Benjamin Franklin and Pennsylvania Politics (review)

Abstract

52Quaker History tablished himself in a lonely papermill village on the Volga River. Here a year later, Harry Timbres died of typhus. The book concludes with barely a hint of subsequent contacts of Friends with Russia—International Student Seminars and work camps, deputations of young Friends to Russia and of young Russians to England and America, Conferences for Diplomats and, currently, exchange visits of American and Russian teachers. Members of the American Friends Service Committee, visiting Moscow early in 1965 to arrange for further joint projects, carried with them a dozen or so copies of this very informative book. These volumes they presented to libraries and placed in offices concerned with Quaker contacts, among them the Ministry of Education and the Foreign Ministry, the Committee on Cultural Relations, the Union of Friendship, the Baptist and Orthodox Churches, and the youth organizations. Pendle HillAnna Brinton Benjamin Franklin and Pennsylvania Politics. By William S. Hanna. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. 1964. x, 239 pages. $6.50. This is a challenging little book with an unusual interpretation. Ordinarily, Franklin is portrayed as the tribune of the people. His policies in which he strove for greater home rule were progressive and highly responsive to popular demands. Accordingly, after a long but successful contest with the proprietaries, Franklin and the progressive element, minus the pacifists, were rewarded with independence when America became involved in the controversy with the mother country. All this, Mr. Hanna maintains, is a "Whiggist" and invalid interpretation. In Pennsylvania, Mr. Hanna concludes, there was no contest between progressive and backward forces, for Franklin and his party were fully as conservative in their political views as their opponents. In reality, all Pennsylvania politicians regardless of party were devoid of political principles, seeking only power and other advantages. Moreover, there was no "sustained democratic impulse" in Pennsylvania or any "inner direction" in politics that responded to "fundamental principles." One would wish that Mr. Hanna had found a battery of new material to support his sweeping conclusions. This, however, is not the case. The book, which in places reads like a Tory or proprietary rebuttal, is essentially a reinterpretation of sources long in use for Pennsylvania history. Nonetheless, his conclusions still might carry conviction were there not so much in the records of a conflicting nature. For example, in contradiction to Hanna, Secretary Peters recognized Franklin 's overwhelming popularity among all classes of voters. "He is a sort of tribune to the people," wrote Peters. Franklin's liberalism, which Hanna denies, is revealed in his writings as well as by his legislative program. His opponents correctly understood his position. He was, declared William Allen, "continually infusing into the people's ears his Republican, Anarchical Notions." Quaker Party popularity, like Franklin's, is well documented. "It is remarkable ," wrote Isaac Norris in 1755, "that the Frontier country of Lancaster, composed of all sorts of Germans and some Church of England Electors, have chosen all their Representatives out of ye Quakers, tho there are scarcely one Book Reviews53 hundred of that Profession in the whole county." That the Assembly was responsive to the wishes of the people is likewise borne out by the record. "If our Constituents disapprove our Conduct a few Days will give them an opportunity of changing us by a new Election," was a message from the House in 1755. The assertion, too, that Pennsylvania politics was devoid of principles or any sense of direction should be dispelled by reading the long and bitter debates over the proprietary issues in the Votes. In the last chapter, Hanna sees an internal upheaval accompanying the Revolution in Pennsylvania. This was accomplished, he thinks, by new men unassociated with the old parties, whose leaders with no heart for change composed the Tory element. Franklin went along with the Whigs but contributed little, according to Hanna, to the revolutionary movement. Again it would seem that the meaning of the sources has been misconstrued. A failure to understand the complexities of the Revolution in Pennsylvania makes this slender chapter seem forced and unconvincing. Rutgers UniversityTheodore Thayer Carolina Cradle: Settlement of the Northwest Carolina Frontier, 1747-1762. By Robert W. Ramsey. Chapel Hill, North Carolina: The University of North...