1
Virtuous Plagiarism
Clarissa Jannsen
Benjamin Franklin was considered a virtuous man in
his day. Franklin’s friend, Benjamin Vaughan, praised him
for his “…frugality, diligence and temperance, …modesty
and …disinterestedness” (58). “The Autobiography of
Benjamin Franklin” demonstrates the emphasis Franklin
placed on virtue through the implementation and practice of
his thirteen virtues and the way he presented himself to
others. However, closer examination discloses seeming
contradictions in Franklin’s virtuous character. Perhaps one
of the most glaring contradictions is found in his support of
a plagiarizing preacher, who, ironically, is advocating
virtuous living. Why would Franklin, a man so intent upon
promoting virtuous living, support repeated acts of
plagiarism? Plagiarism is, after all, stealing someone’s
ideas and using them as your own, which is a form of lying.
Was Franklin using the end—the preacher’s advocacy of
virtuous living—to justify the means—plagiarism of others’
2
sermons? While Franklin’s choice to support this
preacher’s ministry may seem hypocritical, if we examine
Franklin’s views on virtue, we will find that Franklin’s
support was clearly within the bounds of his moral
principles and not a breach of virtue.
The situation unfolds with the arrival of an Irish
Presbyterian preacher named Hemphill. It is apparent
Franklin was impressed with Hemphill’s intelligent and
eloquent presentation of his sermons, for he wrote, “[he]
delivered with a good voice, and apparently extempore,
most excellent discourses…” (77). Franklin attended and
enjoyed Hemphill’s sermons because “…they had little of
the dogmatical kind, but inculcated strongly the practice of
virtue…” (77). Since Franklin ardently advocated virtuous
living and disliked doctrinal sermons, it is not surprising
that Hemphill had a “…zealous partisan…” in Benjamin
Franklin (77). However, not everyone agreed with
Franklin’s impression of Hemphill. Some disagreed with
Hemphill’s doctrine, and so the church was divided between
3
Hemphill’s supporters and detractors. Franklin and other
supporters campaigned ardently in favor of Hemphill.
However, Hemphill was not what he seemed.
Hemphill’s supporters were soon disappointed; Franklin
writes,
One of our adversaries having heard him preach a sermon
that was much admired, thought he had somewhere read the
sermon before, or at least a part of it. On search, he found
that part quoted at length, in one of the British Reviews….
This detection gave many of our party disgust, who
accordingly abandoned his cause…. I stuck by him,
however, as I rather approv’d his giving us good sermons
compos’d by others, than bad ones of his own
manufacture…. (77)
It is in this text that we find this seeming contradiction of
Franklin’s character. Franklin supports, and even condones,
Hemphill’s plagiarism! Franklin even goes so far as to say
that he prefers to hear a good plagiarized sermon to a poor
original one. Franklin’s campaign for virtue seems to be on
the verge of being discredited through the promotion of
vice. Yet, perhaps it is not as endangered as it might appear
at first glance.
In order to discover whether Franklin’s support of
plagiarism was actually a break with virtue, we must
4
discover what his ideas about virtue were. Franklin was
brought up as a Presbyterian, and even though he rejected
Christian doctrine early in life, his views on religion and
virtue reflected Judeo-Christian influence. Franklin was a
Deist, but he thought Deism was somewhat weak because
“…tho’ it might be true, [it] was not very useful” (43).
Usefulness was of utmost importance to Franklin and,
perhaps, a metaphorical balance on which all virtues,
actions and words were weighed. Throughout his
autobiography Franklin implied that if something was not
useful, especially in elevating others’ esteem of him, it was
not beneficial. So Franklin created his own religion based
on virtues he believed to be useful. As he says, “I grew
convinc’d that truth, sincerity and integrity in dealings
between man were of the utmost importance to the felicity
of life; and I form’d written resolutions…to practice them
ever while I lived” (43-44). Franklin’s desire was to
become morally perfect, and he created a list of thirteen
virtues in order to help him achieve this goal.
5
In Franklin’s list of virtues, only one of them really
applies to this situation, and that is sincerity. On this
subject Franklin says, “Use no hurtful deceit; think
innocently and justly; and, if you speak, speak accordingly”
(65). While it is plain that Hemphill was deceitful, it can be
argued that it wasn’t done maliciously. Hemphill was not
seeking to hurt those he preached to. In fact, he was trying
to help them lead better lives through the institution of
virtue. It is entirely possible that Franklin did not view
Hemphill’s deceit as detrimental to his listeners. Instead,
Franklin believed that hearing about the importance of
virtuous living was useful and beneficial to Hemphill’s
listeners, thus allowing him to support Hemphill in spite of
his breach of trust.
However, discussing this situation only as a question
of whether Franklin acted within the bounds of his moral
code or not would be discussing it incompletely. I believe
that Franklin was actually using this illustration to show
readers the importance of reputation and ethos, not to
question his own character. In this way, it is not so
6
important that Franklin backed a plagiarizer. Instead, it is
important to focus on the idea that no matter how good and
virtuous one’s message is, allowing one’s character to be
defamed is detrimental one’s message. Franklin believed it
was of utmost importance to cultivate a respectable image.
Hemphill’s breach of ethical conduct destroyed his message
of virtuous living and disgusted his followers who then
abandoned him (77). Franklin repeatedly uses other
illustrations to demonstrate the importance of ethos. He
suggests that if the evangelist George Whitefield “…had
never written any thing, he would have left behind him a
much more numerous and important sect, and his reputation
might…have been still growing, even after his death” (85).
Franklin says that Whitefield’s theological writings
detracted from his powerful and popular personality and
hurt his ministry. Through these anecdotes Franklin warns
his readers of the consequences of not keeping up
appearances.
So we see that Franklin did not view his support of
Hemphill as a lack of virtue. Franklin welcomed
7
Hemphill’s message as a promotion of his ideas about
virtuous living and a breath of fresh air from preachers’
usual emphasis on doctrine. He stood by Hemphill because
he believed strongly in the message Hemphill preached and
saw no wrong in the message itself, not because he
supported the vice of plagiarism. So Benjamin Franklin’s
character is not marred by this account. This narrative is
not a reflection of Franklin’s character; it is, instead, an
argument for cultivating and maintaining a solid, honorable
ethos.
Word Count: 1,104
Fall 2002
Return to Rhetoric of Freedom Web Page