Approach of Winter.--The _Livret_.--Regulations respecting
Servants.--Servants in America.--Governments of the different Cantons of
Switzerland.--Engagement of Mercenaries.--Population of
Switzerland.--Physical Peculiarities of the Swiss.--Women of
Switzerland.--Mrs. Trollope and the American Ladies.--Affected manner of
Speaking in American Women.--Patois in America.--Peculiar manner of
Speaking at Vévey.--Swiss Cupidity.
Dear ----,
The season is giving warning for all intruders to begin to think of
quitting the cantons. We have not been driven to fires, as in 1828, for
Vévey is not Berne; but the evenings are beginning to be cool, and a
dash of rain, with a foaming lake, are taken to be symptoms, here, as
strong as a frost would be there. Speaking of Berne, a little occurrence
has just recalled the Burgerschaft, which, shorn of its glory as it is,
had some most praiseworthy regulations. During our residence near that
place, I hired a Bernois, as a footman, discharging the man, as a matter
of course, on our departure for Italy. Yesterday I got a doleful letter
from this poor fellow, informing me, among a series of other calamities,
that he had had the misfortune to lose his _livret_, and begging I would
send him such testimonials of character, as it might suit my sense of
justice to bestow. It will be necessary to explain a little, in order
that you may know what this _livret_ is.
The commune, or district, issues to the domestics, a small certified
blank book (_livret_), in which all the evidences of character are to be
entered. The guides have the same, and in many instances, I believe,
they are rendered necessary by law. The free-trade system, I very well
know, would play the deuce with these regulations; but capital
regulations they are, and I make no doubt, that the established fidelity
of the Swiss, as domestics, is in some measure owing to this excellent
arrangement. If men and women were born servants, it might a little
infringe on their natural rights, to be sure; but as even a von Erlach
or a de Bonestetten would have to respect the regulation, were they to
don a livery, I see no harm in a _livret_. Now, by means of this little
book, every moment of a domestic's time might be accounted for, he being
obliged to explain what he was about in the interregnums. All this, to
be sure, might be done by detached certificates, but neither so neatly
nor so accurately; for a man would pretend a need, that he had lost a
single certificate, oftener than he would pretend that he had lost those
he really had, or in other words, his book. Besides, the commune gives
some relief, I believe, when such a calamity can be proved, as proved it
probably might be. In addition, the authorities will not issue a
_livret_ to any but those who are believed to be trust-worthy. Of course
I sent the man a character, so far as I was concerned, for he had
conducted himself perfectly well during the short time he was in my
service.
A regulation like this could not exist in a very large town, without a
good deal of trouble, certainly; and yet what is there of more moment to
the comfort of a population, than severe police regulations on the
subject of servants? America is almost--perhaps the only civilized
country in which the free-trade system is fully carried out in this
particular, and carried out it is with a vengeance. We have the
let-alone policy, _in puris naturalibus_, and everything is truly let
alone, but the property of the master. I do not wish, however, to
ascribe effects to wrong causes. The dislike to being a servant in
America, has arisen from the prejudice created by our having slaves. The
negroes being of a degraded caste, by insensible means their idea is
associated with service; and the whites shrink from the condition. This
fact is sufficiently proved by the circumstance that he who will
respectfully and honestly do your bidding in the field--be a
farm-servant, in fact--will not be your domestic servant. There is no
particular dislike in our people to obey, and to be respectful and
attentive to their duties, as journeymen, farm-labourers, day-labourers,
seamen, soldiers, or anything else, domestic servants excepted, which is
just the duties they have been accustomed to see discharged by blacks
and slaves. This prejudice is fast weakening, whites taking service more
readily than formerly, and it is found that, with proper training, they
make capital domestics, and are very faithful. In time the prejudice
will disappear, and men will come to see it is more creditable to be
trusted about the person and house, than to be turned into the fields.
It is just as difficult to give a minute account of the governments of
the different cantons of Switzerland, as it is to give an account of the
different state governments of America. Each differs, in some respect,
from all the others; and there are so many of them in both cases, as to
make it a subject proper only for regular treatises. I shall therefore
confine the remarks I have to make on this subject to a few general
facts.
Previously to the recent changes, there were twenty-two cantons; a
number that the recent secession of Neufchâtel has reduced to
twenty-one.[43] Until the French revolution, the number was not so
great, many of the present cantons being then associated less
intimately with the confederation, as _allies_, and some of them being
held as political dependents, by those that were cantons. Thus Vaud and
Argovie were both provinces, owned and ruled by Berne.
[Footnote 43: Berne, Soleure, Zurich, Lucerne, Schweitz, Unterwalden,
Uri, Glarus, Tessino, Valais, Vaud, Geneva, Basle, Schaffhausen,
Argovie, Thourgovie, Zug, Fribourg, St. Gall, Appenzell, and the
Grisons. They are named here without reference to their rank or
antiquity.]
The system is that of a confederation, which leaves each of its members
to do pretty much as it pleases, in regard to its internal affairs. The
central government is conducted by a Diet, very much as our affairs were
formerly managed by the old Congress. In this Diet, each canton has one
vote. The executive power, such as it is, is wielded by a committee or
council. Its duties do not extend much beyond being the organ of
communication between the Diet and the Cantons, the care of the treasury
(no great matter), and the reception of, and the treating with, foreign
ministers. The latter duty, however, and indeed all other acts, are
subject to a revision by the Diet.
Although the cantons themselves are only known to the confederation as
they are enrolled on its list, many of them are subdivided into local
governments that are perfectly independent of each other. Thus there are
two Unterwaldens in fact, though only one in the Diet; two Appenzells,
also; and I may add, half a dozen Grisons and Valais. In other words,
the two Unterwaldens are absolutely independent of each other, except as
they are connected through the confederation, though they unite to
choose common delegates to the Diet, in which they are known as only one
canton, and possess but one vote. The same is true of Appenzell, and
will soon, most probably, be true of Schweitz and Basle; in both of
which there are, at this moment, serious dissensions that are likely to
lead to internal separations.[44] The Grisons is more of a consolidated
canton than these examples, but it is subdivided into _leagues_, which
have a good many strong features of independence. The same is true of
Valais, where the subdivisions are termed _dizains_. The Diet does
little beyond controlling the foreign relations of the republic. It
makes peace and war, receives ambassadors, forms treaties, and enters
into alliances. It can only raise armies, however, by calling on the
cantons for their prescribed contingents. The same is true as respects
taxes. This, you will perceive, is very much like our own rejected
confederation, and has most of its evils; though external pressure, and
a trifling commerce, render them less here than they were in America. I
believe the confederation has some control over the public mails, though
I think this is done, also, _through_ the cantons. The Diet neither
coins money, nor establishes any courts, beyond its own power to decide
certain matters that may arise between the cantons themselves. In short,
the government is a very loose one, and it could not hold together in a
crisis, were it not for the jealousy of its neighbours.
[Footnote 44: Basle is now divided into what are called "Basle town" and
"Basle country;" or the city population and the rural. Before the late
changes, the former ruled the latter.]
I have already told you that there exists a strong desire among the
intelligent to modify this system. Consolidation, as you know from my
letters, is wished by no one, for the great difference between the town
and the rural populations causes both to wish to remain independent.
Three languages are spoken in Switzerland, without including the
Rhetian, or any of the numerous _patois_. All the north is German.
Geneva, Vaud, and Valais are French, as are parts of Berne; while
Tessino, lying altogether south of the Alps, is Italian. I have been
told, that the states which treat with Switzerland for mercenaries,
condition that none of them shall be raised in Tessino. But the practice
of treating for mercenaries is likely to be discontinued altogether,
though the republic has lately done something in this way for the Pope.
The objection is to the Italian character, which is thought to be less
constant than that of the real Swiss.
Men, and especially men of narrow habits and secluded lives, part
reluctantly with authority. Nothing can to be more evident than the
fact, that a common currency, common post-offices, common custom-houses,
if there are to be any at all, and various other similar changes, would
be a great improvement on the present system of Switzerland. But a few
who control opinion in the small cantons, and who would lose authority
by the measure, oppose the change. The entire territory of the republic
is not as great as that of Pennsylvania, nor is the entire population
much greater than that of the same state. It is materially less than the
population of New York. On the subject of their numbers, there exists a
singular, and to me an inapplicable, sensitiveness. It is not possible
to come at the precise population of Switzerland. That given in the
tables of the contingents is thought to be exaggerated, though one does
not very well understand the motive. I presume the entire population of
the country is somewhere between 1,500,000, and 1,900,000. Some pretend,
however, there are 2,000,000. Admitting the latter number, you will
perceive that the single state of New York considerably surpasses
it.[45] More than one-third of the entire population of Switzerland is
probably in the single canton of Berne, as one-seventh of that of the
United States is in New York. The proportion between surface and
inhabitants is not very different between New England and Switzerland,
if Maine be excluded. Parts of the cantons are crowded with people, as
Zurich for instance, while a large part is uninhabitable rocks and ice.
[Footnote 45: The population of New York, to-day, is about 2,200,000, or
not greatly inferior to that of Scotland; and superior to that of
Hanover, or Wurtemberg, or Denmark, or Saxony, all of which are
kingdoms. The increase of population in the United States, at present,
the immigration included, is not far from 500,000 souls annually, which
is equal to the addition of an average state each year! The western
speculations find their solution in this fact.]
The Swiss have most of the physical peculiarities of the different
nations that surround them. The German part of the population, however,
are, on the whole, both larger and better-looking than the true
Germans. All the mountaineers are fresher and have clearer complexions
than those in the lower portions of the country, but the difference in
size is not very apparent. Nowhere is there such a population as in our
south-western states; indeed, I question if large men are as common in
any other country. Scotland, however, may possibly form an exception.
The women of Switzerland are better-looking than those of France or
Germany, but beauty, or even extreme prettiness, is rare. Light,
flexible, graceful forms are quite uncommon. Large hands and feet are
met with everywhere, those of our women being miraculous in comparison.
But the same thing is true nearly all over the north of Europe. Even our
men--meaning the gentlemen--I think, might be remarked for the same
peculiarities in this part of the world. The English have absurd notions
on this subject, and I have often enjoyed a malicious pleasure in
bringing my own democratic paws and hoofs (no prodigies at home) in
contrast with their aristocratic members. Of course, the climate has
great influence on all these things.
I scarcely think the Swiss women of the mountains entitled to their
reputation for beauty. If strength, proportions on a scale that is
scarcely feminine, symmetry that is more anatomically than poetically
perfect, enter into the estimate, one certainly sees in some of the
cantons, female peasants who may be called fine women. I remember, in
1828, to have met one of these in the Grisons, near the upper end of the
valley of the Rhine. This woman had a form, carriage, and proportions
that would have made a magnificent duchess in a coronation procession;
but the face, though fresh and fair, did not correspond with the figure.
The women of our own mountains excel them altogether, being a more true
medium between strength and coarseness. Even Mrs. Trollope admits that
the American women (perhaps she ought to have said the girls) are the
most beautiful in the world, while they are the least interesting. Mrs.
Trollope has written a vast deal of nonsense, putting cockneyisms into
the mouths of Americans, and calling them Americanisms, but she has also
written a good many truths. I will not go as far as to say she was right
in the latter part of this charge; but if our girls would cultivate
neater and more elegant forms of expression; equally avoiding vulgar
oh's and ah's! and set phrases; be more careful not to drawl; and not to
open the mouth, so as to call "hot," "haut;" giggle less; speak lower;
have more calmness and more dignity of manner, and _think_ instead of
_pulsating_,--I would put them, for all in all, against any women in the
world. They lose half of these defects when they marry, as it is; but
the wisdom of Solomon would come to our ears with a diminished effect,
were it communicated through the medium of any other than a neat
enunciation. The great desideratum in female education, at home, is to
impart a graceful, quiet, lady-like manner of speaking.
Were it not for precisely this place, Vévey, I should add, that the
women of America speak their language worse than the women of any other
country I ever was in. We all know, that a calm, even, unemphatic mode
of speaking, is almost a test of high-breeding; that a clear enunciation
is, in short, an indispensable requisite, for either a gentleman or a
lady. One may be a fool, and utter nonsense gracefully; but aphorisms
lose their force when conveyed in a vulgar intonation. As a nation, I
repeat, there is more of this fault in America, perhaps, than among an
equal portion of educated people anywhere else. Contrary to the general
rule too, the men of America speak better than the women; though the
men, as a class, speak badly. The peculiar dialect of New England, which
prevails so much all over the country, is derived from a provincial mode
of speaking in England which is just the meanest in the whole island;
and though it is far more intelligible, and infinitely better grammar is
used with us, than in the place whence the _patois_ came, I think we
have gained little on the score of elegance. I once met in England a
distinguished man, who was one of the wealthiest commoners of his
county, and he had hardly opened his mouth before I was struck with this
peculiarity. On inquiry, I learned that he came from the West of
England. It is by no means uncommon to meet with bad grammar, and an
improper use of words as relates to their significations, among the
highest classes in England, though I think not as often as in America,
but it is rare, indeed, that a gentleman or a lady does not express
himself or herself, so far as utterance, delivery, and intonation go, as
a gentleman and lady should. The fault in America arises from the habits
of drawling, and of opening the mouth too wide. Any one knows that, if
he open the stop of an organ, and keep blowing the bellows, he will make
anything but music. We have some extraordinary words, too: who, but a
Philadelphian, for instance, would think of calling his mother a _mare_?
But I am digressing; the peculiar manner of speaking which prevails at
Vévey having led me from the main subject. These people absolutely sing
in their ordinary conversation, more especially the women. In the simple
expression of "_Bon jour, madame_" each alternate syllable is uttered on
an octave higher than the preceding. This is not a _patois_ at all, but
merely a vicious and ungraceful mode of utterance. It prevails more
among the women than among the men; and, as a matter of course, more
among the women of the inferior, than among those of the superior
classes. Still it is more or less general. To ears that are accustomed
to the even, unemphatic, graceful enunciation of Paris, it is impossible
to describe to you, in words, the ludicrous effect it produces. We have
frequently been compelled to turn away, in the shops, to avoid downright
laughter.
There exists the same sensitiveness, on the subject of the modes of
speech, between the French Swiss and their French neighbours, as is to
be found between us and the English. Many intelligent men here have
laboured to convince me that the Genevese, in particular, speak purer
French than even the Parisians. I dare say a part of this pretension may
be true, for a great people take great liberties with everything; but if
America, with her fifteen millions, finds it difficult to maintain
herself in such matters, even when in the right, against the influence
of England, what can little Geneva look for, in such a dispute with
France, but to be put down by sheer volubility. She will be out-talked
as a matter of course, clever as her citizens are.
On the subject of the prevalent opinion of Swiss cupidity, I have very
little to say: the practice of taking service as mercenaries in other
countries, has probably given rise to the charge. As is usually the case
in countries where the means of obtaining a livelihood are not easy, the
Swiss strike me as being more influenced by money than most of their
neighbours, though scarcely more so than the common classes of France.
To a man who gains but twenty in a day, a sou is of more account than to
him who gains forty. I presume this is the whole amount of the matter. I
shall not deny, however, that the _honorarium_ was usually more in view,
in a transaction with a Swiss, than in a transaction with a Frenchman,
though I think the first the most to be depended on. Notwithstanding one
or two instances of roguery that I have encountered, I would as soon
depend on a Swiss, a clear bargain having been made, as on any other man
I know.