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 bloody 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 mass 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 noble 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 sex, 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 passion 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 illustrative 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 illustration 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 pass 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 class, 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 passion, 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 button-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 nobles, 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 pass 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 competition 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.
I now propose to consider one of the brightest features in the national character–Intelligence. Irresistible testimony is borne to their appreciation of the value of education, not merely by the multitudes of schools of all kinds, and by the numbers that attend them, but also by that arrangement of which they may be so justly proud, and which opens the door to every branch of study to their poorest citizens free of expense. No praise is too high for such a noble national institution as the school system of the Republic. How far it may be advisable to bring all the various classes of the community together at that early age when habits which affect after-life are so readily acquired, is another question. Though the roughness of the many may derive advantage from contact with the polish of the few, it appears to me more than probable that the polish of the few will be influenced far more considerably by the roughness of the many. I cannot, therefore, but imagine that the universal admixture of all classes of society in early infancy must operate prejudicially to that advancement in the refinements of civilization which tends to give a superior tone to the society of every country. It must not, however, be imagined that the intelligence obtained at these schools is confined to those subjects which are requisite for making dollars and cents. People of this country, judging of the Republicans by the general accounts given of them through the Press, can have little idea of the extent to which the old standard works of the mother-country are read; but there is an intelligent portion of our own nation to be found among the booksellers, who can enlighten them on this point. I have been told by several of them, not only that old editions of our best authors are rapidly being bought up by citizens of the United States, but that in making their purchases they exhibit an intimate acquaintance with them far greater than they find generally among Englishmen, and which proves how thoroughly they are appreciated by them.
Then again, with reference to their own country; it is impossible for any one to travel among them without being struck with the universal intelligence they possess as to its constitution, its politics, its laws, and all general subjects connected with its prosperity or its requirements; and if they do not always convey their information in the most classical language, at all events they convey it in clear and unmistakeable terms. The Constitution of their country is regularly taught at their schools; and doubtless it is owing to this early insight into the latent springs by which the machinery of Government is worked, that their future appetite for more minute details becomes whetted. I question very much if every boy, on leaving a high school in the United States, does not know far more of the institutions of his country than nine-tenths of the members of the British House of Commons do of theirs. At the same time it should not be forgotten, that the complications which have grown up with a nationality of centuries render the study far more difficult in this country, than it possibly can, be in the giant Republic of yesterday. And in the same way taxation in England, of which 30,000,000l. is due as interest on debt before the State receives one farthing for its disbursements, is one of the most intricate questions to be understood even by enlarged minds; whereas in the United States, scarcely any taxation exists, and the little that does, creates a surplus revenue which they often appear at a loss to know how to get rid of.
Doubtless, the intelligence of the community sometimes exhibits itself in a ‘cuteness which I am not prepared to defend. A clear apprehension of their immediate material interests has produced repudiation of legitimate obligations; but those days are, nationally speaking, I hope, gone by, and many of their merchants stand as high in the estimation of the commercial world as it is possible to desire. At the same time, it is equally true that the spirit of commercial gambling has risen to a point in the States far above what it ever has in this country,–except, perhaps, during the Railway epidemic; and the number of failures is lamentably great.
With their intelligence they combine an enterprise that knows no national parallel. This quality, aided by their law of limited liability, has doubtless tended to urge forward many works and schemes from which the Union is deriving, and has derived, great wealth and advantage; at the same time it has opened the door for the unscrupulous and the shrewd to come in and play high stakes with small capital–in playing which reckless game, while some become millionaires others become bankrupts. This latter state is a matter of comparative unimportance in a country like the Republic, where the field is so great, and a livelihood easily attainable until some opening occurs, when they are as ready to rush into it again as if they had been foaled at Niagara, and had sucked in the impetuosity of its cataract.
There is one shape that their enterprise takes which it would indeed be well for us to imitate, and that is early rising. I quite blush for my country when I think what a “Castle of Indolence” we are in that respect, especially those who have not the slightest excuse for it. On what principle the classes of society in England who are masters of their own time, turn night into day, waste millions yearly in oil and wax, and sleep away the most fresh and healthy hours of the morning, for no other visible purpose but to enable themselves to pass the night in the most stuffy and unhealthy atmosphere, is beyond my comprehension. One thing is certain: it has a tendency to enervate both body and mind, and were it not for the revivifying effects produced by a winter residence in the country, where gentlemen take to field sports, and ladies to razeed dresses, sensible shoes, and constitutional walks, the mortality among our “upper ten thousand” would, I believe, be frightful. In America, the “boys” get up so early, that it is said they frequently “catch the birds by their tails as they are going to roost;” and it is no doubt owing to this that they are so ‘cute. Talk about “catching a weasel asleep,” let me see any of my metropolitan drone friends who can catch a Yankee boy asleep!
It is not, however, merely to early rising that they owe their ‘cuteness. A total absence of idleness, and the fact of being constantly thrown on their own resources in cases of minor difficulty, aid materially in sharpening their wits. You may see these latter influences operating in the difference between soldiers and sailors, when placed in situations where they have to shift for themselves. Some of their anecdotes bearing upon ‘cuteness are amusing enough. I will give one as an illustration.–Owing to some unknown cause, there was a great dearth of eggs in one of the New England States, and they consequently rose considerably in price. It immediately occurred to a farmer’s wife, that, if she could in any way increase the produce of her hens, it would be a source of great gain to her; she accordingly fitted the bottom of each laying hen’s bed with a spring, and fixed a basin underneath, capable of holding two eggs. In due time, the hens laid; but as each hen, after laying, missed the warmth of the precious deposit, she got up to look if it was all right. To her astonishment, no egg was to be seen. “Bless my soul!” says the hen, “well, I declare I thought I had laid an egg. I suppose I must be mistaken;” and down she went to fulfil her duties again. Once more she rose to verify her success. No egg was there. “Well, I vow,” quoth Mrs. Hen, “they must be playing me some trick: I’ll have one more shot, and, if I don’t succeed, I shall give it up.” Again she returned to her labours, and the two eggs that had passed into the basin below supporting the base of her bed, success crowned her efforts, and she exclaimed, “Well, I have done it this time at all events!” The ‘cute wife kept her counsel, and said nothing, either to the hens or to her neighbours, and thus realized a comfortable little bag of dollars.–I give the anecdote as narrated to me, and I must confess I never saw the operation, or heard the remarks of the outwitted hens. I insert it lest in these days of agricultural distress (?) any farmer’s wife be disposed to make a trial of a similar experiment.[CO]
I proceed to consider the energy of the Republicans, a quality in which they may challenge comparison with the world. No enterprise is too great for them to undertake, and no hardship too severe for them to endure. A Yankee will start off with his household gods, and seek a new home in the wilderness, with less fuss than a Cockney would make about packing up a basket of grub to go and pic-nic in Richmond Park. It is the spirit of adventure that has enabled them to cover a whole continent in the incredible manner which the map of the United States shows. The great drawback to this phase of their energy is the total absence it exhibits of those ties of home to which we so fondly cling in the old country. If we were a nation of Yankees, I feel persuaded that in five years we should not have ten millions of inhabitants. No Yankee can exist without elbow-room, except it be the more degraded and rowdy portion of the community, who find a more congenial atmosphere in those sinks of vice inseparable from large towns. This migratory spirit has caused them to exhibit their energy and enterprise in those countless miles of rail and telegraph, which bring the citizens of the most distant States into easy communication with Washington and the Eastern cities. The difficulty of procuring labour is no doubt one cause of the very inefficient way in which many of these works are performed; and it also disables them for executing gigantic works with the speed and certainty that such operations are completed in England. The miniature Crystal Palace at New York afforded a convincing proof of what I have stated; for although it was little more than a quarter of the size of the one in Hyde Park, they were utterly foiled in their endeavours to prepare it in time. In revenge for that failure, the Press tried to console the natives by enlarging on the superior attraction of hippodromes, ice-saloons, and penny shows, with which it was surrounded, and contrasting them with the “gloomy grandeur” of the palace in London. Gloomy grandeur is, I suppose, the Yankee way of expressing the finest park in any city in the world.
Among other remarks on Americans, I have heard many of my countrymen say, “Look how they run after lords!”–It is quite true; a live lord is a comparative novelty, and they run after him in the same way as people in England run after an Indian prince, or any pretentious Oriental: it is an Anglo-Saxon mania. Not very long ago, a friend of mine found a Syrian swaggering about town, _feted_ everywhere, as though he were the greatest man of the day; and who should the Syrian nabob turn out to be, but a man he had employed as a servant in the East, and whom he had been obliged to get bastinadoed for petty theft. In England we run after we know not whom; in America, if a lord be run after, there is at all events a strong presumption in favour of his being at least a gentleman. We toady our Indian swells, and they toady their English swells; and I trust, for our sake, that in so doing they have a decided advantage over us.
I have also heard some of my countrymen observe, as to their hospitality, “Oh! it’s very well; but if you went there as often as I do, you would see how soon their hospitality wears off.” Who on earth ever heard such an unreasonable remark! Because a man, in the fulness of hospitality, dedicates his time, his money, and his convenience to welcome a stranger, of whose character and of whose sociability he knows nothing whatever, is he therefore bound to be saddled with that acquaintance as often as the traveller chooses to visit the American Continent? Is not the very idea preposterous? No man in the world is more ready to welcome the stranger than the American; but if the stranger revisit the same places, the courtesy and hospitality he receives must, in justice, depend upon the impression which his company has left on those upon whom he inflicted it. No doubt the scanty number of travellers enables Americans to exercise more universal hospitality than they could do if the country were filled with strangers in the same way as Great Britain is. The increased travelling of late years has necessarily made a marked difference on that point among ourselves, and doubtless it may hereafter act upon the United States; but the man who does not admit hospitality to be a most distinctive feature of the Republic, at the present time, must indeed be rotten in the brain or the heart.
With regard to the political character of the Union, it is very much in the same state as that of England. The two original parties were Whig and Democrat, the former being synonymous with the Tory party in this country–i.e., an honest body of men, who, in their earnest endeavours to keep the coach straight, put the drag on so often that the horses get restive sometimes, and start off at score when they feel the wheel clogged. The Democrats are more nearly represented by a compound of Whig and Radical–i.e., a body of men who, in their energetic exertions to make the coach go, don’t trouble themselves much about the road, and look upon the drag as a piece of antiquated humbug. Sometimes this carelessness also leads to the team-bolting; but in the States there is so much open country that they may run away for miles without an upset; whereas in England, when this difficulty occurs, the ribands are generally handed over to the Jarvey of the opposite party. This old state of affairs is entirely changed in both hemispheres; each party is more or less broken up, and in neither country is there at present any distinct body sufficiently numerous to form a strong government.
In consequence of these disruptions, it may be imagined how difficult it would be to give any accurate description of the different pieces of crockery that constitute the political “service.” Formerly, the two cries of “Protection to Home Manufacture” and “Free Trade” were the distinct rallying points. At present there are Slaveholders, Slavery Extension, Free-soil, Abolitionist, Annexationist, and Heaven alone knows how many more parties, on the question of Slavery alone, into which the Democratic or dominant party is divided, independent of those other general political divisions which must necessarily exist in so large and varied a community. From the foregoing you will observe that, to say a man is a Democrat conveys no distinct idea of his politics except that he is not a Whig; and the Whigs also have their divisions on the Slave question.
But there is a party lately come into the field, and called the Know-nothings, which requires a special notice. Their ostensible principles have been published in the leading journals of this country, and carry a certain degree of reason upon the face of them, the leading features being that they are a secret society banded together for the purpose of opposing the priestly influence of the Humanists in political matters: for prolonging the period requisite to obtain the rights of citizenship; and for the support of the native-born American in opposition to all other candidates for any public situation that may be contested. Such is the substance of their manifesto. Their opponents say that they are sheer humbugs, and brought into life by a few old political hacks for their own selfish ends. Owing to the factions in the old Whig and Democratic parties, their opponents believe they may succeed for a year or two, but they prophesy their speedy and total disruption. Time will show–I am no prophet. There is one point in their charter, however, that I cannot believe will ever succeed–viz., naturalization or citizenship. Congress would be loth to pass any law that might tend to turn the stream of emigration into another channel, such as Australia or Canada; and individual States would be equally loth to pass such a local law for the same reason, inasmuch as if they did, the emigrants would move on to those States where they obtained most speedily the rights of citizens. The crusade against the Romanists is also so opposed to the spirit of a constitution which professes the principle of the equal rights of man, that it is more than probable they may ere long divide upon the unsolvable question of how to draw the line of demarcation between the influence of the priest and the opinion of his flock. As far, therefore, as I am capable of judging, I do not believe they have a sufficiently broad and distinct basis to stand upon, and I think also that the fact of their being a secret society will rather hasten their end than otherwise.
The last point I shall allude to is the future prospects of the Republic; a question which doubtless is veiled in much obscurity. The black cloud of the South hangs perpetually over their heads, ever from time to time threatening to burst upon them. In the Free States many feel strongly the degradation of being forced to aid in the capture of the fugitive slave; and the aversion to the repulsive task is increasing rather than decreasing. The citizens have on many occasions risen in masses against those who were executing the law, and the military have been brought into collision with them in defending the authorities. The dread of breaking up the Union alone prevents that clause being struck out from the Constitution, by which they are compelled not merely to restore but to hunt up the fugitive. The “Freesoilers” also feel indignant at seeing their nation turning virgin soil into a land of Slavery; the Nebraska Bill has strengthened that feeling considerably. The Abolitionists are subject to constant fits of rabidity which increase intensity with each successive attack. Thousands and thousands of Northerns, who writhe under the feeling that their star-spangled banner is crossed with the stripes of the slave, turn back to the history of their country, and recalling to mind the glorious deeds that their ancestors have accomplished under that flag, their hearts respond–“The Union for ever!”
But perhaps the strongest feeling in the Republic which tends to keep things quiet, is that the intelligence of the community of the North, who are opposed both to slavery and to the fugitive law, foresee that if those objects are only to be obtained at the price of separation from the South, greater evils would probably accrue than those they are anxious to remove. However peaceably a separation might be made in appearance, it could never take place without the most bitter feelings of animosity. Junius describes the intensity of the feeling, by saying, “He hated me as much as if he had once been my friend;” and so it would assuredly prove. Squabbles would breed quarrels, and quarrels would grow into wars; the comparative harmony of a continent would be broken up, and standing armies and fleets become as necessary in the New World as they unfortunately are in the Old. If the South are determined to perpetuate Slavery, the only way it will ever cease to stain the Union is by the force of public opinion, and by the immigration of the white man gradually driving the negro southwards from State to State. As his value decreases, breeding for the market will gradually cease; and he may eventually die out if the millennium does not interfere with the process.
Another, possible cause for division in the Union may come from California, in which State a feeble cry has already been heard of–“a Western Republic.” The facility of intercourse afforded by railroads seems likely to stop the swelling of that cry; but if California did separate, it would not be attended with those evils which a disruption of the Southern States would inevitably produce. The only other chance of a division in the Republic which I can conceive possible is, in the event of a long war with any great maritime power, for ends which only affected one particular portion of the States; in which case the irresistible influence of the all mighty dollar might come into powerful action. The wealth of America is her commerce; whatever checks that, checks the pulsations of her vitality; and unless her honour was thoroughly compromised in the struggle, neither North nor South would be disposed to prolong a ruinous struggle for the sole benefit of the other. The prospects of such a contingency may, I trust, be deemed visionary. France is not likely to come in contact with the Union; and the only other maritime nation is Great Britain, whose interests are so identified with peace, that it is hardly possible she should encourage any other than the most friendly relations. Neither party could gain anything by a war, and both parties would inevitably suffer immensely; and although I fear there is but too strong evidence, that many ignoble minds in the Republic make blustering speeches, and strive to excite hostile feelings, the real intelligence and wealth of the States repudiate the unworthy sentiment, and deprecate any acts that could possibly lead to a collision between the two countries. Besides all which, there is that strong affinity between _L. s. d._ and dollars and cents, whereby so strong an influence is exercised over that commercial body which constitutes no unimportant portion of the wealth and intelligence of both nations.
If the views I have taken be correct, it is indeed impossible to foreshadow the future of the United States; centuries must elapse ere it can become sufficiently peopled to test the adaptation of its present form of government to a thickly populated country; in the meantime, there seems scarcely a limit to her increase in wealth and prosperity. Her present gigantic stride among the nations of the world appears but an invisible atom, if compared with the boundless resources she encircles within her borders, not the least important of which is that mass of energy and intelligence she is, year by year, sowing broadcast throughout the length and breadth of the land, the Church and the School ever following in the train, and reproducing those elements to which she owes her present proud position.
My task is now done. I have endeavoured, in the preceding pages, to convey some general idea of the places I visited, and of the objects which appeared to me most worthy of notice. I have touched but lightly on Cuba, and I have not dwelt at any great length on the prosperous and rising colony of Canada. My remarks have been chiefly on the United States, which, differing in so many points from, the country of her birth, and occupying so conspicuous a place among the nations, presented the most extended field for observation and comment. I have on all occasions stated plainly the impressions produced upon my mind. I have freely remarked upon all those topics which, being public, I conceive to be the legitimate field for a traveller’s criticism; where I have praised, or where I have condemned, I have equally endeavoured to explain my reasons. I have called attention to facts and opinions connected with my own country, where I thought similar points in the Republic might help to throw light upon them. Lastly, I have endeavoured to explain the various causes by which hostile feelings towards this country are engendered and spread abroad among a certain portion of the community; and I have stated my firm conviction, that the majority of the highest order of intelligence and character entertain a sincere desire to perpetuate our present friendly relations.
In conclusion, I would observe, that the opinions and feelings of a nation should not be hastily drawn from the writings of a passing traveller, or from the casual leaders of a Free Press. Man is ever prone to find fault with his neighbour, because the so doing involves a latent claim to superior intelligence in himself; but a man may condemn many things in a nation, while holding the nation itself in high esteem. The world is a large society,–a traveller is but one of the company, who converses through the Press; and as, in the smaller circles, conversation would die or freeze if nothing were stated but what could be mathematically proved, so would volumes of travels come to an untimely end, if they never passed beyond the dull boundary of facts. In both cases, opinions are the life of conversation; because, as no two people agree, they provoke discussion, through the openings of which, as truth oozes out, wise men catch it, leaving the refuse to the unreflecting.
The late Lord Holland, who was equally remarkable for his kindness and his intelligence, is said to have observed, “I never met a man so great a fool, but what I could learn something from him.” Reader, I am bound to confess his Lordship never met me; but I cannot take my leave without expressing a hope, that you will not be less fortunate than that amiable Peer.
And now, farewell, thou Giant Republic! I have long since left thy shores; but I have brought with me, and fondly cherish, the recollection of the many pleasant days I spent within thy borders, and of all those friends whose unceasing hospitality and kindness tracked my path without intermission. I care not for the Filibusteros and Russian sympathizers; I know that the heart of the intelligence of thy people beats with friendly pulsations, to which that of my own countrymen readily responds. All we should, and I trust all we do, mutually desire, is, to encourage an honourable and increasing rivalry in arts, science, commerce, and good-will. He who would disturb our amicable relations, be he Briton or American, is unworthy of the name of a man; for he is a foe to Liberty–Humanity–and Christianity.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote CK: The _New York Herald_ is edited by two renegade British subjects, one of whom was, I am told, formerly a writer in a scurrilous publication in this country.]
[Footnote CL: It has been cited as an example of their fondness for grand-sounding titles, that while, by the Census of Great Britain, there were only 2,328 physicians to 15,163 surgeons, in the United States there were 40,564 physicians to only 191 surgeons.]
[Footnote CM: _Vide_ chapter entitled “America’s Press and England’s Censor.”]
[Footnote CN: One of the few cases in which perhaps there is an advantage in the masses voting, is where a question of public advantage is brought forward, to which many and powerful local interests or monopolies are opposed. Take, for instance, the supply of London with good water, which the most utter dunderhead must admit to be most desirable; yet the influence of vested interests is so strong that its two millions of inhabitants seem destined to be poisoned for centuries, and the lanes and courts will, in all probability, continue as arid as the desert during the same period.–London, look at New York and blush!]
[Footnote CO: While on the subject of eggs, I would ask my reader, did you ever, while eating the said article, find your patience sorely tried as each mouthful was being taken from its shell, and dipped carefully into the salt? If you have ever felt the inconvenience of this tedious process, let me suggest to you a simple remedy. After opening the egg, and taking out one spoonful, put in enough salt for the whole, and then on the top thereof pour a few drops of water; the saline liquid will pervade the whole nutritious substance, and thus render unnecessary those annoying transits above named, which make an egg as great a nuisance at the breakfast-table as a bore in society. Who first took out a patent for this dodge I cannot say, but I suppose it must have been a New Englander.]
NOTES.
NOTE I.
_Extent of Telegraph in the United Kingdom._
Miles. Miles of Wire. ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH COMPANY.
5,070 Under ground 5,000 Above ground 20,700
MAGNETIC TELEGRAPH COMPANY. 1,740 Under ground 6,180 Above ground 4,076
SUBMARINE TELEGRAPH COMPANY. 400 Under ground 2,740 Above ground —
BRITISH TELEGRAPH COMPANY.
1,000[CP] Under ground 2,755 Above ground 3,218
IRISH TELEGRAPH COMPANY.
88 Under ground 176 Above ground —
—- —- Total 8,298 Total 44,845
Of the foregoing, 534 miles are submarine, employing 1100 miles of wire. The cost of putting up a telegraph was originally 105l. per mile for two wires. Experience now enables it to be done for 50l., and that in a far more durable and efficient manner than is practised in the United States. The cost of laying down a submarine telegraph is stated to be about 230l. per mile for six wires, and 110l. for single wires.
One feature in which the telegraphs of Great Britain differ materially from those of America and all other countries, is, the great extent of underground lines. There are nearly 17,000 miles of wire placed underground in England, the cost of which is six times greater than that of overground lines; but it has the inestimable advantage of being never interrupted by changes of weather or by accidents, while the cost of its maintenance is extremely small. This fact must be borne in mind, when we come to consider the relative expense of the transmission of messages in England and the States.
In the foregoing lines we have shown, that England possesses, miles of line, 8,298; miles of wire, 44,845; the United States possesses, miles of lines, 16,735; miles of wire, 23,281.
We thus see, that the telegraph in the United States extends over more than twice as much ground as the British lines; while on the other hand the system of telegraph in England is so much more fully developed, that nearly double the quantity of wire is in actual use. On the English lines, which are in the hands of three companies only, from 25,000 to 30,000 miles are worked on Cook and Wheatstone’s system; 10,000 on the magnetic system–without batteries;–3000 on Bain’s chemical principle–which is rapidly extending;–and the remainder on Morse’s plan.
The price of the transmission of messages is less in America than in England, especially if we regard the distance of transmission. In America a message is limited to ten words; in England to twenty words; and the message is delivered free within a certain distance from the station.
In both countries the names and addresses of the sender and receiver are sent free of charge. The average cost of transmission from London to every station in Great Britain is 13/10 of a penny per word per 100 miles. The average cost from Washington to all the principal towns in America is about 6/10 of a penny per word per 100 miles. The ordinary scale of charges for twenty words in England is 1s. for fifty miles and under; 2s. 6d. between fifty miles and 100 miles; all distances beyond that, 5s. with a few exceptions, where there is great competition. Having received the foregoing statement from a most competent authority, its accuracy may be confidently relied upon.
In conclusion, I would observe that the competition which is gradually growing up in this country must eventually compel a reduction of the present charges; but even before that desirable opposition arrives, the companies would, in my humble opinion, exercise a wise and profitable discretion by modifying their present system of charges. Originally the addresses of both parties were included in the number of words allowed; that absurdity is now given up, but one scarcely less ridiculous still remains–viz., twenty words being the shortest message upon which their charges are based. A merchant in New York can send a message to New Orleans, a distance of 2000 miles, and transact important business in ten words–say “Buy me a thousand bales of cotton–ship to Liverpool;” but if I want to telegraph from Windsor to London a distance of twenty miles, “Send me my portmanteau,” I must pay for twenty words. Surely telegraph companies would show a sound discretion by lowering the scale to ten words, and charging two-thirds of the present price for twenty. Opposition would soon compel such a manifestly useful change; but, independent of all coercion, I believe those companies that strive the most to meet the reasonable demands of the public will always show the best balance-sheet at the end of the year.–Thirteenpence is more than one shilling.
NOTE II.
_A short Sketch of the Progress of Fire-arms._
The first clear notice which we have of rifles is in the year 1498, nearly 120 years after the invention of gunpowder was known to Europe. The Chinese, I believe, claim the invention 3000 years before the Creation. The first rifle-maker was one Zugler, in Germany, and his original object appears to have been merely to make the balls more ragged, so as to inflict more serious wounds; a result produced before that time by biting and hacking the balls. This appears clearly to have been the intention, inasmuch as the cuts were made perfectly straight in the first instance. The accurate dates of the introduction of the various twists I have not been able to ascertain.
I can find no mention of breech-loading arms before the reign of Henry VIII., since which time they have been constantly used in China and other parts of the East. In 1839, they were, I understand, extensively used in Norway. A breech-loading carbine, lately brought across to this country from America as the invention of Mr. Sharpe, was patented by a Mr. Melville, of London, as far back as 1838. I understand Mr. Sharpe’s carbine was tried at Woolwich not long ago, and found to clog, owing to the expansion of the metal from consecutive firing. Nor has any breech-loading weapon hitherto introduced been able to make its way into extensive practical use, although the Americans have constantly used them in their navy for some years past. To return to ancient times.–There is a matchlock in the Tower of London with one barrel and a revolving breech cylinder which was made in the fifteenth century, and there is a pistol on a similar plan, and dating from Henry VIII., which may be seen in the Rotunda at Woolwich. The cylinders of both of these weapons were worked by hand.
The old matchlock, invented in 1471, gave way to a substitute scarcely less clumsy, and known by the initiated as the wheel-lock, the ignition taking place by the motion of the steel wheel against a fixed flint placed in the midst of the priming. This crude idea originated in 1530, and reigned undisputed until the invention of the common old flint and steel, about the year 1692, when this latter became lord paramount, which it still remains with some infatuated old gentlemen, in spite of the beautiful discovery of the application of fulminating powder, as a means of producing the discharge.
Mr. Forsyth patented this invention in 1807, but, whether from prejudice or want of perfection in its application, no general use was made of the copper cap until it was introduced among sportsmen by Mr. Egg, in 1818, and subsequently Mr. J. Manton patented his percussion tubes for a similar purpose. The use of the copper cap in the army dates 1842, or nearly a quarter of a century after its manifest advantages had been apparent to the rest of the community.
Previous to this invention it was impossible to make revolving weapons practically available for general use.
The public are indebted to Mr. Jones for the ingenious mechanism by which continuous pressure on the trigger causes both the revolution of the barrels and the discharge of the piece; this patent goes back to 1829-1830. Colonel Colt first endeavoured to make a number of barrels revolve by raising the hammer, but the weight of the barrels suggested a return to the old rotatory cylinder, for which he took out a patent in 1835; and in 1836 he took out another patent for obtaining the rotatory motion by drawing back the trigger, and he subsequently introduced the addition of a lever ramrod fixed on to the barrel. Col. Colt came to the conclusion that the hammer-revolving cylinder was the more useful article, inasmuch as it enabled the person using it to take a more steady aim than with the other, which, revolving and firing by the action of the trigger, the moment of explosion could not be depended upon. To Col. Colt belongs the honour of so combining obsolete and modern inventions, and superadding such improvements of his own, as to produce the first practical and really serviceable weapon.
Since then Messrs. Dean and Adams, in 1852, revived the old invention of the trigger-revolving cylinder, which has the advantage of only requiring one hand to fire, but which is immeasurably inferior where accuracy of aim is wanted. Mr. Tranter, in 1853, patented a new invention, which, by employing a double trigger, combines the advantages of Colt and avoids the drawbacks of Dean and Adams. By a side-wind he has also adapted that invaluable application of Colt’s–a fixed lever ramrod. Many other patents are springing up daily, too numerous to mention, and too similar to admit of easy definition.
To return to rifles.–It is well known that the ordinary rifle in use until late years was the seven-grooved, with a spherical ball, and the two-grooved, with a zone bullet; the latter an invention known as the Brunswick rifle; and imported from Berlin about 1836. It was upon this weapon Mr. Lancaster proceeded to make some very ingenious experiments, widening the grooves gradually until at last they met, and an elliptic bore rifle was produced, for which he obtained a patent in July, 1850; but upon investigation it would be proved that Mr. Lancaster’s patent was invalid, inasmuch as the elliptical bore rifle is of so ancient a date that it is mentioned in _Scloppetaria_–a work printed in 1808–as even then obsolete; the details, methods, and instruments for their fabrication are fully described therein; and I have seen a rifle of this kind, made by “Dumazin, a Paris,” which is at least a century old; it is now in the possession of the Duke of Athole. Mr. Lancaster is entitled to the credit of bringing into practical use what others had thrown on one side as valueless.
From rifles I turn to balls, in which the chief feature of improvement is the introduction of the conical shape. The question of a conical ball with a saucer base is fully discussed in _Scloppetaria_, but no practical result seems to have been before the public until Monsieur Delvigue, in 1828, employed a solid conical ball, which, resting on the breech clear of the powder, he expanded by several blows with the ramrod sufficiently to make it take the grooves. Colonel Thouvenin introduced a steel spire into the breech, upon which the ball being forced, it expanded more readily. This spire is called the “tige.” Colonel Tamisier cut three rings into the cylindrical surface of the bullet, to facilitate the expansion and improve its flight. These three combinations constitute the _Carabine a Tige_ now in general use in the French army. Captain Minie–in, I believe, 1850–dispensed with the tige, and employed a conical hollow in the ball; into which, introducing an iron cup, the explosion of the powder produced the expansion requisite. As Captain Minie has made no change in the rifle, except removing a tige which was only lately introduced, it is certainly an extraordinary Irishism to call his conical ball a Minie rifle; it was partially adopted in England as early as 1851. Why his invention has not been taken up in France, I cannot say.
Miraculous to remark, the British Government for once appear to have appreciated a useful invention, and various experiments with the Minie ball were carried on with an energy so unusual as to be startling. It being discovered that the iron cup had various disadvantages, besides being a compound article, a tornado of inventions rushed in upon the Government with every variety of modification. The successful competitor of this countless host was Mr. Pritchett, who, while dispensing with the cup entirely, produced the most satisfactory results with a simple conical bullet imperceptibly saucered out in the base, and which is now the generally adopted bullet in Her Majesty’s service. The reader will recognise in Mr. Pritchett’s bullet a small modification of the conical ball alluded to in _Scloppetaria_ nearly fifty years ago.
Through the kindness of a friend, I have been able to get some information as to the vexed question of the Minie ball, which militates against some of the claims of the French captain, if invention be one. The character of the friend through whom I have been put in correspondence with the gentleman named below, I feel to be a sufficient guarantee for the truthfulness of the statements which I here subjoin.
[Illustration]
Mr. Stanton, a proprietor of collieries at Newcastle-on-Tyne, conceived the idea that if a bullet were made to receive the projectile force in the interior of the bullet, but beyond the centre of gravity, it would continue its flight without deviation. Having satisfied himself of the truth of this theory, he sent the mould to the Board of Ordnance on the 20th of January, 1797, and received a reply the following month, stating that upon trial it was found to be less accurate in its flight and less powerful in its penetration than the round bullet then in use. They also informed Mr. Stanton that there were some conical balls in the repository which had been deposited there by the late Lieutenant-General Parker, and which, having more solidity, were superior to those sent by Mr. Stanton, thus proving that the idea of a conical expanding ball is of very ancient date. The mould sent to the Ordnance by Mr. Stanton was taken from a wooden model, of which the accompanying is an exact diagram, and which is in the possession of Mr. Stanton, solicitor, at Newcastle, the son of the originator. Evidence is afforded that Mr. Boyd a banker, and Mr. Stanton, sen., both tried the ball with very different success to that obtained at Woolwich; but this need excite no astonishment, as every sportsman is aware of the wonderful difference in the accuracy with which smooth-bored fire-arms carry balls, and for which no satisfactory reason has ever been advanced. Mr. Kell was subsequently present when his friend Mr. Stanton, jun., had balls made on his father’s principle for a pair of Wogden’s pistols thirty years ago; the result is reported as satisfactory.
In 1829, Mr. Kell conceived the idea of applying the principle to rifles, for which purpose he had a mould made by Mr. Thomas Bulcraig. Mr. Kell altered the original ball in two points; he made the sides stronger, and he formed the front of the ball conoidical instead of hemispherical. I have the ball made from that mould now lying before me, and it is precisely the same as the Minie ball without the iron cup, which we have shown in the preceding pages is totally unnecessary. This ball has been constantly in use by Mr. Kell and others until the present day; it is the first application of a conical expanding ball to rifles that I can find on record, and whatever credit is due to the person who transferred the expanding ball from a smooth bore wherein it was useless, to a rifle wherein it is now proved to be invaluable, belongs, as far as I can trace the application back, to Mr. Kell, A.D. 1829.
In 1830, Mr. Kell employed Mr. Greener, then a gunmaker at Newcastle, to make him a mould for a double pea rifle, and he left in Mr. Greener’s hands one of the balls made for the Wogden pistol, and one of those made by Mr. Bulcraig, to assist him in so doing. It appears that Mr. Greener must have been satisfied with the success attending Mr. Kell’s application of the conical ball to a rifle, for some years after, in August, 1836, he applied to the Ordnance for permission to have a trial of the conical ball made; this was granted, and the experiment was conducted under Major Walcott of the Royal Artillery, on the sands near Tynemouth Castle, the firing party consisting of a company of the 60th Rifles. Mr. Greener having failed to bring a target, to test the superior penetrating power of his balls, the ordinary Artillery target was used. Mr. Greener’s ball had a conical plug of lead in the hollow, for the purpose of producing the expansion when driven home by the force of the powder. After firing several rounds at two hundred yards, only one ball of Mr. Greener’s, which had struck the target, was found to have the plug driven home, the others had all lost their plugs. The same effect was produced when firing into a sand-bank. A trial was then made at 350 yards; the spherical balls and the conical balls both went home to the target, but only one of the latter penetrated.
The objections pointed out to the conical ball were: the frequent loss of the plug, by which its weight was diminished; the inconvenience of having a hall composed of two separate parts; the difficulty of loading if the plug was not placed accurately in the centre; and the danger of the plug losing its place in consequence of being put in loosely, especially when carried about for any length of time in a cartridge.–Mr. Greener loaded the rifles during the trial with the ball and powder separate, not in cartridge.–The advantage admitted was, merely, rapidity of loading if the plug was fairly placed: no superiority of range appears to have been produced over the rifles used by the 60th Regiment. Mr. Greener solicited another trial, but after the report of Major Walcott, the Select Committee considering the ball “useless and chimerical,” no further trial was accorded. The conical ball question was thus once more doomed to oblivion.
In process of time the fabulous ranges of the “_Carabine a Tige_” were heard of, and when it was ascertained that the French riflemen potted the gunners on the ramparts of Rome with such rapidity that they could not stand to their guns before a rifle nearly a mile distant, the cone shape once more turned up, and Captain Minie came forward as the champion of the old expanding ball. The toscin of war was sounded in the East; the public were crying aloud for British arms to be put upon an equality with those of foreign armies; the veterans who had earned their laurels under poor old “Brown Bess” stuck faithfully to her in her death-struggle, and dropped a tear over the triumph of new-fangled notions.
In the middle of last century Lieutenant-General Parker’s ball was thrown aside; at the end of the century, Mr. Stanton’s shared the same fate; Mr. Greener’s followed in 1836 with equal ill success; Captain Minie’s had a short reign, and was in turn superseded by the more solid and superior ball now in use, and for which the country is indebted to the experimental perseverance of Mr. Pritchett; and if ever things obtain their right names, the weapon of the British army will be called the Pritchett ball and not the Minie rifle; but as the world persists in calling the Missouri the Mississippi, I suppose the British public will behave equally shabbily by Mr. Pritchett. The reader will judge for himself of the respective credit due to the various persons through whose ingenuity we have at length succeeded in obtaining the present efficient ball, the wounds from which are more frightful than pen can portray.
There is, however, one lesson which we should learn from the great opposition there has been to the introduction of the conical ball, and that is, the advantage of remodelling the department to which such inventions are referred. The foregoing remarks appear to me conclusive evidence that the testing of fire-arms should not be left to age and experience alone. Prejudice is all but inseparable from age–young and fresh blood is a powerful auxiliary. What I would suggest is, that there should be a special examination to qualify officers of the engineers and artillery to sit in judgment on so important a subject as arms and missiles; and I would then propose that two officers of the former corps, and five of the latter, be selected from those below the rank of field-officer, to form a separate and junior Board, and that each Board should send in its own report. The method of selection which I would suggest is by ballot or vote of those Officers of the same rank in their respective corps; for I feel sure that those who live most together are the best acquainted with one another’s talents. If two Boards are objectionable, form one Board, of which one-half shall be of the junior rank; and if they be equally divided in opinion, let the higher authority appoint an umpire and order a second trial.
Remember how long the now all-but-forgotten “Brown Bess” kept the field against the adversary which has since proved her immeasurable superior; and let the future prove that past experience has not been entirely thrown away. Trials may be troublesome, but officers are paid for taking trouble; and the ingenuity of inventors will always be quickened in proportion to the conviction that their inventions will receive a full and unprejudiced trial; and that, if their first shot at the target of Success be an outside ringer, they will not be denied a chance of throwing another in the Bull’s-eye.
Since the foregoing remarks went to press, it appears that the Pritchett ball has been found wanting, both in England and in the Crimea; its flight is said to be irregular, and the deposit of lead in the barrel so great that after thirty rounds the charge cannot be got down. If this be so, it is only one more proof of the necessity for some improvement in the Board appointed to judge of and superintend warlike missiles.
When Mr. Pritchett had perfected his ball, it was tried in the three-groove rifle, for which it was intended, with the most satisfactory results, and was fired an indefinite number of times without the slightest difficulty. It appears, however, that this successful trial was not sufficient to satisfy the new-born zeal of the authorities. Accordingly, a conclave of gunmakers was consulted previous to the order for manufacturing being sent to Enfield; but with a depth of wisdom far beyond human penetration, they never asked the opinion of Mr. Pritchett, who had made the rifle which had carried the ball so satisfactorily.
The wise men decided that it would be an improvement if the grooves were deepened–a strange decision, when all the experience of the day tends to prove that the shallower the groove the better. Down went the order; the improved rifles were made as fast as possible, and in the month of March they went to the seat of war. May is hardly passed by, and the sad fact discovered in the Crimea is echoed back on our shores, that after thirty rounds the soldiers may right about face or trust to cold steel. I think my youngest boy–if I had one–would have suggested testing the improvement before indulging the army with the weapon. Perhaps the authorities went on the principle that a rifle is a rifle, and a ball is a ball, and therefore that it must be all right. It might as well be said a chancellor is a chancellor, and a black dose is a black dose; therefore, because an able Aesculapius had prescribed a draught which had proved eminently useful to bilious Benjamin, it must agree equally well with lymphatic William.–Never mind, my dear John Bull, sixpence more in the pound Income-tax will remedy the little oversight.
Three years have elapsed since these observations were penned, and behold a giant competitor has entered the field, threatening utter annihilation to the three-groove (or Enfield) rifle and the Pritchett ball. Mr. Whitworth (whose mechanical powers have realized an accuracy almost fabulous), after a long course of experiments made at the Government’s expence, has produced a rifle with an hexagonal box and ball, the correctness of which, at 1100 yards, has proved nearly equal to that of the Enfield at 500 yards, and possessing a penetrating power of wonderful superiority; the Enfield rifle ball scarcely penetrated 13 half-inch Elm planks. Whitworth’s hexagonal ball penetrated 33, and buried itself in the solid block of wood behind. It remains to be seen whether this formidable weapon can be made at such a price as to render it available for military purposes. The hexagonal bore is not a new invention, some of the Russians having used it in the late Baltic campaign; but it is doubtless Mr. Whitworth’s wonderful accuracy of construction that is destined to give it celebrity, by arming it with a power and correctness it wanted before.[CQ] An explosive ball has also been introduced by Colonel Jacob of Eastern celebrity, which from its greater flight will prove, when perfected, a more deadly arm than the old spherical explosive ball invented and forgotten years ago. With the daily improvements in science, we may soon expect to see Colonel Jacob’s in general use, unless the same principle applied to Whitworth’s hexagonal ball should be found preferable.
* * * * *
To those who are amateurs of the rifle, I would recommend a pamphlet, written by Chapman, and published in New York; it is chiefly intended for those who delight in the infantine or octogenarian amusement of peppering a target, but it also contains many points of interest. Among other subjects discussed are the following:–The quantity of twist requisite in a rifle barrel–the gaining twist, as opposed to Mr. Greener, and the decreasing twist–the size of ball best suited to different distances–the swedge, by which a ball, being cast rather larger than requisite, is compressed into a more solid mass–the powder to use, decreasing in size of the grain in proportion to the diminishing length of barrel–the loading muzzle, by which the lips of the grooves are preserved as sharp as a razor, &c. The pamphlet can easily be procured through Messrs. Appleton, of New York and London.
THE END.
[Illustration]
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote CP: The miles of distance may not be quite exact, but the miles of wire may be depended upon.]
[Footnote CQ: The trial between the Enfield and the Whitworth rifles cannot be yet considered conclusive, as there was a difference in the bore of the rifles, and also Mr. Whitworth used a different kind of ball for penetration to that used for long range.]