you must know I have been at Court. We went to Versailles last Sunday,
and had the Honour of being presented to the King; he spoke to both of
us very graciously and chearfully, is a handsome Man, has a very lively
Look, and appears younger than he is. In the Evening we were at the
_Grand Couvert_, where the Family sup in Publick. The Form of their
Sitting at the Table was this: The table was as you see half a Hollow
Square, the Service Gold. When either made a Sign for Drink, the Word
was given by one of the Waiters; _A boire pour le Roy_, or, _A boire
pour la Reine_. Then two persons within the Square approach'd, one with
Wine[,] the other with Water in _Caraffes_; each drank a little Glass of
what he brought, and then put both the _Caraffes_ with a Glass on a
Salver, and presented it. Their Distance from each other was such, as
that other Chairs might have been plac'd between any two of them. An
Officer of the Court brought us up thro' the Crowd of Spectators, and
plac'd Sir John so as to stand between the King and Madame Adelaide, and
me between the Queen and Madame Victoire. The King talk'd a good deal to
Sir John, asking many Questions about our Royal Family; and did me too
the Honour of taking some Notice of me; that's saying enough, for I
would not have you think me so much pleas'd with this King and Queen, as
to have a Whit less regard than I us'd to have for ours. No Frenchman
shall go beyond me in thinking my own King and Queen the very best in
the World, and the most amiable.
[Illustration: **table seating plan**
MAD. LOUISE MAD. SOPHIE
WAITERS
MAD. VICTOIRE MAD. ADELAIDE
THE QUEEN THE KING]
Versailles has had infinite Sums laid out in building it and supplying
it with Water. Some say the Expences exceeded 80 Millions Sterling. The
Range of Building is immense; the Garden-Front most magnificent, all of
hewn Stone; the Number of Statues, Figures, Urns, &c., in Marble and
Bronze of exquisite Workmanship, is beyond Conception. But the
Waterworks are out of Repair, and so is great Part of the Front next the
Town, looking with its shabby half-Brick Walls, and broken Windows, not
much better than the Houses in Durham Yard. There is, in short, both at
Versailles and Paris, a prodigious Mixture of Magnificence and
Negligence, with every kind of Elegance except that of Cleanliness, and
what we call _Tidyness_. Tho' I must do Paris the Justice to say, that
in two Points of Cleanliness they exceed us. The Water they drink, tho'
from the River, they render as pure as that of the best Spring, by
filtring it thro' Cisterns fill'd with Sand; and the Streets by constant
Sweeping are fit to walk in, tho' there is no pav'd footPath.
Accordingly, many well-dress'd People are constantly seen walking in
them. The Crowds of Coaches and Chairs for this Reason is not so great.
Men, as well as Women, carry Umbrellas in their Hands, which they extend
in case of Rain or two [_sic_] much sun; and a Man with an Umbrella not
taking up more than 3 foot square, or 9 square feet of the Street, when,
if in a Coach, he would take up 240 square feet, you can easily conceive
that tho' the Streets here are narrower they may be much less
encumber'd. They are extreamly well pav'd, and the Stones, being
generally Cubes, when worn on one Side, may be turn'd and become new.
The Civilities we everywhere receive give us the strongest Impressions
of the French Politeness. It seems to be a Point settled here
universally, that Strangers are to be treated with Respect; and one has
just the same Deference shewn one here by being a Stranger, as in
England by being a Lady. The Customhouse Officers at Port St. Denis, as
we enter'd Paris, were about to seize 2 doz of excellent Bordeaux Wine
given us at Boulogne, and which we brought with us; but, as soon as they
found we were Strangers, it was immediately remitted on that Account. At
the Church of Notre Dame, where we went to see a magnificent
Illumination, with Figures, &c., for the deceas'd Dauphiness, we found
an immense Crowd, who were kept out by Guards; but, the Officer being
told that we were Strangers from England, he immediately admitted us,
accompanied and show'd us every thing. Why don't we practise this
Urbanity to Frenchmen? Why should they be allowed to outdo us in any
thing?
Here is an Exhibition of Paintings like ours in London, to which
Multitudes flock daily. I am not Connoisseur enough to judge which has
most Merit. Every Night, Sundays not excepted here are Plays or Operas;
and tho' the Weather has been hot, and the Houses full, one is not
incommoded by the Heat so much as with us in Winter. They must have some
Way of changing the Air, that we are not acquainted with. I shall
enquire into it.
Travelling is one Way of lengthening Life, at least in Appearance. It is
but about a Fortnight since we left London, but the Variety of Scenes we
have gone through makes it seem equal to Six Months living in one Place.
Perhaps I have suffered a greater Change, too, in my own Person, than I
could have done in Six Years at home. I had not been here Six Days,
before my Taylor and Perruquier had transform'd me into a Frenchman.
Only think what a Figure I make in a little Bag-Wig and naked Ears! They
told me I was become 20 Years younger, and look'd very galante;
So being in Paris where the Mode is to be sacredly follow'd I was once
very near making Love to my Friend's Wife.
This Letter shall cost you a Shilling, and you may consider it cheap,
when you reflect, that it has cost me at least 50 Guineas to get into
the Situation, that enables me to write it. Besides, I might, if I had
staied at home, have won perhaps two Shillings of you at Cribbidge. By
the Way, now I mention Cards, let me tell you that Quadrille is quite
out of Fashion here, and English Whisk all the Mode at Paris and the
Court.
And pray look upon it as no small Matter, that surrounded as I am by the
Glories of this World, and Amusements of all Sorts, I remember you and
Dolly and all the dear good Folks at Bromley. 'Tis true, I can't help
it, but must and ever shall remember you all with Pleasure.
Need I add, that I am particularly, my dear good Friend, yours most
affectionately,
B. FRANKLIN.
ON THE LABOURING POOR
[From the _Gentleman's Magazine_, April, 1768.]
SIR,
I have met with much invective in the papers, for these two years past,
against the hard-heartedness of the rich, and much complaint of the
great oppressions suffered in this country by the labouring poor. Will
you admit a word or two on the other side of the question? I do not
propose to be an advocate for oppression or oppressors. But when I see
that the poor are, by such writings, exasperated against the rich, and
excited to insurrections, by which much mischief is done, and some
forfeit their lives, I could wish the true state of things were better
understood, the poor not made by these busy writers more uneasy and
unhappy than their situation subjects them to be, and the nation not
brought into disrepute among foreigners, by public groundless
accusations of ourselves, as if the rich in England had no compassion
for the poor, and Englishmen wanted common humanity.
In justice, then to this country, give me leave to remark, that the
condition of the poor here is, by far, the best in Europe, for that,
except in England and her American colonies, there is not in any country
of the known world, not even in Scotland or Ireland, a provision by law
to enforce a support of the poor. Everywhere else necessity reduces to
beggary. This law was not made by the poor. The legislators were men of
fortune. By that act they voluntarily subjected their own estates, and
the estates of all others, to the payment of a tax for the maintenance
of the poor, incumbering those estates with a kind of rent-charge for
that purpose, whereby the poor are vested with an inheritance, as it
were, in all the estates of the rich. I wish they were benefited by this
generous provision in any degree equal to the good intention, with which
it was made, and is continued: But I fear the giving mankind a
dependance on any thing for support, in age or sickness, besides
industry and frugality during youth and health, tends to flatter our
natural indolence, to encourage idleness and prodigality, and thereby to
promote and increase poverty, the very evil it was intended to cure;
thus multiplying beggars instead of diminishing them.
Besides this tax, which the rich in England have subjected themselves
to, in behalf of the poor, amounting in some places to five or six
shillings in the pound, of the annual income, they have, by donations
and subscriptions, erected numerous schools in various parts of the
kingdom, for educating gratis the children of the poor in reading and
writing, and in many of those schools the children are also fed and
cloathed. They have erected hospitals at an immense expence for the
reception and cure of the sick, the lame, the wounded, and the insane
poor, for lying-in women, and deserted children. They are also
continually contributing towards making up losses occasioned by fire, by
storms, or by floods, and to relieve the poor in severe seasons of
frost, in times of scarcity, &c., in which benevolent and charitable
contributions no nation exceeds us. Surely, there is some gratitude due
for so many instances of goodness.
Add to this all the laws made to discourage foreign manufactures, by
laying heavy duties on them, or totally prohibiting them, whereby the
rich are obliged to pay much higher prices for what they wear and
consume, than if the trade was open: These are so many laws for the
support of our labouring poor, made by the rich, and continued at their
expence; all the difference of price, between our own and foreign
commodities, being so much given by our rich to our poor; who would
indeed be enabled by it to get by degrees above poverty, if they did
not, as too generally they do, consider every encrease of wages, only as
something that enables them to drink more and work less; so that their
distress in sickness, age, or times of scarcity, continues to be the
same as if such laws had never been made in their favour.
Much malignant censure have some writers bestowed upon the rich for
their luxury and expensive living, while the poor are starving, &c.;
not considering that what the rich expend, the labouring poor receive in
payment for their labour. It may seem a paradox if I should assert, that
our labouring poor do in every year receive _the whole revenue of the
nation_; I mean not only the public revenue, but also the revenue or
clear income of all private estates, or a sum equivalent to the whole.
In support of this position I reason thus. The rich do not work for one
another. Their habitations, furniture, cloathing, carriages, food,
ornaments, and every thing in short, that they or their families use and
consume, is the work or produce of the labouring poor, who are, and must
be continually, paid for their labour in producing the same. In these
payments the revenues of private estates are expended, for most people
live up to their incomes. In cloathing or provision for troops, in arms,
ammunition, ships, tents, carriages, &c., &c., (every particular the
produce of labour,) much of the public revenue is expended. The pay of
officers, civil and military, and of the private soldiers and sailors,
requires the rest; and they spend that also in paying for what is
produced by the labouring poor.
I allow that some estates may increase by the owners spending less than
their income; but then I conceive that other estates do at the same time
diminish by the owners spending more than their income, so that when the
enriched want to buy more land, they easily find lands in the hands of
the impoverished, whose necessities oblige them to sell; and thus this
difference is equalled. I allow also, that part of the expence of the
rich is in foreign produce or manufactures, for producing which the
labouring poor of other nations must be paid; but then I say, we must
first pay our own labouring poor for an equal quantity of our
manufactures or produce, to exchange for those foreign productions, or
we must pay for them in money, which money, not being the natural
produce of our country, must first be purchased from abroad, by sending
out its value in the produce or manufactures of this country, for which
manufactures our labouring poor are to be paid. And indeed, if we did
not export more than we import, we could have no money at all. I allow
farther, that there are middle men, who make a profit, and even get
estates, by purchasing the labour of the poor, and selling it at
advanced prices to the rich; but then they cannot enjoy that profit, or
the income of estates, but by spending them in employing and paying our
labouring poor, in some shape or other, for the products of industry.
Even beggars, pensioners, hospitals, and all that are supported by
charity, spend their incomes in the same manner. So that finally, as I
said at first, _our labouring poor receive annually the whole of the
clear revenues of the nation_, and from us they can have no more.
If it be said that their wages are too low, and that they ought to be
better paid for their labour, I heartily wish any means could be fallen
upon to do it, consistent with their interest and happiness; but, as the
cheapness of other things is owing to the plenty of those things, so the
cheapness of labour is in most cases owing to the multitude of
labourers, and to their under-working one another in order to obtain
employment. How is this to be remedied? A law might be made to raise
their wages; but, if our manufactures are too dear, they will not vend
abroad, and all that part of employment will fail, unless by fighting
and conquering we compel other nations to buy our goods, whether they
will or no, which some have been mad enough at times to propose.
Among ourselves, unless we give our working people less employment, how
can we, for what they do, pay them higher than we do? Out of what fund
is the additional price of labour to be paid, when all our present
incomes are, as it were, mortgaged to them? Should they get higher
wages, would that make them less poor, if, in consequence, they worked
fewer days of the week proportionably? I have said, a law might be made
to raise their wages; but I doubt much whether it could be executed to
any purpose, unless another law, now indeed almost obsolete, could at
the same time be revived and enforced; a law, I mean, that many have
often heard and repeated, but few have ever duly considered. SIX _days
shalt thou labour_. This is as positive a part of the commandment, as
that which says, _The_ SEVENTH _day thou shalt rest_. But we remember
well to observe the indulgent part, and never think of the other.
_Saint Monday_ is generally as duly kept by our working people as
_Sunday_; the only difference is, that, instead of employing their time
cheaply at church, they are wasting it expensively at the alehouse.
I am, Sir, &c.
MEDIUS.
TO DUPONT DE NEMOURS[74]
London, July 28, 1768.
I received your obliging letter of the 10th May, with the most
acceptable present of your _Physiocratie_, which I have read with great
pleasure, and received from it a great deal of instruction. There is
such a freedom from local and national prejudices and partialities, so
much benevolence to mankind in general, so much goodness mixt with the
wisdom, in the principles of your new philosophy, that I am perfectly
charmed with them, and wish I could have stayed in France for some time,
to have studied in your school, that I might by conversing with its
founders have made myself quite a master of that philosophy.... I had,
before I went into your country, seen some letters of yours to Dr.
Templeman, that gave me a high opinion of the doctrines you are engaged
in cultivating and of your personal talents and abilities, which made me
greatly desirous of seeing you. Since I had not that good fortune, the
next best thing is the advantage you are so good to offer me of your
correspondence, which I shall ever highly value, and endeavour to
cultivate with all the diligence I am capable of.
I am sorry to find that that wisdom which sees the welfare of the parts
in the prosperity of the whole, seems yet not to be known in this
country.... We are so far from conceiving that what is best for mankind,
or even for Europe in general, may be best for us, that we are even
studying to establish and extend a separate interest of Britain, to the
prejudice of even Ireland and our colonies.... It is from your
philosophy only that the maxims of a contrary and more happy conduct are
to be drawn, which I therefore sincerely wish may grow and increase till
it becomes the governing philosophy of the human species, as it must be
that of superior beings in better worlds. I will take the liberty of
sending you a little fragment that has some tincture of it, which, on
that account, I hope may be acceptable.
Be so good as to present my sincere respect to that venerable apostle,
Dr. Quesnay, and to the illustrious Ami des Hommes (of whose civilities
to me at Paris I retain a grateful remembrance), and believe me to be,
with real and very great esteem Sir,
Your obliged and most obedient humble servant
B. FRANKLIN.
TO JOHN ALLEYNE[75]
Craven Street, [August 9, 1768].
DEAR SIR
You made an Apology to me for not acquaint^g me sooner with your
Marriage. I ought now to make an Apology to you for delaying so long the
Answer to your Letter. It was mislaid or hid among my Papers and much
Business put it out of my Mind, or prevented my looking for it and
writing when I thought of it. So this Account between us if you please
may stand balanced. I assure you it gave me great Pleasure to hear you
were married, and into a Family of Reputation. This I learnt from the
Public Papers. The Character you give me of your Bride (as it includes
every Qualification that in the married State conduces to mutual
Happiness) is an Addition to that Pleasure. Had you consulted me, as a
Friend, on the Occasion, Youth on both sides I should not have thought
any Objection. Indeed, from the matches that have fallen under my
Observation, I am rather inclin'd to think, that early ones stand the
best Chance for Happiness. The Tempers and habits of young People are
not yet become so stiff and uncomplying, as when more advanced in Life;
they form more easily to each other, and hence many Occasions of Disgust
are removed. And if Youth has less of that Prudence, that is necessary
to conduct a Family, yet the Parents and elder Friends of young married
Persons are generally at hand to afford their Advice, which amply
supplies that Defect; and, by early Marriage, Youth is sooner form'd to
regular and useful Life; and possibly some of those Accidents, Habits or
Connections, that might have injured either the Constitution, or the
Reputation, or both, are thereby happily prevented.
Particular Circumstances of particular Persons may possibly sometimes
make it prudent to delay entering into that State; but in general, when
Nature has render'd our Bodies fit for it, the Presumption is in
Nature's Favour, that she has not judg'd amiss in making us desire it.
Late Marriages are often attended, too, with this further Inconvenience,
that there is not the same Chance the parents shall live to see their
offspring educated. "_Late Children_," says the Spanish Proverb, "_are
early Orphans_." A melancholy Reflection to those, whose Case it may be!
With us in America, Marriages are generally in the Morning of Life; our
Children are therefore educated and settled in the World by Noon; and
thus, our Business being done, we have an Afternoon and Evening of
chearful Leisure to ourselves; such as your Friend at present enjoys. By
these early Marriages we are blest with more Children; and from the Mode
among us, founded in Nature, of every Mother suckling and nursing her
own Child, more of them are raised. Thence the swift Progress of
Population among us, unparallel'd in Europe.
In fine, I am glad you are married, and congratulate you most cordially
upon it. You are now more in the way of becoming a useful Citizen; and
you have escap'd the unnatural State of Celibacy for Life, the Fate of
many here, who never intended it, but who, having too long postpon'd the
Change of their Condition, find at length, that 'tis too late to think
of it, and so live all their Lives in a Situation that greatly lessens a
Man's Value. An odd Volume of a Set of Books you know is not worth its
proportion of the Set, and what think you of the Usefulness of an odd
Half of a Pair of Scissors? It cannot well cut any thing. It may
possibly serve to scrape a Trencher.
Pray make my Compliments and best Wishes acceptable to your Spouse. I am
old and heavy and grow a little indolent, or I should ere this have
presented them in Person. I shall make but small Use of the old Man's
Privilege, that of giving Advice to younger Friends. Treat your Wife
always with Respect; it will procure Respect to you, not from her only
but from all that observe it. Never use a slighting Expression to her,
even in jest, for Slights in Jest, after frequent bandyings, are apt to
end in angry earnest. Be studious in your Profession, and you will be
learned. Be industrious and frugal, and you will be rich. Be sober and
temperate, and you will be healthy. Be in general virtuous, and you will
be happy. At least, you will, by such Conduct, stand the best Chance for
such Consequences. I pray God to bless you both; being ever your
affectionate Friend,
B. FRANKLIN.
TO THE PRINTER OF THE LONDON CHRONICLE[76]
August 18, 1768.
QUERIES, _recommended to the Consideration of those Gentlemen who are
for vigorous measures with the Americans._
1. Have the Colonists _refused_ to answer any reasonable requisitions
made to their _Assemblies_ by the mother country?
2. If they have _not refused_ to grant reasonable aids in the way, which
they think consistent with _liberty_, why must they be stripped of their
property without their own _consent_, and in a way, which they think
_inconsistent_ with liberty?
3. What is it for a people to be _enslaved_ and _tributary_, if this be
not, viz. to be _forced_ to give up their property at the arbitrary
pleasure of persons, to whose authority they have not _submitted_
themselves, nor _chosen_ for the purpose of imposing taxes upon them?
Wherein consisted the impropriety of King Charles's demanding ship money
by his sole authority, but in its being an exercise of power by the
King, which the people had not _given_ the King? Have the people of
America, as the people of Britain, by sending representatives,
_consented_ to a power in the British parliament to tax them?
4. Has not the British parliament, by repealing the stamp act,
acknowledged that they judged it _improper_? Is there any difference
between the stamp act, and the act obliging the Americans to pay
_whatever we please_, for articles which they _cannot do without_, as
glass and paper? Is there any difference as to justice between our
treatment of the colonists, and the tyranny of the Carthaginians over
their conquered Sardinians, when they obliged them to take all their
corn from them, and at whatever price they pleased to set upon it?
5. If that be true, what is commonly said, viz. That the mother country
gains _two millions_ a year by the colonies, would it not have been
wiser to have gone on quietly in the _happy way_ we were in, till our
gains by those rising and flourishing countries should amount to
_three_, _four_ or _five_ millions a year, than by these new fashioned
vigorous measures to kill the goose which lays the golden eggs? Would it
not have been better policy, instead of _taxing_ our colonists, to have
done whatever we could to _enrich_ them; and encourage them to take off
our articles of _luxury_, on which we may put our own price, and thus
draw them into paying us a _voluntary_ tax; than deluge them in blood,
thin their countries, impoverish and distress them, interrupt their
commerce, force them on bankruptcy, by which our merchants must be
ruined, or tempt them to emigrations, or alliances with our enemies?
6. The late war could not have been _carried on_ without America, nor
without Scotland? Have we treated America and Scotland in such a manner
as is likely in future wars to encourage their zeal for the common
cause? Or is England alone to be the Drawcansir of the world, and to
bully not only their enemies, but her _friends_?
7. Are not the subjects of Britain concerned to check a ministry, who,
by this rage of heaping taxes on taxes, are only drawing into their own
hands more and more wealth and power, while they are hurting the
_commercial_ interest of the empire in general, at the same time that,
amidst profound _peace_, the national debt and burden on the public
continue undiminished?
N. M. C. N. P. C. H.
POSITIONS TO BE EXAMINED, CONCERNING NATIONAL WEALTH
Dated April 4, 1769.
1. All food or subsistence for mankind arises from the earth or waters.