To Benjamin Franklin from Nathaniel Falconer, 13 May 1773
From Nathaniel Falconer
ALS: American Philosophical Society
Philadla May the 13. 1773
My Dear Friend
I Received yours of the 14 of Feb. by Capt. All about a week after the arrival of the London Ships8 the Grand Duke Gave him self some verey unbecoming aiers to me about some person that I think there Famiely are under Great obligations too. They would people hear belive that a Certain man Can Turn out pr[ime?] minnesters and put in at pleashur.9 Our Debate became so warm that I have sold my Right to the Family have got the money advanced and Intrest with there obligation.1 If you should have paid aney money on my account before the Receipt of this they are to Repay it before they have a deed maid.2 I am verey sorrey my Dear Sir I have been so Troublesome to you on this matter. I hope after this it will be no more Trouble as I have Sold it among them selfs. My best Compliments to Mrs. Stevenson Mrs. and Mr. Hewson Salley Franklin and master Temple. I am Dear Sir with Great Respect your Friend and Humble Servant
Nathl Falconer
Addressed: Docter Franklin / in Craven Street Strand / London
8. Capt. All had arrived on April 13. The “London Ships” were the Mary and Elizabeth, which docked about a week later, and the Pa. Packet and the Catherine, which were in port by the beginning of May. Pa. Gaz., April 14, 21, May 5, 1773.
9. The Grand Duke, Joseph Wharton, may have been putting on airs about the family’s relationship with either Thomas Walpole or Samuel Wharton. The latter, we believe, was the one credited with power to unseat ministers, an illusion born of Hillsborough’s ouster. Wharton was becoming unpopular with his colleagues, BF reported two months later, for taking to himself sole credit for everything: to WF below, July 14. See also Morgan to BF above, May 4.
1. The Wharton family had also tried to get WF’s shares in the Walpole Co., had aroused almost equal annoyance, and had failed: WF to BF above, April 30. For Falconer’s right see his letter above, XIX, 292.
2. See also Falconer’s later letter above, ibid., pp. 371–2.