Firmly convinced, from my earliest schoolboy days, of the intimate connexion which exists between boasting and bullying, I had long blushed to feel how pre-eminent my own country was in the ign.o.ble practice; but a more intimate acquaintance with the United States has thoroughly satisfied me that that pre-eminence justly belongs to the great Republic. But it is not merely in national matters that this feeling exhibits itself; you observe it in ordinary life as well, by the intense love shown for t.i.tles; n.o.body is contented until he obtain some rank. I am aware this is a feature inseparable from democracy. Everybody you meet is Captain, Colonel, General, Honourable, Judge, or something; and if they cannot obtain it legitimately, they obtain it by courtesy, or sometimes facetiously, like a gentleman I have before alluded to, who obtained the rank of judge because he was a connoisseur in wine. In these, and a thousand other ways, the love of vanity stands nationally revealed.

I do not think Americans are aware what injustice they do themselves by this love of high-sounding t.i.tles.[CL] For instance, in a paper before me, I see a Deputy Sheriff calling on the mob to resist the law; I see Governor Bigler authorizing General King to call out the military, one naturally supposes to keep order; but observe he calls Mr. Walker, of Erie, a traitor and a scoundrel; of the directors and managers of the railroad, he says, "We will whip them, will whip them, will bury them so deep electricity can't reach them--we will whip them--we will whip the g--ts out of them!" &c.--Now, judging of these people by their t.i.tles, as recognised by the rest of the civilized world, what a disgrace to the higher cla.s.ses of Americans is the foregoing! But anybody who really knows the t.i.tle system of the Republic will at once see that the orator was a mere rowdy. Thus they suffer for their vanity. It pervades every cla.s.s of the whole community, from the rowdy, who talks of "whipping creation," to the pulpit orator, who often heralds forth past success to feed the insatiable appet.i.te: in short, it has become a national disease; and were it not for the safety-valve formed by the unmeasured terms of mutual vituperation they heap upon each other on occasions of domestic squabbles, their fate would a.s.suredly be that of the frog in the fable.

In the medical world, it is said no one has a cold without fever; and I think it may with equal truth be a.s.serted of the national world, no nations are vain without being afflicted with sensitiveness: at all events, it is true as regards the United States. No maiden in her teens is so ticklishly sensitive as the Americans. I do not refer merely to that portion of the community of which I have selected Mr. Douglas, of Illinois, as the type; I allude also to the far higher order of intelligence with which the Republic abounds. There is a touchiness about them all with respect to national and local questions which I never saw equalled: in fact, the few sheets of their Press which reach this country are alone sufficient to convince any one on that point; for in a free country the Press may always be fairly considered, to a certain extent, as the reflex of the public mind. I suppose it is with nations as with individuals, and that each are alike blind to their own failings. In no other way can I account for the Republic overlooking so entirely the sensitiveness of others. Take for instance the appointment of M. Soule--a Frenchman naturalized in America--as minister to the court of Spain. I do not say that he was a Filibustero, but he was universally supposed to be identified with that party; and if he were not so identified, he showed a puerile ignorance of the requirements of a Minister, quite beyond conception, when he received a serenade of five thousand people at New York, who came in procession, bearing aloft the accompanying transparencies, he being at the time accredited to his new ministry.

On the first transparency was the following motto:--

A STAR. PIERCE.

SOULe. CUBA.

On the second banner:--

YOUNG AMERICA AND YOUNG CUBA.

Free thought and free speech for the Cubans.

'Tis no flight of fancy, for Cuba must be, and 'tis Written by fate, an isle Great and free.

O pray, ye doomed tyrants, Your fate's not far: A dread Order now watches you,-- It is the Lone Star.

On the third banner:--

Cuba must and shall be free.

The Antilles Flower, The true Key of the Gulf, Must be plucked from the Crown Of the Old Spanish Wolf.

Monumental representation--a tomb and a weeping willow. On the tomb were the words--

LOPEZ AND CRITTENDEN,

AGUERO AND ARMATERO.

They and their companions are not forgotten.

M. Soule accepts the compliment, and makes a speech, in which he informs his audience that he cannot believe "that this mighty nation can be chained now within the narrow limits which fettered the young Republic of America," &c.

Change the scene, and let any American judge in the following supposed and parallel case. Imagine expeditions fitted out in England, in spite of Government, to free the slaves in the Southern States; imagine a Lopez termination to the affair, and the rowdy blood of England forming other Filibustero expeditions; then imagine the Hon. Mr. Tenderheart identifying himself with them, and receiving an appointment as minister to Washington; after which, imagine him serenaded at St. James's by thousands of people bearing transparencies, the first representing a naked woman under the slave-driver's lash; the second, containing some such verses as "The Antilles Flower," &c.; for instance:--

"The slaves must be plucked From the chains that now gall 'em, Though American wolves An inferior race call 'em."

Let the minister accept the serenade, and address the mult.i.tude, declaring "that this mighty nation can no longer be chained down to pa.s.sive interference," &c. Let me ask any American how the Hon. Mr.

Tenderheart would be received at Washington, particularly if a few days after he took a shot at his French colleague because another person insulted him in that gentleman's house?--I ask, what would Americans say if such a line of conduct were to be pursued towards them? I might go further, and suppose that a conclave of English Ministers met at Quebec, and discussed the question as to how far the flourishing town of Buffalo, so close on the frontier, was calculated to endanger the peace and prosperity of Canada, and then imagine them winding up their report with this clause--If it be so--"then by every law, human and divine, we shall be justified in wresting it from its present owners." The American who penned that sentence must possess a copy of the Scriptures unknown to the rest of the world. Surely America must imagine she has the monopoly of all the sensitiveness in the world, or she would never have acted by Spain as she has done. How humiliated must she feel while contemplating the contrast between her act in appointing the minister, and Spain's demeanour in her silent and dignified reception of him!

This same sensitiveness peeps out in small things as well as great, especially where England is concerned: thus, one writer discovers that the Americans speak French better than the English; probably he infers it from having met a London Cit who had run over to Paris for a quiet Sunday, and who asked him "_Moosyere, savvay voo oo ey lay Toolureeze?"_ Another discovers that American society is much more sought after than English; that Americans are more agreeable, more intelligent, more liberal, &c.; but the comparison is always with England or the English.

And why all this? Simply because it feeds the morbid appet.i.te of many Republican citizens, which the pure truth would not.

This sensitiveness also shows itself in the way they watch the opinions of their country expressed by _The Times_, or by any largely circulating paper. I remember an American colonel who had been through the whole Mexican war, saying to me one day, "I a.s.sure you the Mexican troops are the most contemptible soldiers in the world; I would rather a thousand to one face them than half the number of Camanche Indians."--The object of this remark was to show on what slight and insufficient grounds _The Times_ had spoken of the United States as a great military nation since the Mexican war. An article giving them due credit for a successful campaign was easily magnified beyond its intended proportions, and my gallant friend was modestly disclaiming so high-sounding an appellation; but such evidently was the construction which he felt his countrymen had put upon it.

I turn now for a few moments to the question of Morals; and here, again, it is of course only in a wholesale manner I can treat of the subject.

As far as my inquiries enable me to judge, I find the same elements producing the same results here as in England. Wherever ma.s.ses are cl.u.s.tered together most largely, there vice runs as rampant as in England; nay, I have the authority of a lecture delivered at the Maryland Inst.i.tute, for saying that it is even worse in many places.

After describing various instances of lawless conduct, the lecturer continues thus: "Such lawlessness as I have described is not tolerated in any other part of the world, and would not be tolerated here for a moment, but for the criminal apathy of our citizens generally, and the truckling, on the part of our politicians and public officers, for the votes of the very men whom they know to be violating and trampling on the laws."--In ill.u.s.tration, he states, "In every part of Europe in which I have travelled,--in England, Holland, France, Germany, Switzerland, and Italy; under all the different systems of religion and forms of government; in the large cities, and the small towns and villages; in the highways and byways,--I found better public order, more decorum, where bodies of men were a.s.sembled together, and less tendency to rowdyism, pugilism, and violence, than there is in most parts of this country. In this general statement of the fact, all unprejudiced travellers will, I suppose concur."--Further on, he draws a comparison favourable to London; and, with regard to the Police in our metropolis, he says, "A more respectable and finer-looking body of men it would be difficult to find in any country. A stranger may apply to one for information, with a certainty of receiving a polite and intelligent answer," &c.--I only quote the last paragraph, in case Mr. Matt. Ward should see these pages, and that he may know how the Police behave towards those who know how to conduct themselves.[CM]

The lecturer goes on to complain of the depravity of youth. He then attacks the dispensation of the law, pointing out many instances of their mal-administration. He then proceeds to attack the fire companies; he admits their courage and daring, but points out at the same time their lawlessness. He says--speaking of Philadelphia--"Almost every company has its war-song, breathing the most barbarous and bloodthirsty sentiments towards some rival a.s.sociation, and describing the glory of the fireman to the destruction of his enemy's apparatus, or worse yet, his life."--He gives the following list of the terrific names of the companies: "Hornets, Snappers, Blood-reds, Bed-bugs, Rock-boys, Buffaloes, Skimmers, Scrougers, Revengers, Knockers, Black-hawks, Pirate-boys, Kill-devils." After which he gives the following specimen, of their songs, written by a "Bluffer and Red-devil:"--

"INDEPENDENT HOSE SONG.

"We're the saucy Hyena-boys of George's-street, as all knows; We can whip the Penn and Globe, likewise the Carroll Hose; We'll whip the three together, the Bed-bugs and South Penn throw in for ease; We do run our carriage among our foes, and run her where we please.

"You'd better hush your blowing, Globe, if you know when you are well; For if we take your engine again, we'll smash her all to h.e.l.l. Here is luck to the Bluffers, and all honest boys of that name; Here is to the Hyenas and Red-devils, that no one can tame."

He subsequently points out the evils of allowing political pa.s.sions to guide citizens in the selection of officers, and declares, "that persons are elected to, and now fill, important offices in Baltimore, to whom no responsible trust in private life would be confided by the very men who voted for them."[CN] With regard to the actual commission of crime, and the due punishment of the offenders, he draws the following comparison between London and Baltimore: "The population of the former is 13 times greater than that of the latter; but the number of arrests is as 1 to 7,--in other words, the commission of crime, in proportion to numbers, was 46 per cent. greater than in London. Then, to show the inefficiency of the law, he proceeds to state, that the commitments for trial were only 29 per cent. greater, and that, even of those committed, many escaped just punishment. Of course, the large cities in America are the only places in which any comparison can be made with this country; but, while doing so, the tide of emigration, which helps to fill up their numbers, must not be lost sight of, or we should judge them unfairly.

With regard to the ma.s.ses that are spread over the length and breadth of the land, I certainly have never seen nor heard anything that need make England ashamed of the comparison. It would not be equitable to judge by mere numbers,--you must also bring into the balance the comparative state of affluence and independence of the respective parties; for who can doubt that distress is one of the great causes of crime? Even in the wealthy State of New York, I find an account of the following outrage, committed upon a Mr. Lawrence, when serving a summons upon his aggressor, Mr. Deitz: "He found Mr. Deitz near the house, and handed him the papers. Deitz took them and read them, when he threw them on the ground,--seized Lawrence by the throat, calling him a d----d scoundrel, for coming to serve papers on him. He then called to his family to blow a horn, when a man, named Hollenbeck, who was at work for Deitz as a mason, interceded for Lawrence, who managed to get away, and started off on a run. Deitz followed in pursuit, knocked Lawrence down, and held him until four men in disguise made their appearance. They then tied his hands behind him, and took him to a small piece of bush near by,--then tore off his coat, vest, and cravat, and with a jack-knife cut off his hair, occasionally cutting his scalp,--and, remarking that they had a plaster that would heal it up, they tarred his head and body, and poured tar into his boots. After exhausting all their ingenuity this way, each cut a stick, and whipped him until they got tired. They then tied his hands before him, and started him for the house, each of them kicking him at every step. They made him take the papers back, but took them away again;--when, after knocking him down again, they left him, and he succeeded in reaching the residence of George Beckers last evening. His legs, hands, arms, and face are badly bruised."--If we travel West and South, we shall doubtless find that morality is far more lax than in England; but what can you expect where gentlemen, even senators for States, go out to fight b.l.o.o.d.y duels with rifles at twenty paces, while crowds of spectators are looking on?

Where the Americans have the advantage over our population is, first and foremost, in possessing a boundless extent of territory which gives a rich return for comparatively little labour, and where, if labour is wanted, the scarcity of the article insures its commanding a high price.

Compare England for one moment with two of the oldest American States, and therefore the most thickly populated:--

Square Miles. Inhabitants.

England contains 50,000 17,923,000 New York " 46,000 3,097,000 Pennsylvania " 46,000 2,311,786

We here see, that if we take the most populous States in the Union, the proportion is nearly 6 to 1 in favour of America; but, if we ma.s.s the whole, we shall find--

Square Miles. Inhabitants.

Great Britain and Ireland contain 120,000 27,400,000 United States 3,500,000 23,192,000

This would bring the proportion of population to extent of territory, in rough numbers:--

Great Britain and Ireland 228 inhabitants to the square mile.

United States 7 " " "

In other words, Great Britain is 32 times as thickly populated as the Republic. If these facts are borne in mind, I confess that the commission of crime in Great Britain appears to me proportionally far smaller than in the States, notwithstanding all the advantages of the free and liberal education which is within their reach.

I cannot but think that the general system of training youth in the Republic has a most prejudicial effect, in many instances, on their after-life. In their n.o.ble zeal for the education of the brain, they appear to me to lose sight almost entirely of the necessity of disciplining the mind to that obedience to authority, which lays the foundation of self-control and respect for the laws of the land.

Nationally speaking, there is scarcely such a thing as a lad in the whole Union. A boy in the States hardly gets over the novelty of that portion of his dress which marks the difference of s.e.x, ere his motto is: "I don't care; I shall do what I best please:" in short, he is made a man before he ceases to be a boy; he consequently becomes unable to exercise that restraint which better discipline might have taught him, and the acts of his after-life are thus more likely to be influenced by pa.s.sion and self-will than by reason or reflection. I find in the lecture from which I have already quoted, the following paragraph, which, as I consider it ill.u.s.trative of my last observation, I insert at length.

"But the most alarming feature in the condition of things, not only in the city, but elsewhere throughout the country, is the lawlessness of the youth. The most striking ill.u.s.tration of this which I have seen is taken from a Cincinnati paper of last January. It seems that in the course of a few days one hundred applications had been made by parents in that city to have their own children sent to the House of Refuge.

The particulars of one case, which happened a short time before, are given:--a boy, twelve years of age, was brought before the Mayor's Court by his father, who stated that the family were absolutely afraid the youth would take their lives, and that he had purchased a pistol for the purpose of shooting the housekeeper. A double-barrelled pistol was produced in court, which the police-officer had taken from the boy, who avowed that he had bought it for the purpose stated. The mayor sent the boy to the House of Refuge."

I now pa.s.s on to the question of Liberty in the United States. If by liberty be understood the will of the greater number ruling the State or regulating its laws, certainly they have more liberty than England; but if by liberty be understood that balance of power and adaptation of the laws to the various interests of the whole community, combined with the due execution, of them against offenders of whatever cla.s.s, then I consider that there is unquestionably more liberty in England, in spite of the restrictions by which the franchise is limited--nay, rather I should say, in consequence of those very restrictions; for I believe they tend to secure the services of more liberal, high-minded, and independent representatives than any country--however highly educated its population may be--would return under a system of universal suffrage. I do not intend to convey in the foregoing observation, any opinion as to how far it is desirable, or otherwise, to modify the restrictions at present existing in England; it is obvious they should keep pace with the growing intelligence of the community, inasmuch as, if they do not, popular agitation is readily excited, and violent changes are forced by ignorant pa.s.sion, going far beyond those which educated prudence and a sense of justice ought to have brought forward.--Prevention is better than cure.

Mr. Everett, in a letter dated July 25, 1853, after observing that it has long been the boast of England that she is the great city of refuge for the rest of Europe, adds, "it is the prouder boast of the United States, that they are, and ever have been, an asylum for the rest of the world, including Great Britain herself:" he then goes on to say, "no citizen has ever been driven into banishment."--This is bravely said by an able son of the "Land of Liberty;" but when he penned it, he appears to have forgotten that there are upwards of three millions of his own fellow-creatures held in the galling shackles of hopeless slavery by the citizens of that land of which he makes so proud a boast; and that from one to two thousand of the wretched victims escape annually to the British colony adjoining, which is their sole city of refuge on the whole North American continent. Doubtless Mr. Everett's countrymen do not sufficiently know this startling point of difference, or they would hesitate in accepting such a boast. So ignorant are some of his countrymen of the real truth as regards the citizens of Great Britain, that a friend of mine was asked by a well-educated and otherwise intelligent son of the Republic, "Is it really true that all the land in England belongs to the Queen?"

While on the subject of liberty, it is well to observe one or two curious ways in which it may be said to be controlled in America. If any gentleman wished to set up a marked livery for his servants, he could not do so without being the subject of animadversions in the rowdy Press, styling him a would-be aristocrat. But perhaps the most extraordinary vagary is the Yankee notion that service is degrading; the consequence of which is that you very rarely see a Yankee servant; and if by chance you find one on a farm, he insists on living and eating with the overseer. So jealous are they of the appearance of service, that on many of the railways there was considerable difficulty in getting the guard, or conductor, to wear a riband on his hat designating his office, and none of the people attached to the railway station will put on any livery or uniform by which they can be known. I wonder if it ever occurs to these sons of the Republic, that in thus acting they are striking at the very root of their vaunted equal rights of man, and spreading a broader base of aristocracy than even the Old World can produce. Servants, of course, there must be in every community, and it is ridiculous to suppose that American gentlemen ever did, or ever will, live with their housemaids, cooks, and b.u.t.ton-boys; and if this be so, and that Americans consider such service as degrading, is it not perfectly clear that the sons of the soil set themselves up as n.o.bles, and look upon the emigrants--on whom the duties of service chiefly devolve--in the light of serfs?

I may, while discussing service, as well touch upon the subject of strikes. The Press in America is very ready to pa.s.s strictures on the low rate of wages in this country, such as the three-ha'penny shirt-makers, and a host of other ill-paid and hard-worked poor. Every humane man must regret to see the pressure of compet.i.tion producing such disgraceful results; but my American friends, if they look carefully into their own country, will see that they act in precisely the same way, as far as they are able; in short, that they get labour as cheap as they can. Fortunately for the poor emigrant, the want of hands is so great, that they can insure a decent remuneration for their work; but the proof that the Anglo-Saxon in America is no better than the rest of the world in this respect, is to be found in the fact that strikes for higher wages also take place among them. I remember once reading in the same paper of the strike of three different interests; one of which was that indispensable body, the hotel-waiters. The negroes even joined with the whites, and they gained their point; they knew the true theory of strikes, and made their move "when the market was rising." The hotels were increasing their charges, and they merely wanted their share of the prosperity.