80 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE 



1765, just before the time when Syng said it fainted. 

 If the " Junto" here alluded to could be shown to 

 be the Society-Junto, then the identity of the two 

 would be proved. The absence of minutes for the 

 spring of 1765 would seem to be against the supposi- 

 tion of identity; but so long as it is conceded that 

 meetings may have taken place at some time within 

 the period embraced by the long chasm, and conse- 

 quently, that meetings may have been held in the 

 spring of 1765, the minutes of which have been lost, 

 the question cannot be decided by the mere absence 

 of minutes. But the question is decided by other 

 circumstances. Syng and Eoberts, in the above 

 extracts, evidently speak of an association in which 

 they take a deep interest; and not of the Society- 

 Junto, in which, considering that their names are 

 never mentioned, although we possess the minutes 

 of it for several consecutive years, they could not be 

 plausibly alleged to take any interest at all. It is, 

 therefore, clear to the Committee that they alluded, 

 in their letters, to the Franklin-Junto, of which they 

 are known to have been members, and which, in the 

 absence of satisfactory proof to the contrary, must 

 be held to have been an Association, distinct from 

 the Society-Junto, and existing contemporaneously 

 with it. 



After the long interval for which we have no rec- 

 ords of the Society-Junto, the minutes recommence 

 on the 25th of April, 1766, a month and twenty-five 



