History & Genealogy

In contrast to Gordon Wood’s shorter, focused work, The Americanization of Benjamin Franklin, journalist and biographer Walter Isaacson’s expansive volume allows the reader to enjoy the journey through this entertaining and enlightening narration of Franklin’s life. Isaacson gives a generous sampling of the famous Franklin wit and charm, as well as an honest accounting of his human failings.

Even knowing Franklin’s darker side, the reader will be struck by the wisdom and prescience of the man who is the most remarkable of the nation’s founding fathers. He is the only man to have shaped and signed all four documents that established the existence of United States of America (the Declaration of Independence, the treaty with France, the peace with Britain and the Constitution).

Isaacson breaks the book logically into periods of Franklin’s life: Boston beginnings, Philadelphia success, scientific work and inventions, politics, life abroad and the final homecoming. In addition to the index and chapter notes, Isaacson includes for quick reference, a cast of characters, chronology, currency conversions and photos and illustrations of Franklin and other key players in his life. Final conclusions put into context "lovers" and "haters" of Franklin's legacy among nineteenth and twentieth century writers.

The book’s finest chapter for me is the account of Franklin’s work as delegate to the contentious Constitutional Convention of 1787. He was 81 years old, ailing and probably accurately described as doddering. The weather was hot and uncomfortable. Yet Franklin vigorously championed real democracy when many of the young, aristocratic delegates were not so inclined.

Franklin, favored a legislature with a single, directly elected house. His plan was outvoted (too democratic) in favor of two branches. In addition to the House there would be a Senate whose members were chosen by the state legislatures. (This was the practice until 1913.)

He advocated for government led by an executive council, rather than one man. He asserted the right of Congress to impeach a president and argued against a head of state having veto power over acts of Congress.

Alexander Hamilton proposed the chief executive serve for life and Franklin pointed out he was living proof that a man’s life might go on past his mental and physical prime. Franklin further favored returning the president to the role of average citizen after his term. Other delegates countered that “returning to the mass of the people was degrading.”

IFranklin answered them, “In free Governments the rulers are the servants, and the people their superiors and sovereigns. For the former to return among the latter was not to degrade but to promote them.”

This is a stunning thought in light of our time of the imperial presidency. To further resonance with current issues, we learn Franklin advocated for the direct election of federal judges, rather than having them appointed by the president or Congress.

Many convention delegates believed strongly that only those owning substantial property be eligible for office. John Pinckney of South Carolina suggested $100,000 as the wealth requirement for president, until it was pointed out that George Washington might not qualify. John Madison records that Franklin rose and “expressed his dislike of everything that tended to debase the spirit of the common people.”

Isaacson writes, “He was deeply offended by any suggestion that the Constitution “should betray a great partiality to the rich.” (Though Franklin won this point, it’s hard not to reflect on the critical part money plays in the business of securing elective office today.)

Franklin did propound an idea that was clearly wrong-headed, that all federal officials should serve without pay. Franklin’s positions on issues and works throughout his life absolve him from the charge of promoting elitism, but he was unable to understand that his proposition would. In his long public service Franklin had witnessed the corrupting effect of the passions of ambition and avarice (power and greed) on the English system and in the 50 years he himself held government appointments, he served often without pay.

Franklin couldn't have liked being on the losing side of an issue more than any other man, but he embodied the Enlightenment ideal of compromise and recognized that it was the very essence of the democratic process. Isaacson says, “For (Franklin), compromise was not only a practical approach but a moral one. Tolerance, humility and a respect for others required it.” Franklin himself said to the fractious 1787 assembly, “We are sent hither to consult, not to contend, with each other.”

As I write this review, the USA is celebrating Independence Day. I cannot help wishing that its present day rulers and self-appointed moralists possessed Franklin’s abiding faith in democracy and courage to show tolerance, humility and the respect for others necessary to make it work.

Copyright ©  2005 Christine M. Roane

For permission to reproduce Cool Universe content, contact cmroane@cool-universe.com