I 



the Society-Junto for every month except October, 

 and it will be found that not only the names of mem 

 bers present, but those of absentees are recorded. 

 Mr. Du Ponceau, in his letter to Mr. Kane, answers 

 this objection thus: &quot;Mr. Roberts, at that time, 

 was advanced in age, and full of business. He was 

 not probably a regular member of that Club, subject 

 to fines, and contributing to their expenses. lie was, 

 I suppose, welcome to their meetings as an old asso 

 ciate, and in that sense, I presume, his friend Frank 

 lin urged him to attend the meetings. In that case 

 his name would not necessarily appear in the list of 

 present and absent members at the head of the 

 minutes of each meeting.&quot; In reply to this ex 

 planation it may be urged that Mr. Roberts in 1760 

 was only 54 years of age, and that the usage of the 

 minutes being to note those present, the name even 

 of an honorary member, admitting that there were 

 such, would have been recorded. What makes this 

 more probable, is a passage in the minutes of Febru 

 ary 9th, 1761, w^hen the members met at supper at 

 Whitebread s, at which George Bryan, a former 

 member, is recorded as present by invitation. Again, 

 if Roberts was a member, honorary or not, of the 

 Society-Junto, why does not his name appear in 

 the list of members furnished to the Philosophical 

 Society at the time of Union? The same remark 

 applies to William Coleman, on the assumption of 

 his membership in the Society-Junto. Surely these 



