TO DAVID HARTLEY, ESQ.

Change in administration-Hereditary great officers of

MY DEAR FRIEND,

state, &c.

Passy, Jan. 7, 1784.

Echave this moment received your favor of the 25th past, acquainting me with the change in administra tion. I am not sure that in reforming the constitution, which is sometimes talked of, it would not be better to make your great officers of state hereditary than to suffer the inconvenience of such frequent and total changes. Much faction and cabal would be prevented by having an hereditary first lord of the treasury, an hereditary lord chancellor, privy seal, president of council, secretary of state, first lord of the admiralty, &c. &c. It will not be said that the duties of these offices being important, we cannot trust to nature for the chance of requisite talents, since we have an hereditary set of judges in the last resort, the house of peers; an hereditary king; and in a certain German university, an hereditary professor of mathematics.

-We have not yet heard of the arrival of our express in America, who carried the definitive treaty. He sailed the 26th of September. As soon as the ratification arrives, I shall immediately send you word of it.

...With great esteem I am ever, my dear friend, yours most affectionately,

B. FRANKLIN,

TO THE HON, JOHN JAY, NEW YORK.

Various matter.

DEAR SIR,

Passy, Feb. 8, 1785.

I received by the Marquis de la Fayette your kind letter of the 13th of December. It gave me pleasure on two other accounts, as it informed me of the public welfare, and that of your, I may almost say our dear little family; for since I had the pleasure of their being with me in the same house, I have ever felt a tender affection for them, equal I believe to that of most fathers. I did hope to have heard by the last packet of your, having accepted the secretaryship of foreign affairs, but was disappointed. I write to you now therefore only as a private friend; yet I may mention respecting public affairs, that as far as I can perceive, the good disposition of this court towards us continues. I wish I could say as much for the rest of the European courts. I think that their desire of being connected with us by treaties is of late much abated; and this I suppose occasioned by the pains Britain takes to represent us everywhere as distracted with divisions, discontented with our governments, the people unwilling to pay taxes, the congress unable to collect them, and many desiring the restoration of the old government. The English papers are full of this stuff, and their ministers get it copied into the foreign papers. The moving about of the congress from place to place, has also a bad effect, in giving color to the reports of their being afraid of the people. I hope they will soon settle somewhere, and by the steadiness and wisdom of their measures dissipate all those mists of misrepresentation raised by the remaining malice of ancient enemies, and establish our repu

tation for national justice and prudence as they have done for courage and perseverance.

It grieves me that we have not been able to discharge our first year's payment of interest to this court, due the beginning of last month. I hope it will be the only failure, and that effectual measures will be taken to be exactly punctual hereafter. The good paymaster, says the proverb, is lord of another man's purse. The bad one, if he ever has again occasion to borrow, must pay dearly for his carelessness and injustice.

You are happy in having got back safe to your country. I should be less unhappy, if I could imagine the delay of my congé useful to the states, or in the least degree necessary. But they have many equally capable of doing all I have to do here. The new-proposed treaties are the most important things; but two can go through them as well as three, if indeed any are likely to be completed, which I begin to doubt, since the new ones make little progress, and the old ones, which wanted only the fiat of congress, seem now to be rather going backward; I mean those I had projected with Denmark and Portugal.

་

My grandsons are sensible of the honor of your remembrance, and present their respects to you and Mrs. Jay. I add my best wishes of health and happiness to you all, being with sincere esteem and affection, dear sir, your most obedient humble servant, B. FRANKLIN.

Results of the American contest-State of America-The loyalists Confiscation of estates.

SIR,

Passy, June 26, 1785. I have just received your friendly letter of the 20th instant. I agree with you perfectly in the opinion, that

though the contest has been hurtful to both our countries, yet the event, a separation, is better even for yours than success. The reducing and keeping us in subjection by au armed force would have cost you more than the dominion could be worth, and our slavery would have brought on yours. The ancient system of the British empire was a happy one, by which the colonies were allowed to govern and tax themselves. Had it been wisely continued, it is hard to imagine the degree of power and importance in the world. that empire might have arrived at. All the means of growing greatness, extent of territory, agriculture, commerce, arts, population, were within its own limits, and therefore at its command. I used to consider that system as a large and beautiful porcelain vase. I lamented the measures that I saw likely to break it, and strove to prevent them; because once broken, I saw no probability of its being ever repaired. My endeavors did not succeed: we are broken, and the parts must now do as well as they can for themselves. We may still do well though separated. I have great hopes of our side, and good wishes for yours. The anarchy and confusion you mention as supposed to prevail among us, exist only in your newspapers. I have authentic accounts which assure me that no people were ever better governed, or more content with their respective constitutions and governments than the present thirteen states of America. A little reflection may convince any reasonable man, that a government wherein the administrators are chosen annually by the free voice of the governed, and may also be recalled at any time if their conduct displeases their constituents, cannot be a tyrannical one, as your loyalists represent it; who at the same time in consistently desire to return and live under it. And among an intelligent enlightened people as ours is, there must always be too numerous and too strong a party for supporting good

government and the laws, to suffer what is called anarchy. This better account of our situation must be pleasing to your humanity, and therefore I give it you.

But we differ a little in our sentiments respecting the loy alists (as they call themselves) and the conduct of America, towards them, which you think "seems actuated by a spirit of revenge; and that it would have been more agreeable to policy, as well as justice, to have restored their estates upon their taking the oaths of allegiance to the new governments.”. That there should still be some resentment against them in the breasts of those who have had their houses, farms, and towns so lately destroyed, and relations scalped under the conduct of these royalists, is not wonderful; though I believe the opposition given by many to their re-establishing among us is owing to a firm persuasion, that there could be no reliance on their oaths; and that the effect of receiving those people again would be an introduction of that very anarchy and confusion they falsely reproach us with. Even the example you propose of the English commonwealth's restoring the estates of the royalists after their being subdued, seems rather to countenance and encourage our acting differently, as probably if the power, which always accompanies property, had not been restored to the royalists; if their estates had remained confiscated, and their persons had been banished, they could not have so much contributed to the restoration of kingly power, and the new government of the republic might have been more durable. The majority of examples in your history are on the other side of the question, All the estates in England and south of Scotland, and most of those possessed by the descendants of the English in Ireland, are held from ancient confiscations made of the estates of Caledonians and Britons, the original possessors in