Let us suppose 81-year-old Benjamin Franklin was actually healthy at the 1787 Federal Convention in Philadelphia, in short, that he was fully Franklin. Would such a person have had little impact on the Constitution?
To put it in a modern context, think in terms of, say, Mr. Warren Buffett, who at 82, still healthy and wealthy in 2012, was influencing national tax policy in America — would he have been without influence at the Federal Convention that invented the Constitution? Throw in a local residence with a dining room with seating for 24 about two blocks away, have him tell humorous stories in the most engaging manner of any delegate (indeed, of anyone in Philadelphia), give him the highest IQ in the room, make him governor of the State (elected unanimously) and the most prestigious man in America, with a constant stream of distinguished visitors to his house, and provide him the opportunity to fulfill a lifelong desire for unifying the colonies, slash, States — would such a man have had little influence on the Constitution?
But let’s go further and give him a history as a hugely popular author, as an extremely successful diplomat, make him accomplished at back room dealmaking and parliamentary maneuvering, a satirist and diplomat adept at concealing his hand, a pillar of the Revolution, the greatest philosopher of the era with the activity of mind of a twenty-five-year-old — would such a man have had no influence on the Constitution? We could go on about Dr. Benjamin Franklin (his accomplishments always make for an extensive list such that when the time comes for one I will simply insert the letter “Z”), but popular history has belittled Franklin’s influence on the Constitution, largely due to the incorrect idea he was physically reduced during the summer of 1787, in other words, less than fully himself. But Franklin was a crafty old sophister surrounded by mere novices, and his only medical problems at the time (aside from old age) were a large stone in his bladder that he sometimes had to roll around on the floor to move off the urethra so he could urinate, and gout, which was not active that summer, but nevertheless his knees were weak from the repeated attacks over the years. He was able to manage both issues by avoiding certain activities, minimizing motion (no sudden moves at all), taking opium occasionally for the pain, and riding in a sedan chair. (I discuss Franklin’s health separately, later.)
Franklin was very adaptable to his declining health; he invented bi-focal glasses for reading, and in 1786 the Long Arm to remove books from high shelves, eliminating any need to climb ladders. By all accounts he was mentally sharp to the very end. He was certainly well enough to host many dinners before and during the Federal Convention (FC), and write numerous letters, plus four speeches.
It was no coincidence the place chosen for the FC was the same place the Articles of Confederation and Declaration of Independence were created – almost on Franklin’s doorstep. Virginia was the main driver for the new convention, but Pennsylvania, as the middle (Keystone) state, was geographically crucial to any union, the same as it had been for independence. Franklin and Philadephia would certainly be hospitable to the cause.
Franklin was influencing the FC before it even started. He began enlarging his house in September shortly after the Annapolis Convention dissolved (September 14, 1786) with a call for a more comprehensive meeting to be held at Philadelphia the following May. He added the large meeting and dining room, and the largest private library in America, and he had some really cool stuff. Preparation? Coincidence? But he certainly had it ready to go by the following May, in time for the FC. He had favored a Union since at least 1754, and the 1787 convention would be his last chance to help fulfill that dream.
In December 1786, Governor Randolph of Virginia informed him that Va. had selected delegates for Philadelphia. Franklin immediately had the Pennsylvania Assembly select her delegates too, and promptly notified Randolph when they were chosen. Franklin was doing his part to make the FC a success before it even started.
However, both Franklin and George Washington, who was being pressed to go by his Virginia friends, were extremely concerned about their reputations, and did not want to participate in a failed exercise. Yet they also did not want to be blamed for failure if their attendance might have helped an otherwise failed effort succeed. (As one FC delegate put it (W.R. Davie (N.C.), July 17, 1787), Washington’s and Franklin’s situations although dissimilar were both peculiar and delicate, and they operated with “inconceivable circumspection.”) Once it was clear other political heavyweights would be attending — that the idea was being taken seriously — Franklin had himself elected a delegate on March 28, and by April 3 was writing to Washington urging him to attend too. By April 27 Washington agreed to attend after having previously begged off. He had been very reluctant to go.
Franklin’s letter to Washington is a masterpiece of delicate persuasion, not only in content, but in it’s method of delivery, by which I mean, the person who delivered it. Franklin used his cousin, his most trusted mule, Jonathan Williams Jr., to hand deliver the letter, which I summarise as follows:
I know you are burdened by letters of introduction but this guy is different — he supplied your army from France… and by the way — it would be really helpful if you were to come to Philly.
Jonathan Williams Jr. is one of the unsung heroes of the American Revolution – so it often goes for logistics personnel. But any military man would have wanted to personally thank his (successful) logistics officer, later. Franklin had been one of Washington’s logistics men back in 1755, when Braddock’s expedition was annihilated and Washington barely got out alive, and all the wagons Franklin hired for the army got burned. ‘Cousin Jonathan,’ could also deliver messages too delicate for print. The actual concluding line drove home the point:
“…and Hopes of seeing you here at the Convention, being persuaded that your Presence will be of the greatest Importance to the Success of the Measure.”
Washington could put off requests from others, but Dr. Franklin was on a different level; their friendship dated back to when several of the delegates were mere toddlers. Franklin had sent Washington so much help from France during the Revolution that he had real pull.
At the FC, there is no question Washington knew that Franklin had the greater prestige (reasons: Z). Historians have backdated Washington’s prestige from his service as first president, establishing the preposterous idea that Washington’s prestige was greater than Franklin’s, but the more accurate language is that Washington was the most revered delegate while Franklin had the most prestige. As a practical matter, unlike reverence, prestige does not preclude political enemies; Franklin had them, Washington did not. However, it’s a bit like comparing which tastes better, apples or oranges
As confirmation of Franklin’s prestige, which enhanced his influence, Washington wrote in his diary that he “Waited on the President, Doctr Franklin as soon as I got to town.” It was standard practice of the era for those of lower prestige to wait upon the higher, whereas the higher merely attended the lower. That was May 13, the day before the scheduled start of the FC.
In that meeting Franklin was the senior revolutionary. He was old enough to be the father of everyone at the FC, including Washington, and at one time or another had pulled the wool over just about everyone’s eyes in America. As a satirist, and a diplomat, as with all masters in those dark arts, he was expert at concealing his hand. Franklin informed Washington that he would have to preside over the FC, and probably over any newly formed national government as well. Franklin was the only man in America who could pull rank on Washington. They were the only possible candidates, so they had to settle it between themselves.
Furthermore, to secure the unanimous election of Washington to preside, Franklin stayed home on the opening day, May 25, along with three other PA delegates. If he had showed up there may have been a split vote, and he had long been keen on political unanimity. But Franklin had an additional motive to stay away, namely, to avoid any repercussions from the election of the secretary of the FC, for which position his grandson was a candidate. The split vote (5 – 2 for Major Jackson over William Temple Franklin) for the secretary suggests a split vote was possible for the presiding officer as well. By abstaining through absence, Franklin guaranteed unanimity. (Franklin could also claim health issues as a reason for non-attendence, whether he had them or not, for if Doctor Benjamin Franklin claimed to be indisposed, who would question him?)
One could almost claim Franklin started generally influencing the Constitution back in 1754, in his Albany Plan for Union that sought unanimity. His desire for unanimity was evident in his 1754 political cartoon (a first), of a snake chopped into 13 parts (colonies) with the caption, “Join or die.” Likewise, he influenced the Constitution when he first proposed the Articles of Confederation in 1775. Franklin’s influence in America was pervasive; they were naming places after him while he was still alive (John Paul Jones’ flagship was named ‘Bonhomme Richard’ – Poor Richard)! Would the ingenious and venerable Franklin have had little influence on the delegates to the FC?
Although it would be a stretch to maintain Franklin directly influenced the Constitution with his 1754 Plan for Union, or 1775 Articles of Confederation, his work on the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution of Pennsylvania immediately following the Declaration, did spill over into influence in the FC. His keen interests in 1776 — majority rule, suffrage, and representation — were still keen interests in 1787, and also the main sticking points of the FC; and many of the same people who were involved in 1787 had also been there in 1776. Of the 55 delegates who attended the FC, 41 had been or were members of the Continental Congress, suggesting the FC was round two, except 11 years later. (1787 delegates Clymer, Gerry, Robert Morris, Read, Sherman, Wilson, and Wythe also signed the Declaration of Independence. Franklin was familiar with with some of the delegates for other reasons, too, such as Hugh Williamson of North Carolina, a fellow scientist (in that era they were called philosophers).
The voting in the FC was the same as in the Continental and Confederation Congresses, which meant each State had one vote, so that howsoever the majority of each state delegation voted would be the vote for that State. Hence, if only say, four of seven delegates for a State (e.g., PA) were opposed, to shift the vote of the State might require only two delegates to abstain, which is precisely what Franklin arranged in 1776.
By 1776, Franklin was already an old hand at parliamentary maneuvering, and with John Adams engineered passage of the Declaration of Independence that contained Franklin’s significant insert, “self-evident” (as in, “we hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal… “). He persuaded PA delegates John Dickinson and Robert Morris to abstain from voting against the Declaration, thereby switching PA from 4-3 against to 3-2 in favor. Also, as part of the floor managing of the process, Thomas Jefferson had to be kept calm while Congress eviscerated (edited) his masterpiece, meaning Franklin had to sit next to Jefferson — and hence Jefferson’s anecdote about Franklin (told decades later) in which Franklin described how friends of a hat-maker suggested the removal of one word after another from his sign until all it read was “Hats.” By sitting next to Jefferson in the process he showed his support. The anecdote no doubt drew a smile from Jefferson, which meant Congress could plainly see Franklin’s support on Jefferson’s smiling face. (Franklin was so popular he was sent as a delegate to the Continental Congress immediately after his return from England in 1775.)
Soon after the Declaration of Independence was completed, Franklin co-authored the Pennsylvania Constitution, which attempted to manifest the creed that all men are created equal through the granting of what at the time was the nearest thing to universal suffrage, wherein all sons of freeholders could vote whether they paid taxes or not. The previous Pennsylvania Assembly had maintained it’s existence by denying the suffrage to Franklin’s core group of supporters, the artisans and mechanics who formed his militia in 1747 — the working class — which he always defended. (The term “created equal” refers solely and specifically to birth rank, as Thomas Paine demonstrated in his bestseller, ‘Common Sense’. Franklin detested hereditary titles, much preferring common sense.)
After the Declaration and PA Constitution, Franklin arranged the first loan for the new country and got himself sent to France, where coincidentally he could not only do the most good for the Revolution, and for humanity, by spreading the idea of liberty, and borrowing lots of money for the war effort, but it was also the safest place to be if the Revolution happened to fail — would such a clever man have had little influence in round two? James Madison himself conceded Franklin’s influence when on the last day of the FC the proposal that the Constitution be promulgated as unanimously endorsed by the States (even though G. Morris came up with the idea), “was put into the hands of Franklin to improve it’s chance of success.”
The other delegates knew how influential Franklin was that summer. A letter (October 2, 1787) to Thomas Jefferson, copied in his own handwriting (possibly to cover whoever was sending him inside info about the FC) points out that Franklin “gained much credit within doors for his conduct.” He had even gathered the PA delegation at the end to allay all concerns in pursuit of their unanimous consent. (His propensity for quietly brokering deals also tends to mask his deep influence. John Adams complained furiously that Franklin cut a deal for the peace with England before his fellow commissioner – John Adams – fully knew what was going on. (Adams Journal, May 3, 1783.))
Madison may have found Franklin challenging since he opposed some of Madison’s favorite ideas (e.g. freehold qualifications of electors), which may explain his sometimes peculiar treatment of Franklin (in his Notes and Preface). Quite a few delegates aside from Madison had their pets curbed, so to speak, including Ben Franklin, who favored a unicameral legislature, which was overruled at the outset. The Constitution was created as an act of gigantic compromise, and alliances in the FC shifted by region and issue. Delegates could be allies on one subject, opponents on another. A skillful, back room negotiator like Franklin was in his element.
Unfortunately, we are in the complicated position of depending on Madison at the same time we suspect certain aspects of his Preface and Notes are less than sacrosanct, especially in regards to Franklin. Furthermore, there are at least three different Notes of the Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787. There are Madison’s original scribblings; and then there are the revised Notes that his stepson John Payne (noted for alcoholism and the financial strain he placed upon James and his mother Dolly), recreated under Madison’s supervision from the original (that is, based on the original but with significant editing and alteration, especially, it seems, in regards to Franklin); and what I call the printed version, which are the various printed books (and on-line) compilations of the Madison and Payne texts (e.g., Gaillard and Hunt).
There are other problems with the Notes, and Preface, aside from some alterations in regards to Franklin, that contribute to general misconceptions, which make them less than sacrosanct (too many authors have more or less assumed that what Madison said must be so), but posthumous publication covered Madison’s tracks, and prevents some definite answers.
For example, could Madison speak and write at the same time? If not, then how did he manage to record his long-winded speeches, while recording a long-winded speech by another delegate immediately following his own. He may have accurately noted other speeches but embellished his own speeches later.
Furthermore, not once did Madison write, “and then we broke for lunch,” or any other break, for that matter, other than to adjourn for the day. Or that, “everybody went over for dinner at Franklin’s house afterwards,” as they did on June 6. The Notes convey no framework for time. They were not allowed to read, write, or whisper during speeches, but they must have at the very least stretched their legs now and then. The idea speeches immediately followed each other, as if there were no time gaps, is unlikely; or that it was as if they were in class, waving their hand for the teacher to call on them for the answer, and then they would come up with a brilliant solution out of the blue, is also unlikely. Many speeches and motions were obviously prearranged (e.g., Washington’s election to preside) — that’s just how conventions operate, with much of the work done off the floor, and over dinner, otherwise they would have gotten bogged down, which they did anyway. Read the speeches for some days out loud and time them and it will be evident that, if they were really in convention for at least five hours every day, either they were goofing off for prolonged periods, or much is left out of the Notes. Indeed, the facsimiles of the original (available on-line, Library of Congress) reveal that Madison had to be making changes on the fly.
Even depictions of the seating arrangement that we see nowadays conveys a strange idea, with just two chairs per table – delegates had to gather to vote as states and both VA and PA would have required larger tables. Madison noted twice that he was near Franklin (in his Notes and Detached Memoranda), and Madison sat front and center, which seems the likely place for a venerable delegate such as Franklin.
The Constitution had many fathers, but only one mid-wife for a very difficult birth, without whom the child would have entered the world crippled, underweight, and hampered by a seriously flawed constitution, if at all. Franklin’s influence on the Federal Convention was general and specific, obvious and concealed, positive and negative, far larger than history gives him credit and in operation before it even started. Franklin’s greatest political contribution to America is hidden by his methods of operation, and within the labyrinth of Madison’s Notes, which we must enter to appreciate Franklin’s impact on the FC. But abandon hope all ye who enter the Notes, or at least carry a very large ball of twine.
—
References:
Madison’s Notes of the Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787
Madison’s Detached Memoranda
Madison’s Preface, A Sketch Never Finished nor Applied
Max Farrand’s records
Yates’ Journal
Pierce’s Journal
McHenry’s Journal
Hamlton’s Journal
King’s Journal
Luther Martin’s report to the Maryland Legislature
Jonathan Dayton’s hearsay report
Mannaseh Cutler’s Journal entry for July 15, 1787
Jefferson’s Anecdotes about Franklin
Benjamin Rush’s Anecdotes about Franklin
George Washington’s Diary
Others (e.g., Jared Sparks, various letters/journals of FC delegates, etc.)
Ben Franklin’s Autobiography
Franklin’s Papers (yale.edu/franklinpapers)
Gary Siebel also has a blog about Ben Franklin, which can be found here: http://
