SEPARATE REPORT ON THE DATE OF THE

FOUNDATION OF THE SOCIETY

I am in entire agreement with the main conclusion of the committee's report, that the origin of the American Philosophical Society should be carried back to the Junto founded by Franklin in 1727; but I am unable to agree with one section of the reasoning by which that result has been reached. We have had before us much material for the solution of our problem,-varying in character from vague reminiscences to contemporary written records. Much of this is so late, so doubtful, or so elusive as to be relatively valueless. On the other hand there are three documents or groups of documents which are both contemporary and definite, and on the interpretation of these, I am convinced, the decision of the question referred to us must be mainly based. These are, first, the written minutes in the Society's possession; second, a series of ten letters exchanged between Franklin on one side and Hugh Roberts and Philip Syng on the other, between 1753 and 1785; and third, a letter of the year 1768, from Charles Thomson to Benjamin Franklin.

From the first of these, the two minute books in the possession of our Society, it is evident that there existed for the twelve years from 1757 to 1769, though

with several intermissions, a society consisting of 12 members, meeting on Friday evenings, discussing matters of scientific or other serious interest, making use of a well established entrance ceremony and by-laws, and referred to from time to time in its records as the Junto.1 The name, organization, objects, number of members, time of meeting and other practices of this society immediately suggest the Junto organized by Franklin in 1727 and described by him in his autobiography and some early papers;2 and seem to indicate that this body is nothing more nor less than a continuation of that Society. A slight misgiving is perhaps aroused by the fact that in the minute book no one of the members of Franklin's Society is mentioned as a member or visitor, although at least five were still living through most of this period; that they speak of themselves in 1768 only as having "existed for some years, and nowhere make a claim of very early origin; and that in 1768 Benjamin Franklin himself was elected to membership. Nevertheless these somewhat disconcerting facts can perhaps be explained away, and if we had no source of information except these minute books, I have little doubt they would be looked upon as fragmentary records of the club which Franklin founded in 1727.

4

When, however, we take up the ten letters between Franklin, Roberts, and Syng, which I have spoken of

1 Abstract from Junto Minute book, Report, pp. 99, 101, 103–106, etc.

2 Report, p. 126.

3 Report, p. 115. 4 Report, p. 118.

as the second group of evidences, we are immediately faced with the fact that the writers of these letters, during the same period of time as that covered by the minutes, use expressions about the Junto which are difficult if not impossible to conciliate with the minutes. The body which is referred to in this correspondence is repeatedly spoken of as "the ancient Junto," "the old Junto," "the good old Junto," "the good old club, the Junto." Its members are described as "the remaining members of the good old Junto," "the worthy remains of the ancient Junto," "our old friends of the Junto, Hospital and Insurance." Its members are spoken of by Franklin as having "grown gray together"; it is described in 1765 as "wanting but about two years of 40 since it was established." Roberts speaks of the "trivial chat" that went on at its meetings, and Franklin says, "I love company... and relish even better than I used to do the grave observations and wise sentences of old men's conversation, so that I am sure the Junto will be still agreeable to me as it ever has been. I therefore hope it will not be discontinued as long as we are able to crawl together."'5 One obtains from these letters an impression of a very different body from that described in the minutes.

The body described in the correspondence seems to be a group of elderly men, bound together by old asso5 Report, pp. 129, 130, 132–3, 135, 137-8. Franklin to Roberts, July 16, 1753, Sept. 15, 1758, Feb. 16, 1761, July 7, 1765, Feb. 27, 1766. Roberts to Franklin, May 15, 1760, May 20, 1765, Oct. 12, 1765, June 24, 1785.

Syng to Franklin, May 1, 1766.

ciations, meeting for informal talk, dropping off one by one, but the survivors still holding together, as Franklin says, "till the eve of life is spent." The body described in the minutes is a group of much younger men, three of them sons of the men who carry on the correspondence, meeting for the discussion of definite scientific questions. There is not a single case in which the same person is mentioned in the two bodies of records, until we reach, in 1768, the notice of the election of Benjamin Franklin to membership in the younger body.

At some time, perhaps in the summer of 1765, when, as one of the early members, Philip Syng, wrote somewhat later, "the Junto fainted last summer in the hot weather and has not yet revived," the old group seems to have ceased to meet. Yet even twenty years later, in 1785, when but three of them were still living, they retained their old feeling of comradeship, for one of their members, Hugh Roberts, writing to another, Benjamin Franklin, concerning the third says, "Philip Syng, the only other surviving member of the old Junto, labours under infirmities, keeps much at home where I can seldom go to visit him.""

The younger group, on the other hand, continued to meet, although with various intermissions, until in 1768 they changed their name, enlarged their membership, and prepared themselves for the amalgamation with the Philosophical Society which took place next year. The proof in these letters of the non-identity of the 6 Report, p. 133.

7 Report, pp. 135–6.

two groups of men, both of which refer to themselves as the Junto, does not it is true rise to an actual demonstration, but, added to the doubt left from a study of the minutes, it amounts, in my mind at least, to an absolute conviction. With the opposite view on this question taken in the report of the committee, I cannot therefore agree. The two groups of men have very much in common, including the use of the name Junto, but they were two groups of men, nevertheless.

The third piece of substantive evidence, the letter written by Charles Thomson to Franklin, November 6, 1768, not only confirms the impression of the existence of two societies, but contributes to the solution of the difficulty involved in their contemporary existence. In this letter Thomson, who had been the most active member of the Society of which we have the minutes, at least since 1758, tells Franklin of its recent revival, the extension of its membership and its new plans, and begs his advice and assistance in carrying out these plans. He tells him that he, Franklin, has within the last few months been elected to membership and still more recently to its presidency. This is all in accordance with what we already know from a study of the minutes, and discloses no new fact. Incidentally, however, he tells what the minutes do not tell us, that the Society was begun in 1750. This is a simple concrete statement and there is no reason to doubt that it means just what it says. The society of which we have the minutes was "begun in 1750.''8

8 Report, pp. 153-5.