1. Have you any particular disrespect to any present members? Answer. I have not. 2. Do you sincerely declare that you love mankind in general, of what profession, or or religion soever? Answer. I do. 3. Do you think any person ought to be harmed in his body, name or goods for mere speculative opinions, or his external way of worship? Answer. No. 4. Do you love truth for truth's sake, and will you endeavor impartially to find and receive it yourself, and communicate it to others? Answer. Yes." breast, he shall be asked 2. Do you love mankind in general, of what nation, religion, or profession soever they be? 3. Do you think any one ought to be injured in his estate, character, or person for his mere speculative opinion in matters of religion? 4. Do you love truth for truth's sake, and will you endeavor impartially to find it out, and freely communicate it to others? Junto Minutes, Part 1, 84. 2 Sparks' Franklin 12. Notwithstanding this striking coincidence in organization between the two Juntos, which, it is admitted, could not have been the result of accident, the Committee are of opinion that they were distinct bodies. The reason for their opinion, they will proceed to state as briefly as may be compatible with the difficulty of the subject; and, afterwards, they will throw out some conjectures, in explanation of the fact, that the two Juntos, notwithstanding their being distinct associations, had the same qualifications for the initiation of members. The Committee will first proceed to consider what light may be shed on the question by a comparison of the list of members, known to have belonged severally to the two Juntos. And here it may be remarked that if the Society-Junto, so far as its minutes have come down to us, does not embrace in its list any of the surviving members of the Franklin Junto, it is fatal to the supposition of the identity of the two associations; unless it can be satisfactorily explained why the survivors of the latter are not recognized in the proceedings of the former. The members of the Franklin-Junto, so far as their names have come down to us, were Benjamin Franklin, Joseph Brientnal, Thomas Godfrey, Nicholas Scull, William Parsons, William Mangridge, Hugh Meredith, Stephen Potts, George Webb, Robert Grace, William Coleman, Hugh Roberts, Philip Syng, Enoch Flower, Joseph Wharton, William Griffiths, Luke Morris, Joseph Turner, Joseph Shippen, Joseph Trotter, Samuel Jervis, and Samuel Rhoads, [and Thomas Hopkinson. (See autobiography in Sparks, Vol. I, p. 138.)] In all 22 [23]. 1 Sparks 81, et. seq.— Roberts Vaux, 15 Hazard's Register, 183. The existing members of the Society-Junto in September 1758, the date of the earliest extant minutes, were Francis Rawle, Charles Thomson, Stephen Wooley, Peter Chevalier, J. Mather, Philip Syng, Jun., Isaac Paschall, Edmund Physick, William Franklin, Joshua Howell, William Hopkins, and Paul Jackson; total twelve. See Junto Minute book; as also Tabular Statement marked A, of the attendance of the Society-Junto members, appended to this Report.1 By this Statement, it will be found that these twelve members continued to meet more or less regularly, except William Franklin, who was always absent, until the 20th of June, 1760, when Samuel Powel, elected the previous March, took his seat for the first time. Philip Syng is usually recorded without the affix Junior; but in the minutes of three meetings; namely, those of Jan. 19th, Nov. 30th, Dec. 14th, 1759, he is entered as Philip Syng, Jun. This member, who died in November 1760, was the son of Philip Syng, of the Franklin-Junto, who will, to prevent confusion be hereafter designated, in this report, as Philip Syng, Sen. Of the members of the Franklin-Junto, Franklin, [William] Coleman, Hugh Roberts, Philip Syng, Sen. and Samuel Rhoads are known to have been still living in Sep. 1758. The question here arises, why are they not mentioned, as members, in the minutes of the Society-Junto? 1Not reproduced. The Committee will first inquire why Franklin is not mentioned as a member. This objection to the supposition that Franklin was a member of the Society-Junto, is examined by Mr. Du Ponceau. He says, p. 17, Franklin “was in England, and it was unknown when he should return. He was probably more considered at that time as the founder and patron of that Club (for such in fact it was) than as one of its active members." Again, he remarks, (page 18) "as his representative as it were, we find his son William Franklin in this list of members, though he does not appear to have been a very constant attendant. He went often to the country,probably to New Jersey, of which he was appointed Governor about the time when this volume ends." In judging of the probability of these explanations, it must be borne in mind that Franklin arrived in England, accompanied by his son, in July 1757, and returned with him on the 1st of Nov. 1762, after an absence of more than five years. If the explanation of Mr. Du Ponceau be admitted, it will go to show that while Franklin, though a member, is omitted to be mentioned on the minutes, because he was absent in England, his son is at the same time recognized as a member, and his absence from the meetings, recorded twenty-one times. Is it conceivable that the father would not be noticed at all on the minutes, and the son so frequently, under circumstances so similar for both, if the father had been a member? It is true that Mr. Du Ponceau suggests that Franklin was considered rather as the founder and patron of the Club, than as one of its active members; but granting this, would not the Society-Junto be anxious, nevertheless, to recognize him as a member, if he were such, and record him as absent in England, as they did his son. Again, Mr. Du Ponceau remarks in the same page (18), The Club "would probably have been dissolved, like so many others, if Franklin had not exerted himself by his presence while here, and by his correspondence while abroad, to keep it alive." The Committee would here inquire how far the above surmises tally with the supposition, just before expressed by Mr. Du Ponceau, that Franklin, inasmuch as he was never mentioned on the minutes of the Society-Junto, was considered rather as the founder and patron of the Club than as an active member! But, in tracing the progress of the Society-Junto, a new objection arises to the supposition that Franklin was one of its early members. This Junto, under the changed name of "The American Society for promoting and propagating Useful Knowledge, held in Philadelphia;" which was adopted on the 13th of Dec. 1766, elected Franklin one of its members, on the 19th of February 1768. The name was again changed in September 1768, the new title given being "The American Society held at Philadelphia for promoting Useful Knowledge," which name it con |