REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE 



twelve. To keep up this number, it would have been 

 necessary, in all probability, to elect much younger 

 men than those that remained of the original body. 

 Instead, therefore, of bringing in younger men, they 

 may have induced twelve, in whom they reposed con 

 fidence, to form a similar association and with the 

 same name ; for, if the original Club looked forward 

 to its extinction, arid kept its existence to a certain 

 extent secret, it would rather desire than otherwise 

 that the new association should take its name. The 

 probability of the view here presented, is strength 

 ened by the fact that several of the members of the 

 Society-Junto were sons of members of the Franklin- 

 Junto, as William Franklin, Philip Syng, Jr., and 

 George Roberts. 



Thus it is perceived that, adopting either of the 

 suppositions suggested, the tw r o associations would 

 have had the same name and organization, and the 

 simultaneous existence of a second Junto would have 

 indicated neither opposition nor insult to the Frank 

 lin-Junto. 



Towards the close of his paper, Mr. Du Ponceau 

 speaks of the two parties, aristocratic and popular, 

 into which the inhabitants of Pennsylvania were 

 divided in 1768, and for some years previously, and 

 correctly remarks that the artistocratic party made 

 up the principal part of the Philosophical Society; 

 while the American Society was composed of members 

 from the popular party. Setting out from this gen- 



