Question

persuasive text: cross comparison
general government necessary for all, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the
people if well administered; and i believe further that this is likely to be well administered for a course of
years, and can only end in despotism as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so
corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other. i doubt too whether any other
convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better constitution. for when you assemble a number of
men to have the advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those men all their
prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests, and their selfish views. from such an
assembly can a perfect production be expected? it therefore astonishes me, sir, to find this system
approaching so near to perfection as it does, and i think it will astonish our enemies, who are waiting with
confidence to hear that our councils are confounded, like those of the builders of babel, and that our states
are on the point of separation, only to meet hereafter for the purpose of cutting one anothers throats. thus i
consent, sir, to this constitution because i expect no better, and because i am not sure that it is not the best.
the opinions i have had of its errors, i sacrifice to the public good. i have never whisperd a syllable of them
abroad. within these walls they were born, & here they shall die. if every one of us in returning to our
constituents were to report the objections he has had to it, and endeavour to gain partizans in support of
them, we might prevent its being generally received, and thereby lose all the salutary effects & great
advantages resulting naturally in our favour among foreign nations, as well as among ourselves, from our
real or apparent unanimity. much of the strength and efficiency of any government, in procuring & securing
happiness to the people depends on opinion, on the general opinion of the goodness of that government as
well as of the wisdom & integrity of its governors. i hope therefore that for our own sakes, as a part of the
people, and for the sake of our posterity, we shall act heartily & unanimously in recommending this
constitution, wherever our influence may extend, and turn our future thoughts and endeavours to the
means of having it well administered.
on the whole, sir, i cannot help expressing a wish, that every member of the convention, who may still have
objections to it, would with me on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility, and to make manifest
our unanimity, put his name to this instrument

how does the structure of elizabeths and franklins speeches differ?

elizabeths urges against war; franklins only examines downsides of the document.

elizabeths includes quotes from famous commanders; franklins contains lists of dos
and donts.

elizabeths is straightforward, blunt; franklins is more subtle, with anecdotes and jokes.

Explanation:

Franklin's speech in the provided text is more nuanced. He uses logical reasoning about the nature of assemblies (mentions prejudices, passions, etc. of men in assemblies) and historical references (Builders of Babel). He also has a more diplomatic tone, sacrificing his own opinions for the public good and hoping for unanimity. In contrast, Elizabeth I's famous speeches (not shown here but in general knowledge, e.g., the Tilbury speech) are more straightforward and blunt in rallying troops. For example, in the Tilbury speech, she directly addresses her troops with bold statements about her leadership and their cause.

Answer:

Elizabeth’s is straightforward, blunt; Franklin’s is more subtle, with anecdotes and jokes.