from morning to night, and the kind of work she does in no way tends to
improve her character, or to prepare her for domestic life. She is not
constantly doing various kinds of work, under the direction of another,
thus learning patience, submission, diligence and faithfulness. She is
not learning how to economize, or keep house, or take care of children.
She is not acquiring a habit of ministering to the wants and comforts
of others. In most cases she has a sedentary employment, that keeps
her from the exercise and fresh air, so needful to good health. She is
thrown out of the circle of family friendships, and the safe asylum
of domestic life, and is often brought into contact with selfish
and vicious persons, whose influence tends to injure her tastes
and morals, and in many cases to blast her reputation and character
forever. In general, she cannot have as much time as domestics can
gain, to take care of her clothes, or to read, and thus improve her
mind.
I have known cases, where young girls have left the place of a domestic
in a good family, to go to shops or manufactories, who, after the
trial, have returned with broken down health, to mourn over those
influences, which had done even more evil to the mind, than had been
inflicted on the body.
If I had a young sister, who must earn her own support by the labor of
her hands, I would _first_ look for a place for her as a domestic in a
kind, well educated and Christian family, as the safest, the happiest,
the most useful place I could find.
And I should consider the sedentary, homeless employment of a
sempstress, or the still more dangerous and injurious employments,
of the shop or manufactory, as every way inferior in advantages and
respectability. And I trust a time will come, when all those most
interested in the matter, will view this subject in the same light.
LETTER VIII.
The importance of raising the respectability of the station of
a domestic, in public estimation, and the mode by which it can
be done.
My Friends:
I have in previous letters shown, that the station of a domestic
is honourable and respectable; and that it is a far more desirable
situation than that of many deemed superior to it. I have also shown
some of the reasons why it is not regarded as so honourable and
respectable as it ought to he.
I now wish to point out some of the reasons why it is very important,
both to employers and to domestics, that this employment should be
raised, in general estimation, to that honour and respectability which
really belongs to it.
To understand the subject properly, you must bear in mind these things.
This nation is now more prosperous than any other in the world, and
almost any man of intelligence, industry, and honesty, can, after a
few years, gain so much wealth that he can afford to hire a domestic to
help his wife. Such men, when young, are frequently marrying persons
who are domestics. In this way it comes about, that the number of
domestics is diminishing, and the number of those who wish to hire
domestics is increasing. Domestics are constantly changing to be the
mistresses of families, who wish to hire domestics themselves.
At the same time, women can be hired so much cheaper than men, that it
is becoming more and more common to hire women to do what in past times
was done by men in shops, stores, and manufactories. And though, in
many cases, no greater wages are gained than domestics secure, yet as
these places are considered superior in respectability, many who would
otherwise go to service in families, prefer such places, even when
they work longer and for less wages. But in some cases, women have far
higher wages offered than are ever given to domestics.
These causes are operating constantly to diminish the number of
domestics, until, in some parts of the country, many ladies cannot hire
any person to do their family work on any terms, and though they are
very wealthy, they are obliged to do _all_ their own work. And the more
prosperous this country grows, the more this scarcity of domestics will
increase, unless something is done to remedy the difficulty.
And this will be the greater misfortune, because most young women, who
have wealthy parents, are brought up in such a way, that they have a
delicate constitution that cannot bear hard labour. When, therefore,
they are married, not being able to hire domestics, their health and
strength fail under the care and labours that come upon them; they
lose their courage and spirits, life becomes a burden, and often, they
drag out a weary life, or sink to an early grave. This brings anxiety,
trouble, and care on husbands and fathers, and when the comforts of
home are gone, the road to vice is near, while children, turned off for
want of time, are still greater sufferers. Since I have travelled so
much in this nation, I have been greatly distressed at the amount of
care, anxiety and sorrow that oppress so many thousands, for want of
proper aid from domestics. It is therefore of the greatest consequence
to employers, that the station of a domestic should be so raised in
comfort and respectability, that it will be regarded as a desirable
situation by the thousands that are now employed in work injurious to
themselves.
It is quite as important to all who must labour with their hands for
a livelihood, that the station of a domestic should be regarded as a
respectable and desirable one. I have shown how much superior this
situation is to that of a shop or a manufactory, and it would be a
great blessing to the young women of this nation, who earn their
livelihood, if they so regarded it.
It is a matter, then, that equally interests all classes in society to
inquire, How shall the station and employment of a domestic be raised
in public estimation, so as to be regarded honourable and respectable,
as much so as it deserves to be?
Now this can be accomplished only by having _both sides_ try to bring
it about. On the side of employers, pains must be taken to render the
situation of domestics agreeable and comfortable, and to secure for
them time and means to gain a good education and a comfortable support.
And many intelligent persons are now feeling the importance of this.
I have heard many gentlemen say, “When we get good domestics, we must
pay them so well, and treat them so well, that they will feel that they
cannot improve their condition by any change.” And I have seen many
sensible women acting according to this advice.
But as this book is not designed for employers, but for domestics,
I will confine myself to pointing out the modes by which you can
contribute to raise the respectability of your situation.
To give you my views more clearly, I will describe a domestic who does
the work in a family where I have resided.
In the first place, she always dresses herself neatly, and yet in a
style fitting the work she has to do, while she keeps her chamber and
kitchen in such neat order, and there is such a look of comfort and
respectability about her and all her concerns, that every one likes
to see her in her kitchen. Then she is intelligent and well educated,
at least enough so to know that it is lady-like to be respectful and
polite to every body. If any person comes into her kitchen, she offers
a chair, and treats them with the same politeness that is shown by the
lady of the house to her visitors.
Then she _always_ does _all_ her work _well_. Her bread is always the
best, her meats are well cooked, her vegetables served hot and in the
neatest order. She is economical and careful, too, so that nothing is
wasted by neglect. She is not _set_ in her own ways, but is always
ready to do any kind of work that her employer wishes done, and to do
it in the manner requested.
When the children come into the kitchen, if she has time and it is
convenient, she makes it pleasant to them, but if they give her
trouble, as she has authority given her to do this, she decidedly, but
kindly, requires their instant departure.
She is so prudent, kind, and discreet, that the lady who employs her
can, at any time, leave the care of her family and her children with
her, and feel entirely at ease, knowing that every thing will be done
in the best manner during her absence. And in times of sickness, she
always looks to her kitchen for the tender sympathy and watchful care,
which she never fails to find.
In the evenings, this domestic employs herself in the care of her own
wardrobe, and finds some leisure time to read the books and papers that
are abundantly supplied. In this way she stores her mind with useful
and entertaining knowledge, so that this, with her native sense and
shrewdness, makes her society agreeable and valued by the best educated
persons.
It is true she has her frailties—for who is perfect? But these
excellencies seem so to cover them over, that they are almost
forgotten. Now the consequence of all this is, that more pains is
taken in that family, to make this domestic comfortable and contented
than is given to almost any other person. She is always treated with
respect and kindness, and as she is never unreasonable in her requests,
whatever she expresses a desire for, is always secured for her if
possible. Her chamber, her kitchen, and all her comforts are carefully
provided for, and the children would no more invade her rights, or
treat her with disrespect, than they would treat their parents thus.
Now, I believe there are hundreds in this land, who, if they could get
such a domestic as this, would agree to pay her almost any thing she,
or any one would think of asking. Money, if it could secure such a
domestic, would be of little account, with the multitudes, who now find
that wealth cannot secure for them the services needed to make home
comfortable.
You will now understand why I would advise, as the surest way of
raising the respectability of your employment, _to raise the character
of domestics_. Whenever a time comes in which such a domestic as the
one I have described, is a fair picture of the _whole class_, it is
very certain that the respect and regard that should be given to this
employment, never will be withheld.
I have heard ladies of great good sense, and in the highest circles in
our land, talk in this manner: “Now if I only could find domestics
who are intelligent, well-bred, neat in dress and person, and who so
understand the proprieties of their station as to set a good example to
my children, I should not have the least objection to their sitting in
my parlour, or at my table, whenever it was convenient, nor to treating
them in all respects as the friends and companions of my children. But
such domestics we cannot find.”
This single remark will show to you the reason why there often is a
_necessity_ of making so much difference between the situation of
employers and domestics, as is generally seen in the most wealthy and
intelligent circles. Parents, in the best society, wish to have their
children trained so as to appear properly in the circles in which they
move. For this end they strive to make them neat in dress and person,
polite and respectful in manners, particularly in the use of refined
and grammatical language, and careful to observe propriety in their
behaviour at table and in society. Now if they could get domestics who
would set a good example before their children, in these respects,
it would be very agreeable to them to have them in the parlour and at
table with the children, whenever it was convenient. But if domestics
neglect their person, if their dress is negligent and untidy, if they
are rough and coarse in their manners, and rude and disrespectful
in address, if they use incorrect language and neglect the rules of
propriety at table and in society, there is a very good reason for
excluding them from the table and parlour, where their example would
injure children and be offensive and disagreeable to visitors.
And it is a benefit to domestics that such feelings exist, for it tends
to encourage them to try to be neat, tidy, well-bred and well educated.
If there were no advantages to be gained by a good education and good
manners, no one would try to gain them. This is one reason why God has
appointed it, that the more we improve in these respects, the more
our estimation in society, and our comfort in all respects will be
increased.
On the subject of having domestics sit in the parlour and eat with the
family these things must be taken into consideration. There are some
families who live in such a way that it is perfectly _convenient_ for
them, to have the one who cooks and waits on table, eat and sit with
the family. And then, if the character and manners of a domestic are
suitable, there is no reason why this practice should not be adopted.
But there is another class of persons, whose style of living is such,
that it would be very inconvenient to have the one who cooks and waits
on table sit and eat with the family. In such families one person is
needed during meals to attend to matters in the kitchen, and another
person to change dishes and carry food back and forth, and if these
persons sat at table there would be constant disorder and confusion in
jumping up from table to perform these services, while a dress suitable
for kitchen work would not be suitable at a table where company is
often entertained. Besides this, the master of a family often is so
engaged in business that the only time he can see his wife and children
together is at meals, and then he wishes to be at liberty to talk
freely, as he could not do, if every stranger he hires must come to his
family meal.
For these reasons, even if domestics were ever so well educated
and well bred, there are reasons why it would be more agreeable and
convenient to have the family eat and sit by themselves, and domestics
eat and sit in the kitchen. And when domestics do become intelligent,
and well educated, they will have sense enough to feel, that the place
where they sit or eat, has nothing to do with their respectability.
They will see that it is _most convenient_ to sit and eat in the
kitchen, and they will choose to do so themselves, and never think that
it is any hardship, or any thing that implies, that they are not as
good and as respectable as any other members of the family.
It is because domestics do not consider these things, that they
sometimes feel that it is all owing to _pride_, that their employers
do not have their domestics share the parlour and family meal. Now
I do not doubt that there are _some_ employers that have a foolish
pride of this sort, which is as unworthy of a Christian, as it is of a
republican people. But so far as I have observed, it is among those who
have the least claims to be considered as well bred and well educated.
The more education and good sense a person has, the more it is
seen that respectability depends not on the employment, but on the
_character_ of a person. And those who put on the most airs of
aristocracy and superiority, are generally those who have risen from
circumstances where they had no chance to gain the education and good
breeding, that would have taught them better.
But in most cases, among well educated and sensible persons, the great
reason for having domestics have a separate sitting-room and tables is,
that it is more convenient to the family, and in most cases, it is also
most convenient and agreeable to domestics themselves.
When domestics cannot dress and appear like the family, and when their
education and manners do not qualify them for the society that visits
the family, in most cases, they themselves would prefer to sit and to
eat in the kitchen, and would regard it as a great trial to be obliged
to sit and eat with the family.
LETTER IX.
On the duties of subordination. Rules of the Bible. Respectful
manners the mark of a lady.
My Friends:
I have shown that the chief way in which the station of a domestic
is to be raised in public estimation, is by raising the character of
those who occupy this situation. I have shown also, that it is by the
formation of a right character, that we are to secure true happiness
both in this and in a future life. You will therefore understand the
propriety of my attempting to point out the course which you need to
take in order to form the right character, and also the proper manner
of performing your various duties in life.
In attempting this, I will first direct your attention to what are
called the duties of subordination.
By this I mean those duties owed by all persons to those who have
authority, or any right to control and direct them. We all of us know
that no kind of work can be well done, unless there are overseers to
direct those who work. For this reason, every kind of business is
managed by persons, who have authority to control others. The rulers
of a nation have a right to direct others in all points where the laws
require them so to do. The captain of a ship has authority to command
all his hands. The master of a store, or shop, has a right to control
all who work in his employ. The teacher of a school has a right to
command his scholars in all matters pertaining to his school. The
master and mistress of a family, too, have a right to control their
children, and also all those persons whom they hire to do their work,
in all matters relating to this work.
In all these cases, those who are entitled to direct others should
be treated with respect by those who are under their control; and in
all those matters where they have a right to command, they should be
cheerfully and exactly obeyed.
This duty is constantly, and often enjoined by God in his Holy Word.
“Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake.”
“Obey those that have rule over you.” “Render therefore to all their
dues, fear to whom fear, and honour to whom honour is due.”
It is because the duties of subordination are so important to the
happiness of those who are to be controlled, as well as to society
at large, that God so often and so earnestly urges these duties in
the Bible. And we cannot fully realize the force of these directions,
unless we bear in mind the state of things that existed when they were
written.
In the first place, the kings and rulers over the people, in those
times when these directions were given, were not those appointed by
themselves, who were to rule according to laws made by the people
for their own good, as is the case in this country. Instead of this,
the rulers were bad men and cruel tyrants, who by the help of their
soldiers gained power and authority by mere strength. And in the family
state, the domestics were not, as in this country, persons who for
a reward agree to perform the work of the family. On the contrary,
they were white men and women, who were forced against their will
into servitude, and driven by stripes and cruelties to work for their
masters. Some of these white slaves, it is probable, were from England,
the land of our forefathers.
Now what were the directions given by God to subjects, and to
domestics, in these circumstances? He did not tell them, that because
their rulers and masters were bad men, and had gained power in a wrong
way, that they might refuse to obey. On the contrary, God saw that it
was best, whenever men gain the power over others, that the weaker ones
should submit and obey. He teaches us that the power which men gain
over each other in this way, is permitted by God. In Prov. 8: 15, 16,
God says, “By me kings rule, and princes decree justice. By me princes
rule, and nobles, even _all_ the judges of the earth.” This teaches
us, that in whatever way it may be, that men gain power to rule over
others, so long as they really hold this power, it is by the permission
of God. Though he may disapprove of the men, and of the means they use
to get power, yet so long as they hold the power, He sees that it is
best for all they govern, to submit and obey. Thus In Eccles. 5: 19,
it is said: “Where the word of a king is, there is power, and who may
say to him, what doest thou?” Again, in Daniel 2: 20, it is written,
“Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are
his: and he changeth the times and the seasons; He removeth kings, and
setteth up kings.” Dan. 4: 32, “The Most High ruleth in the kingdom of
men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.” Thus it appears that it is
by God’s will and appointment, that even bad men gain power to rule
over others. And when they have gained this power, the following texts
show what God requires in regard to the honour and obedience to be
rendered to them.
In Matt. 22: 21, when some men came to Christ asking him whether it
was their duty to pay tribute to Cæsar, who was the cruel tyrant then
ruling over them. To this, Christ replied, after looking at the tribute
money, “Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and unto God the
things that are God’s.” This means, render to Cæsar what he has power
to require, just as you render your duties to God.
The Apostle Peter, by God’s authority, also teaches thus, 1 Peter 2:
13, 14, “Submit yourselves to _every_ ordinance of man for the Lord’s
sake, whether it be to kings as supreme, or unto governors, as unto
them that are sent by him, for the punishment of evil doers. As free,
and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the
servants of God.”
This command teaches us that we are to submit to _every ordinance_ of
man _for the Lord’s sake_. That is, when men have power to make laws,
customs and ordinances, we must submit to them for the Lord’s sake—that
is, in order to please and obey God. The only cases where it is right
to resist is, when we are commanded to do what is sinful. It was on
this principle that our forefathers, for a long time, obeyed the laws
of the king of England; even when they were bad laws. But as soon as
the people found they had power to make their own laws, they appointed
rulers of their own, and then they ceased to obey the king of England,
who had not power to force them to do it; and obeyed their own rulers,
who had power given them to govern by the people. As soon, then, as it
is found, that men have power given them to rule, God requires those
under them to submit and obey for the Lord’s sake. This is the wisest
and safest way, for it saves from constant fighting and quarrels. In
the story of the shipwrecked company, we can see that it would have
been better for them all, to submit to be governed by one man, even if
he was a bad man, than to continue in the state of uproar, disorder and
oppression that existed when there was none to rule over them.
The same sort of directions also, were given by God to domestics.
At the time these were written in the Bible, men and women were made
servants by force, and their masters had power to whip, starve and
murder them without punishment. God saw, that in this case, it was
safest and best for servants, as well as for the whole community,
that they should submit to those who had this power. Accordingly the
Apostle Paul, by authority from God, gives these directions, Eph. 6:
5, “Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to
the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as unto
Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. With _good will_ doing
service, as to the Lord, and not to men, knowing that whatsoever good
thing a man doeth, the same shall be received of the Lord, whether he
be bond or free.” Here, those who were held in the most cruel bondage,
were required, so long as they were in the power of their masters,
to submit, and not only to serve them, but to do service “_with good
will_,” “as to the Lord.” That means, feel kindly to your masters, and
do them good, for the sake of obeying and pleasing Jesus Christ.
Again, the same apostle writes, Col. 3: 22, “Servants, obey in all
things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye-service, as
men-pleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing God. And whatsoever
ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not to men, knowing that
ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance, for ye serve the Lord
Christ.” Again, Paul, when teaching Titus how to perform his duties
as a minister of Christ, directs thus, Titus 2: 9, “Exhort servants
to be obedient to their own masters, and to please them well in all
things; _not answering again_; not _purloining_, but showing _all good
fidelity_, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all
things.”