Patrick Henry and Benjamin Franklin

Patrick Henry and Benjamin Franklin both knew that success sometimes requires persistence along with compromise. Compromise is defined by The Oxford Dictionary as an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions. By using this definition and analyzing these speeches, it is obvious to readers that both politicians were willing to make compromises. There are however many differences as to the extent and what type of concessions these gentlemen were willing to make.
The Second Virginia Convention met March 20, 1775 inland at Richmond–in what is now called St. John’s Church. This is where Delegate Patrick Henry presented resolutions to raise a militia, and to furthermore put Virginia in a posture of defense. Henry Basically says in his speech that the colonists have tried to compromise already and it has had no effect.
“Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament.”(Henry102) By reading this statement, Henry’s feelings are fairly obvious. While he believes that other routes should be taken first, the colonists now have no other choice. By analyzing this closer, it is apparent that Henry believes in compromise, but there is a very thin line on where it is time to push forward.

“I have experienced many instances of being obliged, by better information or fuller consideration, to change my opinions even on important subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise.” (Franklin105) Benjamin Franklin’s opinion of opinions. What this statement shows, is a form of compromise. A change of opinion on an important subject because of the influence of another, is a form of compromise. Franklin admits in the very beginning of his Speech that he is very apt to do so.
When we compare Henry and Franklin together, a few similarities are shown. There are however a lot of differences. One of the main things that has to be taken into consideration here, is the fact that these politicians are speaking at two different times in America’s history. If Franklin would have been speaking before the revolution occurred, he most likely would have been a lot more persistent and not wanting to compromise nearly as much. On the flip side, if Henry would have been speaking post-American revolution, he most likely would have been quite a bit more lax and not as prominent about the issue.
Because of the change of opinions due to different circumstances, it is nearly impossible to compare these to politician’s views based upon these speeches. If they are analyzed closely enough, however, it is seen that they both view compromise as a necessity. The real question is, how far are they willing to take it?