“Some families will employ the cheapest physician, without regard to his

ability to kill or cure; some will treat diseases in their incipiency

with quack medicines, bought cheap, hoping thereby to fend off the

doctor’s bill. Some women seem to be pursued by an evil demon of

economy, which, like an _ignis fatuus_ in a bog, delights constantly to

tumble them over into the mire of expense. They are dismayed at the

quantity of sugar in the recipe for preserves, leave out a quarter, and

the whole ferments and is spoiled. They cannot by any means be induced

at any one time to buy enough silk to make a dress, and the dress

finally, after many convulsions and alterations, must be thrown by

altogether, as too scanty. They get poor needles, poor thread, poor

sugar, poor raisins, poor tea, poor coal. One wonders, in looking at

their blackened, smouldering grates, in a freezing day, what the fire is

there at all for,—it certainly warms nobody. The only thing they seem

likely to be lavish in is funeral expenses, which come in the wake of

leaky shoes and imperfect clothing. These funeral expenses at last

swallow all, since nobody can dispute an undertaker’s bill. One pities

these joyless beings. Economy, instead of a rational act of the

judgment, is a morbid monomania, eating the pleasure out of life, and

haunting them to the grave.

“Some people’s ideas of economy seem to run simply in the line of

eating. Their flour is of an extra brand, their meat the first cut; the

delicacies of every season, in their dearest stages, come home to their

table with an apologetic smile,—‘It was scandalously dear, my love, but

I thought we must just treat ourselves.’ And yet these people cannot

afford to buy books, and pictures they regard as an unthought-of

extravagance. Trudging home with fifty dollars’ worth of delicacies on

his arm, Smith meets Jones who is exulting with a bag of crackers under

one arm and a choice little bit of an oil painting under the other,

which he thinks a bargain at fifty dollars. ‘_I_ can’t afford to buy

pictures,’ Smith says to his spouse, ‘and I don’t know how Jones and his

wife manage.’ Jones and his wife will live on bread and milk for a

month, and she will turn her best gown the third time, but they will

have their picture, and they are happy. Jones’s picture remains, and

Smith’s fifty dollars’ worth of oysters and canned fruit to-morrow will

be gone forever. Of all modes of spending money, the swallowing of

expensive dainties brings the least return. There is one step lower than

this,—the consuming of luxuries that are injurious to the health. If all

the money spent on tobacco and liquors could be spent in books and

pictures, I predict that nobody’s health would be a whit less sound, and

houses would be vastly more attractive. There is enough money spent in

smoking, drinking, and over-eating to give every family in the community

a good library, to hang every-body’s parlor-walls with lovely pictures,

to set up in every house a conservatory which should bloom all winter

with choice flowers, to furnish every dwelling with ample bathing and

warming accommodations, even down to the dwellings of the poor; and in

the millennium I believe this is the way things are to be.

“In these times of peril and suffering, if the inquiry arises, How shall

there be retrenchment? I answer, First and foremost retrench things

needless, doubtful, and positively hurtful, as rum, tobacco, and all the

meerschaums of divers colors that do accompany the same. Second,

retrench all eating not necessary to health and comfort. A French family

would live in luxury on the leavings that are constantly coming from the

tables of those who call themselves in middling circumstances. There are

superstitions of the table that ought to be broken through. Why must you

always have cake in your closet? why need you feel undone to entertain a

guest with no cake on your tea-table? Do without it a year, and ask

yourselves if you or your children, or any one else, have suffered

materially in consequence.

“Why is it imperative that you should have two or three courses at every

meal? Try the experiment of having but one, and that a very good one,

and see if any great amount of suffering ensues. Why must social

intercourse so largely consist in eating? In Paris there is a very

pretty custom. Each family has one evening in the week when it stays at

home and receives friends. Tea, with a little bread and butter and cake,

served in the most informal way, is the only refreshment. The rooms are

full, busy, bright,—everything as easy and joyous as if a monstrous

supper, with piles of jelly and mountains of cake were waiting to give

the company a nightmare at the close.

“Said a lady, pointing to a gentleman and his wife in a social circle of

this kind, ‘I ought to know them well,—I have seen them every week for

twenty years.’ It is certainly pleasant and confirmative of social

enjoyment for friends to eat together; but a little enjoyed in this way

answers the purpose as well as a great deal, and better too.”

“Well, papa,” said Marianne, “in the matter of dress now,—how much ought

one to spend just to look as others do?”

“I will tell you what I saw the other night, girls, in the parlor of one

of our hotels. Two middle-aged Quaker ladies came gliding in, with calm,

cheerful faces, and lustrous dove-colored silks. By their conversation I

found that they belonged to that class of women among the Friends who

devote themselves to travelling on missions of benevolence. They had

just completed a tour of all the hospitals for wounded soldiers in the

country, where they had been carrying comforts, arranging, advising, and

soothing by their cheerful, gentle presence. They were now engaged on

another mission, to the lost and erring of their own sex; night after

night, guarded by a policeman, they had ventured after midnight into the

dance-houses where girls are being led to ruin, and with gentle words of

tender, motherly counsel sought to win them from their fatal

ways,—telling them where they might go the next day to find friends who

would open to them an asylum and aid them to seek a better life.

“As I looked upon these women, dressed with such modest purity, I began

secretly to think that the Apostle was not wrong, when he spoke of women

adorning themselves with the _ornament_ of a meek and quiet spirit; for

the habitual gentleness of their expression, the calmness and purity of

the lines in their faces, the delicacy and simplicity of their apparel,

seemed of themselves a rare and peculiar beauty. I could not help

thinking that fashionable bonnets, flowing lace sleeves, and dresses

elaborately trimmed could not have improved even their outward

appearance. Doubtless, their simple wardrobe needed but a small trunk in

travelling from place to place, and hindered but little their prayers

and ministrations.

“Now, it is true, all women are not called to such a life as this; but

might not all women take a leaf at least from their book? I submit the

inquiry humbly. It seems to me that there are many who go monthly to the

sacrament, and receive it with sincere devotion, and who give thanks

each time sincerely that they are thus made ‘members incorporate in the

mystical body of Christ,’ who have never thought of this membership as

meaning that they should share Christ’s sacrifices for lost souls, or

abridge themselves of one ornament or encounter one inconvenience for

the sake of those wandering sheep for whom he died. Certainly there is a

higher economy which we need to learn,—that which makes all things

subservient to the spiritual and immortal, and that not merely to the

good of our own souls and those of our family, but of all who are knit

with us in the great bonds of human brotherhood.

“There have been from time to time, among well-meaning Christian people,

retrenchment societies on high moral grounds, which have failed for want

of knowledge how to manage the complicated question of necessaries and

luxuries. These words have a signification in the case of different

people as varied as the varieties of human habit and constitution. It is

a department impossible to be bound by external rules; but none the less

should every high-minded Christian soul in this matter have a law unto

itself. It may safely be laid down as a general rule, that no income,

however large or however small, should be unblessed by the divine touch

of self-sacrifice. Something for the poor, the sorrowing, the hungry,

the tempted, and the weak should be taken from _what is our own_ at the

expense of some personal sacrifice, or we suffer more morally than the

brother from whom we withdraw it. Even the Lord of all, when dwelling

among men, out of that slender private purse which he accepted for his

little family of chosen ones, had ever something reserved to give to the

poor. It is easy to say, ‘It is but a drop in the bucket. I cannot

remove the great mass of misery in the world. What little I could save

or give does nothing.’ It does this, if no more,—it prevents one soul,

and that soul your own, from drying and hardening into utter selfishness

and insensibility; it enables you to say I have done something; taken

one atom from the great heap of sins and miseries and placed it on the

side of good.

“The Sisters of Charity and the Friends, each with their different

costume of plainness and self-denial, and other noble-hearted women of

no particular outward order, but kindred in spirit, have shown to

womanhood, on the battle-field and in the hospital, a more excellent

way,—a beauty and nobility before which all the common graces and

ornaments of the sex fade, appeal like dim candles by the pure, eternal

stars.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------

IX.

SERVANTS.

IN the course of my papers various domestic revolutions have occurred.

Our Marianne has gone from us with a new name to a new life, and a

modest little establishment not many squares off claims about as much of

my wife’s and Jenny’s busy thoughts as those of the proper mistress.

Marianne, as I always foresaw, is a careful and somewhat anxious

housekeeper. Her tastes are fastidious; she is made for exactitude: the

smallest departures from the straight line appear to her shocking

deviations. She had always lived in a house where everything had been

formed to quiet and order under the ever-present care and touch of her

mother; nor had she ever participated in these cares more than to do a

little dusting of the parlor ornaments, or wash the best china, or make

sponge-cake or chocolate-caramels. Certain conditions of life had always

appeared so to be matters of course that she had never conceived of a

house without them. It never occurred to her that such bread and biscuit

as she saw at the home-table would not always and of course appear at

every table,—that the silver would not always be as bright, the glass as

clear, the salt as fine and smooth, the plates and dishes as nicely

arranged as she had always seen them, apparently without the thought or

care of any one,—for my wife is one of those housekeepers whose touch is

so fine that no one feels it. She is never heard scolding or

reproving,—never entertains her company with her recipes for cookery or

the faults of her servants. She is so unconcerned about receiving her

own personal share of credit for the good appearance of her

establishment, that even the children of the house have not supposed

that there is any particular will of hers in the matter,—it all seems

the natural consequence of having very good servants.

One phenomenon they had never seriously reflected on,—that, under all

the changes of the domestic cabinet which are so apt to occur in

American households, the same coffee, the same bread and biscuit, the

same nicely prepared dishes and neatly laid table always gladdened their

eyes; and from this they inferred only that good servants were more

abundant than most people had supposed. They were somewhat surprised

when these marvels were wrought by professedly green hands, but were

given to suppose that these green hands must have had some remarkable

quickness or aptitude for acquiring. That sparkling jelly, well-flavored

ice-creams, clear soups, and delicate biscuits could be made by a raw

Irish girl, fresh from her native Erin, seemed to them a proof of the

genius of the race; and my wife, who never felt it important to attain

to the reputation of a cook, quietly let it pass.

For some time, therefore, after the inauguration of the new household,

there was trouble in the camp. Sour bread had appeared on the

table,—bitter, acrid coffee had shocked and astonished the palate,—lint

had been observed on tumblers, and the spoons had sometimes dingy

streaks on the brightness of their first bridal polish,—beds were

detected made shockingly awry,—and Marianne came burning with

indignation to her mother.

“Such a little family as we have, and two strong girls,” said

she,—“everything ought to be perfect; there is really nothing to do.

Think of a whole batch of bread absolutely sour! and when I gave that

away, then this morning another exactly like it! and when I talked to

cook about it, she said she had lived in this and that family, and her

bread had always been praised as equal to the baker’s!”

“I don’t doubt she is right,” said I. “Many families never have anything

but sour bread from one end of the year to the other, eating it

unperceiving, and with good cheer; and they buy also sour bread of the

baker, with like approbation,—lightness being in their estimation the

only virtue necessary in the article.”

“Could you not correct her fault?” suggested my wife.

“I have done all I can. I told her we could not have such bread, that it

was dreadful; Bob says it would give him the dyspepsia in a week; and

then she went and made exactly the same;—it seems to me mere

wilfulness.”

“But,” said I, “suppose, instead of such general directions, you should

analyze her proceedings and find out just where she makes her

mistake,—is the root of the trouble in the yeast, or in the time she

begins it, letting it rise too long?—the time, you know, should vary so

much with the temperature of the weather.”

“As to that,” said Marianne, “I know nothing. I never noticed; it never

was my business to make bread; it always seemed quite a simple process,

mixing yeast and flour and kneading it; and our bread at home was always

good.”

“It seems, then, my dear, that you have come to your profession without

even having studied it.”

My wife smiled, and said,—

“You know, Marianne, I proposed to you to be our family bread-maker for

one month of the year before you married.”

“Yes, mamma, I remember; but I was like other girls; I thought there was

no need of it. I never liked to do such things; perhaps I had better

have done it.”

“You certainly had,” said I; “for the first business of a housekeeper in

America is that of a teacher. She can have a good table only by having

practical knowledge, and tact in imparting it. If she understands her

business practically and experimentally, her eye detects at once the

weak spot; it requires only a little tact, some patience, some clearness

in giving directions, and all comes right. I venture to say that your

mother would have exactly such bread as always appears on our table, and

have it by the hands of your cook, because she could detect and explain

to her exactly her error.”

“Do you know,” said my wife, “what yeast she uses?”

“I believe,” said Marianne, “it’s a kind she makes herself. I think I

heard her say so. I know she makes a great fuss about it, and rather

values herself upon it. She is evidently accustomed to being praised for

her bread, and feels mortified and angry, and I don’t know how to manage

her.”

“Well,” said I, “if you carry your watch to a watchmaker, and undertake

to show him how to regulate the machinery, he laughs and goes on his own

way; but if a brother-machinist makes suggestions, he listens

respectfully. So, when a woman who knows nothing of woman’s work

undertakes to instruct one who knows more than she does, she makes no

impression; but a woman who has been trained experimentally, and shows

she understands the matter thoroughly, is listened to with respect.”

“I think,” said my wife, “that your Bridget is worth teaching. She is

honest, well-principled, and tidy. She has good recommendations from

excellent families, whose ideas of good bread it appears differ from

ours; and with a little good-nature, tact, and patience, she will come

into your ways.”

“But the coffee, mamma,—you would not imagine it to be from the same bag

with your own, so dark and so bitter; what do you suppose she has done

to it?”

“Simply this,” said my wife. “She has let the berries stay a few moments

too long over the fire,—they are burnt, instead of being roasted; and

there are people who think it essential to good coffee that it should

look black, and have a strong, bitter flavor. A very little change in

the preparing will alter this.”

“Now,” said I, “Marianne, if you want my advice, I’ll give it to you

gratis:—Make your own bread for one month. Simple as the process seems,

I think it will take as long as that to give you a thorough knowledge of

all the possibilities in the case; but after that you will never need to

make any more,—you will be able to command good bread by the aid of all

sorts of servants; you will, in other words, be a thoroughly prepared

teacher.”

“I did not think,” said Marianne, “that so simple a thing required so

much attention.”

“It is simple,” said my wife, “and yet requires a delicate care and

watchfulness. There are fifty ways to spoil good bread; there are a

hundred little things to be considered and allowed for that require

accurate observation and experience. The same process that will raise

good bread in cold weather will make sour bread in the heat of summer;

different qualities of flour require variations in treatment, as also

different sorts and conditions of yeast; and when all is done, the

baking presents another series of possibilities which require exact

attention.”

“So it appears,” said Marianne, gayly, “that I must begin to study my

profession at the eleventh hour.”

“Better late than never,” said I. “But there is this advantage on your

side: a well-trained mind, accustomed to reflect, analyze, and

generalize, has an advantage over uncultured minds even of double

experience. Poor as your cook is, she now knows more of her business

than you do. After a very brief period of attention and experiment, you

will not only know more than she does, but you will convince her that

you do, which is quite as much to the purpose.”

“In the same manner,” said my wife, “you will have to give lessons to

your other girl on the washing of silver and the making of beds. Good

servants do not often come to us; they must be _made_ by patience and

training; and if a girl has a good disposition and a reasonable degree

of handiness, and the housekeeper understands her profession, she may

make a good servant out of an indifferent one. Some of my best girls

have been those who came to me directly from the ship, with no

preparation but docility and some natural quickness. The hardest cases

to be managed are not of those who have been taught nothing, but of

those who have been taught wrongly,—who come to you self-opinionated,

with ways which are distasteful to you, and contrary to the genius of

your housekeeping. Such require that their mistress shall understand at

least so much of the actual conduct of affairs as to prove to the

servant that there are better ways than those in which she has hitherto

been trained.”

“Don’t you think, mamma,” said Marianne, “that there has been a sort of

reaction against woman’s work in our day? So much has been said of the

higher sphere of woman, and so much has been done to find some better

work for her, that insensibly, I think, almost everybody begins to feel

that it is rather degrading for a woman in good society to be much tied

down to family affairs.”

“Especially,” said my wife, “since in these Woman’s-Rights Conventions

there is so much indignation expressed at those who would confine her

ideas to the kitchen and nursery.”

“There is reason in all things,” said I. “Woman’s-Rights Conventions are

a protest against many former absurd, unreasonable ideas,—the mere

physical and culinary idea of womanhood as connected only with puddings

and shirt-buttons, the unjust and unequal burdens which the laws of

harsher ages had cast upon the sex. Many of the women connected with

these movements are as superior in everything properly womanly as they

are in exceptional talent and culture. There is no manner of doubt that

the sphere of woman is properly to be enlarged, and that republican

governments in particular are to be saved from corruption and failure

only by allowing to woman this enlarged sphere. Every woman has rights

as a human being first, which belong to no sex, and ought to be as

freely conceded to her as if she were a man,—and first and foremost, the

great right of doing anything which God and Nature evidently have fitted

her to excel in. If she be made a natural orator, like Miss Dickenson,

or an astronomer, like Mrs. Somerville, or a singer, like Grisi, let not

the technical rules of womanhood be thrown in the way of her free use of

her powers. Nor can there be any reason shown why a woman’s vote in the

state should not be received with as much respect as in the family. A

state is but an association of families, and laws relate to the rights

and immunities which touch woman’s most private and immediate wants and

dearest hopes; and there is no reason why sister, wife, and mother

should be more powerless in the state than in the home. Nor does it make

a woman unwomanly to express an opinion by dropping a slip of paper into

a box, more than to express that same opinion by conversation. In fact,

there is no doubt, that, in all matters relating to the interests of

education, temperance, and religion, the state would be a material

gainer by receiving the votes of women.

“But, having said all this, I must admit, _per contra_, not only a great

deal of crude, disagreeable talk in these conventions, but a too great

tendency of the age to make the education of women anti-domestic. It

seems as if the world never could advance, except like ships under a

head-wind, tacking and going too far, now in this direction, and now in

the opposite. Our common-school system now rejects sewing from the

education of girls, which very properly used to occupy many hours daily

in school a generation ago. The daughters of laborers and artisans are

put through algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and the higher mathematics,

to the entire neglect of that learning which belongs distinctively to

woman. A girl cannot keep pace with her class, if she gives any time to

domestic matters; and accordingly she is excused from them all during

the whole term of her education. The boy of a family, at an early age,

is put to a trade, or the labors of a farm; the father becomes impatient

of his support, and requires of him to care for himself. Hence an

interrupted education,—learning coming by snatches in the winter months

or in the intervals of work. As the result, the females in our country

towns are commonly, in mental culture, vastly in advance of the males of

the same household; but with this comes a physical delicacy, the result

of an exclusive use of the brain and a neglect of the muscular system,

with great inefficiency in practical domestic duties. The race of

strong, hardy, cheerful girls, that used to grow up in country places,

and made the bright, neat, New England kitchens of old times,—the girls

that could wash, iron, brew, bake, harness a horse and drive him, no

less than braid straw, embroider, draw, paint, and read innumerable

books,—this race of women, pride of olden time, is daily lessening; and

in their stead come the fragile, easily fatigued, languid girls of a

modern age, drilled in book-learning, ignorant of common things. The

great danger of all this, and of the evils that come from it, is that

society by and by will turn as blindly against female intellectual

culture as it now advocates it, and, having worked disproportionately

one way, will work disproportionately in the opposite direction.”

House and Home Papers Seventh Edition · 第 10 / 19 段