed: To  Peter Collinson Esqr F.R.S.  London  per favr of  Mr M’Clenagan  with a Pacquet
Forwarded: In Charles Street Westminster at Mrs. Jump’s.


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to William Shirley, [30 December 1754?]
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Shirley, William

[Sir]
Monday Morning [December 30? 1754]
I return your Excellency the Papers you have been pleas’d to favour me with the Perusal of. I really can think of nothing to add on the Topics you mention’d to me; but am of Opinion that the Force and Impression of the Matters contain’d in the 5 first and 3 last Pages, would be greater, if they might be read together, and were not disjoin’d by the Accounts of the French Settlements and Encroachments. I think, therefore, they should make a separate Part of the Pamphlet; The Account of the French Settlements and Encroachments another distinct Part; and that divided into shorter Paragraphs. And if Your Excellency should be of Opinion that my Paper on the Peopling of Countries, &c. would on this Occasion be of any Use, I would not object to its being annexed. With the greatest Esteem and Attachment, I am, Your Excellency’s most obedient and most humble Servant
B Franklin
 Addressed: To  His Excellency William Shirley Esqr
Endorsed: Papers Concerng the Settlemt. of N Eng &c.


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to Deborah Franklin, 1754
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Franklin, Deborah

Dame
[1754?]
Send 50 Reams largest Demi to Mr. Daniel, Printer at Jamaica.
Send 30 Reams Do to Peter Timothy.
Send the Ream of thick blue Paper to Parker.
Send half the brown Paper in the House to Parker[?], ’tother half to Brother John in Boston; No, send it all to Boston.

[In margin]: Nota, bene. Don’t forget to enter it.


Title: To Benjamin Franklin from Peter Kemble, 1754
From: Kemble, Peter
To: Franklin, Benjamin

Sir:
New [Brunswick, c. 1754?]
Begg the favour you’d forward the Incloseds, in which you’ll much oblige Sir your most humble Servant
Peter Kemble
 Addressed: To  Benjamen Franklin Esqr:  In  Philadelphia


Title: To Benjamin Franklin from ———, 1754
From: ——
To: Franklin, Benjamin

This letter, undated, unsigned, and in an unidentified hand, survives among Franklin’s papers. Internal evidence indicates that it was written by someone in the colonies and at about the middle of the eighteenth century. Because the problem of colonial union was being so actively discussed in 1754, it is tentatively assigned to that year.

Dear Sir
[1754?]
According to your request &c. of all the Schems for uniteing the Strenth of the Colonies which have hitherto appeared, no one in my humble opinion, seems more reasonable, or, that woud more effectually answer all intents and purposes than that of Mr. Davenants published in the year 1698. This Gentleman tells us, that he has seen a Scheme for the general Government of the Northern Colonies, which seems contrived with very good Judgement, upon which account, he says, he thought it not unreasonable to offer the heads of it to the public consideration.
1. That the Colonies may be authorised to meet once a year, or oftner if need require, by their stated and appointed Deputies, and resolve on such measures, as shall be most adviseable at any time to take, for their public tranquility and safty.

2. That in order to it Two persons well qualified for their understanding, sobriety, and substance, be appointed by such province, as their Representatives, or Deputies, which in the whole will make the Congress twinty (now 26) persons.
3dly. That the Kings Commissioner for that purpose especially to be appointed, shoud have the Chair and preside in the said Congress.
4thly. That they shoud meet as near as conveniently may be, to the most Central Colony, for the ease of the Deputies.
5thly. Since that in all probability may be Newyork, both because it is near the Center of the Colonies, And for that it is the Chief Frontier, and the Governor in the Kings Nomination: That the Gov. be the Kings High Commissioner during the session, after the manner of Scotland. (Formerly)
6thly. That their business shoud be to hear and adjust all matters of complaint, or difference between Province and Province &c. as first to consider of ways and means to support the union, and Safty of these Provinces against their Common Enemies. In which Congress the Quotas of men, and charges will be much easier and more equally allotted and proportioned than it is possible for any other establishment to do. For the Provinces knowing their own condition, and one anothers can debate that Matter with more freedom, and Satisfaction, and better adjust, and ballance their affairs in all respects, for their common Safty.
7. That in times of war the Kings High Commissioner shoud be General, or Commander in chief of the several Quota’s upon service against the Common Enemy. (And I will beg leave to add that all proceedings ought to be laid before the Parlament only.)

This Constitution has some resemblance with the Court of the Amphictiones which was a kind of Council, where the General affairs of Greece were debated, which if they had preserv’d in its original purity, and to the first design of it that Country had not been so easie a conquest to the Romans. And it is submitted to better Judgements, whether it woud not Greatly tend to the wellfare and Safty of these Colonies, That Laws not contrary to the Law of England ennacted in such an assembly, shoud remain in force till altered by the Parliment of Gt. Britain, without doubt it woud be a great incitement, to their industry, and render them more pertinacious in their deffence upon any invasion that might happen, to find themselves a free people, and governed by Constitutions of their own makeing, and this seems the more necessary because heretofore, many good Laws have been abrogated in England, upon the false and corrupt Sugestions of Interrested persons. Besides nothing can be more precarious to a people, than Levity in makeing and Rescinding Laws.
Had a proper attention been Given to above, at that time, and the several colonies properly employd, according to their situation, circumstances, and the nature of their productions That is to say—Newfound Land and Nova Scotia, in that of the Fishery, whaling no[t] excepted.
Massachusets, Rhodeisland, and Connecticut in collecting ship timber, Bark and building.
Newyork in the manufacture of Hemp, potash, Salt petre, or even Gunpowder, and ship timber Bark &c.
Newjersey’s which is one continued body of iorn oar in the iorn Manufactury, and ship timber &c.
Pensilvania is chiefly a bread colony but capable of affording most of the other Articles.
Maryland and Virginia to continue in that of the Tobacco trade.
The two Carolinas, in pitch, Tar, Turpentine, Indigo, Silk and Rice.
Georgia, intirely in that of Silk and Indigo.
Had the several Colonies, I say, at that time been thus directed, with proper encouragement, what an advantageous figure woud they have made at this day both for themselves, and their mother Country, but I hope it is not yet too late.
That the high price of labour is owing to the want of hands here, is a General mistake. It is really for want of employment. A labourer who can hardly find employment three days in the week, which is Generally their case, must charge for the four days he is like to live idle for want of employment, or starve. The thoughts indeed of a long winter, to a labourer, who perhaps may not meet with one weeks employment during the whole Season, is not a litle shocking. Whereas by a certain employment during the whole year round he can afford to work for one half of the present wages and will find his account more, at the years end. Besides a full exertion of those manufactories will by the constant returns made reduce the price of that important article of clothing, and at the same time enable the Farmer to purchase those very articles, cheaper and better than he can possibly make them.
I woud not have it here understood, that I mean any of the Colonies shoud monopolize. Let each raise those several articles according to their Circumstances, and Situation. But upon the articles allotted to each respective Colony let there be a bounty allowed, at least let there be skillfull hands placed amongst them for a time at the publick charge. And why might not we detatch some of our own people, of capacity and understanding, after the manner of Peter the Great, into those countries where those manufactories are already carried to perfection, who might return overseers of our works.
To conclud, for I will go no further than the sheet will allow me, I may venture to assure you, there are many thousands of idle people in these provinces who do not know which way to turn their hands and we are dayly encreasing by propagation and accession, who, in this case, may find full employment as well as the young, the old, the lame and the Blind. Yours.


Title: To Benjamin Franklin from George Whitefield, 17 January 1755
From: Whitefield, George
To: Franklin, Benjamin

My dear Mr. F[ranklin],
Virginia, Jan. 17, 1755
I hope that this will find you safely arrived at Philadelphia, from your northward expedition, and ready to come further southwards. This leaves me in my last Virginia stage, near the borders of North-Carolina. People as I came along have been very willing to attend on my feeble labours, and I hope that some real good hath been done. If this be effected, it matters little how the labourer himself may be sometimes fatigued.

His presence doth my pains beguile,
  And makes the wilderness to smile.

Lovely delusion this! Living, dying, and after death I hope to be possessed of it. I have seen your Epitaph. Believe on JESUS, and get a feeling possession of God in your heart, and you cannot possibly be disappointed of your expected second edition, finely corrected, and infinitely amended. Verbum sapienti sat est. I could say more, but time is short. Glad shall I be to wait on you and Mr. H[unter] at the Orphan-house. I send you both my cordial respects, and praying that you may have what good Colonel G[ardine]r once wished me, “A thriving soul in a healthy body,” I subscribe myself, my dear Sir, Your affectionate, obliged friend and ready servant,
G.W.


Title: To Benjamin Franklin from James Bowdoin, 27 January 1755
From: Bowdoin, James
To: Franklin, Benjamin

Sir,
Boston, January 27, 1755
Your collection of philosophical papers I have perused with a great deal of pleasure. I take notice that several letters of mine to you make a part of it, which gave me an additional pleasure, as it places me in some respect in a situation I should always be glad personally to be in, near my friend Franklin.
There are several things in the collection, which I shall take the liberty to remark on, because by that means I have an opportunity of continuing a correspondence, which it will give me pleasure always to maintain.
I shall begin with the 16th. Letter p. 259 of your collection wherein you give a new and ingenious account why damp winds, though not colder by the thermometer, give a more uneasy sensation of cold than dry ones, viz. “because they conduct better; that is, are better fitted to convey away the heat from our bodies. The body cannot feel without itself; our sensation of cold is not in the air without the body, but in those parts of the body which have been deprived of their heat by the air.” Cold is here ascribed only to a negative cause, the absence or deprivation of heat. This may sometimes be the reason of our sensation of cold; but the same sensation may sometimes also arise from a positive cause, the accession of certain particles, which, by insinuating themselves into the blood, may interrupt its motion, and in that way give us the sensation of cold, which may be greater or less in proportion to the quantity of such particles. If cold was a mere negation of heat, I dont see why in the warmest seasons there should sometimes happen the most sudden transitions to cold.
Great heat and cold frequently succeed each other instanter: a flow of southern air, which has been greatly heated by the sun, brings along with it a great quantity of igneous particles, and causes hot weather; the air becomes considerably rarified thereby; the igneous particles (which are the cause of the rarefaction) act within a limited sphere, and, assisted by the elasticity of the rarefied air, bear up against the denser air, which is upon the borders of that sphere of action. So long as there is an exact equilibrium maintained between one and the other, they will remain at rest; but the equilibrium, which cannot be long supported by reason of the fluidity of the air, being destroyed, a current of denser air from the north takes place, and mixing with the rarer air, takes off part of its heat, and at the same time bringing certain nitrous particles along with it, communicates thereof to the rarer air, or the igneous particles may be conceived as ascending in consequence of their less specific gravity; which is manifestly the case when you pour cold water into hot you’ll be able to distinguish a greater heat on the surface than below. Hence a cold air proceeding from a positive cause; or from a positive and negative cause jointly; cold, I mean, as relative to our sensations: hence, also, (when the nitrous particles, or whatever be the positive cause, greatly abound,) snow, or hail; which may be called (as distinguished from our sensations) positive or absolute cold, or effects of a positive cause, which we denominate cold. The common experiment of freezing water before a fire by means of salt or nitre mixed with snow, seems to prove that cold proceeds from a positive cause, and is not a mere negation of heat.
In regard of our sensations, the same thing may be both hot and cold at the same time. If you hold one hand before a fire, and the other in snow, for some time, and afterward put them both into water of a middling degree of heat, you will feel the same water at the same time cold with one hand, and warm with the other; the water conducting the heat from the one, and communicating it (or some of its own) to the other, agreeable to your doctrine.
I am much pleased with your conjecture, p. 263, that there may be a region of electric fire above the atmosphere, and that the Aurorae Boreales may perhaps be currents of that fluid in its own region, becoming from their motion visible. It gives me a better opinion of the ancient philosophers than I ever had before, who, as you observe, thought there was a region of fire above the atmosphere. I join with you that we are but novices in this branch of natural knowledge, though I think you are making very happy advances out of your noviciate.
You seem to be p. 264, “much in the dark about light and are not satisfied with the doctrine that supposes particles of matter continually driven off from the sun’s surface with a swiftness so prodigious; for every particle with such a motion must (you think) do more execution than a 24 pounder discharged from a cannon, and yet it will not drive before it or remove the lightest dust.” This seems to be a weighty objection: but let us suppose a particle of light in motion to be o; then the momentum thereof, equal to its quantity of matter multiplied by its velocity, will be o: it can have no effect in that case on the smallest particle of dust to remove it. Now let us consider what reason there is to make such a supposition. In order to this I must refer you to my letter of November 12. 1753 copied in 42[d] page of your collection, where ’tis said that a point 1027709 million times less than 1/10 of an inch affords light enough to affect the sight at four miles distance. If this calculation was just, it would show that the particles of light are inconceivably small; but upon a review I believe I did not take a right method of calculating, for I ought to have considered the light of the candle as filling a sphere (instead of a circle) of eight miles diameter, which I should have compared with a sphere of half an inch diameter, in order to come at the density of the light when just issuing from the candle (viz. at half an inch distance therefrom) and the density of it at four miles distance; in which case I should have found that, as those spheres are to each other as the cubes of their diameters, the density of the light within the smaller sphere would be 1041850618085376000 times greater than when it arrived at the larger sphere; and corresponding portions of those spheres being in the same proportion to each other as the spheres themselves, the light which would pass through the pupil of the eye (which is about 1/10 of an inch diameter and would make a part of the large sphere) would be an equal number of times rarer than when it quitted the small sphere, and consequently must be contained, while within the small sphere, in a circle 1041850618085 million times less than 1/10 of an inch diameter. Now on the supposition that such a point is possessed by a single particle of light, or that a single particle is equal thereto in bigness, I would ask whether the quantity of matter in such a particle would not be small in a greater degree, than its velocity (equal to that of the sun’s light) would be great? If so, a particle of light in motion may properly be supposed o, and its momentum not sufficient to remove the lightest dust, much less to do as much execution as a 24 pounder. We may go further to lessen the particles of light, by supposing that the candle light, viewed through a prism at the above-mentioned distance, would exhibit the same variety of colours (though not so vivid) as when viewed near; in which case the ray so viewed (which I have hitherto considered as a single particle) must be composed of a very great number of particles, which multiplied by the figures aforesaid would express the proportion that a particle of light is less than 1/10 of an inch: But I have already got beyond my power of conception. I dont know whether this will be a sufficient answer to your objection, for I must acknowledge it does not altogether satisfy myself. If this objection was obviated, I think your other would not stand much in the way, viz. “That the sun must diminish exceedingly by such a waste of matter, and the planets recede to greater distances, through the lessened attraction; but neither is fact for aught we know.”
It has been apprehended, that the sun must diminish greatly by such a constant flux of light from its surface; and that the comets, which no other use could be found for, were intended to recruit it; if they recruit it, its attraction would not be lessened, nor, of consequence, the planets recede to greater distances. I shall acquiesce in this conjecture, till you apply the comets to a better use than the preservation of our Solar System, or perhaps of the universe.
I would now ask leave to consider your hypothesis p.265. You suppose “that all the phenomena of light may be more conveniently solved, by supposing universal space filled with a subtle elastic fluid, which when at rest is not visible, but whose vibrations affect that fine sense in the eye, as those of air do the grosser organs of the ear. We do not in the case of sound imagine that any sonorous particles are thrown off from a bell for instance, and fly in straight lines to the ear; why must we believe that luminous particles leave the sun and proceed to the eye.”
Diverse objections occur hereto, some arising from the supposition itself, and others from the comparison of light with sound. With regard to the first — if universal space be filled with a subtle elastic fluid, that fluid would always be at rest and therefore always invisible, and of consequence there would be always universal darkness; or, if any part could be put in motion, the whole must be in motion; for one single particle of it could not move without moving the next and that the next and so on ad infinitum; and in that case the least motion, let it commence when it would, must produce universal motion, and consequently universal light: and therefore there could be no medium between universal darkness and universal light. But if we relax the sense of the expression, and suppose universal space instead of being filled to abound greatly with the elastic fluid (in which sense I apprehend you intended to be understood) would not everything, which disturbed that fluid, cause a luminous appearance? Would not the inhabitants of the sea and air bespangle both, in all their motions, and thereby like prisms, exhibit the various colors according to the degree of vibration which those motions should occasion in the elastic fluid? and, as to ourselves, would not a radiance attend us wherever we went? What occasion should we have for candle light, when a quick vibration of the hand, or of machines easy to be invented, would dispel the night? Or rather might we not suppose there would be no night at all? For the action of the sun (if the sun should be necessary) would be communicated to us notwithstanding the interposition of the earth? And would not the effect of the sun’s action be only to enlighten us, unattended with heat, which enlivens and cherishes the universe? Would it be possible to collect any heat from the sun with glasses as we now do, if it only occasioned a vibration in the elastic fluid? and would not the elastic fluid, instead of exhibiting a round luminous body which we call the sun, be itself one continued universal blaze of light? These seem to be objections arising from the hypothesis: I shall mention several, which arise from the comparison abovementioned. As sound (or a vibratory motion in the air which I would have considered here as synonymous) is propagated from the sonorous body in all directions, and surrounds and is propagated beyond or behind any obstacle in its way; so light, if it was a vibration of the elastic fluid, would surround and be propagated behind an obstacle, like sound: but this is not fact. Further, as sound confined for instance within the walls of an house, one of whose sides has an hole in it, would be propagated from that hole externally in circles, of which the hole would be the centre; so light, if it was a vibration, or was occasioned by a vibration of the elastic fluid, after passing through an hole would be propagated in circles, of which the hole would be the centre; but this is not fact; for light in its passage through the same uniform medium always passes in right lines. Besides, I am apprehensive that an objection somewhat similar to those above-mentioned against the common hypothesis, will lie against this; for the perpetual vibration, which the elastic fluid must be in, must keep light small bodies (and even a 24 pounder if suspended) in a perpetual vibratory motion, whereby the form and texture of those small bodies could not be duly examined, because the necessary means of such examination viz. a great deal of light would give them a proportionable vibration which would effectually prevent it. But we do not find any such motion, even in the lightest particles of dust; nor any difficulty arising therefrom, in such examinations.
What you mention about the electrical spark that it is bright and visible at a distance, and this without fuel; and in such case “that no part of the electric fluid flies off in such case to distant places, but all goes directly, and is to [be] found in the place to which it is destined,” seems to favour your hypothesis. But may we not suppose that the electric fluid is heterogeneous as well as light. The heterogeneousness of light is inferred from its colours, which are said to vary as the size of the particles vary: the variation becoming conspicuous by a prism and by other means, which class the particles according to their respective magnitudes, or degrees of refrangibility. Besides this which is the usual reason, another may be suggested from which the heterogeneousness of light may be inferred, namely, because it exhibits some effects similar to those of electricity: for example, a globe or pane of glass warmed in the sun or before a fire will attract and repel successively small cork balls, down, and such like bodies, properly circumstanced; and will shew other signs of electricity communicated to the glass by the sun or fire. So in regard to electricity its heterogeneousness may be collected from its producing some effects resembling those of light or fire, which are here considered as equivalent terms. Electricity and fire differ in many respects, and in some they agree as you have shewn in your letters on Electricity. So far as they agree in their effects, their natures may be presumed to be alike; or rather from this agreement or similitude of effects I would infer that they are mixed with and generally accompany each other; and that each produces its own effect at the time of their joint operation; the effects of electricity, similar to those of fire, being produced by the fire mixed with it; and the effects of fire, resembling those of electricity, being produced by the electricity mixed with that; the compound taking its name from the predominant principle. Thus, fire enflames bodies, and throws particles or light at a distance; hence the explosion of gun-powder and the luminous appearance occasioned by the electric spark; the fire mixed with it producing those effects. Thus, also, electricity attracts and repels light bodies alternately under given circumstances; hence the attraction and repulsion of glass heated before a fire; the electricity mixed with the fire producing those effects. In this way I would infer the heterogeneousness of light and electricity, and their mixture with each other; and in this way account for the similitude and difference of their effects; and for the luminous appearance of the electric spark in particular, without diminishing the pure electric fluid contained therein; no part of which (I am persuaded with you) flies off in the case you mention to distant places, but all goes directly, and is to be found in the place to which you destine it. On the same principles, the shining of diamonds in the dark, when rubbed and thereby electrified, may be accounted for without supposing that they lose any part of their matter. If no objection lay against your hypothesis, and the sun is not wasted by expense of light, I can easily conceive (in your method of accounting for it) that it shall otherwise always retain the same quantity of matter; but at present I cannot give into your “philosophical heresy”; for which, though you “are not subject to the Inquisition like poor Galileo,” you are not wholly without punishment, as it has occasioned you the trouble of this epistle. The last thing I shall take notice of at this time is your remarks on Baxter’s Vis Inertiae. You suppose there is no such property in matter, and I agree with you, if anything more be meant by it than a power of resisting, a power exactly equal to the quantum of its own force. Beyond that it is a mere chimera, as you have clearly proved; to which purpose your instance of two globes equal to the sun, set in motion by a musketo, is extremely pertinent. “Surely (to use your words) if it was anything more than a phantom, there might be enough of it in such vast bodies to annihilate by its opposition to motion so trifling a force.” I have no idea of it considered as a property or power: I understand it as expressing the absolute passiveness of matter; that when it is at rest, or in motion, it will continue so till acted upon by something without itself. Matter is commonly said to act upon, move, stop, resist matter; these expressions implying activity are apt to make us think, that matter has some power of action; but what appears is a mere effect, the effect of something distinct from itself. For example, I put the body A in motion, A moves B, B moves C; or rather A and B are the medium by which I move B and C. B, which is said to move C, is as much passive as A, which is immediately moved by me. I am the mover, they the moved; I am the agent, and they the patients. It is this passiveness, that the term vis inertiae (as I think) most properly expresses; though in any sense I apprehend it is used with great impropriety, it being in itself a solecism, a power of inactivity; that is, as power implies action, it must be a power of acting inactively. In regard to the power of resisting, in particular, which matter is said to be endued with, and which vis inertiae is commonly understood to signify, I conceive it to be a mere impression, or the continuation of an impression it originally received at its formation; or perhaps it is the effect of the perpetual action of some superior being upon matter.
Though I think you have demonstrated that vis inertiae, as considered above, is a nullity; yet I apprehend you are mistaken in some of your observations upon your author. You quote him thus “In No. 4, our author goes on and says, The body A requires a certain force to be impressed upon it, to be moved with a celerity as C, or such a force is necessary; and therefore it makes a certain resistance &c.; a body as 2A requires twice that force to be moved with the same celerity, or it makes twice that resistance, and so on.” This you think is not true, but “that the body 2A moved by the force 1F (though the eye may judge otherwise of it) does really move with the same celerity as 1A did when impelled by the same force: for 2A is compounded of 1A + 1A; and if each of the 1A’s, or each part of the compound were made to move with 1C (as they might be by 2F) then the whole would move with 2C, and not with 1C as our author supposes. But 1F applied to 2A’s makes each A move with ½C, and so the whole moves with 1C, exactly the same as 1A was made to do by 1F before.” You add “what is equal celerity but a measuring of the same space by moving bodies in the same time? Now if 1A impelled by 1F measures 100 yards in a minute; and in 2A impelled by 1F, each A measures 50 yards in a minute which added make 100, are not the celerities as well as the forces equal?”
In answer to which I would observe, that the whole of it is grounded (as I apprehend) on a wrong supposition, viz. that the celerity of the compound differs from the celerity of its parts: but nothing is more clear to me than the contrary; for if the compound could have no celerity, when its parts were at rest (which I suppose will easily be granted) then, if its parts have a celerity, that celerity, must be the celerity of the compound. The rest or celerity of its parts must be the rest or celerity of the compound; if it were otherwise, and your principles true, then 2A, which, by some force impressed upon it, moved 100 yards in a minute, would move with twice the celerity of 1A which moved 100 yds. in the same time: that is, 100 yards are twice so much as 100 yards. Or 2A and 1A being supposed to begin their motion from the same mark at the same time, and at the rate aforesaid, they would be both found at the end of a minute at 100 yards distance from the mark, and yet the largest would be 100 yards before the other. I can walk 12 miles in 4 hours at the rate of 3 miles per hour, but in this new way of calculating I should find I had walked in that time 24 miles; for each side of me, or each leg, would have gone 12 miles, which added to itself make 24 miles, being the number of miles both legs went; yet my body would be but 12 miles from the place where I began my walk, so that my legs would leave my body 12 miles behind them: or rather I should be at the same time in two places 12 miles apart; supposing my course direct. Your own definition of celerity will settle the point; “what is equal celerity (say you) but a measuring of the same space by moving bodies in the same time?” You make no distinction here with respect to the quantity of matter in the moving bodies; which should have been done in order to make the foregoing definition and principles compatible. You go on “Since force and celerity in the same quantity of matter are always in proportion to each other, why should we, when the quantity of matter is doubled, allow the force to continue unimpaired, and yet suppose one half of the celerity lost?” The reason I apprehend is (and it is a maxim as you observe) “that the force of bodies in motion is equal to the quantity of matter multiplied by the celerity.” If the celerity of a body be not altered, when its quantity of matter is doubled, its force will be doubled, by the foregoing maxim; and of consequence, in order that the force may continue unimpaired or unaltered, one half of its celerity, when its quantity of matter is doubled, must be lost. This maxim will serve also to discover the mistake (as I apprehend it) pointed out in the instances above quoted. I will apply it to one of them. “The body 2A moved by the force 1F does really (you say) move with the same celerity as 1A did when impelled by the same force.” Now let us suppose the celerity of 1A to be 2, then its force will be 2; the celerity of 2A being the same, viz. 2, its force will be 4, which is double the force of 1A: how are their forces to be made equal? No other way than by lessening the celerity of 2A, or increasing the celerity of 1A: if it be done by diminishing that of 2A, it must be diminished half; that is, its celerity instead of being 2 must be but 1: consequently the body 2A, moved by the force 1F, does not (as you suppose) move with the same celerity as 1A did, when impelled by the same force: and this is corroborated by sense: for to the eye (as you suggest) the body 2A would appear to move with less celerity than 1A.
At the end of your remarks you have started a thought that is new, relative to the formation of matter, and its capacity to act and think, viz. “If God was before all things, and filled all space; then when he formed what we call matter, he must have done it out of his own thinking immaterial substance. The same, though he had not filled all space; if it be true that ex nihilo nihil fit. From hence may we not draw this conclusion, that if any part of matter does not at present act and think, ’tis not from an incapacity in its nature, but from a positive restraint. I know not yet what other consequences may follow the admitting of this position, and therefore I will not be obliged to defend it.”
One of your premises, viz. “that God was before all things,” I acquiesce in; but the other “that he filled all space” must be qualified. If he filled all space in an absolute sense, there could be no space for his creative power to exert itself in; or no space wherein the effects of that power could exist. This seems to be the sense you intended, and in that sense it appears to me your conclusion is necessarily deduced from the premises, viz. “that when God formed matter he must have done it out of his own thinking immaterial substance.” But God (as I conceive) did not fill all space absolutely, or in such a manner as to exclude other beings (the effects of his power) for other beings do exist: and they could not be formed out of his own thinking immaterial substance, for in that case, they could not be other beings, but a part of himself. Besides — may we not suppose that the divine substance, considered as distinct from matter, might pervade universal space, and that matter at the same time might exist therein, and not exclude the deity. Two substances even of the material kind may be conceived in some sort as possessing each other and the same space: as the electrical fluid and the body possessing it: so the substance of God may be conceived as possessing or pervading matter. I don’t mean to run any comparison between the nature of God and the electrical fluid; but only instance in that to assist my own conception. If it be possible, then, for matter to exist and not exclude the divine presence from the space it occupies, your conclusion, I think, is not a necessary one from the premises, for it is formed (if I mistake not) on this supposition, that the divine substance fills all space in such a manner as to exclude all other substances; from whence it would follow, if that supposition was true, and I think necessarily (as you seem to apprehend) “that when God formed what we call matter, he must have done it out of his own thinking immaterial substance.”
But you go on “The same [that is, the same conclusion would be just] though God had not filled all space; if it be true that ex nihilo nihil fit.” The most natural construction of this phrase, and which I think the most intelligible is, that nothing is produced without a cause; but this construction will not seem to support the aforesaid conclusion. I suppose then it means as applied to the case in hand, that something cannot be produced out of nothing by any being whatever. This being settled, the argument will stand thus—If no being whatever can produce anything out of nothing, then God when he formed matter must have done it out of his own thinking immaterial substance. I think this a necessary deduction; but I must beg leave to doubt of the truth of the proposition from whence it is made, for it stands alone, unsupported by any argument, and I cannot suggest any to myself in support of it; though I can several against it. We can judge of things only in proportion to our knowledge of them, and of consequence can form no adequate judgment of a power, whose extent we do not fully know. We cannot determine, then, even in regard to beings in a lower class than ourselves, precisely how far their powers extend; we only know in general that our own powers exceed theirs; and with respect to our own, which we must be most of all acquainted with, we do not fully know what they are capable of performing: many a man has done what he once thought himself not able to do and has failed in what he thought within the compass of his power. If we cannot determine the quantum of our own power, nor that of beings below ourselves much less can we of beings superior to us, and least of all, of the supreme being. In regard to the supreme being we are in some degree acquainted with his power—the more we inquire into it, the higher opinion we conceive of it—those, that know most of it, by being most acquainted with its effects, acknowledge that they know nothing of it in compare with what remains to be known: and they hesitate not to pronounce it infinite. That it is infinite may reasonably be supposed, but cannot (as I apprehend) be demonstrated: for to demonstrate it infinite, it must be demonstrated either, that its effects are infinite, or that all possible effects can be produced by it: but our demonstrations extend not to infinite, nor can relate to all possible effects.
Further—if no being could produce anything out of nothing, then God could not produce matter; but [it] is granted above that matter is produced and that God produced it. To this you will say, the matter produced, was produced out of his own thinking substance. I acknowledge it is difficult to conceive how anything can be produced out of nothing, and this difficulty is the principal reason, I suppose, why it is denied that any thing can: but is it not equally difficult to conceive how matter should be formed out of the divine substance which is as different from matter as their properties are different; as different and as much unlike as wisdom and figure, goodness and solidity, in which there is no more similitude between, than between matter and nonentity and therefore it is as difficult to conceive how matter can be formed out of the divine substance, as how it can be formed out of nothing; and if that difficulty be a sufficient reason to deny the one, it is a sufficient reason to deny the other. I shall next mention some consequences that flow from this position. If God formed matter out of his own thinking immaterial substance, then the substance of God must be diminished, and therefore he cannot be infinite: or if not diminished, the matter formed out of it must be God, or a part of God: in which case he must greatly debase and degrade himself, if matter be less excellent than thinking immaterial substance, and therefore he cannot be unchangeable: in which case he must be a compound of matter and spirit, and therefore not a pure and simple being: he must be both cause and effect, creator and creature, and therefore holy and unholy, wise and foolish, just and unjust, good and mischievous, eternal and temporal, unchangeable and mutable, almighty and frail, true and a liar, happy and miserable.
Lastly, if God formed matter out of his own thinking immaterial substance, he can’t be a necessarily existing being, for if he is, he must exist necessarily just as he is in every circumstance and mode of his existence; but such a change in his substance or essence is inconsistent with such necessary existence; and if he does not exist necessarily, he may not exist at all. If these consequences be just, the position aforesaid from whence they flow, viz. that God formed matter out of his own thinking substance, cannot be true; for so far as we have the means of judging, God is infinitely removed from such a character; and if that position be not true, the other viz. “Ex nihilo nihil fit” cannot be true; for matter, which it is granted had once no existence, must have been formed either out of the divine substance, or ex nihilo.
If the above reasoning be just (which you will be a better judge of than myself) does not your last conclusion viz. “that if any part of matter does not at present act and think, ’tis not from an incapacity in its nature, but from a positive restraint” appear unsupported? If it be capable of being supported, I know you can support it: but you are under no obligation to do it: for you declare you “know not what other consequences may follow from the aforesaid positions, and therefore will not be obliged to defend them.” For my own part, I am very little versed in metaphysics: but so far as I am able to judge, I am quite of your opinion “that there is great uncertainty in that science, and that the contradictions and disputes it affords, are endless:” and it is no wonder that this should be the case, for its object is beyond our ken.

I have great reason to ask pardon for trespassing so much upon your time and patience, and still greater for taking the freedom I have but your goodness exceeds all my trespasses, and, I make no doubt, will atone for them. Your collection of letters I returned to you a fortnight ago, which I hope have not miscarried.
It will give me great pleasure to hear your journey has been agreeable to you and that you are as well as I wish you. I am with the greatest esteem dear Sir your most obliged humble servant
James Bowdoin


Title: From Benjamin Franklin to James Birkett, 1 March 1755
From: Franklin, Benjamin
To: Birkett, James

Sir
Philada. March 1. 1755.
I am but just returned from a long Journey, after near 6 Months Absence, and find your Favour of Sept. 29. by which I have the agreable Advice that you expect to be able to remit me something in Smith’s Affairs very soon.
As to the Thickness of Wire necessary or sufficient to conduct a large Quantity of Lightning; concerning which you desire my Sentiments; you will find something on that Head in Pages 124, and 125, of the enclos’d Pamphlet, which please to accept. And I may add, that in my late Journey I saw an Instance of a very great Quantity of Lightning conducted by a Wire no bigger than a common Knitting Needle. It was at Newbury in New England, where the Spire of the Church Steeple being 70 foot in height above the Belfrey was split all to pieces and thrown about the Street in Fragments; from the Bell down to the Clock, plac’d in the Steeple 20 foot below the Bell, there was the small Wire abovemention’d which communicated the Motion of the Clock to the Hammer striking the Hour on the Bell. As far as the Wire extended, no Part of the Steeple was hurt by the Lightning, nor below the Clock as far as the Pendulum Rod reached; but from the End of the Rod, downwards, the Lightning rent the Steeple surprizingly. The Pendulum Rod was about the thickness of a small Tobacco Pipe Stem, and conducted the Whole without Damage to its own Substance, except that the End where the Lightning was accumulated, it appeared melted [as] much as made a small Drop. But the Clock Wire was [blown?] all to Smoke, and smutted the Wall where it passed in a broad black Track, and also the Cieling under which it was carried horizontally. No more of it was left than about an Inch and half next the Tail of the Hammer, and as much joining to the Clock. Yet this is observable, that tho’ it was so small, as not to be sufficient to conduct the Quantity with Safety to its own Substance, yet it did conduct it, so as to secure all that Part of the Building. Excuse this Scrawl which I have not time to copy fair. I am, with much Respect, Sir Your very humble Servant
B Franklin
PS. I have just been reading a similar Instance taken from the Journal des Sçavans, for 1676, page 113. viz.
“En 1676. le tonnerre écrasa le clocher de l’Abbaye de Saint Medard de Soissons; la foudre se porta à une grande Distance le long des fils d’archal qui communiquoient à l’horloge; elle fondit ces cordes metalliques sans faire d’autres desordres dans tout le trajet.”

 Addressed: To  Mr James Birket  Merchant  Antigua  per Capt Snook Q.D.C.
Endorsed: Philada. Benja Franklin dated Mar: 1st. 1755 Reced. 11th. April Followg. per Capt. Snook Answered 2d. June per Capt. Cuzzens