PHILADELPHIA, APRIL 24, 1834.

Which is the first people in the world? There is no nation which does

not make pretensions to this superiority. Who in France has not sung in

the words of Béranger, "Queen of the world, oh my country! oh France!"

in the full conviction, that the French nation was predestined to be

forever at the head of the human race, to eclipse all others, in peace

and in war? For myself, before I had crossed the frontier, I believed

most implicitly, that we were not only the most generous and chivalric

of people, the most intellectual and ingenious, the first in the fine

arts, the most amiable and brilliant; but also that we were the most

enlightened, the first in political and industrial arts, the most

inventive and the most practical, in short, the pattern-nation, perfect

and unrivalled. Notwithstanding the rains and fogs of Paris, I supposed

our climate the mildest and the most serene in the world; in spite of

the Landes and Champagne, I considered it undeniable, that our soil

was the most fertile, our scenery the most picturesque, in the world.

Trusting to the reports of our exhibitions of industrial skill, I was

ready to swear that we had left our neighbours of England a hundred

leagues behind, and that their manufacturers, to avoid being reduced to

beggary by our competition, would soon be obliged to come over to learn

how to smelt and refine iron, how to spin cotton, how to manufacture

steel, how to manage the most gigantic establishments in the most

economical manner, how to despatch mountains of merchandise beyond sea

most expeditiously.

After having crossed the frontier one gradually lowers these

magnificent pretensions; patriotism becomes purer and stronger. In

visiting foreign parts one sees what is wanting to the prosperity and

glory of his country, and how it might be possible to add some jewels

to her crown. Thus it does not require long observation to see, that

if England might borrow much from us, we have not less to receive from

her. The English are not only more skilful manufacturers and better

merchants than we are, but they possess in a higher degree than we

do, those qualities which enable men, after having conceived grand

projects, to carry them into execution. The English have that practical

sagacity and that unbending perseverance, by which our Titan-like

battles of the Revolution and the Empire, our impetuous and devoted

enthusiasm, our unparalleled victories, our unmatched triumphs, were

reduced to treaties of Vienna, that is to say, were made to result in

our own humiliation, and in the enthronement of Great Britain on the

apex of the European pyramid. The English have less of the gift of

speech, but more capacity for action, than we have. And it is owing to

this, that they have found means to extend their colonial possessions,

while all other nations were losing theirs; what they lost in the West,

they have supplied in the East tenfold. They possess that political

sense, to which they owe the peaceful settlement, during the last

three years, of questions, that seemed destined to shake the granite

foundations of their island and bury it in the sea. They have achieved

their Reform; they have abolished the monopoly of the East India

Company; they have reconstructed the Bank; they have abolished slavery.

During this period, we have been revolving about questions of secondary

importance, without being able to make a decision; we do not know how

to go to work with monopolies, which, in comparison with the colossal

privileges of the East India Company, are grains of sand; we, who have

given to the world the most conclusive arguments in favour of liberty

of commerce!

If in Paris, we consider ourselves, in all, and for all, and forever,

the pattern-people, at London, the opinion is not less exclusively and

decidedly in favour of the English. In London, the duke of Wellington

is called the conqueror of Napoleon, which, indeed, is true to the

letter, but is nevertheless perfectly ridiculous, although Lord

Wellington is certainly an extraordinary man. I have seen Englishmen

pettishly shake their head, when they were told that the sky of England

was foggy; with a little malice, one might drive them to maintain, that

they need not envy the climate of Italy, and that even the atmosphere

of Manchester, where the sight of the sun is a rarity, has charms,

in spite of the slanders of its detractors, even for those who have

breathed the air of Naples. At Madrid, that heroic people, which seems

to be awaking at last from its long lethargy, has not lost the habit of

believing in the supremacy of Spain, and there, they dream that they

are yet in the glorious days of Charles V., when the sun never sat on

the Spanish dominions. And we can pardon this in the noble Castilians;

but I verily believe, also, that Don Pedro and Don Miguel, those

interminable pretenders, have each an official journal which tells them

daily, that the breathless universe has its eyes fixed on their ragged

armies, and that the destinies of the world are settled at Santarem and

Setubal. At Constantinople, in the capital of an empire which exists

only because the other European powers cannot agree in the division

of the spoils, they call us Christian dogs. In Rome the people still

call themselves Romans, and this ridiculous misnomer really makes the

Trans-Tiberine populace believe, that military glory is yet the lot of

the country, and that the _Romans_ will soon resume the character of

lords of the world, magnanimously raising the humble and crushing the

pride of the powerful (_Parcere subjectis_, &c.)! In Vienna, on the

contrary, everybody thinks that Rome is no longer in Rome, but that it

is, of right and in fact, in the archducal capital, that the emperor

is heir by lineal descent to Augustus and Trajan. The devise of an

early prince of the house of Austria (A. E. I. O. U.),[Q] attests that

this pretension is almost as old as the house of Hapsburg. In Prussia,

meanwhile, the young nobles, proud of having studied at the great

universities of Jena and Berlin, and of having worn the sword in an

army which was once the great Frederic's, affect an utter disdain for

the Austrians. Elated by the rapid extension of their country, which

has not, however, yet reached its full growth, the Prussians look upon

their sandy land as the cradle of a new civilisation. It seems as if

the waters of the Spree had some miraculous qualities, and that whoever

has not tasted them, has but four senses instead of five. At St.

Petersburg and Moscow, no one doubts, that the sword of the emperor,

thrown into the scales of the world's destinies, would at once overbear

the opposite balance. Perhaps we of Western Europe have done our part

in filling the Russians with these high notions of the influence of

the Czar. Thus in Europe, each nation arrogates to itself the first

rank, and I do not see why the Americans should be more modest than the

people on the other side of the Atlantic. The miracles which they have

accomplished in fifty years give them a right to be proud, and they,

also, in their turn, are persuaded that they are the first people in

the world, and they boast loudly of their preëminence.

The fact is, there is no chosen people, on whom superiority is entailed

for ages. The Jewish nation, in which this notion of predestination

seemed to be most deeply rooted, has for centuries afforded the most

melancholy refutation of the doctrine. Since the age of Richelieu and

the Revolution of 1688, that is, since Spain has fallen asleep, France

and England have been at the head of civilisation, and have divided the

supremacy between themselves; the one ruling by the theoretical, the

other by the practical; the one giving the tone in politics, the other

in taste, the arts, and manners. But what were France and England three

centuries ago, in the time of Charles V., when the generals of that

emperor and king slew Bayard at Rebecque, made Francis I. prisoner at

Pavia, and the Pope in Rome, whilst four thousand miles further west,

Cortez was conquering for him the proud empire of Montezuma? Prussia,

who now divides with Austria the dominion of Germany, and who is worthy

of that dignity, who is the youthful, the aspiring, the ambitious

Germany, full of the future, as Austria is the patriarchal, sober,

prudent, conservative Germany, clinging to the past and the old,--what

was Prussia three generations ago? What shall we all be, French,

English, Prussians, and Austrians three centuries hence, or perhaps one

hundred years hence? Who can say that some northern blast, finding us

divided, and enfeebled by our divisions, will not have laid low those

who are now so high and haughty? Who knows if the vigourous race which

is now bursting forth from this virgin soil, will not then have passed

us in their turn, as we have outstripped our predecessors? Who can

foretell, whether the two gigantic figures that are now rising above

the horizon, the one in the East with one foot on Moscow and one just

ready to fall on Constantinople, the other in the West, as yet half

hidden by the vast forests of the New World, whose huge limbs stretch

from the mouths of the St. Lawrence to those of the Mississippi: who

can foresee, whether these youthful Titans, who are watching each other

across the Atlantic, and already touch hands on the Pacific, will not

soon divide the empire of the world?

Civilisation is a treasure, to which each generation adds something in

transmitting it to its heirs, and which passes from hand to hand, from

people to people, from country to country. Setting out from Asia it

was four thousand years in reaching the borders of the Atlantic Ocean.

Wo to the nations, that having become depositaries of the treasure,

instead of keeping it with watchful care and labouring to increase

it, lay it down by the road-side, and waste their time and strength

in foolish quarrels; for they will soon be robbed of their trust! The

Americans are the most enterprising of men, and the most aspiring of

people; if we continue to be swallowed up in our barren disputes, they

are the people to snatch from us at unawares the precious charge of

the destinies of our race, and to place themselves at the head of its

march.

Each people has its qualities, which are developed by education, which

at certain moments shine with peculiar brilliancy, like a beacon light

towards which the eyes of mankind are directed, and by which its march

is guided, and which always command the esteem or love or respect of

others. The people of the United States most undeniably have theirs.

No people is so peculiarly fitted by its intrinsic character, as

well as by the circumstances of the territory and the condition of

the population, for democratic institutions. The Americans possess,

therefore, in the highest degree, the better features of democracy,

and they have also its inseparable defects; but if there is something

in them to blame, there is still more to praise. There is much here

for a European to learn, who should come to seek, not subjects

for fault-finding, satire, and sarcasm (which have become vulgar

common-places, since the small coin of Voltaire and Byron has passed

through so many hands), but positive facts, which might be imitated in

our old countries, with the necessary modifications required by the

difference between our circumstances and the condition of America.

Almost all English travellers in this country have seen a great deal

that was bad and scarcely any thing good; the portrait they have drawn

of America and the Americans, is a caricature, which, like all good

caricatures, has some resemblance to the original. The Americans have a

right to deny the jurisdiction of the tribunal, for they have a right

to be tried by their peers, and it does not belong to the most complete

aristocracy in Europe, the English aristocracy, to sit in judgment on a

democracy. Yet all the English travellers in America have belonged to

the aristocracy by their connexions or their opinions, or were aspiring

to it, or aped its habits and judgments, that they might seem to belong

to it.

A Yorkshire farmer or a Birmingham mechanic would certainly pass a very

different judgment; they would probably be as exclusively disposed to

praise, as the most disdainful tourists have been to blame. And the

farmers and mechanics count for something in the numbers of the English

population and in the elements of the British prosperity. Suppose an

Ohio or Illinois farmer, after having sold his flour and salt pork

to advantage, should enact the nabob six months in England, and on

his return should describe, with the rude eloquence of the West, the

distress of the British operatives, the corn laws, the poor rates, the

frightful condition of the Irish peasantry, the impressment of sailors,

the sale of military offices, and to complete his picture of manners,

should add a boxing match, a scene of the guests at a dinner rolling

dead-drunk under the table, and of the sale of a wife by her husband in

open market; if he should give such a picture to his countrymen as a

political and moral portrait of England, the English would shrug their

shoulders, and with reason. Yet his story would be founded on facts,

and could not be said to be actually false in any particular. Now such

a story would be an exact counterpart of most of the representations of

America by English travellers. Do not to others what you would not have

others do to you.

There is one thing in the United States that strikes a stranger on

stepping ashore, and is of a character to silence his sentiments

of national pride, particularly if he is an Englishman; it is the

appearance of general ease in the condition of the people of this

country. While European communities are more or less cankered with the

sore of pauperism, for which their ablest statesmen have as yet been

able to find no healing balm, there are here no paupers, at least not

in the Northern and Western States, which have protected themselves

from the leprosy of slavery. If a few individuals are seen, they are

only an imperceptible minority of dissolute or improvident persons,

commonly people of colour, or some newly landed emigrants, who have

not been able to adopt industrious habits. Nothing is more easy than

to live and to live well by labour. Objects of the first necessity,

bread, meat, sugar, tea, coffee, fuel, are in general cheaper here than

in France, and wages are double or triple. I happened, a few days ago,

to be on the line of a railroad in process of construction, where they

were throwing up some embankments. This sort of labour, which merely

requires force, without skill, is commonly done in the United States

by Irish new-comers, who have no resource but their arm, no quality

but muscular strength. These Irish labourers are fed and lodged, and

hear their bill of fare; three meals a day, and at each meal plenty

of meat and wheat bread; coffee and sugar at two meals, and butter[R]

once a day; in the course of the day, from six to eight glasses of

whiskey are given them according to the state of the weather. Beside

which they receive in money 40 cents a day under the most unfavourable

circumstances, often from 60 to 75 cents. In France the same labour is

worth about 24 cents a day the labourers finding themselves.

This positive and undeniable fact of the general ease, is connected

with another, which gives it a singular importance in the eyes of a

European, who is the friend of progressive reforms, and the enemy

of violence; the prevalence of radicalism in politics. The term

_democrat_, which elsewhere would fill even the republicans with

terror, is here greeted with acclamations, and the name of _Democratic_

is zealously claimed by every party as its exclusive property. But this

is the only kind of property which is called in question; it is true

that material property rapidly disappears in this country, unless it is

preserved by the most constant vigilance, and renewed with untiring

industry. But as long as it exists, it is the object of profound

respect, which, I must confess, has rather surprised me. I should have

expected that the social theory would have borrowed some notions from

the predominant political theory; but there are those in Europe, who

are not there considered the boldest speculators on this subject, who

here would be looked upon as the most audacious innovators. From this

simple statement, it seems natural to infer, that valuable lessons are

to be learned here by those who seek to solve the great question that

now agitates Europe, the amelioration of the greatest number. It would

be interesting to inquire into the causes of this state of things,

and to examine whether, with certain modifications, it could not be

transferred to Europe, and particularly to France.

Society, Manners and Politics in the United States Being a Series of Letters on North America · 第 92 / 223 题