SOCIETY AS THE PEOPLE FOUND IT, NOVEMBER 8, 1892.
Society, as the people found it, on last election day, was certainly
not as attractive as that autocratic gentleman, the distinguished Ward
McAllister found it, and has helped to make it, as related by him in a
book which has been published with much flourish of trumpets, entitled
“Society as _I_ Have Found It.”
While the volume itself hardly rises to the dignity of a dime novel,
it still, doubtless, is a true statement and record of the doings and
pretensions of the very class of people who, by their presumption, have
aroused the silent and sullen indignation of America. The book referred
to, and its writer, Ward McAllister, of course, received a large share
of criticism and ridicule. The absurdities of the book impressed the
critics of the newspapers all over the land. It was made a butt for
the squibs, sarcasm, and ridicule of some man on every newspaper
throughout the country. Passages were selected from the book wherein
Mr. McAllister poses himself in the position of a first-class cook,
and where he recounts how he has been playing the millinery maid for
some lady of fashion. Of course, it struck every one as ridiculous that
any manly man who claimed to be an American should be impressed by the
criticism made upon the “cut of the tails of his dress-coat,” or to
pay any attention to the advice of “a well-dressed Englishman, well up
in all matters pertaining to society,” as to the peculiar fashion to
be adopted concerning a man’s hat; how he should wear his watch-chain,
etc. All such things were so extremely amusing and so utterly farcical
to the brainworkers attached to the newspapers, that they held up the
book and McAllister as objects to create merriment. That was the only
possible view that could be taken by them of anything so absurdly funny
as a man’s highest ambition, his idea of dignity, his aim in life being
so small as that evidenced in McAllister’s autobiography.
There was another side to that question. A creature like McAllister
is not a spontaneous or instantaneous creation of our great Republic.
There must have existed a congenial atmosphere in his “smart set” to
produce an exotic of such rare and unattractive perfume. Had it not
been perfectly apparent that Ward McAllister was not the only person
who imitated and aped foreign manners, and desired to create a social
distinction in America, the book would have been a roaring farce.
Had the people at large supposed that he was the single individual in
America who approved of and earnestly desired to create a collection
of idiots who should claim that “caste” could exist in our country,
then the people would have regarded him much in the manner they would a
buffoon on the stage of a theatre, or some idiot who, from a desire to
attract attention, paints his face sky-blue. But the very advertising
that this blooming flower of sham aristocracy received at the hands
of the newspapers--which was done by the newspaper men in a spirit of
levity, possessing, as they do, sufficient brains to find McAllister
and his subject utterly absurd, in conjunction with many other
well-advertised and extravagantly absurd assumptions on the part of the
wealthy, made a much deeper impression upon the minds of the “Common
People” than it was supposed that it would or could do. McAllister’s
“smart set” in this country--and his “smart set” is not confined to
New York City, but exists in some form or manner in every city, town,
village, and county in the Union--this McAllister-like “smart set” in
each little community, as well as in the large cities, has managed by
its arrogance and assumed superiority to arouse a spirit of resentment
among the “Common People” of the Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Jackson
stamp, because the masses have seen an attempt to establish something
which would create an inequality between the citizens of the Republic.
It was a monstrous joke that the Knights of the Pencil saw in
McAllister and his “Society as I Have Found It,” and, like the
keen-witted men that they are, they proceeded to hurl the javelins of
their wit and sarcasm at this balloon of idiocy and impudence; but in
piercing the balloon, the nauseating odor arising from its explosion
pervaded the nostrils of the “Common People” with more than ordinary
unsavoriness.
In every little village and town, and even through the farming
sections, there is some would-be Ward McAllister and “smart set;”
some little circle who from some imagined cause or reason, in their
own conceit are a little better than the typical old settlers of our
country, who brought the Republic into existence. They try to impress,
and sometimes most insultingly, this supposed superiority upon the
minds of the “Common People.” In one little village it will be, for
example, the owner of some protected little factory, which, in the
wisdom of the legislators, has been protected to encourage and increase
the industries of our country. In the solicitude of the legislators for
the welfare of the people (acting honestly and in the best interests
of the country), they have created the possibility for this man, this
small manufacturer in the little village referred to, to accumulate
a few thousand dollars more than his fellow citizens of the little
village. The money has not been earned either by his sagacity, business
ability, superior education, nor his intrinsic merit as a commercial
genius. It is the result of accidents and the necessity that the
legislators honestly felt existed, to create manufactories in our own
country, to furnish the articles consumed by the people, rather than to
buy the same from England and other foreign countries, sending our gold
abroad out of the country in payment therefor.
The honesty of purpose and the wisdom of the action of the legislative
part of the Government, it is not the province of this book to
question. It is to record the result of the action upon the social
relations of the different members of that little community, or
village, in which the small factory was established, and the attendant
unhappiness arising from the accumulation of a disproportioned amount
of money in the hands of one of the citizens of the community. The
manufacturer, becoming prosperous, began to assume an air of social
superiority. He was enabled to take a trip every now and again to
some near-by city. He there saw his model McAllister. He returned to
his village with un-American affectations, aping the manner of his
model--the McAllister of his near-by city. He began to draw around
him (in much the same manner as McAllister describes the creation of
the “Patriarchs” of New York) those whom he deemed suitable for that
superior social position which he, modelling the machinery after the
manner of the city McAllister, deemed so desirable.
Before proceeding to describe the birth of this superior social
class, and the method of its organization, for which information we
are indebted to this Prince of Cooks and Coats--McAllister--it is
desirable to regard in a political way this local would-be aristocrat,
the manufacturer. He imagines that Protection, the tariff, by which he
has been enabled to amass the wealth, as the foundation upon which he
bases his claim to a more exalted position, socially, than his fellow
citizens, is entirely due to the doctrines of the Republican party.
He loses sight of the fact that the Republican party did not owe its
origin to Protection. The Abraham Lincoln Republican party did not owe
its victory and popularity in the hearts of the people to Protection.
There were other causes which operated powerfully in producing the
result of the election in 1860; but the manufacturer of that little
village, before mentioned, absorbed by the one idea that Protection
has been the one cause of his success, and that it was due to the
Republican party, becomes oblivious to the fact that the necessities of
the Government, during a war to preserve the Federal Union, became so
great that revenue had to be derived from some source, and that many of
the duties imposed upon foreign importations by the Republican party
had for their cause the stern necessity of the soldiers in the field,
fighting to preserve the Union; that the war was not a battle for
Protection. It had for its origin other and very different causes.
The war, which had been the outgrowth of the election of the candidate
of the Republican party, created expenses which the Republican
administration had to meet, and as a means to that end it became
necessary to increase the existing duty and to place new duties upon
imported manufactured articles. And by so doing they carried to a
successful termination the great struggle for the preservation of
the Union, to which the Republican party had pledged itself; which,
together with the inclination and desire of some of the prominent
members of the Republican party to increase the manufacturing
industries of the country, has brought about that Protection and tariff
by which he, the village manufacturer, has profited. He never stops
to consider whether the tariff was a means to the end so profoundly
desired, the preservation of the Union, a means of furnishing sinews
of war by which the stars were retained upon our flag. He regards the
tariff and Protection only in its personal aspect. The Republican
party, to him, means his benefactor, to whom he owes an eternal debt of
gratitude for enabling him to acquire that which, without Protection
and tariff, he never could have obtained in the open field of the
commercial battle wherein the world at large may contend. The position
held by great thinkers of the Abraham Lincoln period is utterly
unappreciated by him. That this tariff and Protection, which has been
such a boon to him, was not created for his especial benefit, never
suggests itself to his mind; that men of the Lincoln day and stamp
should have had in view only the preservation of the Union and creating
a fund to pay the expenses of those engaged to accomplish that end,
does not occur to the village manufacturer.
In fact, many of the Republican politicians have made too much of
the Protection doctrine and not enough of the cause that created it.
This village, protected, small manufacturer, communing with himself,
concludes that without Protection he could never have amassed that
wealth which he is endeavoring to make elevate him above the social
status of his fellow citizens. He acknowledges, possibly, to himself,
that without Protection he might still be struggling for existence upon
an equal plane with the “Common People,” above whose heads he hopes
to elevate himself socially. He regards only the Republican party of
to-day, utterly oblivious to the fact that he and men of the McAllister
and the “smart set” type have no just appreciation and no great
admiration for the father of the Republican party, Abraham Lincoln, and
his doctrines, which are the doctrines and sentiments of the “Common
People.” He merely knows that Protection helped _him_, and he cares
nothing for what it was that brought about Protection and compelled the
Republican party to advocate a high tariff during the Civil War.
Hence, this village manufacturer, this would-be social leader, the
imitator of the city Ward McAllister, is a most ardent Republican. The
little set of satellites which he gathers round him, glad to imitate
the examples and opinions of one who has attained success and who is
a recognized leader of this social movement to create “Caste” in our
communities, become also ardent Republicans. In other words, it becomes
almost a mark of respectability (so called) in the little community
wherein resides the small protected manufacturer, to be a Republican.
The very word “Democrat” smacks so much of the “Common People.” A man
of intelligence, education, or wealth, who is a Democrat, becomes a
social anomaly in that little community. A few prominent men through
the land, who have become associated with the Democratic party, are
spoken of merely as the result of inherited opinions through a long
line of ancestry, similar to an inherited religion, or a motto on a
coat-of-arms. A man who believes in Democracy, in its broad sense,
is regarded in these little communities, when he is possessed of
education, intelligence, and money, as a kind of firebrand. His every
action is viewed with suspicion. So firmly has it become fixed in
the minds of this little set of satellites, who surround the local
manufacturing magnate, that “Republicanism” and “respectability” are
synonymous, that they find it utterly incompatible with reason and
refinement for a man to be respectable, according to their definition
of the term, and not at the same time be a Republican.
The “Common People” in these little communities, many of whom have been
Republicans with Abraham Lincoln, many of whom were veteran soldiers of
the Union, became more incensed by the impression created by this local
“smart set,” than convinced by argument, during the campaign of 1892.
Before proceeding to more fully dissect the sentiment created by this
kind of nonsense, and by its almost invariable association with the
Republican party throughout the land, we will return to the admirable,
unabashed Ward McAllister, and quote something from his text-book of
snobbery, as to the methods adopted in the creation of the “smart set”
in New York, which has furnished a model for similar creations through
the length and breadth of the land.
“As a child,” writes this scion of a race of nobles(?), “I had often
listened with great interest to my father’s account of his visit to
London, with Dominick Lynch, the greatest swell and beau that New
York had ever known. He would describe his going with this friend to
Almack’s, finding themselves in a brilliant assemblage of people,
knowing no one and no one deigning to notice them; Lynch, turning to my
father, exclaimed: ‘Well, my friend, geese, indeed, were we, to thrust
ourselves in here, where we are evidently not wanted.’ He had hardly
finished the sentence when the Duke of Wellington (to whom they had
brought letters, and who had sent them tickets to Almack’s) entered,
looked around, and seeing them, at once approached them, took each
by the arm and walked them twice up and down the room; then, pleading
an engagement, said ‘Good-night’ and left. Their countenances fell as
he rapidly left the room, but the door had barely closed on him when
all crowded around them, and in a few minutes they were presented to
everyone of note, and had a charming evening. He described to us how
Almack’s originated--all by the banding together of powerful women of
influence for the purpose of getting up these balls, and in this way
making them the greatest social events of London society.
“Remembering all this, I resolved, in 1872, to establish in New York an
American Almack’s, taking men instead of women, being careful to select
only the leading representative men of the city, who had the right to
create and lead society. I knew all would depend upon our making a
proper selection. I made up an Executive Committee of three gentlemen,
who daily met at my house, and we went to work in earnest to make a
list of those we should ask to join in the undertaking. One of this
committee, a very bright, clever man, hit upon the name of ‘Patriarchs’
for the Association, which was at once adopted, and then, after some
discussion, we limited the number of Patriarchs to twenty-five, and
that each Patriarch, for his subscription, should have the right of
inviting to each ball four ladies and five gentlemen, including himself
and family; that all distinguished strangers, up to fifty, should be
asked; and then established the rules governing the giving of these
balls--all of which, with some slight modifications, have been carried
out to the letter to this day. The following gentlemen were then asked
to become ‘Patriarchs,’ and at once joined the little band:
John Jacob Astor,
William Astor,
De Lancey Kane,
Ward McAllister,
George Henry Warren,
Eugene A. Livingston,
William Butler Duncan,
E. Templeton Snelling,
Lewis Colford Jones,
John W. Hamersley,
Benjamin S. Welles,
Frederick Sheldon,
Royal Phelps,
Edwin A. Post,
A. Gracie King,
Lewis M. Rutherford,
Robert G. Remsen,
Wm. C. Schermerhorn,
Francis R. Rives,
Maturin Livingston,
Alex. Van Rensselaer,
Walter Langdon,
F. G. D’Hauteville,
C. C. Goodhue,
William R. Travers.”
These proud patriots, constituting a tribunal upon whose decision a
man’s claim to social equality with any other citizen in New York must
rest, could find much in the conduct of their descendants to question
with regard to their title to social superiority. The ventilation
given to the Drayton-Borrowe-Millbank affair reflected no great credit
upon the great name Astor--the first on the list of the “Patriarchs.”
The asinine utterances of a descendant of another of the “Patriarchs,”
which is here given, gives little evidence of inherited wisdom or
common sense.
In the curious case recently tried in New York relative to the right of
a women’s association to erect a statue to a lady who, though counted
among the metropolitan “Four Hundred,” was possessed of much public
spirit and philanthropic energy, one of the witnesses--a member of
the same family--testified that her grandfather “never invited such
people as Horace Greeley” to his house. A correspondent of the New York
_World_ enquires:
“Is it possible that we have an aristocratic society in this
republican country of ours to which the great founder of the
_Tribune_ could not be admitted? Horace Greeley was born in New
Hampshire, the native State of Gen. John Stark, Levi Woodbury,
Daniel Webster, and a long line of soldiers, statesmen, and men
famous in literature. If it is a title to aristocracy to belong
to a family who were original settlers of the country, the
Hamiltons are comparatively a new people, the great founder of
the family being an emigrant from the West Indian island of Nevis
about the year 1770. The Schuylers derive their distinction from
Major-General Philip Schuyler, who was a distinguished officer of
the Revolution, but whose services could not compare with those of
that sterling old hero of Bennington--John Stark.
“Why, Mr. Editor, there are thousands of good Democratic citizens
who can trace back their descent to the Pilgrim Fathers, more than
a hundred years before Alexander Hamilton landed from the West
Indies. Is it not a relic of feudal times and barbarism to claim
distinction above our fellows and superiority of birth on account
of the deeds of an ancestor a hundred or more years ago?
“‘Honor and fame from no condition rise.
Act well your part; there all the honor lies.’”
[Illustration: JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER,
A MAGNATE OF THE STANDARD OIL COMPANY.]
Shades of the great dead of journalism, the Bennetts, Raymonds, and
others who have left the stamp of their genius upon newspaperdom in
America, look down and pity the inane idiot who gives utterance to
sentiments concerning Horace Greeley like those of the descendant of
one of the “Patriarchs!” And men who occupy positions in the world of
journalism, like Halstead, Cockerill, Clark Howell, how like you such
utterances?
Really, had Horace Greeley been alive and known of such an utterly
meaningless assertion, doubtless the old genius would have smiled;
but here is the query: Would it not have made a Democrat of every
female member of his family, who regarded him as the epitome of worth,
virtue, and merit? That a man like Horace Greeley, who had arrived at a
position so pre-eminent as to disregard the snarls of puppies, should
be amused at such a statement, would not be astonishing; but it would
be none the less disagreeable for the women of his family. A woman’s
life is essentially social.
This illustration, and it would be impossible to find a better, of
this nauseating attempt to establish “caste” in our country, will
demonstrate the assertion that attempted class distinction has not
been confined to the laboring man, the workman, or the poor man, but
has been attempted, and made obnoxious, in every degree of wealth,
learning, and position. The little country or village manufacturing
magnate, whose Republicanism is not the Republicanism of _principles_
nor the Republicanism advocated by Abraham Lincoln, has adopted
the scheme set forth by Ward McAllister as a successful one, to be
imitated in his little community, in establishing his own little “smart
set”--his own local “Patriarchs.” Proceeding upon that basis, he and
his little band of innovators have attempted an improvement upon the
social system of each little community, which has become associated
in the minds of the “Common People” of these little communities with
Republicanism; and, therefore, the Republican party, in November last,
was forced to bear the opprobrium that attached itself, in the minds of
the “Common People,” to the “smart set” in their little communities.
Never was a greater mistake made than in supposing that the influence
of this attempted social distinction shall only influence the laborers
and working classes of a community. In proportion as a man, by increase
of wealth and reputation, acquires in the work-a-day world a higher
position with regard to the influence that he wields in the business
or professional world, just so much more bitterly does he resent
the arrogance of the few, who, like the Patriarchs, would establish
a tribunal to try their fellow citizens concerning their social
positions, at which those outside of the charmed circle have no
opportunity to appear and offer proofs and evidence of their worth and
merit. The banker who finds that his wife has been neglected when the
invitations to the Patriarchs’ ball are distributed, feels as keenly
and resentfully the insult as does the longshoreman upon finding that
his wife has not been invited to the butchers’ ball.
Be honest with yourselves, and you will find, down in your hearts, a
very ocean of bitterness occasioned by some slight or insult inflicted
upon your family; and these are the things to which men do not give
words, but which are silently felt, and to change which men silently
voted.
American men bestow upon the women of their families a degree of
devotion and admiration greater than that given by foreigners generally
to their families. The Americans have exalted the women of our
land, irrespective of wealth or condition, to a position of so much
pre-eminence in our social affairs, that in that department of our
lives our women are permitted to have absolute sway and control.
A man who dawdles around society, permitting it to absorb his time and
attention, loses in a certain degree the respect of the large mass of
American men. He is considered rather effeminate. Our social lives are
controlled by the woman. Our opinions are moulded by her; hence, we
feel that, on subjects of a social nature, her judgment, opinions, and
thoughts are entitled to the greatest respect--in fact, controlling
largely our own. Hence the mighty influence of the women who had become
resentfully Democratic because of social snubs. One woman had not been
invited to the Patriarch’s ball; another to the railroad magnate’s
ball; another to the Standard Oil Company king’s entertainment; and,
so on, it runs all down through the different stages created by this
attempted crime of “caste,” leaving behind it a sting in the hearts of
each home as it passes, until it reaches the laborer and strikes him
and his with telling force and effect. The Fricks, Carnegies, Goulds,
Vanderbilts, Astors, become names as hateful to him as Tarquin’s ever
was to the Roman “Common People.”
[Illustration: WARD MacALLISTER.
Self-Appointed Leader of the “Four Hundred” of New York.
“A Prince of Cooks and Coats.”]