This is a modern-English version of Recollections of Europe, originally written by Cooper, James Fenimore. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.

Produced by Carlo Traverso, Mireille Harmelin and the

Produced by Carlo Traverso, Mireille Harmelin and the

Online Distributed Proofreaders Europe at http://dp.rastko.net. This file was produced from images generously made available by the Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF/Gallica)

Online Distributed Proofreaders Europe at http://dp.rastko.net. This file was created from images kindly provided by the Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF/Gallica)

COLLECTION OF ANCIENT AND MODERN BRITISH AUTHORS.

VOL. CLXXII.
RECOLLECTIONS OF EUROPE.
PRINTED BY J. SMITH, 16, RUE MONTMORENCY.

RECOLLECTIONS OF EUROPE.

BY J. FENIMORE COOPER, ESQ.

AUTHOR OF "THE PILOT," "THE SPY", etc.

AUTHOR OF "THE PILOT," "THE SPY," etc.

PARIS, BAUDRY'S EUROPEAN LIBRARY, RUE DU COQ, NEAR THE LOUVRE.

1837.

1837.

CONTENTS.

LETTER I.

Our Embarkation.—Leave-taking.—Our Abigail.—Bay of New York.—The
Hudson.—Ominous Prediction.—The Prophet falsified.—Enter the
Atlantic.—"Land-birds."—Our Master.—Officers of Packet-ships.—Loss
of "The Crisis."—The "Three Chimneys."—Calamities at Sea.
—Sailing-match.—View of the Eddystone.—The Don Quixote.—Comparative
Sailing.—Pilot-boats.—Coast of Dorsetshire.—The Needles.
—Lymington.—Southampton Water.—The Custom-house.

Our Departure.—Saying Goodbye.—Our Abigail.—New York Bay.—The
Hudson River.—Bad Omen.—The Prophet was wrong.—Entering the
Atlantic Ocean.—"Land Birds."—Our Captain.—Officers of Packet Ships.—Loss
of "The Crisis."—The "Three Chimneys."—Disasters at Sea.
—Race at Sea.—View of the Eddystone Lighthouse.—The Don Quixote.—Sailing
Comparison.—Pilot Boats.—Dorsetshire Coast.—The Needles.
—Lymington.—Southampton Water.—The Customs House.

LETTER II.

Controversy at Cowes.—Custom-house Civility.—English Costume.—Fashion
in America.—Quadrilles in New York.—Cowes.—Nautical Gallantry.
English Beauty.—Isle of Wight Butter.—English Scenery.—M'Adamized
Roads.—Old Village Church.—Rural Interment.—Pauper's
Grave.—Carisbrooke Cattle.—Southampton.—Waiter at the Vine.—English
Costume.—Affinity with England.—Netley Abbey.—Southampton Cockneys.

Controversy at Cowes.—Custom-house Politeness.—English Outfits.—Fashion
in America.—Quadrilles in New York.—Cowes.—Nautical Chivalry.
English Beauty.—Isle of Wight Butter.—English Landscape.—M'Adamized
Roads.—Old Village Church.—Rural Burial.—Pauper's
Grave.—Carisbrooke Livestock.—Southampton.—Waitstaff at the Vine.—English
Outfits.—Connection with England.—Netley Abbey.—Southampton Locals.

LETTER III.

Road to London.—Royal Pastime.—Cockney Coachman.—Winchester Assizes.
—Approach to London.—The Parks.—Piccadilly.—Street Excursion.
—Strangers in London.—Americans in England.—Westminster Abbey.
—Gothic Decorations.—Westminster Hall.—Inquisitive Barber.—Pasta and
Malibran.—Drury-lane Theatre.—A Pickpocket.—A Fellow-traveller.
—English Gentlemen.—A Radical.—Encampment of Gipsies.—National
Distinctions.—Antiquities.—National Peculiarities.

Road to London.—Royal Pastime.—Cockney Driver.—Winchester Trials.
—Entering London.—The Parks.—Piccadilly.—City Tour.
—Visitors in London.—Americans in England.—Westminster Abbey.
—Gothic Design.—Westminster Hall.—Curious Barber.—Pasta and
Malibran.—Drury Lane Theatre.—A Pickpocket.—A Travel Companion.
—English Gents.—A Radical.—Gypsy Camp.—National
Differences.—Antiques.—National Quirks.

LETTER IV.

Quit England.—Approach to France.—Havre.—Our Reception there.—Female
Commissionnaire.—Clamour of Drums.—Port of Havre.—Projected
Enterprize.—American Enterprize.—Steam-boat
Excursion.—Honfleur.—Rouen.—French Exaction.—American
Porters.—Rouen Cathedral.—Our Cicerone.—A Diligence.—Picturesque
Road.—European Peasantry.—Aspect of the Country.—Church at
Louviers.—Village near Vernon.—Rosny.—Mantes.—Bourbon Magnificence.
—Approach to Paris—Enter Paris.

Quit England.—Approach to France.—Havre.—Our Reception there.—Female
Commissionnaire.—Clamour of Drums.—Port of Havre.—Planned
Adventure.—American Venture.—Steamboat
Trip.—Honfleur.—Rouen.—French Charges.—American
Porters.—Rouen Cathedral.—Our Guide.—A Diligence.—Scenic
Route.—European Peasantry.—Look of the Country.—Church at
Louviers.—Village near Vernon.—Rosny.—Mantes.—Bourbon Splendor.
—Approach to Paris—Entering Paris.

LETTER V.

Paris in August 1826.—Montmartre.—The Octroi.—View of Paris.
—Montmorency.—Royal Residences.—Duke of Bordeaux.—Horse-racing.
—The Dauphine.—Popular feeling in Paris.—Royal Equipage.—Gardes du
Corps.—Policy of Napoleon.—Centralization.

Paris in August 1826.—Montmartre.—The Tax Barrier.—View of Paris.
—Montmorency.—Royal Residences.—Duke of Bordeaux.—Horse Racing.
—The Dauphine.—Public Sentiment in Paris.—Royal Carriages.—Bodyguards.
Napoleon's Policies.—Centralization.

LETTER VI.

Letters of Introduction.—European Etiquette.—Diplomatic
Entertainments.—Ladies in Coffee-houses.—French Hospitality.—Mr.
Canning at Paris.—Parisian Hotels.—French Lady at
Washington.—Receptions in Paris and in New York.—Mode of
Announcement.—Republican Affectation.—Hotel Monaco.—Dinner given to
Mr. Canning.—Diplomatic Etiquette.—European Ambassadors.—Prime
Minister of France.—Mr. Canning.—Count Pozzo di Borgo.—Precedency at
Dinner.—American Etiquette.—A French Dinner.—Servants.—Catholic
Fasting.—Conversation with Canning.—English Prejudice against
Americans.

Letters of Introduction.—European Etiquette.—Diplomatic
Entertainments.—Women in Coffee Shops.—French Hospitality.—Mr.
Canning in Paris.—Parisian Hotels.—French Woman in
Washington.—Receptions in Paris and New York.—Method of
Announcement.—Republican Pretentiousness.—Hotel Monaco.—Dinner hosted for
Mr. Canning.—Diplomatic Etiquette.—European Ambassadors.—Prime
Minister of France.—Mr. Canning.—Count Pozzo di Borgo.—Seating Order at
Dinner.—American Etiquette.—A French Dinner.—Staff.—Catholic
Fasting.—Conversation with Canning.—British Prejudice against
Americans.

LETTER VII.

English Jurisprudence.—English Justice.—Justice in France.—Continental Jurisprudence.—Juries.—Legal Injustice.—The Bar in France.—Precedence of the Law.

English Jurisprudence.—English Justice.—Justice in France.—Continental Jurisprudence.—Juries.—Legal Injustice.—The Bar in France.—Precedence of the Law.

LETTER VIII.

Army of France.—Military Display.—Fête of the Trocadero.—Royal
Review.—Royal Ordinance.—Dissatisfaction.—Hostile
Demonstration.—Dispersion of Rioters.—French Cavalry.—Learned
Coachman.—Use of Cavalry.—Cavalry Operations.—The
Conscription.—National Defence.—Napoleon's Marshals.—Marshal
Soult—Disaffection of the Army.

Army of France.—Military Display.—Trocadero Festival.—Royal
Review.—Royal Ordinance.—Dissatisfaction.—Hostile
Demonstration.—Dispersion of Rioters.—French Cavalry.—Skilled
Coachman.—Use of Cavalry.—Cavalry Operations.—The
Conscription.—National Defense.—Napoleon's Marshals.—Marshal
Soult—Discontent in the Army.

LETTER IX

Royal Dinner.—Magnificence and Comfort.—Salle de Diane.—Prince de
Condé.—Duke of Orleans.—The Dinner-table.—The Dauphin.—Sires de
Coucy.—The Dauphine.—Ancient Usages—M. de Talleyrand.—Charles X.
—Panoramic Procession.—Droll Effect.—The Dinner.—M. de Talleyrand's
Office.—The Duchesse de Berri.—The Catastrophe.—An Aristocratic
Quarrel.

Royal Dinner.—Magnificence and Comfort.—Salle de Diane.—Prince de
Condé.—Duke of Orleans.—The Dinner Table.—The Dauphin.—Sires de
Coucy.—The Dauphine.—Ancient Traditions—M. de Talleyrand.—Charles X.
—Panoramic Procession.—Humorous Effect.—The Dinner.—M. de Talleyrand's
Role.—The Duchesse de Berri.—The Incident.—An Aristocratic
Argument.

LETTER X.

Road to Versailles.—Origin of Versailles.—The present Chateau.—The
two Trianons.—La Petite Suisse.—Royal Pastime.—Gardens of Versailles.
—The State Apartments.—Marie Antoinette's Chamber.—Death of Louis XV.
—Oeil de Boeuf.—The Theatre and Chapel.—A
Quarry.—Caverns.—Compiègne.—Chateau de Pierre-font.—Influence of
Monarchy.—Orangery at Versailles.

Road to Versailles.—Origin of Versailles.—The current Château.—The
two Trianons.—La Petite Suisse.—Royal Leisure Activities.—Gardens of Versailles.
—The State Apartments.—Marie Antoinette's Room.—Death of Louis XV.
—Oeil de Boeuf.—The Theater and Chapel.—A
Quarry.—Caves.—Compiègne.—Château de Pierre-font.—Impact of
Monarchy.—Orangery at Versailles.

LETTER XI.

Laws of Intercourse.—Americans in Europe.—Americans and English.
—Visiting in America.—Etiquette of Visits.—Presentations at Foreign
Courts.—Royal Receptions.—American Pride.—Pay of the President.
—American Diplomatist.

Laws of Intercourse.—Americans in Europe.—Americans and English.
—Visiting in America.—Etiquette of Visits.—Introductions at Foreign
Courts.—Royal Receptions.—American Pride.—Salary of the President.
—American Diplomat.

LETTER XII.

Sir Walter Scott in Paris.—Conversation with him.—Copyright in
America.—Miss Scott.—French Compliments.—Sir Walter Scott's Person
and Manners.—Ignorance as to America.—French Commerce.—French
Translations.—American Luxury.

Sir Walter Scott in Paris.—Chatting with him.—Copyright in
America.—Miss Scott.—French Compliments.—Sir Walter Scott's Appearance
and Behavior.—Lack of knowledge about America.—French Trade.—French
Translations.—American Luxury.

LETTER XIII.

French Manufactures.—Sèvres China.—Tapestry of the Gobelins.—Paper
for Hangings.—The Savonnerie.—French Carpets.—American Carpets.
—Transfer of old Pictures from Wood to Canvass.—Coronation Coach.
—The Arts in France—in America.—American Prejudice.

French Manufacturing—Sèvres Porcelain—Gobelins Tapestry—Paper
for Wall Hangings—Savonnerie Carpets—French Rugs.
—Transferring Old Images from Wood to Canvas—Coronation Coach.
—The Arts in France—in America—American Bias.

LETTER XIV.

False Notions.—Continental Manners.—People of Paris.—Parisian Women.
—French Beauty.—Men of France.—French Soldiers.

False Notions.—Continental Manners.—People of Paris.—Parisian Women.
—French Beauty.—Men of France.—French Soldiers.

LETTER XV.

Perversion of Institutions.—The French Academy.—Laplace.—Astronomy.
—Theatres of Paris.—Immoral Plot.—Artificial Feelings.—French
Tragedy.—Literary Mania.—The American Press.—American
Newspapers.—French Journals—Publishing Manoeuvres.—Madame Malibran.

Perversion of Institutions.—The French Academy.—Laplace.—Astronomy.
—Theaters of Paris.—Immoral Plot.—Artificial Emotions.—French
Tragedy.—Literary Frenzy.—The American Press.—American
Newspapers.—French Journals—Publishing Tactics.—Madame Malibran.

LETTER XVI.

Environs of Paris.—Village of St. Ouen.—Our House there.—Life on the
River.—Parisian Cockneys.—A pretty Grisette.—Voyage across the
Seine.—A rash Adventurer.—Village Fête.—Montmorency.—View near
Paris.

Environs of Paris.—Village of St. Ouen.—Our House there.—Life on the
River.—Parisian Locals.—A lovely Young Woman.—Trip across the
Seine.—A daring Adventurer.—Village Festival.—Montmorency.—View near
Paris.

LETTER XVII.

Rural Drives.—French Peasantry.—View of Montmartre.—The Boulevards.
—The Abattoirs.—Search for Lodgings.—A queer Breakfast.—Royal
Progresses and Magnificence.—French Carriages and Horses.—Modes of
Conveyance.—Drunkenness.—French Criminal Justice.—Marvellous Stories
of the Police.

Rural Drives.—French Peasantry.—View of Montmartre.—The Boulevards.
—The Slaughterhouses.—House-Hunting.—A Strange Breakfast.—Royal
Events and Grandeur.—French Cars and Horses.—Ways of
Getting Around.—Drunkenness.—French Criminal Justice.—Amazing Stories
of the Police.

LETTER XVIII.

Personal Intercourse.—Parisian Society and Hospitality.—Influence of
Money.—Fiacres.—M. de Lameth.—Strife of Courtesy.—Standard of
Delicacy.—French Dinners.—Mode of Visiting.—The Chancellor of France.
—The Marquis de Marbois.—Political Côteries.—Paris Lodgings.—A
French Party.—An English Party.—A splendid Ball.—Effects of good
Breeding.—Characteristic Traits.—Influence of a Court.

Personal Interaction.—Parisian Society and Hospitality.—Impact of
Money.—Taxis.—M. de Lameth.—Conflict of Courtesy.—Level of
Sensitivity.—French Dinners.—Visiting Etiquette.—The Chancellor of France.
—The Marquis de Marbois.—Political Circles.—Paris Accommodations.—A
French Gathering.—An English Gathering.—A lavish Ball.—Effects of good
Manners.—Distinctive Traits.—Influence of a Court.

LETTER XIX.

Garden of the Tuileries.—The French Parliament.—Parliamentary
Speakers.—The Tribune.—Royal Initiative.—The Charter.—Mongrel
Government.—Ministerial Responsibility.—Elections in
France.—Doctrinaires.—Differences of Opinion.—Controversy.

Garden of the Tuileries.—The French Parliament.—Parliamentary
Speakers.—The Tribune.—Royal Initiative.—The Charter.—Mixed
Government.—Ministerial Responsibility.—Elections in
France.—Doctrinaires.—Differences in Opinion.—Controversy.

LETTER XX.

Excursion with Lafayette.—Vincennes.—The Donjon.—Lagrange.—The
Towers.—Interior of the House—the General's Apartments.—the Cabinet.
—Lafayette's Title.—Church of the Chateau.—Ruins of Vivier.—Roman
Remains.—American Curiosity.—The Table at Lagrange.—Swindling.

Excursion with Lafayette.—Vincennes.—The Dungeon.—Lagrange.—The
Towers.—Inside the House—the General's Rooms.—the Office.
—Lafayette's Title.—Church of the Château.—Ruins of Vivier.—Roman
Remains.—American Curiosity.—The Table at Lagrange.—Scamming.

LETTER XXI.

Insecurity of the Bourbons.—Distrust of Americans.—Literary Visitor.
—The Templars.—Presents and Invitations.—A Spy.—American Virtue.
—Inconsistency.—Social Freedom in America.—French Mannerists.
—National Distinctions.—A lively Reaction.

Insecurity of the Bourbons.—Distrust of Americans.—Literary Visitor.
—The Templars.—Gifts and Invitations.—A Spy.—American Virtue.
—Inconsistency.—Social Freedom in America.—French Mannerists.
—National Distinctions.—A lively Reaction.

LETTER XXII.

Animal Magnetism.—Somnambules.—Magnetised Patients.—My own
Examination.—A Prediction.—Ventriloquism.—Force of the Imagination.

Animal Magnetism.—Sleepwalkers.—Magnetized Patients.—My own
Examination.—A Prediction.—Ventriloquism.—Power of Imagination.

LETTER XXIII.

Preparations for Departure.—My Consulate.—Leave
Paris.—Picardy.—Cressy.—Montreuil.—Gate of Calais.—Port of
Calais.—Magical Words.

Preparations for Departure.—My Consulate.—Leave
Paris.—Picardy.—Cressy.—Montreuil.—Gate of Calais.—Port of
Calais.—Magical Words.

PREFACE.

It may seem to be late in the day to give an account of the more ordinary characteristics of Europe. But the mass of all nations can form their opinions of others through the medium of testimony only; and as no two travellers see precisely the same things, or, when seen, view them with precisely the same eyes, this is a species of writing, after all, that is not likely to pall, or cease to be useful. The changes that are constantly going on everywhere, call for as constant repetitions of the descriptions; and although the pictures may not always be drawn and coloured equally well, so long as they are taken in good faith, they will not be without their value.

It might seem a bit late to talk about the more ordinary features of Europe. But people from all nations can only shape their views of others based on what they hear; and since no two travelers see exactly the same things, or interpret them in the same way, this form of writing is unlikely to lose its appeal or usefulness. The constant changes happening everywhere require ongoing updates to descriptions; and even if the portrayals aren't always perfect, as long as they are genuine, they will still have value.

It is not a very difficult task to make what is commonly called an amusing book of travels. Any one who will tell, with a reasonable degree of graphic effect, what he has seen, will not fail to carry the reader with him; for the interest we all feel in personal adventure is, of itself, success. But it is much more difficult to give an honest and a discriminating summary of what one has seen. The mind so naturally turns to exceptions, that an observer has great need of self-distrust, of the powers of analysis, and, most of all, of a knowledge of the world, to be what the lawyers call a safe witness.

It's not too hard to create what people typically refer to as an entertaining travel book. Anyone who can share, with a decent amount of vivid detail, what they've experienced will likely engage readers; our natural interest in personal adventures often guarantees some level of success. However, crafting an honest and insightful summary of what one has witnessed is much more challenging. Our minds tend to focus on exceptions, so an observer needs a good dose of self-doubt, analytical skills, and, most importantly, a solid understanding of the world to be, as lawyers say, a reliable witness.

I have no excuse of haste, or of a want of time, to offer for the defect of these volumes. All I ask is, that they may be viewed as no more than they profess to be. They are the gleanings of a harvest already gathered, thrown together in a desultory manner, and without the slightest, or, at least, very small pretensions, to any of those arithmetical and statistical accounts that properly belong to works of a graver character. They contain the passing remarks of one who has certainly seen something of the world, whether it has been to his advantage or not, who had reasonably good opportunities to examine what he saw, and who is not conscious of being, in the slightest degree, influenced "by fear, favour, or the hope of reward." His compte rendu must pass for what it is worth.

I have no excuses for being rushed or for not having enough time to explain the shortcomings of these volumes. All I ask is that they be seen as nothing more than what they claim to be. They are the gleanings of a harvest already gathered, put together in a random way, and without any serious claims to the kind of detailed numerical or statistical analysis that usually belongs to more serious works. They include the casual observations of someone who has definitely experienced a bit of the world, whether that's been good for him or not, who had fairly good chances to reflect on what he witnessed, and who isn’t aware of being influenced "by fear, favour, or the hope of reward." His compte rendu should be considered for what it’s worth.

FRANCE.

LETTER I.

Our Embarkation.—Leave-taking.—Our Abigail.—Bay of New York.
—The Hudson.—Ominous Prediction.—The Prophet falsified.—Enter the
Atlantic.—"Land-birds."—Our Master.—Officers of Packet-ships.
—Loss of "The Crisis."—The "Three Chimneys."—Calamities at Sea.
—Sailing-match.—View of the Eddystone.—The Don Quixote.
—Comparative Sailing.—Pilot-boats.—Coast of Dorsetshire.—The Needles.
—Lymington.—Southampton Water.—The Custom-house.

Our Departure.—Saying Goodbye.—Our Abigail.—New York Bay.
—The Hudson River.—Bad Omen.—The Prophet was wrong.—Enter the
Atlantic Ocean.—"Land Birds."—Our Captain.—Packet Ship Officers.
—Loss of "The Crisis."—The "Three Chimneys."—Disasters at Sea.
—Sailing Race.—View of the Eddystone Lighthouse.—The Don Quixote.
—Comparative Sailing.—Pilot Boats.—Dorset Coast.—The Needles.
—Lymington.—Southampton Water.—The Customs House.

TO CAPTAIN SHUBRICK, U.S.N.

MY DEAR SHUBRICK,

"Passengers by the Liverpool, London and Havre packets are informed that a steam-boat will leave the White Hall Wharf precisely at eleven, A.M. to-morrow, June 1st." If to this notice be added the year 1826, you have the very hour and place of our embarkation. We were nominally of the London party, it being our intention, however, to land at Cowes, from which place we proposed crossing the Channel to Havre. The reason for making this variation from the direct route, was the superior comfort of the London ship; that of the French line for the 1st June, though a good vessel and well commanded, being actually the least commodious packet that plied between the two hemispheres.

"Passengers on the Liverpool, London, and Havre boats are notified that a steamship will depart from the White Hall Wharf exactly at 11 A.M. tomorrow, June 1st." If you add the year 1826 to this notice, you'll have the exact time and place of our departure. We were officially part of the London group, but we planned to disembark at Cowes, from where we intended to cross the Channel to Havre. The reason for this detour from the direct route was the greater comfort of the London ship; the French line for June 1st, although a good vessel and well-captained, was actually the least comfortable packet operating between the two hemispheres.

We were punctual to the hour, and found one of the smaller steamers crowded with those who, like ourselves, were bound to the "old world," and the friends who had come to take the last look at them. We had our leave-takings, too, which are sufficiently painful when it is known that years must intervene before there is another meeting. As is always done by good Manhattanese, the town house had been given up on the 1st of May, since which time we had resided at an hotel. The furniture had been principally sold at auction, and the entire month had passed in what I believed to be very ample preparations. It may be questioned if there is any such thing as being completely prepared for so material a change; at all events, we found a dozen essentials neglected at the last moment, and as many oversights to be repaired in the same instant.

We were on time, and found one of the smaller steamers packed with others like us, heading to the "old world," along with friends who came to say their final goodbyes. We had our farewells, which are always tough when you know it will be years before you meet again. As is typical for good Manhattanites, we had vacated our townhouse on May 1st, and since then we had been staying at a hotel. Most of the furniture was sold at auction, and the whole month had gone by with what I thought were thorough preparations. You might wonder if anyone can ever be fully ready for such a big change; in any case, we found a dozen essentials forgotten at the last minute and just as many oversights to fix at the same time.

On quitting the hotel, some fifty or a hundred volumes and pamphlets lay on the floor of my bed-room. Luckily, you were to sail on a cruise in a day or two, and as you promised not only to give them a berth, but to read them one and all, they were transferred forthwith to the Lexington. They were a dear gift, if you kept your word! John was sent with a note, with orders to be at the wharf in half an hour. I have not seen him since. Then Abigail was to be discharged. We had long debated whether this excellent woman should, or should not, be taken. She was an American, and like most of her countrywomen who will consent to serve in a household, a most valuable domestic. She wished much to go, but, on the other side, was the conviction, that a woman who had never been at sea would be useless during the passage; and then we were told so many fine things of the European servants, that the odds were unfortunately against her. The principal objection, however, was her forms of speech. Foreign servants would of themselves be a great aid in acquiring the different languages; and poor Abigail, at the best, spoke that least desirable of all corruptions of the English tongue, the country dialect of New England. Her New England morals and New England sense; in this instance, were put in the balance against her "bens," "an-gels," "doozes," "nawthings," "noans," and even her "virtooes," (in a family of children, no immaterial considerations,) and the latter prevailed. We had occasion to regret this decision. A few years later I met in Florence an Italian family of high rank, which had brought with them from Philadelphia two female domestics, whom they prized above all the other servants of a large establishment. Italy was not good enough for them, however; and, after resisting a great deal of persuasion, they were sent back. What was Florence or Rome to Philadelphia! But then these people spoke good English—better, perhaps, than common English nursery-maids, the greatest of their abuses in orthoepy being merely to teach a child to call its mother a "mare."

On leaving the hotel, about fifty or a hundred books and pamphlets were lying on the floor of my bedroom. Fortunately, you were set to go on a cruise in a day or two, and since you promised not only to store them but to read every single one, they were quickly moved to the Lexington. They were a precious gift, if you kept your word! John was sent with a note and told to be at the wharf in half an hour. I haven't seen him since. Then Abigail was meant to be let go. We had long debated whether this wonderful woman should stay or go. She was American, and like most of her countrywomen willing to work in a household, a truly valuable domestic. She really wanted to join us, but we were concerned that a woman who had never been at sea would be of no use during the trip; plus, we heard so many great things about European servants that the odds were unfortunately against her. The main issue, however, was her way of speaking. Foreign servants would help a lot with learning the different languages; and poor Abigail, at best, spoke that least desirable of all versions of the English language, the rural dialect of New England. Her New England morals and common sense were weighed against her mix of "bens," "an-gels," "doozes," "nawthings," "noans," and even "virtooes," (which are not trivial matters in a family with children), and her way of speaking lost out. We later regretted this decision. A few years later, I met an Italian family of high social status in Florence, who had brought two female servants from Philadelphia, whom they valued above all their other staff in a large household. However, Italy wasn't good enough for them, and after resisting a lot of encouragement, they were sent back. What were Florence or Rome compared to Philadelphia! But these people spoke good English—better, perhaps, than your average English nursery maids, the worst of their pronunciation issues being just teaching a child to call its mother a "mare."

It was a flat calm, and the packets were all dropping down the bay with the ebb. The day was lovely, and the view of the harbour, which has so many, while it wants so many, of the elements of first-rate scenery, was rarely finer. All estuaries are most beautiful viewed in the calm; but this is peculiarly true of the Bay of New York—neither the colour of the water, nor its depth, nor the height of the surrounding land, being favourable to the grander efforts of Nature. There is little that is sublime in either the Hudson, or its mouth; but there is the very extreme of landscape beauty.

It was completely calm, and the ships were all gliding down the bay with the outgoing tide. The day was beautiful, and the view of the harbor, which has so many features while lacking so many others essential for top-notch scenery, was rarely better. All estuaries look most stunning in the calm; but this is especially true for the Bay of New York—neither the color of the water, its depth, nor the height of the surrounding land lends itself to Nature's grander displays. There's little that is awe-inspiring in either the Hudson or its mouth; however, there is an outstanding level of landscape beauty.

Experience will teach every one, that without returning to scenes that have made early impressions, after long absences, and many occasions to examine similar objects elsewhere, our means of comparison are of no great value. My acquaintance with the Hudson has been long and very intimate; for to say that I have gone up and down its waters a hundred times, would be literally much within the truth. During that journey whose observations and events are about to fill these volumes, I retained a lively impression of its scenery, and, on returning to the country, its current was ascended with a little apprehension that an eye which had got to be practised in the lights and shades of the Alps and Appenines might prove too fastidious for our own river. What is usually termed the grandeur of the highlands was certainly much impaired; but other parts of the scenery gained in proportion; and, on the whole, I found the passage between New York and Albany to be even finer than it had been painted by memory. I should think there can be little doubt that, if not positively the most beautiful river, the Hudson possesses some of the most beautiful river-scenery, of the known world.

Experience teaches us that without revisiting places that left a lasting impression after long absences, and after many chances to explore similar sights elsewhere, our comparisons don't hold much value. I've known the Hudson River for a long time and very well; saying I've traveled its waters a hundred times is actually an understatement. During the journey that will be detailed in these volumes, I kept a vivid impression of its scenery. Upon returning to the area, I approached its current with some concern that my eye, having become accustomed to the light and shadow of the Alps and Apennines, might be too critical of our own river. The so-called grandeur of the highlands was certainly diminished, but other parts of the scenery improved proportionately. Overall, I found the passage between New York and Albany to be even more beautiful than I remembered. I believe there’s little doubt that, if not the most beautiful river outright, the Hudson has some of the most stunning river scenery in the known world.

Our ship was named after this noble stream. We got on board of her off Bedlow's, and dropped quietly down as far as the quarantine ground before we were met by the flood. Here we came to, to wait for a wind, more passengers, and that important personage, whom man-of-war's men term the master, and landsmen the captain. In the course of the afternoon we had all assembled, and began to reconnoitre each other, and to attend to our comforts.

Our ship was named after this noble stream. We boarded her off Bedlow's and quietly drifted down to the quarantine area before the tide met us. Here we stopped to wait for some wind, more passengers, and the important person we call the captain, while those in the navy refer to as the master. By the afternoon, we were all gathered and started checking each other out and making ourselves comfortable.

To get accustomed to the smell of the ship, with its confined air, and especially to get all their little comforts about them in smooth water, is a good beginning for your novices. If to this be added moderation in food, and especially in drink; as much exercise as one can obtain; refraining from reading and writing until accustomed to one's situation, and paying great attention to the use of aperients; I believe all is said that an old traveller, and an old sailor too, can communicate on a subject so important to those who are unaccustomed to the sea. Can your experience suggest anything more?

To get used to the smell of the ship, with its stuffy air, and especially to settle into all their little comforts in calm waters, is a great start for beginners. If you also add moderation in food, and especially in drinks; get as much exercise as possible; avoid reading and writing until you’re comfortable in your surroundings, and pay close attention to the use of laxatives; I think that's everything an experienced traveler and sailor can share on a topic so crucial for those who are new to the sea. Does your experience suggest anything else?

We lay that night at the quarantine ground; but early on the morning of the 2nd, all hands were called to heave-up. The wind came in puffs over the heights of Staten, and there was every prospect of our being able to get to sea in two or three hours. We hove short, and sheeted home, and hoisted the three topsails; but the anchor hung, and the people were ordered to get their breakfasts, leaving the ship to tug at her ground-tackle with a view to loosen her hold of the bottom.

We stayed that night at the quarantine area, but early on the morning of the 2nd, everyone was called to get ready. The wind was blowing in gusts over the heights of Staten, and it looked like we would be able to set sail in a few hours. We shortened the anchor rope, secured the sails, and raised the three topsails, but the anchor was stuck. The crew was told to eat their breakfasts while the ship worked to free itself from the seabed.

Everything was now in motion. The little Don Quixote, the Havre ship just mentioned, was laying through the narrows, with a fresh breeze from the south-west. The Liverpool ship was out of sight, and six or seven sails were turning down with the ebb, under every stitch of canvass that would draw. One fine vessel tacked directly on our quarter. As she passed quite near our stern, some one cried from her deck:—"A good run to you, Mr. ——." After thanking this well-wisher, I inquired his name. He gave me that of an Englishman, who resided in Cuba, whither he was bound. "How long do you mean to be absent?" "Five years." "You will never come back." With this raven-like prediction we parted; the wind sweeping his vessel beyond the reach of the voice.

Everything was now in motion. The little Don Quixote, the Havre ship mentioned earlier, was navigating through the narrows with a fresh breeze from the southwest. The Liverpool ship was out of sight, and six or seven sails were drifting down with the outgoing tide, using every bit of canvas to catch the wind. One fine vessel tacked directly behind us. As she passed quite close to our stern, someone shouted from her deck: "Good luck to you, Mr. ——." After thanking this well-wisher, I asked for his name. He gave me the name of an Englishman who lived in Cuba, which was where he was headed. "How long do you plan to be gone?" "Five years." "You’ll never come back." With that ominous prediction, we parted ways as the wind carried his vessel beyond the range of our voices.

These words, "You will never come back!" were literally the last that I heard on quitting my country. They were uttered in a prophetic tone, and under circumstances that were of a nature to produce an impression. I thought of them often, when standing on the western verge of Europe, and following the course of the sun toward the land in which I was born; I remembered them from the peaks of the Alps, when the subtle mind, outstripping the senses, would make its mysterious flight westward across seas and oceans, to recur to the past, and to conjecture the future; and when the allotted five years were up, and found us still wanderers, I really began to think, what probably every man thinks, in some moment of weakness, that this call from the passing ship was meant to prepare me for the future. The result proved in my case, however, as it has probably proved in those of most men, that Providence did not consider me of sufficient importance to give me audible information of what was about to happen. So strong was this impression to the last, notwithstanding, that on our return, when the vessel passed the spot where the evil-omened prediction was uttered, I caught myself muttering involuntarily, "—— is a false prophet; I have come back!"

These words, "You will never come back!" were literally the last I heard when leaving my country. They were spoken in a prophetic tone and under circumstances that left a mark. I thought about them often while standing on the western edge of Europe, watching the sun set toward the land where I was born; I recalled them from the peaks of the Alps, when my mind, racing ahead of my senses, made its mysterious journey west across seas and oceans, to reflect on the past and ponder the future. And when the five years were up, and we were still wandering, I really started to think, like most people do in moments of weakness, that the call from the passing ship was meant to prepare me for what was ahead. However, the outcome for me, as it probably is for most people, was that Providence didn’t consider me important enough to give me clear insight into what was about to happen. Despite this, the impression stayed strong; when we returned and the ship passed the spot where that ominous prediction was made, I found myself muttering involuntarily, "—— is a false prophet; I have come back!"

We got our anchor as soon as the people were ready, and, the wind drawing fresh through the narrows, were not long turning into lower bay. The ship was deep, and had not a sufficient spread of canvass for a summer passage, but she was well commanded, and exceedingly comfortable.

We dropped anchor as soon as everyone was ready, and with the wind picking up through the narrows, it didn't take long to head into the lower bay. The ship was deep and didn’t have enough sails for a summer journey, but it was well commanded and very comfortable.

The wind became light in the lower bay. The Liverpool ship had got to sea the evening before, and the Don Quixote was passing the Hook, just as we opened the mouth of the Raritan. A light English bark was making a fair wind of it, by laying out across the swash; and it now became questionable whether the ebb would last long enough to sweep us round the south-west spit, a détour that our heavier draught rendered necessary.

The wind was gentle in the lower bay. The Liverpool ship had set off the evening before, and the Don Quixote was passing the Hook just as we entered the mouth of the Raritan. A small English ship was catching the wind well by crossing the current, and it was becoming uncertain whether the ebb would continue long enough to carry us around the southwest spit, a detour that was necessary because of our heavier draft.

By paying great attention to the ship, however, the pilot, who was of the dilatory school, succeeded about 3 P.M. in getting us round that awkward but very necessary buoy, which makes so many foul winds of fair ones, when the ship's bead was laid to the eastward, with square yards. In half an hour the vessel had "slapped" past the low sandy spit of land that you have so often regarded with philosophical eyes, and we fairly entered the Atlantic, at a point where nothing but water lay between us and the Rock of Lisbon. We discharged the pilot on the bar.

By focusing carefully on the ship, the pilot, who was quite slow, managed around 3 P.M. to navigate us past that tricky but essential buoy, which turns many strong winds into favorable ones, while the ship was heading east with the sails fully open. In half an hour, the vessel had "slapped" past the low sandy stretch of land that you have often observed thoughtfully, and we officially entered the Atlantic, at a spot where only water stood between us and the Rock of Lisbon. We dropped off the pilot at the bar.

By this time the wind had entirely left us, the flood was making strong, and there was a prospect of our being compelled to anchor. The bark was nearly hull-down in the offing, and the top-gallant-sails of the Don Quixote were just settling into the water. All this was very provoking, for there might be a good breeze to seaward, while we had it calm inshore. The suspense was short, for a fresh-looking line along the sea to the southward gave notice of the approach of wind; the yards were braced forward, and in half an hour we were standing east southerly, with strong headway. About sunset we passed the light vessel which then lay moored several leagues from land, in the open ocean,—an experiment that has since failed. The highlands of Navesink disappeared with the day.

By this time, the wind had completely died down, the tide was strong, and it looked like we might have to anchor. The ship was almost out of view in the distance, and the sails of the Don Quixote were just dipping into the water. This was really frustrating because there could be a good breeze further out to sea, while we were stuck in calm waters near shore. But the wait didn’t last long, as a fresh line on the horizon to the south signaled the arrival of wind; the sails were adjusted, and in half an hour, we were heading east-southeast with a strong momentum. Around sunset, we passed the light vessel that was moored several leagues from shore in the open ocean—a plan that has since proven unsuccessful. The highlands of Navesink disappeared as the sun went down.

The other passengers were driven below before evening. The first mate, a straight-forward Kennebunk man, gave me a wink, (he had detected my sea-education by a single expression, that of "send it an end," while mounting the side of the ship,) and said, "A clear quarter-deck! a good time to take a walk, sir." I had it all to myself, sure enough, for the first two or three days, after which our land-birds came crawling up, one by one; but long before the end of the passage nothing short of a double-reefed-topsail breeze could send the greater part of them below. There was one man, however, who, the mate affirmed wore the heel of a spare topmast smooth, by seating himself on it, as the precise spot where the motion of the ship excited the least nausea. I got into my berth at nine; but hearing a movement overhead about midnight, I turned out again, with a sense of uneasiness I had rarely before experienced at sea. The responsibility of a large family acted, in some measure, like the responsibility of command. The captain was at his post, shortening sail, for it blew fresher: there was some rain; and thunder and lightning were at work in the heavens in the direction of the adjacent continent: the air was full of wild, unnatural lucidity, as if the frequent flashes left a sort of twilight behind them; and objects were discernible at a distance of two or three leagues. We had been busy in the first watch, as the omens denoted easterly weather; the English bark was struggling along the troubled waters, already quite a league on our lee quarter.

The other passengers were taken below before evening. The first mate, a down-to-earth guy from Kennebunk, gave me a wink (he had figured out my familiarity with the sea from my one statement, “send it an end,” while climbing onto the ship) and said, “Clear quarter-deck! Great time to take a walk, sir.” I definitely had it all to myself for the first couple of days, but soon our landlubber friends started coming up one by one; yet long before we reached the end of the journey, only a strong double-reefed-topsail breeze could push most of them back below. There was one guy, though, who the mate claimed had worn down the heel of a spare topmast by sitting on it, as that was the exact spot where the ship's motion caused the least nausea. I climbed into my bunk at nine, but around midnight, hearing some commotion above, I got up again, feeling a sense of unease I had rarely felt at sea. The weight of a large family felt, in some ways, like the weight of command. The captain was at his post, shortening sail because the wind was picking up; there was some rain, and thunder and lightning were flashing in the sky toward the nearby continent. The air had a strange, unnatural brightness, as if the frequent flashes left a sort of twilight behind them, and objects were visible up to two or three leagues away. We had been busy during the first watch, as the signs pointed to easterly weather; the English bark was struggling along the rough waters, already quite a league off our leeward side.

I remained on deck half an hour, watching the movements of the master. He was a mild, reasoning Connecticut man, whose manner of ministering to the wants of the female passengers had given me already a good opinion of his kindness and forethought, while it left some doubts of his ability to manage the rude elements of drunkenness and insubordination which existed among the crew, quite one half of whom were Europeans. He was now on deck in a southwester,[1] giving his orders in a way effectually to shake all that was left of the "horrors" out of the ship's company. I went below, satisfied that we were in good hands; and before the end of the passage, I was at a loss to say whether Nature had most fitted this truly worthy man to be a ship-master or a child's nurse, for he really appeared to me to be equally skilful in both capacities.

I stayed on deck for half an hour, observing the captain's actions. He was a gentle, thoughtful guy from Connecticut, and the way he took care of the female passengers had already made me think highly of his kindness and consideration. However, I had some doubts about his ability to handle the rough behavior of drunkenness and insubordination among the crew, nearly half of whom were Europeans. He was now on deck in a southwest wind, giving orders that effectively cleared away the remaining "horrors" among the ship's company. I went below deck, feeling confident that we were in good hands; by the end of the trip, I found it hard to decide whether Nature had equipped this truly admirable man better to be a ship captain or a caregiver, as he seemed equally skilled in both roles.

[Footnote 1: Doric—south-wester.]

[Footnote 1: Doric—south-west.]

Such a temperament is admirably suited to the command of a packet—a station in which so many different dispositions, habits and prejudices are to be soothed, at the same time that a proper regard is to be had to the safety of their persons. If any proof is wanting that the characters of seamen in general have been formed under adverse circumstances, and without sufficient attention, or, indeed, any attention to their real interests, it is afforded in the fact, that the officers of the packet-ships, men usually trained like other mariners, so easily adapt their habits to their new situation, and become more mild, reflecting and humane. It is very rare to hear a complaint against an officer of one of these vessels; yet it is not easy to appreciate the embarrassments they have frequently to encounter from whimsical, irritable, ignorant, and exacting passengers. As a rule, the eastern men of this country make the best packet-officers. They are less accustomed to sail with foreigners than those who have been trained in the other ports, but acquire habits of thought and justice by commanding their countrymen; for, of all the seamen of the known world, I take it the most subordinate, the least troublesome, and the easiest to govern, so long as he is not oppressed is the native American. This, indeed, is true, both ashore and afloat, for very obvious reasons: they who are accustomed to reason themselves, being the most likely to submit to reasonable regulations; and they who are habituated to plenty, are the least likely to be injured by prosperity, which causes quite as much trouble in this world as adversity. It is this prosperity, too suddenly acquired, which spoils most of the labouring Europeans who emigrate; while they seldom acquire the real, frank independence of feeling which characterizes the natives. They adopt an insolent and rude manner as its substitute, mistaking the shadow for the substance. This opinion of the American seamen is precisely the converse of what is generally believed in Europe, however, and more particularly in England; for, following out the one-sided political theories in which they have been nurtured, disorganization, in the minds of the inhabitants of the old world, is inseparable from popular institutions.

Such a temperament is well-suited for leading a packet—a role where countless different personalities, habits, and biases need to be managed while also ensuring their safety. If there's any doubt that the temperament of sailors is shaped by tough circumstances, often without proper consideration for their true interests, it's clear when you see that the officers of packet ships, typically trained like other sailors, quickly adjust their behaviors to their new roles and become more gentle, thoughtful, and compassionate. Complaints against these officers are pretty rare; however, it can be challenging to appreciate the difficulties they often face from unpredictable, irritable, uninformed, and demanding passengers. Generally, the eastern men of this country make the best packet officers. They have less experience sailing with foreigners compared to those trained at other ports, but they develop a strong sense of fairness and judgment by leading their fellow countrymen. Among all the sailors in the world, I believe the native American is the most obedient, least problematic, and easiest to manage, as long as he is not oppressed. This holds true both on land and at sea for clear reasons: those used to reasoning for themselves are more likely to accept reasonable rules, and those familiar with abundance are less likely to be spoiled by success, which can create just as many issues as hardship. It's this sudden wealth that often spoils many European laborers who immigrate; they rarely attain the genuine, open independence of spirit seen in the natives. Instead, they adopt a rude and arrogant attitude as a substitute, mistaking appearance for reality. This view of American sailors is the exact opposite of what's commonly believed in Europe, particularly in England, where the politically skewed ideas they've grown up with lead them to associate disorder with popular rule.

The early part of the season of 1826 was remarkable for the quantities of ice that had drifted from the north into the track of European and American ships. The Crisis, a London packet, had been missing nearly three months when we sailed. She was known to have been full of passengers, and the worst fears were felt for her safety; ten years have since elapsed, and no vestige of this unhappy ship has ever been found!

The early part of the 1826 season was notable for the large amounts of ice that had drifted down from the north into the routes used by European and American ships. The Crisis, a packet ship from London, had been missing for almost three months by the time we set sail. It was known to be carrying many passengers, and everyone was deeply concerned for its safety; ten years have passed since then, and not a trace of this unfortunate ship has ever been discovered!

Our master prudently decided that safety was of much more importance than speed, and he kept the Hudson well to the southward. Instead of crossing the banks, we were as low as 40°, when in their meridian; and although we had some of the usual signs, in distant piles of fog, and exceedingly chilly and disagreeable weather, for a day or two, we saw no ice. About the 15th, the wind got round to the southward and eastward, and we began to fall off, more than we wished even, to the northward.

Our captain wisely concluded that safety was far more important than speed, so he steered the Hudson well to the south. Instead of crossing the banks, we were as low as 40° when we reached their meridian; and even though we had some of the usual signs, like distant fog banks and very cold, unpleasant weather for a day or two, we didn’t see any ice. Around the 15th, the wind shifted to the south and east, and we started drifting off further north than we wanted.

All the charts for the last fifty years have three rocks laid down to the westward of Ireland, which are known as the "Three Chimneys." Most American mariners have little faith in their existence, and yet, I fancy, no seaman draws near the spot where they are said to be, without keeping a good look-out for the danger. The master of the Hudson once carried a lieutenant of the English navy, as a passenger, who assured him that he had actually seen these "Three Chimneys." He may have been mistaken, and he may not. Our course lay far to the southward of them; but the wind gradually hauled ahead, in such a way as to bring us as near as might be to the very spot where they ought to appear, if properly laid down. The look-outs of a merchant-ship are of no great value, except in serious cases, and I passed nearly a whole night on deck, quite as much incited by my precious charge, as by curiosity, in order to ascertain all that eyes could ascertain under the circumstances. No signs of these rocks, however, were seen from the Hudson.

All the charts for the last fifty years show three rocks located to the west of Ireland, known as the "Three Chimneys." Most American sailors don't really believe in their existence, but I imagine that no sailor approaches the area where they're said to be without keeping a close watch for danger. The captain of the Hudson once had an English navy lieutenant as a passenger, who claimed he had actually seen these "Three Chimneys." He could have been mistaken, or he might not have been. Our route took us well to the south of them; however, the wind gradually picked up and shifted in a way that brought us as close as possible to the exact spot where they should be, according to the charts. The lookouts on a merchant ship aren't very useful unless there's a serious issue, so I spent almost an entire night on deck, driven as much by my precious cargo as by curiosity, trying to see whatever I could under the circumstances. However, no signs of these rocks were seen from the Hudson.

It is surprising in the present state of commerce, and with the vast interests which are at stake, that any facts affecting the ordinary navigation between the two hemispheres should be left in doubt. There is a shoal, and I believe a reef, laid down near the tail of the great bank, whose existence is still uncertain. Seamen respect this danger more than that of the "Three Chimneys," for it lies very much in the track of ships between Liverpool and New York; still, while tacking, or giving it a berth, they do not know whether they are not losing a wind for a groundless apprehension! Our own government would do well to employ a light cruiser, or two, in ascertaining just these facts (many more might he added to the list), during the summer months. Our own brief naval history is pregnant with instances of the calamities that befall ships. No man can say when, or how, the Insurgente, the Pickering, the Wasp, the Epervier, the Lynx, and the Hornet disappeared. We know that they are gone; and of all the brave spirits they held, not one has been left to relate the histories of the different disasters. We have some plausible conjectures concerning the manner in which the two latter were wrecked; but an impenetrable mystery conceals the fate of the four others. They may have run on unknown reefs. These reefs may be constantly heaving up from the depths of the ocean, by subterranean efforts; for a marine rock is merely the summit of a submarine mountain.[2]

It's surprising, given the current state of commerce and the huge stakes involved, that any facts affecting regular navigation between the two hemispheres should still be in doubt. There's a shoal, and I think a reef, marked near the end of the great bank, whose existence is still uncertain. Sailors worry about this danger more than they do about the "Three Chimneys," since it lies almost directly in the path of ships traveling between Liverpool and New York; yet, while they’re maneuvering around it, they can’t be sure if they’re actually missing out on wind because of a baseless fear! Our government should really send out a light cruiser or two to find out just these facts (many more could be added to the list) during the summer months. Our brief naval history is full of examples of the disasters that happen to ships. No one can pinpoint when or how the Insurgente, the Pickering, the Wasp, the Epervier, the Lynx, and the Hornet vanished. We know they're gone; and of all the brave souls they had aboard, not a single one is left to tell the stories of the different tragedies. We have some reasonable guesses about how the last two were wrecked, but the fates of the other four remain a complete mystery. They might have run aground on unknown reefs. These reefs could be constantly rising from the depths of the ocean due to underwater forces; after all, a marine rock is just the peak of a submarine mountain.

[Footnote 2: There is a touching incident connected with the fortunes of two young officers of the navy, that is not generally known. When the Essex frigate was captured in the Pacific, by the Phoebe and Cherub, two of the officers of the former were left in the ship, in order to make certain affidavits that were necessary to the condemnation. The remainder were paroled and returned to America. After a considerable interval, some uneasiness was felt at the protracted absence of those who had been left in the Essex. On inquiry it was found, that, after accompanying the ship to Rio Janeiro, they had been exchanged, according to agreement, and suffered to go where they pleased. After some delay, they took passage in a Swedish brig bound to Norway, as the only means which offered to get to Europe, whence they intended to return home. About this time great interest was also felt for the sloop Wasp. She had sailed for the mouth of the British Channel, where she fell in with and took the Reindeer, carrying her prisoners into France. Shortly after she had an action with and took the Avon, but was compelled to abandon her prize by others of the enemy's cruisers, one of which (the Castilian) actually came up with her and gave her a broad-side. About twenty days after the latter action she took a merchant-brig, near the Western Islands, and sent her into Philadelphia. This was the last that had been heard of her. Months and even years went by, and no farther intelligence was obtained. All this time, too, the gentlemen of the Essex were missing. Government ordered inquiries to be made in Sweden for the master of the brig in which they had embarked; he was absent on a long voyage, and a weary period elapsed before he could be found. When this did happen, he was required to give an account of his passengers. By producing his logbook and proper receipts, he proved that he had fallen in with the Wasp, near the line, about a fortnight after she had taken the merchant-brig named, when the young officers in question availed themselves of the occasion to return to their flag. Since that time, a period of twenty-one years, the Wasp has not been heard of.]

[Footnote 2: There’s a moving story about the fates of two young navy officers that isn’t widely known. When the Essex frigate was captured in the Pacific by the Phoebe and Cherub, two officers from the Phoebe stayed on the ship to make the necessary affidavits for condemnation. The others were paroled and returned to America. After a significant time, there was concern about the prolonged absence of those left on the Essex. Upon investigation, it was discovered that after going with the ship to Rio de Janeiro, they had been exchanged as agreed and were free to go wherever they wanted. After some delay, they boarded a Swedish brig headed for Norway, the only option available to reach Europe before heading home. Around this time, there was also significant interest in the sloop Wasp. She had sailed to the mouth of the British Channel, where she encountered and captured the Reindeer, taking her prisoners to France. Shortly after, she engaged and captured the Avon but had to abandon her prize due to attacks from enemy cruisers, one of which (the Castilian) caught up with her and fired a broadside. About twenty days later, she captured a merchant brig near the Western Islands and sent her to Philadelphia. That was the last anyone heard of her. Months and even years passed without further news. During this time, the Essex officers were also missing. The government ordered inquiries in Sweden to find the captain of the brig they had taken, but he was away on a long voyage, causing a long wait before he could be located. Once he was found, he had to account for his passengers. By presenting his logbook and proper receipts, he demonstrated that he had encountered the Wasp near the equator about two weeks after she had captured the merchant brig, at which point the young officers took the opportunity to return to their flag. Since then, for twenty-one years, there have been no reports of the Wasp.]

We were eighteen days out, when, early one morning, we made an American ship, on our weather quarter. Both vessels had everything set that would draw, and were going about five knots, close on the wind. The stranger made a signal to speak us, and, on the Hudson's main-topsail being laid to the mast, he came down under our stern, and ranged up alongside to leeward. He proved to be a ship called the "London Packet," from Charlestown, bound to Havre, and his chronometer having stopped, he wanted to get the longitude.

We were eighteen days out when, early one morning, we spotted an American ship off our weather quarter. Both vessels had all their sails up and were moving about five knots, close-hauled. The other ship signaled to talk to us, and after the Hudson's main-topsail was lowered to the mast, he came down behind us and positioned himself alongside on the leeward side. He turned out to be a ship called the "London Packet," from Charlestown, headed to Havre, and since his chronometer had stopped, he wanted to determine his longitude.

When we had given him our meridian, a trial of sailing commenced, which continued without intermission for three entire days. During this time, we had the wind from all quarters, and of every degree of force, from the lightest air to a double-reefed-topsail breeze. We were never a mile separated, and frequently we were for hours within a cable's length of each other. One night the two ships nearly got foul, in a very light air. The result showed, that they sailed as nearly alike, one being deep and the other light, as might well happen to two vessels. On the third day, both ships being under reefed topsails, with the wind at east, and in thick weather, after holding her own with us for two watches, the London Packet edged a little off the wind, while the Hudson still hugged it, and we soon lost sight of our consort in the mist.

When we gave him our position, a sailing trial began that lasted non-stop for three full days. During that time, we experienced winds from every direction and at every strength, from the lightest breeze to a strong wind that required double-reefed topsails. We were never more than a mile apart and often stayed within a cable's length of each other for hours. One night, the two ships almost collided in very light winds. The results showed that they sailed almost identically, one being heavily loaded and the other light, which can happen with two vessels. On the third day, both ships had their reefed topsails up, with the wind blowing from the east and thick fog around us. After keeping pace with us for two watches, the London Packet veered slightly off the wind while the Hudson stayed close to it, and we soon lost sight of our companion in the fog.

We were ten days longer struggling with adverse winds. During this time the ship made all possible traverses, our vigilant master resorting to every expedient of an experienced seaman to get to the eastward. We were driven up as high as fifty-four, where we fell into the track of the St. Lawrence traders. The sea seemed covered with them, and I believe we made more than a hundred, most of which were brigs. All these we passed without difficulty. At length a stiff breeze came from the south-west, and we laid our course for the mouth of the British Channel under studding-sails.

We spent ten extra days battling against strong winds. During this time, the ship tried every possible maneuver, with our attentive captain using all the tricks of an experienced sailor to head east. We were pushed up as far as fifty-four, where we ran into the route of the St. Lawrence traders. The sea seemed filled with them, and I think we passed more than a hundred, most of which were brigs. We went past all of them without any trouble. Finally, a strong breeze came from the southwest, and we set our course for the entrance of the British Channel with studding-sails up.

On the 28th we got bottom in about sixty fathoms water. The 29th was thick weather, with a very light, but a fair wind; we were now quite sensibly within the influence of the tides. Towards evening the horizon brightened a little, and we made the Bill of Portland, resembling a faint bluish cloud. It was soon obscured, and most of the landsmen were incredulous about its having been seen at all. In the course of the night, however, we got a good view of the Eddystone.

On the 28th, we reached the bottom in about sixty fathoms of water. The 29th brought thick weather, with a very light but favorable wind; we could now clearly feel the effects of the tides. Toward evening, the horizon brightened a bit, and we spotted the Bill of Portland, which looked like a faint bluish cloud. It was soon hidden again, and most of the landsmen were skeptical about whether it had actually been seen. However, during the night, we got a clear view of the Eddystone.

Going on deck early on the morning of the 30th, a glorious view presented itself. The day was fine, clear, and exhilarating, and the wind was blowing fresh from the westward. Ninety-seven sail, which had come into the Channel, like ourselves, during the thick weather, were in plain sight. The majority were English, but we recognized the build of half the maritime nations of Christendom in the brilliant fleet. Everybody was busy, and the blue waters were glittering with canvass. A frigate was in the midst of us, walking through the crowd like a giant stepping among pigmies. Our own good vessel left everything behind her also, with the exception of two or three other bright-sided ships, which happened to be as fast as herself.

Going on deck early on the morning of the 30th, I was greeted by a stunning view. The weather was nice, clear, and refreshing, with a strong breeze coming from the west. Ninety-seven ships that had entered the Channel, just like us, were clearly visible. Most were English, but we could recognize the design of ships from half the maritime nations of Europe in the vibrant fleet. Everyone was busy, and the blue waters sparkled with sails. A frigate moved among us, towering over the others like a giant among tiny people. Our own good ship left everything behind, except for two or three other fast ships with shiny sides that happened to match her speed.

I found the master busy with the glass; and, as soon as he caught my eye, he made a sign for me to come forward. "Look at that ship directly ahead of us!" The vessel alluded to led the fleet, being nearly hull-down to the eastward. It was the Don Quixote, which had left the port of New York one month before, about the same distance in our advance. "Now look here, inshore of us," added the master: "it is an American; but I cannot make her out." "Look again: she has a new cloth in her main-top-gallant sail." This was true enough, and by that sign, the vessel was our late competitor, the London Packet!

I found the captain busy with the glass; and as soon as he spotted me, he motioned for me to come closer. "Check out that ship straight ahead!" The vessel he was pointing at was leading the fleet, almost out of sight to the east. It was the Don Quixote, which had left New York about a month ago and was roughly at the same distance ahead of us. "Now take a look inshore of us," the captain said, "it's an American ship; but I can't identify it." "Look again: she has a new fabric in her main-top-gallant sail." That was definitely true, and by that sign, the ship was our former rival, the London Packet!

As respects the Don Quixote, we had made a journey of some five thousand miles, and not varied our distance, on arriving, a league. There was probably some accident in this; for the Don Quixote had the reputation of a fast ship, while the Hudson was merely a pretty fair sailer. We had probably got the best of the winds. But a hard and close trial of three days had shown that neither the Hudson nor the London Packet, in their present trims, could go ahead of the other in any wind. And yet here, after a separation of ten days, during which time our ship had tacked and wore fifty times, had calms, foul winds and fair, and had run fully a thousand miles, there was not a league's difference between the two vessels!

As for the Don Quixote, we had traveled about five thousand miles, but our distance hadn’t changed by even a league when we arrived. There must have been some kind of issue because the Don Quixote was known to be a fast ship, while the Hudson was just a decent sailor. We likely had the best wind conditions. Still, a tough and intense test over three days had shown that neither the Hudson nor the London Packet, in their current states, could outpace the other in any wind. Yet here we were, after being apart for ten days, during which our ship had changed course fifty times, experienced calm periods, headwinds, and favorable winds, and had covered nearly a thousand miles, and still, there wasn’t even a league of difference between the two vessels!

I have related these circumstances, because I think they are connected with causes that have a great influence on the success of American navigation. On passing several of the British ships to-day, I observed that their officers were below, or at least out of sight; and in one instance, a vessel of a very fair mould, and with every appearance of a good sailer, actually lay with some of her light sails aback, long enough to permit us to come up with and pass her. The Hudson probably went with this wind some fifteen or twenty miles farther than this loiterer; while I much question if she could have gone as far, had the latter been well attended to. The secret is to be found in the fact, that so large a portion of American ship-masters are also ship-owners, as to have erected a standard of activity and vigilance, below which few are permitted to fall. These men work for themselves, and, like all their countrymen, are looking out for something more than a mere support.

I’ve shared these details because I believe they are linked to factors that significantly impact the success of American navigation. While passing several British ships today, I noticed that their officers were below deck or at least not visible; in one case, a vessel that looked good and had every indication of being a good sailor was actually sitting with some of its light sails back for long enough to let us catch up and pass it. The Hudson likely sailed with this wind about fifteen or twenty miles farther than that ship, and I seriously doubt it could have gone as far if it had been properly attended to. The key issue is that many American ship captains are also ship owners, creating a standard of activity and vigilance that few can afford to drop below. These individuals work for themselves and, like all their fellow countrymen, are aiming for something beyond just making a living.

About noon we got a Cowes pilot. He brought no news, but told us the English vessel I have just named was sixty days from Leghorn, and that she had been once a privateer. We were just thirty from New York.

About noon, we got a Cowes pilot. He didn’t bring any news, but he told us that the English ship I just mentioned was sixty days out from Leghorn and had once been a privateer. We were just thirty days from New York.

We had distant glimpses of the land all day, and several of the passengers determined to make their way to the shore in the pilot-boat. These Channel craft are sloops of about thirty or forty tons, and are rather picturesque and pretty boats, more especially when under low sail. They are usually fitted to take passengers, frequently earning more in this way than by their pilotage. They have the long sliding bowsprit, a short lower mast, very long cross-trees, with a taunt topmast, and, though not so "wicked" to the eye, I think them prettier objects at sea than our own schooners. The party from the Hudson had scarcely got on board their new vessel when it fell calm, and the master and myself paid them a visit. They looked like a set of smugglers waiting for the darkness to run in. On our return we rowed round the ship. One cannot approach a vessel at sea, in this manner, without being struck with the boldness of the experiment which launched such massive and complicated fabrics on the ocean. The pure water is a medium almost as transparent as the atmosphere, and the very keel is seen, usually so near the surface, in consequence of refraction, as to give us but a very indifferent opinion of the security of the whole machine. I do not remember ever looking at my own vessel, when at sea, from a boat, without wondering at my own folly in seeking such a home.

We caught glimpses of the land all day, and several passengers decided to head to the shore in the pilot boat. These Channel boats are sloops that weigh about thirty or forty tons, and they're pretty charming, especially when they're sailing with minimal sail up. They’re typically set up to carry passengers, often making more money this way than from their pilot duties. They feature a long sliding bowsprit, a short lower mast, very long cross-trees, and a tall topmast. While they might not be as striking as our own schooners, I find them more attractive at sea. The group from the Hudson had barely boarded their new vessel when the wind died down, so the captain and I went to visit them. They looked like a band of smugglers waiting for nightfall to move their goods. On our way back, we rowed around the ship. It’s hard to approach a vessel at sea this way without being struck by the boldness of the venture that sent such massive and complex structures onto the ocean. The clear water is almost as transparent as the air, and you can see the keel, which is usually so close to the surface due to refraction, giving us a poor sense of how secure the entire ship really is. I can’t recall ever looking at my own vessel from a boat without wondering about my own foolishness in choosing such a life.

In the afternoon the breeze sprang up again, and we soon lost sight of our friends, who were hauling in for the still distant land. All that afternoon and night we had a fresh and a favourable wind. The next day I went on deck, while the people were washing the ship. It was Sunday, and there was a flat calm. The entire scene admirably suited a day of rest. The Channel was like a mirror, unruffled by a breath of air, and some twenty or thirty vessels lay scattered about the view, with their sails festooned and drooping, thrown into as many picturesque positions by the eddying waters. Our own ship had got close in with the land; so near, indeed, as to render a horse or a man on the shore distinctly visible. We were on the coast of Dorsetshire. A range of low cliffs lay directly abeam of us, and, as the land rose to a ridge behind them, we had a distinct view of a fair expanse of nearly houseless fields. We had left America verdant and smiling, but we found England brown and parched, there having been a long continuance of dry easterly winds.

In the afternoon, the breeze picked up again, and we quickly lost sight of our friends, who were heading toward the still distant land. All that afternoon and night, we enjoyed a fresh, favorable wind. The next day, I went on deck while the crew was cleaning the ship. It was Sunday, and there was a calm stillness. The entire scene was perfect for a day of rest. The Channel looked like a mirror, undisturbed by any breeze, and about twenty or thirty vessels were scattered across the view, their sails hanging loosely and taking on various picturesque shapes due to the swirling waters. Our ship had come close to the land—so close that we could clearly see a horse or a person on the shore. We were along the coast of Dorsetshire. A line of low cliffs was directly off to the side, and as the land rose to a ridge behind them, we could see a wide expanse of almost empty fields. We had left America lush and vibrant, but we found England dry and parched due to a long stretch of dry easterly winds.

The cliffs terminated suddenly, a little way ahead of the ship, and the land retired inward, with a wide sweep, forming a large, though not a very deep bay, that was bounded by rather low shores. It was under these very cliffs, on which we were looking with so much pleasure and security, and at so short a distance, that the well-known and terrible wreck of an Indiaman occurred, when the master, with his two daughters, and hundreds of other lives, were lost. The pilot pointed out the precise spot where that ill-fated vessel went to pieces. But the sea in its anger, and the sea at rest, are very different powers. The place had no terrors for us.

The cliffs ended abruptly just ahead of the ship, and the land curved back, creating a large but not very deep bay, surrounded by fairly low shores. It was right under those cliffs, which we were admiring from a safe distance, that the infamous and tragic wreck of an Indiaman took place, claiming the lives of the captain, his two daughters, and hundreds of others. The pilot showed us the exact location where that doomed ship broke apart. However, the sea in its fury and the sea when calm are completely different forces. The spot held no fear for us.

Ahead of us, near twenty miles distant, lay a high hazy bluff, that was just visible. This was the western extremity of the Isle of Wight, and the end of our passage in the Hudson. A sloop of war was pointing her head in towards this bluff, and all the vessels in sight now began to take new forms, varying and increasing the picturesque character of the view. We soon got a light air ourselves, and succeeded in laying the ship's head off shore, towards which we had been gradually drifting nearer than was desirable. The wind came fresh and fair about ten, when we directed our course towards the distant bluff. Everything was again in motion. The cliffs behind us gradually sunk, as those before us rose, and lost their indistinctness; the blue of the latter soon became grey, and, ere long, white as chalk, this being the material of which they are, in truth, composed.

Ahead of us, about twenty miles away, was a high, hazy bluff that was just barely visible. This marked the western end of the Isle of Wight and the conclusion of our journey in the Hudson. A warship was heading toward this bluff, and all the ships in sight started to change shape, enhancing the picturesque quality of the view. Soon, we caught a light breeze and managed to steer the ship's bow away from the shore, which we had been drifting towards more closely than we wanted. The wind picked up nicely around ten, and we set our course toward the distant bluff. Everything started moving again. The cliffs behind us slowly faded as those in front rose and became clearer; the blue of the latter soon turned to grey, and before long, they shone white as chalk, which is what they are actually made of.

We saw a small whale (it might have been a large grampus) floundering ahead of us, and acting as an extra pilot, for he appeared to be steering, like ourselves, for the Needles. These Needles are fragments of the chalk cliffs, that have been pointed and rendered picturesque by the action of the weather, and our course lay directly past them. They form a line from the extremity of the Isle of Wight, and are awkwardly placed for vessels that come this way in thick weather, or in the dark. The sloop of war got round them first, and we were not far behind her. When fairly within the Needles the ship was embayed, our course now lying between Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, through a channel of no great width. The country was not particularly beautiful, and still looked parched; though we got a distant view of one pretty town, Lymington, in Hampshire. This place, in the distance, appeared not unlike a large New England village, though there was less glare to the houses. The cliffs, however, were very fine, without being of any extraordinary elevation. Though much inferior to the shores of the Mediterranean, they as much surpass anything I remember to have seen on our own coast, between Cape Anne and Cape Florida; which, for its extent, a part of India, perhaps, excepted, is, I take it, just the flattest, and tamest, and least interesting coast in the entire world.

We spotted a small whale (it could have been a large dolphin) struggling ahead of us, acting like an extra pilot, as it seemed to be navigating toward the Needles, just like we were. The Needles are pieces of chalk cliffs that have been shaped and made picturesque by the weather, and our path took us right past them. They stretch from the tip of the Isle of Wight and are tricky for ships navigating through thick fog or darkness. The warship got around them first, and we weren’t far behind. Once we passed the Needles, the ship was trapped, with our route now running between Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, through a narrow channel. The landscape wasn’t especially beautiful and still looked dry, though we caught a distant glimpse of a charming town, Lymington, in Hampshire. This town, from afar, resembled a large New England village, although the houses weren't as glaring. The cliffs, however, were quite impressive, even if they weren't exceptionally tall. While they are much less stunning than the shores of the Mediterranean, they surpass anything I remember seeing on our own coast, between Cape Ann and Cape Florida, which is, in terms of its stretch, probably the flattest, dullest, and least interesting coastline in the entire world, except maybe a part of India.

The master pointed out a mass of dark herbage on a distant height, which resembled a copse of wood that had been studiously clipped into square forms at its different angles. It was visible only for a few moments, through a vista in the hills. This was Carisbrooke Castle, buried in ivy.

The master indicated a patch of dark greenery on a far-off hill that looked like a grove that had been carefully trimmed into square shapes at various angles. It was only visible for a short time through an opening in the hills. This was Carisbrooke Castle, covered in ivy.

There was another little castle, on a low point of land, which was erected by Henry VIII. as a part of a system of marine defence. It would scarcely serve to scale the guns of a modern twenty-four-pounder frigate, judging of its means of resistance and annoyance by the eye. These things are by-gones for England, a country that has little need of marine batteries.

There was another small castle situated on a low spot of land, built by Henry VIII as part of a coastal defense system. It would hardly be able to withstand the cannons of a modern twenty-four-pounder frigate, based on its visible means of resistance and protection. These matters are relics of the past for England, a country that has little need for coastal batteries.

About three, we reached a broad basin, the land retiring on each side of us. The estuary to the northward is called Southampton Water, the town of that name being seated on its margin. The opening in the Isle of Wight is little more than a very wide mouth to a very diminutive river or creek, and Cowes, divided into East and West, lines its shores. The anchorage in the arm of the sea off this little haven was well filled with vessels, chiefly the yachts of amateur seamen, and the port itself contained little more than pilot-boats and crafts of a smaller size. The Hudson brought up among the former. Hauling up the forecourse of a merchant-ship is like lifting the curtain again on the drama of the land. These vessels rarely furl this sail; and they who have not experienced it, cannot imagine what a change it produces on those who have lived a month or six weeks beneath its shadow. The sound of the chain running out was very grateful, and I believe, though well satisfied with the ship as such, that everybody was glad to get a nearer view of our great mother earth.

Around three o'clock, we arrived at a wide basin, with the land receding on both sides. The estuary to the north is known as Southampton Water, with the town of the same name located along its edge. The opening at the Isle of Wight is just a very wide mouth to a small river or creek, and Cowes, split into East and West, lines its shores. The anchorage in the arm of the sea near this little harbor was filled with boats, mainly the yachts of amateur sailors, and the port itself had little more than pilot boats and smaller craft. The Hudson was among the former. Hauling up the foresail of a merchant ship is like pulling back the curtain on the drama of the land. These vessels rarely take down this sail; those who haven't experienced it can't imagine the change it brings to those who have spent a month or six weeks under its shadow. The sound of the anchor chain being lowered was quite pleasing, and I believe, while people were happy with the ship itself, everyone was eager to get a closer look at our great mother earth.

It was Sunday, but we were soon visited by boats from the town. Some came to carry us ashore, others to see that we carried nothing off with us. At first, the officer of the customs manifested a desire to make us all go without the smallest article of dress, or anything belonging to our most ordinary comforts; but he listened to remonstrances, and we were eventually allowed to depart with our night-bags. As the Hudson was to sail immediately for London, all our effects were sent within the hour to the custom-house. At 3 P.M. July 2nd, 1826, we put foot in Europe, after a passage of thirty-one days from the quarantine ground.

It was Sunday, but soon we were visited by boats from the town. Some came to take us ashore, while others were there to make sure we didn't take anything with us. At first, the customs officer wanted us to leave behind even the smallest items of clothing or anything we needed for our basic comfort; however, he listened to our objections, and we were eventually allowed to leave with our overnight bags. Since the Hudson was set to sail for London shortly, all our belongings were sent to the customs house within the hour. At 3 PM on July 2nd, 1826, we stepped onto European soil, after a journey of thirty-one days from the quarantine area.

LETTER II.

Controversy at Cowes.—Custom-house Civility.—English Costume.—Fashion
in America.—Quadrilles in New York.—Cowes.—Nautical Gallantry.
English Beauty.—Isle of Wight Butter.—English Scenery.—M'Adamized
Roads.—Old Village Church.—Rural Interment.—Pauper's
Grave.—Carisbrooke Cattle.—Southampton.—Waiter at the Vine.—English
Costume.—Affinity with England.—Netley Abbey.—Southampton Cockneys.

Controversy at Cowes.—Customs Courtesy.—British Fashion.—Trends
in America.—Quadrilles in New York.—Cowes.—Nautical Charm.
British Beauty.—Isle of Wight Butter.—British Landscape.—M'Adamized
Roads.—Old Village Church.—Rural Burial.—Pauper's
Grave.—Carisbrooke Cattle.—Southampton.—Server at the Vine.—British
Fashion.—Connection with England.—Netley Abbey.—Southampton Locals.

TO MRS. POMEROY, COOPERSTOWN, NEW YORK.

We were no sooner on English ground, than we hurried to one of the two or three small inns of West Cowes, or the principal quarter of the place, and got rooms at the Fountain. Mr. and Mrs. —— had preceded us, and were already in possession of a parlour adjoining our own. On casting an eye out at the street, I found them, one at each window of their own room, already engaged in a lively discussion of the comparative merits of Cowes and Philadelphia! This propensity to exaggerate the value of whatever is our own, and to depreciate that which is our neighbour's, a principle that is connected with the very ground-work of poor human nature, forms a material portion of travelling equipage of nearly every one who quits the scenes of his own youth, to visit those of other people. A comparison between Cowes and Philadelphia is even more absurd than a comparison between New York and London, and yet, in this instance, it answered the purpose of raising a lively controversy between an American wife and a European husband.

We had barely set foot in England when we rushed to one of the few small inns in West Cowes, the main area of the town, and got rooms at the Fountain. Mr. and Mrs. —— had arrived before us and were already occupying a parlor next to ours. When I looked out at the street, I saw them, one at each window of their room, already deep in a spirited debate about the relative merits of Cowes and Philadelphia! This tendency to hype up the value of what we have and downplay that of our neighbors is something deeply rooted in human nature and is a significant part of the luggage that almost everyone carries when they leave their familiar surroundings to explore those of others. Comparing Cowes and Philadelphia is even more ridiculous than comparing New York and London, yet in this case, it sparked a lively argument between an American wife and her European husband.

The consul at Cowes had been an old acquaintance at school some five-and-twenty years before, and an inquiry was set on foot for his residence. He was absent in France, but his deputy soon presented himself with an offer of services. We wished for our trunks, and it was soon arranged that there should be an immediate examination. Within an hour we were summoned to the store-house, where an officer attended on behalf of the customs. Everything was done in a very expeditious and civil manner, not only for us, but for a few steerage passengers, and this, too, without the least necessity for a douceur, the usual passe-partout of England. America sends no manufactures to Europe; and, a little smuggling in tobacco excepted, there is probably less of the contraband in our commercial connexion with England, than ever before occurred between two nations that have so large a trade. This, however, is only in reference to what goes eastward, for immense amounts of the smaller manufactured articles of all Europe find their way, duty free, into the United States. There is also a regular system of smuggling through the Canadas, I have been told.

The consul at Cowes had been an old schoolmate from about twenty-five years ago, so we started looking into where he lived. He was away in France, but his deputy quickly came forward to offer assistance. We needed our trunks, and it was arranged right away for them to be examined. Within an hour, we were called to the storage area, where a customs officer was waiting for us. Everything was handled very quickly and politely, not just for us but also for a few steerage passengers, and this happened without any need for a douceur, the usual passe-partout of England. America doesn’t send any manufactured goods to Europe, and aside from a little smuggling of tobacco, there's probably less contraband in our trade with England than has ever existed between two nations with such a large trade. However, this only applies to what goes eastward, as significant amounts of smaller manufactured goods from all over Europe come into the United States without duties. I've also heard there’s a regular smuggling operation going on through Canada.

While the ladies were enjoying the negative luxury of being liberated from a ship, at the Fountain Inn, I strolled about the place. You know that I had twice visited England professionally before I was eighteen; and, on one occasion, the ship I was in anchored off this very island, though not at this precise spot. I now thought the people altered. There had certainly been so many important changes in myself during the same period, that it becomes me to speak with hesitation on this point: but even the common class seemed less peculiar, less English, less provincial, if one might use such an expression, as applied to so great a nation; in short, more like the rest of the world than formerly. Twenty years before, England was engaged in a war, by which she was, in a degree, isolated from most of Christendom. This insulated condition, sustained by a consciousness of wealth, knowledge, and power, had served to produce a decided peculiarity of manners, and even of appearance. In the article of dress I could not be mistaken. In 1806 I had seen all the lower classes of the English clad in something like costumes. The Channel waterman wore the short dowlas petticoat; the Thames waterman, a jacket and breeches of velveteen, and a badge; the gentleman and gentlewoman, attire such as was certainly to be seen in no other part of the Christian world, the English colonies excepted. Something of this still remained, but it existed rather as the exception than as the rule. I then felt, at every turn, that I was in a foreign country; whereas, now, the idea did not obtrude itself, unless I was brought in immediate contact with the people.

While the women were enjoying the rare luxury of being free from a ship, I wandered around the Fountain Inn. You know I had visited England twice for work before I turned eighteen; on one occasion, the ship I was on anchored near this very island, though not exactly in this spot. Now I thought the people seemed different. There had definitely been a lot of significant changes in myself during that time, so I should be cautious about saying much on this subject, but even the average folks seemed less unusual, less English, less provincial, if you can use that term for such a large nation; in short, they resembled the rest of the world more than they used to. Twenty years ago, England was involved in a war that, to some extent, isolated her from most of Christendom. This isolated situation, backed by a sense of wealth, knowledge, and power, contributed to a distinct way of behaving and even looking. When it came to fashion, I could not be mistaken. In 1806, I had seen all the lower classes of English people dressed in something like costumes. The Channel waterman wore a short dowlas skirt; the Thames waterman, a velveteen jacket and breeches, along with a badge; the gentleman and lady wore outfits that were certainly not found in any other part of the Christian world, except for the English colonies. Some of this still lingered, but it existed more as an exception than a norm. Back then, I felt constantly aware that I was in a foreign country; now, that thought only crossed my mind when I was directly interacting with the people.

America, in my time, at least, has always had an active and swift communication with the rest of the world. As a people, we are, beyond a question, decidedly provincial; but our provincialism is not exactly one of external appearance. The men are negligent of dress, for they are much occupied, have few servants, and clothes are expensive; but the women dress remarkably near the Parisian modes. We have not sufficient confidence in ourselves to set fashions. All our departures from the usages of the rest of mankind are results of circumstances, and not of calculation,—unless, indeed, it be one that is pecuniary. Those whose interest it is to produce changes cause fashions to travel fast, and there is not so much difficulty, or more cost, in transporting anything from Havre to New York, than there is in transporting the same thing from Calais to London; and far less difficulty in causing a new mode to be introduced, since, as a young people, we are essentially imitative. An example or two will better illustrate what I mean.

America, at least during my time, has always had fast and active communication with the rest of the world. As a people, we are undeniably provincial, but our provincialism doesn’t really show on the outside. The men are pretty casual about their clothing because they are busy, have few servants, and clothes can be pricey; however, the women dress very similarly to the styles from Paris. We don’t have enough confidence in ourselves to set trends. All our deviations from the norms of others come from circumstances, not from a plan—unless it’s for financial gain. Those who want to create changes make trends spread quickly, and there’s not much difference in the cost or effort to move something from Havre to New York compared to from Calais to London; plus, it’s much easier to introduce a new style since, as a young nation, we tend to mimic. A few examples will clarify what I mean.

When I visited London, with a part of my family, in 1823, after passing near two years on the continent of Europe, Mrs. —— was compelled to change her dress—at all times simple, but then, as a matter of course, Parisian—in order not to be the subject of unpleasant observation. She might have gone in a carriage attired as a Frenchwoman, for they who ride in England are not much like those who walk; but to walk in the streets, and look at objects, it was far pleasanter to seem English than to seem French. Five years later, we took London on our way to America, and even then something of the same necessity was felt. On reaching home, with dresses fresh from Paris, the same party was only in the mode; with toilettes a little, and but very little, better arranged, it is true, but in surprising conformity with those of all around them. On visiting our own little retired mountain village, these Parisian-made dresses were scarcely the subject of remark to any but to your connoisseurs. My family struck me as being much less peculiar in the streets of C—— than they had been, a few months before, in the streets of London. All this must be explained by the activity of the intercourse between France and America, and by the greater facility of the Americans in submitting to the despotism of foreign fashions.

When I visited London with part of my family in 1823, after spending almost two years in Europe, Mrs. —— had to change her outfit—usually simple but at the time, of course, Parisian—to avoid drawing unwanted attention. She could have worn a carriage like a Frenchwoman, since those who ride in England don’t look like those who walk; but when strolling in the streets and observing things, it was much nicer to appear English than French. Five years later, we passed through London on our way to America, and even then we felt some of the same pressure. Upon returning home, dressed in fresh Parisian outfits, the same group was just in the mode; with their toilettes a little bit, and only just a bit, better put together, it’s true, but surprisingly in line with those around them. When visiting our quiet little mountain village, those Parisian-made dresses hardly caught the eye of anyone except the connoisseurs. I noticed that my family seemed much less out of place in the streets of C—— than they had just a few months earlier in the streets of London. All of this can be explained by the strong connections between France and America and by how easily Americans fall under the influence of foreign styles.

Another fact will show you another side of the subject. While at Paris, a book of travels in America, written by an Englishman (Mr. Vigne), fell into my hands. The writer, apparently a well-disposed and sensible man, states that he was dancing dos-à-dos in a quadrille, at New York, when he found, by the embarrassment of the rest of the set, he had done something wrong. Some one kindly told him that they no longer danced dos-à-dos. In commenting on this trifling circumstance, the writer ascribes the whole affair to the false delicacy of our women! Unable to see the connexion between the cause and the effect, I pointed out the paragraph to one of my family, who was then in the daily practice of dancing, and that too in Paris itself, the very court of Terpsichore. She laughed, and told me that the practice of dancing dos-à-dos had gone out at Paris a year or two before, and that doubtless the newer mode had reached New York before it reached Mr. Vigne! These are trifles, but they are the trifles that make up the sum of national peculiarities, ignorance of which leads us into a thousand fruitless and absurd conjectures. In this little anecdote we learn the great rapidity with which new fashions penetrate American usages, and the greater ductility of American society in visible and tangible things, at least; and the heedless manner with which even those who write in a good spirit of America, jump to their conclusions. Had Captain Hall, or Mrs. Trollope, encountered this unlucky quadrille, they would probably have found some clever means of imputing the nez-à-nez tendencies of our dances to the spirit of democracy! The latter, for instance, is greatly outraged by the practice of wearing hats in Congress, and of placing the legs on tables; and, yet, both have been practised in Parliament from time immemorial! She had never seen her own Legislature, and having a set of theories cut and dried for Congress, everything that struck her as novel was referred to one of her preconceived notions. In this manner are books manufactured, and by such means are nations made acquainted with each other!

Another fact will reveal another side of the topic. While in Paris, I came across a travel book about America written by an Englishman (Mr. Vigne). The writer, who seems like a friendly and sensible guy, mentions that he was dancing dos-à-dos in a quadrille in New York when he noticed the awkwardness of the rest of the group and realized he had done something wrong. Someone kindly informed him that they no longer danced dos-à-dos. Commenting on this minor incident, the writer blames the whole situation on the false modesty of our women! Unable to understand the link between cause and effect, I pointed out this paragraph to a family member who was actively dancing in Paris, the very heart of dance. She laughed and told me that the practice of dancing dos-à-dos had gone out in Paris a year or two earlier, and that the newer style had probably reached New York before it reached Mr. Vigne! These are small details, but they are the small details that make up the sum of national peculiarities, ignorance of which leads us into countless pointless and absurd assumptions. In this little story, we learn how quickly new fashions seep into American customs, and how flexible American society is regarding visible and tangible changes, at least; as well as the careless way even those who write positively about America jump to conclusions. If Captain Hall or Mrs. Trollope had encountered this unfortunate quadrille, they probably would have found some clever way to attribute the nez-à-nez tendencies of our dances to the spirit of democracy! The latter, for instance, is quite bothered by the practice of wearing hats in Congress and putting legs on tables; yet, both have been common in Parliament for ages! She had never witnessed her own Legislature, and with a set of pre-made theories for Congress, everything that seemed new to her was linked to one of her preconceived ideas. This is how books are created, and this is how nations become familiar with one another!

Cowes resembles a toy-town. The houses are tiny; the streets, in the main, are narrow, and not particularly straight, while everything is neat as wax. Some new avenues, however, are well planned, and, long ere this, are probably occupied; and there were several small marine villas in or near the place. One was shown me that belonged to the Duke of Norfolk. It had the outward appearance of a medium-sized American country-house. The bluff King Hal caused another castle to be built here also, which, I understood, was inhabited at the time by the family of the Marquis of Anglesey, who was said to be its governor. A part of the system of the English government patronage is connected with these useless castles and nominally fortified places. Salaries are attached to the governments, and the situations are usually bestowed on military men. This is a good or a bad regulation, as the patronage is used. In a nation of extensive military operations it might prove a commendable and a delicate way of rewarding services; but, as the tendency of mankind is to defer to intrigue, and to augment power rather than to reward merit, the probability is, that these places are rarely bestowed, except in the way of political quids pro quos.

Cowes looks like a little toy town. The houses are small; for the most part, the streets are narrow and not very straight, while everything is tidy and well-kept. However, some new avenues are well-designed and, by now, are probably filled with residents; there were also several small beach houses in or near the area. One that was shown to me belonged to the Duke of Norfolk. It had the appearance of a medium-sized American country house. King Henry VIII had another castle built here as well, which I was told was at that time lived in by the family of the Marquis of Anglesey, who was said to be its governor. Part of the English government's patronage system is linked to these unnecessary castles and supposedly fortified sites. Salaries are associated with these roles, and they are usually given to military personnel. This can be a good or bad arrangement, depending on how the patronage is used. In a nation with extensive military engagements, it might be a commendable and thoughtful way to reward service; however, since people tend to favor intrigue and prioritize power over merit, it’s likely that these positions are seldom awarded unless in exchange for political favors.

I was, with one striking exception, greatly disappointed in the general appearance of the females that I met in the streets. While strolling in the skirts of the town, I came across a group of girls and boys, in which a laughable scene of nautical gallantry was going on. The boys, lads of fourteen or fifteen, were young sailors, and among the girls, who were of the same age and class, was one of bewitching beauty. There had been some very palpable passages of coquetry between the two parties, when one of the young sailors, a tight lad of thirteen or fourteen, rushed into the bevy of petticoats, and, borne away by an ecstasy of admiration, but certainly guided by an excellent taste, he seized the young Venus round the neck, and dealt out some as hearty smacks as I remember to have heard. The working of emotion in the face of the girl was a perfect study. Confusion and shame came first; indignation followed; and, darting out from among her companions, she dealt her robust young admirer such a slap in the face, that it sounded like the report of a pocket-pistol. The blow was well meant, and admirably administered. It left the mark of every finger on the cheek of the sturdy little fellow. The lad clenched his fist, seemed much disposed to retort in kind, and ended by telling his beautiful antagonist that it was very fortunate for her she was not a boy. But it was the face of the girl herself that drew my attention. It was like a mirror which reflected every passing thought. When she gave the blow, it was red with indignation. This feeling instantly gave way to a kinder sentiment, and her colour softened to a flush of surprise at the boldness of her own act. Then came a laugh, and a look about her, as if to inquire if she had been very wrong; the whole terminating in an expression of regret in the prettiest blue eyes in the world, which might have satisfied any one that an offence occasioned by her own sweet face was not unpardonable. The sweetness, the ingenuousness, the spirit mingled with softness, exhibited in the countenance of this girl, are, I think, all characteristic of the English female countenance, when it has not been marble-ized by the over-wrought polish of high breeding. Similar countenances occur in America, though, I think, less frequently than here; and I believe them to be quite peculiar to the Anglo-Saxon race. The workings of such a countenance are like the play of lights and shades in a southern sky.

I was, with one striking exception, really disappointed in the overall look of the women I saw in the streets. While walking around the outskirts of the town, I came across a group of girls and boys, where a funny scene of youthful bravery was unfolding. The boys, around fourteen or fifteen, were young sailors, and among the girls of the same age was one of stunning beauty. There had been some clear flirting between the two groups when one of the young sailors, a boy of thirteen or fourteen, rushed into the crowd of girls, overwhelmed by admiration, and clearly guided by good taste, he wrapped his arms around the young goddess's neck and laid on some of the loudest kisses I ever heard. The emotions on the girl's face were a perfect study. First came confusion and shame; then, indignation took over; and, stepping out from among her friends, she delivered her bold young admirer such a slap in the face that it sounded like a gunshot. The blow was well-intentioned and perfectly executed. It left the print of every finger on the cheek of the sturdy little guy. The lad clenched his fist, seemed ready to retaliate, and finally told his beautiful opponent that she was lucky she wasn’t a boy. But it was the girl’s face that caught my attention. It was like a mirror reflecting every passing thought. When she slapped him, her face was red with anger. That feeling quickly shifted to a softer emotion, and her cheeks softened to a blush of surprise at her own daring act. Then she laughed and looked around, as if to see if she had done something very wrong; all of it ended with an expression of regret in the prettiest blue eyes in the world, which could have convinced anyone that an offense caused by her own lovely face was forgivable. The sweetness, the innocence, and the spirit mixed with gentleness displayed on this girl’s face, I think, are all typical of the English female face, when it hasn’t been hardened by the excessive refinement of high society. Similar faces can be found in America, although I think less often than here; and I believe they are quite unique to the Anglo-Saxon race. The expressions on such a face are like the interplay of light and shadow in a southern sky.

From the windows of the inn we had a very good view of a small castellated dwelling that one of the King's architects had caused to be erected for himself. The effect of gray towers seen over the tree-tops, with glimpses of the lawn, visible through vistas in the copses, was exceedingly pretty; though the indescribable influence of association prevented us from paying that homage to turrets and walls of the nineteenth, that we were ready so devotedly to pay to anything of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.

From the windows of the inn, we had a great view of a small castle-like house that one of the King's architects had built for himself. The sight of gray towers rising above the trees, along with glimpses of the lawn visible through openings in the woods, was really beautiful. However, the indescribable pull of nostalgia kept us from giving the same appreciation to the towers and walls from the nineteenth century that we were eager to show for anything from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.

We broke bread, for the first time in Europe, that evening, having made an early and a hurried dinner on board the ship. The Isle of Wight is celebrated for its butter, and yet we found it difficult to eat it! The English, and many other European nations, put no salt in their table butter; and we, who had been accustomed to the American usage, exclaimed with one voice against its insipidity. A near relation of A——'s who once served in the British army, used to relate an anecdote on the subject of tastes, that is quite in point. A brother officer, who had gone safely through the celebrated siege of Gibraltar, landed at Portsmouth, on his return home. Among the other privations of his recent service, he had been compelled to eat butter whose fragrance scented the whole Rock. Before retiring for the night, he gave particular orders to have hot rolls and Isle of Wight butter served for breakfast. The first mouthful disappointed him, and of course the unlucky waiter suffered. The latter protested that he had executed the order to the letter. "Then take away your Isle of Wight butter," growled the officer, "and bring me some that has a taste."

We shared a meal for the first time in Europe that evening, having had a quick and early dinner on the ship. The Isle of Wight is known for its butter, yet we found it hard to enjoy! The English, like many other European countries, don’t put any salt in their table butter, and we, who were used to the American way, all complained about how bland it was. A close relative of A——'s, who once served in the British army, had a story that fits perfectly here. A fellow officer, who had bravely survived the famous siege of Gibraltar, landed at Portsmouth on his way home. Among the many hardships he faced during his service, he had to eat butter that smelled up the whole Rock. Before going to bed, he specifically ordered hot rolls and Isle of Wight butter for breakfast. But the first bite was a letdown, and of course, the poor waiter had to bear the brunt of it. The waiter insisted that he followed the order exactly. “Then take away your Isle of Wight butter," the officer grumbled, "and bring me some that has a taste.”

Like him of Gibraltar, we were ready to exclaim, "Take away your Isle of Wight butter, and bring us some from the good ship Hudson," which, though not quite as fragrant as that which had obtained its odour in a siege, was not entirely without a taste. This little event, homely as it may appear, is connected with the principle that influences the decisions of more than half of those who visit foreign nations. Usages are condemned because they are not our own; practices are denounced if their connexion with fitness is not self-apparent to our inexperience; and men and things are judged by rules that are of local origin and local application. The moral will be complete when I add, that we, who were so fastidious about the butter at Cowes, after an absence of nearly eight years from America, had the salt regularly worked out of all we ate, for months after our return home, protesting there was no such thing as good butter in America. Had Mrs. —— introduced the Philadelphia butter, however, I think her husband must have succumbed, for I believe it to be the best in the world, not even excepting that of Leyden.

Like the guy from Gibraltar, we were ready to shout, "Get rid of your Isle of Wight butter and bring us some from the good ship Hudson," which, although not quite as aromatic as the butter that picked up its scent during a siege, still had some flavor. This little incident, simple as it may seem, is linked to the principle that influences the choices of many people who travel to foreign countries. Customs are criticized simply because they aren’t our own; practices are condemned if their relevance isn’t obvious due to our lack of experience; and people and things are evaluated based on standards that are locally derived and applied. The moral will be complete when I add that we, who were so particular about the butter at Cowes after being away from America for nearly eight years, found the salt in everything we ate, for months after we returned home, insisting that there was no such thing as good butter in America. However, if Mrs. —— had introduced Philadelphia butter, I think her husband would have given in because I believe it's the best in the world, even better than that from Leyden.

Towards evening, the Hudson having landed all her passengers, and the most of those who were in the steerage, went round the eastern point of the little port, on her way to London.

Towards evening, the Hudson having dropped off all her passengers, along with most of those in the steerage, went around the eastern point of the small port, heading to London.

After taking an early breakfast, we all got into a carriage called a sociable, which is very like a larger sort of American coaches and went to Newport, the principal town in the island. The road ran between hedges, and the scenery was strictly English. Small enclosures, copses, a sward clipped close as velvet, and trees (of no great size or beauty, however,) scattered in the fields, with an effect nearly equal to landscape gardening, were the predominant features. The drought had less influence on the verdure here than in Dorsetshire. The road was narrow and winding, the very beau idéal of a highway; for, in this particular, the general rule obtains that what is agreeable is the least useful. Thanks to the practical good sense and perseverance of Mr. McAdam, not only the road in question, but nearly all the roads of Great Britain have been made, within the last five-and-twenty years, to resemble in appearance, but really to exceed in solidity and strength, the roads one formerly saw in the grounds of private gentlemen. These roads are almost flat, and when they have been properly constructed, the wheel rolls over them as if passing along a bed of iron. Apart from the levels, which, of course, are not so rigidly observed, there is not, any very sensible difference between the draught on a really good McAdamized road and on a railroad. We have a few roads in America that are nearly as good as most one meets with, but we have nothing that deserves to be termed a real imitation of the system of Mr. McAdam.

After having an early breakfast, we all got into a carriage called a sociable, which is very similar to a larger type of American coach, and went to Newport, the main town on the island. The road ran between hedges, and the scenery was distinctly English. Small enclosures, patches of trees, a lawn trimmed close like velvet, and trees (not particularly large or beautiful, though) scattered throughout the fields created an effect nearly akin to landscape gardening, which were the main features. The drought affected the greenery here less than in Dorsetshire. The road was narrow and winding, the very ideal of a highway; for in this case, the general rule holds that what is pleasant is often the least practical. Thanks to the practical good sense and determination of Mr. McAdam, not only has this road, but nearly all the roads in Great Britain been improved in the last twenty-five years to look like, but actually exceed in durability and strength, the roads once found on the estates of private gentlemen. These roads are almost flat, and when constructed properly, the wheels roll over them as if traveling along a bed of iron. Aside from the levels, which aren’t always strictly observed, there isn't much noticeable difference between the effort needed on a really good McAdamized road and on a railroad. We have a few roads in America that come close to the quality most people encounter, but we don’t have anything that truly represents a real imitation of Mr. McAdam’s system.

The distance to Newport was only four or five miles. The town itself, a borough, but otherwise of little note, lies in a very sweet vale, and is neat but plain, resembling, in all but its greater appearance of antiquity and the greater size of its churches, one of our own provincial towns of the same size. A—— and myself took a fly, and went, by a very rural road, to Carisbrooke, a distance of about a mile, in quest of lodgings. Carisbrooke is a mere village, but the whole valley in this part of the island is so highly cultivated, and so many pretty cottages meet the eye—not cottages of the poor, but cottages of the rich—that it has an air of finish and high cultivation that we are accustomed to see only in the immediate vicinity of large towns, and not always even there.

The distance to Newport was only about four or five miles. The town itself, which is a borough, isn’t particularly remarkable, but it sits in a lovely valley and is tidy but simple. It reminds me of one of our own provincial towns of the same size, except it has a more ancient feel and bigger churches. A—— and I took a cab and traveled along a very rural road to Carisbrooke, which is about a mile away, in search of a place to stay. Carisbrooke is just a small village, but the entire valley in this part of the island is so well-kept, and there are so many charming cottages in sight—not cottages of the poor, but cottages of the wealthy—that it has a polished and cultivated vibe that we usually only see near large towns, and even then, not always.

On reaching the hamlet of Carisbrooke we found ourselves immediately beneath the castle. There was a fine old village church, one of those picturesque rustic edifices which abound in England, a building that time had warped and twisted in such a way as to leave few parallel lines, or straight edges, or even regular angles, in any part of it. They told us, also, that the remains of a ruined priory were at hand. We had often laughed since at the eagerness and delight with which we hurried off to look at these venerable objects. It was soon decided, however, that it was a pleasure too exquisite to be niggardly enjoyed alone, and the carriage was sent back with orders to bring up the whole party.

Upon arriving in the village of Carisbrooke, we found ourselves right beneath the castle. There was a lovely old village church, one of those charming rustic buildings that are common in England, a structure that time had bent and warped in such a way that it had few parallel lines, straight edges, or even regular angles anywhere. They also mentioned that the remnants of a ruined priory were nearby. We’ve often laughed since at how eagerly and joyfully we rushed off to see these historic sites. It was soon decided, though, that it was a pleasure too exquisite to enjoy alone, so we sent the carriage back with instructions to bring the whole group up.

While the fly—a Liliputian coach drawn by a single horse, a sort of diminutive buggy—was absent, we went in quest of the priory. The people were very civil, and quite readily pointed out the way. We found the ruin in a farmyard. There was literally nothing but a very small fragment of a blind wall, but with these materials we went to work with the imagination, and soon completed the whole edifice. We might even have peopled it, had not Carisbrooke, with its keep, its gateway, and its ivy-clad ramparts, lain in full view, inviting us to something less ideal. The church, too—the rude, old, hump-backed church was already opened, waiting to be inspected.

While the fly—a tiny carriage pulled by a single horse, a kind of small buggy—was gone, we set out to find the priory. The locals were very polite and quickly pointed us in the right direction. We discovered the ruins in a farmyard. There was basically nothing left but a tiny piece of a featureless wall, but with that, we let our imagination run wild and soon constructed the entire building in our minds. We might have even populated it, if Carisbrooke, with its keep, gateway, and ivy-covered walls, hadn't been right there in front of us, tempting us with something more tangible. The church, too—the old, crooked church—was already open, ready for us to explore.

The interior of this building was as ancient, in appearance, at least, and quite as little in harmony with right lines and regular angles, as its exterior. All the wood-work was of unpainted oak, a colour, however, that was scarcely dark enough to be rich; a circumstance which, to American eyes, at least—eyes on whose lenses paint is ever present—gave it an unfinished look. Had we seen this old building five years later, we might have thought differently. As for the English oak, of which one has heard so much, it is no great matter: our own common oaks are much prettier, and, did we understand their beauty, there would not be a village church in America that, in this particular, would not excel the finest English cathedral. I saw nothing in all Europe, of this nature, that equalled the common oaken doors of the hall at C——, which you know so well.

The inside of this building looked just as old as its outside, at least when it came to appearances, and it also lacked the right lines and straight angles. All the woodwork was made of unpainted oak, a color that wasn’t quite dark enough to look rich; this gave it an unfinished vibe, especially to American eyes that are so used to seeing paint everywhere. If we had seen this old building five years later, we might have thought differently. As for the English oak that everyone talks about, it doesn’t really matter: our regular oaks are much prettier, and if we understood their beauty, every village church in America would outshine even the finest English cathedral in this respect. I didn’t see anything like that in all of Europe that compared to the simple oak doors of the hall at C——, which you know so well.

A movement in the church-yard called us out, and we became pained witnesses of the interment of two of the "unhonoured dead." The air, manner and conduct of these funerals made a deep impression on us both. The dead were a woman and a child, but of different families. There were three or four mourners belonging to each party. Both the bodies were brought in the same horse-cart, and they were buried by the same service. The coffins were of coarse wood, stained with black, in a way to betray poverty. It was literally le convoi du pauvre. Deference to their superiors, and the struggle to maintain appearances—for there was a semblance of the pomp of woe, even in these extraordinary groups, of which all were in deep mourning—contrasted strangely with the extreme poverty of the parties, the niggardly administration of the sacred offices, and the business-like manner of the whole transaction. The mourners evidently struggled between natural grief and the bewilderment of their situation. The clergyman was a good-looking young man, in a dirty surplice. Most probably he was a curate. He read the service in a strong voice, but without reverence, and as if he were doing it by the job. In every way short measure was dealt out to the poor mourners. When the solemn words of "dust to dust, ashes to ashes," were uttered, he bowed hastily towards each grave—he stood between them—and the assistants met his wholesale administration of the rites with a wholesale sympathy.

A commotion in the graveyard caught our attention, and we became saddened witnesses to the burial of two of the "unhonored dead." The atmosphere, manner, and conduct of these funerals left a lasting impression on both of us. The deceased were a woman and a child from different families. There were three or four mourners from each family. Both bodies were transported in the same horse-drawn cart, and they were buried with the same service. The coffins were made of cheap wood, stained black, clearly indicating poverty. It was literally le convoi du pauvre. The deference to their betters, along with the attempt to maintain appearances—there was a semblance of mourning pomp even in these unusual groups, all dressed in deep mourning—strangely contrasted with the extreme poverty of the families, the stingy handling of the sacred rites, and the business-like approach to the whole transaction. The mourners clearly battled between natural sorrow and confusion over their situation. The clergyman was a good-looking young man in a dirty surplice, likely a curate. He read the service in a loud voice but without any reverence, as if he were just going through the motions. In every way, the poor mourners received short shrift. When the solemn words "dust to dust, ashes to ashes" were spoken, he hastily bowed towards each grave—he stood between them—and the attendants responded to his perfunctory delivery of the rites with equally perfunctory sympathy.

The ceremony was no sooner over, than the clergyman and his clerk retired into the church. One or two of the men cast wistful eyes towards the graves, neither of which was half filled, and reluctantly followed. I could scarcely believe my senses, and ventured to approach the door. Here I met such a view as I had never before seen, and hope never to witness again. On one side of me two men were filling the graves; on the opposite, two others were actually paying the funeral fees. In one ear was the hollow sound of the clod on the coffin; in the other the chinking of silver on the altar! Yea, literally on the altar! We are certainly far behind this great people in many essential particulars; our manners are less formed; our civilization is less perfect; but, thanks to the spirit which led our ancestors into the wilderness! such mockery of the Almighty and his worship, such a mingling of God and Mammon, never yet disgraced the temple within the wide reach of the American borders.

The ceremony had barely ended when the clergyman and his clerk went back into the church. One or two of the men looked longingly at the graves, which were only half filled, and reluctantly followed them inside. I could hardly believe what I was seeing and decided to approach the door. What I saw was something I had never experienced before and hope never to see again. On one side, two men were digging the graves; on the other side, two others were actually paying the funeral fees. In one ear, I heard the dull thud of dirt hitting the coffin; in the other, the sound of coins clinking on the altar! Yes, literally on the altar! We are certainly behind this great nation in many important ways; our manners are less refined; our civilization is not as advanced; but, thanks to the spirit that drove our ancestors into the wilderness! Such a mockery of the Almighty and His worship, such a blending of God and money, has never yet sullied the temple within the vast expanse of American territory.

We were joined by the whole party before the sods were laid on the graves of the poor; but some time after the silver had been given for the consolations of religion. With melancholy reflections we mounted to the castle. A—— had been educated in opinions peculiarly favourable to England; but I saw, as we walked mournfully away from the spot, that one fact like this did more to remove the film from her eyes, than volumes of reading.

We were joined by everyone before the dirt was piled on the graves of the poor; but some time after, the money had been given for the comforts of religion. With heavy hearts, we made our way up to the castle. A—— had been raised with views particularly favorable to England; but as we walked sadly away from the site, I noticed that one experience like this did more to open her eyes than a library full of books.

Carisbrooke has been too often described to need many words. Externally, it is a pile of high battlemented wall, completely buried in ivy, forming within a large area, that was once subdivided into courts, of which however, there are, at present, scarcely any remains. We found an old woman as warder, who occupied a room or two in a sort of cottage that had been made out of the ruins. The part of the edifice which had been the prison of Charles I. was a total ruin, resembling any ordinary house, without roof, floors, or chimneys. The aperture of the window through which he attempted to escape is still visible. It is in the outer wall, against which the principal apartments had been erected. The whole work stands on a high irregular ridge of a rocky hill, the keep being much the most elevated. We ascended to the sort of bastion which its summit forms, whence the view was charming. The whole vale, which contains Carisbrooke and Newport, with a multitude of cottages, villas, farm-houses and orchards, with meads, lawns and shrubberies, lay in full view, and we had distant glimpses of the water. The setting of this sweet picture, or the adjacent hills, was as naked and brown as the vale itself was crowded with objects and verdant. The Isle of Wight, as a whole, did not strike me as being either particularly fertile or particularly beautiful, while it contains certain spots that are eminently both. I have sailed entirely round it more than once, and, judging from the appearance of its coasts, and from what was visible in this little excursion, I should think that it had more than a usual amount of waste treeless land. The sea-views are fine, as a matter of course, and the air is pure and bracing. It is consequently much frequented in summer. It were better to call it the "watering-place," than to call it the "garden" of England.

Carisbrooke has been described so often that it hardly needs more words. On the outside, it’s a tall fortress-like wall completely covered in ivy, enclosing a large area that used to be divided into courts, though there are barely any remnants of those now. We met an old woman who served as the caretaker, living in a room or two in a cottage made from the ruins. The part of the building that used to be the prison of Charles I is completely in ruins, resembling an ordinary house, missing its roof, floors, and chimneys. The window he tried to escape from is still visible; it’s in the outer wall where the main rooms used to be. The entire structure sits on a high, uneven ridge of a rocky hill, with the keep being the highest point. We climbed up to the sort of bastion at the top, where the view was lovely. The whole valley, which includes Carisbrooke and Newport, is filled with lots of cottages, villas, farmhouses, and orchards, along with meadows, lawns, and bushes, all laid out before us. We could also see distant glimpses of the sea. The surrounding hills looked as bare and brown as the valley was filled with greenery and activity. Overall, the Isle of Wight doesn’t seem particularly fertile or beautiful, even though it has some areas that are notably both. I've sailed all the way around it more than once, and from what I saw along the coast and during this little trip, it appears to have more than its fair share of barren, treeless land. The sea views are naturally stunning, and the air is fresh and invigorating. Because of this, it attracts a lot of visitors in the summer. It would be more accurate to call it a "watering place" rather than the "garden" of England.

We had come in quest of a house where the family might be left, for a few days, while I went up to London. But the whole party was anxious to put their feet in bona fide old England before they crossed the Channel, and the plan was changed to meet their wishes. We slept that night at Newport, therefore, and returned in the morning to Cowes, early enough to get on board a steam-boat for Southampton. This town lies several miles up an estuary that receives one or two small streams. There are a few dwellings on the banks of the latter, that are about the size and of the appearance of the better sort of country-houses on the Hudson, although more attention appears to have been generally paid to the grounds. There were two more of Henry the Eighth's forts; and we caught a glimpse of a fine ruined Gothic window in passing Netley Abbey.

We had come looking for a house where the family could stay for a few days while I went up to London. But everyone was eager to experience bona fide old England before crossing the Channel, so we changed our plans to accommodate them. We spent that night in Newport and returned to Cowes the next morning, arriving early enough to board a steamboat to Southampton. This town is several miles up an estuary that takes in a couple of small streams. There are a few houses along the banks that resemble the nicer country homes on the Hudson, though they seem to have put more effort into the landscaping. We also saw two more of Henry the Eighth's forts and caught a glimpse of a beautiful ruined Gothic window as we passed Netley Abbey.

We landed on the pier at Southampton about one, and found ourselves truly in England. "Boat, sir, boat?" "Coach, sir, coach?" "London, sir, London?"—"No; we have need of neither!"—"Thank'ee, sir—thank'ee, sir." These few words, in one sense, are an epitome of England. They rang in our ears for the first five minutes after landing. Pressing forward for a livelihood, a multitude of conveniences, a choice of amusements, and a trained, but a heartless and unmeaning civility. "No; I do not want a boat." "Thank'ee, sir." You are just as much "thank'ee" if you do not employ the man as if you did. You are thanked for condescending to give an order, for declining, for listening. It is plain to see that such thanks dwell only on the lips. And yet we so easily get to be sophisticated; words can be so readily made to supplant things; deference, however unmeaning, is usually so grateful, that one soon becomes accustomed to all this, and even begins to complain that he is not imposed on.

We arrived at the pier in Southampton around one o'clock and realized we were truly in England. "Boat, sir, boat?" "Coach, sir, coach?" "London, sir, London?"—"No; we need neither!"—"Thank you, sir—thank you, sir." These few phrases, in a way, capture the essence of England. They echoed in our ears for the first five minutes after we landed. As we moved forward, seeking a way to make a living, we encountered a multitude of conveniences, a variety of entertainment options, and a trained but heartless and hollow politeness. "No; I don’t want a boat." "Thank you, sir." You get the same "thank you" whether you hire the person or not. You are thanked for merely considering placing an order, for declining, for just listening. It’s clear that such thanks are just superficial. Yet, we quickly become sophisticated; words can easily replace actions; deference, no matter how insincere, is often so appreciated that we soon adapt to it all, even beginning to feel frustrated when we are not treated with some pretense.

We turned into the first clean-looking inn that offered. It was called the Vine, and though a second-rate house, for Southampton even, we were sufficiently well served. Everything was neat, and the waiter, an old man with a powdered bead, was as methodical as a clock, and a most busy servitor to human wants. He told me he had been twenty-eight years doing exactly the same things daily, and in precisely the same place. Think of a man crying "Coming, sir," and setting table, for a whole life, within an area of forty feet square! Truly, this was not America.

We went into the first nice-looking inn we found. It was called the Vine, and even though it was a low-quality place for Southampton, we were well taken care of. Everything was tidy, and the waiter, an older man with a powdered wig, was as organized as a clock and very attentive to our needs. He told me he had been doing the same things every day for twenty-eight years, in exactly the same spot. Imagine a man shouting "Coming, sir," and setting the table for his entire life within a space of forty feet square! Truly, this was not America.

The principal street in Southampton, though making a sweep, is a broad, clean avenue, that is lined with houses having, with very few exceptions, bow-windows, as far as an ancient gate, a part of the old defences of the town. Here the High-street is divided into "Above-bar" and "Below-bar". The former is much the most modern, and promises to be an exceedingly pretty place when a little more advanced. "Below-bar" is neat and agreeable too. The people appeared singularly well dressed, after New York. The women, though less fashionably attired than our own, taking the Paris modes for the criterion, were in beautiful English chintzes, spotlessly neat, and the men all looked as if they had been born with hat-brushes and clothes-brushes in their hands, and yet every one was in a sort of seashore costume. I saw many men whom my nautical instinct detected at once to be naval officers,—some of whom must have been captains,—in round-abouts; but it was quite impossible to criticise toilettes that were so faultlessly neat, and so perfectly well arranged.

The main street in Southampton, while curving, is a wide, clean avenue lined with houses that mostly feature bow windows, all the way to an old gate that’s part of the town’s ancient defenses. Here, the High Street splits into "Above-bar" and "Below-bar." The former is much more modern and looks set to become a really lovely area once it develops a bit more. "Below-bar" is tidy and pleasant as well. The people looked surprisingly well-dressed compared to New York. The women, while not as fashionably dressed as those in our own city, using Parisian styles as a standard, wore beautiful English chintz that was spotlessly clean. The men all appeared as though they had been born with hat brushes and clothes brushes in their hands, yet everyone donned a sort of seaside outfit. I spotted many men who my maritime instincts quickly identified as naval officers—some of whom must have been captains—dressed in round-abouts; but it was impossible to critique outfits that were so impeccably neat and perfectly arranged.

We ordered dinner, and sallied forth in quest of lodgings. Southampton is said to be peculiar for "long passages, bow-windows, and old maids." I can vouch that it merits the two first distinctions. The season had scarcely commenced, and we had little difficulty in obtaining rooms, the bow-window and long passage included. These lodgings comprise one or more drawing-rooms, the requisite number of bed-rooms, and the use of the kitchen. The people of the house, ordinarily tradespeople, do the cooking and furnish the necessary attendance. We engaged an extra servant, and prepared to take possession that evening.

We ordered dinner and set out to find a place to stay. Southampton is known for its "long hallways, bay windows, and single women." I can confirm that it definitely has the first two. The season had barely started, so we found it easy to get rooms, including the bay window and long hallway. These accommodations typically have one or more living rooms, enough bedrooms, and access to the kitchen. The homeowners, usually shopkeepers, handle the cooking and provide the necessary service. We hired an extra staff member and got ready to move in that evening.

When we returned to the Vine, we found a visitor in this land of strangers. Mrs. R——, of New York, a relative and an old friend, had heard that Americans of our name were there, and she came doubting and hoping to the Vine. We found that the windows of our own drawing-room looked directly into those of hers. A few doors below us dwelt Mrs. L——, a still nearer relative; and a few days later, we had vis-à-vis, Mrs. M'A——, a sister of A——'s, on whom we all laid eyes for the first time in our lives! Such little incidents recall to mind the close consanguinity of the two nations; although for myself, I have always felt as a stranger in England. This has not been so much from the want of kindness and a community of opinion many subjects, as from a consciousness, that in the whole of that great nation, there is not a single individual with whom I could claim affinity. And yet, with a slight exception, we are purely of English extraction. Our father was the great-great-grandson of an Englishman. I once met with a man, (an Englishman,) who bore so strong a resemblance to him, in stature, form, walk, features and expression, that I actually took the trouble to ascertain his name. He even had our own. I had no means of tracing the matter any farther; but here was physical evidence to show the affinity between the two people. On the other hand, A—— comes of the Huguenots. She is purely American by every intermarriage, from the time of Louis the Fourteenth down, and yet she found cousins in England at every turn, and even a child of the same parents, who was as much of an Englishwoman as she herself was an American.

When we got back to the Vine, we discovered a visitor in this unfamiliar place. Mrs. R—— from New York, a relative and old friend, had heard that Americans with our last name were in the area, and she came with both doubts and hopes to the Vine. We realized that the windows of our drawing-room looked directly into hers. A few doors down lived Mrs. L——, a closer relative; and a few days later, we met Mrs. M'A——, A——'s sister, whom we were seeing for the first time in our lives! These little moments remind me of the close connections between the two nations; although for me, I’ve always felt like a stranger in England. This isn’t due to a lack of kindness or shared opinions on many topics, but rather from the realization that in the entirety of that vast nation, there isn't a single person I could claim a familial bond with. Yet, with a slight exception, we are entirely of English descent. Our father was the great-great-grandson of an Englishman. I once encountered a man (an Englishman) who bore such a striking resemblance to him in height, shape, walk, features, and expression that I actually took the effort to find out his name. He even had our last name. I had no way to investigate further, but this was physical proof of the connection between the two peoples. On the other hand, A—— comes from Huguenot ancestry. She is completely American through every intermarriage since the time of Louis the Fourteenth, yet she found cousins in England at every turn, and even a child of the same parents who was just as much an Englishwoman as she was an American.

We drank to the happiness of America, at dinner. That day, fifty years, she declared herself a nation; that very day, and nearly at that hour, two of the co-labourers in the great work we celebrated, departed in company for the world of spirits!

We raised our glasses to the happiness of America at dinner. Fifty years ago, she declared herself a nation; that very day, almost at that exact hour, two of the collaborators in the great work we were celebrating departed together for the spirit world!

A day or two was necessary to become familiarized to the novel objects around us, and my departure for London was postponed. We profited by the delay, to visit Netley Abbey, a ruin of some note, at no great distance from Southampton. The road was circuitous, and we passed several pretty country-houses, few of which exceeded in size or embellishments, shrubbery excepted, similar dwellings at home. There was one, however, of an architecture much more ancient than we had been accustomed to see, it being, by all appearance, of the time of Elizabeth or James. It had turrets and battlements, but was otherwise plain.

A day or two was needed to get used to the new surroundings, so my trip to London was delayed. We took advantage of the extra time to visit Netley Abbey, a well-known ruin not far from Southampton. The road was winding, and we passed several charming country houses, most of which were about the same size and decoration, except for the shrubs, as similar homes back home. However, there was one house that had a much older architecture than we were used to seeing, seemingly from the time of Elizabeth or James. It had turrets and battlements, but was otherwise quite simple.

The abbey was a fine, without being a very imposing, ruin, standing in the midst of a field of English neatness, prettily relieved by woods. The window already mentioned formed the finest part. The effect of these ruins on us proved the wonderful power of association. The greater force of the past than of the future on the mind, can only be the result of questionable causes. Our real concern with the future is incalculably the greatest, and yet we are dreaming over our own graves, on the events and scenes which throw a charm around the graves of those who have gone before us! Had we seen Netley Abbey, just as far advanced towards completion, as it was, in fact, advanced towards decay, our speculations would have been limited by a few conjectures on its probable appearance; but gazing at it as we did, we peopled its passages, imagined Benedictines stalking along its galleries, and fancied that we heard the voices of the choir, pealing among its arches.

The abbey was a nice, though not overly impressive, ruin, sitting in the middle of a tidy English field, beautifully framed by woods. The previously mentioned window was the most striking feature. The impact of these ruins on us showcased the remarkable power of association. The past holds a stronger grip on our minds than the future, which can only stem from questionable reasons. Our genuine concern for the future is vastly greater, yet we find ourselves lost in thoughts of our own graves, captivated by the events and sights that surround the resting places of those who came before us! If we had seen Netley Abbey in a state as close to completion as it was to decay, our thoughts would have stopped at mere guesses about how it might have looked; but as we stared at it, we filled its hallways with imagined figures of Benedictines walking through its galleries and fancied we heard the choir's voices echoing among its arches.

Our fresh American feelings were strangely interrupted by the sounds of junketing. A party of Southampton cockneys, (there are cockneys even in New York,) having established themselves on the grass, in one of the courts, were lighting a fire, and were deliberately proceeding to make tea! "To tea, and ruins," the invitations most probably run. We retreated into a little battery of the bluff King Hal, that was near by, a work that sufficiently proved the state of nautical warfare in the sixteenth century.

Our fresh American vibe was oddly interrupted by the sounds of a party. A group of Southampton cockneys (yes, there are cockneys even in New York) set up on the grass in one of the courtyards, lighting a fire and getting ready to make tea! The invitations probably said something like, "To tea, and ruins." We moved back to a small fort nearby, King Hal's Bluff, which clearly showed what naval warfare was like in the sixteenth century.

LETTER III.

Road to London.—Royal Pastime.—Cockney Coachman.—Winchester Assizes.
—Approach to London.—The Parks.—Piccadilly.—Street Excursion.
—Strangers in London.—Americans in England.—Westminster Abbey.
—Gothic Decorations.—Westminster Hall.—Inquisitive Barber.—Pasta
and Malibran.—Drury-lane Theatre.—A Pickpocket.—A Fellow-traveller.
—English Gentlemen.—A Radical.—Encampment of Gipsies.—National
Distinctions.—Antiquities.—National Peculiarities.

Road to London.—Royal Entertainment.—Cockney Driver.—Winchester Court Sessions.
—Arriving in London.—The Parks.—Piccadilly.—City Tour.
—Visitors in London.—Americans in England.—Westminster Abbey.
—Gothic Designs.—Westminster Hall.—Curious Barber.—Pasta
and Malibran.—Drury Lane Theatre.—A Pickpocket.—A Fellow Traveler.
—English Gentlemen.—A Radical.—Camp of Gypsies.—National
Differences.—Antiquities.—National Traits.

To R. COOPER, ESQ. COOPERSTOWN.

To R. Cooper, Esq. Cooperstown.

At a very early hour one of the London coaches stopped at the door. I had secured a seat by the side of the coachman, and we went through the "bar" at a round trot. The distance was about sixty miles, and I had paid a guinea for my place. There were four or five other passengers, all on the outside.

At an early hour, one of the London coaches pulled up at the door. I had managed to get a seat next to the driver, and we went through the "bar" at a steady trot. The distance was about sixty miles, and I had paid a guinea for my spot. There were four or five other passengers, all sitting outside.

The road between Southampton and London is one of little interest; even the highway itself is not as good as usual, for the first twenty or thirty miles, being made chiefly of gravel, instead of broken stones. The soil for a long distance was thirsty, and the verdure was nearly gone. England feels a drought sooner than most countries, probably from the circumstances of its vegetation being so little accustomed to the absence of moisture, and to the comparative lightness of the dews. The winds, until just before the arrival of the Hudson, had been blowing from the eastward for several weeks, and in England this is usually a dry wind. The roads were dusty, the hedges were brown, and the fields had nothing to boast of over our own verdure. Indeed, it is unusual to see the grasses of New York so much discoloured, so early in the season.

The road between Southampton and London isn't very interesting; even the highway isn't as good as it usually is. For the first twenty or thirty miles, it's mainly gravel instead of broken stones. The soil for a long stretch was dry, and the greenery was almost gone. England experiences a drought faster than most countries, probably because its vegetation isn't used to a lack of moisture and because the dews are relatively light. The winds, until just before Hudson's arrival, had been coming from the east for several weeks, and in England, this is typically a dry wind. The roads were dusty, the hedges were brown, and the fields had nothing to show off compared to our own greenery. In fact, it's unusual to see the grasses of New York discolored so early in the season.

I soon established amicable relations with my companion on the box. He had been ordered at the Vine to stop for an American, and he soon began to converse about the new world. "Is America anywhere near Van Diemen's Land?" was one of his first questions. I satisfied him on this head, and he apologised for the mistake, by explaining that he had a sister settled in Van Diemen's Land, and he had a natural desire to know something about her welfare! We passed a house which had more the air of a considerable place than any I had yet seen, though of far less architectural pretensions than the miniature castle near Cowes. This, my companion informed me, had once been occupied by George IV. when Prince of Wales. "Here his Royal Highness enjoyed what I call the perfection of life, sir; women, wine, and fox-hunting!" added the professor of the whip, with the leer of a true amateur.

I quickly developed a friendly relationship with my companion in the carriage. He had been instructed at the Vine to wait for an American, and he soon started chatting about the new world. "Is America close to Van Diemen's Land?" was one of his first questions. I cleared that up for him, and he apologized for the mix-up, explaining that he had a sister living in Van Diemen's Land, and he naturally wanted to know how she was doing! We passed by a house that seemed more significant than any I had seen so far, even though it was far less grand than the little castle near Cowes. My companion told me that this place had once been home to George IV when he was Prince of Wales. "Here his Royal Highness enjoyed what I call the pinnacle of life, sir; women, wine, and fox-hunting!" added the whip expert, with the smirk of a true enthusiast.

These coachmen are a class by themselves. They have no concern with grooming the horses, and keep the reins for a certain number of relays. They dress in a particular way, without being at all in livery or uniform, like the continental postilions, talk in a particular way, and act in a particular way. We changed this personage for another, about half the distance between Southampton and London. His successor proved to be even a still better specimen of his class. He was a thorough cockney, and altogether the superior of his country colleague, he was clearly the oracle of the boys, delivering his sentiments in the manner of one accustomed to dictate to all in and about the stables. In addition to this, there was an indescribable, but ludicrous salvo to his dignity, in the way of surliness. Some one had engaged him to carry a blackbird to town, and caused him to wait. On this subject he sang a Jeremiad in the true cockney key. "He didn't want to take the bla-a-a-ck-bud; but if the man wanted to send the bla-a-a-ck-bud, why didn't he bring the bla-a-a-ck-bud?" This is one of the hundred dialects of the lower classes of the English. One of the horses of the last team was restiff, and it became necessary to restrain him by an additional curb before we ventured into the streets of London. I intimated that I had known such horses completely subdued in America by filling their ears with cotton. This suggestion evidently gave offence, and he took occasion soon after to show it. He wrung the nose of the horse with a cord, attaching its end below, in the manner of a severe martingale. While going through this harsh process, which, by the way, effectually subdued the animal, he had leisure to tell him that "he was an English horse, and not an out-landish horse, and he knew best what was good for him," with a great deal more similar sound nationality.

These drivers are in a league of their own. They don't bother with grooming the horses, and they only keep the reins for a limited number of stops. They have their own specific way of dressing, without being in any kind of uniform, like the European postilions. They talk and act in their own unique manner. We switched this driver for another about halfway from Southampton to London. The new guy turned out to be an even better example of his type. He was a real cockney and definitely outclassed his rural counterpart; he was clearly the go-to guy for the young ones, sharing his thoughts like someone used to bossing everyone around the stables. Plus, there was an indescribable yet funny air of grumpiness about him. Someone had hired him to take a blackbird to the city and made him wait. He lamented this delay in true cockney style. "He didn't want to take the bla-a-a-ck-bud; but if the man wanted to send the bla-a-a-ck-bud, why didn't he bring the bla-a-a-ck-bud?" This is one of the many dialects among the working class in England. One of the horses from the last team was restless, so we had to add an extra curb to keep him in check before heading into the streets of London. I mentioned that I had seen such horses completely calmed down in America by stuffing their ears with cotton. This suggestion seemed to rub him the wrong way, and he soon made that clear. He twisted the horse's nose with a cord, securing it in a way that resembled a harsh martingale. While he was going through this tough process, which, by the way, successfully subdued the animal, he had the time to inform it that "it was an English horse, not some foreign horse, and he knew what was best for it," along with a lot more similar nationalistic talk.

Winchester was the only town of any importance on the road. It is pleasantly seated in a valley, is of no great size, is but meanly built, though extremely neat, has a cathedral and a bishop, and is the shire-town of Hampshire. The assizes were sitting, and Southampton was full of troops that had been sent from Winchester, in order to comply with a custom which forbids the military to remain near the courts of justice. England is full of these political mystifications, and it is one of the reasons that she is so much in arrears in many of the great essentials. In carrying out the practice in this identical case, a serious private wrong was inflicted, in order that, in form, an abstract and perfectly useless principle might be maintained. The inns at Southampton were filled with troops, who were billeted on the publicans, will ye, nill ye; and not only the masters of the different houses, but travellers were subjected to a great inconvenience, in order that this abstraction might not be violated. There may be some small remuneration, but no one can suppose for a moment, that the keeper of a genteel establishment of this nature wishes to see his carriage-houses, gateways, and halls thronged with soldiers. Society oppresses him to maintain appearances! At the present day the presence of soldiers might be the means of sustaining justice, while there is not the smallest probability that they would be used for contrary purposes, except in cases in which this usage or law—for I believe there is a statue for it—would not be in the least respected. This is not an age, nor is England the country, in which a judge is to be overawed by the roll of a drum. All sacrifices of common sense, and all recourse to plausible political combinations, whether of individuals or of men, are uniformly made at the expense of the majority. The day is certainly arrived when absurdities like these should be done away with.

Winchester was the only significant town on the road. It's nicely located in a valley, isn't very big, and while it's modestly built, it's really tidy. It has a cathedral and a bishop and serves as the county town of Hampshire. The court was in session, and Southampton was packed with troops that had come from Winchester to follow a rule that prevents the military from staying near the courts. England is full of these political twists, and it's one reason why the country falls behind in many important areas. In enforcing this particular custom, a serious personal injustice occurred just to uphold a meaningless and pointless principle. The inns in Southampton were crowded with soldiers, who were assigned to the local innkeepers, whether they liked it or not; both the owners of the different establishments and travelers faced significant inconveniences just so this principle wouldn't be broken. There may be some minor compensation, but no one can seriously think that an owner of a nice place wants their carriage houses, driveways, and halls filled with soldiers. Society pressures them to keep up appearances! Nowadays, having soldiers around could actually help uphold justice, and there's almost no chance that they'd be used for the opposite, except in cases where this practice—or law, since I believe there's a statute for it—would be totally ignored. This isn’t a time, nor is England the place, where a judge should feel intimidated by the sound of a drum. All sacrifices of common sense and all attempts at plausible political strategies, whether by individuals or groups, consistently come at the expense of the majority. It's definitely time to eliminate these absurdities.

The weather was oppressively hot, nor do I remember to have suffered more from the sun than during this little journey. Were I to indulge in the traveller's propensity to refer everything to his own state of feeling, you might be told what a sultry place England is in July. But I was too old a sailor not to understand the cause. The sea is always more temperate than the land, being cooler in summer and warmer in winter. After being thirty days at sea, we all feel this truth, either in one way or the other. I was quitting the coast, too, which is uniformly cooler than the interior.

The weather was incredibly hot, and I honestly can’t remember suffering more from the sun than I did on this short trip. If I gave in to the traveler's habit of making everything about their own feelings, I could tell you just how muggy England gets in July. But I was experienced enough as a sailor to recognize the real reason. The sea is always more moderate than the land, cooler in summer and warmer in winter. After spending thirty days at sea, we all realize this truth, one way or another. I was also leaving the coast, which is consistently cooler than the inland areas.

When some twelve or thirteen miles from town, the coachman pointed to a wood enclosed by a wall, on our left. A rill trickled from the thicket, and ran beneath the road. I was told that Virginia Water lay there, and that the evening before a single footpad had robbed a coach in that precise spot, or within a few hundred yards of the very place where the King of England at the moment was amusing himself with the fishing-rod. Highway robberies, however are now of exceedingly rare occurrence, that in question being spoken of as the only one within the knowledge of my informant for many years.

When we were about twelve or thirteen miles from town, the driver pointed to a wooded area surrounded by a wall on our left. A small stream flowed from the thicket and ran under the road. I was told that Virginia Water was located there, and that the night before, a lone robber had held up a coach right in that spot or just a few hundred yards away, while the King of England was nearby enjoying some fishing. However, highway robberies are now incredibly rare, and this one was mentioned as the only one my informant could recall for many years.

Our rate of travelling was much the same as that of one of our own better sort of stages. The distance was not materially less than that between Albany and C——n; the roads were not so hilly, and much better than our own road; and yet, at the same season, we usually perform it in about the same time that we went the distance between Southampton and London. The scenery was tame, nor, with the exception of Winchester, was there a single object of any interest visible until we got near London. We crossed the Thames, a stream of trifling expanse, and at Kew we had a glimpse of an old German-looking edifice in yellow bricks, with towers, turrets, and battlements. This was one of the royal palaces. It stood on the opposite side of the river, in the midst of tolerably extensive grounds. Here a nearly incessant stream of vehicles commenced. I attempted to count the stage-coaches, and got as high as thirty-three, when we met a line of mail-coaches, that caused me to stop in despair. I think we met not less than fifty within the last hour of our journey. There were seven belonging to the mail in one group. They all leave London at the same hour, for different parts of the kingdom.

Our travel pace was pretty much the same as one of our nicer stages. The distance wasn’t significantly shorter than the one between Albany and C——n; the roads were less hilly and much better than ours. Still, at this time of year, we usually cover it in about the same time it takes to travel between Southampton and London. The scenery was pretty dull, and aside from Winchester, there wasn't anything interesting to see until we got closer to London. We crossed the Thames, a small river, and at Kew, we caught sight of an old German-style building made of yellow bricks, featuring towers, turrets, and battlements. This was one of the royal palaces, located on the opposite side of the river, surrounded by fairly large grounds. Here, a nearly constant stream of vehicles started to appear. I tried to count the stagecoaches and got up to thirty-three when I encountered a line of mail coaches that made me stop in frustration. I think we saw at least fifty in the last hour of our trip. There were seven from the mail in one group. They all leave London at the same time, heading to different parts of the country.

At Hyde Park Corner I began to recall objects known in my early visits to London. Apsley House had changed owners, and had become the property of one whose great name was still in the germ, when I had last seen his present dwelling. The Parks, a gateway or two excepted, were unchanged. In the row of noble houses that line Piccadilly—in that hospital-looking edifice, Devonshire House—in the dingy, mean, irregular, and yet interesting front of St. James's—in Brookes's, White's, the Thatched House, and various other historical monuments, I saw no change. Buckingham House had disappeared, and an unintelligible pile was rising on its ruins. A noble "palazzo-non-finito" stood at the angle between the Green and St. James's Parks, and here and there I discovered houses of better architecture than London was wont of old to boast. One of the very best of these, I was told, was raised in honour of Mercury, and probably out of his legitimate profits. It is called Crockford's.

At Hyde Park Corner, I started to remember places I recognized from my earlier visits to London. Apsley House had changed owners and now belonged to someone whose famous name was just starting to emerge when I last saw his current home. The Parks, aside from a couple of gates, were the same. In the row of grand houses lining Piccadilly—especially in that hospital-like building, Devonshire House—in the shabby yet interesting front of St. James's—in Brookes's, White's, the Thatched House, and various other historic monuments, I noticed no changes. Buckingham House was gone, and an unclear structure was rising on its site. A grand "palazzo-non-finito" stood at the corner between Green and St. James's Parks, and here and there, I found houses with better architecture than London used to show off. I was told that one of the best of these was built in honor of Mercury, probably funded by his rightful profits. It's called Crockford's.

Our "bla-a-a-ck-bud" pulled up in the Strand, at the head of Adam-street, Adelphi, and I descended from my seat at his side. An extra shilling brought the glimmering of a surly smile athwart his blubber-cheeks, and we parted in good-humour. My fellow-travellers were all men of no very high class, but they had been civil, and were sufficiently attentive to my wants, when they found I was a stranger, by pointing out objects on the road, and explaining the usages of the inns. One of them had been in America, and he boasted a little of his intimacy with General This and Commodore That. At one time, too, he appeared somewhat disposed to institute comparisons between the two countries, a good deal at our expense, as you may suppose; but as I made no answers, I soon heard him settling it with his companions, that, after all, it was quite natural a man should not like to hear his own country abused; and so he gave the matter up. With this exception, I had no cause of complaint, but, on the contrary, good reason to be pleased.

Our "bla-a-a-ck-bud" pulled up on the Strand, at the top of Adam Street, Adelphi, and I got out of my seat next to him. An extra shilling bought me a reluctant smile from his chubby cheeks, and we parted on good terms. The other passengers were all men of no particularly high status, but they were polite and attentive to my needs when they realized I was a stranger, pointing out things along the way and explaining how the inns worked. One of them had been to America and bragged a bit about knowing General This and Commodore That. At one point, he seemed inclined to compare the two countries, mainly at our expense, as you might expect; however, since I didn't respond, I soon heard him agreeing with his friends that it was only natural for someone not to want to hear their own country criticized; so he dropped it. Aside from that, I had no complaints and, on the contrary, plenty of reasons to be happy.

I was set down at the Adam-street Hotel, a house much frequented by Americans. The respectable woman who has so long kept it received me with quiet civility, saw that I had a room, and promised me a dinner in a few minutes. While the latter was preparing, having got rid of the dust, I went out into the streets. The lamps were just lighted, and I went swiftly along the Strand, recalling objects at every step. In this manner I passed, at a rapid pace, Somerset House, St. Clement's-le-Dane, St. Mary-le-Strand, Temple-bar, Bridge-street, Ludgate-hill, pausing only before St. Paul's. Along the whole of this line I saw but little change. A grand bridge, Waterloo, with a noble approach to it, had been thrown across the river just above Somerset House, but nearly everything else remained unaltered. I believe my manner, and the eagerness with which I gazed at long-remembered objects, attracted attention; for I soon observed I was dogged around the church by a suspicious-looking fellow. He either suspected me of evil, or, attracted by my want of a London air, he meditated evil himself. Knowing my own innocence, I determined to bring the matter to an issue. We were alone, in a retired part of the place, and, first making sure that my watch, wallet, and handkerchief had not already disappeared, I walked directly up to him, and looked him intently in the face, as if to recognize his features. He took the hint, and, turning on his heels, moved nimbly of. It is surprising how soon an accustomed eye will distinguish a stranger in the streets of a large town. On mentioning this circumstance next day to ——, he said that the Londoners pretend to recognize a rustic air in a countess, if she has been six months from town. Rusticity in such cases, however, must merely mean a little behind the fashions.

I was dropped off at the Adam Street Hotel, a place quite popular with Americans. The respectable woman who has managed it for a long time welcomed me with calm politeness, ensured I had a room, and promised me dinner in a few minutes. While that was being prepared, I cleaned off the dust from my journey and headed out into the streets. The lamps were just being lit, and I quickly walked along the Strand, recalling familiar sights at every step. In this way, I passed by Somerset House, St. Clement's-le-Dane, St. Mary-le-Strand, Temple Bar, Bridge Street, and Ludgate Hill, stopping only in front of St. Paul's. Overall, I noticed very little had changed. A grand bridge, Waterloo, with an impressive approach, had been built across the river just above Somerset House, but nearly everything else remained the same. I think my demeanor and the eagerness with which I looked at these long-remembered sights caught some attention, because I soon noticed a suspicious-looking guy following me around the church. He either thought I was up to no good, or, attracted by my unfamiliarity with London, he was considering something sinister himself. Knowing I was innocent, I decided to confront him. We were alone in a secluded part of the area, and after making sure my watch, wallet, and handkerchief were still with me, I walked straight up to him and looked him directly in the face as if trying to recognize him. He took the hint and quickly turned away. It’s surprising how quickly someone becomes accustomed to spotting a stranger in the streets of a big city. When I mentioned this the next day to ——, he said that Londoners claim they can spot a country bumpkin in a countess if she’s been away from the city for six months. In such cases, though, "rusticity" just means being a little out of touch with the latest trends.

I had suffered curiosity to draw me two miles from my dinner, and was as glad to get back as just before I had been to run away from it. Still the past, with the recollections which crowded on the mind, bringing with them a flood of all sorts of associations, prevented me from getting into a coach, which would, in a measure, have excluded objects from my sight. I went to bed that night with the strange sensation of being again in London, after an interval of twenty years.

I let my curiosity pull me two miles away from my dinner and was just as happy to return as I had been eager to leave. However, the memories rushing back to me brought a wave of mixed feelings that kept me from getting into a cab, which would have blocked some of the sights. That night, I went to bed with the odd feeling of being back in London after twenty years.

The next day I set about the business which had brought me to the English capital. Most of our passengers were in town, and we met, as a matter of course. I had calls from three or four Americans established here, some in one capacity, and some in others; for our country has long been giving back its increase to England, in the shape of admirals, generals, judges, artists, writers and notion-mongers. But what is all this compared to the constant accessions of Europeans among ourselves? Eight years later, on returning home, I found New York, in feeling, opinions, desires, (apart from profit,) and I might almost say, in population, a foreign rather than American town.

The next day, I got started on the reason I came to the English capital. Most of our passengers were in town, and we met up as usual. I had visits from three or four Americans who had settled here, each in different roles; our country has been sending over more and more admirals, generals, judges, artists, writers, and notion-mongers to England for a long time. But what does all that matter compared to the steady influx of Europeans among us? Eight years later, when I returned home, I found that New York, in terms of feelings, opinions, desires (excluding profit), and I might almost say, in population, felt more like a foreign place than an American one.

I had passed months in London when a boy, and yet had no knowledge of Westminster Abbey! I cannot account for this oversight, for I was a great devotee of Gothic architecture, of which, by the way, I knew nothing, except through the prints; and I could not reproach myself with a want of proper curiosity on such subjects, for I had devoted as much time to their examination as my duty to the ship would at all allow. Still, all I could recall of the abbey was an indistinct image of two towers, with a glimpse in at a great door. Now that I was master of my own movements, one of my first acts was to hurry to the venerable church.

I had spent months in London as a kid, and I still had no idea about Westminster Abbey! I can't explain how I missed it because I was a huge fan of Gothic architecture, although I didn't really know much about it besides what I saw in pictures. I can't say I lacked proper curiosity either—I had spent as much time studying these things as my duties on the ship allowed. Still, all I could remember about the abbey was a blurry image of two towers and a view through a big door. Now that I could explore on my own, one of my first moves was to rush to the historic church.

Westminster Abbey is built in the form of a cross, as is, I believe, invariably the case with every Catholic church of any pretension. At its northern end are two towers, and at its southern is the celebrated chapel of Henry VII. This chapel is an addition, which, allowing for a vast difference in the scale, resembles, in its general appearance, a school, or vestry-room, attached to the end of one of our own churches. A Gothic church is, indeed, seldom complete without such a chapel. It is not an easy matter to impress an American with a proper idea of European architecture. Even while the edifice is before his eyes, he is very apt to form an erroneous opinion of its comparative magnitude. The proportions aid deception in the first place, and absence uniformly exaggerates the beauty and extent of familiar objects. None but those who have disciplined the eye, and who have accustomed themselves to measure proportions by rules more definite than those of the fancy, should trust to their judgments in descriptions of this sort.

Westminster Abbey is built in the shape of a cross, which I believe is typical for any significant Catholic church. At the north end, there are two towers, and at the south end is the famous chapel of Henry VII. This chapel is an addition that, despite a significant difference in size, resembles a school or a meeting room attached to the end of one of our churches. A Gothic church is rarely complete without such a chapel. It's not easy to give an American a true sense of European architecture. Even when standing in front of the building, they often misjudge its size. The proportions can be misleading at first, and being away from familiar sights usually makes their beauty and size seem greater. Only those who have trained their eyes and have learned to measure proportions by more specific standards than mere imagination should rely on their judgments in descriptions like this.

Westminster itself is not large, however, in comparison with St. Paul's, and an ordinary parish church, called St. Margaret's, which must be, I think, quite as large as Trinity, New York, and stands within a hundred yards of the abbey, is but a pigmy compared with Westminster. I took a position in St. Margaret's church-yard, at a point where the whole of the eastern side of the edifice might be seen, and for the first time in my life gazed upon a truly Gothic structure of any magnitude. It was near sunset, and the light was peculiarly suited to the sombre architecture. The material was a grey stone, that time had rendered dull, and which had broad shades of black about its angles and faces. That of the chapel was fresher, and of a warmer tint; a change well suited to the greater delicacy of the ornaments.

Westminster itself isn't large, but compared to St. Paul's, it's quite small. There's an ordinary parish church called St. Margaret's, which is probably about as big as Trinity in New York, and it’s just a hundred yards away from the abbey, but it looks tiny next to Westminster. I stood in the churchyard of St. Margaret's, at a spot where I could see the entire eastern side of the building, and for the first time in my life, I looked at a genuinely impressive Gothic structure. It was near sunset, and the light was just right for the dark architecture. The stone was grey, faded by time, with broad black shades around its edges and surfaces. The stone of the chapel was fresher and had a warmer tone; this change was fitting for the more delicate decorations.

The principal building is in the severer style of the Gothic, without, however, being one of its best specimens. It is comparatively plain, nor are the proportions faultless. The towers are twins, are far from being high, and to me they have since seemed to have a crowded appearance, or to be too near each other; a defect that sensibly lessens the grandeur of the north front. A few feet, more or less, in such a case, may carry the architect too much without, or too much within, the just proportions. I lay claim to very little science on the subject, but I have frequently observed since, that, to my own eye, (and the uninitiated can have no other criterion,) these towers, as seen from the parks, above the tops of the trees, have a contracted and pinched air.

The main building is designed in a stricter Gothic style, but it isn’t one of the best examples. It looks quite plain, and the proportions aren’t perfect. The towers are identical but not very tall, and to me, they seem a bit cramped or too close together; this flaw noticeably diminishes the impressive look of the north front. A few extra feet, one way or another, can significantly throw off the architect's intended proportions. I don’t claim to know much about architecture, but I’ve often noticed that, from my perspective (and that's the only perspective I can rely on), these towers, when viewed from the parks above the treetops, appear narrow and stifled.

But while the abbey church itself is as plain as almost any similar edifice I remember, its great extent, and the noble windows and doors, rendered it to me deeply impressive. On the other hand, the chapel is an exquisite specimen of the most elaborated ornaments of the style. All sorts of monstrosities have, at one period or another, been pressed into the service of the Gothic, such as lizards, toads, frogs, serpents, dragons, spitfires, and salamanders. There is, I believe, some typical connexion between these offensive objects and the different sins. When well carved, properly placed, and not viewed too near, their effect is far from bad. They help to give the edifice its fretted appearance, or a look resembling that of lace. Various other features, which have been taken from familiar objects, such as parts of castellated buildings, portcullises, and armorial bearings, help to make up the sum of the detail. On Henry the Seventh's chapel, toads, lizards, and the whole group of metaphorical sins are sufficiently numerous, without being offensively apparent; while miniature portcullises, escutcheons, and other ornaments, give the whole the rich and imaginative—almost fairy-like aspect,—which forms the distinctive feature of the most ornamented portions of the order. You have seen ivory work-boxes from the East, that were cut and carved in a way to render them so very complicated, delicate, and beautiful, that they please us without conveying any fixed forms to the mind. It would be no great departure from literal truth, were I to bid you fancy one of these boxes swelled to the dimensions of a church, the material changed to stone, and, after a due allowance for a difference in form, for the painted windows, and for the emblems, were I to add, that such a box would probably give you the best idea of a highly-wrought Gothic edifice, that any comparison of the sort can furnish.

But while the abbey church itself is as simple as almost any similar building I can think of, its vast size and the impressive windows and doors made a deep impression on me. In contrast, the chapel is a stunning example of the most intricate decorations of the style. Various unusual creatures, like lizards, toads, frogs, serpents, dragons, spitfires, and salamanders, have at different times been incorporated into the Gothic design. I believe there’s a typical connection between these striking figures and various sins. When they are well carved, properly placed, and viewed from a distance, their effect is quite appealing. They contribute to the building’s textured appearance, resembling lace. Other features taken from familiar objects, like parts of castles, portcullises, and coats of arms, add to the overall detail. In Henry the Seventh's chapel, toads, lizards, and the entire set of metaphorical sins are abundant, yet not overly apparent; while miniature portcullises, shields, and other embellishments give the whole structure a rich and imaginative—almost fairy-tale vibe—which is a distinctive characteristic of the most decorated sections of the style. You’ve seen ivory workboxes from the East, intricately carved and crafted to be so complicated, delicate, and beautiful that they are pleasing without conveying any specific forms. It wouldn’t be too far from the truth if I asked you to imagine one of these boxes enlarged to the size of a church, made of stone instead of ivory, and allowing for differences in shape for the stained glass windows and symbols; I would say that such a box would likely provide the best idea of a highly intricate Gothic structure that any such comparison could offer.

I stood gazing at the pile, until I felt the sensation we term "a creeping of the blood." I know that Westminster, though remarkable for its chapel, was, by no means, a first-rate specimen of its own style of architecture; and, at that moment, a journey through Europe promised to be a gradation of enjoyments, each more exquisite than the other. All the architecture of America united, would not assemble a tithe of the grandeur, the fanciful, or of the beautiful, (a few imitations of Grecian temples excepted,) that were to be seen in this single edifice. If I were to enumerate the strong and excited feelings which are awakened by viewing novel objects, I should place this short visit to the abbey as giving birth in me to sensation No. 1. The emotion of a first landing in Europe had long passed; our recent "land-fall" had been like any other "land-fall," merely pleasant; and I even looked upon St. Paul's as an old and a rather familiar friend. This was absolutely my introduction to the Gothic, and it has proved to be an acquaintance pregnant of more satisfaction than any other it has been my good fortune to make since youth.

I stood staring at the pile until I felt what we call "a creeping of the blood." I know that Westminster, while famous for its chapel, was by no means a top example of its architectural style; and at that moment, a journey through Europe promised to be a series of experiences, each more delightful than the last. All the architecture in America combined wouldn’t come close to the grandeur, creativity, or beauty (except for a few copies of Greek temples) found in this single building. If I were to list the strong and excited feelings that come from seeing new things, I would say this short visit to the abbey sparked the very first sensation in me. The thrill of landing in Europe had long faded; our recent arrival felt just like any other, merely pleasant; and I even viewed St. Paul’s as an old and somewhat familiar friend. This was truly my introduction to Gothic architecture, and it has turned out to be a relationship filled with more satisfaction than any other I've been fortunate enough to develop since my youth.

It was too late to enter the church, and I turned away towards the adjoining public buildings. The English kings had a palace at Westminster, in the times of the Plantagenets. It was the ancient usage to assemble the parliament, which was little more than a lit de justice previously to the struggle which terminated in the commonwealth, in the royal residence, and, in this manner, Westminster Palace became, permanently, the place for holding the meetings of these bodies. The buildings, ancient and modern, form a cluster on the banks of the river, and are separated from the abbey by a street. I believe their site was once an island.

It was too late to go into the church, so I turned toward the nearby public buildings. The English kings had a palace at Westminster during the Plantagenet era. It was the usual practice to gather the parliament, which was little more than a lit de justice before the struggle that led to the commonwealth, at the royal residence. Because of this, Westminster Palace became the permanent venue for these meetings. The ancient and modern buildings cluster along the riverbank and are separated from the abbey by a street. I think their location used to be an island.

Westminster Hall was built as the banqueting room of the palace. There is no uniformity in the architecture of the pile, which is exceedingly complicated and confused. My examination, at this time, was too hurried for details; and I shall refer you to a later visit to England for a description. A vacant space at the abbey end of the palace is called Old Palace-yard, which sufficiently indicates the locality of the ancient royal residence; and a similar, but larger space or square, at the entrance to the hall, is known as New Palace-yard. Two sides of the latter are filled with the buildings of the pile; namely, the courts of law, the principal part of the hall, and certain houses that are occupied by some of the minor functionaries of the establishment, with buildings to contain records, etc. The latter are mean, and altogether unworthy of the neighbourhood. They were plastered on the exterior, and observing a hole in the mortar, I approached and found to my surprise, that here, in the heart of the English capital, as a part of the legislative and judicial structures, in plain view, and on the most frequented square of the vicinity, were houses actually built of wood, and covered with lath and mortar!

Westminster Hall was built as the banquet room of the palace. The architecture here is anything but uniform; it’s very complicated and messy. I didn’t have enough time during this visit to look closely at the details, so I’ll share a description during my next trip to England. There’s an open space at the abbey end of the palace called Old Palace-yard, which clearly indicates where the ancient royal residence was located. A larger square at the entrance to the hall is known as New Palace-yard. Two sides of this square are occupied by the buildings of the complex, including the courts of law, the main part of the hall, and some houses used by lower-level staff, along with building meant for storing records, etc. The latter are pretty shabby and don’t fit in with the neighborhood. They were plastered on the outside, and when I noticed a hole in the mortar, I went closer and was shocked to discover that right here, in the heart of the English capital, part of the legislative and judicial buildings, in plain sight and on the most heavily trafficked square nearby, there were houses actually made of wood, covered with lath and mortar!

The next morning I sent for a hair-dresser. As he entered the room I made him a sign, without speaking, to cut my hair. I was reading the morning paper, and my operator had got half through with his job, without a syllable being exchanged between us, when the man of the comb suddenly demanded, "What is the reason, sir, that the Americans think everything in their own country so much better than it is everywhere else?" You will suppose that the brusquerie, as well as the purport of this interrogatory, occasioned some surprise. How he knew I was an American at all I am unable to say, but the fellow had been fidgeting the whole time to break out upon me with this question.

The next morning, I called for a hairdresser. When he came in, I signaled to him without saying a word to cut my hair. I was reading the morning paper, and he was halfway through his work without us exchanging a single word when he suddenly asked, "What’s the reason, sir, that Americans think everything in their own country is so much better than it is anywhere else?" You can imagine that the bluntness of his question, as well as its meaning, caught me off guard. I have no idea how he figured out I was American, but the guy had been restless the whole time, eager to ask me this question.

I mention the anecdote, in order to show you how lively and general the feeling of jealousy has got to be among our transatlantic kinsmen. There will be a better occasion to speak of this hereafter.

I bring up this story to illustrate how intense and widespread the feeling of jealousy has become among our relatives across the Atlantic. We’ll have a better time to discuss this later.

London was empty. The fashionable streets were actually without a soul, for minutes at a time; and, without seeing it, I could not have believed that a town which, at certain times, is so crowded as actually to render crossing its streets hazardous, was ever so like a mere wilderness of houses. During these recesses in dissipation and fashion, I believe that the meanest residents disappear for a few months.

London was empty. The trendy streets were completely deserted for minutes at a time; and, without seeing it, I wouldn’t have believed that a city which, at certain times, is so packed that crossing its streets becomes dangerous, could ever resemble a desolate stretch of buildings. During these breaks in partying and style, I think even the least significant residents vanish for a few months.

Our fellow-traveller, Mr. L——, however, was in London, and we passed a day or two in company. As he is a votary of music, he took me to hear Madame Pasta. I was nearly as much struck with the extent and magnificence of the Opera-house, as I had been with the architecture of the Abbey. The brilliant manner in which it was lighted, in particular, excited my admiration, for want of light is a decided and a prominent fault of all scenic exhibitions at home, whether they are made in public or in private. Madame Pasta played Semiramide "How do you like her?" demanded L——, at the close of the first act. "Extremely; I scarce know which to praise the most, the command and the range of her voice, or her powers as a mere actress. But, don't you think her exceedingly like the Signorina?" The present Madame Malibran was then singing in New York, under the name of Signorina Garcia. L—— laughed, and told me the remark was well enough, but I had not put the question in exactly the proper form. "Do you not think the Signorina exceedingly like Madame Pasta?" would have been better. I had got the matter wrong end foremost.

Our travel companion, Mr. L——, was in London, and we spent a day or two together. Being a music lover, he took me to hear Madame Pasta. I was just as impressed by the size and beauty of the opera house as I had been by the architecture of the Abbey. The way it was lit, in particular, wowed me, since the lack of lighting is a major and obvious flaw of all performances back home, whether public or private. Madame Pasta performed Semiramide. "What did you think of her?" L—— asked after the first act. "I thought she was amazing; I can hardly decide which is more impressive, the power and range of her voice or her skills as an actress. But don’t you think she looks a lot like the Signorina?" At that time, the current Madame Malibran was singing in New York, going by the name Signorina Garcia. L—— laughed and said my observation was okay, but I hadn't quite phrased the question correctly. "Don't you think the Signorina looks a lot like Madame Pasta?" would have been better. I had gotten it backward.

L—— reminded me of our having amused ourselves on the passage with the nasal tones of the chorus at New York. He now directed my attention to the same peculiarity here. In this particular I saw no difference; nor should there be any, for I believe nearly all who are on the American stage, in any character, are foreigners, and chiefly English.

L—— reminded me of how we entertained ourselves during the trip with the funny nasal voices of the chorus in New York. He now pointed out the same oddity here. I didn’t see any difference; nor should there be, because I believe that almost everyone performing on the American stage, in any role, are foreigners, mostly from England.

The next day we went to old Drury, where we found a countryman, and townsman, Mr. Stephen Price, in the chair of Sheridan. The season was over, but we were shown the whole of the interior. It is also a magnificent structure in extent and internal embellishment, though a very plain brick pile externally. It must have eight or ten times the cubic contents of the largest American theatre. The rival building, Covent Garden, is within a few hundred feet of it, and has much more of architectural pretension, though neither can lay claim to much. The taste of the latter is very well, but it is built of that penny-saving material, stuccoed bricks.

The next day, we visited the old Drury, where we found a local guy, Mr. Stephen Price, in the chair of Sheridan. The season had ended, but we were given a full tour of the interior. It’s an impressive building in size and decoration, although it looks pretty plain from the outside, being just a brick structure. It probably has eight or ten times the volume of the biggest American theater. The competing building, Covent Garden, is just a few hundred feet away and has a lot more architectural flair, though neither can really brag about it. The design of Covent Garden is nice, but it’s made of cheap stucco-covered bricks.

We dined with Mr. Price, and on the table was some of our own justly-celebrated Madeira. L——, who is an oracle on these subjects, pronounced it injured. He was told it was so lately arrived from New York, that there had not been time to affect it. This fact, coupled with others that have since come to my knowledge, induce me to believe that the change of tastes, which is so often remarked in liquors, fruits, and other eatables, is as much wrought on ourselves, as in the much-abused viands. Those delicate organs which are necessary to this particular sense may readily undergo modifications by the varieties of temperature. We know that taste and its sister sense, smelling, are both temporarily destroyed by colds. The voice is signally affected by temperature. In cold climates it is clear and soft; in warm, harsh and deep. All these facts would serve to sustain the probability of the theory that a large portion of the strictures that are lavished on the products of different countries, should be lavished on our own capricious organs. Au reste, the consequence is much the same, let the cause be what it will.

We had dinner with Mr. Price, and on the table was some of our well-known Madeira. L——, who is an expert on these topics, declared it to be spoiled. He was told it had just arrived from New York, so there hadn't been time for it to be affected. This fact, along with others I’ve learned since, makes me believe that the changes in taste we often notice in drinks, fruits, and other foods come from both the items themselves and our own changing preferences. Our sensitive taste buds can easily be affected by different temperatures. We know that taste and its related sense, smell, can be temporarily diminished by colds. The voice is clearly influenced by temperature too; in cold climates, it sounds clear and smooth, while in warm climates it sounds harsh and deep. All these facts support the idea that many criticisms directed at products from different countries should really be aimed at our own unpredictable senses. Au reste, the outcome is pretty much the same, regardless of what causes it.

Mr. M——, an Englishman, who has many business concerns with America, came in while we were still at table, and I quitted the house in his company. It was still broad daylight. As we were walking together, arm and arm, my companion suddenly placed a hand behind him, and said, "My fine fellow, you are there, are you?" A lad of about seventeen had a hand in one of his pockets, feeling for his handkerchief. The case was perfectly clear, for Mr. M—— had him still in his gripe when I saw them. Instead of showing apprehension or shame, the fellow began to bluster and threaten. My companion, after a word or two of advice, hurried me from the spot. On expressing the surprise I felt at his permitting such a hardened rogue to go at large, he said that our wisest course was to get away. The lad was evidently supported by a gang, and we might be beaten as well as robbed, for our pains. Besides, the handkerchief was not actually taken, attendance in the courts was both expensive and vexatious, and he would be bound over to prosecute. In England, the complainant is compelled to prosecute, which is, in effect, a premium on crime! We retain many of the absurdities of the common law, and, among others, some which depend on a distinction between the intention and the commission of the act; but I do not know that any of our States are so unjust as to punish a citizen, in this way, because he has already been the victim of a rogue.

Mr. M——, an Englishman with numerous business interests in America, joined us while we were still at the table, and I left the house with him. It was still bright outside. As we walked together, arm in arm, my friend suddenly reached behind him and said, "Hey, buddy, you're there, aren't you?" A young guy, about seventeen, was feeling in one of his pockets for his handkerchief. It was obvious what was happening, as Mr. M—— still had a hold of him when I noticed. Instead of showing fear or shame, the kid started to shout and threaten. My companion said a few words of advice and quickly led me away from the scene. When I expressed my surprise that he let such a brazen thief go free, he told me that the best thing to do was to leave. The kid was clearly backed by a gang, and we could end up getting beaten or robbed for our trouble. Also, no handkerchief had actually been taken, going to court would be both costly and frustrating, and he'd be required to press charges. In England, the complainant has to pursue the case, which essentially rewards crime! We still have many outdated rules from common law, including some that differentiate between intent and action; but I don't think any of our states are so unfair as to punish a citizen in this way just because they were already a victim of a thief.

After all, I am not so certain our law is much better; but I believe more of the onus of obtaining justice falls on the injured party here than it does with us: still we are both too much under the dominion of the common law.

After all, I'm not so sure our law is any better; but I think more of the onus of getting justice falls on the injured party here than it does with us: still, we're both too much under the control of common law.

The next day I was looking at a bronze statue of Achilles, at Hyde Park Corner, which had been erected in honour of the Duke of Wellington. The place, like every other fashionable haunt at that season, was comparatively deserted. Still, there might have been fifty persons in sight. "Stop him! stop him!" cried a man, who was chasing another directly towards me. The chase, to use nautical terms, began to lighten ship by throwing overboard first one article and then another. As these objects were cast in different directions, he probably hoped that his pursuer, like Atalantis, might stop to pick them up. The last that appeared in the air was a hat, when, finding himself hemmed in between three of us, the thief suffered himself to be taken. A young man had been sleeping on the grass, and this land-pirate had absolutely succeeded in getting his shoes, his handkerchief, and his hat; but an attempt to take off his cravat had awoke the sleeper. In this case, the prisoner was marched off under sundry severe threats of vengeance; for the robbee was heated with the run, and really looked so ridiculous that his anger was quite natural.

The next day I was looking at a bronze statue of Achilles at Hyde Park Corner, which had been put up to honor the Duke of Wellington. The place, like every other trendy spot at that time of year, was relatively empty. Still, there might have been fifty people in sight. "Stop him! Stop him!" shouted a man who was chasing another person directly towards me. The chase, to use nautical terms, began to lighten the load by throwing first one item and then another overboard. As these objects were tossed in different directions, he probably hoped that his pursuer, like Atalanta, might stop to pick them up. The last thing to fly through the air was a hat, and when the thief found himself trapped between three of us, he let himself be caught. A young man had been sleeping on the grass, and this petty thief had actually managed to take his shoes, his handkerchief, and his hat; however, an attempt to take off his cravat had woken the sleeper. In this situation, the prisoner was taken away under various serious threats of revenge; for the robbee was worked up from the chase and really looked so ridiculous that his anger was completely understandable.

My business was now done, and I left London in a night-coach for Southampton. The place of rendezvous was the White Horse Cellar, in Piccadilly—a spot almost as celebrated for those who are in transitu, as was the Isthmus of Suez of old. I took an inside seat this time, for the convenience of a nap. At first, I had but a single fellow-traveller. Venturing to ask him the names of one or two objects that we passed, and fearing he might think my curiosity impertinent, I apologized for it, by mentioning that I was a foreigner. "A foreigner!" he exclaimed; "why, you speak English as well as I do myself!" I confess I had thought, until that moment, that the advantage, in this particular, was altogether on my side; but it seems I was mistaken. By way of relieving his mind, however, I told him I was an American. "An American!" and he seemed more puzzled than ever. After a few minutes of meditation on what he had just heard, he civilly pointed to a bit of meadow through which the Thames meanders, and good-naturedly told me it was Runnymeade. I presume my manner denoted a proper interest, for he now took up the subject of the English Barons, and entered into a long account of their modern magnificence and wealth. This is a topic that a large class in England, who only know their aristocracy by report, usually discuss with great unction. They appear to have the same pride in the superiority of their great families, that the American slave is known to feel in the importance of his master. I say this seriously, and not with a view to sneer, but to point out to you a state of feeling that, at first, struck me as very extraordinary. I suppose that the feelings of both castes depend on a very natural principle. The Englishman, however, as he is better educated, has one respectable feature in his deference. He exults with reason in the superiority of his betters over the betters of most other people: in this particular he is fully borne out by the fact. Subsequent observation has given me occasion to observe, that the English gentleman, in appearance, attainments, manliness, and perhaps I might add, principles, although this and deportment are points on which I should speak with less confidence, stands at the head of his class in Christendom. This should not be, nor would it be, were the gentlemen of America equal to their fortunes, which, unhappily, they are not. Facts have so far preceded opinions at home, as to leave but few minds capable of keeping in their company. But this is a subject to which we may also have occasion to return.

My business was finished, and I left London on a night coach to Southampton. The meeting place was the White Horse Cellar in Piccadilly—a location almost as famous for travelers as the Isthmus of Suez used to be. I took a seat inside this time to have a chance to nap. At first, I had just one fellow passenger. I dared to ask him the names of a couple of things we passed, and worried he might think my curiosity rude, so I apologized by saying I was a foreigner. "A foreigner!" he exclaimed; "you speak English as well as I do!" I have to admit, I thought until that moment that I had the advantage in this regard, but I realized I was wrong. To ease his confusion, I told him I was American. "An American!" he seemed even more perplexed. After a few moments of thinking about what he had just heard, he kindly pointed to a piece of meadow where the Thames flows, and cheerfully told me it was Runnymede. I guess my expression showed genuine interest, because he then went on about the English Barons, giving a long account of their modern wealth and splendor. This is a topic that many people in England, who only know their aristocracy from hearsay, often discuss with great enthusiasm. They seem to take the same pride in the superiority of their noble families that an American slave feels about the importance of his master. I say this seriously, not to mock, but to highlight a sentiment that struck me as quite unusual at first. I suppose the feelings of both groups stem from a very natural principle. The Englishman, however, being better educated, has at least one commendable aspect to his deference. He rightly takes pride in the superiority of his upper class over the upper classes of most other nations: in this regard, he is certainly justified by the facts. My later observations have led me to see that the English gentleman, in terms of appearance, education, manliness, and perhaps I should add, principles—although I would be less confident in speaking of manners—ranks at the top of his class in Christendom. This shouldn't be the case, nor would it be, if the gentlemen of America were truly equal to their fortunes, which unfortunately, they are not. Facts have advanced so far ahead of opinions at home that only a few minds can keep up with them. But this is a topic we might revisit later.

The coach stopped, and we took up a third inside. This man proved to be a radical. He soon began to make side-hits at the "nobility and gentry," and, mingled with some biting truths, he uttered a vast deal of nonsense. While he was in the midst of his denunciations, the coach again stopped, and one of the outsides was driven into it by the night air. He was evidently a gentleman, and the guard afterwards told me he was a Captain Somebody, and a nephew of a Lord Something, to whose country place he was going. The appearance of the captain checked the radical for a little while; but, finding that the other was quiet, he soon returned to the attack. The aristocrat was silent, and the admirer of aristocracy evidently thought himself too good to enter into a dispute with one of the mere people; for to admire aristocracy was, in his eyes, something like an illustration; but wincing under one of the other's home-pushes, he said, "These opinions may do very well for this gentleman," meaning me, who as yet had not uttered a syllable—"who is an American; but I must say, I think them out of place in the mouth of an Englishman." The radical regarded me a moment, and inquired if what the other had just said was true. I answered that it was. He then began an eulogium on America; which, like his Jeremiad on England, had a good many truths blended with a great deal of nonsense. At length, he unfortunately referred to me, to corroborate one of his most capital errors. As this could not be done conscientiously, for his theory depended on the material misconstruction of giving the whole legislative power to Congress, I was obliged to explain the mistake into which he had fallen. The captain and the toady were both evidently pleased; nor can I say, I was sorry the appeal had been made, for it had the effect of silencing a commentator, who knew very little of his subject. The captain manifested his satisfaction, by commencing a conversation, which lasted until we all went to sleep. Both the captain and the radical quitted us in the night.

The coach stopped, and we took a third seat inside. This guy turned out to be a radical. He quickly started taking jabs at the "nobility and gentry," and mixed in some harsh truths with a lot of nonsense. While he was in the middle of his rants, the coach stopped again, and someone from the outside climbed in, clearly feeling the chill of the night air. He looked like a gentleman, and the guard later told me he was Captain Somebody, a nephew of a Lord Something, heading to his country house. The captain's arrival quieted the radical for a bit; but when he saw the captain was quiet too, he went back on the offensive. The aristocrat stayed silent, clearly feeling too superior to engage with one of the common folks; for admiring aristocracy, in his eyes, was like an illustration. However, after one of the radical’s pointed remarks made him squirm, he said, "These opinions might work for this gentleman," meaning me, who hadn’t spoken a word yet—"who is an American; but I must say, I find them out of place coming from an Englishman." The radical looked at me for a moment and asked if what the other had just said was true. I confirmed it. He then launched into a praise of America, which, like his complaints about England, contained a mix of truths and a lot of nonsense. Eventually, he unfortunately pointed to me to back up one of his major errors. Since I couldn’t agree with this misinterpretation—his theory mistakenly assumed that all legislative power rested with Congress—I had to clarify the error he made. The captain and the toady both looked pleased; honestly, I wasn't upset about the interruption, as it quieted a speaker who didn’t know much about his topic. The captain showed his approval by starting a conversation that lasted until we all went to sleep. Both the captain and the radical left us during the night.

Men like the one just described do the truth a great deal of harm. Their knowledge does not extend to first principles, and they are always for maintaining their positions by a citation of facts. One half of the latter are imagined; and even that which is true is so enveloped with collateral absurdities, that when pushed, they are invariably exposed. These are the travellers who come among us Liberals, and go back Tories. Finding that things fall short of the political Elysiums of their imaginations, they fly into the opposite extreme, as a sort of amende honorable to their own folly and ignorance.

Men like the one just described cause a lot of damage to the truth. Their understanding doesn’t go beyond basic principles, and they always try to support their views with references to facts. Half of these facts are made up; even the true ones are so surrounded by ridiculous claims that, when challenged, they are easily debunked. These are the people who come to us Liberals and leave as Tories. When they realize that reality doesn’t match the ideal political paradise they imagined, they swing to the opposite extreme as a way to atone for their own foolishness and ignorance.

At the distance of a few miles from Winchester, we passed an encampment of gipsies, by the way-side. They were better-looking than I had expected to see them, though their faces were hardly perceptible in the grey of the morning. They appeared well fed and very comfortably bivouacked. Why do not these people appear in America? or, do they come, and get absorbed, like all the rest, by the humane and popular tendencies of the country? What a homage will it be to the institutions, if it be found that even a gipsy cease to be a gipsy in such a country! Just as the sun rose, I got out to our lodgings and went to bed.

At a few miles from Winchester, we passed a campsite of gypsies by the roadside. They looked better than I had expected, even though their faces were barely visible in the gray morning light. They seemed well-fed and pretty comfortably settled. Why don’t these people appear in America? Or do they come and get absorbed, like everyone else, by the kind and popular ways of the country? What a tribute it would be to the institutions if it turns out that even a gypsy stops being a gypsy in such a place! Just as the sun rose, I got to our lodging and went to bed.

After a sound sleep of two or three hours, I rose and went to the drawing-room. A lady was in it, seated in a way to allow me to see no more than a small part of her side-face. In that little, I saw the countenance of your aunt's family. It was the sister whom we had never seen, and who had hastened out of Hertfordshire to meet us. There are obvious reasons why such a subject cannot be treated in this letter, but the study of two sisters who had been educated, the one in England and the other in America, who possessed so much in common, and yet, who were separated by so much that was not in common, was to me a matter of singular interest. It showed me, at a glance, the manner in which the distinctive moral and physical features of nations are formed; the points of resemblance being just sufficient to render the points of difference more obvious.

After a good sleep of two or three hours, I got up and went to the living room. There was a woman sitting there, positioned so that I could only see a small part of her profile. In that glimpse, I recognized the face of your aunt's family. It was the sister we had never met, who had rushed from Hertfordshire to greet us. There are clear reasons why I can’t go into detail about this in this letter, but studying two sisters—one raised in England and the other in America—who shared so much yet were different in many ways was incredibly fascinating to me. It showed me right away how the unique moral and physical traits of nations are shaped; the similarities were just enough to highlight the differences even more clearly.

A new and nearer route to Netley had been discovered during my absence, and our unpractised Americans had done little else than admire ruins for the past week. The European who comes to America plunges into the virgin forest with wonder and delight; while the American who goes to Europe finds his greatest pleasure, at first, in hunting up the memorials of the past. Each is in quest of novelty, and is burning with the desire to gaze at objects of which he has often read.

A new, closer route to Netley had been found while I was away, and our inexperienced Americans had spent the past week mainly admiring ruins. The European who visits America dives into the untouched forest with awe and excitement, while the American who travels to Europe initially feels the most joy in searching for historical landmarks. Both are seeking new experiences and are eager to see things they've read about before.

The steam-boat made but one or two voyages a week between Southampton and Havre, and we were obliged to wait a day or two for the next trip. The intervening time was passed in the manner just named. Every place of any importance in England has some work or other written on the subject of its history, its beauties, and its monuments. It is lucky to escape a folio. Our works on Southampton, (which are of moderate dimensions, however,) spoke of some Roman remains in the neighbourhood. The spot was found, and, although the imagination was of greater use than common in following the author's description, we stood on the spot with a species of antiquarian awe.

The steamship only made one or two trips a week between Southampton and Havre, so we had to wait a day or two for the next sailing. We spent that time as mentioned earlier. Every significant place in England has some literature about its history, attractions, and landmarks. It's lucky if it doesn't run to a thick book. Our books about Southampton (which are fairly short) mentioned some Roman ruins nearby. We found the location, and while it took some imagination to picture what the author described, we stood there feeling a kind of historical reverence.

Southampton had formerly been a port of some importance. Many of the expeditions sent against France embarked here, and the town had once been well fortified, for the warfare of the period. A good deal of the old wall remains. All of this was industriously traced out; while the bow-windows, long passages, and old maids, found no favour in our eyes.

Southampton used to be a fairly important port. Many of the expeditions sent to France set sail from here, and the town had once been well fortified for its time. A lot of the old wall still exists. All of this was carefully explored, while the bay windows, long hallways, and elderly women didn't appeal to us at all.

One simple and touching memorial I well remember. There is a ferry between the town and the grounds near Netley Abbey. A lady had caught a cold, which terminated in death, in consequence of waiting on the shore, during a storm, for the arrival of a boat. To protect others from a similar calamity, she had ordered a very suitable defence against the weather to be built on the fatal spot, and to be kept in repair for ever. The structure is entirely of stone, small and exceedingly simple and ingenious. The ground plan is that of a Greek cross. On this foundation are reared four walls, which, of course, cross each other in the centre at right angles. A little above the height of a man, the whole is amply roofed. Let the wind blow which way it will, you perceive there is always shelter. There is no external wall, and the diameter of the whole does not exceed ten feet, if it be as much. This little work is exceedingly English, and it is just as unlike anything American as possible. It has its origin in benevolence, is original in the idea, and it is picturesque. We might accomplish the benevolence, but it would be of a more public character: the picturesque is a thing of which we hardly know the meaning; and as for the originality, the dread of doing anything different from his neighbour would effectually prevent an American from erecting such a shelter; even charity with us being subject to the control of the general voice. On the other hand, what a clever expedient would have been devised, in the first instance, in America, to get across the ferry without taking cold! All these little peculiarities have an intimate connexion with national character and national habits. The desire to be independent and original causes a multitude of silly things to be invented here, while the apprehension of doing anything different from those around them causes a multitude of silly things to be perpetuated in America; and yet we are children of the same parents! When profit is in view, we have but one soul and that is certainly inventive enough; but when money has been made, and is to be spent, we really do not seem to know how to set about it, except by routine.

One simple and touching memorial I remember well. There's a ferry connecting the town to the area near Netley Abbey. A woman unfortunately caught a cold, which led to her death, while waiting on the shore during a storm for a boat to arrive. To prevent others from experiencing a similar tragedy, she had a suitable shelter built at the spot where she died, and it was meant to be maintained forever. The structure is made entirely of stone, small, and incredibly simple yet clever. Its layout resembles a Greek cross. Four walls are erected on this foundation, crossing each other at right angles in the center. A little above a man's height, it has a solid roof. No matter which way the wind blows, there's always shelter inside. There isn’t an external wall, and the entire structure doesn’t exceed ten feet in diameter, if even that. This little project is very English and is completely different from anything American. It came from a place of kindness, is original in its concept, and it’s visually appealing. We might demonstrate kindness, but it would look more like a public project; the idea of being visually appealing is something we hardly grasp; and originality is something that the fear of doing anything different from one’s neighbor would prevent an American from creating such a shelter, even charity being influenced by public opinion. On the other hand, it’s amusing to think about what a clever solution would have been proposed in America to cross the ferry without getting cold! All these little quirks are closely linked to national character and habits. The desire for independence and originality leads to many silly inventions here, while the fear of being different leads to a lot of silly traditions being continued in America; yet we all come from the same roots! When there’s profit involved, we share one mindset, and that’s certainly inventive enough; but when it comes to spending money, we don't really seem to know how to go about it, aside from following routines.

LETTER IV.

Quit England.—Approach to France.—Havre.—Our Reception there.—Female
Commissionnaire.—Clamour of Drums.—Port of Havre.—Projected
Enterprize.—American Enterprize.—Steam-boat
Excursion.—Honfleur.—Rouen.—French Exaction.—American
Porters.—Rouen Cathedral.—Our Cicerone.—A Diligence.—Picturesque
Road.—European Peasantry.—Aspect of the Country.—Church at
Louviers.—Village near Vernon.—Rosny.—Mantes.—Bourbon Magnificence.
—Approach to Paris—Enter Paris.

Quit England.—Approaching France.—Havre.—Our Welcome There.—Female
Commissionaire.—Noise of Drums.—Port of Havre.—Planned
Enterprise.—American Enterprise.—Steamboat
Trip.—Honfleur.—Rouen.—French Charges.—American
Porters.—Rouen Cathedral.—Our Guide.—A Diligence.—Scenic
Road.—European Peasantry.—Look of the Country.—Church at
Louviers.—Village near Vernon.—Rosny.—Mantes.—Bourbon Splendor.
—Getting to Paris—Entering Paris.

To R. COOPER, ESQ., COOPERSTOWN.

To R. Cooper, Esq., Cooperstown.

On quitting England, we embarked from the very strand where Henry V. embarked for the fruitless field of Agincourt. A fearful rumour had gone abroad that the Camilla (the steam-boat) had been shorn of a wing, and there were many rueful faces in the boat that took us off to the vessel. In plainer speech, one of the boilers was out of order, and the passage was to be made with just half the usual propelling power. At that season, or indeed at any season, the only probable consequence was loss of time. With a strong head-wind, it is true, the Camilla might have been compelled to return; but this might also have happened with the use of both the boilers.

On leaving England, we boarded from the very spot where Henry V. set off for the pointless battle of Agincourt. A scary rumor had spread that the Camilla (the steamboat) was down a wing, and there were a lot of worried faces in the boat that took us to the ship. To put it simply, one of the boilers was malfunctioning, and we were making the journey with only half the usual power. At that time, or really at any time, the most likely outcome was just a delay. It’s true that with a strong headwind, the Camilla might have had to turn back; but the same could have happened even if both boilers were running.

Our adventurers did not see things in this light. The division of employments, which produces prices so cheap and good, makes bad travellers. Our boat's cargo embarked with fear and trembling, and "She has but one boiler!" passed from mouth to mouth amid ominous faces. A bachelor-looking personage, of about fifty, with his person well swaddled in July, declared in a loud voice, that we were "all going on board to be drowned." This startled A——, who, having full faith in my nautical experience, asked what we were to think of it? It was a mere question between ten hours and fifteen, and so I told her. The females, who had just before been trembling with alarm, brightened at this, and two or three of them civilly thanked me for the information they had thus obtained incidentally!—"Boat, sir! boat!" "Thank 'ee, sir; thank 'ee, sir."

Our adventurers had a different perspective. The way jobs are divided up, which results in cheaper and better prices, makes for poor travelers. Our boat's cargo boarded with a sense of fear and anxiety, and "She has only one boiler!" spread from person to person among anxious faces. A bachelor, looking to be about fifty and dressed heavily for July, loudly proclaimed that we were "all going on board to drown." This shocked A——, who, trusting my sailing experience, asked what we should think about it. It was simply a matter of whether it would take ten hours or fifteen, and so I told her. The women, who had just been shaking with fear, perked up at this, and two or three of them politely thanked me for the information they had received by chance!—"Boat, sir! boat!" "Thank you, sir; thank you, sir."

We found two or three parties on board of a higher condition than common. Apprehension cast a shade over the cold marble-like polish of even the English aristocrat; for if, as Mrs. Opie has well observed, there is nothing "so like a lord in a passion as a commoner in a passion," "your fear" is also a sad leveller. The boat was soon under way, and gradually our cargo of mental apprehensions settled into the usual dolorous physical suffering of landsmen in rough water. So much for excessive civilization. The want of a boiler under similar circumstances, would have excited no feeling whatever among a similar number of Americans, nineteen in twenty of whom, thanks to their rough-and-tumble habits, would know exactly what to think of it.

We encountered two or three groups onboard who were of a higher status than usual. A sense of anxiety dulled even the polished demeanor of the English aristocrat; as Mrs. Opie insightfully noted, "there's nothing so much like a lord in a rage as a commoner in a rage," and “your fear” also tends to level things out. The boat soon set off, and gradually our worries transformed into the typical miserable physical discomfort experienced by land-dwellers in choppy waters. So much for being overly civilized. If we were in similar circumstances without a boiler, it wouldn’t have stirred any reaction among a comparable number of Americans, nineteen out of twenty of whom, due to their rough-and-tumble ways, would know exactly how to respond.

I was seated, during a part of the day, near a group of young men, who were conversing with a lady of some three or four and twenty. They expressed their surprise at meeting her on board. She told them it was a sudden whim; that no one knew of her movements; she meant only to be gone a fortnight, to take a run into Normandy. In the course of the conversation I learned that she was single, and had a maid and a footman with her. In this guise she might go where she pleased; whereas, had she taken "an escort" in the American fashion, her character would have suffered. This usage, however, is English rather than European. Single women on the Continent, except in extraordinary cases, are obliged to maintain far greater reserve even than with us; and there, single or married, they cannot travel under the protection of any man who is not very nearly connected with them, domestics and dependants excepted.

I was sitting, during part of the day, near a group of young men who were talking to a woman in her early twenties. They were surprised to see her on board. She said it was a spontaneous decision; that no one knew about her plans; she intended to be away for just two weeks, taking a trip to Normandy. During the conversation, I found out she was single and had a maid and a footman with her. In this setup, she could go wherever she wanted; however, if she had taken "an escort" like they do in America, her reputation would have been affected. This practice, though, is more common in England than elsewhere in Europe. Single women on the Continent, except in rare situations, have to be much more reserved than we do; there, whether single or married, they cannot travel with any man who isn't very closely related to them, excluding servants and dependents.

The debates about proceeding at all had detained us so long, and the "one boiler" proved to be so powerless, that night set in, and we had not yet made the coast of France. The breeze had been fresh, but it lulled towards sunset, though not before we began to feel the influence of the tides. About midnight, however, I heard some one exclaim, "Land!" and we all hastened on deck, to take a first look at France.

The discussions about whether to move forward had delayed us for so long, and the "one boiler" turned out to be so ineffective that night fell, and we still hadn't reached the coast of France. The breeze had been strong, but it calmed down toward sunset, although we started to notice the impact of the tides. Around midnight, though, I heard someone shout, "Land!" and we all rushed onto the deck to catch our first glimpse of France.

The boat was running along beneath some cliffs. The moon was shining bright, and her rays lighted up the chalky sides of the high coast, giving them a ghostly hue. The towers of two lighthouses also glittered on a headland near by. Presently a long sea-wall became visible, and, rounding its end, we shot into smooth water. We entered the little port of Havre between artificial works, on one of which stands a low, massive, circular tower, that tradition attributes to no less a personage than Julius Caesar.

The boat was gliding along under some cliffs. The moon was shining brightly, and its rays illuminated the chalky sides of the high coast, giving them an eerie glow. The towers of two lighthouses sparkled on a nearby headland. Soon, a long sea wall appeared, and as we rounded its end, we entered calm waters. We arrived at the small port of Havre between man-made structures, one of which features a low, sturdy, circular tower, which tradition claims was built by none other than Julius Caesar.

What a change in so short a time! On the other side of the Channel, beyond the usual demands for employment, which were made in a modest way, and the eternal "Thank'ee, sir," there was a quiet in the people that was not entirely free from a suspicion of surliness. Here every man seemed to have two voices, both of which he used as if with no other desire than to hear himself speak. Notwithstanding the hour, which was past midnight, the quay was well lined, and a dozen officials poured on board the boat to prevent our landing. Custom-house officers, gendarmes, with enormous hats, and female commissionaires, were counteracting each other at every turn. At length we were permitted to land, being ordered up to a building near by. Here the females were taken into a separate room, where their persons were examined by functionaries of their own sex for contraband goods! This process has been described to me as being to the last degree offensive and humiliating. My own person was respected, I know not, why, for we were herded like sheep. As we were without spot, at least so far as smuggling was concerned, we were soon liberated. All our effects were left in the office, and we were turned into the streets without even a rag but what we had on. This was an inauspicious commencement for a country so polished; and yet, when one comes to look at the causes, it is not easy to point out an alternative. It was our own fault that we came so late.

What a change in such a short time! On the other side of the Channel, apart from the usual requests for jobs made in a humble way, and the endless "Thank you, sir," there was a calm among the people that hinted at a bit of grumpiness. Here, every man seemed to have two voices, and he used both just to hear himself talk. Even though it was past midnight, the quay was crowded, and a dozen officials boarded the boat to stop us from landing. Customs officers, gendarmes with huge hats, and female ticket agents kept getting in each other's way. Finally, we were allowed to land and were ordered to a nearby building. The women were taken into a separate room where their bodies were inspected by female officials for smuggled goods! I’ve heard this process is extremely offensive and humiliating. My own body was left alone, though I’m not sure why, since we were herded together like sheep. Since we didn’t have anything hidden, at least as far as smuggling was concerned, we were quickly set free. All our belongings were left at the office, and we were sent out into the streets with nothing but what we were wearing. This was an unfortunate start in such a polished country; yet, when you think about it, it’s hard to suggest a different outcome. It was our own fault for arriving so late.

The streets were empty, and the tall grey houses, narrow avenues, and the unaccustomed objects, presented a strange spectacle by the placid light of the moon. It appeared as if we had alighted in a different planet. Though fatigued and sleepy, the whole party would involuntarily stop to admire some novelty, and our march was straggling and irregular. One house refused us after another, and it soon became seriously a question whether the night was not to be passed in the open air. P—— was less than three years old, and as we had a regular gradation from that age upward, our début in France promised to be anything but agreeable. The guide said his resources were exhausted, and hinted at the impossibility of getting in. Nothing but the inns was open, and at all these we were refused. At length I remembered that, in poring over an English guide-book, purchased in New York, a certain Hôtel d'Angleterre had been recommended as the best house in Havre. "Savez-vous, mon ami, où est l'Hôtel d'Angleterre?"—"Ma fois, oui; c'est tout près." This "ma fois, oui," was ominous, and the "c'est tout, près," was more so still. Thither we went, however, and we were received. Then commenced the process of climbing. We ascended several stories, by a narrow crooked staircase, and were shown into rooms on the fifth floor.

The streets were deserted, and the tall gray houses, narrow lanes, and unfamiliar objects created a strange scene under the calm light of the moon. It felt like we had landed on a different planet. Although tired and sleepy, the whole group would instinctively pause to check out something new, causing our progress to be scattered and uneven. One house turned us away after another, and it quickly became a serious concern whether we would have to spend the night outside. P—— was under three years old, and since we had a range of ages in our group, our introduction to France didn't seem like it would be very pleasant. The guide mentioned he was out of options and suggested it might be impossible to find a place to stay. Only the inns were open, and we were rejected at all of them. Eventually, I remembered that while I was looking through an English guidebook purchased in New York, a certain Hôtel d'Angleterre had been recommended as the best place in Havre. "Do you know, my friend, where the Hôtel d'Angleterre is?"—"Indeed, yes; it’s very close." This "indeed, yes" was foreboding, and "it’s very close" was even more so. Still, we went there, and they accepted us. Then the ascent began. We climbed several flights of a narrow, twisting staircase and were shown to rooms on the fifth floor.

The floors were of waxed tiles, without carpets or mats, and the furniture was tawdry. We got into our beds, which fatigue could scarcely render it possible to endure, on account of the bugs. A more infernal night I never passed, and I have often thought since, how hazardous it is to trust to first impressions. This night, and one or two more passed at Havre, and one other passed between Rouen and Paris, were among the most uncomfortable I can remember; and yet if I were to name a country in which one would be the most certain to get a good and a clean bed, I think I should name France!

The floors were made of waxed tiles, with no carpets or mats, and the furniture was cheap. We got into our beds, which fatigue barely made it possible to tolerate, due to the bugs. I never spent a more hellish night, and I often think about how risky it is to rely on first impressions. This night, along with a couple of others spent in Havre and another between Rouen and Paris, were some of the most uncomfortable I can remember; yet if I had to name a country where you'd be most likely to find a good and clean bed, I would probably say France!

The next morning I arose and went down the ladder, for it was little better, to the lower world. The servant wished to know if we intended to use the table d'hôte, which he pronounced excellent. Curiosity induced me to look at the appliances. It was a dark, dirty and crowded room, and yet not without certain savoury smells. French cookery can even get the better of French dirt. It was the only place about the house, the kitchen excepted, where a tolerable smell was to be found, and I mounted to the upper regions in self-defence.

The next morning, I got up and went down the ladder, as it was slightly better than the lower world. The servant asked if we wanted to use the table d'hôte, which he claimed was excellent. Out of curiosity, I took a look at the setup. It was a dark, dirty, and crowded room, but it did have some appetizing smells. French cooking can even overcome French dirt. It was the only place in the house, besides the kitchen, that had a decent smell, so I headed back up to the upper levels for my own sake.

An hour or two afterwards, the consul did me the favour to call. I apologized for the necessity of causing him to clamber up so high. "It is not a misfortune here," was the answer, "for the higher one is, the purer is the atmosphere;" and he was right enough. It was not necessary to explain that we were in an inferior house, and certainly everything was extremely novel. At breakfast, however, there was a sensible improvement. The linen was white as snow; we were served with silver forks—it was a breakfast à la fourchette—spotlessly clean napkins, excellent rolls, and delicious butter, to say nothing of côtelettes that appeared to have been cooked by magic. Your aunt and myself looked at each other with ludicrous satisfaction when we came to taste coffee, which happened to be precisely at the same instant. It was the first time either of us had ever tasted French coffee—it would scarcely be exaggeration to say, that either of us had ever tasted coffee at all. I have had many French cooks since; have lived years in the capital of France itself, but I could never yet obtain a servant who understood the secret of making café au lait, as it is made in most of the inns and cafés of that country. The discrepancy between the excellence of the table and the abominations of the place struck them all, so forcibly, that the rest of the party did little else but talk about it. As for myself, I wished to do nothing but eat.

An hour or two later, the consul kindly came to visit. I apologized for making him climb so high. "It's not a problem here," he replied, "because the higher up you are, the cleaner the air is," and he was right. It didn't need to be pointed out that we were in a less impressive house, and everything felt very new. However, breakfast was a noticeable improvement. The linens were as white as snow; we were served with silver forks—it was a breakfast à la fourchette—the napkins were impeccably clean, and we had excellent rolls and delicious butter, not to mention côtelettes that seemed to have been cooked by magic. Your aunt and I exchanged amused looks of satisfaction when we both tasted the coffee at the same time. It was the first time either of us had tried French coffee—it wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that neither of us had really tasted coffee before. I’ve had many French cooks since then and spent years in the heart of France, but I’ve never found a servant who knows the secret of making café au lait like they do in most inns and cafés there. The stark contrast between the amazing food and the unpleasantness of the place struck everyone so much that the rest of the group couldn't stop talking about it. As for me, all I wanted to do was eat.

I had now another specimen of national manners. It was necessary to get our luggage through the custom-house. The consul recommended a commissionnaire to help me. "You are not to be surprised," he said, laughing, as he went away, "if I send you one in petticoats." In a few minutes, sure enough, one of the beau sexe presented herself. Her name was Désirée, and an abler negotiator was never employed. She scolded, coaxed, advised, wrangled, and uniformly triumphed. The officers were more civil, by daylight, than we had found them under the influence of the moon, and our business was soon effected.

I now had another example of national customs. We needed to get our luggage through customs. The consul recommended a commissionnaire to assist me. "Don’t be surprised," he said, laughing as he left, "if I send you one in a skirt." Sure enough, a representative of the beau sexe showed up a few minutes later. Her name was Désirée, and she was an incredibly skilled negotiator. She scolded, persuaded, advised, argued, and consistently succeeded. The officers were much nicer during the day than we had found them under the influence of the moon, and we quickly wrapped up our business.

W—— had brought with him a spy-glass. It was old and of little value, but it was an heir-loom of the family. It came from the Hall at C——n, and had become historical for its service in detecting deer, in the lake, during the early years of the settlement. This glass had disappeared. No inquiry could recover it. "Send for Désirée," said the consul. Désirée came, received her orders, and in half an hour the glass was restored. There was an oversight in not getting a passport, when we were about to quit Havre. The office hours were over, and the steam-boat could not wait. "Were is Désirée?" Désirée was made acquainted with the difficulty, and the passport was obtained. "Désirée, où est Désirée?" cried some one in the crowd, that had assembled to see the Camilla start for England, the day after our arrival. "Here is an Englishman who is too late to get his passport viséd," said this person to Désirée, so near me that I heard it all; "the boat goes in ten minutes—what is to be done?"—"Ma foi—it is too late!" "Try, ma bonne—it's a pity he should lose his passage—voici." The Englishman gave his fee. Désirée looked about her, and then taking the idler by the arm, she hurried him through the crowd, this way and that way, ending by putting him aboard without any passport at all. "It is too late to get one," she said; "and they can but send you back." He passed undetected. France has a plenty of these managing females, though Désirée is one of the cleverest of them all. I understood this woman had passed a year or two in England, expressly to fit herself for her present occupation, by learning the language.

W—— had brought a spyglass with him. It was old and not worth much, but it was a family heirloom. It came from the Hall at C——n and had become notable for its role in spotting deer in the lake during the early days of the settlement. This glass had gone missing. No amount of searching could retrieve it. "Get Désirée," said the consul. Désirée arrived, got her instructions, and within half an hour, the glass was back. There was a mistake in not getting a passport when we were about to leave Havre. The office was closed, and the steamboat couldn’t wait. "Where is Désirée?" Désirée was informed of the problem, and the passport was secured. "Désirée, where is Désirée?" shouted someone in the crowd that had gathered to see the Camilla set off for England the day after we arrived. "Here is an Englishman who is too late to get his passport viséd," said this person to Désirée, close enough for me to hear everything; "the boat leaves in ten minutes—what can we do?"—"Ma foi—it’s too late!" "Try, ma bonne—it’s a shame he should miss his trip—voici." The Englishman paid his fee. Désirée looked around and then took the loiterer by the arm, rushing him through the crowd, this way and that, ultimately managing to get him on board without any passport at all. "It’s too late to get one," she said; "and they can only send you back." He got through without being noticed. France has plenty of these resourceful women, but Désirée is one of the smartest of them all. I gathered that she had spent a year or two in England specifically to prepare for her current job by learning the language.

While engaged in taking our passages on board the steam-boat for Rouen, some one called me by name, in English. The sound of the most familiar words, in one's own language, soon get to be startling in a foreign country. I remember, on returning to England, after an absence of five years, that it was more than a week before I could persuade myself I was not addressed whenever a passer-by spoke suddenly. On the present occasion, I was called to by an old schoolboy acquaintance, Mr. H——r, who was a consul in England, but who had taken a house on what is called the Côte, a hill-side, just above Ingouville, a village at no great distance from the town. We went out to his pretty little cottage, which enjoyed a charming view. Indeed I should particularize this spot as the one which gave me the first idea of one species of distinctive European scenery. The houses cling to the declivity, rising above each other in a way that might literally enable one to toss a stone into his neighbour's chimney-top. They are of stone, but being whitewashed, and very numerous, they give the whole mountain-side the appearance of a pretty hamlet, scattered without order in the midst of gardens. Italy abounds with such little scenes; nor are they unfrequent in France, especially in the vicinity of towns; though whitened edifices are far from being the prevailing taste of that country.

While we were boarding the steamboat to Rouen, someone called my name in English. Hearing familiar words in your own language can be quite surprising when you're in a foreign country. I remember returning to England after being away for five years; it took me over a week to convince myself that I wasn’t being addressed whenever someone spoke suddenly nearby. On this occasion, I was called by an old school friend, Mr. H——r, who was a consul in England but had rented a house on what’s known as the Côte, a hillside just above Ingouville, a village not far from town. We visited his lovely little cottage, which had a beautiful view. In fact, I would highlight this spot as the one that first gave me a sense of a particular type of distinct European scenery. The houses cling to the slope, stacking above one another in a way that you could practically throw a stone into your neighbor's chimney. They are made of stone, but since they are whitewashed and quite numerous, they give the whole mountainside the look of a charming hamlet, scattered haphazardly amid gardens. Italy is full of such little scenes, and you can also find them in France, especially near towns, although whitewashed buildings aren’t the dominant style in that country.

That evening we had an infernal clamour of drums in the principal street, which happened to be our own. There might have been fifty, unaccompanied by any wind instrument. The French do not use the fife, and when one is treated to the drum, it is generally in large potions, and nothing but drum. This is a relic of barbarism, and is quite unworthy of a musical age. There is more or less of it in all the garrisoned towns of Europe. You may imagine the satisfaction with which one listens to a hundred or two of these plaintive instruments, beat between houses six or eight stories high, in a narrow street, and with desperate perseverance! The object is to recall the troops to their quarters.

That evening, we heard a deafening noise of drums in the main street, which happened to be ours. There were probably about fifty of them, without any wind instruments. The French don’t use the fife, and when you get the drums, it’s usually in large quantities and nothing but drums. This is a leftover from a more primitive time and isn’t fitting for a musical era. You can find this everywhere in garrison towns across Europe. You can imagine how enjoyable it is to hear a hundred or so of these mournful instruments echoing between six or eight-story buildings in a narrow street, playing relentlessly! The purpose is to call the troops back to their quarters.

Havre is a tide-harbour. In America, where there is, on an average, not more than five feet of rise and fall to the water of the sea, such a haven would, of course, be impracticable for large vessels. But the majority of the ports on the British Channel are of this character, and indeed a large portion of the harbours of Great Britain. Calais, Boulogne, Havre, and Dieppe, are all inaccessible at low water. The cliffs are broken by a large ravine, a creek makes up the gorge, or a small stream flows outward into the sea, a basin is excavated, the entrance is rendered safe by moles which project into deep water, and the town is crowded around this semi-artificial port as well as circumstances will allow. Such is, more or less, the history of them all. Havre, however, is in some measure an exception. It stands on a plain, that I should think had once been a marsh. The cliffs are near it, seaward, and towards the interior there are fine receding hills, leaving a sufficient site, notwithstanding, for a town of large dimensions.

Havre is a tide harbor. In America, where the sea usually rises and falls by no more than five feet, such a harbor wouldn’t work for large ships. However, most ports on the British Channel are designed this way, and a significant part of Great Britain's harbors are too. Calais, Boulogne, Havre, and Dieppe are all inaccessible during low water. The cliffs are interrupted by a large ravine, a creek flows through the gorge, or a small stream heads out to sea, creating a basin that’s protected by jetties extending into deep water, with the town packed around this semi-artificial port as best as possible. That pretty much sums up the story of them all. Havre is somewhat of an exception, though. It sits on a plain that likely used to be marshland. The cliffs are close by to the sea, and inland there are beautiful rolling hills, leaving enough space for a large town.

The port of Havre has been much improved of late years. Large basins have been excavated, and formed into regular wet docks. They are nearly in the centre of the town. The mole stretches out several hundred yards on that side of the entrance of the port which is next the sea. Here signals are regularly made to acquaint vessels in the offing with the precise number of feet that can be brought into the port. These signals are changed at the rise or fall of every foot, according to a graduated scale which is near the signal pole. At dead low water the entrance to the harbour, and the outer harbour itself, are merely beds of soft mud. Machines are kept constantly at work to deepen them.

The port of Havre has seen significant improvements in recent years. Large basins have been dug out and turned into proper wet docks. They are almost in the heart of the town. The pier extends several hundred yards on the side of the port entrance that faces the sea. Here, signals are regularly sent to inform vessels offshore of the exact depth of water available for entry into the port. These signals are updated with every foot rise or fall, based on a graduated scale near the signal pole. At low tide, the entrance to the harbor and the outer harbor itself are just patches of soft mud. Machines are constantly at work to deepen them.

The ship from sea makes the lights, and judges of the state of the tide by the signals. She rounds the Mole-Head at the distance of fifty or sixty yards, and sails along a passage too narrow to admit another vessel, at the same moment, into the harbour. Here she finds from eighteen to twenty, or even twenty-four feet of water, according to circumstances. She is hauled up to the gates of a dock, which are opened at high water only. As the water falls, one gate is shut, and the entrance to the dock becomes a lock: vessels can enter, therefore, as long as there remains sufficient water in the outer harbour for a ship to float. If caught outside, however, she must lie in the mud until the ensuing tide.

The ship arriving from the sea uses lights to check the tide by its signals. It rounds the Mole-Head about fifty or sixty yards away and sails through a channel that's too narrow for another vessel to enter the harbor at the same time. Here, it finds between eighteen and twenty-four feet of water, depending on the conditions. The ship is pulled up to the dock gates, which only open at high tide. As the water level drops, one gate closes, and the dock entrance functions like a lock: ships can enter as long as there’s enough water in the outer harbor for them to float. If they’re caught outside, they’ll have to wait in the mud until the next tide comes in.

Havre is the sea-port of Paris, and is rapidly increasing in importance. There is a project for connecting the latter with the sea by a ship channel. Such a project is hardly suited to the French impulses, which imagine a thousand grand projects, but hardly ever convert any of them to much practical good. The opinions of the people are formed on habits of great saving, and it requires older calculations, greater familiarity with risks, and more liberal notions of industry, and, possibly, more capital than is commonly found in their enterprises, to induce the people to encounter the extra charges of these improvements, when they can have recourse to what, in their eyes, are simpler and safer means of making money. The government employs men of science, who conceive well; but their conceptions are but indifferently sustained by the average practical intellect of the country. In this particular France is the very converse of America.

Havre is the seaport of Paris and is quickly growing in importance. There’s a plan to connect it to the sea with a shipping channel. However, this kind of project doesn’t really fit the French mindset, which often dreams up grand ideas but rarely turns them into practical benefits. The way people think is shaped by habits of saving, and it takes older calculations, more familiarity with risks, and a broader view of industry—and maybe even more capital than is usually available—to convince them to take on the extra costs of these improvements when they can rely on what they see as simpler and safer ways to make money. The government hires scientists who come up with great ideas, but those ideas don’t always get the practical support needed from the average person in the country. In this respect, France is the complete opposite of America.

The project of making a sea-port of Paris, is founded on a principle that is radically wrong. It is easier to build a house on the sea-side, than to carry the sea into the interior. But the political economy of France, like that of nearly all the continental nations, is based on a false principle, that of forcing improvements. The intellects of the mass should first be acted on, and when the public mind is sufficiently improved to benefit by innovations, the public sentiment might be trusted to decide the questions of locality and usefulness. The French system looks to a concentration of everything in Paris. The political organization of the country favours such a scheme, and in a project of this sort, the interests of all the northern and western departments would be sacrificed to the interests of Paris. As for the departments east and south of Paris, they would in no degree be benefited by making a port of Paris, as goods would still have to be transshipped to reach them. A system of canals and railroads is much wanted in France, and most of all, a system of general instruction, to prepare the minds of the operatives to profit by such advantages. When I say that we are behind our facts in America, I do not mean in a physical, but in a moral sense. All that is visible and tangible is led by opinion; in all that is purely moral, the facts precede the notions of the people.

The idea of turning Paris into a sea port is based on a fundamentally flawed principle. It’s easier to build a house by the sea than to bring the sea inland. However, the political economy of France, like that of almost all continental nations, is based on the misguided principle of forcing improvements. The public's understanding should be nurtured first, and once the public is ready to embrace new ideas, they can be trusted to decide on issues of location and usefulness. The French approach aims to centralize everything in Paris. The political structure of the country supports this scheme, and in such a project, the interests of all the northern and western regions would be sacrificed for the benefit of Paris. As for the regions east and south of Paris, they wouldn’t gain anything from making Paris a port, as goods would still need to be transferred to reach them. What France really needs is a system of canals and railroads, and most importantly, a widespread education system to prepare workers to take advantage of these developments. When I say that we’re behind in America, I’m not talking about physical progress but in a moral sense. Everything that is visible and tangible is driven by public opinion; in matters of morality, the facts come before the people’s understanding.

I found, at a later day, many droll theories broached in France, more especially in the Chamber of Deputies, on the subject of our own great success in the useful enterprises. As is usual, in such cases, any reason but the true one was given. At the period of our arrival in Europe, the plan of connecting the great lakes with the Atlantic had just been completed, and the vast results were beginning to attract attention in Europe. At first, it was thought, as a matter of course, that engineers from the old world had been employed. This was disproved, and it was shown that they who laid out the work, however skilful they may have since become by practice, were at first little more than common American surveyors. Then the trifling cost was a stumbling-block, for labour was known to be far better paid in America than in Europe; and lastly, the results created astonishment. Several deputies affirmed that the cause of the great success was owing to the fact, that in America we trusted such things to private competition, whereas, in France, the government meddled with everything. But it was the state governments, (which indeed alone possess the necessary means and authority,) that had caused most of the American canals to be constructed. These political economists knew too little of other systems to apply a clever saying of their own—Il y a de la Rochefoucald, et de la Rouchefoucald. All governments do not wither what they touch.

I later came across a lot of amusing theories discussed in France, especially in the Chamber of Deputies, about our remarkable success in various useful projects. As often happens, any explanation except for the real one was provided. When we arrived in Europe, the plan to connect the Great Lakes with the Atlantic had just been finished, and the enormous results were starting to grab attention. Initially, it was assumed that engineers from the old world had been involved, but that was proven wrong. It turned out that those who planned the work, no matter how skilled they became with experience, were mostly just regular American surveyors at first. Then the very low costs raised eyebrows since it was known that labor was much better paid in America than in Europe; and finally, the outcomes were astonishing. Several deputies claimed that our great success came from the fact that we relied on private competition in America, while in France, the government got involved in everything. However, it was the state governments, which actually had the necessary resources and authority, that led to most of the construction of American canals. These political economists didn’t know enough about other systems to apply their own clever saying—Il y a de la Rochefoucald, et de la Rouchefoucald. Not all governments ruin what they touch.

Some Americans have introduced steam-boats on the rivers of France, and on the lakes of Switzerland and Italy. We embarked in one, after passing two delectable nights at the Hôtel d'Angleterre. The boat was a frail-looking thing, and so loaded with passengers, that it appeared actually to stagger under its freight. The Seine has a wide mouth, and a long ground-swell was setting in from the Channel. Our Parisian cockneys, of whom there were several on board, stood aghast. "Nous voici en pleine mer!" one muttered to the other, and the annals of that eventful voyage are still related, I make no question, to admiring auditors in the interior of France. The French make excellent seamen when properly trained; but I think, on the whole, they are more thoroughly landsmen than any people of my acquaintance, who possess a coast. There has been too much sympathy with the army to permit the mariners to receive a proper share of the public favour.

Some Americans have brought steamboats to the rivers of France, and the lakes of Switzerland and Italy. We boarded one after spending two lovely nights at the Hôtel d'Angleterre. The boat looked fragile and was so packed with passengers that it seemed to struggle under the weight. The Seine has a wide mouth, and a long swell was coming in from the Channel. Our Parisian tourists, of which there were several on board, were in shock. "We’re out in the open sea!" one whispered to another, and I’m sure the stories of that memorable journey are still being told to rapt audiences in the interior of France. The French make great sailors when properly trained; however, I believe they are generally more familiar with land than any other coastal people I know. There has been too much support for the army, leaving the seafarers with less of the public's attention.

The boat shaped her course diagonally across the broad current, directly for Honfleur. Here we first began to get an idea of the true points of difference between our own scenery and that of the continent of Europe, and chiefly of that of France. The general characteristics of England are not essentially different from those of America, after allowing for a much higher finish in the former, substituting hedges for fences, and stripping the earth of its forests. These, you may think, are, in themselves, grand points of difference, but they fall far short of those which render the continent of Europe altogether of a different nature. Of forest, there is vastly more in France than in England. But, with few exceptions, the fields are not separated by enclosures. The houses are of stone, or of wood, rough-cast. Honfleur, as we approached, had a grey distinctness that is difficult to describe. The atmosphere seemed visible, around the angles of the buildings, as in certain Flemish pictures, bringing out the fine old sombre piles from the depth of the view, in a way to leave little concealed, while nothing was meretricious or gaudy. At first, though we found these hues imposing, and even beautiful, we thought the view would have been gayer and more agreeable, had the tints been livelier; but a little use taught us that our tastes had been corrupted. On our return home every structure appeared flaring and tawdry. Even those of stone had a recent and mushroom air, besides being in colours equally ill suited to architecture or a landscape. The only thing of the sort in America which appeared venerable and of a suitable hue, after an absence of eight years, was our own family abode, and this, the despoiler, paint, had not defiled for near forty years.

The boat angled its way diagonally across the wide current, heading straight for Honfleur. Here, we started to grasp the real differences between our own scenery and that of continental Europe, particularly France. The general characteristics of England aren't that different from those of America, if you consider the higher polish of the former, the use of hedges instead of fences, and the clearing of forests. You might think these are significant differences, but they pale in comparison to the factors that make the continent of Europe feel fundamentally different. France has much more forest than England. However, with a few exceptions, the fields aren't divided by fences. The houses are made of stone or rough-cast wood. As we got closer to Honfleur, it had a distinct grey quality that’s hard to put into words. The atmosphere seemed to hang around the edges of the buildings, reminiscent of certain Flemish paintings, highlighting the beautiful old structures from the depth of the view, revealing everything without being flashy or gaudy. At first, while we found these colors striking and even beautiful, we thought the view would have been brighter and more pleasing with livelier shades; but after a little time, we realized our tastes had been spoiled. When we returned home, everything looked bright and gaudy. Even the stone buildings had a fresh, cheap feel, with colors that didn’t really suit the architecture or the landscape. The only thing in America that felt aged and had a suitable color, after being away for eight years, was our family home, which hadn’t been painted in nearly forty years.

We discharged part of our cargo at Honfleur, but the boat was still greatly crowded. Fatigue and ill health rendered standing painful to A——, and all the benches were crowded. She approached a young girl of about eighteen, who occupied three chairs. On one she was seated; on another she had her feet; and the third held her reticule. Apologizing for the liberty, A—— asked leave to put the reticule on the second chair, and to take the third for her own use. This request was refused! The selfishness created by sophistication and a factitious state of things renders such acts quite frequent, for it is more my wish to offer you distinctive traits of character than exceptions. This case of selfishness might have been a little stronger than usual, it is true, but similar acts are of daily occurrence, out of society, in France. In society, the utmost respect to the wants and feelings of others is paid, vastly more than with us; while, with us, it is scarcely too strong to say that such an instance of unfeeling selfishness could scarcely have occurred at all. We may have occasion to inquire into the causes of this difference in national manners hereafter.

We unloaded part of our cargo in Honfleur, but the boat was still quite crowded. Fatigue and poor health made standing painful for A——, and all the benches were packed. She approached a young girl about eighteen who was taking up three chairs. She was sitting on one, had her feet on another, and the third was holding her reticule. Apologizing for the intrusion, A—— asked if she could move the reticule to the second chair and use the third for herself. This request was denied! The selfishness brought on by sophistication and an artificial environment makes such situations rather common, as I’d prefer to highlight distinctive character traits rather than exceptions. It's true that this instance of selfishness might have been a bit more pronounced than usual, but similar acts happen daily, out of society, in France. In society, there is a high level of respect for others' needs and feelings, much more than what we see here; while here, it wouldn’t be too strong to say that such a display of unfeeling selfishness would be almost unthinkable. We might need to explore the reasons for this difference in national manners later on.

The Seine narrows at Quilleboeuf, about thirty miles from Havre, to the width of an ordinary European tide river. On a high bluff we passed a ruin, called Tancarville, which was formerly a castle of the De Montmorencies. This place was the cradle of one of William's barons; and an English descendant, I believe, has been ennobled by the title of Earl of Tankerville.

The Seine narrows at Quilleboeuf, about thirty miles from Havre, to the width of an ordinary European tidal river. On a high bluff, we passed a ruin called Tancarville, which used to be a castle of the De Montmorencies. This place was the birthplace of one of William's barons; and an English descendant, I believe, has been given the title of Earl of Tankerville.

Above Quilleboeuf the river becomes exceedingly pretty. It is crooked, a charm in itself, has many willowy islands, and here and there a grey venerable town is seated in the opening of the high hills which contract the view, with crumbling towers, and walls that did good service in the times of the old English and French wars. There were fewer seats than might have been expected, though we passed three or four. One near the waterside, of some size, was in the ancient French style, with avenues cut in formal lines, mutilated statues, precise and treeless terraces, and other elaborated monstrosities. These places are not entirely without a pretension to magnificence; but, considered in reference to what is desirable in landscape gardening, they are the very laid idéal of deformity. After winding our way for eight or ten hours amid such scenes, the towers of Rouen came in view. They had a dark ebony-coloured look, which did great violence to our Manhattanese notions, but which harmonized gloriously with a bluish sky, the grey walls beneath, and a background of hanging fields.

Above Quilleboeuf, the river becomes incredibly beautiful. It twists and turns, which is charming in itself, and has many willow-covered islands. Here and there, an old, weathered town sits nestled in the hills that frame the view, featuring crumbling towers and walls that once served during the old English and French wars. We encountered fewer places to sit than expected, though we came across three or four. One larger spot by the water was styled in the ancient French manner, with avenues cut in neat lines, damaged statues, orderly terraces, and other elaborate oddities. These locations aren't completely lacking in grandeur, but when it comes to what's desirable in landscape gardening, they represent the very laid idéal of ugliness. After winding our way through such scenes for eight or ten hours, the towers of Rouen came into sight. They had a dark, ebony-like appearance that clashed with our New York sensibilities but harmonized beautifully with the bluish sky, the grey walls below, and a backdrop of sloping fields.

Rouen is a sea-port; vessels of two hundred, or two hundred and fifty tons burden, lying at its quays. Here is also a custom-house, and our baggage was again opened for examination. This was done amid a great deal of noise and confusion, and yet so cursorily as to be of no real service. At Havre, landing as we did in the night, and committing all to Désirée the next day, I escaped collision with subordinates. But, not having a servant, I was now compelled to look after our effects in person. W—— protested that we had fallen among barbarians; what between brawls, contests for the trunks, cries, oaths, and snatching, the scene was equally provoking and comic.

Rouen is a seaport with ships that hold two hundred or two hundred and fifty tons docked at its quays. There's also a customs office where our luggage was opened for inspection again. This was done amidst a lot of noise and chaos, but it was so quick that it was hardly helpful. When we arrived in Havre at night and left everything to Désirée the next day, I managed to avoid dealing with the staff. However, since I didn't have a servant this time, I had to take care of our belongings myself. W—— complained that we had ended up among barbarians; between the fights, struggles for the bags, shouting, swearing, and grabbing, the situation was both frustrating and amusing.

Without schooling, without training of any sort, little checked by morals, pressed upon by society, with nearly every necessary of life highly taxed, and yet entirely loosened from the deference of feudal manners, the Frenchmen of this class have, in general, become what they who wish to ride upon their fellow mortals love to represent them as being, truculent, violent, greedy of gain, and but too much disposed to exaction. There is great bonhomie and many touches of chivalry in the national character; but it is asking too much to suppose that men who are placed in the situation I have named, should not exhibit some of the most unpleasant traits of human infirmity. Our trunks were put into a handbarrow, and wheeled by two men a few hundred yards, the whole occupying half an hour of time. For this service ten francs were demanded. I offered five, or double what would have been required by a drayman in New York, a place where labour is proverbially dear. This was disdainfully refused, and I was threatened with the law. Of the latter I knew nothing; but, determined not to be bullied into what I felt persuaded was an imposition, I threw down the five francs and walked away. These fellows kept prowling about the hotel the whole day, alternately wheedling and menacing, without success. Towards night one of them appeared, and returned the five francs, saying, that he gave me his services for nothing. I thanked him, and put the money in my pocket. This fit of dignity lasted about five minutes, when, as finale, I received a proposal to pay the money again, and bring the matter to a close, which was done accordingly.

Without any education or training of any kind, barely held back by morals, pressured by society, with almost everything necessary for survival heavily taxed, and completely free from the constraints of feudal customs, the Frenchmen in this class have generally become what those who wish to dominate others love to depict them as: aggressive, violent, greedy for profit, and all too prone to exploitation. There is a lot of friendliness and some elements of chivalry in the national character; but it’s unrealistic to think that men in the situation I’ve described wouldn’t show some of the less pleasant aspects of human weakness. Our luggage was placed in a handbarrow and carried by two men for a few hundred yards, which took half an hour in total. They asked for ten francs for this service. I offered five, which was double what a laborer in New York would have required, a place known for expensive labor. This was arrogantly rejected, and I was threatened with legal action. I didn’t know anything about that, but determined not to be intimidated into what I believed was an unfair charge, I dropped the five francs and walked away. These guys kept lurking around the hotel all day, shifting between pleading and threatening, but to no avail. By evening, one of them showed up and returned the five francs, saying he would offer his services for free. I thanked him and put the money in my pocket. This moment of pride lasted about five minutes, when, as a final turn of events, I received a request to pay the money again to settle the matter, which I did.

An Englishman of the same class would have done his work in silence, with a respect approaching to servility, and with a system that any little contretems would derange. He would ask enough, take his money with a "thank 'ee, sir," and go off looking as surly as if he were dissatisfied. An American would do his work silently, but independently as to manner—but a fact will best illustrate the conduct of the American. The day after we landed at New-York, I returned to the ship for the light articles. They made a troublesome load, and filled a horse-cart. "What do you think I ought to get for carrying this load, 'sqire?" asked the cartman, as he looked at the baskets, umbrellas, band-boxes, valises, secretaries, trunks, etc. etc.; "it is quite two miles to Carroll Place." "It is, indeed; what is your fare?" "Only thirty-seven and a half cents;" (about two francs;) "and it is justly worth seventy-five, there is so much trumpery." "I will give you a dollar." "No more need be said, sir; you shall have everything safe." I was so much struck with this straight-forward manner of proceeding, after all I had undergone in Europe, that I made a note of it the same day.

An Englishman from the same social class would have done his job quietly, showing a kind of respect that bordered on servility, and his routine would be easily disrupted by any minor hiccups. He would ask for enough, take his payment with a "thank you, sir," and leave looking as grumpy as if he were unhappy. An American would work quietly but with a more independent attitude. A specific example highlights the American's approach. The day after we arrived in New York, I went back to the ship for the lighter items. They were a bit of a hassle to carry and filled a horse cart. "What do you think I should get for hauling this load, sir?" asked the cart driver, looking at the baskets, umbrellas, boxes, suitcases, desks, trunks, etc. "It’s almost two miles to Carroll Place." "It is indeed; what’s your fare?" "Only thirty-seven and a half cents; (about two francs); and it’s honestly worth seventy-five because of all this junk." "I’ll give you a dollar." "No need to say more, sir; everything will be safe with you." I was so impressed by this straightforward way of doing things, especially after all I had experienced in Europe, that I made a note of it that same day.

The Hôtel de l'Europe, at Rouen, was not a first-rate inn, for France, but it effectually removed the disagreeable impression left by the Hôtel d'Angleterre, at Havre. We were well lodged, well fed, and otherwise well treated. After ordering dinner, all of a suitable age hurried off to the cathedral.

The Hôtel de l'Europe in Rouen wasn't a top-notch hotel in France, but it definitely got rid of the bad vibes left by the Hôtel d'Angleterre in Havre. We had comfortable accommodations, good food, and were treated nicely overall. After we ordered dinner, everyone of appropriate age rushed off to the cathedral.

Rouen is an old, and by no means a well-built town. Some improvements along the river are on a large scale, and promise well; but the heart of the city is composed principally of houses of wooden frames, with the interstices filled in with cement. Work of this kind is very common in all the northern provincial towns of France. It gives a place a singular, and not altogether an unpicturesque air; the short dark studs that time has imbrowned, forming a sort of visible ribs to the houses.

Rouen is an old town, and definitely not well-built. There are some large-scale improvements along the river that look promising, but the center of the city mainly consists of houses with wooden frames, and the spaces in between are filled with cement. This type of construction is common in many northern provincial towns in France. It gives the place a unique, and not entirely unattractive, vibe; the short, dark beams that have darkened over time create a kind of visible framework for the houses.

When we reached the little square in front of the cathedral, verily Henry the Seventh's chapel sunk into insignificance. I can only compare the effect of the chiselling on the quaint Gothic of this edifice, to that of an enormous skreen of dark lace, thrown into the form of a church. This was the first building of the kind that my companions had ever seen; and they had, insomuch, the advantage over me, as I had, in a degree, taken off the edge of wonder by the visit already mentioned to Westminster. The first look at this pile was one of inextricable details. It was not difficult to distinguish the vast and magnificent doors, and the beautiful oriel windows, buried as they were in ornament; but an examination was absolutely necessary to trace the little towers, pinnacles, and the crowds of pointed arches, amid such a scene of architectural confusion. "It is worth crossing the Atlantic, were it only to see this!" was the common feeling among us.

When we got to the small square in front of the cathedral, Henry the Seventh's chapel really felt unimportant. The intricate carvings on this quirky Gothic building reminded me of a huge screen of dark lace shaped like a church. This was the first building of its kind that my friends had ever seen, giving them the edge over me since I had somewhat dulled my sense of wonder with my earlier visit to Westminster. The first view of this structure was packed with so many details. The grand and stunning doors and the beautiful oriel windows were easy to spot, even though they were overwhelmed with decoration; however, you needed a close look to find the little towers, spires, and the many pointed arches amidst such a chaotic architectural scene. "It’s worth crossing the Atlantic just to see this!" was the shared sentiment among us.

It was some time before we discovered that divers dwellings had actually been built between the buttresses of the church, for their comparative diminutiveness, quaint style, and close incorporation with the pile, caused us to think them, at first, a part of the edifice itself. This desecration of the Gothic is of very frequent occurrence on the continent of Europe, taking its rise in the straitened limits of fortified towns, the cupidity of churchmen, and the general indifference to knowledge, and, consequently, to taste, which depressed the ages that immediately followed the construction of most of these cathedrals.

It took us a while to realize that several small homes had actually been built between the church's buttresses. Their small size, unique style, and close integration with the structure made us initially think they were part of the building itself. This disrespect for Gothic architecture happens often in Europe, arising from the limited space in fortified towns, the greed of church leaders, and the widespread lack of appreciation for knowledge—and, as a result, for taste—that characterized the times right after most of these cathedrals were built.

We were less struck by the interior, than by the exterior of this building. It is vast, has some fine windows, and is purely Gothic; but after the richness of the external details, the aisles and the choir appeared rather plain. It possessed, however, in some of its monuments, subjects of great interest to those who had never stood over a grave of more than two centuries, and rarely even over one of half that age. Among other objects of this nature, is the heart of Coeur de Lion, for the church was commenced in the reign of one of his predecessors; Normandy at that time belonging to the English kings, and claiming to be the depository of the "lion heart."

We were more impressed by the outside of the building than the inside. It’s huge, has some great windows, and is purely Gothic; but compared to the detailed exterior, the aisles and the choir seemed a bit plain. However, it did have some monuments that would really catch the eye of anyone who had never stood over a grave older than two centuries, and rarely one even half that age. Among these interesting items is the heart of Coeur de Lion, since the church was started during the reign of one of his predecessors; back then, Normandy belonged to the English kings, who claimed to hold the "lion heart."

Rouen has many more memorials of the past. We visited the square in which Joan of Arc was burned; a small irregular area in front of her prison; the prison itself, and the hall in which she had been condemned. All these edifices are Gothic, quaint, and some of them sufficiently dilapidated.

Rouen has many more reminders of its history. We visited the square where Joan of Arc was executed; a small, irregular area in front of her prison; the prison itself, and the hall where she was condemned. All of these buildings are Gothic, charming, and some are quite run-down.

I had forgotten to relate, in its place, a fact, as an offset to the truculent garrulity of the porters. We were shown round the cathedral by a respectable-looking old man in a red scarf, a cocked hat, and a livery, one of the officers of the place. He was respectful, modest, and well instructed in his tale. The tone of this good old cicerone was so much superior to anything I had seen in England—in America such a functionary is nearly unknown—that, under the influence of our national manners, I had awkward doubts as to the propriety of offering him money. At length the five francs rescued from the cupidity of the half-civilized peasants of la basse Normandie were put into his hand. A look of indecision caused me to repent the indiscretion. I thought his feelings had been wounded. "Est-ce que monsieur compte me présenter tout ceci?" I told him I hoped he would do me the favour to accept it. I had only given more than was usual, and the honesty of the worthy cicerone hesitated about taking it. To know when to pay, and what to pay, is a useful attainment of the experienced traveller.

I had forgotten to mention a point that balanced out the annoying chattiness of the porters. An older man in a red scarf, a cocked hat, and a uniform, one of the officers of the place, showed us around the cathedral. He was respectful, humble, and knowledgeable about his story. His tone was so much better than anything I had experienced in England—in America, we hardly ever see someone like him—that, influenced by our national manners, I was unsure about whether it was appropriate to give him money. Eventually, I handed him the five francs I had saved from the greed of the less refined peasants of la basse Normandie. A look of uncertainty made me regret my choice. I felt like I had hurt his feelings. "Are you going to present me with all of this?" he asked. I told him I hoped he would accept it. I had only given more than what was usual, and the honest old guide hesitated to take it. Knowing when and how much to pay is a valuable skill for the seasoned traveler.

Paris lay before us, and, although Rouen is a venerable and historical town, we were impatient to reach the French capital. A carriage was procured, and, on the afternoon of the second day, we proceeded.

Paris was in front of us, and while Rouen is an old and historic town, we were eager to get to the French capital. We hired a carriage, and on the afternoon of the second day, we set off.

After quitting Rouen the road runs, for several miles, at the foot of high hills, and immediately on the banks of the Seine. At length we were compelled to climb the mountain which terminates near the city, and offers one of the noblest views in France, from a point called St. Catherine's Hill. We did not obtain so fine a prospect from the road, but the view far surpassed anything we had yet seen in Europe. Putting my head out of the window, when about half way up the ascent, I saw an object booming down upon us, at the rate of six or eight miles the hour, that resembled in magnitude at least a moving house. It was a diligence, and being the first we had met, it caused a general sensation in our party. Our heads were in each other's way, and finding it impossible to get a good view in any other manner, we fairly alighted in the highway, old and young, to look at the monster unincumbered. Our admiration and eagerness caused as much amusement to the travellers it held, as their extraordinary equipage gave rise to among us; and two merrier parties did not encounter each other on the public road that day.

After leaving Rouen, the road runs for several miles along the base of high hills and right by the Seine River. Eventually, we had to climb the mountain that ends near the city, which offers one of the best views in France from a spot called St. Catherine's Hill. We didn't get such a great perspective from the road, but the view was way better than anything we had seen in Europe so far. As I leaned out of the window, about halfway up the hill, I noticed something coming toward us at six or eight miles an hour that looked like a moving house. It was a stagecoach, and since it was the first one we had seen, it created quite a stir in our group. Our heads were in each other's way, and finding it impossible to get a good look otherwise, we all jumped out right onto the road—young and old—to watch the giant vehicle without obstruction. Our admiration and excitement amused the travelers inside as much as their unusual coach entertained us, and on that day, two happier groups didn't meet on the public road.

A proper diligence is formed of a chariot-body, and two coach-bodies placed one before the other, the first in front. These are all on a large scale, and the wheels and train are in proportion. On the roof (the three bodies are closely united) is a cabriolet, or covered seat, and baggage is frequently piled there, many feet in height. A large leathern apron covers the latter. An ordinary load of hay, though wider, is scarcely of more bulk than one of these vehicles, which sometimes carries twenty-five or thirty passengers, and two or three tons of luggage. The usual team is composed of five horses, two of which go on the pole, and three on the lead, the latter turning their heads outwards, as W—— remarked, so as to resemble a spread eagle. Notwithstanding the weight, these carriages usually go down a hill faster than when travelling on the plain. A bar of wood is brought, by means of a winch that is controlled by a person called the conducteur, one who has charge of both ship and cargo, to bear on the hind wheels, with a greater or less force, according to circumstances, so that all the pressure is taken off the wheel horses. A similar invention has latterly been applied to railroad cars. I have since gone over this very road with ten horses, two on the wheel, and eight in two lines on the lead. On that occasion, we came down this very hill, at the rate of nine miles the hour.

A proper diligence consists of a chariot body and two coach bodies placed one in front of the other, with the first one at the front. All of this is built on a large scale, and the wheels and train match in size. On the roof (where the three bodies are closely connected) is a cabriolet, or covered seat, and luggage is often stacked there, reaching several feet high. A large leather apron covers the luggage. An ordinary load of hay, while wider, is hardly bulkier than one of these vehicles, which can carry twenty-five to thirty passengers and two or three tons of luggage. The usual team consists of five horses, two on the pole and three in the lead, with the latter turning their heads outward, as W—— noted, resembling a spread eagle. Despite the weight, these carriages often descend hills faster than when traveling on flat ground. A wooden bar is operated by a winch controlled by a person called the conducteur, who is in charge of both the vehicle and its cargo, applying varying pressure on the back wheels, so that the wheel horses bear less weight. A similar mechanism has recently been used for railroad cars. I have since traveled this exact road with ten horses, two on the wheel and eight in two lines in the lead. On that trip, we went down this very hill at a speed of nine miles per hour.

After amusing ourselves with the spectacle of the diligence, we found the scenery too beautiful to re-enter the carriage immediately, and we walked to the top of the mountain. The view from the summit was truly admirable. The Seine comes winding its way through a broad rich valley, from the southward, having just before run east, and, a league or two beyond due west, our own Susquehanna being less crooked. The stream was not broad, but its numerous isles, willowy banks, and verdant meadows, formed a line for the eye to follow. Rouen in the distance, with its ebony towers, fantastic roofs, and straggling suburbs, lines its shores, at a curvature where the stream swept away west again, bearing craft of the sea on its bosom. These dark old towers have a sombre, mysterious air, which harmonizes admirably with the recollections that crowd the mind at such a moment! Scarce an isolated dwelling was to be seen, but the dense population is compressed into villages and bourgs, that dot the view, looking brown and teeming, like the nests of wasps. Some of these places have still remains of walls, and most of them are so compact and well defined that they appear more like vast castles than like the villages of England or America. All are grey, sombre, and without glare, rising from the background of pale verdure, so many appropriate bas reliefs.

After having some fun watching the stagecoach, we found the scenery so beautiful that we didn't want to get back in the carriage right away, so we walked to the top of the mountain. The view from the peak was truly amazing. The Seine winds through a broad, lush valley coming from the south, having recently turned east, and a league or two beyond due west, our own Susquehanna is less winding. The river isn't wide, but its many islands, willowy banks, and green meadows create a line for the eye to follow. Rouen can be seen in the distance, with its dark towers, quirky roofs, and sprawling suburbs lining the shores where the river curves west again, carrying sea vessels on its surface. These ancient towers have a dark, mysterious vibe that perfectly matches the thoughts that fill the mind at such a moment! Hardly a single isolated house can be seen, as the dense population is packed into villages and bourgs, dotting the landscape and appearing brown and bustling, like wasp nests. Some of these places still have remnants of walls, and most are so compact and well-defined that they resemble grand castles more than villages in England or America. All are grey, somber, and lack brightness, rising from the background of pale greenery, serving as fitting bas reliefs.

The road was strewed with peasants of both sexes, wending their way homeward, from the market of Rouen. One, a tawny woman, with no other protection for her head than a high but perfectly clean cap, was going past us, driving an ass, with the panniers loaded with manure. We were about six miles from the town, and the poor beast, after staggering some eight or ten miles to the market in the morning, was staggering back with this heavy freight, at even. I asked the woman, who, under the circumstances, could not be a resident of one of the neighbouring villages, the name of a considerable bourg that lay about a gun-shot distant, in plain view, on the other side of the river. "Monsieur, je ne saurais pas vous dire, parce que, voyez-vous, je ne suis pas de ce pays-là," was the answer!

The road was crowded with peasants of both genders, making their way home from the market in Rouen. One woman, with sun-kissed skin and nothing on her head but a high, perfectly clean cap, walked past us, leading a donkey loaded with manure. We were about six miles from the town, and the poor animal, after stumbling about eight or ten miles to the market that morning, was struggling back with this heavy load in the evening. I asked the woman, who obviously couldn’t be from one of the nearby villages, the name of a sizable bourg that was just a short distance away, clearly visible on the other side of the river. "Sir, I can't tell you because, you see, I'm not from this area," she replied!

Knowledge is the parent of knowledge. He who possesses most of the information of his age will not quietly submit to neglect its current acquisitions, but will go on improving as long as means and opportunities offer; while he who finds himself ignorant of most things, is only too apt to shrink from a labour which becomes Herculean. In this manner ambition is stifled, the mind gets to be inactive, and finally sinks into unresisting apathy. Such is the case with a large portion of the European peasantry. The multitude of objects that surround them becomes a reason of indifference; and they pass, from day to day, for a whole life, in full view of a town, without sufficient curiosity in its history to inquire its name, or, if told by accident, sufficient interest to remember it. We see this principle exemplified daily in cities. One seldom thinks of asking the name of a passer-by, though he may be seen constantly; whereas, in the country, such objects being comparatively rare, the stranger is not often permitted to appear without some question touching his character.[3]

Knowledge leads to more knowledge. Those who have the most information in their time won’t just ignore new discoveries, but will keep improving as long as they have the means and opportunities; meanwhile, those who realize they don’t know much are likely to shy away from what feels like an overwhelming challenge. This way, ambition gets stifled, the mind becomes inactive, and eventually falls into complete indifference. This happens with a large part of the European peasantry. The many things around them lead to apathy, and they go through life, day in and day out, right near a town, without enough curiosity about its history to ask its name, or if they happen to learn it by chance, they don’t bother to remember it. We see this principle in action every day in cities. People rarely think to ask the name of someone passing by, even if they see them all the time; while in the countryside, since such encounters are much less common, strangers are often met with questions about who they are.

[Footnote 3: When in London, two years later, I saw a gentleman of rather striking appearance pass my door for two months, five or six times of a morning. Remembering the apathy of the Norman peasant, I at length asked who it was—"Sir Francis Burdett," was the answer.]

[Footnote 3: When I was in London two years later, I saw a gentleman with a rather striking appearance walk past my door for about two months, five or six times each morning. Remembering how indifferent the Norman peasant was, I finally asked who he was—“Sir Francis Burdett,” was the reply.]

I once inquired of a servant girl, at a French inn, who might be the owner of a chateau near by, the gate of which was within a hundred feet of the house we were in. She was unable to say, urging, as an apology, that she had only been six weeks in her present place! This, too, was in a small country hamlet. I think every one must have remarked, coeteris paribus, how much more activity and curiosity of mind is displayed by a countryman who first visits a town, than by the dweller in a city who first visits the country. The first wishes to learn everything, since be has been accustomed to understand everything he has hitherto seen; while the last, accustomed to a crowd of objects, usually regards most of the novel things he now sees for the first time with indifference.

I once asked a maid at a French inn about who owned a nearby chateau, the gate of which was just a hundred feet from the house we were staying in. She couldn’t say, apologizing that she had only been in her current job for six weeks! This was also in a small rural village. I think everyone must have noticed, coeteris paribus, how much more curiosity and eagerness to learn is shown by a country person visiting a city for the first time compared to someone from the city visiting the countryside for the first time. The former wants to learn everything since he is used to understanding everything he has seen so far, while the latter, accustomed to a crowd of sights, usually views most of the new things he encounters with indifference.

The road, for the rest of the afternoon, led us over hills and plains, from one reach of the river to another, for we crossed the latter repeatedly before reaching Paris. The appearance of the country was extraordinary in our eyes. Isolated houses were rare, but villages dotted the whole expanse. No obtrusive colours; but the eye had frequently to search against the hill-side, or in the valley, and, first detecting a mass, it gradually took in the picturesque angles, roofs, towers, and walls of the little bourg. Not a fence, or visible boundary of any sort, to mark the limits of possessions. Not a hoof in the fields grazing, and occasionally, a sweep of mountain-land resembled a pattern-card, with its stripes of green and yellow, and other hues, the narrow fields of the small proprietors. The play of light and shade on these gay upland patches though not strictly in conformity with the laws of taste, certainly was attractive. When they fell entirely into shadow, the harvest being over, and their gaudy colours lessened, they resembled the melancholy and wasted vestiges of a festival.

The road, for the rest of the afternoon, took us over hills and plains, from one side of the river to the other, as we crossed it repeatedly before reaching Paris. The scenery was incredible to us. Isolated houses were uncommon, but villages were scattered across the whole area. There were no bright colors; instead, the eye often had to scan the hillside or valley until it spotted a cluster, gradually taking in the charming angles, roofs, towers, and walls of the small bourg. There was not a fence or visible boundary of any kind to mark property lines. There were no grazing animals in the fields, and at times, a sweep of mountainous land looked like a sample card, with its stripes of green, yellow, and other colors, the narrow fields of small landowners. The play of light and shadow on these colorful upland patches, while not strictly according to the rules of aesthetics, was certainly appealing. When they were completely in shadow, the harvest over, and their bright colors faded, they resembled the sad and depleted remnants of a festival.

At Louviers we dined, and there we found a new object of wonder in the church. It was of the Gothic of the bourgs, less elaborated and more rudely wrought than that of the larger towns, but quaint, and, the population considered, vast. Ugly dragons thrust out their grinning heads at us from the buttresses. The most agreeable monstrosities imaginable were crawling along the grey old stones. After passing this place, the scenery lost a good deal of the pastoral appearance which renders Normandy rather remarkable in France, and took still more of the starched pattern-card look, just mentioned. Still it was sombre, the villages were to be extracted by the eye from their setting of fields, and here and there one of those "silent fingers pointing to the skies" raised itself into the air, like a needle, to prick the consciences of the thoughtless. The dusky hues of all the villages contrasted oddly, and not unpleasantly, with the carnival colours of the grains.

At Louviers we had dinner, and there we discovered a new source of fascination in the church. It was in the Gothic style of the bourgs, less intricate and more roughly made than that of the bigger towns, but charming, and, considering the population, quite large. Ugly dragons poked their grinning heads at us from the buttresses. The most interesting grotesques imaginable were crawling along the grey old stones. After leaving this place, the scenery lost much of the pastoral charm that makes Normandy quite notable in France, taking on more of the stiff, pattern-card appearance I just mentioned. Still, it was dark and somber; the villages were hard to distinguish from the fields, and here and there one of those "silent fingers pointing to the skies" shot up into the air like a needle, meant to jolt the consciences of the careless. The muted tones of all the villages contrasted strangely, but not unpleasantly, with the vibrant colors of the crops.

We slept at Vernon, and, before retiring for the night, passed half an hour in a fruitless attempt to carry by storm a large old circular tower, that is imputed to the inexhaustible industry of Caesar. This was the third of his reputed works that we had seen since landing in France. In this part of Europe, Caesar has the credit of everything for which no one else is willing to apply, as is the case with Virgil at Naples.

We stayed overnight in Vernon, and before going to bed, we spent half an hour unsuccessfully trying to capture a large, old circular tower, which is said to be the result of Caesar's tireless efforts. This was the third of his legendary constructions that we had seen since arriving in France. In this part of Europe, Caesar gets the credit for anything no one else wants to claim, similar to what happens with Virgil in Naples.

It was a sensation to rise in the morning with the rational prospect of seeing Paris, for the first time in one's life, before night. In my catalogue it stands numbered as sensation the 5th; Westminster, the night arrival in France, and the Cathedral of Rouen, giving birth to numbers 1, 2, and 4. Though accustomed to the tattoo, and the evening bugle of a man-of-war, the drums of Havre had the honour of number 3. Alas! how soon we cease to feel those agreeable excitements at all, even a drum coming in time to pall on the ear!

It was an incredible feeling to wake up in the morning with the exciting prospect of seeing Paris for the first time before the day was over. In my list, I’ve marked this as sensation number 5; the night arrival in France and the Cathedral of Rouen are marked as numbers 1, 2, and 4. Even though I was used to the sound of the tattoo and the evening bugle from a warship, the drums of Havre earned the title of number 3. Sadly, how quickly we stop feeling those enjoyable thrills; even a drum can eventually start to sound dull!

Near Vernon we passed a village, which gave us the first idea of one feature in the old régime. The place was grey, sombre, and picturesque, as usual, in the distance; but crowded, dirty, inconvenient, and mean, when the eye got too near. Just without the limits of its nuisances stood the chateau, a regular pile of hewn stone, with formal allées, abundance of windows, extensive stables, and broken vases. The ancient seigneur probably retained no more of this ancient possession than its name, while some Monsieur Le Blanc, or Monsieur Le Noir, filled his place in the house, and "personne dans la seigneurie."

Near Vernon, we passed a village that gave us our first glimpse of one aspect of the old regime. The place looked grey, gloomy, and picturesque from a distance, but up close, it was crowded, dirty, inconvenient, and shabby. Just beyond its nuisances stood the chateau, a solid structure made of hewn stone, with formal pathways, a lot of windows, large stables, and broken vases. The old lord probably held onto nothing but the name of this ancient property, while some Monsieur Le Blanc or Monsieur Le Noir took his place in the house, and "personne dans la seigneurie."

A few leagues farther brought us to an eminence, whence we got a beautiful glimpse of the sweeping river, and of a wide expanse of fertile country less formally striped and more picturesque than the preceding. Another grey castellated town lay on the verge of the river, with towers that seemed even darker than ever. How different was all this from the glare of our own objects! As we wound round the brow of the height, extensive park-grounds, a village more modern, less picturesque, and less dirty than common, with a large chateau in red bricks, was brought in sight, in the valley. This was Rosny, the place that gave his hereditary title to the celebrated Sully, as Baron and Marquis de Rosny; Sully, a man, who, like Bacon, almost deserves the character so justly given of the latter by Pope, that of "The wisest, greatest, meanest, of mankind." The house and grounds were now the property of Madame, as it is the etiquette to term the Duchesse de Berri. The town in the distance, with the dark towers, was Mantes, a place well known in the history of Normandy. We breakfasted at Le Cheval Blanc. The church drew us all out, but it was less monstrous than that of Louviers, and, as a cathedral, unworthy to be named with those of the larger places.

A few leagues later, we reached a high point where we got a beautiful view of the winding river and a wide stretch of fertile land that was less formally striped and more picturesque than what we had seen before. Another gray castle-like town was on the edge of the river, with towers that appeared even darker than usual. This was so different from the brightness of our own surroundings! As we rounded the top of the hill, we spotted extensive park grounds, a more modern village that was less picturesque and cleaner than usual, along with a large chateau made of red bricks in the valley. This was Rosny, the place that gave his hereditary title to the famous Sully, known as Baron and Marquis de Rosny; Sully, a man who, like Bacon, almost deserves the description given to the latter by Pope, that of "The wisest, greatest, meanest, of mankind." The house and grounds now belonged to Madame, as is customary when referring to the Duchesse de Berri. The town in the distance, with the dark towers, was Mantes, a location well-known in the history of Normandy. We had breakfast at Le Cheval Blanc. The church attracted everyone's attention, but it was less monstrous than the one in Louviers and, as a cathedral, not worthy of being compared to those in larger towns.

The next stage brought us to St. Germain-en-Laye, or to the verge of the circle of low mountains that surround the plains of Paris. Here we got within the influence of royal magnificence and the capital. The Bourbons, down to the period of the revolution, were indeed kings, and they have left physical and moral impressions of their dynasty of seven hundred years, that will require as long a period to eradicate. Nearly every foot of the entire semi-circle of hills to the west of Paris is historical, and garnished by palaces, pavilions, forests, parks, aqueducts, gardens, or chases. A carriage terrace, of a mile in length, and on a most magnificent scale in other respects, overlooks the river, at an elevation of several hundred feet above its bed. The palace itself, a quaint old edifice of the time of Francis I, who seems to have had an architecture not unlike that of Elizabeth of England, has long been abandoned as a royal abode. I believe its last royal occupant was the dethroned James II. It is said to have been deserted by its owners, because it commands a distant view of that silent monitor, the sombre beautiful spire of St. Denis, whose walls shadow the vaults of the Bourbons; they who sat on a throne not choosing to be thus constantly reminded of the time when they must descend to the common fate and crumbling equality of the grave.

The next stage took us to St. Germain-en-Laye, or to the edge of the circle of low mountains that surround the plains of Paris. Here we entered the realm of royal splendor and the capital. The Bourbons, up until the revolution, really were kings, and they have left both physical and moral marks from their seven-hundred-year dynasty that will take just as long to erase. Almost every inch of the entire semi-circle of hills to the west of Paris is historical, adorned with palaces, pavilions, forests, parks, aqueducts, gardens, or hunting grounds. A mile-long carriage terrace, impressively designed, overlooks the river from several hundred feet above its bed. The palace itself, a charming old building from the time of Francis I, who had an architectural style similar to that of Elizabeth of England, has long been abandoned as a royal residence. I believe its last royal resident was the dethroned James II. It’s said to have been left by its owners because it offers a distant view of that quiet reminder, the somber beautiful spire of St. Denis, whose walls cast shadows over the tombs of the Bourbons; those who sat on a throne did not want to be constantly reminded of the time when they would have to face the common fate of decay and equality in death.

An aqueduct, worthy of the Romans, gave an imposing idea of the scale on which these royal works were conducted. It appeared, at the distance of a league or two, a vast succession of arches, displaying a broader range of masonry than I had ever before seen. So many years had passed since I was last in Europe, that I gazed in wonder at its vastness.

An aqueduct, fit for the Romans, showcased the impressive scale of these royal projects. It stretched out for a league or two, presenting a huge series of arches, displaying a more extensive range of masonry than I had ever seen before. So many years had gone by since my last visit to Europe that I looked on in awe at its enormity.

From St. Germain we plunged into the valley, and took our way towards Paris, by a broad paved avenue, that was bordered with trees. The road now began to show an approach to a capital, being crowded with all sorts of uncouth-looking vehicles, used as public conveyances. Still it was on a Lilliputian scale as compared to London, and semi-barbarous even as compared to one of our towns. Marly-la-Machine was passed; an hydraulic invention to force water up the mountains to supply the different princely dwellings of the neighbourhood. Then came a house of no great pretension, buried in trees, at the foot of the bill. This was the celebrated consular abode, Malmaison. After this we mounted to a hamlet, and the road stretched away before us, with the river between, to the unfinished Arc de l'Étoile, or the barrier of the capital. The evening was soft, and there had been a passing shower. As the mist drove away, a mass rose like a glittering beacon, beyond the nearest hill, proclaiming Paris. It was the dome of the Hotel of the Invalids!

From St. Germain, we headed into the valley and made our way toward Paris along a wide, paved road lined with trees. The road began to feel more city-like, crowded with all kinds of strange-looking vehicles serving as public transport. Still, it felt small compared to London and somewhat primitive compared to our towns. We passed Marly-la-Machine, a hydraulic system designed to pump water up the hills to supply the various grand homes in the area. Then we came across a modest house hidden among the trees at the foot of the hill. This was the famous consular residence, Malmaison. After that, we climbed up to a small village, and the road stretched ahead of us, with the river in between, leading to the unfinished Arc de l'Étoile, the gateway to the capital. The evening was gentle, and there had been a brief shower. As the mist cleared, a large structure appeared like a shining beacon beyond the nearest hill, announcing Paris. It was the dome of the Hotel des Invalides!

Though Paris possesses better points of view from its immediate vicinity than most capitals, it is little seen from any of its ordinary approaches until fairly entered. We descended to the river by a gentle declivity. The chateau and grounds of Neuilly, a private possession of the Duke of Orleans, lay on our left; the Bois de Boulogne, the carriage promenade of the capital, on our right. We passed one of those abortions, a magnificent village, (Neuilly,) and ascended gently towards the unfinished Arch of the Star. Bending around this imposing memorial of—Heaven knows what! for it has had as many destinations as France has had governors—we entered the iron gate of the barrier, and found ourselves within the walls of Paris.

Though Paris has better viewpoints from its surroundings than most capitals, it isn't really visible from any of its usual approaches until you're quite close. We made our way down to the river via a gentle slope. The chateau and grounds of Neuilly, a private property of the Duke of Orleans, were on our left; the Bois de Boulogne, the main promenade of the city, was on our right. We passed one of those misguided attempts at grandeur, a magnificent village (Neuilly), and continued our gentle ascent toward the unfinished Arch of the Star. As we curved around this imposing monument—whatever it's meant to symbolize, given that it has had as many purposes as France has had rulers—we entered through the iron gate of the barrier and found ourselves inside the walls of Paris.

We were in the Avenue de Neuilly. The Champs Elysées, without verdure, a grove divided by the broad approach, and moderately peopled by a well-dressed crowd, lay on each side. In front, at the distance of a mile, was a mass of foliage that looked more like a rich copse in park than an embellishment of a town garden; and above this, again, peered the pointed roofs of two or three large and high members of some vast structure, sombre in colour and quaint in form. They were the pavilions of the Tuileries.[4] A line of hotels became visible through trees and shrubbery on the left, and on the right we soon got evidence that we were again near the river. We had just left it behind us, and after a détour of several leagues, here it was again flowing in our front, cutting in twain the capital.

We were on Avenue de Neuilly. The Champs Elysées, lacking greenery, with a wide path dividing it, was moderately filled with a well-dressed crowd on both sides. In front of us, about a mile away, there was a cluster of trees that seemed more like a lush thicket in a park than an enhancement of a city garden; above it, the pointed roofs of two or three large buildings appeared, dark in color and oddly shaped. They were the pavilions of the Tuileries.[4] A row of hotels became visible through the trees and bushes on the left, and on the right, we quickly realized we were once again near the river. We had just passed it, and after a detour of several miles, it was now flowing in front of us, dividing the capital.

[Footnote 4: Tuileries is derived from Tuile, or tile; the site of the present gardens having been a tile-yard.]

[Footnote 4: Tuileries comes from Tuile, which means tile; the area where the current gardens are located used to be a tile yard.]

Objects now grew confused, for they came fast. We entered and crossed a paved area, that lay between the Seine, the Champs Elysées, the garden of the Tuileries, and two little palaces of extraordinary beauty of architecture. This was the place where Louis XVI. and his unfortunate wife were beheaded. Passing between the two edifices last named, we came upon the Boulevards, and plunged at once into the street-gaiety and movement of this remarkable town.

Objects quickly became unclear as they rushed by. We walked across a paved area between the Seine, the Champs Elysées, the Tuileries garden, and two beautifully designed little palaces. This was the site where Louis XVI and his tragic wife were executed. After passing between the two mentioned buildings, we reached the Boulevards and immediately immersed ourselves in the lively atmosphere and energy of this remarkable city.

LETTER V.

Paris in August 1826.—Montmartre.—The Octroi.—View of Paris.
—Montmorency.—Royal Residences.—Duke of Bordeaux.—Horse-racing.
—The Dauphine.—Popular feeling in Paris.—Royal Equipage.—Gardes du
Corps.—Policy of Napoleon.—Centralization.

Paris in August 1826.—Montmartre.—The Octroi.—View of Paris.
—Montmorency.—Royal Residences.—Duke of Bordeaux.—Horse-racing.
—The Dauphine.—Public sentiment in Paris.—Royal Carriages.—Guard of the
Corps.—Napoleon's Strategy.—Centralization.

To R COOPER, ESQ., COOPERSTOWN.

To R. Cooper, Esq., Cooperstown.

We were not a fortnight in Paris before we were quietly established, en bourgeois, in the Faubourg St. Germain. Then followed the long and wearying toil of sight-seeing. Happily, our time was not limited, and we took months for that which is usually performed in a few days. This labour is connected with objects that description has already rendered familiar, and I shall say nothing of them, except as they may incidentally belong to such parts of my subject as I believe worthy to be noticed.

We weren't in Paris for more than two weeks before we settled in comfortably, en bourgeois, in the Faubourg St. Germain. Then came the long and exhausting task of sightseeing. Luckily, we weren't in a rush and took months to do what usually only takes a few days. This effort is tied to things that descriptions have already made familiar, so I won’t say much about them, except as they might connect to the parts of my topic that I think are worth mentioning.

Paris was empty in the month of August 1826. The court was at St. Cloud; the Duchesse de Berri at her favourite Dieppe; and the fashionable world was scattered abroad over the face of Europe. Our own minister was at the baths of Aix, in Savoy.

Paris was empty in August 1826. The court was at St. Cloud; the Duchesse de Berri was at her favorite spot, Dieppe; and the social scene was spread out all over Europe. Our minister was at the baths in Aix, Savoy.

One of the first things was to obtain precise and accurate ideas of the position and entourage of the place. In addition to those enjoyed from its towers, there are noble views of Paris from Montmartre and Père Lachaise. The former has the best look-out, and thither we proceeded. This little mountain is entirely isolated, forming no part of the exterior circle of heights which environ the town. It lies north of the walls, which cross its base. The ascent is so steep as to require a winding road, and the summit, a table of a hundred acres, is crowned by a crowded village, a church, and divers windmills. There was formerly a convent or two, and small country-houses still cling to its sides, buried in the shrubbery that clothe their terraces.

One of the first things was to get accurate ideas about the location and surroundings of the place. Besides the views from its towers, there are stunning views of Paris from Montmartre and Père Lachaise. Montmartre has the best lookout, so we headed there. This little hill is completely isolated and doesn’t belong to the outer circle of heights that surround the city. It sits north of the walls, which run along its base. The climb is so steep that it requires a winding road, and the top, a flat area of about a hundred acres, is topped by a bustling village, a church, and several windmills. There used to be a couple of convents, and small country houses still cling to its slopes, hidden among the greenery that covers their terraces.

We were fortunate in our sky, which was well veiled in clouds, and occasionally darkened by mists. A bright sun may suit particular scenes, and peculiar moods of the mind, but every connoisseur in the beauties of nature will allow that, as a rule, clouds, and very frequently a partial obscurity, greatly aid a landscape. This is yet more true of a bird's-eye view of a grey old mass of walls, which give up their confused and dusky objects all the better for the absence of glare. I love to study a place teeming with historical recollections, under this light; leaving the sites of memorable scenes to issue, one by one, out of the grey mass of gloom, as time gives up its facts from the obscurity of ages.

We were lucky with our sky, which was nicely covered in clouds and sometimes darkened by mist. A bright sun might work for certain scenes and specific moods, but anyone who appreciates the beauty of nature will agree that, as a general rule, clouds and often a bit of obscurity really enhance a landscape. This is even more true when looking down from above at a grey old mass of walls, which reveal their confusing and shadowy details much better without the harshness of bright light. I love to explore a place rich in historical memories under this kind of light, watching sites of significant events gradually emerge from the grey gloom, just as time reveals its truths from the shadow of ages.

Unlike English and American towns, Paris has scarcely any suburbs. Those parts which are called its Faubourgs are, in truth, integral parts of the city; and, with the exception of a few clusters of winehouses and guinguettes, which have collected near its gates to escape the city duties, the continuity of houses ceases suddenly with the barrières, and, at the distance of half a mile from the latter, one is as effectually in the country, so far as the eye is concerned, as if a hundred leagues in the provinces. The unfenced meadows, vineyards, lucerne, oats, wheat, and vegetables, in many places, literally reach the walls. These walls are not intended for defence, but are merely a financial enceinte, created for offensive operations against the pockets of the inhabitants. Every town in France that has two thousand inhabitants is entitled to set up an octroi on its articles of consumption, and something like four millions of dollars are taken annually at the gates of Paris, in duties on this internal trade. It is merely the old expedient to tax the poor, by laying impositions on food and necessaries.

Unlike English and American towns, Paris has very few suburbs. The areas referred to as its Faubourgs are actually integral parts of the city; and, aside from a few clusters of winehouses and guinguettes that have gathered near the city gates to avoid city taxes, the row of houses stops abruptly at the barrières. Just half a mile from there, you're as much in the countryside, in terms of what you see, as if you were a hundred leagues away in the provinces. The open meadows, vineyards, lucerne, oats, wheat, and vegetables often extend right up to the walls. These walls aren’t meant for defense; they’re just a financial barrier, created to charge fees to the residents. Every town in France with at least two thousand inhabitants can establish an octroi on goods sold within it, and around four million dollars are collected each year at the gates of Paris in taxes on this internal trade. It’s just the old way of taxing the poor by imposing charges on food and essentials.

From the windmills of Montmartre, the day we ascended, the eye took in the whole vast capital at a glance. The domes sprung up through the mist, like starling balloons; and here and there the meandering stream threw back a gleam of silvery light. Enormous roofs denoted the sites of the palaces, churches, or theatres. The summits of columns, the crosses of the minor churches, and the pyramids of pavilion tops, seemed struggling to rear their heads from out the plain of edifices. A better idea of the vastness of the principal structures was obtained here in one hour, than could be got from the streets in a twelvemonth. Taking the roofs of the palace, for instance, the eye followed its field of slate and lead through a parallelogram for quite a mile. The sheet of the French opera resembled a blue pond, and the aisles of Notre Dame and St. Eustache, with their slender ribs and massive buttresses, towered so much above the lofty houses around them, as to seem to stand on their ridges. The church of St. Geneviève, the Pantheon of the revolution, faced us on the swelling land of the opposite side of the town, but surrounded still with crowded lines of dwellings; the Observatory limiting equally the view, and the vast field of houses in that direction.

From the windmills of Montmartre, on the day we went up, you could see the entire city at a glance. The domes popped up through the mist like balloons; and now and then, the winding river reflected a gleam of silvery light. Massive roofs marked the locations of palaces, churches, or theaters. The tops of columns, the crosses of smaller churches, and the pyramids of pavilion roofs seemed to be straining to rise above the sea of buildings. You could get a better sense of the size of the main structures in just one hour here than you could from the streets in a whole year. Taking the roofs of the palace, for example, your eyes traced its expanse of slate and lead over a rectangle stretching almost a mile. The dome of the French opera looked like a blue pond, and the aisles of Notre Dame and St. Eustache, with their slender arches and strong buttresses, soared so much higher than the tall houses around them that they seemed to be perched on their rooftops. The church of St. Geneviève, the Pantheon of the revolution, faced us on the rising land on the other side of the city, still surrounded by densely packed buildings; the Observatory restricted the view as well, along with the vast field of houses in that direction.

Owing to the state of the atmosphere, and the varying light, the picture before us was not that simply of a town, but, from the multiplicity and variety of its objects, it was a vast and magnificent view. I have frequently looked at Paris since from the same spot, or from its church towers, when the strong sunlight reduced it to the appearance of confused glittering piles, on which the eye almost refused to dwell; but, in a clouded day, all the peculiarities stand out sombre and distinct, resembling the grey accessories of the ordinary French landscape.

Due to the state of the sky and the changing light, the scene in front of us was more than just a town; it was a huge and stunning view with a mix of different objects. I've often looked at Paris from the same spot or from its church towers since then, when the bright sunlight made it look like a jumble of sparkling shapes that the eye could barely focus on; but on a cloudy day, all the details emerged clearly and distinctly, resembling the grey features of the typical French landscape.

From the town we turned to the heights which surround it. East and south-east, after crossing the Seine, the country lay in the waste-like unfenced fields which characterize the scenery of this part of Europe. Roads stretched away in the direction of Orleans, marked by the usual lines of clipped and branchless trees. More to the west commence the abrupt heights, which, washed by the river, enclose nearly half the wide plain, like an amphitheatre. This has been the favourite region of the kings of France, from the time of Louis XIII. down to the present day. The palaces of Versailles, St. Germain, St. Cloud, and Meudon, all lie in this direction, within short distances of the capital; and the royal forests, avenues, and chases intersect it in every direction, as mentioned before.

From the town, we headed up to the heights that surround it. East and southeast, after crossing the Seine, the landscape stretched out in the open fields that are typical of this part of Europe. Roads extended towards Orleans, lined with the usual trimmed trees. Further west, the steep heights rise, bordered by the river, creating an amphitheater that encloses almost half the vast plain. This has been the favored area of the kings of France, from the time of Louis XIII to the present day. The palaces of Versailles, St. Germain, St. Cloud, and Meudon are all in this direction, just a short distance from the capital; and the royal forests, pathways, and hunting grounds crisscross it in every direction, as mentioned earlier.

Farther north, the hills rise to be low mountains, though a wide and perfectly level plain spreads itself between the town and their bases, varying in breadth from two to four leagues. On the whole of this expanse of cultivated fields, there was hardly such a thing as an isolated house. Though not literally true, this fact was so nearly so as to render the effect oddly peculiar, when one stood on the eastern extremity of Montmartre, where, by turning southward, he looked down upon the affluence and heard the din of a vast capital, and by turning northward, he beheld a country with all the appliances of rural life, and dotted by grey villages. Two places, however, were in sight, in this direction, that might aspire to be termed towns. One was St. Denis, from time immemorial the burying-place of the French kings; and the other was Montmorency, the bourg which gives its name to, or receives it from, the illustrious family that is so styled; for I am unable to say which is the fact. The church spire of the former is one of the most beautiful objects in view from Montmartre, the church itself, which was desecrated in the revolution, having been restored by Napoleon. St. Denis is celebrated, in the Catholic annals, by the fact of the martyr, from whom the name is derived, having walked after decapitation, with his head under his arm, all the way from Paris to this very spot.

Farther north, the hills rise to form low mountains, but a wide and perfectly flat plain stretches between the town and their bases, varying in width from two to four leagues. Across this entire expanse of cultivated fields, there was hardly a single isolated house. While not completely true, this situation was so close to reality that it created a strangely unique effect when standing at the eastern edge of Montmartre. By looking south, you could see the wealth and hear the noise of a huge city, and by looking north, you’d see a countryside equipped with all the features of rural life, dotted with gray villages. However, two places stood out in that direction that could be considered towns. One was St. Denis, which has been the burial site of French kings for ages, and the other was Montmorency, a town named after the famous family it’s associated with; I can’t say which one came first. The church spire of St. Denis is one of the most beautiful sights visible from Montmartre. The church itself, which was desecrated during the revolution, was restored by Napoleon. St. Denis is noted in Catholic history for the story of the martyr, from whom the name is derived, who is said to have walked after being decapitated, holding his head under his arm, all the way from Paris to this very spot.

Montmorency is a town of no great size or importance, but lying on the side of a respectable mountain, in a way to give the spectator more than a profile, it appears to be larger than it actually is. This place is scarcely distinguishable from Paris, under the ordinary light; but on a day like that which we had chosen, it stood out in fine relief from the surrounding fields, even the grey mass of its church being plainly visible. If Paris is so beautiful and striking when seen from the surrounding heights, there are many singularly fine pictures in the bosom of the place itself. We rarely crossed the Pont Royal, during the first month or two of our residence, without stopping the carriage to gaze at the two remarkable views it offers. One is up the reach of the Seine which stretches through the heart of the town, separated by the island; and the other, in an opposite direction, looks down the reach by which the stream flows into the meadows, on its way to the sea. The first is a look into the avenues of a large town, the eye resting on the quaint outlines and endless mazes of walls, towers, and roofs; while the last is a prospect, in which the front of the picture is a collection of some of the finest objects of a high state of civilization, and the background a beautiful termination of wooded and decorated heights.

Montmorency is a town that may not be very large or significant, but it’s situated on the side of a respectable mountain, making it look bigger than it actually is. It's hard to tell it apart from Paris in regular light; however, on a day like the one we chose, it really stands out against the surrounding fields, even the grey bulk of its church is clearly visible. If Paris looks so beautiful and impressive from the nearby hills, there are many stunning views within the town itself. During the first month or two of our stay, we hardly crossed the Pont Royal without stopping the carriage to admire the two remarkable vistas it offers. One view looks up the Seine as it flows through the heart of the town, separated by the island, and the other looks downstream, where the river flows into the meadows on its way to the sea. The first view offers an insight into the streets of a large town, with your gaze captured by the unique shapes and endless twists of walls, towers, and roofs; while the second view showcases a scene where the foreground is filled with some of the finest elements of a high state of civilization, and the background presents a beautiful line of wooded and embellished heights.

At first, one who is accustomed to the forms and movements of a sea-port feels a little disappointment at seeing a river that bears nothing but dingy barges loaded with charcoal and wine-casks. The magnificence of the quays seems disproportioned to the trifling character of the commerce they are destined to receive. But familiarity with the town soon changes all these notions, and while we admit that Paris is altogether secondary, so far as trade is concerned, we come to feel the magnificence of her public works, and to find something that is pleasing and picturesque, even in her huge and unwieldy wood and coal barges. Trade is a good thing in its way, but its agents rarely contribute to the taste, learning, manners, or morals of a nation.

At first, someone used to the hustle and bustle of a port might feel a bit let down when they see a river filled with dirty barges carrying coal and barrels of wine. The grandeur of the docks feels out of place compared to the modest nature of the trade they handle. But getting used to the town quickly shifts our perspective, and while we acknowledge that Paris is pretty much secondary in terms of trade, we start to appreciate the grandeur of its public works and even find something attractive and charming about the bulky wood and coal barges. Trade has its benefits, but the people involved often don't add much to a nation's taste, knowledge, manners, or morals.

The sight of the different interesting objects that encircle Paris stimulated our curiosity to nearer views, and we proceeded immediately to visit the environs. These little excursions occupied more than a month, and they not only made us familiar with the adjacent country, but, by compelling us to pass out at nearly every one of the twenty or thirty different gates or barriers, as they are called, with a large portion of the town also. This capital has been too often described to render any further account of the principal objects necessary, and in speaking of it, I shall endeavour to confine my remarks to things that I think may still interest you by their novelty.

The sight of the various interesting places surrounding Paris sparked our curiosity for closer looks, so we immediately set out to explore the area. These little trips took more than a month, and they not only helped us get to know the nearby countryside, but also required us to pass through nearly all of the twenty or thirty gates or barriers, as they’re called, along with a large part of the city. This capital has been described so many times that I don't think it's necessary to go over the main attractions again, so I’ll focus my comments on things that I believe might still interest you because they're new.

The royal residences in Paris at this time are, strictly speaking, but two,—the Tuileries and the Palais Royal. The Louvre is connected with the first, and it has no finished apartments that are occupied by any of princely rank, most of its better rooms being unfinished, and are occupied as cabinets or museums. A small palace, called the Elysée Bourbon, is fitted up as a residence for the heir presumptive, the Duc de Bordeaux; but, though it contains his princely toys, such as miniature batteries of artillery, etc., he is much too young to maintain a separate establishment. This little scion of royalty only completed his seventh year not long after our arrival in France; on which occasion one of those silly ceremonies, which some of the present age appear to think inseparable from sound principles, was observed. The child was solemnly and formally transferred from the care of the women to that of the men. Up to this period, Madame la Vicomtesse de Gontaut-Biron had been his governess, and she now resigned her charge into the hands of the Baron de Damas, who had lately been Minister of Foreign Affairs. Madame de Gontaut was raised to the rank of Duchess on the occasion. The boy himself is said to have passed from the hands of the one party to those of the other, in presence of the whole court, absolutely naked. Some such absurdity was observed at the reception of Marie Antoinette, it being a part of regal etiquette that a royal bride, on entering France, should leave her old wardrobe, even to the last garment, behind her. You will be amused to hear that there are people in Europe who still attach great importance to a rigid adherence to all the old etiquette at similar ceremonies. These are the men who believe it to be essential that judges and advocates should wear wigs, in an age when, their use being rejected by the rest of the world, their presence cannot fail, if it excite any feeling, to excite that of inconvenience and absurdity. There is such a thing as leaving society too naked, I admit; but a chemise, at least, could not have injured the little Duke of Bordeaux at this ceremony. Whenever a usage that is poetical in itself, and which awakens a sentiment without doing violence to decency, or comfort, or common sense, can be preserved, I would rigidly adhere to it, if it were only for antiquity's sake; but, surely, it would be far more rational for judges to wear false beards, because formerly Bacon and Coke did not shave their chins, than it is for a magistrate to appear on the bench with a cumbrous, hot, and inconvenient cloud of powdered flax, or whatever may be the material on his poll, because our ancestors, a century or two since, were so silly as to violate nature in the same extraordinary manner.

The royal residences in Paris at this time are really just two: the Tuileries and the Palais Royal. The Louvre is linked to the first, and it has no finished apartments that are occupied by anyone of royal status, most of its nicer rooms being unfinished and used as offices or museums. A small palace called the Elysée Bourbon is set up as a home for the heir apparent, the Duc de Bordeaux; however, he’s way too young to have his own household, even though it has his princely toys, like miniature artillery batteries and so on. This little royal just turned seven shortly after we arrived in France; on that occasion, one of those silly ceremonies that some people today think are essential for good principles took place. The child was officially and formally transferred from the care of women to that of men. Up until that time, Madame la Vicomtesse de Gontaut-Biron had been his governess, and she now handed him over to the Baron de Damas, who had recently served as Minister of Foreign Affairs. Madame de Gontaut was made a Duchess for the occasion. The boy is said to have passed from one party to the other in front of the entire court, absolutely naked. A similar absurdity occurred at Marie Antoinette’s reception, as part of royal protocol required a royal bride entering France to leave all her old clothes behind, down to the last garment. You'll find it amusing that there are people in Europe who still see a rigid adherence to all the old protocols at such events as critically important. These are the same folks who believe judges and lawyers should wear wigs, even when the rest of the world has moved on, making their presence feel inconvenient and silly. I admit there’s such a thing as being too exposed in society; but a chemise at least wouldn't have harmed the little Duke of Bordeaux during this ceremony. Whenever a ritual is inherently poetic and evokes sentiment without compromising decency, comfort, or common sense, I would certainly stick to it, if only for tradition’s sake. But honestly, it would make much more sense for judges to wear fake beards because Bacon and Coke didn’t shave, rather than having a magistrate appear in court with a bulky, hot, and inconvenient powdered wig just because our ancestors were foolish enough to go against nature in such a bizarre way a century or two ago.

Speaking of the Duke of Bordeaux, reminds me of an odd, and, indeed, in some degree a painful scene, of which I was accidentally a witness, a short time before the ceremony just mentioned. The émigrés have brought back with them into France a taste for horse-racing, and, supported by a few of the English who are here, there are regular races, spring and autumn, in the Champs de Mars. The course is one of the finest imaginable, being more than a mile in circumference, and surrounded by mounds of earth, raised expressly with that object, which permit the spectators to overlook the entire field. The result is a species of amphitheatric arena, in which any of the dramatic exhibitions, that are so pleasing to this spectacle-loving nation, may be enacted. Pavilions are permanently erected at the starting-post, and one or two of these are usually fitted up for the use of the court, whenever it is the pleasure of the royal family to attend, as was the case at the time the little occurrence I am about to relate took place.

Talking about the Duke of Bordeaux reminds me of a strange and somewhat painful scene that I happened to witness shortly before the ceremony I just mentioned. The émigrés have brought a love for horse racing back to France, and with the support of a few English people here, there are regular races in the Champs de Mars during spring and autumn. The track is one of the finest you could imagine, going over a mile in circumference and surrounded by earth mounds created specifically for this purpose, allowing spectators to see the whole field. This setup creates a kind of amphitheater where any of the dramatic shows that this spectacle-loving nation enjoys can take place. Pavilions are permanently set up at the starting point, and one or two of these are typically reserved for the court whenever the royal family chooses to attend, as was the case during the little incident I'm about to describe.

On this occasion Charles X. came in royal state, from St. Cloud, accompanied by detachments of his guards, many carriages, several of which were drawn by eight horses, and a cloud of mounted footmen. Most of the dignitaries of the kingdom were present, in the different pavilions, or stands, and nearly or quite all the ministers, together with the whole diplomatic corps. There could not have been less than a hundred thousand spectators on the mounds.

On this occasion, Charles X arrived in royal style from St. Cloud, accompanied by his guards, many carriages—some pulled by eight horses—and a crowd of mounted footmen. Most of the dignitaries from the kingdom were present in the various pavilions or stands, along with nearly all the ministers and the entire diplomatic corps. There were at least a hundred thousand spectators on the mounds.

The racing itself was no great matter, being neither within time nor well contested. The horses were all French, the trial being intended for the encouragement of the French breeders, and the sports were yet too recent to have produced much influence on the stock of the country. During the heats, accompanied by a young American friend, I had strolled among the royal equipages, in order to examine their magnificence, and returning towards the course, we came out unexpectedly at a little open space, immediately at one end of the pavilion in which the royal family was seated. There were not a dozen people near us, and one of these was a sturdy Englishman, evidently a tradesman, who betrayed a keen and a truly national desire to get a look at the king. The head of a little girl was just visible above the side of the pavilion, and my companion, who, by a singular accident, not long before, had been thrown into company with les enfans de France, as the royal children are called, informed me that it was Mademoiselle d'Artois, the sister of the heir presumptive. He had given me a favourable account of the children, whom he represented as both lively and intelligent, and I changed my position a little, to get a better look of the face of this little personage, who was not twenty feet from the spot where we stood. My movement attracted her attention; and, after looking down a moment into the small area in which we were enclosed, she disappeared. Presently a lady looked over the balustrade, and our Englishman seemed to be on tenter-hooks. Some thirty or forty French gathered round us immediately, and I presume it was thought none but loyal subjects could manifest so much desire to gaze at the family, especially as one or two of the French clapped the little princess, whose head now appeared and disappeared again, as if she were earnestly pressing something on the attention of those within the pavilion. In a moment the form of a pale and sickly-looking boy was seen, the little girl, who was a year or two older, keeping her place at his side. The boy was raised on the knee of a melancholy-looking and rather hard-featured female of fifty, who removed his straw hat in order to salute us. "These are the Dauphine and the Duc de Bordeaux," whispered my companion, who knew the person of the former by sight. The Dauphine looked anxiously, and I thought mournfully, at the little cluster we formed directly before her, as if waiting to observe in what manner her nephew would be received. Of course my friend and myself, who were in the foreground, stood uncovered; as gentlemen we could not do less, nor as foreign gentlemen could we very well do more. Not a Frenchman, however, even touched his hat! On the other hand, the Englishman straddled his legs, gave a wide sweep with his beaver, and uttered as hearty a hurrah as if he had been cheering a member of parliament who gave gin in his beer. The effect of this single, unaccompanied, unanswered cheer, was both ludicrous and painful. The poor fellow himself seemed startled at hearing his own voice amid so profound a stillness, and checking his zeal as unexpectedly as he had commenced its exhibition, he looked furiously around him and walked surlily away. The Dauphine followed him with her eyes. There was no mistaking his gaitered limbs, dogged mien, and florid countenance; be clearly was not French, and those that were, as clearly turned his enthusiasm into ridicule. I felt sorry for her, as, with a saddened face, she set down the boy, and withdrew her own head within the covering of the pavilion. The little Mademoiselle d'Artois kept her bright looks, in a sort of wonder, on us, until the circumspection of those around her, gave her a hint to disappear.

The race itself wasn't anything special, not really timed or fiercely contested. All the horses were French, as the event was meant to support French breeders, and the sport was still too new to have much impact on the country’s stock. During the heats, I was walking around the royal carriages with a young American friend to admire their grandeur. As we made our way back to the track, we unexpectedly came upon a small open area right by one end of the pavilion where the royal family was seated. There were only about a dozen people nearby, one of whom was a sturdy Englishman, clearly a tradesman, who had a strong, national urge to catch a glimpse of the king. A little girl’s head was just visible over the edge of the pavilion, and my companion, who by a strange coincidence had recently met les enfans de France, the royal children, informed me that it was Mademoiselle d'Artois, the sister of the heir apparent. He had given me a positive impression of the children, describing them as lively and smart, so I shifted my position a bit to get a better look at this little girl, who was only about twenty feet away from us. My movement caught her attention, and after she glanced down into our small area for a moment, she disappeared. Soon after, a lady looked over the balustrade, making our Englishman tense with excitement. Immediately, about thirty or forty French people gathered around us, probably thinking that only loyal subjects could show such eagerness to see the family, especially since one or two of them clapped for the little princess, whose head appeared and vanished again, as if she were trying to get the attention of those inside the pavilion. A moment later, we saw a pale, sickly-looking boy, with the little girl, who was a year or two older, staying by his side. The boy was sitting on the lap of a sad-looking, somewhat stern-faced woman in her fifties, who removed his straw hat to greet us. "These are the Dauphine and the Duc de Bordeaux," my friend whispered, recognizing the former. The Dauphine looked anxiously, and I thought sadly, at our little group, seemingly waiting to see how her nephew would be received. Naturally, my friend and I, being in the front, stood bareheaded; as gentlemen, we couldn’t do less, but as foreign gentlemen, we also couldn’t do much more. Not a single Frenchman, however, even touched his hat! In contrast, the Englishman spread his legs, gave a big flourish with his hat, and cheered as enthusiastically as if he were supporting a member of parliament who gave out gin with his beer. The effect of this lone, unaccompanied cheer was both ridiculous and uncomfortable. The poor guy seemed startled at his own voice in the midst of such deep silence, and suddenly pulled back his enthusiasm as quickly as he had expressed it, glaring around him before sulkily walking away. The Dauphine watched him with her eyes. There was no mistaking his gaited legs, stubborn demeanor, and flushed face; it was clear he wasn’t French, and those who were clearly mocked his enthusiasm. I felt sorry for her as she set the boy down with a sad expression and pulled her head back under the shelter of the pavilion. Little Mademoiselle d'Artois kept her bright expression, looking at us in wonder, until the cautiousness of those around her signaled her to disappear.

This was the first direct and near view I got of the true state of popular feeling in Paris towards the reigning family. According to the journals in the interest of the court, enthusiasm was invariably exhibited whenever any of their princes appeared in public; but the journals in every country, our own dear and shrewd republic not excepted, are very unsafe guides for those who desire truth.

This was the first time I got a clear and close-up look at how people in Paris really felt about the ruling family. According to the court's friendly newspapers, there was always enthusiasm whenever any of the princes showed up in public; however, newspapers in every country, including our own clever and beloved republic, are not reliable sources for those seeking the truth.

I am told that the style of this court has been materially altered, and perhaps improved, by the impetuous character of Napoleon. The king rarely appears in public with less than eight horses, which are usually in a foam. His liveries are not showy, neither are the carriages as neat and elegant as one would expect. The former are blue and white, with a few slight ornaments of white and red lace, and the vehicles are showy, large and even magnificent, but, I think, without good taste. You will be surprised to hear that he drives with what in America we call "Dutch collars." Six of the horses are held in hand, and the leaders are managed by a postilion. There is always one or more empty carriages, according to the number of the royal personages present, equipped in every respect like those which are filled, and which are held in reserve against accidents; a provision, by the way, that is not at all unreasonable in those who scamper over the broken pavements, in and about Paris, as fast as leg can be put to the ground.

I’ve heard that the style of this court has changed quite a bit, maybe even for the better, thanks to Napoleon's bold approach. The king rarely shows up in public with fewer than eight horses, which are usually all lathered up. His uniforms aren’t flashy, and neither are the carriages as tidy and stylish as you might expect. The colors are blue and white, with a few minor touches of white and red lace, and the vehicles are impressive, large, and even grand, but they lack taste, in my opinion. You might be surprised to know that he drives with what we in America call "Dutch collars." Six of the horses are held in hand, while the lead horses are controlled by a postilion. There are always one or more empty carriages, depending on how many royal figures are present, fully equipped like the ones in use, just in case. It’s a reasonable precaution given how fast they dash over the rough pavements in and around Paris.

Notwithstanding the present magnificence of the court, royalty is shorn of much of its splendour in France, since the days of Louis XVI. Then a city of a hundred thousand souls (Versailles) was a mere dependant of the crown; lodgings for many hundred abbés, it is said, were provided in the palace alone, and a simple representation at the palace opera cost a fortune.

Despite the current grandeur of the court, royalty has lost much of its luster in France since the time of Louis XVI. Back then, the city of Versailles, with its hundred thousand residents, was just a subordinate of the crown; it's said that the palace alone housed accommodations for many hundreds of abbés, and even a single performance at the palace opera cost a fortune.

It is not an easy matter to come at the real cost of the kingly office in this country, all the expenditures of the European governments being mystified in such a way, as to require a very intimate knowledge of the details to give a perfectly clear account of them. But, so far as I have been able to ascertain, the charges that arise from this feature of the system do not fall much short, if indeed they do any, of eight millions of dollars annually. Out of this sum, however, the king pays the extra allowances of his guards, the war office taking the same view of all classes of soldiers, after distinguishing between foot and cavalry. You will get an idea of the luxury of royalty by a short account of the gardes du corps. These troops are all officers, the privates having the rank and receiving the pay of lieutenants. Their duty, as the name implies, is to have the royal person in their especial care, and there is always a guard of them in an ante-chamber of the royal apartments. They are heavy cavalry, and when they mount guard in the palaces, their arm is a carabine. A party of them always appear near the carriage of the king, or indeed near that of any of the reigning branch of the family. There are said to be four regiments or companies of them, of four hundred men each; but it strikes me the number must be exaggerated. I should think, however, that there are fully a thousand of them. In addition to these selected troops, there are three hundred Swiss, of the Swiss and royal guards; of the latter, including all arms, there must be many thousands. These are the troops that usually mount guard in and about all the palaces. The annual budget of France appears in the estimates at about a milliard, or a thousand millions of francs; but the usual mystifications are resorted to, and the truth will give the annual central expenses of the country at not less, I think, than two hundred millions of dollars. This sum, however, covers many items of expenditure, that we are accustomed to consider purely local. The clergy, for instance, are paid out of it, as is a portion of the cost of maintaining the roads. On the other hand, much money is collected, as a general regulation, that does not appear in the budget. Few or no churches are built, and there are charges for masses, interments, christenings, and fees for a hundred things, of which no account is taken in making out the sum total of the cost of government.

It’s not easy to determine the true cost of the monarchy in this country since the expenses of European governments are often obscured, requiring a deep understanding of the details to provide a clear picture. However, from what I can gather, the costs associated with this part of the system are close to, if not exceeding, eight million dollars a year. Out of this amount, the king covers additional payments for his guards, with the war office treating all types of soldiers similarly, after distinguishing between infantry and cavalry. You can get a sense of royal luxury from a brief overview of the gardes du corps. These troops are all officers, and the privates hold the rank and receive the pay of lieutenants. Their job, as the name suggests, is to protect the royal person and there's always a guard stationed in an ante-room of the royal quarters. They are heavy cavalry, and when they guard the palaces, they carry a carabine. A group of them is always present near the king's carriage, or even beside that of any member of the royal family. It’s said there are four regiments or companies, each with four hundred men, but I suspect that number is inflated. I would estimate there are at least a thousand of them. In addition to these elite troops, there are three hundred Swiss guards among the Swiss and royal forces; overall, including all branches, there must be thousands. These are the soldiers who typically guard all the palaces. France’s annual budget is reported to be about a milliard, or a billion francs; however, due to usual obfuscations, the true annual central expenses are at least two hundred million dollars, I believe. This figure includes many expenditures that we usually consider purely local. For example, the clergy is paid from this budget, as are some road maintenance costs. On the flip side, a lot of money is collected as a general rule that doesn’t show up in the budget. Not many churches are built, and there are costs for masses, funerals, baptisms, and various fees, none of which are accounted for in the total government expenses.

It was the policy of Napoleon to create a system of centralization, that should cause everything to emanate from himself. The whole organization of government had this end in view, and all the details of the departments have been framed expressly to further this object. The prefects are no more than so many political aides, whose duty it is to carry into effect the orders that emanate from the great head, and lines of telegraphs are established all over France, in such a way that a communication may be sent from the Tuileries, to the remotest corner of the kingdom, in the course of a few hours. It has been said that one of the first steps towards effecting a revolution, ought to be to seize the telegraphs at Paris, by means of which such information and orders could be sent into the provinces, as the emergency might seem to require.

It was Napoleon's policy to create a centralized system that made everything come from him. The entire government organization aimed for this goal, and all the details of the departments were specifically designed to support it. The prefects serve as political aides, responsible for carrying out the orders from the top leader, and telegraph lines are set up all over France so that a message can be sent from the Tuileries to the farthest corner of the kingdom within a few hours. It has been suggested that one of the first steps to trigger a revolution would be to take control of the telegraphs in Paris, through which information and orders could be sent to the provinces as needed.

This system of centralization has almost neutralized the advancement of the nation, in a knowledge of the usages and objects of the political liberty that the French have obtained, by bitter experience, from other sources. It is the constant aim of that portion of the community which understands the action of free institutions, to increase the powers of the municipalities, and to lessen the functions of the central government; but their efforts are resisted with a jealous distrust of everything like popular dictation. Their municipal privileges are, rightly enough, thought to be the entering wedges of real liberty. The people ought to manage their own affairs, just as far as they can do so without sacrificing their interests for want of a proper care, and here is the starting point of representation. So far from France enjoying such a system, however, half the time a bell cannot be hung in a parish church, or a bridge repaired, without communications with and orders from Paris.

This system of centralization has nearly stifled the progress of the nation, particularly in understanding the practices and goals of the political freedom that the French people have learned, through difficult experiences, from other sources. Those in the community who recognize the value of free institutions always aim to enhance the powers of local governments and reduce the role of the central government; however, their efforts are met with a distrust of anything resembling popular control. Their local privileges are rightly seen as the initial steps toward genuine freedom. The people should handle their own affairs as much as possible without risking their interests due to a lack of proper attention, and this is the foundation of representation. Yet, instead of enjoying such a system, in France, often a bell cannot be hung in a parish church or a bridge repaired without getting in touch with and receiving orders from Paris.

LETTER VI.

Letters of Introduction.—European Etiquette.—Diplomatic Entertainments.
—Ladies in Coffee-houses.—French Hospitality.—Mr. Canning at Paris.
—Parisian Hotels.—French Lady at Washington.—Receptions in Paris
and in New York.—Mode of Announcement.—Republican Affectation.
—Hotel Monaco.—Dinner given to Mr. Canning.—Diplomatic Etiquette.
—European Ambassadors.—Prime Minister of France.—Mr. Canning.
—Count Pozzo di Borgo.—Precedency at Dinner.—American Etiquette.
—A French Dinner.—Servants.—Catholic Fasting.—Conversation with
Canning.—English Prejudice against Americans.

Letters of Introduction.—European Etiquette.—Diplomatic Events.
—Women in Coffee Shops.—French Hospitality.—Mr. Canning in Paris.
—Parisian Hotels.—French Woman in Washington.—Receptions in Paris
and New York.—Announcement Methods.—Republican Pretension.
—Hotel Monaco.—Dinner for Mr. Canning.—Diplomatic Etiquette.
—European Ambassadors.—French Prime Minister.—Mr. Canning.
—Count Pozzo di Borgo.—Seating Order at Dinner.—American Etiquette.
—A French Dinner.—Staff.—Catholic Fasting.—Conversation with
Canning.—British Bias Against Americans.

To MRS. POMEROY, COOPERSTOWN, NEW YORK.

To Mrs. Pomeroy, Cooperstown, New York.

I quitted America with some twenty letters of introduction, that had been pressed upon me by different friends, but which were carefully locked up in a secretary, where they still remain, and are likely to remain for ever, or until they are destroyed. As this may appear a singular resolution for one who left his own country to be absent for years, I shall endeavour to explain it. In the first place, I have a strong repugnance to pushing myself on the acquaintance of any man: this feeling may, in fact, proceed from pride, but I have a disposition to believe that it proceeds, in part, also from a better motive. These letters of introduction, like verbal introductions, are so much abused in America, that the latter feeling, perhaps I might say both feelings, are increased by the fact. Of all the people in the world we are the most prodigal of these favours, when self-respect and propriety would teach us we ought to be among the most reserved, simply because the character of the nation is so low, that the European, more than half the time, fancies he is condescending when he bestows attentions on our people at all. Other travellers may give you a different account of the matter, but let every one be responsible for his own opinions and facts. Then a friend who, just as we left home, returned from Europe after an absence of five years, assured me that he found his letters of but little use; that nearly every agreeable acquaintance he made was the result of accident, and that the Europeans in general were much more cautious in giving and receiving letters of this nature than ourselves.

I left America with about twenty letters of introduction given to me by different friends, but they’re safely tucked away in a desk, where they still sit and will probably stay forever, or until they’re thrown out. This might seem like a strange choice for someone who left their home country to be away for years, so I’ll try to explain. First of all, I really don’t like putting myself in the way of any person’s acquaintance: this feeling might come from pride, but I also like to think it comes from a better reason. These letters of introduction, just like verbal ones, are used so irresponsibly in America that those feelings—both feelings, perhaps—are intensified by this fact. Out of all the people in the world, we are the most generous with these favors, when dignity and propriety would suggest we should be among the most reserved, simply because the reputation of the nation is so low that Europeans often think they’re being gracious just by giving any attention to our people at all. Other travelers might tell you a different story, but let each person be accountable for their own views and experiences. Then a friend who had just returned from Europe after being away for five years assured me that he found his letters to be of little use; nearly every pleasant connection he made was due to chance, and that Europeans were generally much more careful about giving and receiving letters like these than we are.

The usages of all Europe, those of the English excepted, differ from our own on the subject of visits. There the stranger, or the latest arrival, is expected to make the first visit, and an inquiry for your address is always taken for an intimation that your acquaintance would be acceptable. Many, perhaps most Americans, lose a great deal through their provincial breeding, in this respect, in waiting for attentions that it is their duty to invite, by putting themselves in the way of receiving them. The European usage is not only the most rational, but it is the most delicate. It is the most rational, as there is a manifest absurdity in supposing, for instance, that the inhabitant of a town is to know whenever a visitor from the country arrives; and it is the most delicate, as it leaves the newcomer, who is supposed to know his own wishes best, to decide for himself whether he wishes to make acquaintances or not. In short, our own practices are provincial and rustic, and cannot exist when the society of the country shall have taken the usual phases of an advanced civilization. Even in England, in the higher classes, the cases of distinguished men excepted, it is usual for the stranger to seek the introduction.

The customs across Europe, except those of the English, differ from ours when it comes to visits. There, a newcomer or recent arrival is expected to make the first move, and asking for your address is seen as a sign that they’d like to connect. Many, if not most, Americans miss out because of their limited upbringing, waiting for others to reach out instead of taking the initiative themselves. The European way is not only more logical but also more considerate. It's more logical since it’s unreasonable to expect that someone living in a town knows when a visitor from the countryside arrives; and it’s more considerate because it allows the newcomer, who knows their own preferences best, to decide whether they want to meet new people. In short, our own practices are limited and outdated, and they won’t hold up in a society that has reached the typical stages of advanced civilization. Even in England, among the upper classes, aside from a few exceptional individuals, it’s common for the newcomer to seek introductions.

Under such circumstances, coupled with the utter insignificance of an ordinary individual in a town like Paris, you will easily understand that we had the first months of our residence entirely to ourselves. As a matter of course, we called on our own minister and his wife; and, as a matter of course, we have been included in the dinners and parties that they are accustomed to give at this season of the year. This, however, has merely brought us in contact with a chance-medley of our own countrymen, these diplomatic entertainments being quite obviously a matter of accident, so far as the set is concerned. The dinners of your banker, however, are still worse, since with them the visiting-list is usually a mere extract from the ledger.

Given the situation and the complete unimportance of an average person in a city like Paris, it's easy to see that we spent our first few months there entirely on our own. Naturally, we visited our minister and his wife, and naturally, we've been invited to the dinners and parties they usually host this time of year. However, this has only put us in contact with a random mix of our fellow countrymen, as these diplomatic events are clearly just luck of the draw when it comes to the guest list. The dinners held by your banker are even worse, since their guest list is typically just a selection from their client roster.

Our privacy has not been without its advantages. It has enabled us to visit all the visible objects without the incumbrance of engagements, and given me leisure to note and to comment on things that might otherwise have been overlooked. For several months we have had nothing to do but to see sights, get familiarized with a situation that, at first, we found singularly novel, and to brush up our French.

Our privacy has definitely had its perks. It's allowed us to explore all the sights without the burden of obligations, giving me enough time to take note of and comment on things that might have otherwise gone unnoticed. For several months, we've only had to focus on sightseeing, getting used to a situation that initially felt very new, and improving our French.

I never had sufficient faith in the popular accounts of the usages of other countries, to believe one-half of what I have heard. I distrusted from the first the fact of ladies—I mean real, bona fide ladies, women of sentiment, delicacy, taste, and condition—frequenting public eating-houses, and habitually living, without the retirement and reserve that is so necessary to all women, not to say men, of the caste. I found it difficult, therefore, to imagine I should meet with many females of condition in restaurans and cafés. Such a thing might happen on an emergency, but it was assailing too much all those feelings and tastes which become inherent in refinement, to suppose that the tables of even the best house of the sort in Paris could be honoured by the presence of such persons, except under particular circumstances. My own observation corroborated this opinion, and, in order to make sure of the fact, I have put the question to nearly every Frenchwoman of rank it has since been my good fortune to become sufficiently acquainted with to take the liberty. The answer has been uniform. Such things are sometimes done, but rarely; and even then it is usual to have the service in a private room. One old lady, a woman perfectly competent to decide on such a point, told me frankly:—"We never do it, except by way of a frolic, or when in a humour which induces people to do many other silly and unbecoming things. Why should we go to the restaurateurs to eat? We have our own houses and servants as well as the English, or even you Americans"—it may be supposed I laughed—"and certainly the French are not so devoid of good taste as not to understand that the mixed society of a public-house is not the best possible company for a woman."

I never really trusted the popular stories about the customs of other countries enough to believe half of what I heard. From the beginning, I doubted that ladies—I mean real, genuine ladies, women of sentiment, delicacy, taste, and status—would go to public restaurants and live without the privacy and reserve that are so essential for all women, not to mention men of their class. Because of that, it was hard for me to imagine running into many women of status in restaurants and cafés. It might happen in an emergency, but it would challenge all the feelings and tastes that come with refinement to think that even the best restaurants in Paris would be graced by their presence unless under special circumstances. My own observations supported this view, and to confirm it, I've asked nearly every Frenchwoman of rank whom I've become friendly enough with to take the risk. The answers have been consistent. Such things happen occasionally, but rarely; and even then, they usually prefer to have the service in a private room. One older lady, perfectly qualified to give her opinion on this, told me directly: "We never do it unless it's just for fun, or when we're in a mood that makes people do other silly and inappropriate things. Why would we go to the restaurants to eat? We have our own homes and servants just like the English, or even you Americans"—I must admit I laughed—"and certainly the French aren't so lacking in good taste that they don't know a mixed crowd at a public place isn't the best company for a woman."

It is, moreover, a great mistake to imagine that the French are not hospitable, and that they do not entertain as freely, and as often, as any other people. The only difference between them and the English, in this respect, or between them and ourselves, is in the better taste and ease which regulate their intercourse of this nature. While there is a great deal of true elegance, there is no fuss, at a French entertainment; and all that you have heard of the superiority of the kitchen in this country, is certainly true. Society is divided into castes in Paris, as it is everywhere else; and the degrees of elegance and refinement increase as one ascends as a matter of course; but there is less of effort, in every class, than is usual with us. One of the best-bred Englishmen of my acquaintance, and one, too, who had long been in the world, has frankly admitted to me, that the highest tone of English society is merely an imitation of that which existed in Paris previously to the revolution, and of which, though modified as to usages and forms, a good deal still remains. By the highest tone, however, you are not to suppose I mean that laboured, frigid, heartless manner that so many, in England especially, mistake for high breeding, merely because they do not know how to unite with the finish which constant intercourse with the world creates, the graceful semblance of living less for one's self than for others, and to express, as it were, their feelings and wishes, rather than to permit one's own to escape him—a habit that, like the reflection of a mirror, produces the truest and most pleasing images, when thrown back from surfaces the most highly polished. But I am anticipating rather than giving you a history of what I have seen.

It’s a big mistake to think that the French aren’t hospitable or that they don’t host gatherings as freely and frequently as any other people. The only difference between them and the English, or between them and us, is the better taste and ease that govern their social interactions. While there’s a lot of genuine elegance, French gatherings lack fussiness, and everything you’ve heard about the superior food in this country is definitely true. Society in Paris is divided into castes, just like everywhere else, and the levels of elegance and refinement naturally increase as you move up the social ladder; however, there’s less effort involved in every class than what we typically see. One of the most refined Englishmen I know, who had a lot of experience in the world, admitted to me that the highest level of English society is just an imitation of what existed in Paris before the revolution. A lot of that remains, although it has changed a bit in terms of customs and forms. But when I say "highest tone," I’m not talking about the forced, cold, and heartless manner that many people in England mistakenly believe represents high breeding, simply because they don’t understand how to combine the polish that comes from constant social interactions with the graceful way of living for others rather than just for oneself, expressing their feelings and desires instead of letting their own feelings escape—this habit, much like a mirror's reflection, produces the truest and most pleasing images when coming from the most polished surfaces. But I’m getting ahead of myself rather than giving you a straightforward account of what I’ve seen.

In consequence of our not having brought any letters, as has just been mentioned, and of not having sought society, no one gave themselves any trouble on our account for the first three or four months of our residence in Paris. At the end of that period, however, I made my début at, probably, as brilliant an entertainment as one usually sees here in the course of a whole winter. Mr. Canning, then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, came to Paris on a visit, and, as is usual on such occasions, diplomacy was a good deal mixed up with eating and drinking. Report says, that the etiquette of the court was a good deal deranged by this visit, the Bourbons not having adopted the hale-fellow hospitality of the English kings. M. de Villèle or M. de Damas would be invited to dine at Windsor almost as a matter of course; but the descendant of Hugh Capet hesitated about breaking bread with an English commoner. The matter is understood to have been gotten over, by giving the entertainment at St. Cloud, where, it would seem, the royal person has fewer immunities than at the Tuileries. But, among other attentions that were bestowed on the English statesman, Mr. Brown determined to give him a great diplomatic dinner; and our own legations having a great poverty of subordinates, except in the way of travelling attachés, I was invited to occupy one end of the table, while the regular secretary took his seat at the other. Before I attempt a short description of this entertainment, it may help to enliven the solitude of your mountain residence, and serve to give you more distinct ideas of the matter than can be obtained from novels, if I commence with a summary of the appliances and modes of polite intercourse in this part of the world, as they are to be distinguished from our own.

Due to the fact that we didn’t bring any letters, as just mentioned, and didn’t seek socializing, no one bothered with us for the first three or four months of our time in Paris. However, after that period, I made my début at what was probably one of the most spectacular events usually seen here over an entire winter. Mr. Canning, who was the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs at the time, came to Paris for a visit, and, as often happens in such situations, diplomacy was mixed with eating and drinking. It's said that the court's etiquette was somewhat disrupted by this visit since the Bourbons hadn’t embraced the friendly hospitality of the English kings. M. de Villèle or M. de Damas would be invited to dine at Windsor almost automatically; however, the descendant of Hugh Capet was hesitant to break bread with an English commoner. This issue was apparently resolved by hosting the event at St. Cloud, where it seems the royal family has fewer privileges than at the Tuileries. Among other gestures made toward the English statesman, Mr. Brown decided to host a grand diplomatic dinner; and since our legations were lacking in subordinate staff, except for some traveling attachés, I was invited to sit at one end of the table while the regular secretary took his seat at the other. Before I give a brief description of this dinner, it might brighten the solitude of your mountain residence and help you form a clearer picture of the event than you can get from novels, if I start with a summary of the customs and ways of polite interaction in this part of the world and how they differ from our own.

In the first place, you are to discard from your mind all images of two rooms and folding-doors, with a passage six feet wide, a narrow carpeted flight of steps, and a bed-room prepared for the ladies to uncloak in, and another in which the men can brush their hair and hide their hats. Some such snuggeries very possibly exist in England, among the middling classes; but I believe all over the continent of Europe style is never attempted without more suitable means to carry out the intention.

First of all, you need to get rid of any thoughts of two rooms with folding doors, a six-foot-wide hallway, a narrow carpeted staircase, and a bedroom where the ladies can change and another one for the men to fix their hair and stash their hats. Such cozy setups might exist in England among the middle class, but I believe throughout Europe, style is never pursued without more appropriate resources to achieve the goal.

In Paris, every one who mingles with the world lives in an hotel, or a house that has a court and an outer gate. Usually the building surrounds three sides of this court, and sometimes the whole four; though small hotels are to be found, in which the court is encircled on two, or even on three of its sides, merely by high walls. The gate is always in the keeping of a regular porter, who is an important personage about the establishment, taking in letters, tickets, etc., ejecting blackguards and all other suspicious persons, carrying messages, besides levying contributions on all the inmates of the house, in the way of wood and coal. In short, he is in some measure, held to be responsible for the exits and entrances, being a sort of domestic gendarme. In the larger hotels there are two courts, the great and la basse cour, the latter being connected with the offices and stables.

In Paris, everyone who is part of society lives in a hotel or a house that has a courtyard and an outer gate. Typically, the building surrounds three sides of this courtyard, and sometimes all four; although there are small hotels where the courtyard is only bordered on two or even three sides by tall walls. The gate is always managed by a regular porter, who is a significant figure at the establishment, receiving letters, tickets, etc., kicking out troublemakers and any other suspicious individuals, delivering messages, and also collecting fees from all the residents for things like wood and coal. In short, he is somewhat responsible for who comes and goes, acting like a sort of house guard. In the larger hotels, there are two courtyards: the main one and la basse cour, which is connected to the offices and stables.

Of course, these hotels vary in size and magnificence. Some are not larger than our own largest town dwellings, while others, again, are palaces. As these buildings were originally constructed to lodge a single establishment, they have their principal and their inferior apartments; some have their summer and their winter apartments. As is, and always must be the case, where everything like state and magnificence are affected, the reception-rooms are en suite; the mode of building which prevails in America, being derived from the secondary class of English houses. It is true, that in London, many men of rank, perhaps of the nobility, do not live in houses any larger, or much better, than the best of our own; though I think, that one oftener sees rooms of a good size and proper elevation, even in these dwellings, than it is usual to see in America. But the great houses of London, such as Burlington-house, Northumberland-house, Devonshire-house, Lansdown-house, Sutherland-house (the most magnificent of all) etc. are, more or less, on the continental plan, though not generally built around courts. This plan eschews passages of all descriptions, except among the private parts of the dwelling. In this respect, an American house is the very opposite of a European house. We are nothing without passages, it being indispensable that every room should open on one; whereas, here the great point is to have as little to do with them as possible. Thus you quit the great staircase by a principal door, and find yourself in an ante-chamber; this communicates with one or two more rooms of the same character, gradually improving in ornaments and fixtures, until you enter a salon. Then comes a succession of apartments, of greater or less magnificence, according to circumstances until you are led entirely round the edifice, quitting it by a door on the great staircase again, opposite to the one by which you entered. In those cases in which there are courts, the principal rooms are ranged in this manner, en suite, on the exterior range, usually looking out on the gardens, while those within them, which look into the court, contain the bed-rooms, boudoir, eating-rooms, and perhaps the library. So tenacious are those, who lay any claim to gentility here, of the use of the ante-chambers, that I scarcely recollect a lodging of any sort, beyond the solitary chamber of some student, without, at least, one. They seem indispensable, and I think rightly, to all ideas of style, or even of comfort. I remember to have seen an amusing instance of the strength of this feeling in the case of the wife of a former French minister, at Washington. The building she inhabited was one of the ordinary American double houses, as they are called, with a passage through the centre, the stairs in the passage, and a short corridor, to communicate with the bed-rooms above. Off the end of this upper corridor, if, indeed, so short a transverse passage deserves the name, was partitioned a room of some eight feet by ten, as a bed-room. A room adjoining this, was converted into a boudoir and bed-room, for Madame de ——, by means of a silk screen. The usual door of the latter opened, of course, on the passage. In a morning call one day, I was received in the boudoir. Surprised to be carried up stairs on such an occasion, I was still more so to find myself taken through a small room, before I was admitted to the larger. The amount of it all was; that Madame de ——, accustomed to have many rooms, and to think it vulgar to receive in her great drawing-room of a morning, believing au premier, or up one pair of stairs, more genteel than the rez de chaussée, or the ground floor, and feeling the necessity of an ante-chamber as there was an abruptness in being at once admitted into the presence of a lady from a staircase, a sort of local brusquerie, that would suit her cook better than the wife of an envoy extraordinary, had contrived to introduce her guests through the little bed-room, at the end of the upstairs entry!

Of course, these hotels come in all sizes and levels of luxury. Some are no bigger than the largest homes in our town, while others are palaces. Since these buildings were originally designed to accommodate a single establishment, they have both main and secondary rooms; some feature summer and winter rooms. As is the case with places that emphasize elegance and grandeur, the reception rooms are connected, which is a building style in America derived from lower-end English homes. It's true that in London, many people of rank, possibly even nobility, live in houses that are not any larger or much nicer than the best of ours; however, one often finds rooms of decent size and height in these homes, more so than is common in America. But the grand homes of London, like Burlington House, Northumberland House, Devonshire House, Lansdown House, and Sutherland House (the most magnificent of all), mostly follow a continental layout, though they typically aren't arranged around courtyards. This layout avoids corridors except in the private parts of the house. In this aspect, an American house is the complete opposite of a European one. We rely heavily on hallways, as it's essential for every room to open into one; on the other hand, the goal here is to minimize their presence as much as possible. So, you exit the grand staircase through a main door and find yourself in a reception area; this connects to one or two more similarly styled rooms, gradually becoming more ornate until you enter a salon. Then, you encounter a series of rooms of varying degrees of grandeur, depending on the situation, leading you completely around the building, exiting again through a door on the grand staircase, opposite the one you came in. In cases where there are courtyards, the main rooms are typically arranged in this way, en suite, along the outer walls, usually with views of gardens, while the rooms facing the courtyard typically contain bedrooms, a small living area, dining rooms, and possibly a library. Those who aspire to gentility here are so adamant about using reception areas that I can hardly remember a rental, aside from a single room for some student, without at least one. They seem essential, rightly so, to any notion of style or even comfort. I recall an amusing example of this sentiment involving the wife of a former French minister in Washington. The place she lived in was a typical American double house, as they're called, with a central hallway, stairs in the hallway, and a short corridor leading to the bedrooms above. At the end of this upper corridor, if such a short passage can even be called that, there was a room about eight by ten feet that served as a bedroom. An adjacent room was turned into a boudoir and bedroom for Madame de ——, using a silk screen for separation. Naturally, the usual door of the latter opened onto the hallway. During a morning visit one day, I was welcomed in the boudoir. Surprised to find myself taken upstairs for such an occasion, I was even more surprised to be led through a small room before being allowed into the larger one. The gist of it was that Madame de ——, used to having many rooms and thinking it unrefined to receive guests in her large drawing-room in the morning, believed that being on the first floor, or up one flight of stairs, was more elegant than being on the ground floor, and felt the need for a reception area, as there was something abrupt about being immediately led into the presence of a lady straight from a staircase, a kind of local brusquerie that would suit her cook better than the wife of an extraordinary envoy, had cleverly arranged to bring her guests through the little bedroom at the end of the upstairs hallway!

From all this you will be prepared to understand some of the essential differences between a reception in Paris and one at New York, or even at Washington. The footman, or footmen, if there are two, ascend to the inner ante-chamber, with their masters and mistresses, where they receive the cloaks, shawls, over-coats, or whatever else has been used for the sake of mere warmth, and withdraw. If they are sent home, as is usually the case at dinners and evening parties, they return with the things at the hour ordered; but if the call be merely a passing one, or the guest means to go early to some other house, they either wait in the ante-chamber, or in a room provided for that purpose. The French are kind to their servants; much kinder than either the English, or their humble imitators, ourselves; and it is quite common to see, not only a good warm room, but refreshments, provided for the servants at a French party. In England, they either crowd the narrow passages and the door-way, or throng the street, as with us. In both countries, the poor coachmen sit for hours on their carriage-boxes, like so many ducks, in the drizzle and rain.

From all this, you'll understand some of the key differences between a gathering in Paris and one in New York or even Washington. The footman, or footmen if there are two, go up to the inner waiting area with their hosts, where they take the cloaks, shawls, overcoats, or anything else that was used for warmth, and then leave. If they’re sent home, which usually happens at dinners and evening parties, they return with the items at the scheduled time; but if the visit is just for a short time or the guest is planning to leave early for another place, they either wait in the waiting area or in a designated room. The French are kind to their servants—much kinder than the English or their lesser imitators, including us; it’s quite common to see not only a warm room but also refreshments for the servants at a French party. In England, they either crowd the narrow hallways and doorways or congest the street, just like us. In both countries, the poor coachmen sit for hours on their carriage boxes, like ducks, in the drizzle and rain.

The footman gives the names of his party to the maître d'hôtel, or the groom of the chambers, who, as he throws open the door of the first drawing-room, announces them in a loud voice. Announcing by means of a line of servants, is rarely, if ever, practised in France, though it is still done in England, at large parties, and in the great houses. Every one has heard the story of the attempt at Philadelphia, some forty years ago, to introduce the latter custom, when, by the awkwardness of a servant, a party was announced as "Master and Mistress, and the young ladies;" but you will smile when I tell you that the latter part of this style is precisely that which is most in vogue at Paris. A young lady here may be admired, she may be danced with, and she may even look and be looked at; but in society she talks little, is never loud or belleish, is always neat and simple in her attire, using very little jewelry, and has scarcely any other name than Mademoiselle. The usual mode of announcing is, "Monsieur le Comte et Madame la Comtesse d'une telle, avec leurs demoiselles;" or, in plain English, "The Count and Countess Such-a-one, with their daughters" This you will perceive is not so far, after all, from "Master and Mistress, and the young ladies." The English, more simple in some respects, and less so in others, usually give every name, though, in the use of titles, the utmost good taste is observed. Thus every nobleman below a duke is almost uniformly addressed and styled Lord A——, Lord B——, etc. and their wives, Ladies A——, and B——. Thus the Marquess of Lansdowne would, I think, always be addressed and spoken of, and even announced, merely as Lord Lansdowne. This, you will observe, is using the simplest possible style, and it appears to me that there is rather an affectation of simplicity in their ordinary intercourse, the term "My Lord" being hardly ever used, except by the tradesmen and domestics. The safest rule for an American, and certainly the one that good taste would dictate, is to be very sparing in his use of everything of this sort, since he cannot be always certain of the proper usages of the different countries he visits, and, so long as he avoids unnecessary affectations of republicanisms, and, if a gentleman, this he will do without any effort, simplicity is his cue. When I say avoids the affectations of republicanisms, I do not mean the points connected with principles, but those vulgar and underbred pretensions of ultra equality and liberalism, which, while they mark neither manliness nor a real appreciation of equal rights almost uniformly betray a want of proper training and great ignorance of the world. Whenever, however, any attempt is made to identify equality of rights and democratical institutions with vulgarity and truculency, as is sometimes attempted here, in the presence of Americans, and even in good company, it is the part of every gentleman of our country to improve the opportunity that is thus afforded him, to show it is a source of pride with him to belong to a nation in which a hundred men are not depressed politically, in order that one may be great; and also to show how much advantage, after all, he who is right in substance has over him who is substantially wrong, even in the forms of society, and in that true politeness which depends on natural justice. Such a principle, acted on systematically would soon place the gentlemen of America where they ought to be, and the gentlemen of other countries where, sooner or later, they must be content to descend, or to change their systems. That these things are not so, must be ascribed to our provincial habits, our remote situation, comparative insignificance, and chiefly to the circumstance that men's minds, trained under a different state of things, cannot keep even pace with the wonderful progress of the facts of the country.

The footman gives the names of his group to the maître d'hôtel, or the groom of the chambers, who, as he opens the door to the first drawing-room, announces them loudly. Announcing through a line of servants is rarely, if ever, done in France, but it’s still practiced in England at large parties and in big households. Everyone knows the story from about forty years ago in Philadelphia about the attempt to introduce this custom, when due to a servant's awkwardness, a party was announced as "Master and Mistress, and the young ladies;" but you’ll chuckle when I tell you that the latter part of that style is actually quite popular in Paris. A young lady here might be admired, danced with, and even looked at; but in society, she talks little, is never loud or flashy, is always neat and simple in her clothing, wears very little jewelry, and hardly has any name other than Mademoiselle. The usual way to announce people is, "Monsieur le Comte et Madame la Comtesse d'une telle, avec leurs demoiselles;" or, in plain English, "The Count and Countess Such-and-Such, with their daughters." You’ll see that this isn’t too far from "Master and Mistress, and the young ladies." The English, being simpler in some ways and more complex in others, tend to give every name, though they always show good taste in the use of titles. Thus every nobleman beneath a duke is generally addressed as Lord A——, Lord B——, etc., and their wives as Ladies A—— and B——. So the Marquess of Lansdowne would, I believe, always be called and spoken of, and even announced, simply as Lord Lansdowne. This, you’ll notice, is the simplest possible style, and it seems to me there’s a bit of a pretense of simplicity in their everyday interactions since the term "My Lord" is rarely used except by tradespeople and servants. The safest guideline for an American, and certainly the one that good taste suggests, is to be very careful in using such terms, as he can’t always be sure of the proper customs in the different countries he visits, and as long as he avoids unnecessary pretensions of republicanism, and as a gentleman, he will do this effortlessly, simplicity should be his guide. When I say avoids the affectations of republicanisms, I don’t mean the issues related to principles, but rather those vulgar and ill-bred pretensions of extreme equality and liberalism, which, while failing to convey manliness or a true understanding of equal rights, almost always reveal a lack of proper training and a significant ignorance of the world. However, whenever there is an attempt to link equality of rights and democratic institutions with vulgarity and aggression, as sometimes happens here, in front of Americans and even in good company, it is every gentleman's responsibility from our country to seize that opportunity to show his pride in being from a nation where a hundred men aren't politically repressed for one to achieve greatness; and also to demonstrate how much advantage he has over someone who is fundamentally wrong, even in social forms, and in the true politeness rooted in natural justice. Following such a principle systematically would soon place the gentlemen of America where they belong, and the gentlemen of other countries where they must eventually accept their decline or change their systems. The fact that this isn’t the case can be attributed to our provincial habits, our isolated location, our relative insignificance, and chiefly to the fact that people’s minds, shaped by a different environment, can’t keep pace with the remarkable progress of the realities in the country.

But all this time I have only got you into the outer salon of a French hotel. In order that we may proceed more regularly, we will return to the dinner given by our minister to Mr. Canning. Mr. Brown has an apartment in the Hotel Monaco, one of the best houses in Paris. The Prince of Monaco is the sovereign of a little territory of the same name, on the Gulf of Nice, at the foot of the maritime Alps. His states may be some six or eight miles square, and the population some six or eight thousand. The ancient name of the family is Grimaldi; but by some intermarriage or other, the Duke of Valentinois, a Frenchman, has become the prince. This little state is still independent, though under the especial protection of the King of Sardinia, and without foreign relations. It was formerly a common thing for the petty princes of Europe to own hotels at Paris. Thus the present Hotel of the Legion of Honour was built by a Prince of Salms; and the Princes of Monaco had two, one of which is occupied by the Austrian ambassador, and, in the other, our own minister, just at this moment, has an apartment. As I had been pressed especially to be early, I went a little before six, and finding no one in the drawing-room, I strolled into the bureau, where I found Mr. Shelden, the secretary of legation, who lived in the family, dressed for dinner. We chatted a little, and, on my admiring the magnificence of the rooms, he gave me the history of the hotel, as you have just heard it, with an additional anecdote, that may be worth relating.

But all this time, I've only taken you to the outer salon of a French hotel. To proceed more smoothly, let's go back to the dinner our minister hosted for Mr. Canning. Mr. Brown has an apartment in the Hotel Monaco, one of the best places in Paris. The Prince of Monaco is the ruler of a small territory with the same name, located on the Gulf of Nice, at the base of the maritime Alps. His territory is about six to eight miles square, with a population of around six to eight thousand people. The family name is Grimaldi, but through some intermarriage, the Duke of Valentinois, a Frenchman, has become the prince. This tiny state is still independent, though it’s under the special protection of the King of Sardinia and has no foreign relations. It used to be common for the small princes of Europe to own hotels in Paris. For example, the current Hotel of the Legion of Honour was built by a Prince of Salms, and the Princes of Monaco had two hotels, one of which is occupied by the Austrian ambassador, while our own minister currently has an apartment in the other. Since I was encouraged to arrive early, I went a little before six, and finding no one in the drawing room, I wandered into the office, where I found Mr. Shelden, the secretary of legation, who lived with the family and was dressed for dinner. We chatted for a bit, and when I mentioned how magnificent the rooms were, he shared the history of the hotel, just as you’ve heard it, along with an additional anecdote that might be worth telling.

"This hotel," said the secretary, "was once owned by M. de Talleyrand, and this bureau was probably the receptacle of state secrets of far greater importance than any that are connected with our own simple and unsupported claims for justice." He then went on to say, that the citizens of Hamburg, understanding it was the intention of Napoleon to incorporate their town with the empire, had recourse to a …ceur,[5] in order to prevent an act that, by destroying their neutrality, would annihilate their commerce. Four millions of francs were administered on this occasion, and of these, a large proportion, it is said, went to pay for the Hotel Monaco, which was a recent purchase of M. de Talleyrand. To the horror of the Hambourgeois, the money was scarcely paid, when the deprecated decree appeared, and every man of them was converted into a Frenchman by the stroke of a pen. The worthy burghers were accustomed to receive a quid pro quo for every florin they bestowed, failing of which, on the present occasion, they sent a deputation forthwith, to Napoleon, to reveal the facts, and to make their complaints. That great man little liked that any one but himself should peculate in his dominions, and, in the end, M. de Talleyrand was obliged to quit the Hotel Monaco. By some means with which I am unacquainted, most probably by purchase, however, the house is now the property of Madame Adelaide of Orleans.

"This hotel," said the secretary, "was once owned by M. de Talleyrand, and this desk probably held state secrets of much greater significance than any of our simple and unsupported claims for justice." He continued, explaining that the citizens of Hamburg, knowing Napoleon intended to annex their city to the empire, sought a …ceur,[5] to prevent an act that would destroy their neutrality and ruin their trade. On this occasion, four million francs were allocated, and a large portion of that, it is said, was used to pay for the Hotel Monaco, which was a recent acquisition of M. de Talleyrand. To the shock of the people of Hamburg, the money was barely paid when the unwanted decree was issued, and every one of them was turned into a French citizen with a single stroke of a pen. The honorable citizens were used to getting something in return for every florin they spent, and since that wasn’t the case this time, they quickly sent a delegation to Napoleon to report the situation and voice their complaints. That great man didn't like anyone else profiting in his domains, and eventually, M. de Talleyrand had to leave the Hotel Monaco. By some means that I don’t know, likely through purchase, the house is now owned by Madame Adelaide of Orleans.

[Footnote 5: the first three letters of the word cannot be correctly read on the original book]

[Footnote 5: the first three letters of the word can't be clearly read in the original book]

The rolling of a coach into the court was a signal for us to be at our posts, and we abandoned the bureau so lately occupied by the great father of diplomacy, for the drawing-room. I have already told you that this dinner was in honour of Mr. Canning, and, although diplomatic in one sense, it was not so strictly confined to the corps as to prevent a selection. This selection, in honour of the principal guest, had been made from the representatives of the great powers, Spain being the least important nation represented on the occasion, the republic of Switzerland excepted. I do not know whether the presence of the Swiss chargé-d'affaires was so intended or not, but it struck me as pointed and in good taste, for all the other foreign agents were ambassadors, with the exception of the Prussian, who was an Envoy Extraordinary. Diplomacy has its honorary gradations as well as a military corps; and, as you can know but little of such matters, I will explain them en passant. First in rank comes the Ambassador. This functionary is supposed to represent the personal dignity of the state that sends him. If a king, there is a room in his house that has a throne, and it is usual to see the chair reversed, in respect for its sanctity; and it appears to be etiquette to suspend the portrait of the sovereign beneath the canopy. The Envoy Extraordinary comes next, and then the Minister Plenipotentiary. Ordinarily, these two functions are united in the same individual. Such is the rank of Mr. Brown. The Minister Resident is a lower grade, and the Chargé-d'affaires the lowest of all. Inter se, these personages take rank according to this scale. Previously to the peace of 1814, the representative of one monarch laid claim to precede the representative of another, always admitting, however, of the validity of the foregoing rule. This pretension gave rise to a good deal of heartburning and contention. Nothing can, in itself, be of greater indifference whether A. or B. walk into the reception-room or to the dinner-table first; but when the idea of general superiority is associated with the act, the aspect of the thing is entirely changed. Under the old system, the ambassador of the Emperor, claimed precedence over all other ambassadors, and, I believe, the representatives of the kings of France had high pretensions also. Now there are great mutations in states. Spain, once the most important kingdom of Europe, has much less influence to-day than Prussia, a power of yesterday. Then the minister of the most insignificant prince claimed precedency over the representative of the most potent republic. This might have passed while republics were insignificant and dependent; but no one can believe that a minister of America, for instance, representing a state of fifty millions, as will be the case before long, would submit to such an extravagant pretension on the part of a minister of Wurtemburg, or Sardinia, or Portugal. He would not submit to such a pretension on the part of the minister of any power on earth.

The arrival of a coach at the court signaled us to take our places, and we left the office recently used by the esteemed father of diplomacy for the drawing-room. I've already mentioned that this dinner was held in honor of Mr. Canning, and while it was diplomatic in nature, it wasn't so exclusive to the corps as to prevent a curated guest list. This guest list, in honor of our main guest, included representatives from the major powers, with Spain being the least significant nation present, excluding the Republic of Switzerland. I'm not sure if the inclusion of the Swiss chargé-d'affaires was intentional, but I found it noteworthy and tasteful, considering that all the other foreign agents were ambassadors, except for the Prussian, who was an Envoy Extraordinary. Diplomacy has its own ranking system similar to a military hierarchy; and since you may not be familiar with these details, I’ll explain them briefly. The highest rank is the Ambassador. This official typically represents the personal dignity of the state they come from. If they are a king, there’s a room in their residence featuring a throne, which is often seen turned backward out of respect, and it’s customary to hang the sovereign's portrait beneath the canopy. Next in rank is the Envoy Extraordinary, followed by the Minister Plenipotentiary. Usually, these two roles are held by the same person, as is the case with Mr. Brown. The Minister Resident is a lower rank, and the Chargé-d'affaires is the lowest. Among themselves, they rank according to this hierarchy. Before the peace of 1814, the representative of one monarch would claim priority over another’s representative, though they usually acknowledged the general ranking system. This claim led to quite a bit of rivalry and conflict. It doesn’t really matter who walks into the reception room or to the dinner table first; however, when the notion of overall superiority is attached to this act, the situation changes entirely. Under the previous system, the ambassador of the Emperor claimed precedence over all other ambassadors, and the representatives of the kings of France had high claims as well. Now, significant changes have taken place among states. Spain, once the most powerful kingdom in Europe, holds much less influence today compared to Prussia, a power that emerged recently. Back then, the minister from the least important prince would claim precedence over the representative of the most powerful republic. This might have been acceptable when republics were weak and dependent, but no one would expect a minister from America, representing a state of fifty million people—as it will be soon—to submit to such an outrageous claim from a minister of Württemberg, Sardinia, or Portugal. They wouldn’t accept such a claim from any minister of any nation.

I do not believe that the Congress of Vienna had sufficient foresight, or sufficient knowledge of the actual condition of the United States, to foresee this difficulty; but there were embarrassing points to be settled among the European states themselves, and the whole affair was disposed of on a very discreet and equitable principle. It was decided that priority of standing at a particular court should regulate the rank between the different classes of agents at that particular court. Thus the ambassador longest at Paris precedes all the other ambassadors at Paris; and the same rule prevails with the ministers and chargés, according to their respective gradations of rank. A provision, however, was made in favour of the representative of the Pope, who, if of the rank of a nuncio, precedes all ambassadors. The concession has been made in honour of the church, which, as you must know, or ought to be told, is an interest much protected in all monarchies, statesmen being notoriously of tender consciences.

I don't think the Congress of Vienna had enough foresight or understanding of the actual state of the United States to predict this issue; however, there were complicated matters to address among the European states themselves, and the whole situation was handled with a pretty careful and fair approach. It was decided that the order of precedence at a specific court would determine the rank among the various representatives at that court. So, the ambassador who has been in Paris the longest ranks ahead of all other ambassadors there; and the same rule applies to ministers and chargés, based on their ranks. However, there was a special provision made for the Pope's representative, who, if they hold the rank of a nuncio, ranks above all ambassadors. This concession was made to honor the church, which, as you should know or be told, is a well-protected interest in all monarchies, as politicians tend to have very sensitive consciences.

The constant habit of meeting drills the diplomatic corps so well, that they go through the evolutions of etiquette as dexterously as a corps of regular troops perform their wheelings and countermarches. The first great point with them is punctuality; for, to people who sacrifice so much of it to forms, time gets to be precious. The roll of wheels was incessant in the court of the Hotel Monaco, from the time the first carriage entered until the last had set down its company. I know, as every man who reflects must know, that it is inherently ill-bred to be late anywhere; but I never before felt how completely it was high breeding to be as punctual as possible. The maître d'hôtel had as much as he could do to announce the company, who entered as closely after each other as decorum and dignity would permit. I presume one party waited a little for the others in the outer drawing-room, the reception being altogether in the inner room.

The constant habit of meeting trains the diplomatic corps so well that they navigate the rules of etiquette as skillfully as regular troops perform their formations. The first key point for them is punctuality; for people who sacrifice so much time to protocols, time becomes extremely valuable. The sound of carriages was nonstop in the courtyard of the Hotel Monaco, from when the first carriage drove in until the last one dropped off its guests. I realize, as anyone who thinks deeply must, that it is fundamentally rude to be late anywhere; but I had never fully appreciated how truly elegant it is to be as punctual as possible. The maître d'hôtel had his hands full announcing guests, who entered as closely together as decorum and dignity allowed. I assume one group waited a bit for the others in the outer drawing room, as the reception took place entirely in the inner room.

The Americans very properly came first. We were Mr. Gallatin, who was absent from London on leave, his wife and daughter, and a clergyman and his wife, and myself; Mrs. —— having declined the invitation on account of ill health. The announcing and the entrance of most of the company, especially as everybody was in high dinner-dress, the women in jewels and the men wearing all their orders, had something of the air of a scenic display. The effect was heightened by the magnificence of the hotel, the drawing-room in which we were collected being almost regal.

The Americans rightly took the lead. We were Mr. Gallatin, who was away from London on leave, his wife and daughter, a clergyman and his wife, and me; Mrs. —— had turned down the invitation due to health issues. The announcement and arrival of most of the guests, especially since everyone was dressed to the nines—with women in jewelry and men in their full regalia—had a bit of a theatrical vibe. The grandness of the hotel added to this effect, with the drawing-room where we gathered being almost royal.

The first person who appeared was a handsome, compact, well-built, gentleman-like little man, who was announced as the Duke of Villa Hermosa, the Spanish ambassador. He was dressed with great simplicity and beauty, having, however, the breast of his coat covered with stars, among which I recognized, with historical reverence, that of the Golden Fleece. He came alone, his wife pleading indisposition for her absence. The Prussian minister and his wife came next. Then followed Lord and Lady Granville, the representatives of England. He was a large, well-looking man, but wanted the perfect command of movement and manner that so much distinguish his brethren in diplomacy: as for mere physical stuff, he and our own minister, who stands six feet four in his stockings, would make material enough for all the rest of the corps. He wore the star of the Bath. The Austrian ambassador and ambassadress followed, a couple of singularly high air, and a good tone of manner. He is a Hungarian, and very handsome; she a Veronese, I believe, and certainly a woman admirably adapted for her station. They had hardly made their salutations before M. le Comte et Mad. la Comtesse de Villèle were announced. Here, then, we had the French prime minister. As the women precede the men into a drawing-room here, knowing how to walk and to curtsey alone, I did not, at first, perceive the great man, who followed so close to his wife's skirts as to be nearly hid. But he was soon flying about the room at large, and betrayed himself immediately to be a fidget. Instead of remaining stationary, or nearly so as became his high quality, he took the initiative in compliments, and had nearly every diplomatic man walking apart in the adjoining room, in a political aside, in less than twenty minutes. He had a countenance of shrewdness, and I make little doubt is a better man in a bureau than in a drawing-room. His colleague, the foreign minister, M. de Damas, and his wife, came next. He was a large, heavy-looking personage, that I suspect throws no small part of the diplomacy on the shoulders of the premier; though he had more the manner of good society than his colleague. He has already exchanged his office for that of governor of the heir presumptive, as I have already stated. There was a pause, when a quiet, even-paced, classical-looking man, in the attire of an ecclesiastic, appeared in the door, and was announced as "My Lord the Nuncio." He was then an archbishop, and wore the usual dress of his rank; but I have since met him at an evening party with a red hat; under his arm, the Pope having recalled him, and raised him to that dignity. He is now Cardinal Macchi. He was a priestly and an intellectual-looking personage, and, externals considered, well suited to his station. He wore a decoration or two, as well as most of the others.

The first person to arrive was a handsome, well-built little man who was introduced as the Duke of Villa Hermosa, the Spanish ambassador. He was dressed simply yet elegantly, with his coat adorned with decorations, including the Golden Fleece, which I recognized with respect. He came alone, as his wife was unwell. Next came the Prussian minister and his wife, followed by Lord and Lady Granville, representing England. He was a tall, good-looking man but lacked the polished movement and demeanor typical of his diplomatic peers; physically, he and our own minister, who is six feet four in his shoes, could match the rest of the group combined. He wore the star of the Bath. Following them were the Austrian ambassador and ambassadress, a couple with a distinctly elegant presence. He was a handsome Hungarian, and she was a Veronese woman, perfectly suited for her role. They had barely finished greeting everyone when M. le Comte and Mad. la Comtesse de Villèle were announced. Here was the French prime minister. Since the women enter the drawing room before the men, knowing how to walk and curtsey on their own, I initially didn’t notice the important figure following closely behind his wife. But it wasn’t long before he was moving around the room, revealing himself as an energetic presence. Rather than staying still, as was expected for someone of his high rank, he took the lead in compliments and had most of the diplomatic men chatting in an adjacent room within twenty minutes. He had a shrewd expression, and I doubt he’s more effective in social settings than he is in the office. Next were his colleague, the foreign minister, M. de Damas, and his wife. He was a large, heavy-looking man, who I suspect leaves much of the diplomatic work to the prime minister; however, he had a more refined demeanor than his colleague. He has already transitioned to the role of governor for the heir presumptive, as I mentioned earlier. There was a moment of silence before a calm, classic-looking man dressed as an ecclesiastic appeared in the doorway and was introduced as "My Lord the Nuncio." He was an archbishop, wearing the typical attire of his rank; however, I later saw him at an evening gathering with a red hat, having been recalled by the Pope and elevated to that position. He is now Cardinal Macchi. He had a priestly and intellectual appearance, and considering appearances, was well-suited to his role. He also wore a couple of decorations like most of the others.

"My Lord Clanricarde and Mr. Canning" came next, and the great man, followed by his son-in-law, made his appearance. He walked into the room with the quiet aplomb of a man accustomed to being lionised; and certainly, without being of striking, he was of very pleasing appearance. His size was ordinary, but his frame was compact and well built, neither too heavy nor too light for his years, but of just the proportions to give one the idea of a perfect management of the machine. His face was agreeable, and his eye steady and searching. He and M. de Villèle were the very opposites in demeanour, though, after all, it was easy to see that the Englishman had the most latent force about him. One was fidgety, and the other humorous; for, with all his command of limb and gesture, nothing could be more natural than the expression of Mr. Canning, I may have imagined that I detected some of his wit, from a knowledge of the character of his mind. He left the impression, however, of a man whose natural powers were checked by a trained and factitious deference to the rank of those with whom he associated. Lord Granville, I thought, treated him with a sort of affectionate deference; and, right or wrong, I jumped to the conclusion, that the English ambassador was a straight-forward, good fellow at the bottom, and one very likely to badger the fidgetty premier, by his steady determination to do what was right. I thought M. de Damas, too, looked like an honest man. God forgive me, if I do injustice to any of these gentlemen!

"My Lord Clanricarde and Mr. Canning" came next, and the important figure, followed by his son-in-law, made his entrance. He walked into the room with the calm confidence of a man used to being celebrated; and while he wasn't striking, he had a very pleasant appearance. His build was average, but he was compact and well-proportioned, neither too heavy nor too light for his age, just right to give the impression of someone in perfect control of himself. His face was friendly, and his gaze was steady and probing. He and M. de Villèle had completely different demeanors, though it was clear that the Englishman had a lot of hidden strength. One was restless, while the other was more humorous; despite being able to move with grace and expression, Mr. Canning's demeanor felt very natural. I might have sensed some of his wit, considering what I knew about his personality. However, he gave off the impression of a man whose natural abilities were held back by a cultivated and somewhat artificial respect for the status of those around him. Lord Granville, I thought, treated him with a sort of warm respect; and, right or wrong, I concluded that the English ambassador was essentially a straightforward, good guy at heart, likely to challenge the anxious prime minister with his firm commitment to doing what was right. I also felt that M. de Damas seemed like an honest man. God forgive me if I misjudge any of these gentlemen!

All this time, I have forgotten Count Pozzo di Borgo, the Russian ambassador. Being a bachelor, he came alone. It might have been fancy, but I thought he appeared more at his ease under the American roof than any of his colleagues. The perfect good understanding between our own government and that of Russia extends to their representatives, and, policy or not, we are better treated by them than by any other foreign ministers. This fact should be known and appreciated, for as one citizen of the republic, however insignificant, I have no notion of being blackguarded and vituperated half a century, and then cajoled into forgetfulness, at the suggestions of fear and expediency, as circumstances render our good-will of importance. Let us at least show that we are not mannikins to be pulled about for the convenience and humours of others, but that we know what honest words are, understand the difference between civility and abuse, and have pride enough to resent contumely, when, at least, we feel it to be unmerited. M. Pozzo is a handsome man, of good size and a fine dark eye, and has a greater reputation for talents than any other member of the diplomatic corps now at Paris. He is by birth a Corsican, and, I have heard it said, distantly related to Bonaparte. This may be true, Corsica being so small a country; just as some of us are related to everybody in West Jersey. Our party now consisted of the prime minister, the secretary of foreign affairs, the Austrian and English ambassadors, and the Prussian minister, with their wives,—the Nuncio, the Russian and Spanish ambassadors, the Swiss chargé-d'affaires, Mr. Canning, Lord Clanricarde, —Mr. Mrs. and Miss Gallatin, and the other Americans already mentioned, or twenty-five in all.

All this time, I’ve forgotten Count Pozzo di Borgo, the Russian ambassador. Being single, he came alone. It might have been just a feeling, but I thought he seemed more relaxed under the American roof than any of his colleagues. The solid relationship between our government and Russia extends to their representatives, and, whether by design or not, we’re treated better by them than by any other foreign ministers. This should be recognized and valued, because as a citizen of the republic, no matter how insignificant I may be, I have no intention of being insulted and abused for half a century, then sweet-talked into forgetting it, just because fear and convenience dictate that our goodwill is important. Let’s at least show that we’re not mere puppets to be manipulated for the comfort and whims of others, but that we know what honest words are, can distinguish between politeness and insult, and have enough pride to stand up against disrespect when we feel it’s undeserved. M. Pozzo is a handsome man, of good stature and with striking dark eyes, and he’s better known for his skills than any other member of the diplomatic corps currently in Paris. He’s originally from Corsica, and I’ve heard he might be distantly related to Bonaparte. This could very well be true, given how small Corsica is; just like some of us are connected to almost everyone in West Jersey. Our party now included the prime minister, the secretary of foreign affairs, the Austrian and English ambassadors, the Prussian minister and their spouses, the Nuncio, the Russian and Spanish ambassadors, the Swiss chargé-d'affaires, Mr. Canning, Lord Clanricarde, Mr. Mrs. and Miss Gallatin, and the other Americans already mentioned, totaling about twenty-five people.

If I had been struck with the rapid and business-like manner in which the company entered, I was amused with the readiness with which they paired off when dinner was announced. It was like a coup de théâtre, every man and woman knowing his or her exact rank and precedency, and the time when to move. This business of getting out of a drawing-room to a dinner-table is often one of difficulty, though less frequently in France than in most other European countries, on account of the admirable tact of the women, who seldom suffer a knotty point to get the ascendancy, but, by choosing the gentlemen for themselves, settle the affair off hand. From their decision, of course, there is no appeal. In order that in your simplicity you may not mistake the importance of this moment, I will relate an anecdote of what lately occurred at a dinner given by an English functionary in Holland.

If I was impressed by how quickly and efficiently the group came together, I found it amusing how easily they paired off when dinner was announced. It was like a coup de théâtre, with every man and woman knowing exactly their rank and when to move. Getting from a drawing-room to a dinner table can be tricky, though it's not as often the case in France as in other European countries, thanks to the excellent tact of the women, who usually avoid complications by choosing their partners themselves, settling things on the spot. When they decide, there's no arguing. To make sure you understand how important this moment is, let me share an anecdote about a recent dinner hosted by an English official in Holland.

When William invaded England, in 1688, he took with him many Dutch nobles, some of whom remained, and became English peers. Among others, he created one of his followers an Irish earl; but choosing to return to Holland, this person was afterwards known as the Count de ——, although his Irish rank was always acknowledged. It happened that the wife of the descendant of this person was present at the entertainment in question. When dinner was announced, the company remarked that the master of the house was in a dilemma. There was much consultation, and a delay of near half an hour before the matter was decided. The debated point was, whether Madame de —— was to be considered as a Dutch or an Irish countess. If the latter, there were English ladies present who were entitled to precede her; if the former, as a stranger, she might get that advantage herself. Luckily for the rights of hospitality, the Dutch lady got the best of it.

When William invaded England in 1688, he brought along many Dutch nobles, some of whom stayed and became English peers. Among them, he made one of his followers an Irish earl; however, this person chose to return to Holland and was later known as the Count de ——, although his Irish title was always recognized. Interestingly, the wife of this person's descendant was at the event in question. When dinner was announced, the guests noticed that the host was in a tough spot. There was a lot of discussion, and it took nearly half an hour before they reached a decision. The main issue was whether Madame de —— should be treated as a Dutch or an Irish countess. If she was considered Irish, there were English ladies present who would take precedence over her; if she was seen as Dutch, she might have the advantage of being a stranger. Fortunately for the sake of hospitality, the Dutch lady came out on top.

These things sound absurd, and sometimes they are so; but this social drilling, unless carried to extremes, is not without its use. In America, I have always understood that, on such occasions, silent laws of etiquette exist in all good company, which are founded on propriety and tact. The young give way to the old, the undistinguished to the distinguished, and he who is at home to the stranger. These rules are certainly the most rational, and in the best taste, when they can be observed, and, on the whole, they lead perhaps to the fewest embarrassments; always so, if there happen to be none but the well-bred present, since seats become of little consideration where no importance is attached to them. I confess to some manoeuvring in my time, to get near, or away from a fire, out of a draught, or next some agreeable woman; but the idea whether I was at the head or the foot of the table never crossed my mind: and yet here, where they do mean the salt to come into the account, I begin to take care that they do not "bite their thumbs" at me. Two or three little things have occurred in my presence, which show that all our people do not even understand the ways of their own good society. A very young man lately, under the impression that gallantry required it, led one of the most distinguished women in the room to the table, merely because he happened to be next her, at the moment dinner was announced. This was certainly a failure even in American etiquette, every woman being more disposed to appreciate the delicacy and respect which should have induced such a person to give place to one of higher claims, than to prize the head-over-heels assiduity that caused the boy to forget himself. Sentiment should be the guide on such occasions, and no man is a gentleman until his habits are brought completely in subjection to its dictates, in all matters of this sort.

These things sound ridiculous, and sometimes they are; but this social practice, unless taken to extremes, does have its benefits. In America, I've always understood that, on such occasions, unspoken rules of etiquette exist in all good company, based on propriety and tact. Young people give way to older ones, the less notable yield to the more noteworthy, and the host gives preference to guests. These rules are definitely the most sensible and tasteful when they can be followed, and overall, they likely lead to the fewest awkward moments; especially if only well-mannered people are present since seating becomes less important when it's not treated as such. I admit to some strategizing in my time to get closer or farther from a fire, out of a draft, or next to a pleasant woman; but the notion of whether I was at the head or foot of the table never crossed my mind: yet here, where they do consider the salt important, I start to make sure they're not "biting their thumbs" at me. A couple of small things have happened in my presence that show not everyone understands the norms of good society. A very young man recently, thinking that gallantry required it, led one of the most distinguished women at the table simply because he happened to be next to her when dinner was announced. This was definitely a mistake even in American etiquette, as every woman would be more inclined to appreciate the delicacy and respect that should have prompted him to yield to someone with greater claims than to value the eager eagerness that made him forget himself. Sentiment should guide behavior in these situations, and no man is a gentleman until his actions fully align with its principles in all such matters.

There was very little sentiment, however, in marshalling the company at the dinner given to Mr. Canning. I will not undertake to say that all the guests were invited to meet this gentleman, and that he had been asked to name a day, as is usual when it is intended to pay an especial compliment; but I was asked to meet him, and I understood that the dinner was in his honour. Diplomatic etiquette made short work of the matter, notwithstanding, for the doors were hardly thrown open, before all the privileged vanished, with a quickness that was surprising. The minister took Madame de Villèle; M. de Villèle, Mrs. Brown; M. de Damas, the wife of the oldest ambassador; and the Nuncio, Madame de Damas: after which, the ambassadors and ministers took each other's wives in due order, and with a promptitude that denoted great practice. Even the charge disappeared, leaving the rest of us to settle matters among ourselves as well as we could. Mr. Canning, Mr. Gallatin, Lord Clanricarde, the divine, the secretary, and myself, were left with only the wife of the clergyman and Miss Gallatin. As a matter of course, the Americans, feeling themselves at home, made signs for the two Englishmen to precede them, and Mr. Canning offered his arm to Mrs. ——, and Lord Clanricarde, his to Miss Gallatin. Here occurred a touch of character that is worthy to be mentioned, as showing of how very little account an American, male or female, is in the estimation of a European, and how very arbitrary are the laws of etiquette among our English cousins. Mr. Canning actually gave way to his son-in-law, leaving the oldest of the two ladies to come after the youngest, because, as a marquis, his son-in-law took precedence of a commoner! This was out of place in America, at least, where the parties were, by a fiction in law, if not in politeness, and it greatly scandalized all our Yankee notions of propriety. Mrs. —— afterwards told me that he apologized for the circumstance, giving Lord Clanricarde's rank as the reason. "Sempereadem," or "worse and worse," as my old friend O——n used to translate it. What became of the precedency of the married lady all this time? you will be ready to ask. Alas! she was an American, and had no precedency. The twelve millions may not settle this matter as it should be; but, take my word for it, the "fifty millions" will. Insignificant as all this is, or rather ought to be, your grandchildren and mine will live to see the mistake rectified. How much better would it be for those who cannot stop the progress of events, by vain wishes and idle regrets, to concede the point gracefully, and on just principles, than to have their cherished prejudices broken down by dint of sheer numbers and power!

There was very little sentiment in gathering the company at the dinner for Mr. Canning. I can’t say that all the guests were invited specifically to meet him or that he was asked to choose a date, as is typical when giving a special honor; but I was invited to meet him, and I understood the dinner was in his honor. Diplomatic protocol took care of things quickly, though, because the doors were barely opened before all the important people disappeared with surprising speed. The minister took Madame de Villèle; M. de Villèle took Mrs. Brown; M. de Damas took the wife of the oldest ambassador; and the Nuncio took Madame de Damas. After that, the ambassadors and ministers paired off with each other's wives in order, efficiently and with great experience. Even the charge d'affaires left, leaving the rest of us to manage as best we could. Mr. Canning, Mr. Gallatin, Lord Clanricarde, the clergyman, the secretary, and I were left with only the clergyman's wife and Miss Gallatin. Naturally, the Americans, feeling right at home, motioned for the two Englishmen to go ahead, and Mr. Canning offered his arm to Mrs. ——, while Lord Clanricarde offered his to Miss Gallatin. Here’s a notable moment that shows how little regard a European has for an American, whether male or female, and highlights the arbitrary rules of etiquette among our English cousins. Mr. Canning actually yielded to his son-in-law, leaving the older of the two ladies to follow the younger, because, as a marquis, his son-in-law had precedence over a commoner! This behavior would be unacceptable in America, at least, where the groups were, legally speaking, if not in terms of politeness, and it greatly upset our American sense of propriety. Mrs. —— later told me that he apologized for the situation, citing Lord Clanricarde's rank as the reason. "Sempereadem," or "worse and worse," as my old friend O——n used to say. What about the precedence of the married lady during all this? you might wonder. Alas! she was an American and had no precedence. The twelve million may not settle this issue properly, but trust me, the "fifty million" will. As insignificant as this seems, or rather should seem, our grandchildren will see this mistake corrected. How much better for those who can’t stop the march of events with empty wishes and pointless regrets to concede gracefully, based on fair principles, than to have their cherished biases dismantled by sheer numbers and power!

The dinner itself was, like every dinner that is given at Paris, beautiful in decoration, admirable in its order, and excellent in viands, or rather, in its dishes; for it is the cookery and not the staple articles that form the boast of the French kitchen. As you are notable in your own region for understanding these matters, I must say a word touching the gastric science as it is understood here. A general error exists in America on the subject of French cookery, which is not highly seasoned, but whose merit consists in blending flavours and in arranging compounds, in such a manner as to produce, at the same time, the lightest and most agreeable food. A lady who, from her public situation, receives once a week, for the entire year, and whose table has a reputation, assured me lately, that all the spices consumed annually in her kitchen did not cost her a franc. The effect of a French dinner is its principal charm. One of reasonably moderate habits, rises from the table with a sense of enjoyment, that, to a stranger, at least, is sometimes startling. I have, on several occasions, been afraid I was relaxing into the vices of a gourmet, if, indeed, vices they can be called. The gourmand is a beast, and there is nothing to be said in his favour; but, after all, I incline to the opinion that no one is the worse for a knowledge of what is agreeable to the palate. Perhaps no one of either sex is thoroughly trained, or properly bred, without being tant soit peu de gourmet. The difference between sheer eating, and eating with tact and intelligence, is so apparent as to need no explanation. A dinner here does not oppress one. The wine neither intoxicates nor heats, and the frame of mind and body in which one is left, is precisely that best suited to intellectual and social pleasures. I make no doubt, that one of the chief causes of the French being so agreeable as companions, is, in a considerable degree, owing to the admirable qualities of their table. A national character may emanate from a kitchen. Roast beef, bacon, pudding, and beer, and port, will make a different man, in time, from Chateau Margau, côtelettes, consommés, and soufflés. The very name of vol au vent is enough to make one walk on air!

The dinner itself was, like every dinner held in Paris, beautifully decorated, well-organized, and excellent in its dishes; because it’s the cooking, not just the ingredients, that makes French cuisine exceptional. Since you’re known in your area for understanding these things, I want to say a bit about the culinary art as it’s practiced here. There’s a common misconception in America about French cooking, which isn’t heavily seasoned but focuses on blending flavors and arranging ingredients in a way that creates both light and delightful dishes. A lady who hosts weekly dinners throughout the year and has a reputation for her table recently told me that all the spices used in her kitchen over the year cost her less than a franc. The effect of a French dinner is its main appeal. Someone with moderate habits can leave the table feeling refreshed, which can be surprising, at least to an outsider. There have been times when I feared I was succumbing to the habits of a gourmet, if those can truly be considered bad habits. The gourmand is gluttonous, and there’s really no good to say about him; however, I believe that knowing what pleases the palate can only be beneficial. Perhaps no one, regardless of gender, is truly refined or well-mannered without being at least a little bit of a gourmet. The distinction between eating for sustenance and eating with appreciation and intelligence is so clear it needs no explanation. A dinner here doesn’t weigh you down. The wine neither intoxicates nor warms you up, and the state of mind and body that you are left in is exactly right for enjoying intellectual and social pleasures. I’m convinced that one of the main reasons the French are such pleasant companions is largely due to their remarkable dining culture. A national character can arise from its cuisine. Roast beef, bacon, pudding, beer, and port will shape a different person over time than Chateau Margau, côtelettes, consommés, and soufflés. Just the name vol au vent is enough to lift one's spirits!

Seriously, these things have more influence than may be, at a glance, imagined. The first great change I could wish to make in America, would be to see a juster appreciation of the substance, and less importance attached to outward forms, in moral things. The second would be, to create a standard of greatness and distinction that should be independent, or nearly independent, of money. The next, a more reasoning and original tone of thought as respects our own distinctive principles and distinctive situation, with a total indifference to the theories that have been broached to sustain an alien and an antagonist system, in England; and the last (the climax), a total reform in the kitchen! If I were to reverse the order of these improvements, I am not certain the three last might not follow as a consequence of the first. After our people have been taught to cook a dinner, they ought also to be taught how to eat it.

Seriously, these things have more influence than you might think at first. The first big change I would want to see in America is a fairer understanding of what really matters and less emphasis on appearances in moral matters. The second would be to establish a standard of greatness and distinction that is mostly, if not entirely, independent of money. Next, I would encourage a more thoughtful and original perspective regarding our unique principles and distinctive situation, with complete disregard for the theories put forth to support a foreign and opposing system in England; and the final point (the most important), a complete reform in the kitchen! If I were to rearrange these improvements, I believe the last three might naturally follow from the first. Once our people learn to cook a meal, they should also be taught how to enjoy it.

Our entertainment lasted the usual hour and a half; and, as one is all this time eating, and there are limits to the capacity of a stomach, a part of the lightness and gaiety with which one rises from a French dinner ought to be attributed to the time that is consumed at the table. The different ingredients have opportunity to dispose of themselves in their new abode, and are not crowded together pell-mell, or like papers and books in —— library, as I think they must be after a transatlantic meal. As for the point of a mere consumption of food, I take it the palm must be given to your Frenchman. I had some amusement to-day in watching the different countries. The Americans were nearly all through their dinner by the time the first course was removed. All that was eaten afterwards was literally, with them, pure makeweight, though they kept a hungry look to the last. The English seemed fed even before the dinner was begun; and, although the continental powers in general had the art of picking till they got to the finger-bowls, none really kept up the ball but the Frenchmen. It happened to be Friday, and I was a little curious to discover whether the Nuncio came to these places with a dispensation in his pocket. He sat next to Madame de Damas, as good a Catholic as himself, and I observed them helping themselves to several suspicious-looking dishes during the first course. I ought to have told you before, that one rarely, almost never, helps his neighbour, at a French entertainment. The dishes are usually put on the table, removed by the servants to be carved in succession, and handed to the guests to help themselves. When the service is perfect, every dish is handed to each guest. In the great houses, servants out of livery help to the different plats, servants in livery holding the dishes, sauces, etc., and changing the plates. I believe it is strictly haut ton for the servants in livery to do nothing but assist those out of livery. In America it is thought stylish to give liveries; in Europe those who keep most servants out of livery are in the highest mode, since these are always a superior class of menials. The habits of this quarter of the world give servants a very different estimation from that which they hold with us. Nobles of high rank are employed about the persons of princes; and, although, in this age, they perform no strictly menial offices, or only on great occasions, they are, in theory, the servitors of the body. Nobles have been even employed by nobles; and it is still considered an honour for the child of a physician, or a clergyman, or a shopkeeper, in some parts of Europe, to fill a high place in the household of a great noble. The body servant, or the gentleman, as he is sometimes called even in England, of a man of rank, looks down upon a mechanic as his inferior. Contrary to all our notions as all this is, it is strictly reasonable, when the relative conditions, information, habits, and characters of the people are considered. But servants here are divided into many classes; for some are scullions, and some are entrusted with the keys. It follows that those who maintain most of the higher class, who are never in livery, maintain the highest style. To say, he keeps a servant out of livery, means, that he keeps a better sort of domestic. Mere footmen always wear it; the maître d'hôtel, or groom of the chambers, and the valet, never.

Our entertainment lasted the usual hour and a half, and since one spends all this time eating, and there are limits to how much one can eat, part of the lightness and cheerfulness with which one leaves a French dinner should be credited to the time spent at the table. The different ingredients have a chance to settle in their new place and aren’t crammed together haphazardly like papers and books in a messy library, which I imagine must happen after a meal across the ocean. When it comes to the pure act of eating, I think the French definitely take the prize. I found it amusing today to observe the different nationalities. The Americans were mostly done with their dinner by the time the first course was cleared away. Everything they ate afterwards was just extra, even though they maintained a hungry look until the end. The English seemed to be full even before dinner started; and while most continental diners were good at picking until they reached the finger bowls, only the French really kept the meal going. It happened to be Friday, and I was curious to see if the Nuncio came to these places with a dispensation in his pocket. He sat next to Madame de Damas, a good Catholic like himself, and I noticed them helping themselves to several questionable dishes during the first course. I should have mentioned earlier that it’s rare, almost never, for someone to help their neighbor at a French meal. The dishes are usually placed on the table, taken away by the servants to be carved in turn, and then handed to the guests to serve themselves. When the service is perfect, every dish is passed to each guest. In the grand houses, servants not in uniform serve the different courses, while those in uniform hold the dishes, sauces, etc., and change the plates. I believe it’s considered very fashionable for the servants in uniform to do nothing but assist those not in uniform. In America, it’s seen as stylish to have liveried servants; in Europe, those who have the most servants out of uniform are considered the most upscale, as these are always of a higher class of domestic workers. The customs of this part of the world give servants a very different status than they have with us. High-ranking nobles are appointed to serve princes; and although, in this day and age, they don’t perform strictly menial tasks, or only on special occasions, they are, in theory, the aides to the household. Nobles have even served other nobles; and it’s still viewed as an honor for the child of a doctor, clergyman, or shopkeeper in some parts of Europe to hold a high position in a noble’s household. The personal servant, or the “gentleman,” as he’s sometimes called even in England, of a man of rank looks down on a tradesman as his inferior. Although this is contrary to all our beliefs, it actually makes sense when you consider the relative conditions, knowledge, customs, and characters of the people involved. But here, servants are divided into many classes; some are kitchen workers, while others have important responsibilities. This means that those who employ the most from the higher class, who are never in uniform, maintain the highest status. To say someone keeps a servant out of livery means they have a better type of domestic help. Regular footmen always wear uniforms; the head waiter, or the groom of the chambers, and the valet do not.

But to return to the dispensation, I made it a point to taste every dish that had been partaken of by the Nuncio and his neighbour; and I found that they were all fish; but fish so treated, that they could hardly know what to think of themselves. You may remember, however, that an Archbishop of Paris was sufficiently complaisant to declare a particular duck, of which one of Louis the Sixteenth's aunts was fond, to be fish, and, of course, fit to be eaten on fast-days.

But back to the meal, I made sure to try every dish that the Nuncio and his neighbor had eaten; and I found that they were all fish, but prepared in a way that they could hardly recognize themselves. You might recall, though, that an Archbishop of Paris was kind enough to declare a certain duck, which one of Louis the Sixteenth's aunts liked, to be fish, and therefore, suitable to eat on fast days.

The fasting of these people would strike you as singular; for I verily believe they eat more of a fast-day than on any other. We engaged a governess for the girls not long after our arrival, and she proved to be a bigoted Catholic, a furious royalist, and as ignorant as a calf. She had been but a few weeks in the house, when I detected her teaching her élèves to think Washington an unpardonable rebel, La Fayette a monster, Louis XVI. a martyr, and all heretics in the high road to damnation. There remained no alternative but to give her a quarter's salary, and to get rid of her. By the way, this woman was of a noble family, and as such received a small pension from the court. But I kept her fully a month longer than I think I otherwise should, to see her eat on fast-days. Your aunt had the consideration invariably to order fish for her, and she made as much havoc among them as a pike. She always commenced the Friday with an extra allowance of fruit, which she was eating all the morning; and at dinner she contrived to eat half the vegetables and all the fish. One day, by mistake, the soup happened to be gras instead of maigre, and, after she had swallowed a large plateful, I was malicious enough to express my regrets at the mistake. I really thought the poor woman was about to disgorge on the spot; but by dint of consolation she managed to spare us this scene. So good an occasion offering, I ventured to ask her why she fasted at all, as I did not see it made any great difference in the sum total of her bodily nutriment. She assured me that I did not understand the matter. The fruit was merely a "rafraîchissant" and so counted for nothing; and as for the fish and vegetables, I might possibly think them very good eating, and, for that matter, so did she, on Thursdays and Saturdays; but no sooner did Friday come than she longed for meat. The merit of the thing consisted, therefore, more in denying her appetite than in going without food. I tried hard to persuade her to take a côtelette with me; but the proposition made her shudder, though she admitted that she envied me every mouthful I swallowed. The knowledge of this craving did not take away my appetite.

The fasting of these people would seem strange to you; I truly believe they eat more on fast days than on any other day. We hired a governess for the girls shortly after we arrived, and she turned out to be a narrow-minded Catholic, a passionate royalist, and as clueless as a calf. After just a few weeks, I caught her teaching her students to think of Washington as an unpardonable rebel, La Fayette as a monster, Louis XVI as a martyr, and all heretics as doomed. I had no choice but to pay her a quarter's salary and let her go. By the way, this woman came from a noble family and received a small pension from the court. However, I kept her for a whole month longer than I probably would have just to watch her eat on fast days. Your aunt always thoughtfully ordered fish for her, and she devoured them like a pike. She would start every Friday with an extra serving of fruit, eating it all morning; and at dinner, she somehow managed to consume half the vegetables and all the fish. One day, by mistake, the soup was rich instead of light, and after she had eaten a large bowl, I couldn't help but express my regrets about the mistake. I really thought the poor woman was about to vomit on the spot, but after some comforting, she managed to avoid that scene. Taking advantage of the situation, I asked her why she fasted at all since it didn’t seem to make much difference in how much food she consumed. She assured me that I didn't understand. The fruit was merely a "refresher" and didn’t count, and as for the fish and vegetables, I might think they were great meals—and she did, on Thursdays and Saturdays; but as soon as Friday came, she craved meat. So, the real merit was in denying her appetite rather than actually going without food. I tried hard to persuade her to have a chop with me, but the suggestion made her shudder, even though she admitted that she envied every bite I took. Knowing about her craving didn’t lessen my appetite.

Lest you should suppose that I am indulging in the vulgar English slang against French governesses, I will add, that our own was the very worst, in every respect, I ever saw, in or out of France; and that I have met with ladies in this situation every way qualified, by principles, attainments, manners, and antecedents, to be received with pleasure in the best company of Europe.

Lest you think I'm just using common slang against French governesses, I should say that our own was the absolute worst I've ever seen, both in France and elsewhere. I've encountered women in this role who were fully qualified, in terms of their values, skills, manners, and backgrounds, to be welcomed in the finest social circles in Europe.

Our connives in the Hotel Monaco soon disappeared after the chasse-café, leaving none but the Americans behind them. Men and women retired as they came; the latter, however, taking leave, as is always required by the punctilios of your sex, except at very large and crowded parties, and even then properly; and the former, if alone, getting away as quietly as possible. The whole affair was over before nine o'clock, at which hour the diplomatic corps was scattered all through Paris.

Our connives in the Hotel Monaco quickly left after the chasse-café, leaving only the Americans behind. Men and women exited as they arrived; however, the women took their leave, as is always expected of your gender, except at very large and crowded gatherings, and even then, it's done properly; while the men, if alone, slipped away as quietly as they could. The whole event wrapped up before nine o'clock, by which time the diplomatic corps had spread out all across Paris.

Previously to this dispersion, however, Mr. Gallatin did me the favour to present me to Mr. Canning. The conversation was short, and was chiefly on America. There was a sore part in his feelings in consequence of a recent negotiation, and he betrayed it. He clearly does not love us; but what Englishman does? You will be amused to hear that, unimportant in other respects as this little conversation was, it has been the means of affecting the happiness of two individuals of high station in Great Britain. It would be improper for me to say more; but of the fact I can entertain no manner of doubt, and I mention it here merely as a curious instance of the manner in which "tall oaks from little acorns grow."

Before this gathering broke up, Mr. Gallatin took the time to introduce me to Mr. Canning. The conversation was brief and mainly focused on America. He seemed to carry some resentment from a recent negotiation, and it showed. He clearly doesn't like us, but what Englishman really does? You'll find it amusing that, although this small talk seemed insignificant in other ways, it ended up influencing the happiness of two prominent individuals in Great Britain. It wouldn't be right for me to say more, but I have no doubt about this fact, and I mention it here simply as an interesting example of how "tall oaks from little acorns grow."

I ought to have said that two, instead of one event, followed this dinner. The second was our own introduction into European society. The how and wherefore it is unnecessary to explain, but some of the cleverest and best-bred people of this well-bred and clever capital took us by the hand, all "unlettered" as we were, and from that moment, taking into consideration our tastes and my health, the question has been, not how to get into, but how to keep out of, the great world. You know enough of these matters, to understand that, the ice once broken, any one can float in the current of society.

I should have mentioned that two events, rather than just one, followed this dinner. The second was our introduction into European society. It’s unnecessary to explain the details, but some of the smartest and most well-mannered people in this sophisticated capital took us under their wing, even though we were completely inexperienced. From that moment on, considering our interests and my health, the focus shifted from figuring out how to fit in to figuring out how to avoid the high society. You know enough about this to understand that once the ice is broken, anyone can navigate the waters of social life.

This little footing has not been obtained without some contretems, and I have learned early to understand that wherever there is an Englishman in the question, it behoves an American to be reserved, punctilious, and sometimes stubborn. There is a strange mixture of kind feeling, prejudice, and ill-nature, as respects us, wrought into the national character of that people, that will not admit of much mystification. That they should not like us, may be natural enough; but if they seek the intercourse, they ought, on all occasions, to be made to conduct it equally, without annoyance and condescension and on terms of perfect equality; conditions, by the way, that are scarcely agreeable to their present notions of superiority.[6]

This small position hasn't come without some contretemps, and I've learned early on that whenever an Englishman is involved, it's important for an American to be cautious, thorough, and sometimes stubborn. There's a weird mix of kindness, bias, and negativity towards us woven into the national character of that people, which doesn't allow for much misunderstanding. It might be natural for them to not like us, but if they want to interact, they should always be expected to do so equally, without irritation or condescension, and on terms of complete equality; conditions, by the way, that don't align with their current sense of superiority.[6]

[Footnote 6: The change in this respect during the last ten years is patent. No European nation has, probably, just at this moment as much real respect for America as the English, though it is still mixed with great ignorance, and a very sincere dislike. Still, the enterprise, activity, and growing power of the country are forcing themselves on the attention of our kinsmen; and if the government understood its foreign relations as well as it does its domestic, and made a proper exhibition of maritime preparation and of maritime force, this people would hold the balance in many of the grave questions that are now only in abeyance in European politics. Hitherto we have been influenced by every vacillation in English interests, and it is quite time to think of turning the tables, and of placing, as far as practicable, American interests above the vicissitudes of those of other people. The thing is more easily done than is commonly imagined, but a party politician is rarely a statesman, the subordinate management necessary to the one being death to the comprehensive views that belong to the other. The peculiar nature of the American institutions, and the peculiar geographical situation of the country, moreover, render higher qualities necessary, perhaps, to make a statesman here than elsewhere.]

[Footnote 6: The change in this regard over the last ten years is clear. No European country likely has as much genuine respect for America right now as the English do, although that respect is still mixed with significant ignorance and a strong dislike. Nevertheless, the nation's drive, energy, and increasing influence are catching the attention of our relatives; and if the government understood its foreign relations as well as it does its domestic issues and showcased its maritime readiness and power properly, this population could play a crucial role in many important issues that are currently just on hold in European politics. So far, we have been swayed by every shift in English interests, and it's about time we consider flipping the script and prioritizing American interests over the unpredictable interests of others. This is more easily achieved than most people think, but a party politician is rarely a true statesman, as the focus on minor details needed for one often undermines the broader perspective required for the other. Additionally, the unique characteristics of American institutions and the specific geographical situation of the country may demand even greater qualities to be a statesman here than in other places.]

In order to understand why I mention any other than the French, in the capital of France, you will remember that there are many thousands of foreigners established here, for longer or shorter periods, who, by means of their money (a necessary that, relatively, is less abundant with the French), materially affect society, contriving to penetrate it in all directions, in some way or other.

To understand why I talk about anyone other than the French in the capital of France, keep in mind that there are thousands of foreigners who settle here for varying lengths of time. Their money—something that is relatively less available among the French—significantly impacts society, allowing them to integrate in various ways.

LETTER VII.

English Jurisprudence.—English Justice.—Justice in France.—Continental Jurisprudence.—Juries.—Legal Injustice.—The Bar in France.—Precedence of the Law.

English Jurisprudence.—English Justice.—Justice in France.—Continental Jurisprudence.—Juries.—Legal Injustice.—The Bar in France.—Precedence of the Law.

To JACOB SUTHERLAND, ESQ. NEW YORK.

To Jacob Sutherland, Esq. New York.

Your legal pursuits will naturally give you an interest in the subject of the state of justice in this part of the world. A correspondence like mine would not admit of any very profound analysis of the subject, did I possess the necessary learning, which I do not, but I may present a few general facts and notions, that will give you some idea of the state of this important feature of society. The forms and modes of English jurisprudence are so much like our own, as to create the impression that the administration of justice is equally free from venality and favour. As a whole and when the points at issue reach the higher functionaries of the law, I should think this opinion true; but, taking those facts that appear in the daily prints, through the police reports and in the form of personal narratives, as guides, I should think that there is much more oppression, many more abuses, and far more outrages on the intention of the law, in the purlieus of the courts in England, through the agency of subordinates, than with us. The delays and charges of a suit in chancery almost amount to a denial of justice. Quite lately, I saw a statement, which went to show that a legacy to a charity of about 1000_l_., with the interest of some fourteen years, had been consumed in this court, with the exception of rather more than 100_l_. This is an intolerable state of things, and goes to prove, I think, that, in some of its features at least, English jurisprudence is behind that of every other free country.

Your legal pursuits will naturally spark your interest in the state of justice in this part of the world. A correspondence like mine wouldn't allow for any deep analysis of the topic, even if I had the necessary knowledge, which I don’t. However, I can share a few general facts and ideas that will give you some insight into this crucial aspect of society. The forms and methods of English law are so similar to ours that it creates the impression that the administration of justice is equally free from corruption and favoritism. Overall, when cases reach the higher levels of the law, I believe this view is accurate. However, considering the facts that appear in daily newspapers, through police reports, and in personal accounts, I think there is much more oppression, numerous abuses, and far more violations of the law's intent around the courthouses in England, due to subordinate officials, than there is with us. The delays and costs of a lawsuit in chancery nearly amount to a denial of justice. Recently, I saw a report indicating that a legacy to a charity of about £1,000, plus 14 years of interest, had been eaten up in this court, leaving just over £100. This is an unacceptable situation and suggests, I believe, that in some respects at least, English law is lagging behind that of every other free country.

But I have been much impressed lately, by a case that would be likely to escape the attention of more regular commentators. A peer of the realm having struck a constable on a race-course, is proceeded against, in the civil action. The jury found for the plaintiff, damages fifty pounds. In summing up, the judge reasoned exactly contrary to what I am inclined to think would have been the case had the matter been tried before you. He gave it as his opinion that the action was frivolous, and ought never to have been brought; that the affair should have been settled out of court; and, in short, left the impression that it was not, as such, so great a hardship for a constable to be struck by a peer, that his honour might not be satisfied with the offering of a guinea or two. The jury thought differently; from which I infer that the facts did not sustain the judge in his notions. Now, the reasoning at home would, I think, have been just the other way. The English judge said, in substance, a man of Lord ——'s dignity ought not to have been exposed to this action; you would have said, a senator is a law-maker, and owes even a higher example of order than common to the community; he insinuated that a small reparation ought to suffice, while you would have made some strong hints at smart-money.

But I have recently been really struck by a case that might fly under the radar of more traditional commentators. A nobleman hit a police officer at a racecourse, and now he’s facing a civil lawsuit. The jury ruled in favor of the plaintiff, awarding damages of fifty pounds. In his closing remarks, the judge argued exactly the opposite of what I think would have happened if you were presiding over the case. He expressed the opinion that the lawsuit was trivial and should have never been filed; he suggested that the matter should have been resolved outside of court; and essentially, he left the impression that it wasn’t such a big deal for a police officer to be hit by a nobleman, implying that a couple of guineas would be enough compensation. The jury disagreed; which leads me to believe that the facts did not support the judge's views. I think the reasoning back home would have been quite different. The English judge implied that someone of Lord ——'s stature shouldn’t have had to deal with this lawsuit; whereas you would have said that a senator is a lawmaker and has a responsibility to set an even higher standard of order for the community; he suggested that a small compensation should be enough, while you would have hinted at a considerable sum for damages.

I mention this case, for I think it rather illustrative of English justice. Indeed, it is not easy to see how it well can be otherwise: when society is divided into castes, the weak must go to the wall. I know that the theory here is quite different, and that one of the boasts of England is the equality of its justice; but I am dealing in facts, and not in theories. In America it is thought, and with proper limitations I dare say justly, that the bias of juries, in the very lowest courts, is in favour of the poor against the rich; but the right of appeal restores the balance, and, in a great degree, secures justice. In each case it is the controlling power that does the wrong; in England the few, in America the many.

I bring up this case because I think it really highlights English justice. Honestly, it’s hard to see how it could be any different: when society is split into classes, the vulnerable always get left behind. I know that the theory is quite different here, and one of England’s claims is the equal application of justice; but I'm focusing on facts, not theories. In America, it's believed—and with some valid limitations, I’d say rightly so—that juries, especially in the lowest courts, tend to favor the poor over the rich; however, the right to appeal helps balance things out and largely ensures justice. In both cases, it’s the power that causes the injustice; in England, it’s the few who hold that power, while in America, it's the many.

In France, as you probably know, juries are confined to criminal cases. The consequence is, a continuance of the old practice of soliciting justice. The judge virtually decides in chambers, and he hears the parties in chambers, or, in other words, wherever he may choose to receive them. The client depends as much on external influence and his own solicitations, as on the law and the justice of his case. He visits the judge officially, and works upon his mind by all the means in his power. You and I have been acquainted intimately from boyhood, and it has been my bad luck to have had more to do with the courts than I could wish; and yet, in all the freedom of an otherwise unfettered intercourse, I have never dared to introduce the subject of any suit in which I have been a party. I have been afraid of wounding your sense of right, to say nothing of my own, and of forfeiting your esteem, or at least, of losing your society. Now had we been Frenchmen, you would have expected me to solicit you; you would probably have heard me with the bias of an old friend; and my adversary must have been a singularly lucky fellow, or you a very honest one, if he did not get the worst of it, supposing the case to admit of doubt. Formerly, it was known that influence prevailed; bribes were offered and received, and a suit was a contest of money and favouritism rather than one of facts and principles.

In France, as you probably know, juries are only used in criminal cases. This leads to the ongoing practice of seeking justice through influence. The judge essentially decides in private, and he meets with the parties anywhere he prefers. The client relies as much on outside influence and personal appeals as on the law and the merits of their case. He meets the judge officially and tries to sway his opinion by any means available. You and I have been close friends since childhood, and unfortunately, I've had more dealings with the courts than I’d like; yet, despite our otherwise open conversations, I’ve never dared to bring up any legal matters I’ve been involved in. I’ve feared hurting your sense of justice, not to mention my own, and losing your respect or, at the very least, your company. If we were French, you would have expected me to solicit your help; you would likely have listened with the understanding of an old friend; and my opponent would have had to be incredibly fortunate, or you extremely honest, if he didn’t come out worse for it, assuming the case was debatable. In the past, it was well known that influence played a significant role; bribes were given and accepted, turning a lawsuit into a battle of money and favoritism instead of one based on facts and principles.

I asked General La Fayette not long since, what he thought of the actual condition of France as respects the administration of justice. In most political cases he accused the government of the grossest injustice, illegality, and oppression. In the ordinary criminal cases he believed the intentions of the courts and juries perfectly fair, as, indeed, it is difficult to believe they should not be. In the civil suits he thought a great improvement had taken place; nor did he believe that there now exists much of the ancient corruption. The civil code of Napoleon had worked well, and all he complained of was a want of fitness between the subordinate provisions of a system invented by a military despot for his own support, and the system of quasi liberty that had been adopted at the restoration; for the Bourbons had gladly availed themselves of all the machinery of power that Napoleon bequeathed to France.

I recently asked General La Fayette what he thought about the current state of France regarding the justice system. He criticized the government for extreme injustice, illegality, and oppression in most political cases. However, he believed that the intentions of the courts and juries in ordinary criminal cases were generally fair, which is hard to dispute. He felt that there had been a significant improvement in civil cases and did not think that much of the old corruption still existed. The civil code established by Napoleon had functioned well, but his only complaint was that there was a mismatch between the subordinate aspects of a system designed by a military ruler for his own benefit and the system of quasi-liberty that was implemented after the restoration. The Bourbons were more than happy to use all the mechanisms of power that Napoleon left behind for France.

A gentleman who heard the conversation afterwards told me the following anecdote. A friend of his had long been an unsuccessful suitor in one of the higher courts of the kingdom. They met one day in the street, when the other told him that an unsealed letter, which he held in his hand, contained an offer of a pair of carriage-horses to the wife of the judge who had the control of his affair. On being told he dare not take so strong a step, M. de ——, my informant, was requested to read the letter, to seal it and to put it in the boîte aux lettres with his own hands, in order to satisfy himself of the actual state of justice in France. All this was done, and "I can only add," continued M. de ——, "that I afterwards saw the horses in the carriage of Madame ——, and that my friend gained his cause." To this anecdote I can only say, I tell it exactly as I heard it, and that M. de —— is a deputy, and one of the honestest and simplest-minded men of my acquaintance. It is but proper to add, that the judge in question has a bad name, and is little esteemed by the bar; but the above-mentioned fact would go to show that too much of the old system remains.

A man who overheard the conversation later shared this story with me. A friend of his had been unsuccessfully trying to win over a high-ranking judge in the kingdom for quite some time. One day, they met in the street, and the friend mentioned that an unsealed letter he was holding offered a pair of horses for the judge's wife. When he said he couldn't take such a bold step, M. de ——, my source, was asked to read the letter, seal it, and personally drop it in the mailbox to confirm how justice really works in France. He did all of this, and "I can only add," M. de —— continued, "that I later saw the horses in Madame ——'s carriage, and my friend won his case." To this story, I can only say that I’m relaying it exactly as I heard it, and that M. de —— is a deputy and one of the most honest and straightforward people I know. It's also worth mentioning that the judge in question has a bad reputation and is not well-respected by the legal community; however, this incident suggests that too much of the old system still lingers.

In Germany justice bears a better name, though the absence of juries generally must subject the suitor to the assaults of personal influence. Farther south, report speaks still less favourably of the manner in which the laws are interpreted; and, indeed, it would seem to be an inevitable consequence of despotism that justice should be abused. One hears occasionally of some signal act of moderation and equity on the part of monarchies, but the merits of systems are to be proved, not by these brilliant coups de justice, but by the steady, quiet and regular working of the machine, on which men know how to calculate, in which they have faith, and which as seldom deceives them as comports with human fallibility, rather than by scenes in which the blind goddess is made to play a part in a melodrama.

In Germany, justice has a better reputation, although the lack of juries often exposes the parties involved to personal influence. Further south, the reports are even less favorable regarding how laws are interpreted; it seems that an inevitable result of despotism is the distortion of justice. Occasionally, there are notable acts of fairness and justice from monarchies, but the effectiveness of systems should be judged not by these dramatic moments of justice, but by the consistent, calm, and orderly functioning of the system, which people can rely on, trust in, and which deceives them as rarely as human imperfection allows, instead of by situations where the blind goddess takes center stage in a melodrama.

On the whole, it is fair to presume that, while public opinion, and that intelligence which acts virtually as a bill of rights, even in the most despotic governments of Europe, not even excepting Turkey, perhaps, have produced a beneficial influence on the courts, the secrecy of their proceedings, the irresponsible nature of their trusts (responsible to power, and irresponsible to the nation), and the absence of publicity, produce precisely the effects that a common-sense view of the facts would lead one who understands human nature to expect.

Overall, it's reasonable to believe that while public opinion, along with the intelligence that essentially serves as a bill of rights, has had a positive impact on the courts—even in the most authoritarian governments in Europe, possibly including Turkey—the secrecy of their processes, the unaccountable nature of their duties (responsive to those in power but not to the people), and the lack of transparency result in exactly the outcomes that someone with a good understanding of human nature would anticipate.

I am no great admirer of the compromising verdicts of juries, in civil suits that admit of a question as to amounts. They are an admirable invention to settle questions of guilty or not guilty, but an enlightened court would, nine times in ten, do more justice in the cases just named. Would it not be an improvement to alter the present powers of juries, by letting them simply find for or against the suitor, leaving the damages to be assessed by regular officers, that might resemble masters in chancery? At all events, juries, or some active substitute, cannot be safely dispensed with until a people have made great progress in the science of publicity, and in a knowledge of the general principles connected with jurisprudence.

I'm not a big fan of the mixed decisions that juries make in civil cases where the amount is in question. Juries are great for deciding if someone is guilty or not guilty, but a well-informed court would, most of the time, deliver more justice in these situations. Wouldn't it be better to change the current powers of juries so they can only decide for or against the plaintiff, while letting trained professionals determine the damages, similar to masters in chancery? In any case, we can't completely do without juries, or some effective alternative, until people have made significant progress in understanding transparency and the basic principles of law.

This latter feature is quite peculiar to America. Nothing has struck me more in Europe than the ignorance which everywhere exists on such subjects, even among educated people. No one appears to have any distinct notions of legal principles, or even of general law, beyond a few prominent facts, but the professional men. Chance threw me, not long since into the company of three or four exceedingly clever young Englishmen. They were all elder sons, and two were the heirs of peers.[7] Something was said on the subject of a claim of a gentleman with whom I am connected to a large Irish estate. The grandfather of this gentleman was the next brother to the incumbent, who died intestate. The grandson, however, was defeated in his claim, in consequence of its being proved, that the ancestor through whom he derived his claim was of the half-blood. My English companions did not understand the principle, and when, I explained by adding, that the grandfather of the claimant was born of a different mother from the last holder in fee, and that he could never inherit at law (unless by devise), the estate going to a hundredth cousin of the whole blood in preference, or even escheating to the king, they one and all protested England had no such law! They were evidently struck with the injustice of transferring property that had been acquired by the common ancestor of two brothers to a remote cousin, merely because the affinity between the sons was only on the father's side although that very father may have accumulated the estate; and they could not believe that what struck them as so grievous a wrong, could be the law of descents under which they lived. Luckily for me, one learned in the profession happened to be present, and corroborated the fact. Now all these gentlemen were members of parliament; but they were accustomed to leave legal questions of this nature to the management of professional men.

This last characteristic is pretty unique to America. Nothing has surprised me more in Europe than the ignorance surrounding these topics, even among educated people. Nobody seems to have any clear understanding of legal principles or even general law, aside from a few basic facts, except for the professionals. Recently, I found myself in the company of three or four incredibly bright young Englishmen. They were all firstborn sons, and two of them were heirs to titles. We discussed a claim made by a gentleman I know to a large estate in Ireland. The grandfather of this gentleman was the next brother to the previous owner, who died without a will. However, the grandson lost his claim because it was proven that the ancestor from whom he inherited was of half-blood. My English friends didn't grasp the principle, and when I explained that the claimant's grandfather had a different mother than the last owner and could never inherit under law (unless through a will), and that the estate would go instead to a distant cousin of full blood or even revert to the king, they all insisted that England had no such law! They were clearly troubled by the injustice of transferring property acquired by two brothers' common ancestor to a far-off cousin, just because the connection through the sons was only on the father's side, even though that father may have built the estate. They couldn't believe that what seemed to them such an unfair situation could be the law of inheritance they lived under. Fortunately for me, a legal expert happened to be there and confirmed it. All these gentlemen were members of parliament, but they typically left legal issues like this to the professionals.

[Footnote 7: This absurd and unaccountable provision of the common law has since been superseded by a statute regulating descents on a more intelligible and just provision. England has made greater advances in common sense and in the right, in all such matters, within the last five years, than during the previous hundred.]

[Footnote 7: This ridiculous and unreasonable aspect of common law has since been replaced by a statute that regulates inheritance in a clearer and fairer way. England has made more progress in common sense and justice in all these matters over the last five years than in the previous hundred.]

I mentioned this conversation to another Englishman, who thought the difficulty well disposed of by saying, that if property ever escheated in this manner, I ought to remember, that the crown invariably bestowed it on the natural heir. This struck me as singular reasoning to be used by a people who profess to cherish liberty, inasmuch as, to a certain degree, it places all the land in the kingdom at the mercy of the sovereign. I need not tell you, moreover, that this answer was insufficient, as it did not meet the contingency of a remote cousin's inheriting to the prejudice of the children of him who earned the estate. But habit is all in all with the English in such matters; and that which they are accustomed to see and hear, they are accustomed to think right.

I brought this conversation up with another Englishman, who thought the issue was easily resolved by saying that if property ever reverted like this, I should remember that the crown always gave it to the natural heir. I found this reasoning strange coming from a people who claim to value liberty, since it effectively puts all the land in the kingdom at the mercy of the sovereign. I also don't need to tell you that this answer was lacking, as it didn't address the possibility of a distant cousin inheriting to the disadvantage of the children of the person who actually earned the estate. But for the English, habit is everything in these matters; what they’re used to seeing and hearing, they tend to think is right.

The bar is rising greatly in public consideration in France. Before the revolution there were certain legal families of great distinction; but these could scarcely be considered as forming a portion of the regular practitioners. Now, many of the most distinguished statesmen, peers, and politicians of France, commenced their careers as advocates. The practice of public speaking gives them an immense advantage in the chambers, and fully half of the most popular debaters are members who belong to the profession. New candidates for public favour appear every day, and the time is at hand when the fortunes of France, so lately controlled by soldiers, will be more influenced by men of this profession than by those of all the others. This is a great step in moral civilization; for the country that most feels the ascendancy of the law, and that least feels that of arms, is nearest to the summit of human perfection. When asked which profession takes rank in America, I tell them the law in influence, and the church in deference. Some of my moustachoed auditors stare at this reply; for here the sword has precedence of all others, and the law, with few exceptions, is deemed a calling for none but those who are in the secondary ranks of society. But, as I have told you, opinion is undergoing a great change in this particular. I believe that every efficient man in the present ministry is, or has been, a lawyer.

The status of the legal profession is significantly rising in public perception in France. Before the revolution, there were certain prestigious legal families, but they were hardly seen as part of the regular practitioners. Now, many of the most notable statesmen, peers, and politicians in France began their careers as lawyers. Their public speaking skills give them a huge edge in the chambers, and about half of the most popular speakers are members of this profession. New candidates seeking public approval show up every day, and it's only a matter of time before the future of France, which was recently dominated by military leaders, will be more shaped by legal professionals than by anyone else. This marks a significant advancement in moral civilization; a country that strongly feels the power of the law and less so the influence of military force is closest to achieving the highest form of human perfection. When asked which profession holds the most prestige in America, I tell them it's law in terms of influence and the church in terms of respect. Some of my mustachioed listeners look surprised at this answer since, here, the military is considered superior to all other professions, and the law is, with a few exceptions, seen as a career for those in the lower ranks of society. However, as I've mentioned, there's a significant shift in opinion happening in this regard. I believe that every effective member of the current ministry is, or has been, a lawyer.

LETTER VIII.

Army of France.—Military Display.—Fête of the Trocadero.—Royal Review.
—Royal Ordinance.—Dissatisfaction.—Hostile Demonstration.—Dispersion
of Rioters.—French Cavalry.—Learned Coachman.—Use of Cavalry.—Cavalry
Operations.—The Conscription.—National Defence.—Napoleon's Marshals.
—Marshal Soult—Disaffection of the Army.

Army of France.—Military Display.—Trocadero Festival.—Royal Review.
—Royal Ordinance.—Dissatisfaction.—Hostile Demonstration.—Dispersal
of Rioters.—French Cavalry.—Knowledgeable Coachman.—Use of Cavalry.—Cavalry
Operations.—The Draft.—National Defense.—Napoleon's Marshals.
—Marshal Soult—Discontent in the Army.

To COL. BANKHEAD, U.S. ARTILLERY.

To Col. Bankhead, U.S. Artillery.

The army of France obtained so high a reputation, during the wars of the revolution and the empire, that you may feel some curiosity to know its actual condition. As the Bourbons understand that they have been restored to the throne, by the great powers of Europe, if not in opposition to the wishes of a majority of Frenchmen, certainly in opposition to the wishes of the active portion of the population, and consequently to that part of the nation which would be most likely to oppose their interests, they have been accused of endeavouring to keep the establishments of France so low as to put her at the mercy of any new combination of the allies. I should think this accusation, in a great degree, certainly unmerited; for France, at this moment, has a large and, so far as I can judge, a well-appointed army, and one that is charged by the liberal party with being a heavy expense to the nation, and that, too, chiefly with the intention of keeping the people in subjection to tyranny. But these contradictions are common in party politics. It is not easy here to get at statistical facts accurately, especially those which are connected with expenditure. Nominally, the army is about 200,000 men, but it is whispered that numerous congés are given, in order to divert the funds that are thus saved to other objects. Admitting all this to be true, and it probably is so in part, I should think France must have fully 150,000 men embodied, without including the National Guards. Paris is pretty well garrisoned, and the casernes in the vicinity of the capital are always occupied. It appears to me there cannot be less than 20,000 men within a day's march of the Tuileries, and there may be half as many more.[8]

The French army gained such a strong reputation during the wars of the revolution and the empire that you might be curious about its current state. Since the Bourbons know they were restored to the throne by the major powers of Europe, if not against the wishes of the majority of French people, certainly against the desires of the more active members of the population, they have faced accusations of trying to keep France's military forces so weak that she would be at the mercy of any new coalition of allies. I think these accusations are largely unjust; France currently has a sizable and, as far as I can tell, well-equipped army, which the liberal party claims is a significant financial burden for the nation, primarily aimed at keeping the people under oppression. However, these contradictions are typical in party politics. It’s difficult to get accurate statistics here, especially regarding spending. Officially, the army consists of about 200,000 men, but there are rumors that many leave of absences are granted to redirect the funds saved to other purposes. Assuming this is partly true, I would estimate that France must have at least 150,000 active soldiers, excluding the National Guards. Paris is reasonably well-garrisoned, and the barracks near the capital are always occupied. It seems to me that there can't be fewer than 20,000 men within a day's march of the Tuileries, and perhaps as many as another 10,000.

[Footnote 8: The sudden disbandment of the guards and other troops in 1830 greatly diminished the actual force of the country.]

[Footnote 8: The abrupt disbanding of the guards and other troops in 1830 significantly reduced the country's actual military force.]

Since our arrival there have been several great military displays, and I have made it a point to be present at them all. The first was a petite guerre,[9] on the plains of Issy, or within a mile of the walls of the town. There may have been 15,000 men assembled for the occasion, including troops of all arms.

Since we got here, there have been several impressive military displays, and I've made it a priority to attend them all. The first was a petite guerre,[9] on the plains of Issy, or just a mile from the town's walls. There were probably about 15,000 soldiers gathered for the event, including troops from all branches.

[Footnote 9: Sham-fight.]

[Footnote 9: Staged fight.]

One of the first things that struck me at Paris was the careless militia-like manner in which the French troops marched about the streets. The disorder, irregularity, careless and indifferent style of moving, were all exactly such as I have heard laughed at a thousand times in our own great body of national defenders. But this is only one of many similar instances, in which I have discovered that what has been deemed a peculiarity in ourselves, arising from the institutions perhaps, is a very general quality belonging rather to man than to any particular set of men. Our notions, you will excuse the freedom of the remark, are apt to be a little provincial, and every one knows that fashion, opinions and tastes only become the more exaggerated the farther we remove from the centre of light. In this way, we come to think of things in an exaggerated sense, until, like the boy who is disappointed at finding a king a man, we form notions of life that are anything but natural and true.

One of the first things that struck me in Paris was the laid-back, almost militia-like way the French troops marched around the streets. The disorder, irregularity, and carefree style of their movements were exactly the kind of stuff I've heard mocked a thousand times in our own national defenders. But this is just one of many examples where I've realized that what we consider a quirk of our own society—probably due to our institutions—is actually a common trait of humanity rather than something specific to a certain group of people. Our perspectives, if you'll allow me to be candid, can be a bit narrow-minded, and everyone knows that trends, opinions, and tastes tend to get more exaggerated the farther we are from the center of influence. This leads us to view things in an exaggerated way, until, much like the boy who is let down to discover a king is just a man, we develop perceptions of life that aren't really natural or true.

I was still so new to all this, however, that I confess I went to the plain of Issy expecting to see a new style of manoeuvring, or, at least, one very different from that which I had so often witnessed at home, nor can I say that in this instance there was so much disappointment. The plan of the day did not embrace two parties, but was merely an attack on an imaginary position, against which the assailants were regularly and scientifically brought up, the victory being a matter of convention. The movements were very beautiful, and were made with astonishing spirit and accuracy. All idea of disorder or the want of regularity was lost here, for entire battalions advanced to the charges without the slightest apparent deviation from perfectly mathematical lines.

I was still pretty new to all this, so I admit I went to the plain of Issy expecting to see a different way of fighting, or at least something really different from what I had often seen back home, and I can’t say I was too disappointed this time. The plan for the day didn’t involve two sides; it was just an attack on a fake position, with the attackers methodically and scientifically lined up, making the victory more about agreement than actual conflict. The movements were really impressive and executed with amazing energy and precision. There was no sign of chaos or lack of order here, as whole battalions charged forward without the slightest deviation from perfectly straight lines.

When we reached the acclivity that overlooked the field, a new line was forming directly beneath us, it being supposed that the advance of the enemy had already been driven in upon his main body, and the great attack was just on the point of commencing.

When we got to the rise that overlooked the field, a new line was forming right below us, as it was believed that the enemy's advance had already been pushed back to their main forces, and the major attack was about to begin.

A long line of infantry of the French guards formed the centre of the assailants. Several batteries of artillery were at hand, and divers strong columns of horse and foot were held in reserve. A regiment of lancers was on the nearest flank, and another of cuirassiers was stationed at the opposite. All the men of the royal family were in the field, surrounded by a brilliant staff. A gun was fired near them, by way of signal, I suppose, when two brigades of artillery galloped through the intervals of the line, unlimbered, and went to work as if they were in downright earnest. The cannonade continued a short time, when the infantry advanced in line, and delivered its fire by companies, or battalions, I could not discern which, in the smoke. This lasted some ten minutes, when I observed a strong column of troops, dressed in scarlet, moving up with great steadiness and regularity from the rear. These were the Swiss Guards, and there might have been fifteen hundred or two thousand of them. The column divided into two, as it approached the rear of the line, which broke into column in turn, and for a minute there was a confused crowd of red and blue coats, in the smoke, that quite set my nautical instinct at defiance. The cuirassiers chose this moment to make a rapid and menacing movement in advance, but without opening their column, and some of the artillery reappeared and commenced firing at the unoccupied intervals. This lasted a very little while for the Swiss deployed into line like clock-work, and then made a quick charge, with beautiful precision. Halting, they threw in a heavy fire, by battalions; the French guard rallied and formed upon their flanks; the whole reserve came up; the cuirassiers and lancers charged, by turning the position assailed, and for ten or fifteen minutes there was a succession of quick evolutions, which like the finale of a grand piece of music, appeared confused even while it was the most scientific, and then there was a sudden pause. The position, whose centre was a copse, had been carried, and we soon saw the guards formed on the ground that was supposed to have been held by the enemy. The artillery still fired occasionally, as on a retreating foe, and the lancers and cuirassiers were charging and manoeuvring, half a mile farther in advance, as if following up their advantage.

A long line of French guards made up the center of the attackers. Several artillery units were ready, and various strong groups of cavalry and infantry were held in reserve. A regiment of lancers was positioned on one flank, and another of cuirassiers was on the opposite side. All the members of the royal family were present in the field, surrounded by an impressive staff. A gun fired nearby as a signal, I assume, when two artillery brigades rushed through the gaps in the line, set up, and got to work as if they were completely serious. The cannon fire continued for a short while, then the infantry advanced in line and opened fire by companies or battalions; it was hard to tell in the smoke. This lasted about ten minutes when I noticed a strong column of troops in scarlet moving steadily and methodically from the rear. These were the Swiss Guards, numbering perhaps fifteen hundred to two thousand. As the column approached the back of the line, it split into two, and the line formed into a column in turn. For a moment, there was a chaotic mix of red and blue uniforms in the smoke that defied my nautical instincts. The cuirassiers promptly advanced menacingly but didn't break their column, while some artillery reemerged and started firing into the empty spaces. This didn’t last long as the Swiss deployed into line flawlessly and then made a quick charge with excellent precision. They paused to deliver a heavy volley by battalions; the French guard regrouped and formed on their flanks; the entire reserve moved up; the cuirassiers and lancers charged, flanking the attacked position, and for ten to fifteen minutes, a series of rapid movements ensued, confusing like the finale of a grand symphony, even though it was highly coordinated, and then there was a sudden halt. The position, centered around a copse, had been taken, and we soon saw the guards established on the ground that was supposed to have been occupied by the enemy. The artillery continued to fire occasionally, as if at a retreating foe, while the lancers and cuirassiers charged and maneuvered half a mile further ahead, following up on their advantage.

Altogether, this was much the prettiest field exercise I ever witnessed. There was a unity of plan, a perfection of evolution, and a division of matériel about it, that rendered it to my eyes as nearly perfect as might be. The troops were the best of France, and the management of the whole had been confided to some one accustomed to the field. It contained all the poetry, without any of the horrors of a battle. It could not possess the heart-stirring interest of a real conflict, and yet it was not without great excitement.

Altogether, this was the most beautiful field exercise I’ve ever seen. There was a unity of purpose, a flawless execution, and an organization of material that made it seem almost perfect in my eyes. The troops were the finest from France, and the whole operation was entrusted to someone experienced in the field. It had all the poetry of battle without any of its horrors. While it couldn’t capture the intense emotions of a real fight, it still offered a great deal of excitement.

Some time after the petite guerre of Issy, the capital celebrated the fête of the Trocadero. The Trocadero, you may remember, was the fortress of Cadix, carried by assault, under the order of the Dauphin, in the war of the late Spanish revolution. This government, which has destroyed all the statues of the Emperor, proscribed his family, and obliterated every visible mark of his reign in their power, has had the unaccountable folly of endeavouring to supplant the military glory acquired under Napoleon by that of Louis Antoine, Dauphin of France! A necessary consequence of the attempt, is a concentration of all the military souvenirs of the day in this affair of the Trocadero. Bold as all this will appear to one who has not the advantage of taking a near view of what is going on here, it has even been exceeded, through the abject spirit of subserviency in those who have the care of public instruction, by an attempt to exclude even the name of the Bonaparte from French history. My girls have shown me an abridgment of the history of France, that has been officially prepared for the ordinary schools, in which there is no sort of allusion to him. The wags here say, that a work has been especially prepared for the heir presumptive, however, in which the Emperor is a little better treated; being spoken of as "a certain Marquis de Bonaparte, who commanded the armies of the king."

Some time after the petite guerre of Issy, the capital celebrated the fête of the Trocadero. The Trocadero, you might recall, was the fortress in Cadiz that was taken by assault on the orders of the Dauphin during the late Spanish revolution. This government, which has destroyed all the statues of the Emperor, banned his family, and erased every sign of his reign they could, has had the ridiculous idea of trying to replace the military glory gained under Napoleon with that of Louis Antoine, Dauphin of France! A direct result of this effort is the gathering of all the military memories of the time around this Trocadero event. As bold as this might seem to someone who hasn't had the chance to closely observe what's happening here, it’s even been taken further, through the submissive attitude of those responsible for public education, with an attempt to remove even the name Bonaparte from French history. My daughters showed me an edited version of French history that has been officially prepared for regular schools, in which there is no mention of him at all. The locals joke that a special book has been prepared for the heir presumptive, though, where the Emperor gets treated a bit better, being referred to as "a certain Marquis de Bonaparte, who commanded the armies of the king."

The mimic attack on the Trocadero, like its great original, was at night. The troops assembled in the Champs de Mars, and the assault was made, across the beautiful bridge of Jena, on a sharp acclivity near Passy, which was the imaginary fortress. The result was a pretty good effect of night-firing, some smoke, not a little noise, with a very pretty movement of masses. I could make nothing of it, of much interest, for the obscurity prevented the eyes from helping the imagination.

The mimic attack on the Trocadero, just like the original, happened at night. The troops gathered in the Champs de Mars, and the assault was launched across the beautiful Jena Bridge, up a steep slope near Passy, which was the pretend fortress. The result was a decent display of night-firing, some smoke, a lot of noise, and a visually appealing movement of troops. I couldn't find it particularly interesting, as the darkness made it hard for the eyes to spark the imagination.

Not long since, the king held a great review of regular troops, and of the entire body of the National Guards of Paris and its environs. This review also took place in the Champs de Mars, and it was said that nearly a hundred thousand men were under arms for the occasion. I think there might have been quite seventy thousand. These mere reviews have little interest, the evolutions being limited to marching by regiments on and off the ground. In doing the latter, the troops defile before the king. Previously to this, the royal cortege passed along the several lines, receiving the usual honours.

Not long ago, the king held a large review of the regular army and the entire National Guard of Paris and surrounding areas. This review also took place in the Champs de Mars, and it was said that nearly a hundred thousand troops were present for the event. I think there might have been around seventy thousand. These types of reviews aren’t very exciting, as the movements are mostly limited to troops marching on and off the field. As they do the latter, the soldiers parade in front of the king. Before this, the royal procession went along the lines, receiving the usual honors.

On this occasion the Dauphine and the Duchesse de Berri followed the king in open carriages, accompanied by the little Duc de Bordeaux and his sister. I happened to be at an angle of the field as the royal party, surrounded by a showy group of marshals and generals, passed, and when there seemed to be a little confusion. As a matter of course, the cry of "Vive le roi!" had passed along with the procession; for, popular or not, it is always easy for a sovereign to procure this sign of affection, or for others to procure it for him. You will readily understand that employés of the government are especially directed to betray the proper enthusiasm on such occasions. There was however, a cry at this corner of the area that did not seem so unequivocally loyal, and, on inquiry, I was told that some of the National Guards had cried "A bas les ministres!" The affair passed off without much notice, however; and I believe it was generally forgotten by the population within an hour. The desire to get rid of M. de Villèle and his set was so general in Paris, that most people considered the interruption quite as a matter of course.

On this occasion, the Dauphine and the Duchesse de Berri followed the king in open carriages, along with the little Duc de Bordeaux and his sister. I happened to be at an angle of the field as the royal party, surrounded by a flashy group of marshals and generals, passed by, and when there seemed to be a little confusion. Naturally, the cry of "Vive le roi!" went along with the procession; because, popular or not, it's always easy for a sovereign to get this sign of affection, or for others to get it for him. You’ll easily understand that government employees are especially instructed to show the right enthusiasm on such occasions. However, there was a cry at this corner of the area that didn't seem so clearly loyal, and when I asked about it, I was told that some of the National Guards had shouted, "Down with the ministers!" The incident passed without much attention, though; and I believe it was mostly forgotten by the crowd within an hour. The desire to rid themselves of M. de Villèle and his group was so widespread in Paris that most people saw the interruption as completely normal.

The next day the capital was electrified by a royal ordinance, disbanding all the National Guards of Paris! A more infatuated, or, if it were intended to punish the disaffected, a more unjust decree, could not easily have been issued. It was telling the great majority of the very class which forms the true force of every government that their rulers could not confide in them. As confidence, by awakening pride, begets a spirit in favour of those who depend on it, so does obvious distrust engender disaffection. But the certainty that Louis XVI. lost his throne and his life for the want of decision, has created one of those sweeping opinions here of the virtue of energy, that constantly leads the rulers into false measures. An act that might have restrained the France of 1792, would be certain to throw the France of 1827 into open revolt. The present generation of Frenchmen, in a political sense, have little in common with even the French of 1814, and measures must be suited to the times in which we live. As well might one think of using the birch on the man, that had been found profitable with the boy, as to suppose these people can be treated like their ancestors.

The next day, the capital was buzzing with a royal decree disbanding all the National Guards of Paris! A more reckless or, if it was meant to punish those who were unhappy, a more unfair order could hardly have been given. It was telling the vast majority of the very group that represents the true strength of any government that their leaders didn't trust them. Just as trust can stir pride and foster loyalty among those who rely on it, obvious distrust breeds disaffection. But the fact that Louis XVI lost his throne and his life due to indecision has led to a widespread belief in the importance of decisiveness, which often pushes rulers into misguided actions. An approach that could have kept France in check in 1792 would surely spark open rebellion in France of 1827. The current generation of French people has little in common politically with even those from 1814, and actions need to reflect the times we live in. It would be just as foolish to think that using the same punishment that worked on a boy would be effective on a man, as it is to assume these people can be treated like their ancestors.

As might have been expected, a deep, and what is likely to prove a lasting discontent, has been the consequence of the blunder. It is pretended that the shopkeepers of Paris are glad to be rid of the trouble of occasionally mounting guard, and that the affair will be forgotten in a short time. All this may be true enough, in part, and it would also be true in the whole, were there not a press to keep disaffection alive, and to inflame the feelings of those who have been treated so cavalierly; for he knows little of human nature who does not understand that, while bodies of men commit flagrant wrongs without the responsibility being kept in view by their individual members, an affront to the whole is pretty certain to be received as an affront to each of those who make an integral part.

As might have been expected, a deep and likely lasting discontent has resulted from the mistake. It’s claimed that the shopkeepers of Paris are relieved to be done with the hassle of occasionally standing guard, and that this issue will be forgotten soon. This may be partly true, and it would be entirely true if it weren’t for the media that keeps dissatisfaction alive and fuels the anger of those who have been treated so dismissively. Because anyone who knows human nature understands that, while groups of people can commit serious wrongs without individual members feeling the consequences, an offense against the whole is almost certainly felt as a personal insult by each member.

The immediate demonstrations of dissatisfaction have not amounted to much, though the law and medical students paraded the streets, and shouted beneath the windows of the ministers the very cry that gave rise to the disbandment of the guards. But, if no other consequence has followed this exercise of arbitrary power, I, at least, have learned how to disperse a crowd. As you may have occasion some days, in your military capacity, to perform this unpleasant duty, it may be worth while to give you a hint concerning the modus operandi.

The recent protests of discontent haven't achieved much, even though law and medical students marched through the streets, shouting under the ministers' windows the same slogans that led to the guards being disbanded. However, if nothing else has come from this abuse of power, I've at least figured out how to break up a crowd. Since you might need to carry out this unenviable task in your military role someday, it could be helpful to share some tips on the modus operandi.

Happening to pass through the Place Vendôme, I found the foot of the celebrated column which stands directly in the centre of the square surrounded by several hundred students. They were clustered together like bees, close to the iron railing which encloses the base of the pillar, or around an area of some fifty or sixty feet square. From time to time they raised a shout, evidently directed against the ministers, of whom one resided at no great distance from the column. As the hotel of the État-Major of Paris is in this square, and there is always a post at it, it soon became apparent there was no intention quietly to submit to this insult. I was attracted by a demonstration on the part of the corps de garde, and, taking a station at no greet distance from the students, I awaited the issue.

Happening to pass through Place Vendôme, I stumbled upon the base of the famous column that stands right in the center of the square, surrounded by several hundred students. They were gathered like bees near the iron railing enclosing the base of the pillar, or around an area about fifty or sixty feet square. From time to time, they shouted, clearly protesting against the ministers, one of whom lived not far from the column. Since the État-Major hotel of Paris is in this square and there’s always a post there, it quickly became clear that they weren’t going to quietly accept this insult. I was drawn to a show of force from the corps de garde, and standing not far from the students, I waited to see what would happen.

The guard, some thirty foot soldiers, came swiftly out of the court of the hotel, and drew up in a line before its gate. This happened as I reached their own side of the square, which I had just crossed. Presently, a party of fifteen or twenty gendarmes à cheval came up, and wheeled into line. The students raised another shout, as it might be, in defiance. The infantry shouldered arms, and, filing off singly, headed by an officer, they marched in what we call Indian file, towards the crowd. All this was done in the most quiet manner possible, but promptly, and with an air of great decision and determination. On reaching the crowd, they penetrated it, in the same order, quite up to the railing. Nothing was said, nor was anything done; for it would have been going farther than the students were prepared to proceed, had they attempted to seize and disarm the soldiers. This appeared to be understood, and, instead of wasting the moments and exasperating his enemies by a parley, the officer, as has just been said, went directly through them until he reached the railing. Once there, he began to encircle it, followed in the same order by his men. The first turn loosened the crowd, necessarily, and then I observed that the muskets, which hitherto had been kept at a "carry," were inclined a little outwards. Two turns enabled the men to throw their pieces to a charge, and, by this time, they had opened their order so far as to occupy the four sides of the area. Facing outwards, they advanced very slowly, but giving time for the crowd to recede. This manoeuvre rendered the throng less and less dense, when, watching their time, the mounted gendarmes rode into it in a body, and, making a circuit, on a trot, without the line of infantry, they got the mass so loosened and scattered, that, unarmed as the students were, had they been disposed to resist, they would now have been completely at the mercy of the troops. Every step that was gained of course weakened the crowd, and, in ten minutes, the square was empty; some being driven out of it in one direction, and some in another, without a blow being struck, or even an angry word used. The force of the old saying, "that the king's name is a tower of strength," or, the law being on the side of the troops, probably was of some avail; but a mob of fiery young Frenchmen is not too apt to look at the law with reverence.

The guard, made up of around thirty foot soldiers, quickly came out of the hotel's courtyard and lined up in front of the gate. This happened just as I reached their side of the square, which I had just crossed. Soon, a group of fifteen or twenty mounted police arrived and formed a line. The students cheered again, almost defiantly. The infantry shouldered their weapons and, led by an officer, marched in a single file towards the crowd. They did all this as quietly as possible, but with urgency and a strong sense of determination. When they reached the crowd, they pushed their way through, maintaining their formation until they got to the railing. No one spoke or made any moves because it would have been more than the students were willing to do if they tried to capture and disarm the soldiers. This seemed to be understood, and rather than wasting time and provoking his opponents with a discussion, the officer, as previously mentioned, moved straight through them until he reached the railing. Once there, he began to circle it, with his men following in the same line. The first turn naturally loosened the crowd, and then I noticed that the muskets, which had been held at a "carry," were tilted slightly outward. After two turns, the soldiers were able to bring their weapons to a ready position, and by that time, they had widened their formation enough to cover all four sides of the area. Facing outward, they moved very slowly, allowing the crowd to back away. This maneuver gradually thinned the crowd, and when the moment was right, the mounted police charged into it as a group, moving around at a trot, while the infantry maintained their position. They broke up the mass so much that, unarmed as the students were, if they had wanted to resist, they would have been completely at the mercy of the troops. Every step taken weakened the crowd, and within ten minutes, the square was empty; some were pushed out in one direction and some in another, without a blow being thrown or even an angry word exchanged. The weight of the old saying, "that the king's name is a tower of strength," or the law being on the side of the troops, probably had some impact; however, a group of fiery young Frenchmen isn’t usually too inclined to respect the law.

I stood near the hotels, but still in the square, when a gendarme, sweeping his sabre as one would use a stick in driving sheep, came near me. He told me to go away. I smiled, and said I was a stranger, who was looking at the scene purely from curiosity. "I see you are, sir," he answered, "but you had better fall back into the Rue de la Paix." We exchanged friendly nods, and I did as he told me, without further hesitation. In truth, there remained no more to be seen.

I was standing near the hotels, still in the square, when a police officer, waving his sword like someone would use a stick to herd sheep, approached me. He told me to leave. I smiled and said I was a visitor, just checking out the scene out of curiosity. "I can see that, sir," he replied, "but you should move back to Rue de la Paix." We exchanged friendly nods, and I followed his advice without any hesitation. Honestly, there wasn't much left to see anyway.

Certainly, nothing could have been done in better temper, more effectually, nor more steadily, than this dispersion of the students. There is no want of spirit in these young men, you must know, but the reverse is rather the case. The troops were under fifty in number, and the mob was between six hundred and a thousand, resolute, active, sturdy young fellows, who had plenty of fight in them, but who wanted the unity of purpose that a single leader can give to soldiers. I thought this little campaign of the column of the Place Vendôme quite as good, in its way, as the petite guerre of the plains of Issy.

Certainly, nothing could have been handled with a better attitude, more effectively, or more consistently than this dispersal of the students. There’s no lack of spirit in these young men, you should know; rather, it’s quite the opposite. The troops numbered less than fifty, while the crowd was between six hundred and a thousand—determined, energetic, tough young men who were ready to fight but lacked the single-minded direction that a sole leader can provide to soldiers. I thought this brief operation of the column at Place Vendôme was just as good, in its own way, as the petite guerre of the plains of Issy.

I do not know whether you have fallen into the same error as myself in relation to the comparative merits of the cavalry of this part of the world, though I think it is one common to most Americans. From the excellence of their horses, as well as from that general deference for the character and prowess of the nation which exists at home, I had been led to believe that the superior qualities of the British cavalry were admitted in Europe. This is anything but true; military men, so far as I can learn, giving the palm to the Austrian artillery, the British infantry, and the French cavalry. The Russians are said to be generally good for the purposes of defence, and in the same degree deficient for those of attack. Some shrewd observers, however, think the Prussian army, once more, the best in Europe.

I don't know if you’ve made the same mistake I have regarding the comparative strengths of the cavalry in this part of the world, but I think it’s a common belief among many Americans. Because of the quality of their horses and the general respect for the reputation and skills of the nation that exists at home, I was led to believe that everyone in Europe acknowledged the superior qualities of the British cavalry. However, that’s far from the truth; from what I've gathered, military experts actually give top honors to the Austrian artillery, the British infantry, and the French cavalry. The Russians are generally considered good for defense but lacking in attack. Some sharp observers, though, believe the Prussian army is once again the best in Europe.

The French cavalry is usually mounted on small, clumsy, but sturdy beasts, that do not show a particle of blood. Their movement is awkward, and their powers, for a short effort, certainly are very much inferior to those of either England or America. Their superiority must consist in their powers of endurance; for the blooded animal soon falls off, on scanty fare and bad grooming. I have heard the moral qualities of the men given as a reason why the French cavalry should be superior to that of England. The system of conscription secures to an army the best materials, while that of enlistment necessarily includes the worst. In this fact is to be found the real moral superiority of the French and Prussian armies. Here, service, even in the ranks, is deemed honourable; whereas with us, or in England, it would be certain degradation to a man of the smallest pretension to enlist as a soldier, except in moments that made stronger appeals than usual to patriotism. In short, it is primâ facie evidence of a degraded condition for a man to carry a musket in a regular battalion. Not so here. I have frequently seen common soldiers copying in the gallery of the Louvre, or otherwise engaged in examining works of science or of taste; not ignorantly, and with vulgar wonder, but like men who had been regularly instructed. I have been told that a work on artillery practice lately appeared in France, which excited so much surprise by its cleverness, that an inquiry was set on foot for its author. He was found seated in a cabriolet in the streets, his vocation being that of a driver. What renders his knowledge more surprising is the fact, that the man was never a soldier at all; but, having a great deal of leisure, while waiting for his fares, he had turned his attention to this subject, and had obtained all he knew by means of books. Nothing is more common than to see the drivers of cabriolets and fiacres reading in their seats; and I have even seen market-women, under their umbrellas, à la Robinson, with books in their hands. You are not, however, to be misled by these facts, which merely show the influence of the peculiar literature of the country, so attractive and amusing; for a very great majority of the French can neither read nor write. It is only in the north that such things are seen at all, except among the soldiers, and a large proportion of even the French army are entirely without schooling.

The French cavalry typically rides small, clumsy, but sturdy animals that don't show a trace of blood. Their movements are awkward, and their short-term capabilities are definitely inferior to those of England or America. Their advantage lies in their endurance because a well-bred animal quickly declines on poor food and insufficient care. I've heard that the moral qualities of the soldiers are cited as a reason for the French cavalry's superiority over that of England. The conscription system ensures that an army gets the best recruits, while the enlistment system tends to include the least suitable. This difference reflects the real moral superiority of the French and Prussian armies. Here, serving in the ranks is seen as honorable, while in our country or in England, volunteering as a soldier would be viewed as a disgrace for anyone with even a small sense of self-worth, except in moments that call more strongly to patriotism. In short, it's generally seen as evidence of low status for a man to carry a musket in a regular battalion. Not so in France. I've often seen regular soldiers sketching in the Louvre or engaged in exploring scientific or artistic works, not mindlessly, but like people who have received formal education. I heard about a book on artillery practice that recently emerged in France, which created such surprise due to its quality that an inquiry was launched to find its author. He was discovered sitting in a cab, working as a driver. What makes his knowledge more surprising is that he was never a soldier; with plenty of free time while waiting for fares, he focused on that subject and learned everything from books. It's not unusual to see cab drivers reading while they wait, and I've even seen market women, under their umbrellas, à la Robinson, with books in hand. However, don’t be misled by these examples, which merely demonstrate the appeal and charm of the country’s unique literature; a large majority of the French population cannot read or write. Such scenes are only common in the north, except among soldiers, and a significant portion of the French army has no formal education at all.

To return to the cavalry, I have heard the superiority of the French ascribed also to their dexterity in the use of the sabre, or, as it is termed here, l'arme blanche. After all, this is rather a poetical conclusion; for charges of cavalry rarely result in regular hand-to-hand conflicts. Like the bayonet, the sabre is seldom used except on an unresisting enemy. Still, the consciousness of such a manual superiority might induce a squadron less expert to wheel away, or to break, without waiting for orders.

To get back to the cavalry, I've heard people claim that the French are superior due to their skill with the saber, or what we call here, l'arme blanche. Ultimately, this seems more poetic than practical; cavalry charges don't usually end in actual hand-to-hand fighting. Much like the bayonet, the saber is seldom used against an opponent who is putting up a fight. However, just knowing they have that kind of skill might make a less experienced squadron turn away or break formation without waiting for orders.

I have made the acquaintance, here, of an old English general, who has passed all his life in the dragoons, and who commanded brigades of cavalry in Spain and at Waterloo. As he is a sensible old man, of great frankness and simplicity of character, perfect good breeding and good nature, and moreover, so far as I can discover, absolutely without prejudice against America, he has quite won my heart, and I have availed myself of his kindness to see a good deal of him. We walk together frequently, and chat of all things in heaven and earth, just as they come uppermost. The other day I asked him to explain the details of a charge of his own particular arm to me, of which I confessed a proper ignorance. "This is soon done," said the old gentleman, taking my arm with a sort of sly humour, as if he were about to relate something facetious: "against foot, a charge is a menace; if they break, we profit by it; if they stand, we get out of the scrape as well as we can. When foot are in disorder, cavalry does the most, and it is always active in securing a victory, usually taking most of the prisoners. But as against cavalry, there is much misconception. When two regiments assault each other, it is in compact line—" "How," I interrupted him, "do not you open, so as to leave room to swing a sabre?" "Not at all. The theory is knee to knee; but this is easier said than done, in actual service. I will suppose an unsuccessful charge. We start, knee to knee, on a trot. This loosens the ranks, and, as we increase the speed, they become still looser. We are under the fire of artillery, or, perhaps, of infantry, all the time, and the enemy won't run. At this moment, a clever officer will command a retreat to be sounded. If he should not, some officer is opportunely killed, or some leading man loses command of his horse, which is wounded and wheels, the squadron follows, and we get away as well as we can. The enemy follows, and if he catches us, we are cut up. Other charges do occur; but this is the common history of cavalry against cavalry, and, in unsuccessful attacks of cavalry, against infantry too. A knowledge of the use of the sword is necessary; for did your enemy believe you ignorant of it, he would not fly; but the weapon itself is rarely used on such occasions. Very few men are slain in their ranks by the bayonet or the sabre."

I’ve met an old English general here who spent his whole life in the dragoons and led cavalry brigades in Spain and at Waterloo. He’s a wise old man, honest and straightforward, with excellent manners and a good nature. Plus, as far as I can tell, he has no bias against America, so he has completely won me over. I’ve taken advantage of his generosity to spend a lot of time with him. We frequently walk together and talk about everything under the sun as it comes to mind. The other day, I asked him to explain the specifics of a charge from his unit, honestly admitting that I didn’t know much about it. “That’s easy to explain,” he said, taking my arm with a bit of a mischievous smile, like he was about to share something humorous: “Against infantry, a charge is a threat; if they break, we benefit; if they hold their ground, we get out of the situation as best we can. When infantry are disorganized, cavalry does the most work and is usually crucial in securing a victory, often capturing most of the prisoners. But there’s a lot of misunderstanding when it comes to cavalry versus cavalry. When two regiments charge each other, it’s in a solid line—” “How,” I interrupted, “don’t you open up to give space to swing a saber?” “Not at all. The theory is knee to knee, but it’s easier said than done in the heat of battle. Let’s imagine an unsuccessful charge. We begin, knee to knee, at a trot. This loosens the ranks, and as we speed up, they become even more scattered. We’re under fire from artillery or maybe infantry the whole time, and the enemy won’t flee. At this point, a smart officer will call for a retreat. If he doesn’t, some officer might get killed, or a leading man might lose control of his horse, which could get injured and turn around, causing the entire squadron to follow, and we’ll try to escape as best we can. If the enemy pursues us and catches up, we get cut down. Other types of charges happen, but this is the typical scenario for cavalry against cavalry, and also, in unsuccessful cavalry attacks against infantry. Knowing how to use a sword is essential; if your enemy thinks you’re clueless about it, they won’t flee, but the weapon itself is rarely used in those situations. Very few men are killed in their ranks by bayonets or sabers.”

I was once told, though not directly by an officer, that the English dragoon neglected his horse in the field, selling the provender for liquor, and that, as a consequence, the corps became inefficient; whereas the French dragoon, being usually a sober man, was less exposed to this temptation. This may, or may not, be true; but drunkenness is now quite common in the French army, though I think much less so in the cavalry than in the foot. The former are generally selected with some care, and the common regiments of the line, as a matter of course, receive the refuse of the conscription.

I once heard, although not directly from an officer, that the English dragoon often ignored his horse in the field, selling its feed for alcohol, and that this caused the unit to become ineffective; meanwhile, the French dragoon, usually being a sober individual, faced less temptation. This might be true or not; however, drunkenness is now quite common in the French army, though I believe it happens much less in the cavalry than in the infantry. The cavalry soldiers are usually chosen with more care, while the regular infantry units typically get the leftovers from the draft.

This conscription is after all, extremely oppressive and unjust, though it has the appearance of an equal tax. Napoleon had made it so unpopular, by the inordinate nature of his demands for men, that Louis XVIII. caused an article to be inserted in the charter, by which it was to be altogether abolished. But a law being necessary to carry out this constitutional provision, the clause remains a perfect dead letter, it being no uncommon thing for the law to be stronger than the constitution even in America, and quite a common thing here. I will give you an instance of the injustice of the system. An old servant of mine has been drafted for the cavalry. I paid this man seven hundred francs a year, gave him coffee, butter, and wine, with his food, and he fell heir to a good portion of my old clothes. The other day he came to see me, and I inquired into his present situation. His arms and clothes were found him. He got neither coffee, wine, nor butter; and his other food, as a matter of course, was much inferior to that he had been accustomed to receive with me. His pay, after deducting the necessary demands on it in the shape of regular contributions, amounts to about two sous a day, instead of the two francs he got in my service.

This draft is incredibly oppressive and unfair, even though it looks like an equal burden. Napoleon made it so unpopular with his excessive demands for soldiers that Louis XVIII had an article added to the charter to abolish it completely. But since a law is needed to implement this constitutional change, the clause is effectively useless. It's not uncommon for the law to outweigh the constitution, even in America, and it's quite common here. To illustrate the injustice of this system: a former servant of mine has been drafted into the cavalry. I used to pay him seven hundred francs a year, provide him with coffee, butter, and wine along with his meals, and he inherited a good amount of my old clothes. The other day he came to visit, and I asked about his current situation. His uniform and gear were provided to him, but he wasn’t given any coffee, wine, or butter, and his food was significantly worse than what he used to get from me. After deductions for mandatory contributions, his pay comes out to about two sous a day, compared to the two francs he earned while working for me.

Now, necessity, in such matters, is clearly the primary law. If a country cannot exist without a large standing army, and the men are not to be had by voluntary enlistments, a draft is probably the wisest and best regulation for its security. But, taking this principle as the basis of the national defence, a just and a paternal government would occupy itself in equalizing the effects of the burden, as far as circumstances would in any manner admit. The most obvious and efficient means would be by raising the rate of pay to the level, at least, of a scale that should admit of substitutes being obtained at reasonable rates. This is done with us, where a soldier receives a full ration, all his clothes, and sixty dollars a year.[10] It is true, that this would make an army very costly, and, to bear the charge, it might be necessary to curtail some of the useless magnificence and prodigality of the other branches of the government; and herein is just the point of difference between the expenditures of America and those of France. It must be remembered, too, that a really free government, by enlisting the popular feeling in its behalf through its justice, escapes all the charges that are incident to the necessity of maintaining power by force, wanting soldiers for its enemies without, and not for its enemies within. We have no need of a large standing army, on account of our geographical position, it is true; but had we the government of France, we should not find that our geographical position exempted us from the charge.

Now, in matters like this, necessity is clearly the primary law. If a country can't survive without a large standing army, and people aren't willing to enlist voluntarily, then a draft is probably the smartest and most effective way to ensure its security. However, if we take this principle as the foundation for national defense, a fair and caring government would work to balance the burden as much as circumstances allow. The most straightforward and effective method would be to increase pay to a level that allows for substitutes to be hired at reasonable rates. We do this here, where a soldier receives full rations, all his clothing, and sixty dollars a year.[10] It's true that this would make maintaining an army quite expensive, and to cover the costs, it might be necessary to cut back on some of the unnecessary extravagance and waste in other government areas. This highlights the key difference between the spending of America and that of France. It's also important to remember that a genuinely free government, by engaging public sentiment through fairness, avoids the costs associated with maintaining power through force, needing soldiers to protect against outside enemies rather than facing internal threats. We don't need a large standing army because of our geographical position, that's true; but if we had a government like France's, we wouldn't find our geography exempting us from those costs.

[Footnote 10: He now receives seventy-two.]

[Footnote 10: He now receives seventy-two.]

You have heard a great deal of the celebrated soldiers who surrounded Napoleon, and whose names have become almost as familiar to us as his own. I do not find that the French consider the marshals men of singular talents. Most of them reached their high stations on account of their cleverness in some particular branch of their duties, and by their strong devotion, in the earlier parts of their career, to their master. Maréchal Soult has a reputation for skill in managing the civil detail of service. As a soldier, he is also distinguished for manoeuvring in the face of his enemy, and under fire. Some such excitement appears necessary to arouse his dormant talents. Suchet is said to have had capacity; but, I think, to Massena, and to the present King of Sweden, the French usually yield the palm in this respect. Davoust was a man of terrible military energy, and suited to certain circumstances, but scarcely a man of talents. It was to him Napoleon said, "remember, you have but a single friend in France—myself; take care you do not lose him." Lannes seems to have stood better than most of them as a soldier, and Macdonald as a man. But, on the whole, I think it quite apparent there was scarcely one among them all calculated to have carried out a very high fortune for himself, without the aid of the directing genius of his master. Many of them had ambition enough for anything; but it was an ambition stimulated by example, rather than by a consciousness of superiority.

You’ve heard a lot about the famous soldiers who surrounded Napoleon, and their names are almost as well-known as his. I don’t think the French view the marshals as particularly talented individuals. Most of them rose to their high positions due to their skills in specific areas of their duties and their strong loyalty to their leader in the early parts of their careers. Maréchal Soult is known for his skill in handling the civilian aspects of service. As a soldier, he’s also recognized for his ability to maneuver in front of the enemy and under fire. Some level of excitement seems necessary to awaken his latent talents. Suchet is said to have had ability; however, I believe that Massena and the current King of Sweden are often regarded as more capable by the French. Davoust was a man of intense military energy, suited for certain situations, but he wasn’t really a man of talent. Napoleon once told him, “Remember, you have only one friend in France—me; take care you don’t lose him.” Lannes seemed to perform better than most of them as a soldier, while Macdonald did well as an individual. Overall, it’s pretty clear that hardly any of them could have achieved great success on their own without the guiding genius of their leader. Many had enough ambition for anything, but it was an ambition fueled by example rather than a sense of superiority.

In nothing have I been more disappointed than in the appearance of these men. There is more or less of character about the exterior and physiognomy of them all, it is true; but scarcely one has what we are accustomed to think the carriage of a soldier. It may be known to you that Moreau had very little of this, and really one is apt to fancy he can see the civic origin in nearly all of them. While the common French soldiers have a good deal of military coquetry, the higher officers appear to be nearly destitute of it. Maréchal Molitor is a fine man; Maréchal Marmont, neat, compact, and soldierly-looking; Maréchal Mortier, a grenadier without grace; Maréchal Oudinot, much the same; and so on to the end of the chapter. Lamarque is a little swarthy man, with good features and a keen eye; but he is military in neither carriage nor mien.

In nothing have I been more disappointed than in the appearance of these men. They all have some character in their looks, it's true, but hardly any of them carry themselves like soldiers. You may know that Moreau didn’t have much of that, and it’s easy to imagine their civic backgrounds. While ordinary French soldiers show quite a bit of military flair, the higher-ranking officers seem to lack it entirely. Maréchal Molitor is an impressive man; Maréchal Marmont is neat, compact, and looks like a soldier; Maréchal Mortier is a grumpy-looking grenadier; Maréchal Oudinot is pretty much the same; and so on to the end of the chapter. Lamarque is a small, dark-skinned man with good features and sharp eyes, but he doesn’t seem military in either his posture or demeanor.

Crossing the Pont Royal, shortly after my arrival, in company with a friend, the latter pointed out to me a stranger, on the opposite side-walk, and desired me to guess who and what he might be. The subject of my examination was a compact, solidly-built man, with a plodding rustic air, and who walked a little lame. After looking at him a minute, I guessed he was some substantial grazier, who had come to Paris on business connected with the supplies of the town. My friend laughed, and told me it was Marshal Soult. To my inexperienced eye, he had not a bit of the exterior of a soldier, and was as unlike the engravings we see of the French heroes as possible. But here, art is art; and like the man who was accused of betraying another into a profitless speculation by drawing streams on his map, when the land was without any, and who defended himself by declaring no one ever saw a map without streams, the French artists appear to think every one should be represented in his ideal character, let him be as bourgeois as he may in truth. I have seen Marshal Soult in company, and his face has much character. The head is good, and the eye searching, the whole physiognomy possessing those latent fires that one would be apt to think would require the noise and excitement of a battle to awaken. La Fayette looks more like an old soldier than any of them. Gérard, however, is both a handsome man and of a military mien.

Crossing the Pont Royal shortly after I arrived, I was with a friend who pointed out a stranger on the opposite sidewalk and asked me to guess who he was. The man I was examining was solidly built with a down-to-earth vibe and walked with a slight limp. After looking at him for a minute, I guessed he was a substantial cattle dealer who had come to Paris for business related to the town's supplies. My friend laughed and told me it was Marshal Soult. To my inexperienced eye, he didn't look like a soldier at all and was nothing like the engravings we see of French heroes. But when it comes to art, it’s different; like the man who was accused of misleading someone into a pointless investment by putting rivers on his map when the land had none, and who defended himself by saying no one ever saw a map without rivers, French artists seem to believe everyone should be depicted in their ideal form, no matter how bourgeois they might actually be. I’ve seen Marshal Soult in person, and his face has a lot of character. He has a strong head and a piercing gaze, and his whole expression carries the kind of inner fire that you’d think would need the noise and excitement of a battle to ignite. La Fayette looks more like an old soldier than any of them. Gérard, however, is both handsome and has a military demeanor.

Now and then we see a vieux moustache in the guards; but, on the whole, I have been much surprised at finding how completely the army of this country is composed of young soldiers. The campaigns of Russia, of 1813, 1814, and of 1815, left few besides conscripts beneath the eagles of Napoleon. My old servant Charles tells me that the guardhouse is obliged to listen to tales of the campaign of Spain, and of the Trocadero!

Now and then we spot an old-timer in the ranks; but overall, I've been really surprised to see how entirely the army of this country is made up of young soldiers. The campaigns in Russia in 1813, 1814, and 1815 left very few volunteers under Napoleon's command. My old servant Charles says that the guardhouse has to listen to stories about the campaign in Spain and the Trocadero!

The army of France is understood to be very generally disaffected. The restoration has introduced into it, in the capacity of general officers, many who followed the fortunes of the Bourbons into exile, and some, I believe, who actually fought against this country in the ranks of her enemies. This may be, in some measure, necessary, but it is singularly unfortunate.

The French army is widely seen as quite unhappy. The restoration has brought in a lot of general officers who were loyal to the Bourbons during their exile, and some, I believe, even fought against this country alongside its enemies. While this might be somewhat necessary, it's still sadly unfortunate.

I have been told, on good authority, that, since the restoration of 1815, several occasions have occurred, when the court thought itself menaced with a revolution. On all these occasions the army, as a matter of course, has been looked to with hope or with distrust. Investigation is said to have always discovered so bad a spirit, that little reliance is placed on its support.

I’ve been informed, from reliable sources, that since the restoration in 1815, there have been several instances when the court felt threatened by a revolution. During all these times, people have naturally turned to the army with either hope or skepticism. Reports indicate that investigations have consistently revealed such a negative attitude that there’s little trust in its support.

The traditions of the service are all against the Bourbons. It is true, that very few of the men who fought at Marengo and Austerlitz still remain; but then the recollection of their deeds forms the great delight of most Frenchmen. There is but one power that can counteract this feeling, and it is the power of money. By throwing itself into the arms of the industrious classes, the court might possibly obtain an ally, sufficiently strong to quell the martial spirit of the nation; but, so far from pursuing such a policy, it has all the commercial and manufacturing interests marshalled against it, because it wishes to return to the bon vieux tems of the old system.

The traditions of the service are completely opposed to the Bourbons. It's true that very few of the men who fought at Marengo and Austerlitz are still around, but the memories of their accomplishments bring great joy to most French people. There's only one force that can counteract this sentiment, and that's money. By aligning itself with the working class, the court might gain a strong ally to suppress the nation’s martial spirit; however, rather than following that path, it has all the commercial and manufacturing interests turned against it because it wants to go back to the bon vieux tems of the old system.

After all, I much question if any government in France will have the army cordially with it, that does not find it better employment than mock-fights on the plain of Issy, and night attacks on the mimic Trocadero.

After all, I really wonder if any government in France will have the army fully behind it if it doesn't offer them better activities than mock battles on the plain of Issy and night raids on the fake Trocadero.

LETTER IX.

Royal Dinner.—Magnificence and Comfort.—Salle de Diane.—Prince de
Condé.—Duke of Orleans.—The Dinner-table.—The Dauphin.—Sires de
Coucy.—The Dauphine.—Ancient Usages—M. de Talleyrand.—Charles X.
—Panoramic Procession.—Droll Effect.—The Dinner.—M. de Talleyrand's
Office.—The Duchesse de Berri.—The Catastrophe.—An Aristocratic
Quarrel.

Royal Dinner.—Magnificence and Comfort.—Salle de Diane.—Prince de
Condé.—Duke of Orleans.—The Dinner-table.—The Dauphin.—Sires de
Coucy.—The Dauphine.—Ancient Usages—M. de Talleyrand.—Charles X.
—Panoramic Procession.—Funny Effect.—The Dinner.—M. de Talleyrand's
Office.—The Duchesse de Berri.—The Catastrophe.—An Aristocratic
Argument.

To MRS. SINGLETON W. BEALL, GREEN BAY.

To Mrs. Singleton W. Beall, Green Bay.

We have lately witnessed a ceremony that may have some interest for one who, like yourself, dwells in the retirement of a remote frontier post. It is etiquette for the kings of France to dine in public twice in the year, viz. the 1st of January, and the day that is set apart for the fête of the king. Having some idle curiosity to be present on one of these occasions, I wrote the usual note to the lord in, waiting, or, as he is called here, "le premier gentilhomme de la chambre du roi, de service," and we got the customary answer, enclosing us tickets of admission. There are two sorts of permissions granted on these occasions: by one you are allowed to remain in the room during the dinner; and by the other, you are obliged to walk slowly through the salle, in at one side and out at the other, without, however, being suffered to pause even for a moment. Ours were of the former description.

We recently witnessed a ceremony that might interest someone like you, who lives in the seclusion of a remote frontier post. It's a tradition for the kings of France to publicly dine twice a year, specifically on January 1st and on the day dedicated to the king's fête. Out of sheer curiosity to attend one of these events, I wrote the usual note to the lord-in-waiting, or as he's called here, "le premier gentilhomme de la chambre du roi, de service," and we received the standard reply with admission tickets. There are two types of permissions granted for these occasions: one allows you to stay in the room during dinner, while the other requires you to walk slowly through the hall, entering on one side and exiting on the other, without being allowed to pause for even a moment. Ours were of the first type.

The King of France having the laudable custom of being punctual, and as every one dines in Paris at six, that best of all hours for a town life, we were obliged to order our own dinner an hour earlier than common, for looking at others eating on an empty stomach is, of all amusements, the least satisfactory. Having taken this wise precaution, we drove to the chateau at half after five, it not being seemly to enter the room after the king, and, as we discovered, for females impossible.

The King of France had the admirable habit of being on time, and since everyone in Paris dines at six, which is the best time for city life, we had to order our dinner an hour earlier than usual because watching others eat while hungry is, of all pastimes, the least enjoyable. Having taken this smart step, we drove to the chateau at 5:30, as it wouldn’t be appropriate to enter the room after the king, and, as we found out, it was impossible for women to do so.

Magnificence and comfort seldom have much in common. We were struck with this truth on entering the palace of the king of France. The room into which we were first admitted was filled with tall, lounging foot soldiers, richly attired, but who lolled about the place with their caps on, and with a barrack-like air that seemed to us singularly in contrast with the prompt and respectful civility with which one is received in the ante-chamber of a private hotel. It is true that we had nothing to do with the soldiers and lackeys who thronged the place; but if their presence was intended to impress visitors with the importance of their master, I think a more private entrance would have been most likely to produce that effect; for I confess, that it appeared to me has a mark of poverty, that troops being necessary to the state and security of the monarch, he was obliged to keep them in the vestibule by which his guests entered. But this is royal state. Formerly, the executioner was present; and in the semi-barbarous courts of the East, such is the fact even now. The soldiers were a party of the Hundred Swiss; men chosen for their great stature, and remarkable for the perfection of their musket. Two of them were posted as sentinels at the foot of the great staircase by which we ascended, and we passed several more on the landings.

Magnificence and comfort rarely go hand in hand. We realized this truth when we entered the palace of the king of France. The room where we first waited was filled with tall, relaxed soldiers, dressed in fancy uniforms, yet they lounged around casually with their caps on, giving off a barrack-like vibe that felt oddly out of place compared to the prompt and polite service you receive in the lobby of a nice hotel. To be fair, we had no interaction with the soldiers and attendants crowding the area; however, if their presence was meant to impress visitors with the significance of their master, I believe a more private entrance would achieve that goal better. In fact, it struck me as a sign of weakness that troops, necessary for the state and the king's security, had to be stationed in the entryway for his guests. But such is royal display. In the past, the executioner was present; and in the semi-barbaric courts of the East, that remains true even now. The soldiers were part of the Hundred Swiss; they were selected for their impressive height and known for their perfectly crafted muskets. Two of them stood as sentinels at the bottom of the grand staircase we climbed, and we passed several more on the landings.

We were soon in the Salle des Gardes, or the room which the gardes du corps on service occupied. Two of these quasi soldiers were also acting as sentinels here, while others lounged about the room. Their apartment communicated with the Salle de Diane, the hall or gallery prepared for the entertainment. I had no other means but the eye of judging of the dimensions of this room; but its length considerably exceeds a hundred feet, and its breadth is probably forty, or more. It is of the proper height, and the ceiling is painted in imitation of those of the celebrated Farnese Palace at Rome.

We soon entered the Salle des Gardes, the room where the gardes du corps on duty were stationed. Two of these quasi soldiers were acting as sentries, while others were lounging around the room. Their space connected to the Salle de Diane, the hall or gallery prepared for entertainment. I could only estimate the size of this room by sight; it’s definitely longer than a hundred feet and probably over forty feet wide. It has a good height, and the ceiling is painted to resemble those of the famous Farnese Palace in Rome.

We found this noble room divided, by a low railing, into three compartments. The centre, an area of some thirty feet by forty, contained the table, and was otherwise prepared for the reception of the court. On one side of it were raised benches for the ladies, who were allowed to be seated; and, on the other, a vacant space for the gentlemen, who stood. All these, you will understand, were considered merely as spectators, not being supposed to be in the presence of the king. The mere spectators were dressed as usual, or in common evening dress, and not all the women even in that; while those within the railings, being deemed to be in the royal presence, were in high court dresses. Thus I stood for an hour within five-and-twenty feet of the king, and part of the time much nearer, while, by a fiction of etiquette, I was not understood to be there at all. I was a good while within ten feet of the Duchesse de Berri, while, by convention, I was nowhere. There was abundance of room in our area, and every facility of moving about, many coming and going, as they saw fit. Behind us, but at a little distance, were other rows of raised seats, filled with the best instrumental musicians of Paris. Along the wall, facing the table, was a narrow raised platform, wide enough to allow of two or three to walk abreast, separated from the rest of the room by a railing, and extending from a door at one end of the gallery, to a door at the other. This was the place designed for the passage of the public during the dinner; no one, however, being admitted, even here, without a ticket.

We found this grand room divided by a low railing into three sections. The center area, about thirty feet by forty feet, had the table and was set up for the court. On one side were raised benches for the ladies, who could sit, and on the other side was an open space for the gentlemen, who stood. All of these people were just spectators, not actually considered to be in the presence of the king. The spectators were dressed in regular or evening attire, with not all the women in formal wear; meanwhile, those inside the railing, viewed as being in the royal presence, were in formal court dresses. Therefore, I stood for an hour within twenty-five feet of the king, and at times much closer, while, due to a quirk of etiquette, I was not acknowledged to be there at all. I was quite close to the Duchesse de Berri while, by convention, I was nowhere. There was plenty of space in our area, with people coming and going as they pleased. Behind us, at a small distance, were other raised rows of seats filled with the best musicians in Paris. Along the wall opposite the table was a narrow raised platform, wide enough for two or three people to walk side by side, separated from the rest of the room by a railing, extending from one door at one end of the gallery to another door at the other end. This area was meant for the public to pass through during dinner; however, nobody was allowed in here without a ticket.

A gentleman of the court led your aunt to the seats reserved for the female spectators, which were also without the railing, and I took my post among the men. Although the court of the Tuileries was, when we entered the palace, filled with a throng of those who were waiting to pass through the Gallery of Diana, to my surprise, the number of persons who were to remain in the room was very small. I account for the circumstance, by supposing, that it is not etiquette for any who have been presented to attend, unless they are among the court; and, as some reserve was necessary in issuing these tickets, the number was necessarily limited. I do not think there were fifty men on our side, which might have held several hundred; and the seats of the ladies were not half filled. Boxes were fitted up in the enormous windows, which closed and curtained, a family of fine children occupying that nearest to me. Some one said they were the princes of the house of Orleans; for none of the members of the royal family have seats at the grands couverts, as these dinners are called, unless they belong to the reigning branch. There is but one Bourbon prince more remote from the crown[11] than the Duc d'Orléans, and this is the Prince de Condé, or, as he is more familiarly termed here, the Duc de Bourbon, the father of the unfortunate Duc d'Enghien. So broad are the distinctions made between the sovereign and the other members of his family in these governments, that it was the duty of the Prince de Condé to appear to-day behind the king's chair, as the highest dignitary of his household; though it was understood that he was excused, on account of his age and infirmities. These broad distinctions, you will readily imagine, however, are only maintained on solemn and great state occasions; for, in their ordinary intercourse, kings nowadays dispense with most of the ancient formalities of their rank. It would have been curious, however, to see one descendant of St. Louis standing behind the chair of another, as a servitor; and more especially, to see the Prince de Condé standing behind the chair of Charles X.; for, when Comte d'Artois and Duc de Bourbon, some fifty years since, they actually fought a duel on account of some slight neglect of the wife of the latter by the former.

A court gentleman guided your aunt to the seats set aside for the female spectators, which also lacked a railing, and I took my place among the men. Even though the court of the Tuileries was packed with people waiting to go through the Gallery of Diana when we entered the palace, I was surprised by how few remained in the room. I think this happened because it’s not appropriate for anyone who has been presented to attend unless they are part of the court; and since some discretion was required in issuing these tickets, the number was inevitably limited. I don’t believe there were even fifty men on our side, which could have accommodated several hundred, and the ladies' seats were less than half filled. Boxes were arranged in the massive windows, which were closed and curtained, with a family of lovely children in the one closest to me. Someone mentioned that they were princes of the House of Orleans; because none of the royal family have seats at the grands couverts, as these dinners are called, unless they belong to the reigning branch. There is only one Bourbon prince further removed from the throne than the Duc d'Orléans, and that is the Prince de Condé, or, as he is more commonly referred to here, the Duc de Bourbon, the father of the unfortunate Duc d'Enghien. The distinctions made between the sovereign and the other members of his family in these governments are so pronounced that it was the Prince de Condé’s duty to appear today behind the king’s chair as the highest dignitary of his household; though it was understood that he was excused due to his age and health issues. You can easily imagine that these sharp distinctions are only maintained on formal and significant state occasions; in their everyday interactions, kings nowadays forgo most of the old formalities of their rank. It would have been interesting, however, to see one descendant of St. Louis standing behind the chair of another as a servant; and even more so to see the Prince de Condé standing behind Charles X.; because, back when they were Comte d'Artois and Duc de Bourbon, they actually fought a duel over some minor slight involving the wife of the latter from the former about fifty years ago.

[Footnote 11: 1827]

[Footnote 11: 1827]

The crown of France, as you know, passes only in the male line. The Duke of Orleans is descended from Louis XIII., and the Prince de Condé from Louis IX. In the male line, the Duke of Orleans is only the fourth cousin, once removed, of the king, and the Prince de Condé the eighth or ninth. The latter would be even much more remotely related to the crown, but for the accession of his own branch of the family in the person of Henry IV. who was a near cousin of his ancestor. Thus you perceive, while royalty is always held in reverence—for any member of the family may possibly become the king—still there are broad distinctions made between the near and the more distant branches of the line. The Duke of Orleans fills that equivocal position in the family, which is rather common in the history of this species of government. He is a liberal, and is regarded with distrust by the reigning branch, and with hope by that portion of the people who think seriously of the actual state of the country. A saying of M. de Talleyrand, however, is circulated at his expense, which, if true, would go to show that this wary prince is not disposed to risk his immense fortune in a crusade for liberty. "Ce n'est pas assez d'être quelqu'un—il faut être quelque chose," are the words attributed to the witty and wily politician; but, usually, men have neither half the wit nor half the cunning that popular accounts ascribe to them, when it becomes the fashion to record their acts and sayings. I believe the Duke of Orleans holds no situation about the court, although the king has given him the title of Royal Highness, his birth entitling him to be styled no more than Serene Highness. This act of grace is much spoken of by the Bourbonists, who consider it a favour that for ever secures the loyalty and gratitude of the Duke. The Duchess, being the daughter of a king, had this rank from her birth.

The crown of France, as you know, only passes through the male line. The Duke of Orleans is a descendant of Louis XIII., while the Prince de Condé descends from Louis IX. In terms of the male line, the Duke of Orleans is just the fourth cousin, once removed, of the king, and the Prince de Condé is the eighth or ninth cousin. The latter would be even more distantly related to the crown if not for the fact that his own branch of the family came into power with Henry IV., who was a close cousin of his ancestor. So, you can see that while royalty is always respected—because any family member could potentially become king—there are significant distinctions between the closer and more distant branches of the lineage. The Duke of Orleans occupies a somewhat ambiguous position in the family, which is quite common in the history of this kind of government. He is a liberal, viewed with suspicion by the reigning branch, and with hope by those who seriously consider the current state of the country. However, a saying by M. de Talleyrand is often quoted that, if true, suggests this cautious prince isn't willing to risk his substantial fortune for a cause of freedom: "It's not enough to be someone—you have to be something." This phrase, attributed to the clever and shrewd politician, often highlights that people usually have far less wit or cunning than the popular stories claim when their actions and sayings are recorded. I believe the Duke of Orleans holds no position in the court, although the king has given him the title of Royal Highness, even though he is officially entitled to be called no more than Serene Highness. This act of grace is frequently discussed by the Bourbonists, who see it as a favor that will ensure the Duke's loyalty and gratitude forever. The Duchess, being the daughter of a king, held this rank from her birth.

The orchestra was playing when we entered the Gallery of Diana, and throughout the whole evening it gave us, from time to time, such music as can only be found in a few of the great capitals of Europe.

The orchestra was playing when we entered the Gallery of Diana, and throughout the entire evening it treated us to music that can only be found in a handful of the great capitals of Europe.

The covers were laid, and every preparation was made within the railing for the reception of the convives. The table was in the shape of a young moon, with the horns towards the spectators, or from the wall. It was of some length, and as there were but four covers, the guests were obliged to be seated several feet from each other. In the centre was an armchair, covered with crimson velvet, and ornamented with a crown; this was for the king. A chair without arms, on his right, was intended for the Dauphin; another on his left, for the Dauphine; and the fourth, which was still further on the right of the Dauphin, was intended for Madame, as she is called, or the Duchess of Berri. These are the old and favourite appellations of the monarchy, and, absurd as some of them are, they excite reverence and respect from their antiquity. Your Wolverines, and Suckers, and Buckeyes, and Hooziers would look amazed to hear an executive styled the White Fish of Michigan, or the Sturgeon of Wisconsin; and yet there is nothing more absurd in it, in the abstract, than the titles that were formerly given in Europe, some of which have descended to our times. The name of the country, as well as the title of the sovereign, in the case of Dauphiné, was derived from the same source. Thus, in homely English, the Dolphin of Dolphinstown, renders "le Dauphin de Dauphiné" perfectly well. The last independent Dauphin, in bequeathing his states to the King of France of the day, (the unfortunate John, the prisoner of the Black Prince,) made a condition that the heir apparent of the kingdom should always be known by his own title, and consequently, ever since, the appellation has been continued. You will understand, that none but an heir-apparent is called the Dauphin, and not an heir-presumptive. Thus, should the present Dauphin and the Duc de Bordeaux die, the Duke of Orleans, according to a treaty of the time of Louis XIV., though not according to the ancient laws of the monarchy, would become heir-presumptive; but he could never be the Dauphin, since, should the king marry again, and have another son, his rights would be superseded. None but the heir-apparent, or the inevitable heir, bears this title. There were formerly Bears in Belgium, who were of the rank of Counts. These appellations were derived from the arms, the Dauphin now bearing dolphins with the lilies of France. The Boar of Ardennes got his sobriquet from bearing the head of a wild boar in his arms. There were formerly many titles in France that are now extinct, such as Captal, Vidame, and Castellan, all of which were general, I believe, and referred to official duties. There was, however, formerly, a singular proof of how even simplicity can exalt a man, when the fashion runs into the opposite extremes. In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, there existed in France powerful noblemen, the owners and lords of the castle and lands of Coucy or Couci, who were content to bear the appellation of Sire, a word from which our own "Sir" is derived, and which means, like Sir, the simplest term of courtesy that could be used. These Sires de Coucy were so powerful as to make royal alliances; they waged war with their sovereign, and maintained a state nearly royal. Their pride lay in their antiquity, independence, and power; and they showed their contempt for titles by their device, which is said to have been derived from the answer of one of the family to the sovereign, who, struck with the splendour of his appearance and the number of his attendants, had demanded, "What king has come to my court?" This motto, which is still to be seen on the ancient monuments of the family, reads:—

The table was set, and everything was prepared within the railing for the arrival of the guests. The table resembled a young moon, with the tips facing the audience or away from the wall. It was long, and since there were only four place settings, the guests had to sit several feet apart. In the center was an armchair draped in crimson velvet and adorned with a crown; this was for the king. On his right was an armless chair for the Dauphin, on his left another for the Dauphine, and a fourth chair further to the right of the Dauphin for Madame, or the Duchess of Berri. These old and beloved titles of the monarchy, though some may seem silly, command respect and reverence due to their history. Your Wolverines, Suckers, Buckeyes, and Hooziers would be astonished to hear a leader referred to as the White Fish of Michigan or the Sturgeon of Wisconsin; yet there's nothing more ridiculous about it than the titles once used in Europe, some of which still exist today. The name of the region, along with the title of the ruler, in the case of Dauphiné, stemmed from the same origin. So, in plain English, the Dolphin of Dolphinstown translates "le Dauphin de Dauphiné" perfectly. The last independent Dauphin, when passing his territories to the King of France at the time (the unfortunate John, the prisoner of the Black Prince), stipulated that the kingdom's heir apparent should always be known by this title, and so it has persisted ever since. You must understand, only an heir apparent is called the Dauphin, not an heir presumptive. Therefore, if the current Dauphin and the Duc de Bordeaux were to die, the Duke of Orleans, according to a treaty from Louis XIV's time (though not under the monarchy’s ancient laws), would become heir presumptive, but he could never be the Dauphin since if the king remarried and had another son, his rights would be overridden. Only the heir apparent, or the inevitable heir, carries this title. There used to be Bears in Belgium who were of the rank of Counts. These titles came from their coats of arms, with the Dauphin now featuring dolphins alongside the lilies of France. The Boar of Ardennes got his nickname because he bore the head of a wild boar in his arms. Many titles from France once existed that are now extinct, such as Captal, Vidame, and Castellan, all of which referred generally to official duties, I believe. However, there was once a striking demonstration of how simplicity can elevate a person when styles shifted in the opposite direction. In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, powerful noblemen who owned and controlled the castle and lands of Coucy were satisfied to bear the title Sire, a word from which our own "Sir" is derived, signifying the most basic term of courtesy. These Sires de Coucy were influential enough to forge royal alliances, wage war against their sovereign, and uphold a state nearly royal. Their pride stemmed from their history, independence, and power; they displayed disdain for titles with their motto, reportedly originating from one family member's response to the sovereign, who, struck by his grandeur and the size of his entourage, asked, "What king has come to my court?" This motto, still visible on the ancient monuments of the family, states:—

      "Je ne suis roi, ne prince, ne duc, ne comte aussi;
                Je suis le Sire de Coucy."[12]

"Je ne suis roi, ne prince, ne duc, ne comte aussi;
                Je suis le Sire de Coucy."[12]

[Footnote 12: "I am neither king, nor prince, nor duke, nor even a count;
I am M. de Coucy."]

[Footnote 12: "I am neither a king, nor a prince, nor a duke, nor even a count;
I am M. de Coucy."]

This greatly beats Coke of Holkham, of whom it is said that George IV., who had been a liberal in his youth, and the friend of the great Norfolk commoner, vexed by his bringing up so many liberal addresses, threatened—"If Coke comes to me with any more of his Whig petitions, I'll Knight him."

This is way better than Coke of Holkham, who was said to have irritated George IV. in his youth, when he was more progressive and a friend of the prominent Norfolk commoner, by bringing him so many liberal petitions. George threatened, "If Coke shows up with any more of his Whig petitions, I'll Knight him."

I have often thought that this simplicity of the Sires de Coucy furnishes an excellent example for our own ministers and citizens when abroad. Instead of attempting to imitate the gorgeous attire of their colleagues, whose magnificence, for the want of stars and similar conventional decorations, they can never equal, they should go to court as they go to the President's House, in the simple attire of American gentlemen. If any prince should inquire,—"Who is this that approaches me, clad so simply that I may mistake him for a butler, or a groom of the chambers?" let him answer, "Je ne suis roi, ne prince, ne duc, ne comte aussi—I am the minister of the United States of Ameri_key_," and leave the rest to the millions at home. My life for it, the question would not be asked twice. Indeed, no man who is truly fit to represent the republic would ever have any concern about the matter. But all this time the dinner of the King of France is getting cold.

I have often thought that this simplicity of the Sires de Coucy provides a great example for our own ministers and citizens when they are abroad. Instead of trying to mimic the flashy outfits of their colleagues, whose grandeur, due to the lack of stars and other conventional decorations, they can never match, they should attend court dressed as they would at the President's House, in the simple attire of American gentlemen. If any prince were to ask, "Who is this that approaches me, dressed so simply that I might mistake him for a butler or a chamber attendant?" let him respond, "I am not a king, nor a prince, nor a duke, nor a count—I am the minister of the United States of America," and let the rest be left to the millions back home. I bet the question wouldn’t be asked twice. In fact, no one truly fit to represent the republic would ever worry about this. But meanwhile, the King of France's dinner is getting cold.

We might have been in the gallery fifteen minutes, when there was a stir at a door on the side where the females were seated, and a huissier cried out—"Madame la Dauphine!" and, sure enough, the Dauphine appeared, followed by two dames d'honneur. She walked quite through the gallery, across the area reserved for the court, and passed out at the little gate in the railing which communicated with our side of the room, leaving the place by the same door at which we had entered. She was in high court dress, with diamonds and lappets, and was proceeding from her own apartments, in the other wing of the palace, to those of the king. As she went within six feet of me, I observed her hard and yet saddened countenance with interest; for she has the reputation of dwelling on her early fortunes, and of constantly anticipating evil. Of course she was saluted by all in passing, but she hardly raised her eyes from the floor; though, favoured by my position, I got a slight, melancholy smile, in return for my own bow.

We had been in the gallery for about fifteen minutes when there was a commotion at the side door where the women were seated, and an usher called out, "Madame la Dauphine!" Sure enough, the Dauphine appeared, followed by two ladies-in-waiting. She walked right through the gallery, across the area reserved for the court, and exited through the small gate in the railing that connected to our side of the room, using the same door we had entered. She was dressed in full court attire, adorned with diamonds and lace, making her way from her own rooms in the other wing of the palace to the king’s. As she passed within six feet of me, I took note of her hard yet sorrowful expression; she's known for reflecting on her past fortunes and always fearing the worst. Naturally, everyone greeted her as she walked by, but she barely lifted her eyes from the ground; however, thanks to my position, I received a slight, melancholic smile in response to my bow.

The Dauphine had scarcely disappeared, when her Royal Highness, Madame, was announced, and the Duchess of Berri went through in a similar manner. Her air was altogether less constrained, and she had smiles and inclinations for all she passed. She is a slight, delicate, little woman, with large blue eyes, a fair complexion, and light hair. She struck me as being less a Bourbon than an Austrian, and, though wanting in embonpoint, she would be quite pretty but for a cast in one of her eyes.

The Dauphine had just left when her Royal Highness, Madame, was announced, and the Duchess of Berri followed in a similar way. She seemed much more relaxed and smiled and nodded at everyone she met. She is a petite, delicate woman with large blue eyes, a fair complexion, and light hair. She appeared to me to be less of a Bourbon and more of an Austrian, and although she lacks fullness, she would be quite pretty if not for a slight squint in one of her eyes.

A minute or two later, we had Monseigneur le Dauphin, who passed through the gallery in the same manner as his wife and sister-in-law. He had been reviewing some troops, and was in the uniform of a colonel of the guards; booted to the knees, and carrying a military hat in his hand. He is not of commanding presence, though I think he has the countenance of an amiable man, and his face is decidedly Bourbon. We were indebted to the same lantern like construction of the palace, for this preliminary glimpse at so many of the actors in the coming scene.

A minute or two later, we saw Monseigneur le Dauphin, who walked through the gallery just like his wife and sister-in-law. He had been reviewing some troops and was dressed in the uniform of a colonel of the guards, with knee-high boots and a military hat in his hand. He doesn’t have a commanding presence, but I believe he has the look of a kindhearted man, and his face clearly shows his Bourbon heritage. We were grateful for the palace’s lantern-like design, which gave us this early view of many of the people involved in the upcoming scene.

After the passage of the Dauphin, a few courtiers and superior officers of the household began to appear within the railed space. Among them were five or six duchesses. Women of this rank have the privilege of being seated in the presence of the king on state occasions, and tabourets were provided for them accordingly. A tabouret is a stuffed stool, nearly of the form of the ancient cerulean chair, without its back, for a back would make it a chair at once, and, by the etiquette of courts, these are reserved for the blood-royal, ambassadors, etc. As none but duchesses could be seated at the grand couvert, you may be certain none below that rank appeared. There might have been a dozen present. They were all in high court dresses. One, of great personal charms and quite young, was seated near me, and my neighbour, an old abbé, carried away by enthusiasm, suddenly exclaimed to me—"Quelle belle fortune, monsieur, d'être jeune, jolie, et duchesse!" I dare say the lady had the same opinion of the matter.

After the Dauphin passed by, a few courtiers and high-ranking officials from the household started to appear in the roped-off area. Among them were five or six duchesses. Women of this rank have the privilege of sitting in the king's presence during state events, so tabourets were set up for them. A tabouret is a padded stool similar to the old cerulean chair but without a back, as having a back would categorize it as a chair, which, according to court etiquette, is reserved for royalty, ambassadors, and so on. Since only duchesses could sit at the grand couvert, you can be sure that no one of a lower rank was present. There might have been about a dozen there. They were all dressed in formal court attire. One young woman, who was quite beautiful, sat near me, and my neighbor, an elderly abbé, caught up in excitement, suddenly exclaimed to me, "What a wonderful fortune, sir, to be young, pretty, and a duchess!" I’m sure the lady felt the same way.

Baron Louis, not the financier, but the king's physician, arrived. It was his duty to stand behind the king's chair, like Sancho's tormentor, and see that he did not over-eat himself. The ancient usages were very tender of the royal person. If he travelled, he had a spare litter, or a spare coach, to receive him, in the event of accident,—a practice that is continued to this day; if he ate, there was one to taste his food, lest he might be poisoned; and when he lay down to sleep, armed sentinels watched at the door of his chamber. Most of these usages are still continued, in some form or other, and the ceremonies which are observed at these public dinners are mere memorials of the olden time.

Baron Louis, not the banker but the king's doctor, arrived. His job was to stand behind the king's chair, like Sancho's tormentor, and make sure he didn't eat too much. The old customs were very protective of the royal person. When he traveled, he had a spare litter or a spare coach ready for emergencies—a practice that still exists today. If he ate, someone would taste his food to check for poison, and when he went to sleep, armed guards watched at his bedroom door. Most of these customs are still practiced in some way, and the rituals observed at public dinners are just remnants of the past.

I was told the following anecdote by Mad. de ——, who was intimate with Louis XVIII. One day, in taking an airing, the king was thirsty, and sent a footman to a cottage for water. The peasants appeared with some grapes, which they offered, as the homage of their condition. The king took them and ate them, notwithstanding the remonstrances of his attendants. This little incident was spoken of at court, where all the monarch does and says becomes matter of interest, and the next time Mad. de —— was admitted, she joined her remonstrances to those of the other courtiers. "We no longer live in an age when kings need dread assassins," said Louis, smiling. A month passed, and Mad. de —— was again admitted. She was received with a melancholy shake of the head, and with tears. The Duc de Berri had been killed in the interval!

I heard the following story from Madame de ——, who was close with Louis XVIII. One day, while enjoying a jaunt, the king got thirsty and sent a footman to a cottage for water. The peasants came out with some grapes, which they offered as a token of their respect. The king took them and ate them, despite his attendants' protests. This little incident was talked about at court, where everything the monarch does and says becomes a topic of interest, and the next time Madame de —— was received, she joined in with the other courtiers to express their concerns. "We no longer live in an age when kings need to fear assassins," said Louis, smiling. A month later, Madame de —— was again admitted. She was met with a sad shake of the head and tears. The Duc de Berri had been killed in the meantime!

A few gentlemen, who did not strictly belong to the court, appeared among the duchesses, but, at the most, there were but six or eight. One of them, however, was the gayest looking personage I ever saw in the station of a gentleman, being nothing but lace and embroidery, even to the seams of his coat; a sort of genteel harlequin. The abbé, who seemed to understand himself, said he was a Spanish grandee.

A few gentlemen, who technically didn’t belong to the court, mingled among the duchesses, but there were only about six or eight of them at most. One of them, though, was the most flamboyant person I’ve ever seen in a gentleman's role, dressed completely in lace and embroidery, even the seams of his coat; like a posh harlequin. The abbé, who seemed to know his stuff, claimed he was a Spanish grandee.

I was near the little gate, when an old man, in a strictly court dress, but plain and matter-of-fact in air, made an application for admittance. In giving way for him to pass, my attention was drawn to his appearance. The long white hair that hung down his face, the cordon bleu, the lame foot, the imperturbable countenance, and the unearthly aspect, made me suspect the truth. On inquiring, I was right. It was M. de Talleyrand! He came as grand chamberlain, to officiate at the dinner of his master.

I was by the little gate when an old man, dressed in formal court attire, but with a straightforward and no-nonsense demeanor, asked to be let in. As I stepped aside for him, I couldn't help but notice his appearance. The long white hair hanging down his face, the cordon bleu, the limp, the unfazed expression, and the otherworldly look made me suspect something. When I asked, I was right. It was M. de Talleyrand! He came as grand chamberlain to preside over his master's dinner.

Everything, in a court, goes by clock-work. Your little great may be out of time, and affect a want of punctuality, but a rigid attention to appointments is indispensable to those who are really in high situations. A failure in this respect would produce the same impression on the affairs of men, that a delay in the rising of the sun would produce on the day. The appearance of the different personages named, all so near each other, was the certain sign that one greater than all could not be far behind. They were the dawn of the royal presence. Accordingly, the door which communicated with the apartments of the king, and the only one within the railed space, opened with the announcement of "Le service du Roi," when a procession of footmen of the palace appeared, bearing the dishes of the first course. All the vessels, whether already on the table, or those in their hands, were of gold, richly wrought, or, at least, silver gilt, I had no means of knowing which; most probably they were of the former metal. The dishes were taken from the footmen by pages, of honour in scarlet dresses, and by them placed in order on the table. The first course was no sooner ready, than we heard the welcome announcement of "Le Roi." The family immediately made their appearance, at the same door by which the service had entered. They were followed by a proper number of lords and ladies in waiting. Every one arose, as a matter of course, even to the "jeunes, jolies, et duchesses;" and the music, as became it, gave us a royal crash. The huissier, in announcing the king, spoke in a modest voice, and less loud, I observed, than in announcing the Dauphin and the ladies. It was, however, a different person; and it is probable one was a common huissier, and the other a gentleman acting in that character.

Everything in a court runs like clockwork. Your minor aristocrat may be out of sync and seem a bit late, but strict adherence to schedules is essential for those truly in high positions. A misstep in this regard would have the same impact on people's affairs as a delay in the sunrise would have on the day. The appearance of the various dignitaries, all so close to one another, was a sure sign that someone greater was not far behind. They were the dawn of the royal presence. Accordingly, the door connecting to the king’s chambers, and the only one within the fenced area, opened with the announcement of "Le service du Roi," as a procession of palace footmen entered, carrying the dishes for the first course. All the vessels, whether already on the table or in their hands, were made of gold, richly decorated, or at least gilt silver; I couldn’t tell which for sure, but they were probably gold. The footmen handed the dishes to pages dressed in scarlet, who organized them on the table. As soon as the first course was ready, we heard the anticipated announcement of "Le Roi." The royal family entered immediately through the same door by which the service had come. They were followed by the appropriate number of lords and ladies in attendance. Everyone stood up automatically, including the "young, pretty, and duchesses," and the music appropriately played a royal fanfare. The usher announced the king in a quiet voice, and I noticed it was softer than when announcing the Dauphin and the ladies. However, that was a different usher, and it's likely one was a common usher while the other was a gentleman fulfilling that role.

Charles X. is tall, without being of a too heavy frame, flexible of movement, and decidedly graceful. By remembering that he is king, and the lineal chief of the ancient and powerful family of the Bourbons, by deferring properly to history and the illusions of the past, and by feeling tant soit peu more respect for those of the present day than is strictly philosophical, or perhaps wise, it is certainly possible to fancy that he has a good deal of that peculiar port and majesty that the poetry of feeling is so apt to impute to sovereigns. I know not whether it is the fault of a cynical temperament, or of republican prejudices, but I can see no more, about him than the easy grace of an old gentleman, accustomed all his life to be a principal personage among the principal personages of the earth. This you may think was quite sufficient,—but it aid not altogether satisfy the exigence of my unpoetical ideas. His countenance betrayed, a species of vacant bonhommie, rather than of thought or dignity of mind; and while he possessed, in a singular degree, the mere physical machinery of his rank, he was wanting in the majesty of character and expression, without which no man can act well the representation of royalty. Even a little more severity of aspect would have better suited the part, and rendered le grand couvert encore plus grand.

Charles X is tall but not overly heavy, moves easily, and is undeniably graceful. If one remembers that he is a king and the head of the ancient and powerful Bourbon family, respects history and the nostalgia of the past, and feels just a bit more respect for present-day figures than is strictly rational or perhaps sensible, it’s certainly possible to imagine that he has a fair amount of the special poise and dignity that emotion tends to associate with rulers. I’m not sure if it's due to a cynical view or republican biases, but I only see in him the easy charm of an old gentleman, accustomed throughout his life to being a key figure among influential people. You might think that was sufficient, but it didn't entirely meet the demands of my unromantic thoughts. His face showed a kind of vacant friendliness rather than thought or dignity; while he had, in a unique way, the physical attributes of his rank, he lacked the majesty of character and expression that no one can properly embody royalty without. Even a touch more seriousness of expression would have better suited the role and made the grandeur feel even grander.

The king seated himself, after receiving the salutations of the courtiers within the railing, taking no notice however, of those who, by a fiction of etiquette, were not supposed to be in his presence. The rest of the family occupied their respective places in the order I have named, and the eating and drinking began, from the score. The different courses were taken off and served by footmen and pages in the manner already described, which, after all, by substituting servants out of livery for pages, is very much the way great dinners are served, in great houses, all over Europe.

The king sat down after greeting the courtiers within the railing, ignoring those who, due to a pretense of etiquette, were not meant to be in his presence. The rest of the family took their places as I previously mentioned, and the eating and drinking commenced, according to the menu. The different courses were brought out and served by footmen and pages as I’ve already described, which, after all, by using non-uniformed servants instead of pages, is pretty much how big dinners are served in grand houses across Europe.

As soon as the king was seated, the north door of the gallery, or that on the side opposite to the place where I had taken post, was opened, and the public was admitted, passing slowly through the room without stopping. A droller mélange could not be imagined than presented itself in the panoramic procession; and long before the grand couvert was over, I thought it much the most amusing part of the scene. Very respectable persons, gentlemen certainly, and I believe in a few instances ladies, came in this way, to catch a glimpse of the spectacle. I saw several men that I knew, and the women with them could have been no other than their friends. To these must be added, cochers de fiacres in their glazed hats, bonnes in their high Norman caps, peasants, soldiers in their shakos, épiciers and garçons without number. The constant passage, for it lasted without intermission for an hour and a half, of so many queer faces, reminded me strongly of one of those mechanical panoramas, that bring towns, streets, and armies, before the spectator. One of the droll effects of this scene was produced by the faces, all of which turned, like sunflowers, towards the light of royalty, as the bodies moved steadily on. Thus, on entering, the eyes were a little inclined to the right; as they got nearer to the meridian, they became gradually bent more aside; when opposite the table, every face, was full; and, in retiring, all were bent backwards over their owners' shoulders, constantly offering a dense crowd of faces, looking towards a common centre, while the bodies were coming on, or moving slowly off the stage. This, you will see, resembled in some measure the revolutions of the moon around our orb, matter and a king possessing the same beneficent attraction. I make no doubt, these good people thought we presented a curious spectacle; but I am persuaded they presented one that was infinitely more so.

As soon as the king was seated, the north door of the gallery, or the one on the side opposite where I was standing, opened, and the public was let in, passing slowly through the room without stopping. A funnier mix could not have been imagined than the colorful procession that appeared; and long before the formal dining started, I found it to be the most entertaining part of the scene. Very respectable people, certainly gentlemen, and I believe some ladies as well, walked in this way to catch a glimpse of the spectacle. I recognized several men, and the women with them could only have been their friends. Along with them were cab drivers in their shiny hats, maids in their high Norman caps, peasants, soldiers in their hats, and countless shopkeepers and their assistants. The constant flow, lasting uninterrupted for an hour and a half, of so many quirky faces strongly reminded me of one of those mechanical panoramas that display towns, streets, and armies before the viewer. One of the amusing effects of this scene was created by the faces, all of which turned, like sunflowers, toward the light of royalty as the bodies moved steadily on. Thus, upon entering, the eyes were slightly inclined to the right; as they approached the center, they gradually turned more sideways; when in front of the table, every face was in full view; and while stepping back, all were tilted backward over their owners' shoulders, constantly presenting a dense crowd of faces looking toward a common center, even as the bodies flowed in or slowly exited the stage. This, as you can see, somewhat resembled the moon's revolutions around our planet, with both matter and a king holding the same magnetic pull. I have no doubt that these good people thought we were an interesting sight; but I am convinced they were providing one that was far more fascinating.

I had seen in America, in divers places, an Englishman, a colonel in the army. We had never been introduced, but had sat opposite to each other at tables d'hôtes, jostled each other in the President's House, met in steam-boats, in the streets, and in many other places, until it was evident our faces were perfectly familiar to both parties; and yet we never nodded, spoke, or gave any other sign of recognition, than by certain knowing expressions of the eyes. In Europe, the colonel reappeared. We met in London, in Paris, in the public walks, in the sight-seeing places of resort, until we evidently began to think ourselves a couple of Monsieur Tonsons. To-night, as I was standing near the public platform, whose face should appear in the halo of countenances but that of my colonel! The poor fellow had a wooden leg, and he was obliged to stump on in his orbit as well as he could, while I kept my eye on him, determined to catch a look of recognition if possible. When he got so far forward as to bring me in his line of sight, our eyes met, and he smiled involuntarily. Then he took a deliberate survey of my comfortable position, and he disappeared in the horizon, with some such expression on his features as must have belonged to Commodore Trunnion, when he called out to Hatchway, while the hunter was leaping over the lieutenant, "Oh! d—n you; you are well anchored!"

I had seen an Englishman, a colonel in the army, in various places in America. We had never been officially introduced, but we had sat across from each other at tables d'hôtes, bumped into each other in the President's House, encountered one another on steam-boats, in the streets, and many other spots, until it became clear that our faces were completely familiar to both of us; yet we never nodded, spoke, or gave any other sign of acknowledgment, aside from certain knowing looks. The colonel showed up again in Europe. We ran into each other in London, in Paris, in public parks, at popular tourist spots, until we both seemed to think of ourselves as a couple of Monsieur Tonsons. Tonight, as I was standing near the public stage, who should appear in the crowd but my colonel! The poor guy had a wooden leg, and he had to move along as best he could, while I kept an eye on him, hoping to catch a look of recognition if I could. When he got close enough to bring me into his line of sight, our eyes met, and he smiled without meaning to. Then he took a good look at my comfortable spot, and he faded into the distance with an expression that must have been similar to what Commodore Trunnion had when he shouted to Hatchway, while the hunter was jumping over the lieutenant, "Oh! damn you; you are well anchored!"

I do not think the dinner, in a culinary point of view, was anything extraordinary. The king ate and drank but little, for, unlike his two brothers and predecessors, he is said to be abstemious. The Daupin played a better knife and fork; but on the whole, the execution was by no means great for Frenchmen. The guests sat so far apart, and the music made so much noise, that conversation was nearly out of the question; though the King and the Dauphin exchanged a few words in the course of the evening. Each of the gentlemen, also, spoke once or twice to his female neighbour, and that was pretty much the amount of the discourse. The whole party appeared greatly relieved by having something to do during the desert, in admiring the service, which was of the beautiful Sèvres china. They all took up the plates, and examined them attentively; and really I was glad they had so rational an amusement to relieve their ennui.

I don’t think the dinner was anything special from a culinary standpoint. The king ate and drank very little because, unlike his two brothers and predecessors, he’s said to be quite restrained. The Dauphin managed the knife and fork better, but overall, the food wasn’t anything remarkable for French standards. The guests were seated so far apart, and the music was so loud, that having a conversation was nearly impossible; although the King and the Dauphin did say a few words to each other during the evening. Each gentleman also spoke once or twice to the woman next to him, and that pretty much summed up the conversation. The whole group seemed really relieved to have something to do during dessert, which was admiring the beautiful Sèvres china. They all picked up the plates and examined them closely, and honestly, I was glad they had such a sensible way to stave off their boredom.

Once, early in the entertainment, M. de Talleyrand approached the king, and showed him the bill of fare! It was an odd spectacle to see this old diplomate descending to the pantomime of royalty, and acting the part of a maître d'hôtel. Had the duty fallen on Cambacères, one would understand it, and fancy that it might be well done. The king smiled on him graciously, and, I presume, gave him leave to retire; for soon after this act of loyal servitude, the prince disappeared. As for M. Louis, he treated Charles better than his brother treated Sancho; for I did not observe the slightest interference, on his part, during the whole entertainment; though one of those near me said he had tasted a dish or two by way of ceremony,—an act of precaution that I did not myself observe. I asked my neighbour, the abbé, what he thought of M. de Talleyrand. After looking up in my face distrustfully, he whispered:—"Mais, monsieur, c'est un chat qui tombe toujours sur ses pieds;" a remark that was literally true tonight, for, the old man was kept on his feet longer than could have been agreeable to the owner of two such gouty legs.

Once, early in the event, M. de Talleyrand approached the king and showed him the menu! It was a strange sight to see this old diplomat stepping into the role of royalty and acting like a head waiter. If it had been Cambacères, it would have made sense, and we could imagine it being done well. The king smiled at him kindly and, I assume, allowed him to step back; because shortly after this act of loyal service, the prince vanished. As for M. Louis, he treated Charles better than his brother treated Sancho; I didn’t notice any interference from him during the entire event, although someone near me mentioned he had sampled a dish or two out of courtesy—a precaution I didn’t see myself. I asked my neighbor, the abbot, what he thought of M. de Talleyrand. After looking at me suspiciously, he whispered: “But, sir, he’s a cat who always lands on his feet;” a remark that was literally true tonight, as the old man was on his feet longer than would have been comfortable for someone with two such gouty legs.

The Duchesse de Berri, who sat quite near the place where I stood, was busy a good deal of the time à lorgner the public through her eye-glass. This she did with very little diffidence of manner, and quite as coolly as an English duchess would have stared at a late intimate whom she was disposed to cut. It certainly was neither a graceful, nor a feminine, nor a princely occupation. The Dauphine played the Bourbon better; though, when she turned her saddened, not to say cruel eyes, on the public, it was with an expression that almost amounted to reproach. I did not see her smile once during the whole time she was at table; and yet I thought there were many things to smile at.

The Duchesse de Berri, who was sitting quite close to where I stood, spent a lot of her time lorgning the crowd through her monocle. She did this with very little shyness and just as coolly as an English duchess would have stared at an old friend she wanted to ignore. It definitely wasn’t a graceful, feminine, or royal thing to do. The Dauphine did the Bourbon thing better; however, when she turned her sad, not to mention cruel, eyes on the crowd, it was with an expression that could almost be seen as reproach. I didn't see her smile even once the whole time she was at the table; yet I thought there were plenty of things to smile about.

At length the finger-bowls appeared, and I was not sorry to see them. Contrary to what is commonly practised in very great houses, the pages placed them on the table, just as Henri puts them before us democrats every day. I ought to have said, that the service was made altogether in front, or at the unoccupied side of the table, nothing but the bill of fare, in the hands of M. de Talleyrand, appearing in the rear. As soon as this part of the dinner was over, the king arose, and the whole party withdrew by the door on the further side of the galery. In passing the gradins of the ladies, he stopped to says a few kind words to an old woman who was seated there, muffled in a cloak, and the light of royalty vanished.

At last, the finger bowls showed up, and I was glad to see them. Unlike what's usually done in really fancy houses, the servers put them on the table, just like Henri does for us everyday folks. I should mention that the service was done entirely from the front, or from the empty side of the table, with only the menu in M. de Talleyrand's hands appearing from the back. Once this part of dinner was done, the king stood up, and the whole group left through the door on the other side of the gallery. As he passed by the ladies' section, he paused to say a few kind words to an old woman sitting there, wrapped in a cloak, and the light of royalty faded away.

The catastrophe is to come. The instant the king's back was turned, the gallery became a scene of confusion. The musicians ceased playing, and began to chatter; the pages dashed about to remove the service, and everybody was in motion. Observing that your —— was standing undecided what to do, I walked into the railed area, brushed past the gorgeous state table, and gave her my arm. She laughed, and said it had all been very magnificent and amusing, but that some one had stolen her shawl! A few years before, I had purchased for her a merino shawl, of singular fineness, simplicity, and beauty. It was now old, and she had worn it on this occasion, because she distrusted the dirt of a palace; and laying it carelessly by her side, in the course of the evening she had found in its place a very common thing of the same colour. The thief was deceived by its appearance your —— being dressed for an evening party, and had probably mistaken it for a cashmere. So much for the company one meets at court! Too much importance, however, must not be attached to this little contretems, as people of condition are apt to procure tickets for such places, and to give them to their femmes de chambre. Probably, half the women present, the "jeunes et jolies" excepted, were of this class. But mentioning this affair to the old Princesse de ——, she edified me by an account of the manner in which Madame la Comtesse de —— had actually appropriated to the service of her own pretty person the cachemire of Madame la Baronne de ——, in the royal presence; and how there was a famous quarrel, à l'outrance, about it; so I suspend my opinions as to the quality of the thief.

The disaster is about to happen. The moment the king turned his back, the gallery erupted into chaos. The musicians stopped playing and started chatting; the attendants rushed around to clear the table, and everyone was on the move. Noticing that your —— was standing there unsure of what to do, I stepped into the roped-off area, brushed past the lavish state table, and offered her my arm. She laughed and said it had all been very grand and entertaining, but that someone had stolen her shawl! A few years earlier, I'd bought her a merino shawl that was notably fine, simple, and beautiful. It was now old, and she had worn it that night because she didn’t trust the dirtiness of a palace; carelessly placing it beside her, she discovered later that it had been replaced with a much cheaper version of the same color. The thief was fooled by its appearance since your —— was dressed for an evening event, and likely mistook it for a cashmere. So much for the kind of people you encounter at court! However, we shouldn't read too much into this little contretems, as people of high status tend to get tickets for these events and give them to their femmes de chambre. Probably half the women there, except for the "young and pretty," were from that category. But when I mentioned this incident to the old Princesse de ——, she enlightened me with a story about how Madame la Comtesse de —— had actually claimed the cachemire of Madame la Baronne de —— for her own delightful use in the presence of royalty; and how there was a notorious quarrel, à l'outrance, over it. So I hold off on my judgment about the thief's quality.

LETTER X.

Road to Versailles.—Origin of Versailles.—The present Chateau.—The
two Trianons.—La Petite Suisse.—Royal Pastime.—Gardens of Versailles.
—The State Apartments.—Marie Antoinette's Chamber.—Death of Louis XV.
—Oeil de Boeuf.—The Theatre and Chapel.—A
Quarry.—Caverns.—Compiègne.—Chateau de Pierre-font.—Influence of
Monarchy.—Orangery at Versailles.

Road to Versailles.—Origin of Versailles.—The current Château.—The
two Trianons.—La Petite Suisse.—Royal Leisure Activity.—Gardens of Versailles.
—The State Apartments.—Marie Antoinette's Room.—Death of Louis XV.
—Oeil de Boeuf.—The Theatre and Chapel.—A
Quarry.—Caves.—Compiègne.—Château de Pierrefont.—Impact of
Monarchy.—Orangery at Versailles.

To R. COOPER, ESQ., COOPERSTOWN, NEW YORK.

To R. Cooper, Esq., Cooperstown, New York.

We have been to Versailles, and although I have no intention to give a laboured description of a place about which men have written and talked these two centuries, it is impossible to pass over a spot of so much celebrity in total silence.

We have been to Versailles, and even though I don’t want to give an elaborate description of a place that people have been writing and talking about for the last two centuries, I can’t just ignore such a famous spot completely.

The road to Versailles lies between the park of St. Cloud and the village and manufactories of Sèvres. A little above the latter is a small palace, called Meudon, which, from its great elevation, commands a fine view of Paris. The palace of St. Cloud, of course, stands in the park; Versailles lies six or eight miles farther west; Compiègne is about fifty miles from Paris in one direction; Fontainebleau some thirty in another, and Rambouillet rather more remotely, in a third. All these palaces, except Versailles, are kept up, and from time to time are visited by the court. Versailles was stripped of its furniture in the revolution; and even Napoleon, at a time when the French empire extended from Hamburgh to Rome, shrunk from the enormous charge of putting it in a habitable state. It is computed that the establishment at Versailles, first and last, in matters of construction merely, cost the French monarchy two hundred millions of dollars! This is almost an incredible sum, when we remember the low price of wages in France; but, on the other hand, when we consider the vastness of the place, how many natural difficulties were overcome, and the multitude of works from the hands of artists of the first order it contained, it scarcely seems sufficient.

The road to Versailles runs between the park of St. Cloud and the village and factories of Sèvres. Just above Sèvres is a small palace called Meudon, which, due to its high location, offers a great view of Paris. The palace of St. Cloud is obviously located in the park; Versailles is about six to eight miles further west; Compiègne is around fifty miles from Paris in one direction; Fontainebleau is about thirty miles in another direction, and Rambouillet is even farther away, in yet another direction. All these palaces, except for Versailles, are maintained and occasionally visited by the court. Versailles was stripped of its furniture during the revolution; even Napoleon, when the French empire stretched from Hamburg to Rome, hesitated to cover the huge expense of making it livable again. It's estimated that the construction costs at Versailles, from the beginning to the end, amounted to two hundred million dollars for the French monarchy! This is an almost unbelievable amount, especially when we consider the low wage rates in France; however, when we think about the scale of the place, the numerous natural challenges that were tackled, and the many works created by top-tier artists that it housed, it hardly seems like enough.

Versailles originated as a hunting-seat, in the time of Louis XIII. In that age, most of the upland near Paris, in this direction, lay in forest, royal chases; and, as hunting was truly a princely sport, numberless temporary residences of this nature existed in the neighbourhood of the capital. There are still many remains of this barbarous magnificence, as in the wood of Vincennes, the forest of St. Germain, Compiègne, Fontainebleau, and divers others; but great inroads have been made in their limits by the progress of civilization and the wants of society. So lately as the reign of Louis XV. they hunted quite near the town; and we are actually, at this moment, dwelling in a country house, at St. Ouen, in which, tradition hatch it, he was wont to take his refreshments.

Versailles started as a hunting lodge during the time of Louis XIII. Back then, much of the land near Paris in that direction was covered in forests and royal hunting grounds. Since hunting was truly a sport for royalty, there were numerous temporary homes for this purpose around the capital. Many remnants of this extravagant past still exist, like in the woods of Vincennes, the forest of St. Germain, Compiègne, Fontainebleau, and others; however, significant progress has been made in clearing these areas for modern society's needs. As recently as the reign of Louis XV, they would hunt very close to the city; in fact, we are currently staying in a country house in St. Ouen where, according to tradition, he used to enjoy his meals.

The original building at Versailles was a small chateau, of a very ugly formation, and it was built of bricks. I believe it was enlarged, but not entirely constructed, by Louis XIII. A portion of this building is still visible, having been embraced in the subsequent structures; and, judging from its architecture, I should think it must be nearly as ancient as the time of Francis I. Around this modest nucleus was constructed, by a succession of monarchs, but chiefly by Louis XIV. the most regal residence of Europe, in magnificence and extent, if not in taste.

The original building at Versailles was a small chateau with a pretty unappealing design, made of bricks. I believe Louis XIII enlarged it, though he didn’t fully build it. A part of this building is still visible, integrated into the later structures; and judging by its architecture, I’d say it’s nearly as old as the time of Francis I. Around this simple core, a series of monarchs—mainly Louis XIV—built the most magnificent royal residence in Europe, both in size and splendor, if not always in style.

The present chateau, besides containing numberless wings and courts, has vast casernes for the quarters of the household troops, stables for many hundred horses, and is surrounded by a great many separate hotels, for the accommodation of the courtiers. It offers a front on the garden, in a single continuous line, that is broken only by a projection in the centre of more than a third of a mile in length. This is the only complete part of the edifice that possesses uniformity; the rest of it being huge piles grouped around irregular courts, or thrown forward in wings, that correspond to the huge body like those of the ostrich. There is on the front next the town, however, some attempt at simplicity and intelligibility of plan; for there is a vast open court lined by buildings, which have been commenced in the Grecian style. Napoleon, I believe, did something here, from which there is reason to suppose that he sometimes thought of inhabiting the palace. Indeed, so long as France has a king, it is impossible that such a truly royal abode can ever be wholly deserted. At present, it is the fashion to grant lodgings in it to dependants and favourites. Nothing that I have seen gives me so just and so imposing an idea of the old French monarchy as a visit to Versailles. Apart from the vastness and splendour of the palace, here is a town that actually contained, in former times, a hundred thousand souls, that entirely owed its existence to the presence of the court. Other monarchs lived in large towns; but here was a monarch whose presence created one. Figure to yourself the style of the prince, when a place more populous than Baltimore, and infinitely richer in externals, existed merely as an appendage to his abode!

The current chateau, besides having countless wings and courtyards, has large barracks for the household troops, stables for many hundreds of horses, and is surrounded by numerous separate hotels for the courtiers' accommodations. It presents a front to the garden in a continuous line, interrupted only by a projection in the center that stretches over a third of a mile. This is the only cohesive part of the building that maintains uniformity; the rest consists of massive structures arranged around irregular courtyards or extending forward in wings, resembling the body of an ostrich. On the front facing the town, however, there is some attempt at simplicity and clarity in its design, featuring a large open courtyard lined with buildings that have been started in a Grecian style. I believe Napoleon made some changes here, which suggests he occasionally thought about living in the palace. In fact, as long as France has a king, it's impossible for such a truly royal residence to be entirely vacant. Currently, it's common to provide accommodations in it for dependents and favorites. Nothing I have seen gives me a more accurate and impressive impression of the old French monarchy than a visit to Versailles. Aside from the vastness and grandeur of the palace, this was a town that once housed a hundred thousand people, entirely dependent on the presence of the court. Other monarchs lived in large cities; but here was a monarch whose presence created one. Just imagine the status of the prince when a place more populous than Baltimore, and infinitely richer in appearance, existed solely as an extension of his residence!

The celebrated garden contains two or three hundred acres of land, besides the ground that is included in the gardens of the two Trianons. These Trianons are small palaces erected in the gardens, as if the occupants of the chateau, having reached the acmé of magnificence and splendour in the principal residence, were seeking refuge against the effect of satiety in these humbler abodes. They appear small and insignificant after the palace; but the Great Trianon is a considerable house, and contains a fine suite of apartments, among which are some very good rooms. There are few English abodes of royalty that equal even this of Le Grand Trianon. The Petit Trianon was the residence of Madame de Maintenon; it afterwards was presented to the unfortunate Marie Antoinette, who, in part converted its grounds into an English garden, in addition to setting aside a portion into what is called La Petite Suisse.

The famous garden spans two to three hundred acres, not including the land that makes up the gardens of the two Trianons. These Trianons are small palaces built within the gardens, as if the residents of the chateau, having reached the peak of luxury and opulence in the main residence, were looking for a retreat from the effects of excess in these simpler homes. They seem small and unremarkable compared to the palace; however, the Great Trianon is quite a substantial building and features a lovely suite of rooms, some of which are very nice. There are few royal residences in England that match even this one at Le Grand Trianon. The Petit Trianon was home to Madame de Maintenon and later given to the unfortunate Marie Antoinette, who transformed part of its grounds into an English garden and designated another area as La Petite Suisse.

We went through this exceedingly pretty house and its gardens with melancholy interest. The first is merely a pavilion in the Italian taste, though it is about half as large as the President's House, at Washington. I should think the Great Trianon has quite twice the room of our own Executive residence; and, as you can well imagine, from what has already been said, the Capitol itself would be but a speck among the endless edifices of the chateau. The projection in the centre of the latter is considerably larger than the capitol, and it materially exceeds that building in cubic contents. Now this projection is but a small part indeed of the long line of façade, it actually appearing too short for the ranges of wings.

We walked through this incredibly beautiful house and its gardens with a sense of wistfulness. The main building is just a pavilion in Italian style, though it’s about half the size of the White House in Washington. I would guess the Great Trianon has at least double the space of our own Executive residence; and, as you can imagine from what’s already been mentioned, the Capitol would be just a tiny dot among the vast buildings of the chateau. The central projection of the chateau is much larger than the Capitol and has significantly more volume. Now, this projection is just a small part of the long façade, which actually looks too short compared to the wings that extend on either side.

Marie Antoinette was much censured for the amusements in which she indulged in the grounds of the Little Trianon, and vulgar rumour exaggerating their nature, no small portion of her personal unpopularity is attributable to this cause. The family of Louis XVI. appears to have suffered for the misdeeds of its predecessors, for it not being very easy to fancy anything much worse than the immoralities of Louis XV. the public were greatly disposed "to visit the sins of the fathers on the children."

Marie Antoinette faced a lot of criticism for the activities she enjoyed at the Little Trianon, and rumors exaggerated their nature, which contributed significantly to her unpopularity. The family of Louis XVI seemed to pay for the wrongdoings of their predecessors since it was hard to imagine anything worse than the immoral actions of Louis XV. Because of this, the public was very inclined to "pay the price for the sins of the fathers."

La Petite Suisse is merely a romantic portion of the garden, in which has been built what is called the Swiss Hamlet It contains the miniature abodes of the Curé, the Farmer, the Dairywoman, the Garde-de-Chasse, and the Seigneur, besides the mill. There is not much that is Swiss, however, about the place, with the exception of some resemblance in the exterior of the buildings. Here, it is said, the royal family used occasionally to meet, and pass an afternoon in a silly representation of rural life, that must have proved to be a prodigious caricature. The King (at least, so the guide affirmed), performed the part of the Seigneur, and occupied the proper abode; the Queen was the Dairy woman, and we were shown the marble tables that held her porcelain milk-pans; the present King, as became his notorious propensity to field-sports, was the Garde-de-Chasse, the late King was the Miller, and, mirabile dictu, the Archbishop of Paris did not disdain to play the part of the Curé. There was, probably, a good deal of poetry in this account; though it is pretty certain that the Queen did indulge in some of these phantasies. There happened to be with me, the day I visited this spot, an American from our own mountains, who had come fresh from home, with all his provincial opinions and habits strong about him. As the guide explained these matters, I translated them literally into English for the benefit of my companion, adding, that the fact rendered the Queen extremely unpopular with her subjects. "Unpopular!" exclaimed my country neighbour; "why so, sir?" "I cannot say; perhaps they thought it was not a fit amusement for a queen." My mountaineer stood a minute cogitating the affair in his American mind; and then nodding his head, he said:—"I understand it now. The people thought that a king and queen, coming from yonder palace to amuse themselves in this toy hamlet, in the characters of poor people, were making game of them!" I do not know whether this inference will amuse you as much as it did me at the time.

La Petite Suisse is just a charming part of the garden, featuring what is known as the Swiss Hamlet. It includes the tiny homes of the Curé, the Farmer, the Dairywoman, the Garde-de-Chasse, and the Seigneur, along with a mill. However, there's not much that’s truly Swiss about the place, aside from some similarity in the building exteriors. Here, it's said the royal family would sometimes gather and spend an afternoon playacting rural life in a rather ridiculous way. The King (at least that's what the guide claimed) took on the role of the Seigneur and stayed in the appropriate house; the Queen was the Dairywoman, and we were shown the marble tables that held her porcelain milk-pans. The current King, true to his well-known love for hunting, played the Garde-de-Chasse, the late King was the Miller, and, mirabile dictu, the Archbishop of Paris didn’t mind taking on the role of the Curé. There was probably a fair bit of poetry in this story, though it's quite certain the Queen did indulge in some of these fantasies. On the day I visited this place, I happened to be with an American from our own mountains, who had just come from home, carrying all his strong provincial opinions and habits. As the guide explained these things, I translated them word for word into English for my friend, adding that this made the Queen really unpopular among her subjects. “Unpopular!” exclaimed my country neighbor; “why's that, sir?” “I can’t say; maybe they thought it was not a suitable pastime for a queen.” My mountaineer pondered this for a moment in his American way, and then nodded his head, saying:—“I get it now. The people thought that a king and queen, coming from that palace to have fun in this toy hamlet, pretending to be poor people, were making fun of them!” I don’t know if this conclusion will amuse you as much as it did me at the time.

Of the gardens and the jets d'eau, so renowned, I shall say little. The former are in the old French style, formal and stiff, with long straight allées, but magnificent by their proportions and ornaments. The statuary and vases that are exposed to the open air, in this garden, must have cost an enormous sum. They are chiefly copies from the antique.

Of the gardens and the jets d'eau, which are so well-known, I'll say very little. The gardens are designed in the old French style, formal and rigid, featuring long straight allées, but they are impressive due to their size and decoration. The statues and vases displayed outdoors in this garden must have cost a fortune. They are mainly replicas of antique pieces.

As you stand on the great terrace, before the centre of the palace, the view is down the principal avenue, which terminates at the distance of two or three miles with a low naked hill, beyond which appears the void of the firmament. This conceit singularly helps the idea of vastness, though in effect it is certainly inferior to the pastoral prettiness and rural thoughts of modern landscape gardening. Probably too much is attempted here; for if the mind cannot conceive of illimitable space, still less can it be represented by means of material substances.

As you stand on the large terrace in front of the center of the palace, the view looks down the main avenue, which ends two or three miles away at a low, bare hill, beyond which you can see the emptiness of the sky. This idea oddly emphasizes the sense of vastness, even though it’s definitely not as nice as the charming beauty and rural themes of modern landscape design. Maybe there’s too much being attempted here; if the mind struggles to grasp limitless space, it’s even harder to express it with physical things.

We examined the interior of the palace with melancholy pleasure. The vast and gorgeous apartments were entirely without furniture, though many of the pictures still remain. The painted ceilings, and the gildings too, contribute to render the rooms less desolate than they would otherwise have been. I shall not stop to describe the saloons of Peace and War, and all the other celebrated apartments, that are so named from the subjects of their paintings, but merely add that the state apartments lie en suite, in the main body of the building, and that the principal room, or the great gallery, as it is termed, is in the centre, with the windows looking up the main avenue of the garden. This gallery greatly surpasses in richness and size any other room, intended for the ordinary purposes of a palace, that I have ever seen. Its length exceeds two hundred and thirty feet, its width is about thirty-five, and its height is rather more than forty. The walls are a complete succession of marbles, mirrors, and gildings. I believe, the windows and doors excepted, that literally no part of the sides or ends of this room show any other material. Even some of the doors are loaded with these decorations. The ceiling is vaulted, and gorgeous with allegories and gildings; they are painted by the best artists of France. Here Louis XIV. moved among his courtiers, more like a god than a man, and here was exhibited that mixture of grace and moral fraud, of elegance and meanness, of hope and disappointment, of pleasure and mortification, that form the characters and compose the existence of courtiers.

We explored the inside of the palace with a bittersweet sense of enjoyment. The vast and stunning rooms were completely unfurnished, though many of the paintings still remained. The painted ceilings and the gildings helped make the spaces feel less empty than they otherwise would have. I won’t go into detail about the halls of Peace and War, or the other well-known rooms named after the themes of their artwork, but I will mention that the state rooms are arranged in a suite in the main part of the building, with the main room, or the great gallery, situated in the center, its windows overlooking the main avenue of the garden. This gallery is far more opulent and larger than any other room meant for regular palace use that I've ever seen. Its length is over two hundred and thirty feet, its width about thirty-five feet, and its height is just over forty feet. The walls are entirely covered in marble, mirrors, and gildings. I believe, aside from the windows and doors, that literally no part of the sides or ends of this room is made of any other material. Even some of the doors are adorned with these decorations. The ceiling is vaulted and stunning, filled with allegories and gildings painted by the best artists in France. Here, Louis XIV moved among his courtiers, more like a god than a man, and this is where you would see that blend of grace and moral deceit, of elegance and pettiness, of hope and letdown, of pleasure and discomfort, which defines the lives of courtiers.

I do not know the precise number of magnificent ante-chambers and saloons through which we passed to reach this gallery, but there could not have been less than eight; one of which, as a specimen of the scale on which the palace is built, is near eighty feet long, and sixty wide. Continuing our course along the suite, we passed, among others, a council-room that looked more like state than business, and then came to the apartments of the Queen. There were several drawing-rooms, and ball-rooms, and card-rooms, and ante-rooms, and the change from the gorgeousness of the state apartments, to the neat, tasteful, chaste, feminine, white and gold of this part of the palace was agreeable, for I had got to be tired of splendour, and was beginning to feel a disposition to "make game of the people," by descending to rusticity.

I can't say how many magnificent hallways and rooms we went through to get to this gallery, but there were at least eight. One of those rooms, demonstrating the scale of the palace, is almost eighty feet long and sixty feet wide. As we continued along the corridor, we passed a council room that seemed more about display than business, and then we arrived at the Queen's apartments. There were several drawing rooms, ballrooms, card rooms, and ante-rooms, and the transition from the opulence of the state rooms to the neat, stylish, elegant white and gold of this section of the palace was refreshing. I had grown tired of all the grandeur and was starting to feel a desire to "make fun of the people" by embracing a more rustic vibe.

The bed-room of Marie Antoinette is in the suite. It is a large chamber, in the same style of ornament as the rest of her rooms, and the dressing-rooms, bath, and other similar conveniences, were in that exquisite French taste, which can only be equalled by imitation. The chamber of the King looked upon the court, and was connected with that of the Queen, by a winding and intricate communication of some length. The door that entered the apartments of the latter opened into a dressing-room, and both this door and that which communicated with the bed-room form a part of the regular wall, being tapestried as such, so as not to be immediately seen,—a style of finish that is quite usual in French houses. It was owing to this circumstance that Marie Antoinette made her escape, undetected, to the King's chamber, the night the palace was entered by the fish-women.

The bedroom of Marie Antoinette is part of the suite. It's a large room, decorated in the same style as the rest of her spaces, with the dressing rooms, bath, and other similar amenities showcasing that exquisite French taste that’s hard to match. The King’s chamber overlooked the courtyard and was connected to the Queen's room through a winding, complex passageway. The door leading into the Queen's quarters opened into a dressing room, and both this door and the one connecting to the bedroom are integrated into the wall, being covered with tapestries so they aren't immediately visible—a common design in French homes. It was because of this arrangement that Marie Antoinette was able to make her escape, unnoticed, to the King's chamber on the night that the palace was invaded by the fish-women.

We saw the rooms in which Louis XIV. and Louis XV. died. The latter, you may remember, fell a victim to the small-pox, and the disgusting body, that had so lately been almost worshipped, was deserted, the moment he was dead. It was left for hours, without even the usual decent observances. It was on the same occasion, we have been told, that his grandchildren, including the heir, were assembled in a private drawing-room, waiting the result, when they were startled by a hurried trampling of feet. It was the courtiers, rushing in a crowd, to pay their homage to the new monarch! All these things forced themselves painfully on our minds, as we walked through the state rooms. Indeed there are few things that can be more usefully studied, or which awaken a greater source of profitable recollections, than a palace that has been occupied by a great and historical court. Still they are not poetical.

We saw the rooms where Louis XIV and Louis XV died. The latter, you might remember, succumbed to smallpox, and the disgusting body that had recently been almost worshipped was abandoned the moment he died. It was left for hours, without even the usual respectful observances. We were told that on that same occasion, his grandchildren, including the heir, were gathered in a private drawing-room, waiting for news, when they were startled by a hurried rush of feet. It was the courtiers, rushing in a crowd to pay their respects to the new monarch! All these things weighed heavily on our minds as we walked through the state rooms. In fact, there are few things more valuable to study or that provoke a greater source of meaningful memories than a palace that has been home to a great and historical court. Still, they are not poetic.

The balcony, in which La Fayette appeared with the Queen and her children, opens from one of these rooms. It overlooks the inner court; or that in which the carriages of none but the privileged entered, for all these things were regulated by arbitrary rules. No one, for instance, was permitted to ride in the King's coach, unless his nobility dated from a certain century (the fourteenth, I believe), and these were your gentilshommes; for the word implies more than a noble, meaning an ancient nobleman.

The balcony where La Fayette showed up with the Queen and her kids opens from one of these rooms. It looks over the inner courtyard, which was only for the privileged carriages, since everything was controlled by arbitrary rules. For example, nobody was allowed to ride in the King's coach unless their nobility could be traced back to a specific century (I think it was the fourteenth), and those were your gentilshommes; because the term means more than just a noble, it refers to an old nobleman.

The writing cabinet, private dining-room, council-room in ordinary, library, etc. of the King, came next; the circuit ending in the Salles des Gardes, and the apartments usually occupied by the officers and troops on service.

The writing cabinet, private dining room, regular council room, library, etc. of the King came next; the circuit ending in the Salles des Gardes and the rooms usually occupied by the officers and troops on duty.

There was one room we got into, I scarce know how. It was a long, high gallery, plainly finished for a palace, and it seemed to be lighted from an interior court, or well; for one was completely caged when in it. This was the celebrated Bull's Eye (oeil de boeuf), where the courtiers danced attendance before they were received. It got its name from an oval window over the principal door.

There was one room we managed to enter, and I hardly know how. It was a long, high gallery, simply designed for a palace, and it looked like it was lit from an inner courtyard, or well; because once you were in it, you felt completely trapped. This was the famous Bull's Eye (oeil de boeuf), where the courtiers waited before they were received. It got its name from an oval window above the main door.

We looked at no more than the state apartments, and those of the King and Queen, and yet we must have gone through some thirty or forty rooms, of which, the baths and dressing-room of the Queen excepted, the very smallest would be deemed a very large room in America. Perhaps no private house contains any as large as the smallest of these rooms, with the exception of here and there a hall in a country house; and, no room at all, with ceilings nearly as high, and as noble, to say nothing of the permanent decorations, of which we have no knowledge whatever, if we omit the window-glass, and the mantels, in both of which, size apart, we often beat even the French palaces.

We only checked out the state apartments, including those of the King and Queen, but we still must have walked through about thirty or forty rooms. Aside from the Queen's baths and dressing room, even the smallest of these rooms would be considered very large in America. There’s probably no private home that has rooms as big as the smallest of these, except for maybe a few hallways in country houses. Plus, there’s no room at all with ceilings nearly as high and impressive, not to mention the permanent decorations we know nothing about, except for the window glass and the mantels, where, size aside, we often surpass even the French palaces.

We next proceeded to the Salle de Spectacle, which is a huge theatre. It may not be as large as the French Opera-house at Paris, but its dimensions did not appear to me to be much less. It is true, the stage was open, and came into the view; but it is a very large house for dramatic representations. Now, neither this building nor the chapel, seen on the exterior of the palace, though additions that project from the regular line of wall, obtrudes itself on the eye, more than a verandah attached to a window, on one of our largest houses! In this place the celebrated dinner was given to the officers of the guards.

We then went to the Salle de Spectacle, which is a large theater. It may not be as big as the French Opera House in Paris, but it didn’t seem much smaller to me. True, the stage was exposed and visible, but it’s still a spacious venue for dramatic performances. Neither this building nor the chapel, which can be seen on the outside of the palace, stands out to the eye more than a porch attached to a window on one of our biggest houses! This is where the famous dinner was held for the officers of the guards.

The chapel is rich and beautiful. No catholic church has pews, or, at all events they are very unusual, though the municipalities do sometimes occupy them in France, and, of course, the area was vacant. We were most struck with the paintings on the ceiling, in which the face of Louis XIV. was strangely and mystically blended with that of God the Father! Pictorial and carved representations of the Saviour and of the Virgin abound in all catholic countries; nor do they much offend, unless when the crucifixion is represented with bleeding wounds; for, as both are known to have appeared in the human form, the mind is not shocked at seeing them in the semblance of humanity. But this was the first attempt to delineate the Deity we had yet seen; and it caused us all to shudder. He is represented in the person of an old man looking from the clouds, in the centre of the ceiling, and the King appears among the angels that surround him. Flattery could not go much farther, without encroaching on omnipotence itself.

The chapel is rich and beautiful. No Catholic church has pews, or at least they are very rare, although the municipalities do sometimes use them in France, and of course, the space was empty. We were particularly struck by the paintings on the ceiling, where the face of Louis XIV. was strangely and mystically blended with that of God the Father! Pictorial and carved representations of the Savior and the Virgin are common in all Catholic countries; they usually don't offend, unless the crucifixion is depicted with bleeding wounds; since both are known to have appeared in human form, people aren’t shocked to see them looking like humans. But this was the first attempt to portray the Deity that we had encountered, and it made us all shudder. He is depicted as an old man looking down from the clouds at the center of the ceiling, while the King appears among the angels surrounding him. Flattery couldn’t go much further without crossing the line into omnipotence itself.

In returning from Versailles, to a tithe of the magnificence of which I have not alluded, I observed carts coming out of the side of a hill, loaded with the whitish stone that composes the building material of Paris. We stopped the carriage, and went into the passage, where we found extensive excavations. A lane of fifteen or twenty feet was cut through the stone, and the material was carted away in heavy square blocks. Piers were left, at short intervals, to sustain the superincumbent earth; and, in the end, the place gets to be a succession of intricate passages, separated by these piers, which resemble so many small masses of houses among the streets of a town. The entire region around Paris lies on a substratum of this stone, which indurates by exposure to the air, and the whole secret of the celebrated catacombs of Paris is just the same as that of this quarry, with the difference that this opens on a level with the upper world, lying in a hill, while one is compelled to descend to get to the level of the others. But enormous wheels, scattered about the fields in the vicinity of the town, show where shafts descend to new quarries on the plains, which are precisely the same as those under Paris. The history of these subterranean passages is very simple. The stone beneath has been transferred to the surface, as a building material; and the graves of the town, after centuries, were emptied into the vaults below. Any apprehensions of the caverns falling in, on a great scale, are absurd, as the constant recurrence of the piers, which are the living rock, must prevent such a calamity; though it is within the limits of possibility that a house or two might disappear. Quite lately, it is said, a tree in the garden of the Luxembourg fell through, owing to the water working a passage down into the quarries, by following its roots. The top of the tree remained above ground some distance; and to prevent unnecessary panic, the police immediately caused the place to be concealed by a high and close board fence. The tree was cut away in the night, the hole was filled up, and few knew anything about it. But it is scarcely possible that any serious accident should occur, even to a single house, without a previous and gradual sinking of its walls giving notice of the event. The palace of the Luxembourg, one of the largest and finest edifices of Paris, stands quite near the spot where the tree fell through, and yet there is not the smallest danger of the structure's disappearing some dark night, the piers below always affording sufficient support. Au reste, the catacombs lie under no other part of Paris than the Quartier St. Jacques, not crossing the river, nor reaching even the Faubourg St. Germain.

On our way back from Versailles, to a fraction of the grandeur I haven't mentioned, I noticed carts coming out from the side of a hill, filled with the whitish stone used for building Paris. We stopped the carriage and went into the passage, where we discovered large excavations. A path about fifteen or twenty feet wide was cut through the stone, and the material was loaded onto carts in heavy square blocks. Piers were left at regular intervals to support the earth above, and eventually, the area turned into a maze of intricate passages, separated by these piers, looking like clusters of small houses in a town. The entire area around Paris sits on a base of this stone, which hardens when exposed to air. The well-known catacombs of Paris share the same secret as this quarry, except that this one is open at ground level on a hill, while the catacombs require you to descend to reach them. Massive wheels scattered across fields near the town show where shafts go down to new quarries in the plains, which are just like the ones beneath Paris. The story of these underground passages is pretty straightforward. The stone underneath has been brought to the surface for building, and over centuries, the town's graves were emptied into the vaults below. Fears of the caverns collapsing on a large scale are unfounded, as the constant presence of the piers, which are solid rock, prevents such a disaster; though it is possible for a house or two to vanish. Recently, it’s said, a tree in the Luxembourg garden fell through because water was eroding a path into the quarries by following its roots. The top of the tree stayed above ground for a while, and to avoid causing panic, the police quickly put up a tall, solid fence to hide the area. The tree was removed at night, the hole was filled, and few people knew anything about it. However, it’s nearly impossible for a serious accident to happen, even to a single house, without a prior and gradual sinking of its walls signaling the event. The Luxembourg palace, one of the largest and most beautiful buildings in Paris, is located very close to where the tree fell, yet there’s no real risk of it disappearing one night, as the piers below always provide adequate support. Au reste, the catacombs are located under no other part of Paris than the Quartier St. Jacques, not crossing the river, nor reaching even the Faubourg St. Germain.

I have taken you so unceremoniously out of the chateau of Versailles to put you into the catacombs, that some of the royal residences have not received the attention I intended. We have visited Compiègne this summer, including it in a little excursion of about a hundred miles, that we made in the vicinity of the capital, though it scarcely offered sufficient matter of interest to be the subject of an especial letter. We found the forest deserving of its name, and some parts of it almost as fine as an old American wood of the second class. We rode through it five or six miles to see a celebrated ruin, called Pierre-fond, which was one of those baronial holds, out of which noble robbers used to issue, to plunder on the highway, and commit all sorts of acts of genteel violence. The castle and the adjacent territory formed one of the most ancient seigneuries of France. The place was often besieged and taken. In the time of Henry IV. that monarch, finding the castle had fallen into the hands of a set of desperadoes, who were ranked with the Leaguers, sent the Duc d'Epernon against the place; but he was wounded, and obliged to raise the siege. Marshal Biron was next despatched, with all the heavy artillery that could be spared; but he met with little better success. This roused Henry, who finally succeeded in getting possession of the place. In the reign of his son, Louis XIII, the robberies and excesses of those who occupied the castle became so intolerable, that the government seized it again, and ordered it to be destroyed. Now you will remember that this castle stood in the very heart of France, within fifty miles of the capital, and but two leagues from a royal residence, and all so lately as the year 1617; and that it was found necessary to destroy it, on account of the irregularities of its owners. What an opinion one is driven to form of the moral civilization of Europe from a fact like this! Feudal grandeur loses greatly in a comparison with modern law, and more humble honesty.

I have pulled you out of the Chateau of Versailles and into the catacombs so abruptly that some of the royal residences didn’t get the attention I meant to give them. We visited Compiègne this summer as part of a little trip of about a hundred miles around the capital, although it didn't really provide enough interest to warrant a special letter. The forest lived up to its name, with some parts almost as nice as an average second-class American woods. We rode through it for five or six miles to see a famous ruin called Pierre-fond, which was one of those baronial strongholds where noble thieves used to come out, rob on the highway, and commit all sorts of genteel violence. The castle and the surrounding land were among the oldest seigneuries in France. The place was often besieged and captured. During the reign of Henry IV, that king, finding the castle had fallen into the hands of a bunch of desperate people associated with the Leaguers, sent the Duc d'Epernon to take it back, but he was injured and had to lift the siege. Next, Marshal Biron was sent with all the heavy artillery available, but he had little more success. This got Henry fired up, and he eventually managed to take control of the place. During the reign of his son, Louis XIII, the robberies and chaos caused by those who held the castle became so unbearable that the government reclaimed it and ordered it to be destroyed. Now, you’ll remember that this castle was right in the heart of France, just fifty miles from the capital and only two leagues from a royal residence, and this was as recently as 1617. It's remarkable that they found it necessary to destroy it because of the misdeeds of its owners. What a perspective this gives on the moral state of Europe! Feudal grandeur falls short when compared to modern law and more humble honesty.

It was easier, however, to order the Chateau de Pierre-fond to be destroyed, than to effect that desirable object. Little more was achieved than to make cuts into the external parts of the towers and walls, and to unroof the different buildings; and, although this was done two hundred years since, time has made little impression on the ruins. We were shown a place where there had been an attempt to break into the walls for stones, but which had been abandoned, because it was found easier to quarry them from the living rock. The principal towers were more than a hundred feet high, and their angles and ornaments seemed to be as sharp and solid as ever. This was much the noblest French ruin we had seen, and it may be questioned if there are many finer, out of Italy, in Europe.

It was easier, however, to order the Chateau de Pierre-fond to be destroyed than to achieve that goal. Little more was accomplished than making cuts into the outside of the towers and walls and removing the roofs of the various buildings; and, although this happened two hundred years ago, time has had little effect on the ruins. We were shown a spot where there had been an attempt to break into the walls for stones, but that was abandoned because it turned out to be easier to quarry them from the living rock. The main towers were over a hundred feet tall, and their angles and ornaments appeared just as sharp and solid as ever. This was by far the most impressive French ruin we had seen, and it's questionable whether there are many more stunning ones outside of Italy, in Europe.

The palace of Compiègne, after that of Versailles, hardly rewarded us for the trouble of examining it. Still it is large and in perfect repair: but the apartments are common-place, though there are a few that are good. A prince, however, is as well lodged, even here, as is usual in the north of Europe. The present king is fond of resorting to this house, on account of the game of the neighbouring forest. We saw several roebucks bounding among the trees, in our drive to Pierre-fond.[13]

The palace of Compiègne, after Versailles, didn't really reward us for the effort of checking it out. Still, it's big and in perfect condition; however, the rooms are pretty ordinary, though there are a few that stand out. A prince, though, has a decent place to stay here, just like in most of northern Europe. The current king enjoys visiting this residence because of the game in the nearby forest. We saw several roebucks leaping among the trees during our drive to Pierre-fond.[13]

[Footnote 13: Pierre-fond, or Pierre-font]

[Footnote 13: Pierre-fond, or Pierre-font]

I have dwelt on the palaces and the court so much, because one cannot get a correct idea of what France was, and perhaps I ought to say, of what France, through the reaction, will be, if this point were overlooked. The monarch was all in all in the nation—the centre of light, wealth, and honour; letters, the arts, and the sciences revolved around him, as the planets revolve around the sun; and if there ever was a civilized people whose example it would be fair to quote for or against the effects of monarchy, I think it would be the people of France. I was surprised at my own ignorance on the subject of the magnificence of these kings, of which, indeed, it is not easy for an untravelled American to form any just notion; and it has struck me you might be glad to hear a little on these points.

I focused a lot on the palaces and the court because you can't really understand what France was, and maybe I should say what France will become through the reaction, if we overlook this aspect. The monarch was everything to the nation—the center of light, wealth, and honor; literature, the arts, and sciences all revolved around him, just like planets revolve around the sun. If there’s ever been a civilized society that serves as a fitting example for or against the effects of monarchy, I believe it’s the people of France. I was surprised by my own lack of knowledge about the grandeur of these kings, which isn’t easy for someone from America who hasn’t traveled to grasp; and I thought you might appreciate hearing a bit about this.

After all I have said, I find I have entirely omitted the Orangery at Versailles. But then I have said little or nothing of the canals, the jets d'eau, of the great and little parks, which, united, are fifty miles in circumference, and of a hundred other things. Still, as this orangery is on a truly royal scale, it deserves a word of notice before I close my letter. The trees are housed in winter in long vaulted galleries, beneath the great terrace; and there is a sort of sub-court in front of them, where they are put into the sun during the pleasant season. This place is really an orange grove; and, although every tree is in a box, and is nursed like a child, many of them are as large as it is usual to find in the orange groves of low latitudes. Several are very old, two or three dating from the fifteenth century, and one from the early part of it. What notions do you get of the magnificence of the place, when you are told, that a palace, subterraneous, it is true, is devoted to this single luxury, and that acres are covered with trees in boxes?

After everything I've mentioned, I realize I completely overlooked the Orangery at Versailles. However, I haven't talked much about the canals, the fountains, or the large and small parks, which together stretch for fifty miles, along with a hundred other things. Still, since this orangery is genuinely on a royal scale, it deserves a mention before I wrap up my letter. The trees are kept in long vaulted galleries during the winter under the great terrace, and there's a kind of courtyard in front of them where they can soak up the sun during the nice weather. This place is basically an orange grove; and even though each tree is in a pot and cared for like a child, many of them are as large as those typically found in orange groves in warmer climates. Some are quite old, with a couple dating back to the fifteenth century, and one even earlier. Just think about the grandeur of the place when you learn that a palace, albeit underground, is dedicated to this single luxury, and that there are acres filled with trees in pots!

LETTER XI.

Laws of Intercourse.—Americans in Europe.—Americans and English.
—Visiting in America.—Etiquette of Visits.—Presentations at Foreign
Courts.—Royal Receptions.—American Pride.—Pay of the President.
—American Diplomatist.

Laws of Intercourse.—Americans in Europe.—Americans and English.
—Visiting in America.—Etiquette of Visits.—Introductions at Foreign
Courts.—Royal Receptions.—American Pride.—Salary of the President.
—American Diplomat.

To JAMES STEVENSON, ESQUIRE, ALBANY.

To James Stevenson, Esq., Albany.

I intend this letter to be useful rather than entertaining. Living, as we Americans do, remote from the rest of the world, and possessing so many practices peculiar to ourselves, at the same time that we are altogether wanting in usages that are familiar to most other nations, it should not be matter of surprise that we commit some mistakes on this side of the water, in matters of taste and etiquette. A few words simply expressed, and a few explanations plainly made, may serve to remove some errors, and perhaps render your own contemplated visit to this part of the world more agreeable.

I want this letter to be helpful rather than entertaining. Since we Americans live far away from the rest of the world and have many practices unique to us, while lacking the customs that are common in most other countries, it’s not surprising that we make some mistakes here when it comes to taste and etiquette. A few clearly stated words and simple explanations can help correct some misunderstandings and possibly make your upcoming visit to this area more enjoyable.

There is no essential difference in the leading rules of ordinary intercourse among the polished of all Christian nations. Though some of these rules may appear arbitrary, it will be found, on examination, that they are usually derived from very rational and sufficient motives. They may vary, in immaterial points, but even these variations arise from some valid circumstance.

There’s no fundamental difference in the main rules of social interaction among the refined people of all Christian nations. While some of these rules might seem arbitrary, a closer look shows that they usually come from very reasonable and solid reasons. They might differ in minor ways, but even these differences stem from some legitimate circumstance.

The American towns are growing so rapidly, that they are getting to have the population of capitals without enjoying their commonest facilities. The exaggerated tone of our largest towns, for instance, forbids the exchange of visits by means of servants. It may suit the habits of provincial life to laugh at this as an absurdity, but it may be taken pretty safely as a rule, that men and women of as much common sense as the rest of their fellow-creatures, with the best opportunities of cultivating all those tastes that are dependant on society, and with no other possible motive than convenience, would not resort to such a practice without a suitable inducement. No one who has not lived in a large town that does possess these facilities, can justly appreciate their great advantages, or properly understand how much a place like New York, with its three hundred thousand inhabitants, loses by not adopting them. We have conventions for all sorts of things in America, some of which do good and others harm, but I cannot imagine anything that would contribute more to the comfort of society, than one which should settle the laws of intercourse on principles better suited to the real condition of the country than those which now exist. It is not unusual to read descriptions deriding the forms of Europe, written by travelling Americans; but I must think they have been the productions of very young travellers, or, at least, of such as have not had the proper means of appreciating the usages they ridicule Taking my own experience as a guide, I have no hesitation in saying, that I know no people among whom the ordinary social intercourse is as uncomfortable, and as little likely to stand the test of a rational examination, as our own.

The American towns are growing so fast that they're starting to have populations like those of capitals without the basic amenities. The over-the-top atmosphere of our biggest cities, for example, makes it impractical to visit one another using servants. While it might seem silly to people from smaller towns, it's safe to say that men and women who are just as sensible as anyone else, who have the best chances to develop social tastes, and who have no other reason than convenience, wouldn't choose to engage in such practices without a good reason. No one who hasn't lived in a big city that actually has these amenities can fully appreciate their significant benefits or understand how much a place like New York, with its three hundred thousand residents, misses out by not having them. We have conventions for all kinds of things in America, some of which have positive effects and others that do harm, but I can't think of anything that would improve societal comfort more than one that establishes rules for interaction based on a better understanding of the country’s actual situation than those that currently exist. It's common to see Americans traveling abroad mocking European customs, but I believe these critiques often come from very young travelers or those who haven’t had the proper foundation to appreciate the customs they’re criticizing. Based on my own experiences, I can confidently say that I know no group of people where ordinary social interactions are as uncomfortable and as unlikely to withstand rational scrutiny as in our own.

The first rule, all-important for an American to know, is, that the latest arrival makes the first visit. England is, in some respects, an exception to this practice, but I believe it prevails in all the rest of Europe. I do not mean to say that departures are not made from this law, in particular instances; but they should always be taken as exceptions, and as pointed compliments. This rule has many conveniences, and I think it also shows a more delicate attention to sentiment and feeling. While the points of intrusion and of disagreeable acquaintances are left just where they would be under our own rule, the stranger is made the judge of his own wishes. It is, moreover, impossible, in a large town, to know of every arrival. Many Americans, who come to Europe with every claim to attention, pass through it nearly unnoticed, from a hesitation about obtruding themselves on others, under the influence of the opinions in which they have been educated. This for a long time was my own case, and it was only when a more familiar acquaintance with the practices of this part of the world made me acquainted with their advantages that I could consent freely to put myself forward.

The first rule, which is crucial for an American to understand, is that the latest arrival should make the first visit. England is, in some ways, an exception to this rule, but I believe it holds true for the rest of Europe. I’m not saying there aren’t exceptions to this rule in specific cases; however, those should always be seen as exceptions and as thoughtful gestures. This rule has many benefits, and I think it also demonstrates a more refined consideration of emotions and feelings. While the uncomfortable moments and unwanted acquaintances are still present, the newcomer gets to decide what they want. Additionally, in a big city, it’s impossible to be aware of every person arriving. Many Americans who come to Europe expecting attention often go nearly unnoticed because they hesitate to impose on others due to the attitudes they were taught. This was my experience for a long time, and it was only when I became more familiar with the customs in this part of the world that I learned to appreciate their benefits and felt comfortable stepping forward.

You are not to understand that any stranger arriving in a place like Paris, or London, has a right to leave cards for whom he pleases. It is not the custom, except for those who, by birth, or official station, or a high reputation, may fairly deem themselves privileged, to assume this liberty, and even then, it is always better to take some preliminary step to assure one's self that the visit will be acceptable. The law of salutes is very much the law of visits, in this part of the world. The ship arriving sends an officer to know if his salute will be returned gun for gun, and the whole affair, it is true, is conducted in rather a categorical manner, but the governing principles are the same in both cases, though more management may be required between two gentlemen than between two men-of-war.

You shouldn’t think that any stranger coming to a place like Paris or London has the right to leave their visiting cards for whoever they want. It’s not really how things are done, except for those who are privileged by birth, official position, or a strong reputation. Even then, it’s always better to take some steps first to make sure the visit will be welcome. The rules for greetings are very similar to the rules for visits in this part of the world. When a ship arrives, it sends an officer to check if its salute will be returned with the same cannon fire, and while the whole situation is indeed handled in a rather strict way, the basic principles are the same in both cases, even if more finesse is needed between two gentlemen than between two warships.

The Americans in Europe, on account of the country's having abjured all the old feudal distinctions that still so generally prevail here, labour under certain disadvantages, that require, on the one hand, much tact and discretion to overcome, and, on the other, occasionally much firmness and decision.

The Americans in Europe, because their country has rejected all the old feudal distinctions that still commonly exist here, face certain disadvantages that require, on one hand, a lot of tact and discretion to navigate, and, on the other hand, sometimes a good amount of firmness and decisiveness.

The rule I have adopted in my own case, is to defer to every usage, in matters of etiquette, so far as I have understood them, that belongs to the country in which I may happen to be. If, as has sometimes happened (but not in a solitary instance in France), the claims of a stranger have been overlooked, I have satisfied myself by remembering, that, in this respect at least, the Americans are the superiors, for that is a point in which we seldom fail; and if they are remembered, to accept of just as much attention as shall be offered. In cases, in which those arbitrary distinctions are set up, that, by the nature of our institutions cannot, either in similar or in any parallel cases, exist in America, and the party making the pretension is on neutral ground, if the claim be in any manner pressed, I would say that it became an American to resist it promptly; neither to go out of his way to meet it, nor to defer to it when it crosses his path. In really good society awkward cases of this nature are not very likely to occur; they are, however, more likely to occur as between our own people and the English, than between those of any other nation; for the latter, in mixed general associations, have scarcely yet learned to look upon and treat us as the possessors of an independent country. It requires perfect self-possession, great tact, and some nerve, for an American, who is brought much in contact with the English on the continent of Europe, to avoid a querulous and ungentlemanlike disposition to raise objections on these points, and at the same time to maintain the position, and command the respect, with which he should never consent to dispense. From my own little experience, I should say we are better treated, and have less to overlook, in our intercourse with the higher than with the intermediate classes of the English.

The rule I've adopted for myself is to respect every etiquette custom, as far as I've understood them, that belongs to the country I'm in. If, as has sometimes happened (but not just once in France), the needs of a visitor have been ignored, I remind myself that, in this regard at least, Americans are better, as we typically don't overlook others; and if we are acknowledged, we accept the level of attention offered. In situations where arbitrary distinctions are made that, due to the nature of our institutions, can't exist in America, and the person making the claim is on neutral ground, if the claim is pushed in any way, I believe an American should promptly reject it; they shouldn't go out of their way to acknowledge it, nor should they give in when it obstructs their path. In truly good social settings, awkward situations like this are unlikely to arise; however, they are more likely to happen between our people and the English than with anyone else; because the latter, in diverse general gatherings, still haven't fully accepted us as the holders of an independent country. It takes perfect composure, great skill, and some courage for an American who frequently interacts with the English in Europe to avoid a whiny and unrefined attitude about these issues while still maintaining the dignity and respect they should never compromise. From my limited experience, I believe we are treated better and have less to overlook in our dealings with the upper classes of the English than with those of the middle class.

You will have very different accounts of these points, from some of our travellers. I only give you the results of my own observation, under the necessary limitations of my own opportunities. Still I must be permitted to say that too many of our people, in their habitual deference to England, mistake offensive condescension for civility. Of the two, I will confess I would rather encounter direct arrogance, than the assumption of a right to be affable. The first may at least be resisted. Of all sorts of superiority, that of a condescending quality is the least palatable.

You’ll get very different accounts of these points from some of our travelers. I’m only sharing the results of my own observations, with the necessary limitations of my own experiences. Still, I have to say that too many of our people, in their usual respect for England, confuse offensive condescension with politeness. Honestly, I’d rather deal with outright arrogance than the assumption that someone has the right to be friendly. At least you can push back against the first. Of all kinds of superiority, condescending superiority is the least enjoyable.

I believe Washington is the only place in America where it is permitted to send cards. In every other town, unless accompanied by an invitation, and even then the card is supposed to be left, it would be viewed as airs. It is even equivocal to leave a card in person, unless denied. Nothing can be worse adapted to the wants of American society than this rigid conformity to facts. Without porters; with dwellings in which the kitchens and servants' halls are placed just as far from the street-doors as dimensions of the houses will allow; with large straggling towns that cover as much ground as the more populous capitals of Europe, and these towns not properly divided into quarters; with a society as ambitious of effect, in its way, as any I know; and with people more than usually occupied with business and the family cares,—one is expected to comply rigidly with the most formal rules of village propriety. It is easy to trace these usages to their source, provincial habits and rustic manners; but towns with three hundred thousand inhabitants ought to be free from both. Such rigid conditions cannot well be observed, and a consequence already to be traced is, that those forms of society which tend to refine it, and to render it more human and graceful, are neglected from sheer necessity. Carelessness in the points of association connected with sentiment (and all personal civilities and attention have this root) grows upon one like carelessness in dress, until an entire community may get to be as ungracious in deportment, as it is unattractive in attire.

I believe Washington is the only place in America where sending cards is allowed. In every other town, unless it comes with an invitation—and even then, the card is meant to be left—doing so would seem pretentious. It's even questionable to drop off a card in person, unless you're turned away. Nothing is less suited to the needs of American society than this strict adherence to formalities. Without porters, with homes where the kitchens and staff areas are positioned as far from the front doors as space will allow, with sprawling towns that cover as much ground as the busier European capitals, and these towns not properly divided into neighborhoods; with a society just as eager for impact, in its own way, as any I've seen; and with people especially preoccupied with their jobs and family responsibilities—one is expected to rigidly follow the most formal rules of small-town etiquette. It’s easy to trace these customs back to provincial habits and rural manners; however, towns with three hundred thousand residents should be free from both. Such strict conditions are hard to maintain, and as a result, those aspects of society that promote refinement and make it more humane and graceful are neglected out of sheer necessity. Carelessness regarding the elements of social interaction tied to sentiment (since all personal courtesies and attentions stem from this) builds up like carelessness in dress, until an entire community can become as ungracious in behavior as it is unappealing in appearance.

The etiquette of visits, here, is reduced to a sort of science. A card is sent by a servant, and returned by a servant. It is polite to return it, next day, though three, I believe, is the lawful limits, and it is politer still to return it the day it is received. There is no affectation about sending the card, as it is not at all unusual to put E.P. (en personne) on it, by way of expressing a greater degree of attention, even when the card is sent. When the call is really made in person, though the visitor does not ask to be admitted, it is also common to request the porter to say that the party was at the gate. All these niceties may seem absurd and supererogatory, but depend on it they have a direct and powerful agency in refining and polishing intercourse, just as begging a man's pardon, when you tread on his toe, has an effect to humanize, though the parties know no offence was intended. Circumstances once rendered it proper that I should leave a card for a Russian diplomate, an act that I took care he should know, indirectly, I went out of my way to do, as an acknowledgment for the civilities his countrymen showed to us Americans. My name was left at the gate of his hotel (it was not in Paris), as I was taking a morning ride. On returning home, after an absence of an hour, I found his card lying on my table. Instead, however, of its containing the usual official titles, it was simply Prince —. I was profoundly emerged in the study of this new feature in the forms of etiquette, when the friend, who had prepared the way for the visit, entered. I asked an explanation, and he told me that I had received a higher compliment than could be conveyed by a merely official card, this being a proffer of personal attention. "You will get an invitation to dinner soon;" and, sure enough, one came before he had quitted the house. Now, here was a delicate and flattering attention paid, and one that I felt, without trouble to either party; one that the occupations of the diplomate would scarcely permit him to pay, except in extraordinary cases, under rules more rigid.

The rules for visits here have become almost scientific. A servant delivers a card, and a servant returns it. It’s polite to reply the next day, though three days is acceptable, and it’s even nicer to respond on the same day it was received. There's no pretense in sending the card; it’s common to write E.P. (en personne) on it to show a bit more thoughtfulness, even when it's sent. When the visit actually happens in person, even if the visitor doesn’t ask to come in, it's customary to have the doorman mention that someone was at the gate. All these little details might seem silly, but trust me, they play a significant role in making interactions more refined and polished, just like saying sorry when you accidentally step on someone’s foot helps to make things more civil, even when no offense was meant. There was a time when I needed to leave a card for a Russian diplomate, and I made sure he knew, indirectly, that I had gone out of my way to do this as a thank you for how his fellow countrymen treated us Americans. I left my name at the gate of his hotel (it wasn’t in Paris) while I was out for a morning ride. When I returned home after about an hour, I found his card on my table. Instead of the usual official titles, it simply read Prince —. I was deeply intrigued by this new aspect of etiquette when the friend who had set up the visit came in. I asked for an explanation, and he told me that I had received a greater compliment than a standard official card would convey, as this was a sign of personal attention. "You’ll get a dinner invitation soon;" and sure enough, one arrived before he even left my house. Here was a subtle and flattering gesture, one that felt effortless for both of us; a gesture that the diplomate probably wouldn’t normally have the time to make, except in unusual circumstances due to stricter protocols.

There is no obligation on a stranger to make the first visit, certainly; but if he do not, he is not to be surprised if no one notices him. It is a matter of delicacy to obtrude on the privacy of such a person, it being presumed that he wishes to be retired. We have passed some time in a village near Paris, which contains six or eight visitable families. With one of these I had some acquaintance, and we exchanged civilities; but wishing to be undisturbed, I extended my visit no farther, and I never saw anything of the rest of my neighbours. They waited for me to make the advances.

There’s no requirement for a stranger to make the first visit, of course; but if they don’t, they shouldn’t be surprised if nobody pays attention to them. It’s considered rude to intrude on someone’s privacy, as it’s assumed they prefer to keep to themselves. I spent some time in a village near Paris, which has about six or eight families that are open to visitors. I had some acquaintance with one of these families, and we exchanged friendly gestures; however, wanting to be left alone, I didn’t extend my visit any further and never interacted with the rest of my neighbors. They were waiting for me to reach out first.

A person in society, here, who is desirous of relieving himself, for a time, from the labour and care of maintaining the necessary intercourse, can easily do it, by leaving cards of P.P.O. It might be awkward to remain long in a place very publicly after such a step, but I ventured on it once, to extricate myself from engagements that interfered with more important pursuits, with entire success. I met several acquaintances in the street, after the cards were sent, and we even talked together, but I got no more visits or invitations. When ready to return to town, all I had to do was to leave cards again, and things went on as if nothing had happened. I parried one or two allusions to my absence, and had no further difficulty. The only awkward part of it was, that I accepted an invitation to dine en famille with a literary friend, and one of the guests, of whom there were but three, happened to be a person whose invitation to dinner I had declined on account of quitting town! As he was a sensible man, I told him the simple fact, and we laughed at the contretems, and drank oar wine in peace.

A person in society who wants to take a break from the effort and responsibilities of maintaining social interactions can easily do so by leaving behind P.P.O. cards. It might feel awkward to stay in a place publicly for too long after doing this, but I once did it successfully to free myself from commitments that were getting in the way of more important pursuits. After I sent the cards, I ran into a few acquaintances on the street, and we chatted, but I didn’t receive any more visits or invites. When I was ready to return to town, all I had to do was leave cards again, and everything went back to normal as if nothing had happened. I managed to deflect a couple of comments about my absence and faced no further issues. The only awkward moment was when I accepted an invitation to dinner en famille with a literary friend, and one of the other three guests happened to be someone whose dinner invitation I had turned down because I was leaving town! Since he was a reasonable guy, I simply told him what happened, and we both laughed about the contretemps while enjoying our wine peacefully.

The Americans who come abroad frequently complain of a want of hospitality in the public agents. There is a strong disposition in every man under institutions like our own, to mistake himself for a part of the government, in matters with which he has no proper connexion, while too many totally overlook those interests which it is their duty to watch. In the first place, the people of the United Slates do not give salaries to their ministers of sufficient amount to authorize them to expect that any part of the money should be returned in the way of personal civilities. Fifty thousand francs a year is the usual sum named by the French, as the money necessary to maintain a genteel town establishment, with moderate evening entertainments, and an occasional dinner. This is three thousand francs more than the salary of the minister, out of which he is moreover expected to maintain his regular diplomatic intercourse. It is impossible for any one to do much in the way of personal civilities, on such an allowance.

Americans traveling abroad often complain about the lack of hospitality from public officials. Each person under systems like ours tends to mistake themselves for part of the government in matters that have no real connection to them, while too many completely ignore the interests they’re supposed to oversee. Firstly, the people of the United States don’t pay their ministers enough to expect any kind of personal attention in return. The French usually state that fifty thousand francs a year is the amount needed to maintain a respectable town home, with moderate evening entertainment and the occasional dinner. This is three thousand francs more than a minister's salary, and they are also expected to handle their regular diplomatic duties out of that. It’s impossible for anyone to be very accommodating on such a limited budget.

There is, moreover, on the part of too many of our people, an aptitude to betray a jealous sensitiveness on the subject of being presented at foreign courts. I have known some claim it as a right when it is yielded to the minister himself as an act of grace. The receptions of a sovereign are merely his particular mode of receiving visits. No one will pretend that the President of the United States is obliged to give levees and dinners, nor is a king any more compelled to receive strangers, or even his own subjects, unless it suit his policy and his taste. His palace is his house, and he is the master of it, the same as any other man is master of his own abode. It is true, the public expects something of him, and his allowance is probably regulated by this expectation, but the interference does not go so far as to point out his company. Some kings pass years without holding a court at all; others receive every week. The public obligation to open his door, is no more than an obligation of expediency, of which he, and he only, can be the judge. This being the rule, not only propriety, but fair dealing requires that all who frequent a court should comply with the conditions that are understood to be implied in the permission. While there exists an exaggerated opinion, on the part of some of our people, on the subject of the fastidiousness of princes, as respects their associates, there exists among others very confused notions on the other side of the question. A monarch usually cares very little about the quarterings and the nobility of the person he receives, but he always wishes his court to be frequented by people of education, accomplishments, and breeding. In Europe these qualities are confined to castes, and, beyond a question, as a general practice, every king would not only prefer, but, were there a necessity for it, he would command that his doors should be closed against all others, unless they came in a character different from that of courtiers. This object has, in effect, been obtained, by establishing a rule, that no one who has not been presented at his own court can claim to be presented at any foreign European court; thus leaving each sovereign to see that no one of his own subjects shall travel with this privilege who would be likely to prove an unpleasant guest to any other prince. But we have neither any prince nor any court, and the minister is left to decide for himself who is, and who is not, proper to be presented.

There’s also, among too many of our people, a tendency to feel a jealous sensitivity about being presented at foreign courts. I’ve seen some people claim it as a right when it’s actually granted to the minister as an act of grace. A sovereign’s receptions are just his personal way of welcoming visitors. No one would argue that the President of the United States is required to host receptions and dinners, nor is a king obligated to welcome strangers or even his own subjects, unless it aligns with his policies and preferences. His palace is his home, and he is the one in charge of it, just like anyone else is in charge of their own place. It’s true that the public expects something from him, and his allowances are likely based on those expectations, but that doesn’t extend to dictating who he should host. Some kings go years without holding formal courts, while others do it every week. His obligation to open his doors is merely one of practicality, which only he can truly determine. Given this rule, not only is propriety important, but fairness also dictates that anyone who attends a court should follow the understood terms of that permission. While some of our people have an exaggerated idea about the selectiveness of princes regarding their guests, others have very muddled views on the opposite side. A monarch usually doesn’t care much about the lineage or nobility of the person he hosts, but he always wants his court to be attended by educated, accomplished, and well-bred individuals. In Europe, these traits are usually tied to castes, and generally speaking, every king would prefer and, if necessary, demand that his doors be closed to everyone else unless they arrived in a capacity different from that of courtiers. This aim has effectively been achieved by establishing a rule that anyone who hasn’t been presented at his own court can’t claim to be presented at any foreign European court, thus ensuring that no one from his realm can travel with that privilege if they would likely be an unwelcome guest to any other royalty. But we don’t have a prince or a court, and the minister is left to decide for himself who is and isn’t suitable to be presented.

Let us suppose a case. A master and his servant make a simultaneous request to be presented to the King of France. Both are American citizens, and if either has any political claim, beyond mere courtesy, to have his request attended to, both have. The minister is left to decide for himself. He cannot so far abuse the courtesy that permits him to present his countrymen at all, as to present the domestic, and of course he declines doing it. In this case, perhaps, public opinion would sustain him, as, unluckily, the party of the domestics is small in America, the duties usually falling to the share of foreigners and blacks. But the principle may be carried upwards, until a point is attained where a minister might find it difficult to decide between that which his own sense of propriety should dictate, and that which others might be disposed to claim. All other ministers get rid of their responsibility by the acts of their own courts; but the minister of the republic is left exposed to the calumny, abuse, and misrepresentation of any disappointed individual, should he determine to do what is strictly right.

Let’s consider a situation. A master and his servant both request to be introduced to the King of France at the same time. They are both American citizens, and if either of them has any political reason, beyond simple courtesy, for their request to be granted, then both do. The minister is left to make his own decision. He can't abuse the courtesy that allows him to introduce his fellow countrymen by favoring the servant, so he chooses not to present him. In this scenario, public opinion might support him, as, unfortunately, the group of domestic workers is small in America, with most responsibilities falling on foreigners and Black individuals. However, this principle could be pushed further, to a point where a minister might struggle to balance what his own sense of propriety suggests and what others could expect. Other ministers can avoid their responsibility through the actions of their own governments, but the minister of the republic is left vulnerable to slander, insults, and misrepresentation from any disappointed individual if he chooses to do what is strictly right.

Under these circumstances, it appears to me that there are but two courses left for any agent of our government to pursue: either to take official rank as his only guide, or to decline presenting any one. It is not his duty to act as a master of ceremonies; every court has a regular officer for this purpose, and any one who has been presented himself, is permitted on proper representations to present others. The trifling disadvantage will be amply compensated for, by the great and peculiar benefits that arise from our peculiar form of government.

Under these circumstances, it seems to me that there are only two options left for any representative of our government: either to assume official status as their sole guide or to refuse to present anyone at all. It's not their responsibility to act as a master of ceremonies; every court has an official for this role, and anyone who has been presented themselves is allowed, with proper requests, to present others. The minor downside will be more than made up for by the significant and unique advantages that come from our specific form of government.

These things will quite likely strike you as of little moment. They are, however, of more concern than one living in the simple society of America may at first suppose. The etiquette of visiting has of course an influence on the entire associations of a traveller, and may not be overlooked, while the single fact that one people were practically excluded from the European courts, would have the same effect on their other enjoyments here, that it has to exclude an individual from the most select circles of any particular town. Ordinary life is altogether coloured by things that, in themselves, may appear trifling, but which can no more be neglected with impunity, than one can neglect the varying fashions in dress.

These things might seem unimportant to you. However, they matter more than someone living in the straightforward society of America might initially think. The etiquette of visiting definitely impacts a traveler’s overall experience and can’t be ignored. The fact that one group was practically shut out from European courts has the same impact on their other experiences here as being excluded from the most exclusive social circles in any town would. Everyday life is completely shaped by things that might seem trivial, but those things can't be ignored without consequences, just like you can’t ignore changing fashion trends.

The Americans are not a shoving people, like their cousins the English. Their fault in this particular lies in a morbid pride, with a stubbornness that is the result of a limited experience, and which is too apt to induce them to set up their own provincial notions, as the standard, and to throw them backward into the intrenchments, of self-esteem. This feeling is peculiarly fostered by the institutions. It is easy to err in this manner; and it is precisely the failing of the countryman, everywhere, when he first visits town. It is, in fact, the fault of ignorance of the world. By referring to what I have just told you, it will be seen that these are the very propensities which will be the most likely to make one uncomfortable in Europe, where so much of the initiative of intercourse is thrown upon the shoulders of the stranger.

The Americans aren't pushy, like their English relatives. Their issue here comes from an unhealthy pride, along with a stubbornness rooted in limited experience, which tends to lead them to promote their own local ideas as the standard and cling to their self-esteem. This feeling is especially encouraged by the institutions. It's easy to make this mistake, and it’s a common issue for anyone from the countryside when they first visit a city. It’s really a sign of being inexperienced with the world. Referring back to what I mentioned earlier, it’s clear that these tendencies are likely to make someone uncomfortable in Europe, where much of the responsibility for starting conversations falls on the outsider.

I cannot conclude this letter without touching on another point, that suggests itself at the moment. It is the fashion to decry the niggardliness of the American government on the subject of money, as compared with those of this hemisphere. Nothing can be more unjust. Our working men are paid better than even those of England, with the exception of a few who have high dignities to support. I do not see the least necessity for giving the President a dollar more than he gets to-day, since all he wants is enough to entertain handsomely, and to shield him from loss. Under our system, we never can have an exclusive court, nor is it desirable, for in this age a court is neither a school of manners, nor a school of anything else that is estimable. These facts are sufficiently proved by England, a country whose mental cultivation and manners never stood as high as they do to-day, and yet it has virtually been without a court for an entire generation. A court may certainly foster taste and elegance; but they may be quite as well fostered by other, and less exclusive, means. But while the President may receive enough, the heads of departments, at home, and the foreign ministers of the country, are not more than half paid, particularly the latter. The present minister is childless, his establishment and his manner of living are both handsome, but not a bit more so than those of a thousand others who inhabit this vast capital, and his intercourse with his colleagues is not greater than is necessary to the interests of his country. Now, I know from his own statement, that his expenses, without a family, exceed by one hundred per cent, his salary. With a personal income of eighty to a hundred thousand francs a years, he can bear this drain on his private fortune, but he is almost the only minister we ever had here who could.

I can’t wrap up this letter without mentioning another point that’s come to mind. It’s trendy to criticize the stinginess of the American government when it comes to funding, especially compared to others in this region. That’s completely unfair. Our workers earn more than even those in England, except for a few who hold high positions. I don’t see any reason to give the President a dollar more than he currently receives, since all he needs is enough to entertain properly and to protect himself from financial loss. Under our system, we can never have an exclusive court, nor is it necessary, because in this day and age, a court is neither a place for good manners nor for anything else worthy. England demonstrates this well; a nation whose education and manners are better than ever before has practically not had a court for an entire generation. While a court can promote taste and elegance, those can be fostered just as well through other, less exclusive, means. However, while the President may be adequately compensated, the department heads at home and the foreign ministers are paid less than half, especially the latter. The current minister has no children, and both his household and lifestyle are elegant, but not more so than a thousand others living in this vast capital, and his interactions with his colleagues are only what’s necessary for the country’s interests. I know from his own words that his expenses, without a family, are 100% more than his salary. With a personal income of eighty to a hundred thousand francs a year, he can manage this drain on his private wealth, but he’s almost the only minister we’ve ever had here who can.

The actual position of our diplomatic agents in Europe is little understood at home. There are but two or three modes of maintaining the rights of a nation, to say nothing of procuring those concessions from others which enter into the commercial relations of states, and in some degree affect their interests. The best method, certainly, as respects the two first, is to manifest a determination to defend them by an appeal to force; but so many conflicting interests stand in the way of such a policy, that it is exceedingly difficult, wisest and safest in the end though it be, to carry it out properly. At any rate, such a course has never yet been in the power of the American government, whatever it may be able to do hereafter, with its increasing numbers and growing wealth. But even strength is not always sufficient to obtain voluntary and friendly concessions, for principle must, in some degree, be respected by the most potent people, or they will be put to the ban of the world. Long diplomatic letters, although they may answer the purposes of ministerial exposés, and read well enough in the columns of a journal, do very little, in fact, as make-weights in negotiations. I have been told here, sub rosâ, and I believe it that some of our laboured efforts, in this way to obtain redress in the protracted negotiation for indemnity, have actually lain months in the bureaux, unread by those who alone have power to settle the question. Some commis perhaps may have cursorily related their contents to his superior, but the superior himself is usually too much occupied in procuring and maintaining ministerial majorities, or in looking after the monopolizing concerns of European politics, to wade through folios of elaborate argument in manuscript. The public ought to understand, that the point presents itself to him in the security of his master's capital, and with little or no apprehension of its coming to an appeal to arms, very differently from what it occasionally presents itself in the pages of a President's message, or in a debate in Congress. He has so many demands on his time, that it is even difficult to have a working interview with him at all; and when one is obtained, it is not usual to do more than to go over the preliminaries. The details are necessarily referred to subordinates.

The actual role of our diplomats in Europe isn't well understood back home. There are only a couple of ways to uphold a nation's rights, not to mention securing the concessions from others that play into states' trade relations and impact their interests. The most effective approach, especially regarding the first two, is to show a determination to defend them by resorting to force; however, numerous conflicting interests make it extremely challenging to implement such a policy properly, even though it might be the wisest and safest option in the long run. At least for now, the American government hasn't had the ability to take that route, though it may in the future with its increasing population and wealth. Still, having strength isn’t always enough to gain voluntary and friendly concessions, because even the most powerful nations must respect principles to avoid being isolated by the world. Lengthy diplomatic letters, while they might serve the purpose of ministerial reports and can sound impressive in a newspaper, actually do very little as leverage in negotiations. I've been told here, in confidence, and I believe it, that some of our drawn-out efforts to seek justice in the ongoing negotiations for compensation have sat unread for months in the offices of those with the power to resolve the issue. Perhaps some aides have briefly shared their contents with higher-ups, but those higher-ups are usually too busy securing and maintaining ministerial majorities or managing the monopolistic aspects of European politics to sift through piles of detailed arguments in written form. The public should know that the issue presents itself to him from the comfort of his capital with little concern for a potential armed conflict, which is very different from how it occasionally appears in a President's message or during Congressional debates. He has so many demands on his time that it’s even hard to schedule a productive meeting with him, and when one is finally arranged, it typically only covers the basics. The specifics are inevitably left to his subordinates.

Now, in such a state of things, any one accustomed to the world, can readily understand how much may be effected by the kind feelings that are engendered by daily, social intercourse. A few words can be whispered in the ears of a minister, in the corner of a drawing-room, that would never reach him in his bureau. Then all the ministers are met in society, while the diplomate, properly speaking, can claim officially to see but one. In short, in saving, out of an overflowing treasury, a few thousand dollars a year, we trifle with our own interests, frequently embarrass our agents, and in some degree discredit the country. I am not one of your sensitives on the subject of parade and appearance, nor a member of the embroidery school; still I would substitute for the irrational frippery of the European customs, a liberal hospitality, and a real elegance, that should speak well for the hearts and tastes of the nation. The salary of the minister at Paris, I know it, by the experience of a housekeeper, ought to be increased by at least one half, and it would tell better for the interests of the country were it doubled. Even in this case, however, I do not conceive that an American would be justified in mistaking the house of an envoy for a national inn; but that the proper light to view his allowances would be to consider them as made, first, as an act of justice to the functionary himself; next, as a measure of expediency, as connected with the important interests of the country. As it is, I am certain that no one but a man of fortune can accept a foreign appointment, without committing injustice to his heirs; and I believe few do accept them without sincerely regretting the step, in after years.

Now, with things being as they are, anyone familiar with the world can easily see how much can be influenced by the positive feelings created through daily social interactions. A few words can be quietly shared with a minister in a corner of a drawing-room that would never reach him in his office. All the ministers gather in social settings, while the diplomat, in the official sense, can only claim to see one of them. In short, by saving a few thousand dollars a year from an overflowing budget, we risk our own interests, often complicate the efforts of our agents, and somewhat damage the country's reputation. I’m not one of those people overly sensitive about appearances or ostentation; however, I would replace the irrational trivialities of European customs with generous hospitality and genuine elegance that reflect well on the character and taste of our nation. The salary of the minister in Paris, which I've learned from my time as a housekeeper, should be raised by at least half, and it would benefit the country’s interests if it were doubled. Even then, I don’t think an American should confuse an envoy's residence with a public inn; rather, his salary should be seen first as a matter of fairness to the official and second, as a practical measure connected to the country’s significant interests. As it stands, I’m sure that only someone with wealth can accept a foreign position without doing an injustice to their heirs, and I believe few take such roles without later regretting their decision.

LETTER XII.

Sir Walter Scott in Paris.—Conversation with him.—Copyright in
America.—Miss Scott.—French Compliments.—Sir Walter Scott's Person
and Manners.—Ignorance as to America.—French Commerce.—French
Translations.—American Luxury.

Sir Walter Scott in Paris.—Chatting with him.—Copyright in
America.—Miss Scott.—French Compliments.—Sir Walter Scott's Appearance
and Manners.—Lack of Knowledge about America.—French Trade.—French
Translations.—American Luxury.

To JAMES E. DE KAY, ESQUIRE.

To JAMES E. DE KAY, ESQ.

We have not only had Mr. Canning in Paris, but Sir Walter Scott has suddenly appeared among us. The arrival of the Great Unknown, or, indeed, of any little Unknown from England, would be an event to throw all the reading clubs at home into a state of high moral and poetical excitement. We are true village lionizers. As the professors of the Catholic religion are notoriously more addicted to yielding faith to miraculous interventions, in the remoter dioceses, than in Rome itself; as loyalty is always more zealous in a colony than in a court; as fashions are more exaggerated in a province than in a capital, and men are more prodigious to every one else than their own valets,—so do we throw the haloes of a vast ocean around the honoured heads of the celebrated men of this eastern hemisphere. This, perhaps, is the natural course of things, and is as unavoidable as that the sun shall hold the earth within the influence of its attraction, until matters shall be reversed by the earth's becoming the larger and more glorious orb of the two. Not so in Paris. Here men of every gradation of celebrity, from Napoleon down to the Psalmanazar of the day, are so very common, that one scarcely turns round in the streets to look at them. Delicate and polite attentions, however, fall as much to the share of reputation here as in any other country, and perhaps more so as respects literary men, though there is so little wonder-mongering. It would be quite impossible that the presence of Sir Walter Scott should not excite a sensation. He was frequently named in the journals, received a good deal of private and some public notice, but, on the whole, much less of both, I think, than one would have a right to expect for him, in a place like Paris. I account for the fact, by the French distrusting the forthcoming work on Napoleon, and by a little dissatisfaction which prevails on the subject of the tone of "Paul's Letters to his Kinsfolk." This feeling may surprise you, as coming from a nation as old and as great as France; but, alas! we are all human.

We not only have Mr. Canning in Paris, but Sir Walter Scott has suddenly shown up among us. The arrival of the Great Unknown, or even any minor Unknown from England, would be a big deal that would get all the reading clubs back home in a frenzy of moral and poetic excitement. We are true village lionizers. Just as followers of the Catholic faith are known to have more faith in miraculous events in remote dioceses than in Rome itself; as loyalty tends to be stronger in a colony than in a court; as trends are often more extreme in a province than in a capital, and people seem more extraordinary to everyone else than to their own servants—so do we surround celebrated figures from this eastern hemisphere with the admiration of a vast ocean. This is probably the natural order of things, as unavoidable as the sun keeping the earth in its gravitational pull until a time comes when the earth becomes the larger and more glorious of the two. Not so in Paris. Here, people of all levels of fame, from Napoleon to the least notable figure of the day, are so common that one hardly glances at them while walking down the street. However, courteous and refined gestures of esteem are as prevalent here as anywhere else, perhaps even more so for literary figures, even though there's less of a tendency to make a big deal out of them. It would be impossible for Sir Walter Scott’s presence not to make an impression. He was frequently mentioned in the newspapers, received a fair amount of private and some public attention, but overall, I think less of both than one might expect for him in a place like Paris. I attribute this to the French skepticism about his upcoming work on Napoleon, along with some dissatisfaction regarding the tone of "Paul's Letters to his Kinsfolk." This sentiment might surprise you, coming from a nation as old and significant as France; but, unfortunately, we are all human.

The King spoke to him, in going to his chapel, Sir Walter being in waiting for that purpose; but, beyond this, I believe he met with no civilities from the court.

The King spoke to him on his way to the chapel, with Sir Walter waiting for that purpose; but aside from this, I don’t think he received any other polite gestures from the court.

As for myself, circumstances that it is needless to recount had brought me, to a slight degree, within the notice of Sir Walter Scott, though we had never met, nor had I ever seen him, even in public, so as to know his person. Still I was not without hopes of being more fortunate now, while I felt a delicacy about obtruding myself any further on his time and attention. Several days after his arrival went by, however, without my good luck bringing me in his way, and I began to give the matter up, though the Princesse —— with whom I had the advantage of being on friendly terms, flattered me with an opportunity of seeing the great writer at her house, for she had a fixed resolution of making his acquaintance before he left Paris, coûte que coûte.

As for me, circumstances that aren’t worth recounting had brought me, to a small extent, to the attention of Sir Walter Scott, even though we had never met and I had never seen him in person, not even in public. Still, I hoped I might be luckier this time, even though I felt hesitant to impose on his time and attention. Several days passed after his arrival without me crossing paths with him, and I started to give up hope, even though the Princesse — with whom I was on friendly terms — encouraged me by offering a chance to meet the famous writer at her place, since she was determined to introduce herself to him before he left Paris, coûte que coûte.

It might have been ten days after the arrival of Sir Walter Scott, that I had ordered a carriage, one morning, with an intention of driving over to the other side of the river, and had got as far as the lower flight of steps, on my way to enter it, when, by the tramping of horses in the court, I found that another coach was driving in. It was raining, and, as my own carriage drove from the door to make way for the newcomer, I stopped where I was, until it could return. The carriage-steps rattled, and presently a large, heavy-moulded man appeared in the door of the hotel. He was grey, and limped a little, walking with a cane. His carriage immediately drove round, and was succeeded by mine, again; so I descended. We passed each other on the stairs, bowing as a matter of course. I had got to the door, and was about to enter the carriage, when it flashed on my mind that the visit might be to myself. The two lower floors of the hotel were occupied as a girl's boarding-school; the reason of our dwelling in it, for our own daughters were in the establishment; au second, there was nothing but our own appartement, and above us, again, dwelt a family whose visitors never came in carriages. The door of the boarding-school was below, and men seldom came to it, at all. Strangers, moreover, sometimes did honour me with calls. Under these impressions I paused, to see if the visitor went as far as our flight of steps. All this time, I had not the slightest suspicion of who he was, though I fancied both the face and form were known to me.

It might have been ten days after Sir Walter Scott arrived that I ordered a carriage one morning, planning to drive to the other side of the river. I had gotten as far as the lower flight of steps on my way to get in when I heard the sound of horses trampling in the courtyard, indicating another coach was arriving. It was raining, and as my carriage pulled away from the door to let the newcomer in, I paused where I was until it came back. The carriage steps rattled, and soon a large, solidly built man appeared in the hotel doorway. He was grey and limped slightly, using a cane. His carriage drove around and mine returned, so I went down the steps. We passed each other on the stairs, nodding as a matter of course. I reached the door and was about to get into the carriage when it struck me that the visit might be for me. The two lower floors of the hotel were being used as a girls' boarding school; that was why we were staying here, since our daughters were enrolled there. On the second floor, it was just our own apartment, and above us lived a family whose guests never arrived by carriage. The boarding school’s entrance was downstairs, and men rarely came to it at all. Strangers also sometimes came to see me. With all this in mind, I paused to see if the visitor would come up to our flight of steps. All this time, I had no idea who he was, though I felt both his face and form were familiar to me.

The stranger got up the large stone steps slowly, leaning, with one hand, on the iron railing, and with the other, on his cane. He was on the first landing, as I stopped, and, turning towards the next flight, our eyes met. The idea that I might be the person he wanted, seemed then to strike him for the first time. "Est-ce Mons. —— que j'ai l'honneur de voir?" he asked, in French, and with but an indifferent accent. "Monsieur, je m'appelle ——. Eh bien, donc—je suis Walter Scott."

The stranger slowly climbed the large stone steps, leaning on the iron railing with one hand and using his cane with the other. I paused as he reached the first landing, and when he turned toward the next flight, our eyes met. It seemed like the thought that I might be the person he was looking for struck him for the first time. "Is this Mr. —— I have the honor of seeing?" he asked in French, with only a slight accent. "Sir, my name is ——. Well then—I'm Walter Scott."

I ran up to the landing, shook him by the hand, which he stood holding out to me cordially, and expressed my sense of the honour he was conferring. He told me, in substance, that the Princesse —— had been as good as her word, and having succeeded herself in getting hold of him, she had good-naturedly given him my address. By way of cutting short all ceremony, he had driven from his hotel to my lodgings. All this time he was speaking French, while my answers and remarks were in English. Suddenly recollecting himself, he said—"Well, here have I been parlez-vousing to you, in a way to surprise you, no doubt; but these Frenchmen have got my tongue so set to their lingo, that I have half forgotten my own language." As we proceeded up the next flight of steps, he accepted my arm, and continued the conversation in English, walking with more difficulty than I had expected to see. You will excuse the vanity of my repeating the next observation he made, which I do in the hope that some of our own exquisites in literature may learn in what manner a man of true sentiment and sound feeling regards a trait that they have seen fit to stigmatize unbecoming, "I'll tell you what I most like," he added, abruptly; "and it is the manner in which you maintain the ascendency of your own country on all proper occasions, without descending to vulgar abuse of ours. You are obliged to bring the two nations in collision, and I respect your liberal hostility." This will probably be esteemed treason in our own self-constituted mentors of the press, one of whom, I observe, has quite lately had to apologize to his readers for exposing some of the sins of the English writers in reference to ourselves! But these people are not worth our attention, for they have neither the independence which belongs to masculine reason, nor manhood even to prize the quality in others. "I am afraid the mother has not always treated the daughter well," he continued, "feeling a little jealous of her growth, perhaps; for, though we hope England has not yet begun to descend on the evil side, we have a presentiment that she has got to the top of the ladder."

I rushed up to the landing, shook his hand, which he was extending to me warmly, and expressed my gratitude for the honor he was bestowing. He basically told me that the Princesse —— had kept her promise and, having managed to find him, she kindly gave him my address. To skip all the formalities, he had driven from his hotel to my place. The whole time, he was speaking French, while I responded in English. Suddenly, he realized and said, "Well, here I am, parlez-vousing with you in a way that must surprise you; but these Frenchmen have conditioned me to their language so much that I've half forgotten my own." As we climbed the next flight of steps, he took my arm and continued our conversation in English, walking with more difficulty than I had anticipated. You’ll have to excuse my vanity for sharing the next comment he made, which I do hoping that some of our literary elites might learn how a man with genuine feelings regards a trait they’ve labeled as inappropriate. "I'll tell you what I like the most," he said suddenly; "it's how you keep the superiority of your own country in proper situations without resorting to cheap shots at ours. You have to pit the two nations against each other, and I admire your fair criticism." This might be deemed treasonous by our self-appointed media experts, one of whom I noticed has recently had to apologize to his readers for pointing out some flaws in English writers regarding us! But these people aren't worth our attention; they lack the independence that comes with rational thinking and don’t even value that quality in others. "I’m afraid the mother hasn't always treated the daughter well," he continued, "perhaps feeling a bit jealous of her growth; for though we hope England hasn’t started to decline, we have a feeling she’s reached the top of the ladder."

There were two entrances to our apartments; one, the principal, leading by an ante-chamber and salle à manger into the salon, and thence through other rooms to a terrace; and the other, by a private corridor, to the same spot. The door of my cabinet opened on this corridor, and though it was dark, crooked, and anything but savoury, as it led by the kitchen, I conducted Sir Walter through it, under an impression that he walked with pain; an idea of which I could not divest myself, in the hurry of the moment. But for this awkwardness on my part, I believe I should have been the witness of a singular interview. General Lafayette had been with me a few minutes before, and he had gone away by the salon, in order to speak to Mrs. ——. Having a note to write, I had left him there, and I think his carriage could not have quitted the court when that of Sir Walter Scott entered. If so, the General must have passed out by the ante-chamber about the time we came through the corridor.

There were two entrances to our apartments; one was the main entrance, leading through an antechamber and dining room into the living room, and then through other rooms to a terrace; the other was a private hallway that led to the same place. The door to my study opened onto this hallway, and even though it was dark, narrow, and not very pleasant since it ran past the kitchen, I guided Sir Walter through it, thinking that he was walking with difficulty; it was a thought I couldn’t shake in the rush of the moment. If I hadn’t been so awkward, I believe I would have witnessed a unique meeting. General Lafayette had been with me just a few minutes before and had left through the living room to talk to Mrs. ——. I had a note to write, so I left him there, and I think his carriage couldn’t have left the courtyard when Sir Walter Scott’s carriage arrived. If that’s the case, the General must have passed through the antechamber around the same time we came through the hallway.

There would be an impropriety in my relating all that passed in this interview; but we talked over a matter of business, and then the conversation was more general. You will remember that Sir Walter was still the Unknown[14] and that he was believed to be in Paris in search of facts for the Life of Napoleon. Notwithstanding the former circumstance, he spoke of his works with great frankness and simplicity, and without the parade of asking any promises of secrecy. In short, as he commenced in this style, his authorship was alluded to by us both just as if it had never been called in question. He asked me if I had a copy of the —— by me, and on my confessing I did not own a single volume of anything I had written, he laughed, and said he believed that most authors had the same feeling on the subject: as for himself, he cared not if he never saw a Waverley novel again, as long as he lived. Curious to know whether a writer as great and as practised as he felt the occasional despondency which invariably attends all my own little efforts of this nature, I remarked that I found the mere composition of a tale a source of pleasure, so much so, that I always invented twice as much as was committed to paper in my walks, or in bed, and in my own judgment much the best parts of the composition never saw the light; for what was written was usually written at set hours, and was a good deal a matter of chance, and that going over and over the same subject in proofs disgusted me so thoroughly with the book, that I supposed every one else would be disposed to view it with the same eyes. To this he answered that he was spared much of the labour of proofreading, Scotland, he presumed, being better off than America in this respect; but still be said he "would as soon see his dinner again after a hearty meal as to read one of his own tales when he was fairly rid of it."

It wouldn't be appropriate for me to share everything that happened in this meeting, but we discussed a business matter and then moved on to more general topics. You'll remember that Sir Walter was still the Unknown[14] and was believed to be in Paris looking for information for the Life of Napoleon. Despite that, he spoke about his works with great honesty and straightforwardness, without asking for any promises of secrecy. Essentially, since he started like that, we both mentioned his authorship as if it had never been questioned. He asked me if I had a copy of the —— with me, and when I admitted that I didn't own a single book of my own writing, he laughed and said he believed most authors felt the same way. As for him, he said he wouldn't mind if he never saw another Waverley novel again for the rest of his life. Curious to know if a writer as talented and experienced as he was felt the same occasional discouragement that comes with my own small attempts at writing, I mentioned that I found simply composing a story to be enjoyable, so much so that I often created twice as much in my mind during walks or in bed than what I actually wrote down. In my opinion, the best parts of what I created never got published because what was written was usually done at set times and felt largely random, and having to go over the same material multiple times for proofreading made me so fed up with the book that I figured everyone else would feel the same way. He replied that he avoided much of the hassle of proofreading, presuming Scotland was better off than America in that regard; however, he said he "would rather see his dinner again after a big meal than read one of his own stories once he was done with it."

[Footnote 14: He did not avow himself for several months afterwards.]

[Footnote 14: He did not admit it for several months afterwards.]

He sat with me nearly an hour, and he manifested, during the time the conversation was not tied down to business, a strong propensity to humour. Having occasion to mention our common publisher in Paris, he quaintly termed him, with a sort of malicious fun, "our Gosling;"[15] adding, that he hoped he, at least, "laid golden eggs."

He sat with me for almost an hour, and when we weren't talking business, he showed a real flair for humor. When he brought up our shared publisher in Paris, he playfully called him "our Gosling," with a hint of mischief, adding that he hoped at least "he laid golden eggs."

[Footnote 15: His name was Gosselin.]

[Footnote 15: His name was Gosselin.]

I hoped that he had found the facilities he desired, in obtaining facts for the forthcoming history. He rather hesitated about admitting this. "One can hear as much as he pleases, as a gentleman, he is not always sure how much of it he can, with propriety, relate in a book; besides"—throwing all his latent humour into the expression of his small grey eyes—"one may even doubt how much of what he hears is fit for history on another account." He paused, and his face assumed an exquisite air of confiding simplicity, as he continued, with perfect bonne foi and strong Scottish feeling, "I have been to see my countryman M'Donald, and I rather think that will be about as much as I can do here, now." This was uttered with so much naïveté that I could hardly believe it was the same man who, a moment before, had shown so much shrewd distrust of oral relations of facts.

I hoped he had found the resources he needed to gather information for the upcoming history. He seemed a bit uncertain about admitting this. "One can hear as much as he wants, but as a gentleman, he isn’t always sure how much of it he can appropriately include in a book; besides"—injecting all his hidden humor into the expression in his small grey eyes—"one might even question how much of what he hears is suitable for history for another reason." He paused, and his face took on a delightful look of genuine simplicity as he continued, with complete bonne foi and strong Scottish sentiment, "I've been to see my countryman M'Donald, and I think that will be about as much as I can do here, now." This was said with such naïveté that I could hardly believe it was the same person who just a moment before had shown so much clever skepticism about spoken accounts of facts.

I inquired when we might expect the work "Some time in the course of the winter," he replied, "though it is likely to prove larger than I at first intended. We have got several volumes printed, but I find I must add to the matter considerably, in order to dispose of the subject. I thought I should get rid of it in seven volumes, which are already written, but it will reach, I think, to nine." "If you have two still to write, I shall not expect to see the book before spring." "You may: let me once get back to Abbotsford, and I'll soon knock off those two fellows." To this I had nothing to say, although I thought such a tour de force in writing might better suit invention than history.

I asked when we could expect the work. "Sometime during the winter," he replied, "though it’s likely to be bigger than I initially thought. We've printed several volumes, but I realize I need to add quite a bit more to cover the topic properly. I originally thought I could wrap it up in seven volumes, which are already written, but I think it’ll stretch to nine." "If

When he rose to go, I begged him to step into the salon, that I might have the gratification of introducing my wife to him. To this he very good-naturedly assented, and entering the room, after presenting Mrs. —— and my nephew W——. he took a seat. He sat some little time, and his fit of pleasantry returned, for he illustrated his discourse by one or two apt anecdotes, related with a slightly Scottish accent, that he seemed to drop and assume at will. Mrs. —— observed to him that the bergère in which he was seated had been twice honoured that morning, for General Lafayette had not left it more than half an hour. Sir Walter Scott looked surprised at this, and said inquiringly, "I thought he had gone to America, to pass the rest of his days." On my explaining the true state of the case, he merely observed, "He is a great man;" and yet I thought the remark was made coldly, or in complaisance to us.

When he got up to leave, I asked him to come into the living room so I could introduce my wife to him. He kindly agreed, and after presenting Mrs. —— and my nephew W——, he took a seat. He sat for a little while, and his playful mood returned, as he shared a couple of fitting stories with a slight Scottish accent that he seemed to use at will. Mrs. —— mentioned that the bergère he was sitting in had been graced that morning, since General Lafayette had just left it less than half an hour ago. Sir Walter Scott looked surprised and asked, "I thought he had gone to America to spend the rest of his life." After I explained the situation, he simply said, "He is a great man," but I thought the comment came off as a bit cold or just polite.

When Sir Walter left us, it was settled that I was to breakfast with him the following day but one. I was punctual, of course, and found him in a new silk douillette that he had just purchased, trying "as hard as he could," as he pleasantly observed, to make a Frenchman of himself—an undertaking as little likely to be successful, I should think, in the case of his Scottish exterior, and Scottish interior too, as any experiment well could be. There were two or three visitors, besides Miss Ann Scott, his daughter, who was his companion in the journey. He was just answering an invitation from the Princesse ——, to an evening party, as I entered. "Here," said he, "you are a friend of the lady, and parlez-vous so much better than I; can you tell me whether this is for Jeudi, or Lundi, or Mardi, or whether it means no day at all?" I told him the day of the week intended. "You get notes occasionally from the lady, or you could not read her scrawl so readily?" "She is very kind to us, and we often have occasion to read her writing." "Well, it is worth a very good dinner to get through a page of it." "I take my revenge in kind, and I fancy she has the worst of it." "I don't know, after all that she will get much the better of me with this plume d'auberge." He was quite right, for, although Sir Walter writes a smooth even hand, and one that appears rather well than otherwise on a page, it is one of the most difficult to decipher I have ever met with; the i's, u's, m's, n's, a's, e's, t's, etc., etc., for want of dots, crossings, and being fully rounded, looking all alike, and rendering the reading slow and difficult, without great familiarity with his mode of handling the pen: at least, I have found it so.

When Sir Walter left us, it was decided that I would have breakfast with him the day after tomorrow. I was on time, of course, and found him in a new silk douillette that he had just bought, trying "as hard as he could," as he kindly noted, to make himself seem French—an effort that seemed unlikely to succeed, given his Scottish looks and nature. There were a couple of visitors there, along with Miss Ann Scott, his daughter, who was accompanying him on the trip. He was just replying to an invitation from the Princesse —— for an evening gathering as I arrived. "Here," he said, "you are a friend of the lady, and you parlez-vous so much better than I do; can you tell me if this is for Jeudi, or Lundi, or Mardi, or if it means no day at all?" I informed him of the intended day of the week. "You get notes from the lady sometimes, or you wouldn’t be able to read her handwriting so well?" "She is very kind to us, and we often have to read her writing." "Well, it’s worth a really nice dinner just to get through a page of it." "I get my revenge in kind, and I think she has it worse." "I don’t know if she’ll really have the upper hand over me with this plume d'auberge." He was spot on, because although Sir Walter writes quite smoothly and his handwriting looks nice on a page, it’s one of the most difficult to read I’ve ever encountered; the i's, u's, m's, n's, a's, e's, t's, and so on all look alike without dots, crossings, and proper rounding, making it slow and tricky to read unless you're very familiar with his way of writing: at least, that’s been my experience.

He had sealed the note, and was about writing the direction, when he seemed at a loss. "How do you address this lady—as Her Highness?" I was much surprised at this question from him, for it denoted a want of familiarity with the world, that one would not have expected in a man who had been so very much and so long courted by the great. But, after all, his life has been provincial, though, as his daughter remarked in the course of the morning, they had no occasion to quit Scotland to see the world, all the world coming to see Scotland.

He had sealed the note and was about to write the address when he seemed unsure. "How do you address this lady— as Her Highness?" I was quite surprised by this question from him, as it showed a lack of worldly experience that one wouldn't expect from someone who had been so greatly sought after by the elite for so long. But, after all, his life had been provincial, although, as his daughter pointed out earlier that morning, they didn't need to leave Scotland to experience the world; the world came to see Scotland.

The next morning he was with me again, for near an hour and we completed our little affair. After this we had a conversation on the law of copyrights in the two countries, which as we possess a common language, is a subject of great national interest. I understood him to say that he had a double right in England to his works; one under a statute, and the other growing out of common law. Any one publishing a book, let it be written by whom it might, in England, duly complying with the law, can secure the right, whereas none but a citizen can do the same in America. I regret to say that I misled him on the subject of our copyright law, which, after all, is not so much more illiberal than that of England as I had thought it.

The next morning, he was with me again for almost an hour, and we wrapped up our little project. After that, we talked about copyright laws in both countries, which is a topic of great national interest since we share a common language. I understood him to say that he had dual rights to his works in England; one coming from a statute and the other from common law. In England, anyone publishing a book, regardless of who wrote it, can secure the right by following the law, whereas only a citizen can do the same in America. I regret to admit that I misled him about our copyright law, which, in reality, isn't as much less generous than England's as I had thought.

I told Sir Walter Scott, that, in order to secure a copyright in America, it was necessary the book should never have been published anywhere else. This was said under the popular notion of the matter; or that which is entertained among the booksellers. Reflection and examination have since convinced me of my error: the publication alluded to in the law can only mean publication in America; for, as the object of doing certain acts previously to publication is merely to forewarn the American public that the right is reserved, there can be no motive for having reference to any other publication. It is, moreover, in conformity with the spirit of all laws to limit the meaning of their phrases by their proper jurisdiction. Let us suppose a case. An American writes a book, he sends a copy to England, where it is published in March complying with the terms of our own copyright law, as to the entries and notices, the same work is published here in April. Now will it be pretended that his right is lost, always providing that his own is the first American publication? I do not see how it can be so by either the letter or the spirit of the law. The intention is to encourage the citizen to write, and to give him a just property in the fruits of his labour; and the precautionary provisions of the law are merely to prevent others from being injured for want of proper information. It is of no moment to either of these objects that the author of a work has already reaped emolument in a foreign country: the principle is to encourage literature by giving it all the advantages it can obtain.

I told Sir Walter Scott that to secure copyright in America, a book should never have been published anywhere else. This was based on the common belief among booksellers. However, after some reflection and examination, I've realized I was mistaken: the publication mentioned in the law refers only to publication in America. The purpose of taking certain actions before publication is simply to inform the American public that the rights are reserved, so there’s no reason to consider any other publication. Additionally, it aligns with the principle of all laws to define their terms within their appropriate jurisdiction. Let’s consider an example. An American writes a book and sends a copy to England, where it’s published in March following the rules of our copyright law regarding entries and notices; the same book is published here in April. Now, can we really claim that his rights are lost, as long as his publication is the first American one? I don’t see how that could be the case according to either the letter or the spirit of the law. The goal is to encourage citizens to write and to give them rightful ownership of the outcomes of their labor; the law’s precautionary measures are simply to prevent others from being harmed by a lack of proper information. It doesn’t matter for either of these purposes that the author has already benefited in another country: the principle is to promote literature by giving it all the support it can get.

If these views are correct, why may not an English writer secure a right in this country, by selling it in season, to a citizen here? An equitable trust might not, probably would not be sufficient; but a bona fide transfer for a valuable consideration, I begin to think, would. It seems to me that all the misconception which has existed on this point has arisen from supposing that the term publication refers to other than a publication in the country. But, when one remembers how rare it is to get lawyers to agree on a question like this, it becomes a layman to advance his opinion with great humility. I suppose, after all a good way of getting an accurate notion of the meaning of the law, would be to toss a dollar into the air, and cry "heads," or "tails." Sir Walter Scott seemed fully aware of the great circulation of his books in America, as well as how much he lost by not being able to secure a copyright. Still he admitted they produced him something. Our conversation on this subject terminated by a frank offer, on his part, of aiding me with the publishers of his own country;[16] but, although grateful for the kindness, I was not so circumstanced as to be able to profit by it.

If these views are correct, why can't an English writer establish a right in this country by selling it here in a timely manner to a local citizen? An equitable trust likely wouldn't be enough, but I’m starting to think that a bona fide transfer for a valuable consideration would work. It seems to me that all the misunderstanding on this issue has come from the idea that the term publication refers to anything other than publication in this country. However, considering how rare it is to get lawyers to agree on such questions, it takes a layperson to share their opinion with a lot of humility. I guess, in the end, a good way to get a clear understanding of the law’s meaning would be to toss a dollar into the air and call "heads" or "tails." Sir Walter Scott seemed well aware of how widely his books circulated in America and how much he lost by not being able to secure a copyright. Still, he acknowledged that they did bring him some income. Our conversation on this topic concluded with him making a straightforward offer to help me connect with publishers in his country;[16] but, although I appreciated his kindness, I wasn't in a position to take advantage of it.

[Footnote 16: An offer that was twice renewed, after intervals of several years.]

[Footnote 16: An offer that was renewed twice, after several years apart.]

He did not appear to me to be pleased with Paris. His notions of the French were pretty accurate, though clearly not free from the old fashioned prejudices. "After all," he remarked, "I am a true Scot, never, except on this occasion, and the short visit I made to Paris in 1815, having been out of my own country, unless to visit England, and I have even done very little of the latter." I understood him to say he had never been in Ireland, at all.

He didn’t seem to be happy with Paris. His views on the French were mostly on point, though clearly still stuck in some outdated prejudices. "After all," he said, "I’m a real Scot; I’ve never left my own country except for this trip and a brief visit to Paris in 1815, and I’ve hardly visited England either." I took it to mean he had never been to Ireland at all.

I met him once more, in the evening, at the hotel of the Princesse ——. The party had been got together in a hurry, and was not large. Our hostess contrived to assemble some exceedingly clever people, however, among whom were one or two women, who are already historical, and whom I had fancied long since dead. All the female part of the company, with the silent delicacy that the French so well understand, appeared with ribbons, hats, or ornaments of some sort or other, of a Scottish stamp. Indeed, almost the only woman in the room, that did not appear to be a Caledonian was Miss Scott. She was in half-mourning, and, with her black eyes and jet-black hair, might very well have passed for a French woman, but for a slight peculiarity about the cheek-bones. She looked exceedingly well, and was much admired. Having two or three more places to go to, they stayed but an hour. As a matter of course, all the French women were exceedingly empressées in their manner towards the Great Unknown; and as there were three or four that were very exaggerated on the score of romance, he was quite lucky if he escaped some absurdities. Nothing could be more patient than his manner, under it all; but as soon as he very well could, he got into a corner, where I went to speak to him. He said, laughingly, that he spoke French with so much difficulty, he was embarrassed to answer the compliments. "I am as good a lion as needs be, allowing my mane to be stroked as familiarly as they please, but I can't growl for them, in French. How is it with you?" Disclaiming the necessity of being either a good or a bad lion, being very little troubled in that way, for his amusement I related to him an anecdote. Pointing out to him a Comtesse de ——, who was present, I told him, I had met this lady once a week for several months, and at every soirée she invariably sailed up to me to say—"Oh, Monsieur ——, quelles livres!—vos charmans livres—que vos livres sont charmans!" and I had just made up my mind that she was, at least, a woman of taste, when she approached me with the utmost sang-froid, and cried— "Bon soir, Monsieur ——; je viens d'acheter tous vos livres, et je compte profiter de la première occasion pour les lire!"

I ran into him again one evening at the Princesse —— hotel. The gathering was put together quickly and wasn’t very large. However, our hostess managed to bring together some very clever people, including a couple of women who are already part of history and whom I had thought were long gone. All the women present, with the subtle elegance that the French are known for, wore some kind of Scottish-themed ribbons, hats, or accessories. In fact, almost the only woman in the room who didn’t seem Scottish was Miss Scott. She was in half-mourning, and with her black eyes and jet-black hair, she could easily have passed for a Frenchwoman, if not for a slight quirk in her cheekbones. She looked really good and was much admired. With a couple more places to go, they only stayed for an hour. Naturally, all the French women were very eager in their demeanor towards the Great Unknown; and since there were three or four who were especially dramatic in their romantic ways, he was lucky to avoid some ridiculous situations. His patience under it all was remarkable, but as soon as he could, he found a corner where I went to talk to him. He joked that he struggled with French so much that he felt awkward responding to the compliments. "I’m as good a lion as anyone needs, letting them stroke my mane however they want, but I can’t manage to growl in French for them. How about you?" I dismissed the need to be either a good or bad lion, as it hardly concerned me. For his entertainment, I told him a story. I pointed out a Comtesse de —— who was there and mentioned that I had met her once a week for several months. At every soirée, she always came up to me and said, "Oh, Monsieur ——, what wonderful books!—your charming books—how charming your books are!" Just when I thought she was at least a woman of taste, she approached me with complete nonchalance and exclaimed, "Good evening, Monsieur ——; I just bought all your books, and I plan to take the first chance to read them!"

I took leave of him in the ante-chamber, as he went away, for he was to quit Paris the following evening.

I said goodbye to him in the foyer as he was leaving because he was going to leave Paris the next evening.

Sir Walter Scott's person and manner have been so often described, that you will not ask much of me in this way, especially as I saw so little of him. His frame is large and muscular, his walk difficult, in appearance, though be boasted himself a vigorous mountaineer, and his action, in general, measured and heavy. His features and countenance were very Scottish, with the short thick nose, heavy lips, and massive cheeks. The superior or intellectual part of his head was neither deep nor broad, but perhaps the reverse, though singularly high. Indeed, it is quite uncommon to see a scull so round and tower-like in the formation, though I have met with them in individuals not at all distinguished for talents. I do not think a casual observer would find anything unusual in the exterior of Sir Walter Scott, beyond his physical force, which is great, without being at all extraordinary. His eye, however, is certainly remarkable. Grey, small, and without lustre, in his graver moments it appears to look inward, instead of regarding external objects, in a way, though the expression, more or less, belongs to abstraction, that I have never seen equalled. His smile is good-natured and social; and when he is in the mood, as happened to be the fact so often in our brief intercourse as to lead me to think it characteristic of the man, his eye would lighten with a great deal of latent fun. He spoke more freely of his private affairs than I had reason to expect, though our business introduced the subject naturally; and, at such times, I thought the expression changed to a sort of melancholy resolution, that was not wanting in sublimity.

Sir Walter Scott's appearance and behavior have been described so often that you won’t expect much from me on this front, especially since I saw very little of him. He had a large, muscular build, and his walk seemed cumbersome, although he claimed to be a strong mountaineer; generally, his movements were deliberate and heavy. His features were distinctly Scottish, characterized by a short, thick nose, heavy lips, and strong cheeks. The intellectual part of his head wasn’t particularly deep or broad, but rather the opposite, though it was quite high. It's unusual to see a skull so round and tall in shape, although I’ve encountered similar shapes in individuals who weren’t particularly known for their talents. I don’t think a casual observer would notice anything extraordinary about Sir Walter Scott’s appearance beyond his great but not exceptional physical strength. However, his eyes are definitely striking. They’re small, gray, and lack brightness; during his more serious moments, they seem to look inward rather than at the outside world, in a way I’ve never seen matched, though the expression reflects an abstract thought. His smile is warm and sociable; and when he was in a good mood, which happened often during our brief interactions, his eyes would sparkle with a lot of hidden humor. He spoke more openly about his personal life than I expected, as our conversation naturally led to that topic; during those moments, I felt his expression shifted to a kind of melancholy resolution that had a touch of grandeur.

The manner of Sir Walter Scott is that of a man accustomed to see much of the world without being exactly a man of the world himself. He has evidently great social tact, perfect self-possession, is quiet, and absolutely without pretension, and has much dignity; and yet it struck me that he wanted the ease and aplomb of one accustomed to live with his equals. The fact of his being a lion may produce some such effect; but I am mistaken if it be not more the influence of early habits and opinions than of anything else.

The way Sir Walter Scott carries himself is that of someone who has seen a lot of the world without being fully immersed in it. He clearly has strong social skills, is calm, totally unpretentious, and carries himself with dignity; however, I noticed he lacks the ease and confidence of someone used to mingling with his peers. Being a notable figure might contribute to that impression, but I believe it’s more about his upbringing and beliefs than anything else.

Scott has been so much the mark of society, that it has evidently changed his natural manner, which is far less restrained than it is his habit to be in the world. I do not mean by this, the mere restraint of decorum, but a drilled simplicity or demureness, like that of girls who are curbed in their tendency to fun and light-heartedness, by the dread of observation. I have seldom known a man of his years, whose manner was so different in a tête-à-tête, and in the presence of a third person. In Edinburgh the circle must be small, and he probably knows every one. If strangers do go there, they do not go all at once, and of course the old faces form the great majority; so that he finds himself always on familiar ground. I can readily imagine that in Auld Reekie, and among the proper set, warmed perhaps by a glass of mountain-dew, Sir Walter Scott, in his peculiar way, is one of the pleasantest companions the world holds.

Scott has been such a figure in society that it has clearly changed his natural demeanor, which is much less restrained than how he behaves in public. I don’t mean just the typical restraint of decorum, but rather a practiced simplicity or shyness, similar to girls who hold back their tendency to have fun and be carefree because they fear being watched. I rarely come across a man of his age whose demeanor is so different when it’s just the two of us compared to when there's a third person present. In Edinburgh, the social circle must be small, and he probably knows everyone. If strangers do visit, they don’t come all at once, and naturally, the familiar faces make up the majority, so he always finds himself on familiar ground. I can easily imagine that in Auld Reekie, among the right crowd, maybe after a glass of whiskey, Sir Walter Scott, in his own unique way, is one of the most enjoyable companions one could have.

There was a certain M. de —— at the soirée of the Princesse ——, who has obtained some notoriety as the writer of novels. I had, the honour of being introduced to this person, and was much amused with one of his questions. You are to understand that the vaguest possible notions exist in France on the subject of the United States. Empires, states, continents, and islands are blended in inextricable confusion, in the minds of a large majority of even the intelligent classes, and we sometimes hear the oddest ideas imaginable. This ignorance, quite pardonable in part, is not confined to France by any means, but exists even in England, a country that ought to know us better. It would seem that M. de ——, either because I was a shade or two whiter than himself, or because he did not conceive it possible that an American could write a book (for in this quarter of the world there is a strong tendency to believe that every man whose name crosses the ocean from America is merely some European who has gone there), or from some cause that to me is inexplicable, took it into his head that I was an Englishman who had amused a leisure year or two in the Western Hemisphere. After asking me a few questions concerning the country, he very coolly continued—"Et combien de temps avez-vous passé en Amérique, monsieur?" Comprehending his mistake, for a little practice here makes one quick in such matters, I answered, "Monsieur, nous y sommes depuis deux siècles." I question if M. de —— has yet recovered from his surprise!

There was a certain M. de —— at the soirée of the Princesse ——, who has gained some fame as a novelist. I had the honor of being introduced to him and found one of his questions quite amusing. You should know that there are very vague ideas in France about the United States. Empires, states, continents, and islands all get mixed up in the minds of many, even among the educated classes, and we sometimes hear the strangest ideas imaginable. This ignorance, which is somewhat excusable, isn't just limited to France; it also exists in England, a country that should know us better. It seems M. de ——, either because I was a bit whiter than him, or because he couldn't believe an American could write a book (since there’s a strong belief here that anyone whose name comes from America is just a European who went there), or for some reason I can't understand, thought I was an Englishman who had spent a year or two in the Western Hemisphere for fun. After asking me a few questions about the country, he casually continued—"Et combien de temps avez-vous passé en Amérique, monsieur?" Realizing his mistake, since a little experience here makes one quick to catch on, I replied, "Monsieur, nous y sommes depuis deux siècles." I wonder if M. de —— has even recovered from his surprise!

The French, when their general cleverness is considered, are singularly ignorant of the habits, institutions, and civilization of other countries. This is in part owing to their being little addicted to travelling. Their commercial enterprise is not great; for though we occasionally see a Frenchman carrying with him into pursuits of this nature the comprehensive views, and one might almost say, the philosophy, that distinguish the real intelligence of the country, such instances are rare, the prevailing character of their commerce being caution and close dealing. Like the people of all great nations, their attention is drawn more to themselves than to others; and then the want of a knowledge of foreign languages has greatly contributed to their ignorance. This want of knowledge of foreign languages, in a nation that has traversed Europe as conquerors, is owing to the fact that they have either carried their own language with them, or met it everywhere. It is a want, moreover, that belongs rather to the last generation than to the present; the returned emigrants having brought back with them a taste for English, German, Italian, and Spanish, which has communicated itself to all, or nearly all, the educated people of the country. English, in particular, is now very generally studied; and perhaps, relatively, more French, under thirty years of age, are to be found in Paris who speak English, than Americans, of the same age, are to be found in New York who speak French.

The French, when you think about their general intelligence, are surprisingly unaware of the habits, institutions, and cultures of other countries. This is partly because they don't travel much. Their business ventures aren't particularly vast; while we sometimes notice a French person bringing the broad perspectives, and you could almost say the philosophy, that characterize the country's true intelligence into business, these cases are uncommon, as their trade is mostly cautious and conservative. Like the citizens of many major nations, they tend to focus more on themselves than on others; and their lack of knowledge of foreign languages has significantly added to their ignorance. This lack of foreign language skills, in a nation that has traveled across Europe as conquerors, is due to the fact that they either took their own language with them or encountered it everywhere. Moreover, this lack belongs more to the previous generation than to the current one; returning emigrants have brought with them an interest in English, German, Italian, and Spanish, which has spread to almost all educated people in the country. English, in particular, is now widely studied; and perhaps, relatively, there are more French people under thirty in Paris who speak English than there are Americans of the same age in New York who speak French.

I think the limited powers of the language, and the rigid laws to which it has been subjected, contribute to render the French less acquainted with foreign nations than they would otherwise be. In all their translations there is an effort to render the word, however peculiar may be its meaning, into the French tongue. Thus, "township" and "city," met with in an American book, would probably be rendered by "canton" or "commune" or "ville;" neither of which conveys an accurate idea of the thing intended. In an English or American book we should introduce the French word at once, which would induce the reader to inquire into the differences that exist between the minor territorial divisions, of his own country, and those of the country of which he is reading. In this manner is the door open for further information, until both writers and readers come to find it easier and more agreeable to borrow words from others, than to curtail their ideas by their national vocabularies. The French, however, are beginning to feel their poverty in this respect, and some are already bold enough to resort to the natural cure.

I think the limited powers of the language and the strict rules it follows make the French less familiar with foreign countries than they could be. In all their translations, there's a push to convert the word, no matter how unique its meaning, into French. For example, "township" and "city" from an American book would probably be translated as "canton", "commune", or "ville"; none of which accurately capture the intended meaning. In an English or American book, we would directly use the French term, which would encourage the reader to explore the differences between the smaller geographic divisions of their own country and those of the country they are reading about. This way, a pathway opens for more information, and both writers and readers come to find it easier and more enjoyable to borrow terms from others rather than limit their ideas to their own national vocabularies. However, the French are starting to realize their shortcomings in this area, and some are already bold enough to seek a natural remedy.

The habit of thinking of other nations through their own customs, betrays the people of this country into many ridiculous mistakes. One hears here the queerest questions imaginable every day; all of which, veiled by the good breeding and delicacy that characterize the nation, betray an innocent sense of superiority that may be smiled at, and which creates no feeling of resentment. A savant lately named to me the coasting tonnage of France, evidently with the expectation of exciting my admiration; and on my receiving the information coolly, he inquired, with a little sarcasm of manner—"Without doubt, you have some coasting tonnage also in America?" "The coasting tonnage of the United Slates, Monsieur, is greater than the entire tonnage of France." The man looked astonished, and I was covered with questions as to the nature of the trade that required so much shipping among a population numerically so small. It could not possibly be the consumption of a country—he did not say it, but he evidently thought it—so insignificant and poor? I told him, that bread, wine, and every other article of the first necessity excepted, the other consumption of America, especially in luxuries, did not fall so much short of that of France as he imagined, owing to the great abundance in which the middling and lower classes lived. Unlike Europe, articles that were imported were mere necessaries of life, in America, such as tea, coffee, sugar, etc. etc., the lowest labourer usually indulging in them. He left me evidently impressed with new notions, for there is a desire to learn mingled with all their vanity.

The habit of seeing other countries through the lens of one’s own customs leads people in this country to make many silly mistakes. Every day, I hear the strangest questions imaginable; all of which, masked by the politeness and sensitivity that define the nation, reveal an innocent sense of superiority that can be laughed off, and which doesn’t create any resentment. A savant recently mentioned to me the coasting tonnage of France, clearly expecting to impress me; when I responded casually to the information, he asked, with a hint of sarcasm, “Surely you have some coasting tonnage in America as well?” “The coasting tonnage of the United States, Monsieur, is greater than the entire tonnage of France.” The man looked shocked, and I was bombarded with questions about the kind of trade that needed so much shipping among a population that was numerically so small. He couldn’t possibly believe it was the consumption of a country—he didn’t say it outright, but it was clear he thought it—so insignificant and poor? I explained that aside from bread, wine, and every other basic necessity, America’s consumption of other items, especially luxuries, wasn’t as far behind France’s as he thought, due to the great abundance in which the middle and lower classes lived. Unlike Europe, the imported items in America—like tea, coffee, sugar, etc.—were just necessities of life, with even the lowest-paid workers typically enjoying them. He left me clearly impressed with new ideas, as there’s a thirst for knowledge mixed in with all their vanity.

But I will relate a laughable blunder of a translator, by way of giving you a familiar example of the manner in which the French fall into error concerning the condition of other nations, and to illustrate my meaning. In one of the recent American novels that have been circulated here, a character is made to betray confusion, by tracing lines on the table, after dinner, with some wine that had been spilt; a sort of idle occupation sufficiently common to allow the allusion to be understood by every American. The sentence was faithfully rendered; but, not satisfied with giving his original, the translator annexes a note, in which he says, "One sees by this little trait, that the use of table-cloths, at the time of the American Revolution, was unknown in America!" You will understand the train of reasoning that led him to this conclusion. In France the cover is laid, perhaps, on a coarse table of oak, or even of pine, and the cloth is never drawn; the men leaving the table with the women. In America, the table is of highly polished mahogany, the cloth is removed, and the men sit, as in England. Now the French custom was supposed to be the custom of mankind, and wine could not be traced on the wood had there been a cloth; America was a young and semi-civilized nation, and, ergo, in 1779, there could have been no table-cloths known in America!—When men even visit a people of whom they have been accustomed to think in this way, they use their eyes through the medium of the imagination. I lately met a French traveller who affirmed that the use of carpets was hardly known among us.

But I want to share a funny mistake made by a translator to give you a clear example of how the French get confused about other countries’ situations and to illustrate my point. In one of the recent American novels that circulated here, a character shows confusion by tracing lines on the table with some spilled wine after dinner; it's a pretty common idle activity that every American would get. The translator accurately translated the sentence, but wanting to explain further, he added a note that says, "This little detail shows that tablecloths were not known in America at the time of the American Revolution!" You can see how he reached that conclusion. In France, the table is typically set on a rough oak or even pine surface, and the cloth is never removed; the men leave the table with the women. In America, the table is made of shiny mahogany, the cloth is taken away, and men stay seated, just like in England. The French custom was assumed to be the norm for everyone, and if there had been a tablecloth, you wouldn’t see wine stains on the wood; America was seen as a young and semi-civilized country, and, therefore, in 1779, there couldn’t have been any tablecloths in America!—When people visit cultures they often think of in this way, they view them through the lens of their imagination. I recently met a French traveler who insisted that using carpets was hardly known here.

LETTER XIII.

French Manufactures.—Sèvres China.—Tapestry of the Gobelins.—Paper
for Hangings.—The Savonnerie.—French Carpets.—American Carpets.
—Transfer of old Pictures from Wood to Canvass.—Coronation Coach.
—The Arts in France—in America.—American Prejudice.

French Manufacturing—Sèvres Porcelain—Gobelins Tapestry—Paper for Wall Hangings—The Savonnerie—French Rugs—American Rugs—Transferring Old Photos from Wood to Canvas—Coronation Coach—The Arts in France and America—American Bias.

To JAMES E. DE KAY, ESQUIRE.

To James E. De Kay, Esq.

In my last, I gave you a few examples of the instances in which the
French have mistaken the relative civilization of their country and
America, and I shall now give you some in which we have fallen into the
same error, or the other side of the question.

In my last, I gave you a few examples of the instances in which the
French have mistaken the relative civilization of their country and
America, and I shall now give you some in which we have fallen into the
same error, or the other side of the question.

There has lately been an exhibition of articles of French manufacture, at Paris; one of, I believe, the triennial collections of this character, that have been established here. The court of the Louvre was filled with temporary booths for the occasion, and vast ranges of the unfinished apartments in that magnificent palace have been thrown open for the same purpose. The court of the Louvre, of itself, is an area rather more than four hundred feet square, and I should think fully a quarter of a mile of rooms in the building itself are to be added to the space occupied for this purpose.

There has recently been an exhibition of French-made goods in Paris, part of what I believe is one of those triennial collections established here. The courtyard of the Louvre was filled with temporary booths, and many of the unfinished rooms in that stunning palace have been opened up for the event. The courtyard of the Louvre is a little over four hundred feet square, and I would estimate that around a quarter of a mile of rooms in the building itself are included in the space used for this purpose.

The first idea, with which I was impressed, on walking through the booths and galleries, on this occasion, was the great disproportion between the objects purely of taste and luxury, and the objects of use. The former abounded, were very generally elegant and well-imagined, while the latter betrayed the condition of a nation whose civilization has commenced with the summit, instead of the base of society.

The first thing that struck me while walking through the booths and galleries was how imbalanced the display was between items meant for taste and luxury and those meant for practical use. The luxury items were plentiful, elegant, and thoughtfully designed, while the practical items reflected the state of a nation whose civilization began at the top instead of the foundation of society.

In France, nearly every improvement in machinery is the result of scientific research; is unobjectionable in principles, profound in the adaptation of its parts to the end, and commonly beautiful in form. But it ends here, rarely penetrating the mass, and producing positive results. The Conservatoire des Arts, for instance, is full of beautiful and ingenious ploughs; while France is tilled with heavy, costly, and cumbrous implements of this nature. One sees light mould turning up, here, under a sort of agricultural diligences, drawn by four, and even six heavy horses, which in America would be done quite as well, and much sooner, by two. You know I am farmer enough to understand what I say, on a point like this. In France, the cutlery, ironware, glass, door-fastenings, hinges, locks, fire-irons, axes, hatchets, carpenter's tools, and, in short, almost everything that is connected with homely industry and homely comfort, is inferior to the same thing in America. It is true, many of our articles are imported, but this produces no change in the habits of the respective people; our manufactories are merely in Birmingham, instead of being in Philadelphia.

In France, almost every advancement in machinery comes from scientific research; it’s solid in principles, well-adapted in its parts for their purpose, and usually attractive in design. However, it stops there, seldom reaching the general population or delivering tangible results. The Conservatoire des Arts, for example, has plenty of beautiful and clever plows, yet France is filled with heavy, expensive, and cumbersome tools of this kind. You can see light soil being turned over here with a kind of agricultural diligences pulled by four or even six strong horses, which in America would be handled just as well, and much faster, with only two. You know I’m knowledgeable enough about farming to understand what I’m talking about on this issue. In France, the cutlery, iron goods, glass, door locks, hinges, padlocks, fire tools, axes, hatchets, carpenter tools, and nearly everything else related to everyday work and comfort is of lower quality compared to similar items in America. It’s true that many of our products are imported, but that doesn’t change the habits of the people; our factories are simply in Birmingham instead of Philadelphia.

I have now been long enough in France to understand that seeing an article in an exhibition like the one I am describing, is no proof that it enters at all into the comforts and civilization of the nation, although it may be an object as homely as a harrow or a spade. The scientific part of the country has little influence, in this way, on the operative. The chasm between knowledge and ignorance is so vast in France, that it requires a long time for the simplest idea to find its way across it.

I have been in France long enough to realize that seeing something in an exhibition like the one I'm describing doesn't necessarily mean it contributes to the comforts and civilization of the country, even if it's as simple as a harrow or a spade. The scientific sector has little impact on the working class in this regard. The gap between knowledge and ignorance is so wide in France that it takes a long time for even the simplest ideas to bridge it.

Exhibitions are everywhere bad guides to the average civilization of a country, as it is usual to expose only the objects that have been wrought with the greatest care. In a popular sense, they are proofs of what can be done, rather than of what is done. The cloths that I saw in the booths, for instance, are not to be met with in the shops; the specimens of fire-arms, glass, cutlery, etc., etc., too, are all much superior to anything one finds on sale. But this is the case everywhere, from the boarding-school to the military parade, men invariably putting the best foot foremost when they are to be especially inspected. This is not the difference I mean. Familiar as every American, at all accustomed to the usages of genteel life in his own country, must be with the better manufactures of Great Britain, I think he would be struck by the inferiority of even the best specimens of the commoner articles that were here laid before the public. But when it came to the articles of elegance and luxury, as connected with forms, taste, and execution, though not always in ingenuity and extent of comfort, I should think that no Englishman, let his rank in life be what it would, could pass through this wilderness of elegancies without wonder.

Exhibitions are often poor reflections of an average country's culture since they usually only showcase the items crafted with the utmost care. In a general sense, they demonstrate what can be accomplished rather than what actually is accomplished. For example, the textiles I saw at the stalls aren’t found in stores; the examples of firearms, glassware, cutlery, and so on are all much better than what you typically find for sale. This happens everywhere, from boarding schools to military parades, where people always front their best efforts for scrutiny. But that's not the difference I’m talking about. Every American familiar with the finer products of Great Britain would likely be struck by the inferiority of even the best examples of everyday items displayed here. However, when it comes to elegant and luxurious articles relating to design, taste, and craftsmanship—though may not always excel in innovation and comfort—I'd say that no Englishman, regardless of social status, could walk through this array of elegance without feeling amazed.

Even the manufactures in which we, or rather the English (for I now refer more to use than to production), ordinarily excel, such as carpets, rugs, porcelain, plate, and all the higher articles of personal comfort, as exceptions, surpass those of which we have any notion. I say, as exceptions, not in the sense by which we distinguish the extraordinary efforts of the ordinary manufacturer, in order to make a figure at an exhibition, but certain objects produced in certain exclusive establishments that are chiefly the property of the crown, as they have been the offspring of regal taste and magnificence.

Even the products where we, or rather the English (since I'm focusing more on usage than production), usually excel, like carpets, rugs, porcelain, silverware, and all the higher-end comfort items, as exceptions, outshine anything we can imagine. I say as exceptions, not in the way we point out the impressive efforts of a regular manufacturer trying to stand out at an exhibition, but rather specific items made in certain exclusive places that mainly belong to the crown, as they reflect royal taste and grandeur.

Of this latter character is the Sèvres china. There are manufactures of this name of a quality that brings them within the reach of moderate fortunes, it is true; but one obtains no idea of the length to which luxury and taste have been pushed in this branch of art without examining the objects made especially for the king, who is in the habit of distributing them as presents among the crowned heads and his personal favourites. After the ware has been made with the greatest care and of the best materials, artists of celebrity are employed to paint it. You can easily imagine the value of these articles, when you remember that each plate has a design of its own, beautifully executed in colours, and presenting a landscape or an historical subject that is fit to be framed and suspended in a gallery. One or two of the artists employed in this manner have great reputations, and it is no uncommon thing to see miniatures in gilded frames which, on examination, prove to be on porcelain. Of course the painting has been subject to the action of heat in the baking. As respects the miniatures, there is not much to be said in their favour. They are well drawn and well enough coloured; but the process and the material give them a glossy, unnatural appearance, which must prevent them from ever being considered as more than so many tours de force in the arts. But on vases, dinner-sets, and all ornamental furniture of this nature, in which we look for the peculiarities of the material, they produce a magnificence of effect that I cannot describe. Vases of the value of ten or fifteen thousand francs, or even of more money, are not uncommon; and at the exhibition there was a little table, the price of which I believe was two thousand dollars, that was a perfect treasure in its way.

Of this latter type is the Sèvres china. There are factories producing this china of a quality that makes it affordable for those with moderate means, it's true; but you can't grasp the extent to which luxury and taste have been taken in this art without looking at the pieces made specifically for the king, who often gives them as gifts to other royals and his close friends. Once the ware has been meticulously crafted from the best materials, well-known artists are hired to paint it. You can easily imagine the value of these items when you consider that each plate has its own unique design, beautifully painted in colors, showcasing a landscape or a historical scene that could be framed and hung in a gallery. One or two of the artists involved are highly regarded, and it's not unusual to find miniatures in gilded frames that, upon closer inspection, turn out to be painted on porcelain. Naturally, the painting has undergone heat in the firing process. As for the miniatures, there isn’t much to praise. They are well-drawn and adequately colored; however, the method and material give them a shiny, unnatural look, preventing them from being regarded as anything more than mere tours de force in the arts. But on vases, dinner sets, and all types of decorative items, where we expect the unique qualities of the material, they create a level of magnificence that I can't describe. Vases worth ten or fifteen thousand francs, or even more, are common; and at the exhibition, there was a small table priced at what I believe was two thousand dollars, which was a true gem in its own right.

Busts, and even statues, I believe, have been attempted in this branch of art. This of course is enlisting the statuary as well as the painter in its service. I remember to have seen, when at Sèvres, many busts of the late Duc de Berri in the process of drying, previously to being put into the oven. Our cicerone on that occasion made us laugh by the routine with which he went through his catalogue of wonders. He had pointed out to us the unbaked busts in a particular room, and on entering another apartment, where the baked busts were standing, he exclaimed—"Ah! voilà son Altesse Royale toute cuite." This is just the amount of the criticism I should hazard on this branch of the Sèvres art, or on that which exceeds its legitimate limits—"Behold his Royal Highness, ready cooked."

Busts, and even statues, have definitely been attempted in this field of art. This, of course, involves both sculptors and painters in the process. I remember seeing many busts of the late Duke of Berry drying when I was in Sèvres, before being placed in the oven. Our guide at the time made us laugh with how he recited his list of attractions. He had shown us the unbaked busts in one room, and when we entered another one with the baked busts displayed, he exclaimed—"Ah! Here is His Royal Highness, fully cooked." This is about the extent of the critique I would make on this aspect of Sèvres art, or on anything that goes beyond its proper scope—"Behold His Royal Highness, ready cooked."

The value of some of the single plates must be very considerable, and the king frequently, in presenting a solitary vase, or ornament of the Sèvres porcelain, presents thousands.

The value of some of the individual plates must be quite significant, and the king often, when giving a single vase or piece of Sèvres porcelain, is presenting thousands.

The tapestry is another of the costly works that it has suited the policy of France to keep up, while her ploughs, and axes, and carts, and other ordinary implements, are still so primitive and awkward. The exhibition contained many specimens from the Gobelins that greatly surpassed my expectations. They were chiefly historical subjects, with the figures larger than life, and might very well have passed with a novice, at a little distance, for oil-paintings. The dimensions of the apartment are taken, and the subject is designed, of course, on a scale suited to the room. The effect of this species of ornament is very noble and imposing, and the tapestries have the additional merit of warmth and comfort. Hangings in cloth are very common in Paris, but the tapestry of the Gobelins is chiefly confined to the royal palaces. Our neighbour the Duc de —— has some of it, however, in his hotel, a present from the king; but the colours are much faded, and the work is otherwise the worse for time. I have heard him say that one piece he has, even in its dilapidated state, is valued at seven thousand francs. Occasionally a little of this tapestry is found in this manner in the great hotels; but, as a rule, its use is strictly royal.

The tapestry is one of the expensive works that France has decided to maintain, even though its farming tools, axes, carts, and other everyday items are still so basic and clumsy. The exhibition featured many pieces from the Gobelins that exceeded my expectations. They were mostly historical themes, with figures larger than life, and from a distance, they could easily be mistaken for oil paintings by someone inexperienced. The room's dimensions are taken into account, and the subject is designed to fit it properly. The effect of this type of decoration is very elegant and impressive, and the tapestries also provide warmth and comfort. Fabric hangings are quite common in Paris, but Gobelins tapestries are mainly found in royal palaces. Our neighbor, the Duc de ——, does have some in his hotel, a gift from the king; however, the colors have faded a lot, and the piece has deteriorated over time. I’ve heard him say that one of his pieces, even in its worn condition, is valued at seven thousand francs. Occasionally, you might find a bit of this tapestry in large hotels, but generally, it’s reserved for royal use.

The paper for hangings is another article in which the French excel. We get very pretty specimens of their skill in this manufacture in America, but, with occasional exceptions, nothing that is strictly magnificent finds its way into our markets. I was much struck with some of these hangings that were made to imitate velvet. The cloth appeared to be actually incorporated with the paper, and by no ingenuity of which I was master could I detect the means. The style of paper is common enough everywhere, but this exhibition had qualities far surpassing anything of the sort I had ever before seen. Curiosity has since led me to the paper-maker, in order to penetrate the secrets of his art; and there, like the affair of Columbus and the egg, I found the whole thing as simple as heart could wish. You will probably smile when you learn the process by which paper is converted into velvet, which is briefly this:—

The wallpaper is another area where the French really shine. We do get some nice examples of their craftsmanship in America, but, with a few exceptions, nothing truly magnificent reaches our markets. I was really impressed by some of the wallpapers designed to look like velvet. The fabric seemed to be completely blended with the paper, and no matter how hard I tried, I couldn’t figure out how they did it. The type of paper is pretty common everywhere, but this display had qualities far beyond anything I’d ever seen before. My curiosity later led me to visit the paper maker to uncover the secrets of his craft; and there, much like Columbus with the egg, I found the whole process to be as straightforward as it could be. You’ll probably laugh when you hear how paper is transformed into velvet, which is simply this:—

Wooden moulds are used to stamp the designs, each colour being put on, by laying a separate mould on its proper place, one mould being used after another, though only one is used on any particular occasion. Thus, all the black is put on now, the green to-morrow, and the yellow next day. As to the velvets, they are produced as follows:—Wool is chopped fine, and dyed the desired hue. I am not certain that cotton, or even other materials, may not be used. This chopped and coloured wool is thrown into a tub; the mould is covered with some glutinous substance, and, when applied, it leaves on the paper the adhesive property, as types leave the ink. The paper passes immediately over the tub, and a boy throws on the wool. A light blow or two, of a rattan, tosses it about, and finally throws all back again into the tub that has not touched the glue. The printed part, of course, is covered with blue, or purple, or scarlet wood, and is converted, by a touch of the wand, into velvet! The process of covering a yard lasts about ten seconds, and I should think considerably more than a hundred yards of paper could be velvetized in an hour. We laughed at the discovery, and came away satisfied that Solomon could have known nothing about manufacturing paper-hangings, or he would not have said there was nothing "new under the sun."

Wooden molds are used to stamp the designs, with each color applied by placing a separate mold in its specific spot, one mold after another, though only one is used at a time. So, all the black is applied now, green tomorrow, and yellow the next day. As for the velvets, they’re made like this: Wool is finely chopped and dyed the desired color. I’m not sure if cotton or other materials might not also be used. This chopped and dyed wool is thrown into a tub; the mold is coated with a sticky substance, and when applied, it leaves an adhesive mark on the paper, just like ink does on types. The paper then passes right over the tub, and a boy sprinkles the wool on it. A light tap or two with a rattan stirs it around, and finally, all the unused wool is tossed back into the tub that hasn't touched the glue. The printed area, of course, is covered with blue, purple, or scarlet wood, and with a flick of the wand, it turns into velvet! The process of covering a yard takes about ten seconds, and I’d guess you could velvetize well over a hundred yards of paper in an hour. We laughed at this discovery and left convinced that Solomon couldn’t have known anything about making wallpaper, or he wouldn’t have said there’s nothing "new under the sun."

But the manufacture of France that struck me as being strictly in the best taste, in which perfection and magnificence are attained without recourse to conceits, or doing violence to any of the proprieties, are the products of the Savonnerie, and the exquisitely designed and executed works of Beauvais. These include chair bottoms and backs, hangings for rooms, and, I believe, carpets. At all events, if the carpets do not come from these places, they are quite worthy to have that extraction. Flowers, arabesques, and other similar designs, exquisitely coloured and drawn, chiefly limit the efforts of the former; and the carpets were in single pieces, and made to fit the room. Nothing that you have ever seen, or probably have imagined, at all equals the magnificence of some of these princely carpets. Indeed, I know nothing that runs a closer parallel to the general civilization between France and England, and I might almost add of America, than the history of their respective carpets. In France, a vast majority of the people hardly know what a carpet is. They use mud floors, or, rising a little above the very lowest classes, coarse stone and rude tiles are substituted. The middling classes, out of the large towns, have little else besides painted tiles. The wooden parquet is met with, in all the better houses, and is well made and well kept. There is a finish and beauty about them, that is not misplaced even in a palace. Among all these classes, until quite lately, carpets were unknown, or at least they were confined to the very highest class of society. The great influx of English has introduced them into the public hotels and common lodging-houses; but I have visited among many French of rank and fortune, in the dead of winter, and found no carpets. A few of a very coarse quality, made of rags, adroitly tortured into laboured designs, are seen, it is true, even in indifferent houses; but the rule is as I have told you. In short, carpets, in this country, until quite lately, have been deemed articles of high luxury; and, like nearly everything else that is magnificent and luxurious, at the point where they have been taken up, they infinitely exceed anything of the sort in England. The classical designs, perfect drawings, and brilliant colours, defeat every effort to surpass them,—I had almost said, all competition.

But the products from France that really stand out as being incredibly tasteful, achieving perfection and elegance without any gimmicks or violating decorum, are those from Savonnerie and the beautifully crafted works of Beauvais. This includes chair seats and backs, wall hangings, and, if I’m not mistaken, carpets. If those carpets don’t actually come from these places, they absolutely deserve to. The former mainly focus on flowers, arabesques, and similar designs that are beautifully colored and rendered. The carpets are made in single pieces and tailored to fit the room. Nothing you've ever seen or could probably imagine compares to the grandeur of some of these royal carpets. In fact, I can’t think of anything that reflects the overall cultural differences between France, England, and even America quite like the history of their carpets. In France, most people barely know what a carpet is. They typically have mud floors, or for those a bit above the lowest classes, rough stone and simple tiles are used instead. The middle class outside the major cities mainly has painted tiles. Well-made wooden parquet can be found in better homes, and it looks polished and beautiful, fitting even for a palace. Until recently, carpets were practically unknown among all these classes or were limited to the highest elite. The influx of English people has brought carpets into public hotels and common lodging houses; however, I’ve visited many French families of wealth and status during the dead of winter and found no carpets. It’s true that a few very coarse, rag-made carpets, clumsily crafted into elaborate designs, can be seen even in average homes, but that’s the exception. In short, carpets in this country have been considered luxury items until quite recently, and like nearly everything else that is grand and luxurious, the ones they have now far surpass anything similar in England. The classic designs, flawless drawings, and vibrant colors put them in a league of their own—I might almost say there's no competition.

In all America, except in the new regions, with here and there a dwelling on the frontier, there is scarcely a house to be found without carpets, the owners of which are at all above the labouring classes. Even in many of the latter they are to be found. We are carpeted, frequently, from the kitchen to the garret; the richness and rarity of the manufacture increasing as we ascend in the scale of wealth and fashion, until we reach the uttermost limits of our habits—a point where beauty and neatness verge upon elegance and magnificence. At this point, however, we stop, and the turn of the French commences. Now this is the history of the comparative civilization of the two countries, in a multitude of other matters; perhaps, it would be better to say, it is the general comparative history of the two countries. The English differ from us, only, in carrying their scale both higher and lower than ourselves; in being sometimes magnificent, and sometimes impoverished; but, rarely, indeed, do they equal the French in the light, classical, and elegant taste that so eminently distinguishes these people. There is something ponderous and purse-proud about the magnificence of England, that is scarcely ever visible here; though taste is evidently and rapidly on the increase in England on the one hand, as comfort is here on the other. The French have even partially adopted the two words "fashionable" and "comfortable."

In all of America, except in the new areas and a few homes on the frontier, you can hardly find a house without carpets, especially among those who are above the working class. Even many in those lower classes have them. We have carpets often from the kitchen to the attic; the quality and uniqueness of the carpets increase as we move up in wealth and style, until we reach the heights of our lifestyles—a point where beauty and tidiness blend into elegance and grandeur. However, we stop at this point, and the French begin. This reflects the history of the relative civilization of the two countries in many other aspects; maybe it’s better to say it’s a general comparative history of both nations. The English differ from us by having their standards both higher and lower than ours; they can be magnificent at times and impoverished at others; but they rarely match the French in the light, classic, and elegant taste that distinctly defines them. There’s something heavy and overly proud about the splendor of England that’s hardly seen here; although taste is clearly and quickly improving in England on one side, comfort is advancing here on the other. The French have even partially embraced the terms "fashionable" and "comfortable."

One of the most curious things connected with the arts in France, is that of transferring old pictures from wood to canvass. A large proportion of the paintings of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were done on wood or copper, and many of the former are, or have been, in danger of being lost, from decay. In order to meet the evil, a process has been invented by which the painting is transferred to canvass, where it remains, to all appearance, as good as ever. I have taken some pains to ascertain in what manner this nice operation is performed. I have seen pictures in various stages of the process, though I have never watched any one through it all; and, in one instance, I saw a small Wouvermans stripped to the shirt, if it may be so expressed, or, in other words, when it was nothing but paint. From what I have seen and been told, I understand the mode of effecting this delicate and almost incredible operation to be as follows:—

One of the most interesting things related to the arts in France is the practice of transferring old paintings from wood to canvas. A large number of paintings from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were created on wood or copper, and many of the wooden ones are at risk of being lost due to decay. To address this problem, a method has been developed to transfer the painting to canvas, where it appears to be just as good as ever. I’ve made an effort to find out how this careful process is done. I’ve seen paintings at various stages of the transfer, although I’ve never watched the entire process from start to finish; in one case, I saw a small Wouvermans painting stripped down to just the paint, so to speak. From what I’ve observed and been told, I understand that the procedure for carrying out this delicate and almost unbelievable operation is as follows:—

A glue is rubbed over the face of the picture, which is then laid on a piece of canvass that is properly stretched and secured, to receive it. Weights are now laid on the back of the picture, and it is left for a day or two, in order that the glue may harden. The weights are then removed, and the operator commences removing the wood, first with a plane, and, when he approaches the paint, with sharp delicate chisels. The paint is kept in its place by the canvass to which it is glued, and which is itself secured to the table; and although the entire body of the colours, hardened as it is by time, is usually not thicker than a thin wafer, the wood is commonly taken entirely from it. Should a thin fragment be left, however, or a crack made in the paint, it is considered of no great moment. The Wouvermans alluded to, was pure paint, however, and I was shown the pieces of wood, much worm-eaten, that had been removed. When the wood is away, glue is applied to the back of the paint, and to the canvass on which it is intended the picture shall remain. The latter is then laid on the paint; new weights are placed above it, and they are left two or three days longer, for this new glue to harden. When it is thought the adhesion between the second canvass and the paint is sufficient, the weights are removed, the picture is turned, and warm water is used in loosening the first canvass from the face of the picture, until it can be stripped off. More or less of the varnish of the picture usually comes off with the glue, rendering the separation easier. The painting is then cleaned, retouched, and, should it be necessary, varnished and framed; after which it commonly looks as well, and is really as sound and as good as ever, so far, at least, as the consistency is concerned.

A glue is applied over the surface of the painting, which is then placed on a properly stretched and secured piece of canvas. Weights are set on the back of the painting, and it's left for a day or two to let the glue harden. After that, the weights are removed, and the person starts taking off the wood, first using a plane, and then, as they get closer to the paint, using sharp, delicate chisels. The paint stays in place because of the canvas it’s glued to, which is also secured to the table; although the entire layer of paint, hardened by time, is usually no thicker than a thin wafer, the wood is typically completely removed. If a thin sliver is left or a crack forms in the paint, it’s usually not a big deal. However, the referenced Wouvermans was pure paint, and I was shown the pieces of wood, which were quite eaten by worms, that had been removed. Once the wood is gone, glue is applied to the back of the paint and to the canvas that the painting will stay on. This canvas is then placed on the paint, new weights are added on top, and it's left for two or three more days to let this new glue set. When it seems like the bond between the second canvas and the paint is strong enough, the weights are taken off, the painting is flipped, and warm water is used to loosen the first canvas from the surface of the painting until it can be peeled away. Some of the varnish from the painting usually comes off with the glue, making the separation easier. The painting is then cleaned, retouched, and, if needed, varnished and framed; after that, it usually looks just as good as it ever did and is really just as sound and solid as before, at least in terms of consistency.

Among other wonders in the exhibition, was the coronation coach of Charles X. This carriage is truly magnificent. It is quite large, as indeed are all the royal carriages, perhaps as large as an American stage-coach; the glass, pure and spotless as air, goes all round the upper compartments, so as to admit of a view of the whole interior; the panels are beautifully painted in design; the top has gilded and well-formed angels blowing trumpets, and the crown of France surmounts the centre. The wheels, and train, and pole, are red, striped with gold. All the leather is red morocco, gilt, as is the harness. Plumes of ostrich feathers ornament the angles, and, altogether, it is a most glittering and gorgeous vehicle. The paintings, the gildings, and all the details are well executed, except the running gear, which struck me as clumsy and imperfect. The cost is said to have been about sixty thousand dollars.

Among other wonders in the exhibition was the coronation coach of Charles X. This carriage is truly magnificent. It is quite large, just like all the royal carriages, possibly as big as an American stagecoach; the glass, clear and spotless, surrounds the upper compartments to allow a view of the entire interior; the panels are beautifully painted in design; the top has gilded and well-crafted angels blowing trumpets, and the crown of France crowns the center. The wheels, train, and pole are red, striped with gold. All the leather is red morocco, gilt, as is the harness. Plumes of ostrich feathers adorn the corners, and overall, it is a very glittering and stunning vehicle. The paintings, gildings, and all the details are well executed, except the running gear, which seemed clumsy and imperfect to me. The cost is said to have been about sixty thousand dollars.

Many new rooms in the Louvre were thrown open on this occasion, in order that the paintings on their ceilings might be viewed; and as I walked through this gorgeous magnificence, I felt how small were our highest pretensions to anything like elegance or splendour. The very extreme of art, of this nature, may, of itself, be of no great direct benefit, it is true; but is should be remembered, that the skill which produces these extraordinary fruits, in its road to the higher points of magnificence, produces all that embellishes life in the intermediate gradations.

Many new rooms in the Louvre were opened for this event so that guests could admire the paintings on their ceilings. As I walked through this stunning beauty, I realized how insignificant our claims to elegance or grandeur really are. While the pinnacle of art like this might not directly benefit us much, it’s important to remember that the skill that creates these remarkable works also enhances every aspect of life along the way to achieving greater elegance.

In America, in the eagerness of gain, and with the contracted habits that a love of gain engenders, which by their own avidity, as is usual with the grosser passions, too often defeat their own ends, we overlook the vast importance of cultivating the fine arts, even in a pecuniary sense, to say nothing of the increased means of enjoying the very money that is so blindly pursued, which their possession entails. France is at this moment laying all Christendom under contribution, simply by means of her taste. Italy, where the arts have flourished still longer, and where they have still more effectually penetrated society, would drive the English and French out of every market on earth, were the national energy at all equal to the national tastes. These things do not as exclusively belong to extreme luxury as they may at first seem. Science, skill of the nicest investigation, and great research, are all enlisted in their behalf; and, in time, implements of the most homely uses derive perfection, as by-plays, from the investigations consequent on the production of luxuries. It is true, that, by blending a certain amount of information with practice, as in the case of the American labourer, our wants find the means of furnishing their own supplies; but, apart from the fact that the man who makes a chair is not obliged to sit in it, and is therefore content to consult his profits merely, the impulses of practice are much aided by the accumulated knowledge of study. The influence that the arts of design have had on the French manufactures is incalculable. They have brought in the aid of chemistry, and mathematics, and a knowledge of antiquity; and we can trace the effects in the bronzes, the porcelain, the hangings, the chintzes, the silks, down to the very ribands of the country. We shall in vain endeavour to compete with the great European nations, unless we make stronger efforts to cultivate the fine arts. Of what avails our beautiful glass, unless we know how to cut it? or of what great advantage, in the strife of industry, will be even the skilful glass-cutter, should he not also be the tasteful glass-cutter? It is true that classical forms and proportions are, as yet, of no great account among us; and the great mass of the American people still cling to their own uninstructed fancies, in preference to the outlines and proportions of the more approved models, and to those hues which art has demonstrated to be harmonious. This is the history of every society in its progress to perfection; and, cut off as we are from the rest of the civilized world, it is not to be expected that we are to make an extraordinary exception. But, while we may be satisfied with our own skill and taste, the happy lot of all ignorance, our customers will not have the same self-complacency, to induce them to become purchasers. We find this truth already. We beat all nations in the fabrication of common unstamped cottons. Were trade as free as some political economists pretend, we should drive all our competitors out of every market, as respects this one article. But the moment we attempt to print, or to meddle with that part of the business which requires taste, we find ourselves inferior to the Europeans, whose forms we are compelled to imitate, and of course to receive when no longer novel, and whose hues defy our art.

In America, in the rush to make money and with the narrow habits that a love for profit creates—which, like other intense passions, often end up undermining their own goals—we tend to ignore the significant importance of nurturing the fine arts, even from a financial perspective, not to mention how they enhance the enjoyment of the very money that people chase after blindly. Right now, France is influencing all of Christendom just through her sense of style. Italy, where the arts have thrived even longer and have more deeply influenced society, could easily push the English and French out of every market on the globe if the national energy matched the national preferences. These pursuits aren’t solely the domain of extreme luxury, as they might first appear. Science, meticulous skills, and extensive research all play a role in supporting them; and over time, tools for everyday use gain perfection as a side effect of exploring luxury goods. It's true that by combining some knowledge with practical skills, like in the case of the American worker, our needs can often provide for themselves; however, aside from the fact that the person making a chair isn't required to sit in it—thus only focusing on profit—the drive for practice is greatly enhanced by accumulated knowledge. The impact that design arts have had on French manufacturing is enormous. They have incorporated chemistry, mathematics, and historical knowledge, which we can see reflected in the bronzes, porcelain, textiles, chintzes, and silks, right down to the ribbons of the country. It will be futile to compete with the major European nations unless we make stronger efforts to develop the fine arts. What good is our beautiful glass if we don't know how to cut it? Or how advantageous will a skilled glass-cutter be, if they're not also a tasteful one? It's true that classical forms and proportions don’t hold much value for us yet; and most Americans still prefer their own untrained tastes over the shapes and ratios of more established models and the colors that art has shown to be harmonious. This reflects the journey of any society towards perfection; and cut off as we are from the rest of the civilized world, it’s unrealistic to expect that we would be an extraordinary exception. However, while we might be content with our own skills and tastes—which is a comfort of ignorance—our customers won't share the same complacency to drive them to buy from us. We already see this truth. We outpace all nations in producing basic unbranded cottons. If trade were as free as some economists argue, we would eliminate all our competition in that area. But the moment we try to print or engage in the aspect of the business that requires taste, we find ourselves outdone by Europeans, whose styles we must mimic, and inevitably accept once they are no longer new, and whose colors defy our artistic abilities.

The wisest thing the United States could do, would be to appropriate thirty or forty millions to the formation of a marine, not to secure the coast, as our hen-roost statesmen are always preaching, but to keep in our own hands the control of our own fortunes, by rendering our enmity or friendship of so much account to Europe that no power shall ever again dare trespass on our national rights:—and one of the next wisest measures, I honestly believe, would be to appropriate at once a million to the formation of a National Gallery, in which copies of the antique, antiques themselves, pictures, bronzes, arabesques, and other models of true taste, might be collected, before which the young aspirants for fame might study, and with which become imbued, as the preliminary step to an infusion of their merits into society. Without including the vast influence of such a cultivation on the manners, associations, intellects, and habits of the people—an influence that can scarcely be appreciated too highly—fifty years would see the first cost returned fifty-fold in the shape of the much-beloved dollars. Will this happen? Not till men of enlightened minds—statesmen, instead of political partizans—are sent to Washington. It is the misfortune of America to lie so remote from the rest of the civilized world, as to feel little of the impulses of a noble competition, our rivalry commonly limiting itself to the vulgar exhibitions of individual vanity; and this the more to our disadvantage, as, denied access to the best models for even this humble species of contention with the antagonists we are compelled to choose, victory is as bad as defeat.

The smartest move the United States could make would be to allocate thirty or forty million to build a navy, not just to protect the coast, as our self-serving politicians always suggest, but to maintain control over our own destiny. This way, our friendship or hostility would carry enough weight in Europe that no power would dare infringe on our national rights again. Another wise action would be to invest a million right away in creating a National Gallery, where we could collect copies of classical art, actual antiques, paintings, bronzes, arabesques, and other examples of true taste. Young people aspiring for fame could study them and be inspired, taking their first steps towards contributing their talents to society. The widespread impact of such cultural development on the manners, relationships, intellect, and habits of the population—which can't be overvalued—would pay back the initial investment fiftyfold in beloved dollars within fifty years. Will this happen? Not until people with enlightened minds—statesmen, rather than political partisans—are elected to Washington. America's misfortune is that it's so far removed from the rest of the civilized world that we feel little of the inspiring competition found elsewhere, with our rivalry mostly boiling down to petty displays of individual pride. This disadvantage is compounded because, without access to the best models even for this low level of competition with the opponents we inevitably face, winning feels just as hollow as losing.

One of the great impediments to a high class of improvement in America, is the disposition to resent every intimation that we can be any better than we are at present. Few, perhaps no country, has ever enduced so much evil-disposed and unmerited abuse as our own. It is not difficult to trace the reasons, and every American should meet it with a just and manly indignation. But, being deemed a nation of rogues, barbarous, and manifesting the vices of an ancestry of convicts, is a very different thing from standing at the head of civilization. This tendency to repel every suggestion of inferiority is one of the surest signs of provincial habits; it is exactly the feeling with which the resident of the village resents what he calls the airs of the town, and that which the inland trader brings with him among those whom he terms the "dandies" of the sea-board. In short, it is the jealousy of inferiority on the exciting points; whatever may be the merits of its subject in other matters, and furnishes of itself the best possible proof that there is room for amendment. The French have a clever and pithy saying, that of—"On peut tout dire à un grand peuple." "One may tell all to a great nation."[17]

One of the biggest obstacles to true improvement in America is the tendency to react negatively to any suggestion that we could be better than we currently are. Few, if any, countries have faced as much unwarranted criticism as our own. It's not hard to understand why, and every American should respond to it with rightful and strong indignation. However, being seen as a nation of crooks, uncivilized, and displaying the flaws of a history of convicts is very different from leading the way in civilization. This impulse to dismiss any hint of inferiority is a clear sign of narrow-mindedness; it resembles how someone from a small town reacts to what they perceive as the pretentiousness of city folks, or how an inland trader feels around those he calls the "fancy people" of the coast. In short, it's a jealousy about feeling inferior in notable areas; no matter the merits of the person in other respects, it clearly indicates there is room for improvement. The French have a smart saying: "On peut tout dire à un grand peuple." "One may tell all to a great nation."[17]

[Footnote 17:—Every one was telling me that I should find the country so altered after an absence of eight years, that I should not know it. Altered, indeed, I found it, but not quite so evidently improved. It struck me that there was a vast expansion of mediocrity that was well enough in itself, but which was so overwhelming as nearly to overshadow everything that once stood prominent as more excellent. This was perhaps no more than a natural consequence of the elasticity and growth of a young, vigorous community, which, in its agregate character, as in that of its individuals, must pass through youth to arrive at manhood. Still it was painful and doubly so to one coming from Europe. I saw the towns increased, more tawdry than ever, but absolutely with less real taste than they had in my youth. The art of painting alone appeared to me to have made any material advances in the right direction, if one excepts increase in wealth, and in the facilities to create wealth. The steam-boats were the only objects that approached magnificence; but while they had increased in show, they had less comfort and respectability. The taverns, as a whole, had deteriorated; though the three first I happened to enter might well compete with a very high class of European inns, viz. Head's, Barnum's, and Gadsby's.]

[Footnote 17:—Everyone was telling me that I would find the country so changed after being away for eight years that I wouldn't recognize it. Changed, indeed, I found it, but not necessarily in a better way. It struck me that there was a huge spread of mediocrity that was fine in itself, but it was so overwhelming that it nearly overshadowed everything that once stood out as superior. This was perhaps just a natural result of the growth and development of a young, lively community, which, like its individuals, must go through youth to reach maturity. Still, it was painful, especially for someone coming from Europe. I saw the towns expanded, more showy than ever, but with noticeably less real taste than they had in my youth. The art of painting seemed to have made some real progress in the right direction, aside from the increase in wealth and opportunities to create wealth. The steam boats were the only things that came close to being magnificent; however, while they had become flashier, they offered less comfort and respectability. Overall, the taverns had declined; though the first three I happened to enter could compete with very high-quality European inns, namely Head's, Barnum's, and Gadsby's.]

LETTER XIV.

False Notions.—Continental Manners.—People of Paris.—Parisian Women.
—French Beauty.—Men of France.—French Soldiers.

False Notions.—Continental Manners.—People of Paris.—Parisian Women.
—French Beauty.—Men of France.—French Soldiers.

To JAMES STEVENSON, ESQUIRE, ALBANY.

To James Stevenson, Esq., Albany.

I cannot tell you whence the vulgar notions that we entertain of the French, which, with many other pernicious prejudices, have made a part of our great inheritance from England, have been originally obtained. Certainly I have seen no thing, nor any person, after a long residence in the country, to serve as models to the flippant marquis, the overdressed courtiers, or the petites maîtresses of the English dramatists. Even a French perruquier is quite as homely and plain a personage as an English or an American barber. But these Athenians grossly caricature themselves as well as their neighbours. Although Paris is pretty well garnished with English of all degrees, from the Duke down, it has never yet been my luck to encounter an English dandy. Now and then one meets with a "dresser," a man who thinks more of his appearance than becomes his manhood, or than comports with good breeding; and occasionally a woman is seen who is a mere appendage to her attire; but I am persuaded, that, as a rule, neither of these vulgar classes exists among people of any condition, in either country. It is impossible for me to say what changes the revolution, and the wars and the new notions, may have produced in France, but there is no sufficient reason for believing that the present cropped and fringeless, bewhiskered, and laceless generation of France, differs more from their bewigged, belaced, and powdered predecessors, than the men and women of any other country differ from their particular ancestors. Boys wore cocked hats, and breaches, and swords, in America, previously to the revolution; and our immediate fathers flourished in scarlet coats, powder, ruffled fingers, and embroidered waistcoats.

I can't say where the silly ideas we have about the French come from, along with many other harmful prejudices we've inherited from England. After spending a long time in the country, I haven’t seen anything or anyone that matches the stereotypes of the flippant marquis, the overly dressed courtiers, or the petites maîtresses portrayed by English playwrights. Even a French perruquier is just as ordinary and plain as an English or American barber. But these Athenians grossly exaggerate both themselves and their neighbors. Although Paris is filled with English people of all types, from the Duke down, I’ve never had the luck of running into an English dandy. Occasionally, I come across a "dresser," someone who cares more about his appearance than is fitting for a man or proper etiquette; and sometimes I see a woman who is just an accessory to her outfit. However, I'm convinced that, generally speaking, neither of these superficial classes exists among people of any status in either country. I can't say what changes the revolution, the wars, and new ideas may have brought to France, but there's no strong reason to believe that the current generation of cropped hair, no-ruff, mustached, and laceless individuals in France is any more different from their bewigged, be-laced, and powdered ancestors than the people of any other country are from their own forebears. Boys wore cocked hats, breeches, and carried swords in America before the revolution; and our immediate ancestors were dressed in scarlet coats, powdered hair, ruffled cuffs, and embroidered waistcoats.

The manners of the continent of Europe are more finished than those of England, and while quiet and simplicity are the governing rules of good breeding everywhere, even in unsophisticated America, this quiet and simplicity is more gracious and more graceful in France than in the neighbouring island. As yet, I see no other difference in mere deportment, though there is abundance when one goes into the examination of character.

The etiquette on the continent of Europe is more refined than that of England, and while calmness and simplicity are the main principles of good manners everywhere, even in unrefined America, this calmness and simplicity are more charming and elegant in France than on the nearby island. So far, I don't notice any other differences in basic behavior, although there is plenty to discuss when it comes to character.

I have met with a good many people of the old court at Paris, and though now and then there is a certain roué atmosphere about them, both men and women, as if too much time had been passed at Coblentz, they have generally, in other respects, been models of elegant demeanour. Usually they are simple, dignified, and yet extremely gracious—gracious without the appearance of affability, a quality that is almost always indicative of a consciousness of superiority. The predominant fault of manner here is too strong a hand in applying flattery; but this is as much the fault of the head as of breeding. The French are fond of hearing pleasant things. They say themselves that "a Frenchman goes into society to make himself agreeable, and an Englishman to make himself disagreeable;" and the dire is not altogether without foundation in truth. I never met a Frenchman in society here, who appeared to wish to enhance his importance by what are called "airs," though a coxcomb in feeling is an animal not altogether unknown to the natural history of Paris, nor is the zoological science of M. Cuvier indispensable to his discovery.

I’ve met quite a few people from the old court in Paris, and although there’s sometimes a bit of a roué vibe about them, both men and women, as if they’ve spent too much time at Coblentz, they’re generally examples of elegant behavior. Usually, they come across as simple, dignified, and very gracious—gracious without seeming overly friendly, which often indicates a sense of superiority. The main issue with their demeanor is that they sometimes overdo the flattery; but that’s as much a matter of mindset as it is about upbringing. The French enjoy hearing nice things. They themselves say, “a Frenchman goes into society to make himself agreeable, and an Englishman to make himself disagreeable,” and there’s some truth to this. I’ve never encountered a Frenchman in social settings here who seemed to want to boost his status with what we call "airs," though a vain person isn’t unheard of in Paris, nor is it necessary to have M. Cuvier’s expertise to spot one.

I shall probably surprise you with one of my opinions. I think the population of Paris, physically speaking, finer than that of London. Fine men and fine women are, by no means, as frequent, after allowing for the difference in whole numbers, in the French, as in the English capital; but neither are there as many miserable, pallid, and squalid objects. The French are a smaller race than the English, much smaller than the race of English gentlemen, so many of whom congregate at London; but the population of Paris has a sturdy, healthful look, that I do not think is by any means as general in London. In making this comparison, allowance must be made for the better dress of the English, and for their fogs, whose effect is to bleach the skin and to give a colour that has no necessary connexion with the springs of life, although the female portion of the population of Paris has probably as much colour as that of London. It might possibly be safer to say that the female population of Paris is finer than that of London, though I think on the whole the males may be included also. I do not mean by this, that there is relatively as much female beauty in Paris as in London, for in this respect the latter has immeasurably the advantage; but, looks apart, that the physique of the French of Paris is superior to that of the English of London. The population of Paris is a favourable specimen of that of the kingdom; while that of London, Westminster excepted, is not at all above the level of the entire country, if indeed it be as good.[18]

I’m probably going to surprise you with one of my opinions. I think the people of Paris, physically speaking, are more attractive than those of London. There aren't as many good-looking men and women in Paris compared to London when you consider the overall population numbers; however, you also won't find as many miserable, pale, and dirty individuals. The French are a smaller race than the English, especially smaller than the English gentlemen who gather in London; yet, the people in Paris have a strong, healthy appearance that I don't think is as common in London. When making this comparison, you have to account for the better clothing of the English and their fog, which tends to wash out skin tones and create a color that doesn't necessarily reflect health, although the women in Paris likely have as much color as those in London. It might be safer to say that the women of Paris are more attractive than those in London, though I believe the men should be included as well. I don’t mean to suggest that there’s as much female beauty in Paris as in London, since London definitely has the upper hand in that regard; but taking looks out of the equation, the physique of the Parisians is better than that of the Londonders. The population of Paris represents a favorable example of the rest of the country, while the population of London, with Westminster being the exception, is not significantly above the average for the entire country, if it is even as good.

[Footnote 18: This opinion remains the same in the writer, who between the years 1806 and 1833 has been six times in London, and between the years 1826 and 1833, five times in Paris. In 1833 he left Paris for London, sailing for home from the latter place. A few days after his arrival he went to Washington, where during the session of Congress, dress and air not considered, he thought he had never met so large a proportion of fine men in any part of the world. He was particularly struck with their size, as was an American friend who was with him, and who had also passed many years abroad, having left Liverpool the same day the writer sailed from Portsmouth.]

[Footnote 18: This opinion still stands for the author, who from 1806 to 1833 visited London six times and Paris five times between 1826 and 1833. In 1833, he left Paris for London and sailed home from there. A few days after arriving, he went to Washington, where during the congressional session, regardless of attire or demeanor, he felt he had never encountered so many impressive individuals anywhere in the world. He was especially impressed by their stature, just like an American friend who was with him, and who had also spent many years abroad, having departed from Liverpool on the same day the author left Portsmouth.]

The very general notion which exists in America, that the French are a slightly-built, airy people, and that their women in particular are thin and without embonpoint, is a most extraordinary one, for there is not a particle of foundation for it. The women of Paris are about as tall as the women of America, and, could a fair sample of the two nations be placed in the scales, I have no doubt it would be found that the French women would outweigh the Americans in the proportion of six to five. Instead of being meagre, they are compactly built, with good busts, inclining to be full, and well-limbed, as any one may see who will take the trouble to walk the streets after a hard shower; for, as Falstaff told Prince Henry, "You are straight enough in the shoulders; you care not who sees your back." Indeed, I know no females to whom the opinion which we entertain of the French women may better apply than to our own, and yet I know none who are so generally well-looking.

The common belief in America that French people are slim and delicate, especially their women who are seen as thin and lacking curves, is quite surprising because there’s no truth to it. Women in Paris are about the same height as American women, and if we were to weigh a fair sample from both countries, I’m sure we’d find that French women would actually weigh more by a ratio of six to five. Instead of being skinny, they have a solid build with nice figures that tend to be full, and are well-proportioned, as anyone can see by taking a stroll down the street after a heavy rain. As Falstaff said to Prince Henry, "You are straight enough in the shoulders; you care not who sees your back." In fact, I don’t know of any women that better fit the opinion we have of French women than our own, yet I don’t know any who are as generally attractive.

The French are not a handsome nation. Personal beauty in either sex is rare: there is a want of simplicity, of repose, of dignity, and even of harmonious expression, what they themselves call finesse, in their countenances, and yet the liveliness of the eyes and the joyous character of their looks render them agreeable. You are not to understand from this that great personal beauty does not exist in France, however, for there are so many exceptions to the rule, that they have occasionally made me hesitate about believing it a rule at all. The French often possess a feature in great perfection that is very rare in England, where personal beauty is so common in both sexes. It is in the mouth, and particularly in the smile. Want of finesse about the mouth is a general European deficiency (the Italians have more of it than any other people I know), and it is as prevalent an advantage in America. But the races of Saxon root fail in the chin, which wants nobleness and volume. Here it is quite common to see profiles that would seem in their proper places on a Roman coin.

The French are not an attractive nation. Personal beauty in either gender is rare: there's a lack of simplicity, calmness, dignity, and even harmonious expression—what they themselves refer to as finesse—in their faces. Yet, the liveliness of their eyes and the cheerful nature of their expressions make them appealing. This doesn’t mean that exceptional beauty doesn’t exist in France, though; there are so many exceptions that I’ve sometimes doubted whether it’s even a rule. The French often have a feature that is rarely seen in England, where personal beauty is quite common in both genders. It’s in the mouth, especially the smile. A lack of finesse in the mouth is a common European shortcoming (Italians have more of it than anyone else I know), and it’s just as prevalent in America. However, people of Saxon descent tend to have less noble and voluminous chins. It’s quite common here to see profiles that would fit perfectly on a Roman coin.

Although female beauty is not common in France, when it is found, it is usually of a very high order. The sweet, cherub-like, guileless expression that belongs to the English female face, and through it to the American, is hardly ever, perhaps never, met with here. The French countenance seldom conveys the idea of extreme infantile innocence. Even in the children there is a manner which, while it does not absolutely convey an impression of an absence of the virtues, I think leaves less conviction of its belonging to the soul of the being, than the peculiar look I mean. One always sees woman—modest, amiable, spirituelle, feminine and attractive, if you will, in a French girl; while one sometimes sees an angel in a young English or American face. I have no allusion now to religious education, or to religious feelings, which are quite as general in the sex, particularly the young of good families, under their characteristic distinctions, here as anywhere else. In this particular the great difference is, that in America it is religion, and in France it is infidelity, that is metaphysical.

Although female beauty isn’t very common in France, when it does appear, it’s usually of a very high caliber. The sweet, cherub-like, innocent look that characterizes English women, and by extension American women, is rarely, if ever, seen here. French faces rarely give off the impression of extreme childlike innocence. Even in children, there’s a certain demeanor that, while it doesn’t totally suggest a lack of virtues, feels less convincing as part of their soul than the distinct look I’m referring to. One always sees a woman—modest, kind, intelligent, feminine, and appealing, if you will—in a French girl; while sometimes, you see an angel in the face of a young English or American girl. I’m not referring to religious upbringing or feelings, which are just as common among women, especially those from good families, under their unique distinctions, here as anywhere else. In this specific regard, the key difference is that in America, religion is central, while in France, it’s metaphysical doubt.

There is a coquettish prettiness that is quite common in France, in which air and manner are mingled with a certain sauciness of expression that is not easily described, but which, while it blends well enough with the style of the face, is rather pleasing than captivating. It marks the peculiar beauty of the grisette, who, with her little cap, hands stuck in the pockets of her apron, mincing walk, coquettish eye, and well-balanced head, is a creature perfectly sui generis. Such a girl is more like an actress imitating the character, than one is apt to imagine the character itself. I have met with imitators of these roguish beauties in a higher station, such as the wives and daughters of the industrious classes, as it is the fashion to call them here, and even among the banking community, but never among women of condition, whose deportment in France, whatever may be their morals, is usually marked by gentility of air, and a perfectly good tone of manner, always excepting that small taint of rouéism to which I have already alluded, and which certainly must have come from the camp and emigration.

There’s a flirty charm that’s pretty common in France, where a certain playfulness in expression blends with a particular style that’s hard to describe, but while it goes well with a pretty face, it’s more pleasing than truly captivating. It captures the unique beauty of the grisette, who, with her little cap, hands in the pockets of her apron, delicate walk, flirtatious glance, and well-balanced head, is a completely unique being. Such a girl resembles an actress playing a role more than what you’d expect from the character itself. I’ve encountered imitations of these cheeky beauties among women of higher status, such as the wives and daughters of the working class—what we like to call them here—and even within the banking community, but never among women of high society, whose behavior in France, regardless of their morals, is usually characterized by grace and a refined manner, except for that slight hint of rouéism that I mentioned before, which surely stems from military life and exiles.

The highest style of the French beauty is the classical. I cannot recall a more lovely picture, a finer union of the grand and the feminine, than the Duchesse de ——, in full dress, at a carnival ball, where she shone peerless among hundreds of the élite of Europe. I see her now, with her small, well-seated head; her large, dark, brilliant eye, rivetted on the mazes of a Polonaise, danced in character; her hair, black as the raven's wing, clustering over a brow of ivory; her graceful form slightly inclining forward in delighted and graceful attention; her features just Grecian enough to be a model of delicate beauty, just Roman enough to be noble; her colour heightened to that of youth by the heat of the room, and her costume, in which all the art of Paris was blended with a critical knowledge of the just and the becoming. And yet this woman was a grandmother!

The epitome of French beauty is the classical style. I can't think of a more stunning image, or a better blend of grandeur and femininity, than the Duchesse de ——, fully dressed at a carnival ball, where she stood out among hundreds of Europe’s elite. I can picture her now, with her small, well-proportioned head; her large, dark, sparkling eye fixed on the intricate movements of a Polonaise danced in character; her hair, as black as a raven's wing, framing her ivory brow; her graceful figure slightly leaning forward in captivated and elegant attention; her features just Grecian enough to exemplify delicate beauty, just Roman enough to convey nobility; her complexion glowing with youthful vibrancy from the heat of the room, and her outfit a perfect blend of Parisian art and a keen sense of what is proper and flattering. And yet, this woman was a grandmother!

The men of France have the same physical and the same conventional peculiarities as the women. They are short, but sturdy. Including all France, for there is a material difference in this respect between the north and the south, I should think the average stature of the French men (not women) to be quite an inch and a half below the average stature of America, and possibly two inches. At home, I did not find myself greatly above the medium height, and in a crowd I was always compelled to stand on tiptoe to look over the heads of those around me; whereas, here, I am evidently un grand, and can see across the Champs Elysées without any difficulty. You may remember that I stand as near as may be to five feet ten; it follows that five feet ten is rather a tall man in France. You are not to suppose, however, that there are not occasionally men of great stature in this country. One of the largest men I have ever seen appears daily in the garden of the Tuileries, and I am told he is a Frenchman of one of the north-eastern provinces. That part of the kingdom is German rather than French, however, and the population still retain most of the peculiarities of their origin.

The men of France have the same physical traits and common characteristics as the women. They are short but sturdy. Overall, I think the average height of French men (not women) is about an inch and a half shorter than that of Americans, and possibly two inches shorter. At home, I didn't consider myself very tall, and in a crowd, I always had to stand on tiptoe to see over the heads of those around me; however, here, I clearly stand out as “un grand” and can see across the Champs Elysées without any trouble. You may recall that I’m close to five feet ten; this means that five feet ten is considered pretty tall in France. But don’t think that there aren’t occasionally some very tall men here. One of the tallest men I’ve ever seen appears daily in the Tuileries garden, and I’ve been told he’s a Frenchman from one of the northeastern provinces. However, that part of the country is more German than French, and the people there still have many of the characteristics of their heritage.

The army has a look of service and activity rather than of force. I should think it more formidable by its manoeuvres than its charges. Indeed, the tactics of Napoleon, who used the legs of his troops more than their muskets, aiming at concentrating masses on important points, goes to show that he depended on alertness instead of bottom. This is just the quality that would be most likely to prevail against your methodical, slow-thinking, and slow-moving German; and I make no question the short, sturdy, nimble legs of the little warriors of this country have gained many a field.

The army gives off a vibe of service and action rather than just brute force. I think it's more impressive through its maneuvers than its attacks. In fact, Napoleon's tactics, which relied more on the mobility of his troops than their rifles, focusing on gathering forces at critical points, show that he relied on quickness instead of strength. This is exactly the quality that would likely dominate over your methodical, slow-thinking, and sluggish German approach; and I'm sure the short, sturdy, quick legs of the little warriors from this country have won many battles.

A general officer, himself a six-footer, told me, lately, that they had found the tall men of very little use in the field, from their inability to endure the fatigues of a campaign. When armies shall march on railroads, and manoeuvre by steam, the grenadiers will come in play again; but as it is, the French are admirably adapted by their physique to return the career that history has given them. The Romans resembled them in this respect, Cicero admitting that many people excelled them in size, strength, beauty, and even learning, though he claimed a superiority for his countrymen, on the score of love of country and reverence for the gods. The French are certainly patriotic enough, though their reverence for the gods may possibly be questioned.

A general officer, who is himself six feet tall, recently told me that they found tall men to be pretty useless in the field because they can’t handle the demands of a campaign. When armies start marching on railroads and maneuvering with steam power, the tall soldiers will be useful again; but for now, the French are well-suited by their build for the role history has given them. In this regard, the Romans were similar, with Cicero admitting that many people were bigger, stronger, more attractive, and even more educated than them, though he argued his countrymen were superior because of their love of country and respect for the gods. The French are definitely patriotic, although you could question their reverence for the gods.

The regiments of the guards, the heavy cavalry, and the artillery are all filled with men chosen with some care. These troops would, I think, form about an average American army, on the score of size. The battalions of the line receive the rest. As much attention is bestowed in adapting the duty to the physique, and entire corps are composed of men of as nearly as possible the same physical force, some of the regiments certainly make but an indifferent figure, as to dimensions, while others appear particularly well. Still, if not overworked, I should think these short men would do good service. I think I have seen one or two regiments, in which the average height has not exceeded five feet three inches. The chances of not being hit in such a corps are worth something, for the proportion, compared to the chances in a corps of six-footers, is as sixty-three to seventy-two, or is one-eighth in favour of the Lilliputians. I believe the rule for retreating is when one-third of the men are hors de combat.

The regiments of the guards, heavy cavalry, and artillery are all made up of carefully selected men. These troops would, I think, represent about an average American army in terms of size. The line battalions get the rest. A lot of effort goes into matching the duty to the physique, and entire corps are made up of men who are as similar in physical ability as possible. Some regiments definitely don't measure up in size, while others look particularly impressive. Still, if they’re not overworked, I believe these shorter men could perform well. I think I've seen one or two regiments where the average height doesn't exceed five feet three inches. The odds of not getting hit in such a unit are worth considering, as the ratio compared to a unit of six-footers is about sixty-three to seventy-two, giving an advantage of one-eighth to the shorter guys. I understand the rule for retreating is when one-third of the men are hors de combat.

Now, supposing a regiment of three thousand grenadiers were obliged to retire with a loss of one thousand men, the little fellows, under the same fire, should have, at the same time, two thousand one hundred and thirty-seven sound men left, and of course, unless bullied out of it, they ought to gain the day.

Now, let's say a regiment of three thousand grenadiers had to withdraw after losing one thousand men; those remaining, under the same fire, would have two thousand one hundred and thirty-seven healthy soldiers left, and of course, unless intimidated, they should be able to win the day.

LETTER XV.

Perversion of Institutions.—The French Academy.—Laplace.—Astronomy.
—Theatres of Paris.—Immoral Plot.—Artificial Feelings.—French
Tragedy.—Literary Mania.—The American Press.—American
Newspapers.—French Journals—Publishing Manoeuvres.—Madame Malibran.

Perversion of Institutions.—The French Academy.—Laplace.—Astronomy.
—Theatres of Paris.—Immoral Plots.—Fake Emotions.—French
Tragedy.—Literary Obsession.—The American Press.—American
Newspapers.—French Journals—Publishing Tactics.—Madame Malibran.

To JAMES E. DE KAY, ESQUIRE.

To JAMES E. DE KAY, ESQ.

It appears to be the melancholy lot of humanity, that every institution which ingenuity can devise shall be perverted to an end different from the legitimate. If we plan a democracy, the craven wretch who, in a despotism, would be the parasite of a monarch, heads us off, and gets the best of it under the pretence of extreme love for the people; if we flatter ourselves that by throwing power into the hands of the rich and noble, it is put beyond the temptation to abuse it, we soon discover that rich is a term of convention, no one thinking he has enough until he has all, and that nobility of station has no absolute connexion with nobleness of spirit or of conduct; if we confide all to one, indolence, favouritism, and indeed the impossibility of supervision, throws us again into the hands of the demagogue, in his new, or rather true character of a courtier. So it is with life; in politics, religion, arms, arts and letters, yea, even the republic of letters, as it is called, is the prey of schemes and parasites, and things in fact, are very different from things as they seem to be.

It seems to be a sad reality of humanity that every institution we can create ends up being used for purposes other than its intended ones. If we design a democracy, the cowardly person who would thrive under a dictatorship becomes our leader, pretending to care deeply for the people while really looking out for themselves; if we convince ourselves that giving power to the wealthy and noble will prevent its misuse, we quickly realize that "wealthy" is just a label, as no one feels satisfied until they have it all, and that high status doesn't necessarily mean having a noble character or behavior; if we trust everything to one person, laziness, favoritism, and the impossibility of oversight lead us back into the control of a demagogue, who now takes on his true role as a courtier. The same applies to life; in politics, religion, military, arts, and letters, yes, even the so-called republic of letters, are prey to schemes and parasites, and things in fact are very different from how they seem.

"In the seventeen years that I have been a married man," said Captain —— of the British navy, "I have passed but seventeen months with my wife and family," "But, now there is peace, you will pass a few years quietly in America, to look after your affairs," said I, by way of awkward condolence. "No, indeed; I shall return to England as soon as possible, to make up for lost time. I have been kept so much at sea, that they have forgotten me at home, and duty to my children requires that I should be on the spot." In the simplicity of my heart, I thought this strange, and yet nothing could be more true. Captain —— was a scion of the English aristocracy, and looked to his sword for his fortune. Storms, fagging, cruising, all were of small avail compared to interest at the Admiralty, and so it is with all things else, whether in Europe or America. The man who really gains the victory, is lucky, indeed, if he obtain the meed of his skill and valour. You may be curious to know of what all this is à propos? To be frank with, you, I have visited the French Academy—"ces quarante qui ont l'esprit comme quatre," and have come away fully impressed with the vanity of human things!

"In the seventeen years that I’ve been married," said Captain —— of the British Navy, "I’ve spent only seventeen months with my wife and family." "But now that there’s peace, you'll get to spend a few quiet years in America, taking care of your affairs," I said awkwardly trying to comfort him. "Not at all; I’ll head back to England as soon as I can to make up for lost time. I’ve been at sea so much that they’ve forgotten me at home, and it's my duty as a father to be there." In my innocence, I found this strange, yet it couldn’t have been more accurate. Captain —— was a member of the English aristocracy and relied on his sword for his livelihood. Storms, exhaustion, and long cruises mattered little compared to connections at the Admiralty, and the same applies to everything else, whether in Europe or America. The person who truly wins is lucky indeed if they receive recognition for their skill and bravery. You might be wondering what this has to do with anything. To be honest, I’ve visited the French Academy—"those forty who have wit like four"—and I've come away completely aware of the vanity of human things!

The occasion was the reception of two or three new members, when, according to a settled usage, the successful candidates pronounced eulogies on their predecessors. You may be curious to know what impression the assembled genius of France produced on a stranger from the western world. I can only answer, none. The Academy of the Sciences can scarcely ever be less than distinguished in such a nation; but when I came to look about me, and to inquire after the purely literary men, I was forcibly struck with the feebleness of the catalogue of names. Not one in five was at all known to me, and very few, even of those who were, could properly be classed among the celebrated writers of the day. As France has many very clever men who were not on the list, I was desirous of knowing the reason, and then learned that intrigue, court-favour, and "log-rolling" to use a quaint American term, made members of the academy as well as members of the cabinet. A moment's reflection might have told me it could not well be otherwise. It would be so in America, if we were burthened with an academy; it is so as respects collegiate honours; and what reason is there for supposing it should not be so in a country so notoriously addicted to intrigue as France?

The event was the welcoming of two or three new members, during which, as was the tradition, the successful candidates spoke highly of their predecessors. You might wonder what impression the combined brilliance of France made on an outsider from the western world. I can only say, none. The Academy of the Sciences is rarely anything but impressive in such a nation; however, when I looked around and asked about the purely literary figures, I was struck by how weak the list of names was. Not one in five was familiar to me, and very few of those I recognized could truly be considered celebrated writers of the time. Since France has many talented individuals who weren’t on the list, I wanted to understand why, and I discovered that intrigue, favoritism, and "log-rolling," to use a quirky American term, played a role in who became members of the academy, just as in the cabinet. A moment’s thought should have made it clear to me that this was the case. It would be the same in America if we had an academy; it certainly is in terms of college honors; so why would we assume it would be different in a country so famously prone to intrigue as France?

One ought not to be the dupe of these things. There are a few great names, distinguished by common consent, whose claims it is necessary to respect. These men form the front of every honorary institution; if there are to be knights and nobles, and academicians, they must be of the number; not that such distinctions are necessary to them, but that they are necessary to the distinctions; after which the oi polloi are enrolled as they can find interest. Something very like an admission of this is contained in an inscription on the statue of Molière, which stands in the vestibule of the hall of the Academy, which frankly says, "Though we are not necessary to your glory, you are necessary to ours." He was excluded from the forty, by intrigue, on account of his profession being that of a player. Shakspeare, himself, would have fared no better. Now, fancy a country in which there was a club of select authors, that should refuse to enrol the name of William Shakspeare on their list!

One shouldn't be fooled by these things. There are a few prominent names, widely acknowledged, whose contributions we need to honor. These individuals represent every prestigious institution; if there are knights, nobles, or academicians, they must be included; not that these titles matter to them, but because they are essential to the titles themselves; after that, the oi polloi are included as they seek recognition. A sentiment similar to this is expressed in an inscription on the statue of Molière, which stands in the entrance of the Academy hall, stating, "Though we are not necessary to your glory, you are necessary to ours." He was excluded from the forty due to political maneuvering because of his profession as an actor. Shakespeare himself wouldn’t have fared any better. Now, imagine a country with a group of elite authors that refuses to include William Shakespeare on their roster!

The sitting was well attended, and I dare say the addresses were not amiss; though there is something exceedingly tiresome in one of these eulogies, that is perpetrated by malice prepense. The audience applauded very much, after the fashion of those impromptus which are made à loisir, and I could not but fancy that a good portion of the assembly began to think the Academy was what the cockneys call a rum place, before they heard the last of it. We had a poem by Comte Daru, to which I confess I did not listen, notwithstanding my personal respect for the distinguished writer, simply because I was most heartily wearied before he began, and because I can never make anything of French poetry, in the Academy or out of it.

The meeting was well attended, and I must say the speeches weren’t bad; though there’s something really tedious about one of these eulogies, which is done on purpose. The audience applauded quite a bit, like those spontaneous reactions that are made à loisir, and I couldn't help but think that a good number of people in the crowd started to believe the Academy was what the locals call a rum place, before they heard the whole thing. We had a poem by Comte Daru, which I admit I didn’t listen to, despite my personal respect for the accomplished writer, simply because I was completely exhausted before he even started, and because I can never understand French poetry, whether it’s at the Academy or not.

It would be unjust to speak lightly of any part of the French Academy, without a passing remark in honour of those sections of it to which honour is due. In these sections may be included, I think, that of the arts, as well as that of the sciences. The number of respectable artists that exist in this country is perfectly astonishing. The connoisseurs, I believe, dispute the merits of the school, and ignorant as I am, in such matters, I can myself see that there is a prevalent disposition, both in statuary and painting, to sacrifice simplicity to details, and that the theatrical is sometimes mistaken for the grand; but, after admitting both these faults, and some defects in colouring, there still remains a sufficient accumulation of merit, to create wonder in one, like myself, who has not had previous opportunities of ascertaining the affluence of a great nation in this respect.

It wouldn't be fair to downplay any part of the French Academy without acknowledging the sections that truly deserve recognition. I believe this includes both the arts and the sciences. The number of talented artists in this country is simply astonishing. I understand that experts often debate the quality of different schools, and while I may not be knowledgeable in these matters, I can see that there’s a tendency, both in sculpture and painting, to prioritize intricate details over simplicity, and that what is often meant to be grand can sometimes come off as overly theatrical. However, despite these flaws and a few issues with color, there’s still enough noteworthy talent that leaves someone like me, who hasn't had much chance to appreciate the wealth of talent in such a great nation, truly amazed.

As regards the scientific attainments of the French, it is unnecessary to say anything; though I believe you will admit that they ought at least to have the effect of counteracting some of the prejudices about dancing-masters, petits maîtres, and perruquiers, that have descended to us, through English novels and plays. Such a man as Laplace, alone, is sufficient to redeem an entire people from these imputations. The very sight of one of his demonstrations will give common men, like ourselves, headaches, and you will remember that having successfully got through one of the toughest of them, he felicitated himself that there was but one other man living who could comprehend it, now it was made.

When it comes to the scientific achievements of the French, I don’t think it’s necessary to elaborate. However, I’m sure you’d agree that they should help dispel some of the stereotypes about dance instructors, petits maîtres, and perruquiers that we've inherited from English novels and plays. A person like Laplace alone is enough to lift an entire nation from these accusations. Just witnessing one of his demonstrations can give ordinary folks like us headaches, and you’ll recall that after successfully working through one of his most challenging problems, he congratulated himself by noting that there was only one other person alive who could understand it, now that it was solved.

What a noble gift would it have been to his fellow-creatures, had some competent follower of Laplace bestowed on them a comprehensive but popular compend of the leading astronomical facts, to be used as one of the most ordinary school-books! Apart from the general usefulness of this peculiar species of knowledge, and the chances that, by thus popularizing the study, sparks might be struck from the spirit of some dormant Newton, I know no inquiry that has so strong a tendency to raise the mind from the gross and vulgar pursuits of the world, to a contemplation of the power and designs of God. It has often happened to me, when, filled with wonder and respect for the daring and art of man, I have been wandering through the gorgeous halls of some palace, or other public edifice, that an orrery or a diagram of the planetary system has met my eye, and recalled me, in a moment, from the consideration of art, and its intrinsic feebleness, to that of the sublimity of nature. At such times, this globe has appeared so insignificant, in comparison with the mighty system of which it forms so secondary a part, that I felt a truly philosophical indifference, not to give it a better term, for all it contained. Admiration of human powers, as connected with the objects around me, has been lost in admiration of the mysterious spirit which could penetrate the remote and sublime secrets of the science; and on no other occasions have I felt so profound a conviction of my own isolated insignificance, or so lively a perception of the stupendous majesty of the Deity.

What a remarkable gift it would have been to his fellow beings if some skilled follower of Laplace had created a comprehensive yet accessible summary of key astronomical facts to be used as a common school textbook! Besides the general usefulness of this unique type of knowledge and the possibility that by popularizing the study, inspiration might ignite in the spirit of some dormant Newton, I can’t think of any inquiry that has such a strong tendency to elevate the mind from the trivial and mundane pursuits of life to a contemplation of the power and purpose of God. There have been many times when, filled with awe and respect for human creativity, I have wandered through the stunning halls of a grand palace or other public building, and an orrery or diagram of the solar system has caught my eye, instantly pulling me back from admiring art and its inherent limitations to reflecting on the grandeur of nature. In those moments, our planet has seemed so insignificant compared to the vast system of which it is just a small part that I felt a truly philosophical indifference, if I may put it that way, towards everything it holds. My admiration for human abilities, as linked to the surroundings, faded into admiration for the mysterious spirit that could uncover the distant and magnificent secrets of this science; and in no other moments have I felt such a deep conviction of my own isolated smallness or such a vivid awareness of the incredible greatness of the Divine.

Passing by the common and conceded facts of the dimensions of the planets, and the extent of their orbits, what thoughts are awakened by the suggestion that the fixed stars are the centres of other solar systems, and the eccentric comets are links to connect them all in one great and harmonious design! The astronomers tell us that some of these comets have no visible nucleuses—that the fixed stars are seen through their apparent densest parts, and that they can be nothing but luminous gases; while, on the other hand, others do betray dark compact bodies of more solid matter. Fixed stars unaccountably disappear, as if suddenly struck out of their places. Now, we know that aerolites are formed in the atmosphere by a natural process, and descend in masses of pure iron. Why may not the matter of one globe, dispersed into its elements by the fusion of its consummation, reassemble in the shape of comets, gaseous at first, and slowly increasing and condensing in the form of solid matter, varying in their course as they acquire the property of attraction, until they finally settle into new and regular planetary orbits by the power of their own masses, thus establishing a regular reproduction of worlds to meet the waste of eternity? Were the earth dissolved into gases by fusion, what would become of its satellite the moon? Might not the principles of our planet, thus volatilized, yield to its nearer attraction, assemble around that orb, which, losing its governing influence, should be left to wander in infinite space, subject to a new but eccentric law of gravity, until finally reduced again within the limits of some new system? How know we that such is not the origin of comets?

Passing by the common and accepted facts about the sizes of the planets and the range of their orbits, what thoughts arise when considering that the fixed stars could be the centers of other solar systems, and the eccentric comets link them all together in one grand and harmonious plan? Astronomers tell us that some of these comets have no visible nuclei—that the fixed stars are seen through their densest parts, and can only be made up of glowing gases; whereas, others reveal dark, dense bodies of more solid material. Fixed stars inexplicably vanish, as if suddenly knocked out of their positions. We know that meteors form in the atmosphere through natural processes and fall to Earth as pure iron masses. Why couldn't the matter of one planet, broken down into its elements through fusion at its end, come together again in the form of comets, initially gaseous, then slowly growing and solidifying, changing their paths as they gain attractive force, until they eventually settle into new and stable planetary orbits due to their own mass, establishing a regular cycle of worlds to balance the wastage of eternity? If Earth were broken down into gases through fusion, what would happen to its moon? Might not the components of our planet, now turned into vapor, gather around that moon, which, losing its controlling force, would then drift in infinite space, subject to a new but unpredictable law of gravity, until it eventually falls back within the bounds of a new system? How do we know this isn't the origin of comets?

Many astronomers have believed that the solar system, in company with thousands of other systems, revolves around a common centre, in orbits so vast as to defy computation, and a religious sentiment might well suggest that this centre of the universe is the throne of the Most High. Here we may fancy the Deity seated in power, and controlling, by his will, the movements of worlds, directing each to the completion of his own mysterious and benevolent designs.

Many astronomers have believed that the solar system, along with thousands of other systems, revolves around a common center, in orbits so vast that they are beyond calculation. A spiritual sentiment might suggest that this center of the universe is the throne of the Most High. Here, we can imagine the Deity seated in power, controlling, by His will, the movements of worlds, guiding each to fulfill His own mysterious and benevolent plans.

It certainly might be dangerous to push our speculations too far, but there can be no risk in familiarizing men to consider the omnipotence of God, and to feel their own comparative insignificance. What ideas of vastness are obtained by a knowledge of the fact that there exist stars in the firmament which ordinary telescopes show us only as single bodies, but which, on examination, by using reflectors of a higher power, are found to be clusters of orbs—clusters of worlds—or clusters of suns! These, again, are found to be binary stars, or two stars revolving round each other, while they are thought, at the same time, to revolve around their central sun, and accompanied by this again, probably, to revolve round the great common centre of all!

It might be risky to take our guesses too far, but there’s no danger in getting people to think about God’s limitless power and to recognize their own relatively small significance. Think about the incredible vastness revealed by knowing that there are stars in the sky that regular telescopes show us as single points of light, but that, when viewed with more powerful reflectors, turn out to be clusters of worlds—or clusters of suns! These are often discovered to be binary stars, or two stars orbiting each other, while also believed to be circling around their central sun, and perhaps, at the same time, orbiting the vast common center of everything!

But, in the words of the quaint old song, I must cry "Holla! my fancy, whither dost thou go?" Before taking leave of the stars altogether, however, I will add that the French, and I believe all Europe, with the exception of England, follow the natural order of time, in counting the seasons. Thus the spring commences with the vernal equinox, and the autumn with the autumnal. This division of the year leaves nearly the whole of March as a winter month, June as a spring month, and September as belonging to the summer. No general division of the seasons can suit all latitudes; but the equinoxes certainly suggest the only two great events of the year, that equally affect the entire sphere. Had the old method of computing time continued, the seasons would gradually have made the circle of the months, until their order was reversed as they are now known to be in the northern and southern hemispheres.

But, as the old song goes, I must shout "Hey! Where are you going, my thoughts?" Before I completely say goodbye to the stars, I want to mention that the French, and I think all of Europe except England, follow the natural order of time when counting the seasons. So spring starts with the spring equinox, and autumn starts with the autumnal equinox. This way of dividing the year means that most of March is still considered winter, June is seen as spring, and September is part of summer. A single way to divide the seasons won’t work for all latitudes, but the equinoxes do mark the two significant events of the year that affect everyone. If the old way of keeping time had continued, the seasons would have gradually shifted their months until their order was flipped, as it is known to be in the northern and southern hemispheres now.

Quitting the Academy, which, with its schools of the classical and the romantic, has tempted me to a higher flight than I could have believed possible, let us descend to the theatres of Paris. Talma was still playing last year, when we arrived, and as in the case of repentance, I put off a visit to the Théâtre Français, with a full determination to go, because it might be made at any time. In the meanwhile, he fell ill and died, and it never was my good fortune to see that great actor. Mademoiselle Mars I have seen, and, certainly, in her line of characters, I have never beheld her equal. Indeed, it is scarcely possible to conceive of a purer, more severe, more faultless, and yet more poetical representation of common nature, than that which characterizes her art. Her acting has all the finish of high breeding, with just as much feeling as is necessary to keep alive the illusion. As for rant, there is not as much about her whole system, as would serve a common English, or American actress, for a single "length."

Leaving the Academy, which, with its traditional and romantic schools, inspired me to reach heights I never thought possible, let's move on to the theaters of Paris. Talma was still performing last year when we arrived, and, like someone procrastinating on a visit, I kept putting off going to the Théâtre Français, fully intending to go because I could do it anytime. In the meantime, he became ill and passed away, and I never had the chance to see that great actor. I've seen Mademoiselle Mars, and honestly, in her roles, I have never witnessed anyone who can compare. Truly, it’s hard to imagine a more pure, refined, flawless, and yet poetical portrayal of everyday life than what characterizes her craft. Her acting has the polish of high class, with just enough emotion to sustain the illusion. As for overacting, her entire approach has less than what a standard English or American actress would use for a single dramatic performance.

To be frank with you, so great is the superiority of the French actors, in vaudevilles, the light opera, and genteel comedy, that I fear I have lost my taste for the English stage. Of tragedy I say nothing, for I cannot enter into the poetry of the country at all, but, in all below it, these people, to my taste, are immeasurably our superiors; and by ours, you know I include the English stage. The different lines here, are divided among the different theatres; so that if you wish to laugh, you can go to the Variétés; to weep, to the Théâtre Français; or, to gape, to the Odéon. At the Porte St. Martin, one finds vigorous touches of national character, and at the Gymnase, the fashionable place of resort, just at this moment, national traits polished by convention. Besides these, there are many other theatres, not one of which, in its way, can be called less than tolerable.

To be honest with you, the French actors are so much better in vaudevilles, light opera, and classy comedies that I think I've lost my appreciation for the English stage. I won’t even mention tragedy, as I can’t really connect with the poetry here at all. But in everything below that, these performers are, in my opinion, far superior to us; and by us, I mean the English stage. Each theater here specializes in different genres, so if you want to laugh, you can head to the Variétés; to cry, the Théâtre Français; or to be amazed, the Odéon. At the Porte St. Martin, you’ll find strong elements of national character, and at the Gymnase, the trendy spot right now, you’ll see national traits refined by social norms. Besides these, there are many other theaters, and none can be considered less than acceptable in their own way.

One can say but little in favour of the morals of too many of the pieces represented here. In this particular there is a strange obliquity of reason, arising out of habitual exaggeration of feeling, that really seems to disqualify most of the women, even from perceiving what is monstrous, provided it be sentimental and touching. I was particularly advised to go to the Théâtre Madame to see a certain piece by a côterie of very amiable women, whom I met the following night at a house where we all regularly resorted, once a week. On entering, they eagerly inquired if "I had not been charmed, fascinated; if any thing could be better played, or more touching?" Better played it could not easily be, but I had been so shocked with the moral of the piece, that I could scarcely admire the acting. "The moral! This was the first time they had heard it questioned." I was obliged to explain. A certain person had been left the protector of a friend's daughter, then an infant. He had the child educated as his sister, and she grew to be a woman, ignorant of her real origin. In the meantime, she has offers of marriage, all of which she unaccountably refuses. In fine, she was secretly cherishing a passion for her guardian and supposed brother; an explanation is had, they marry, and the piece closes. I objected to the probability of a well-educated young woman's falling in love with a man old enough to be selected as her guardian, when she was an infant, and against whom there existed the trifling objection of his being her own brother.

One can say very little in favor of the morals of too many of the plays shown here. There’s a weird twist in reasoning, coming from a constant exaggeration of feelings, that really makes most of the women unable to see what’s wrong, as long as it’s sentimental and emotional. I was specifically told to go to the Théâtre Madame to see a certain play by a group of very nice women I met the next night at a gathering we all attended weekly. When I walked in, they eagerly asked if I hadn't been charmed, fascinated; if anything could be better acted or more touching? It couldn’t have been acted better, but I was so shocked by the moral of the play that I could hardly appreciate the performance. "The moral! This is the first time we've heard it questioned." I had to explain. A certain man was left as the guardian of a friend's daughter when she was a baby. He raised her like his sister, and she grew up oblivious to her real background. In the meantime, she had marriage proposals, all of which she inexplicably turned down. Ultimately, she was secretly in love with her guardian, who she thought was her brother; they eventually find out the truth, get married, and the play ends. I objected to the idea that a well-educated young woman would fall in love with a man old enough to be chosen as her guardian when she was an infant, especially considering the slight issue that he was her own brother.

"But he was not her brother—not even a relative." "True; but she believed him to be her brother." "And nature—do you count nature as nothing?—a secret sentiment told her he was not her brother." "And use, and education, and an open sentiment, and all the world told her he was. Such a woman was guilty of a revolting indelicacy and a heinous crime, and no exaggerated representation of love, a passion of great purity in itself, can ever do away with the shocking realities of such a case."

"But he was not her brother—not even a relative." "True; but she believed he was her brother." "And nature—do you consider nature as nothing?—a secret feeling told her he wasn't her brother." "And experience, education, and an open feeling, and everyone around her said he was. A woman like that committed a disgusting impropriety and a serious crime, and no exaggerated expression of love, which is a pure passion in itself, can ever erase the shocking realities of such a situation."

I found no one to agree with me. He was not her brother, and though his tongue and all around her told her he was, her heart, that infallible guide, told her the truth. What more could any reasonable man ask?

I found no one to agree with me. He was not her brother, and even though his words and everything around her suggested he was, her heart, that reliable guide, told her the truth. What more could any sensible person want?

It was à propos of this play, and of my objection to this particular feature of it, that an exceedingly clever French woman laughingly told me she understood there was no such thing as love in America. That a people of manners as artificial as the French, should suppose that others, under the influence of the cold, formal exterior which the puritans have entailed on so large a portion of the public, were without strong feeling, is not altogether as irrational as may at first appear. Art, in ordinary deportment, is both cause and effect. That which we habitually affect to be, gets in the end to be so incorporated with our natural propensities as to form a part of the real man. We all know that by discipline we can get the mastery of our strongest passions, and, on the other hand, by yielding to them and encouraging them, that they soon get the mastery over us. Thus do a highly artificial people, fond of, and always seeking high excitement, come, in time, to feel it artificially, as it were, by natural impulses.

It was à propos of this play, and my objection to this specific aspect of it, that a very clever French woman jokingly told me she believed there was no such thing as love in America. That a group of people with manners as artificial as the French would think that others, influenced by the cold, formal attitude that the Puritans imposed on a large part of the public, lack deep feelings is not as unreasonable as it might seem at first. Art, in everyday behavior, is both a cause and an effect. What we consistently pretend to be eventually becomes so intertwined with our natural tendencies that it becomes part of who we really are. We all know that through discipline, we can control our strongest passions, and conversely, by giving in to them and encouraging them, they can easily take control of us. In this way, a highly artificial society, which loves and constantly seeks high excitement, can come to feel it artificially, as if by natural impulses.

I have mentioned the anecdote of the play, because I think it characteristic of a tone of feeling that is quite prevalent among a large class of the French, though I am far from saying there is not a class who would, at once, see the grave sacrifice of principle that is involved, in building up the sentiments of a fiction on such a foundation of animal instinct. I find, on recollection, however, that Miss Lee, in one of her Canterbury Tales, has made the love of her plot hinge on a very similar incident. Surely she must have been under the influence of some of the German monstrosities that were so much in vogue, about the time she wrote, for even Juvenal would scarcely have imagined anything worse, as the subject of his satire.

I mentioned the story from the play because it reflects a feeling that is common among a large group of the French. However, I’m not saying there aren’t some who would immediately recognize the serious sacrifice of principle involved in constructing the emotions of a fiction on such a foundation of basic instinct. On reflection, I realize that Miss Lee, in one of her Canterbury Tales, based the love in her plot on a very similar incident. She must have been influenced by some of the German horrors that were so popular around the time she wrote, as even Juvenal would hardly have imagined anything worse as the subject of his satire.

You will get a better idea of the sentimentalism that more or less influences the tables of this country, however, if I tell you that the ladies of the côterie, in which the remarks on the amorous sister were made, once gravely discussed in my presence the question whether Madame de Staël was right or wrong, in causing Corinne to go through certain sentimental experiences, as our canters call it at home, on a clouded day, instead of choosing one on which the sun was bright: or, vice versa; for I really forget whether it was on the "windy side" of sensibility or not, that the daughter of Necker was supposed to have erred.

You'll get a better sense of the sentimentalism that influences the conversations around here if I tell you that the ladies of the côterie, where the comments about the romantic sister were made, once seriously debated in front of me whether Madame de Staël was right or wrong for putting Corinne through certain sentimental experiences, as our friends call them back home, on a gloomy day instead of picking a sunny one: or, vice versa; because I honestly can't remember if it was on the "windy side" of sensitivity that Necker's daughter was thought to have made her mistake.

The first feeling is that of surprise at finding a people so artificial in their ordinary deportment, so chaste and free from exaggeration in their scenic representations of life. But reflection will show us that all finish has the effect of bringing us within the compass of severe laws, and that the high taste which results from cultivation repudiates all excess of mere manner. The simple fact is, that an educated Frenchman is a great actor all the while, and that when he goes on the stage, he has much less to do to be perfect, than an Englishman who has drilled himself into coldness, or an American who looks upon strong expressions of feeling as affectation. When the two latter commence the business of playing assumed parts, they consider it as a new occupation, and go at it so much in earnest, that everybody sees they are acting.[19]

The first impression is one of surprise at discovering a people who are so refined in their everyday behavior, so genuine and free from exaggeration in their portrayals of life. But upon reflection, we realize that all refinement compels us to adhere to strict rules, and that the sophistication resulting from education rejects any excess of mere style. The simple truth is that an educated French person is a skilled actor all the time, and when they step onto the stage, they have much less to prove to be exceptional than an English person who has trained themselves into detachment, or an American who views strong displays of emotion as insincere. When the latter two start acting, they treat it as a new role and approach it so seriously that it’s obvious to everyone that they are performing.

[Footnote 19: Mr. Mathews and Mr. Power were the nearest to the neat acting of France of any male English performers the writer ever saw. The first sometimes permitted himself to be led astray, by the caricatures he was required to represent, and by the tastes of his audience; but the latter, so far as the writer has seen him, appears determined to be chaste, come what, come will.]

[Footnote 19: Mr. Mathews and Mr. Power were the closest to the polished acting of France among any male English performers the writer has ever seen. The first occasionally allowed himself to be influenced by the caricatures he was expected to portray and by the preferences of his audience; but the latter, as far as the writer has observed, seems committed to staying true to form, regardless of the circumstances.]

You will remember, I say nothing in favour of the French tragic representations. When a great and an intellectual nation, like France, unites to applaud images and sentiments that are communicated through their own peculiar forms of speech, it becomes a stranger to distrust his own knowledge, rather than their taste. I dare say that were I more accustomed to the language, I might enjoy Corneille and Racine, and even Voltaire, for I can now greatly enjoy Molière; but, to be honest in the matter, all reciters of heroic French poetry appear to me to depend on a pompous declamation, to compensate for the poverty of the idioms, and the want of nobleness in the expressions. I never heard any one, poet or actor, he who read his own verses, or he who repeated those of others, who did not appear to mouth, and all their tragic playing has had the air of being on stilts. Napoleon has said, from the sublime to the ridiculous it is but a step. This is much truer in France than in most other countries, for the sublime is commonly so sublimated, that it will admit of no great increase. Racine, in a most touching scene, makes one of his heroic characters offer to wipe off the tears of a heroine lest they should discolour her rouge! I had a classmate at college, who was so very ultra courtly in his language, that he never forgot to say, Mr. Julius Caesar, and Mr. Homer.

You’ll remember that I don’t say anything positive about French tragic performances. When a great and intellectual nation like France comes together to celebrate images and feelings expressed in their unique way, it feels strange to doubt my own understanding instead of their taste. I dare say that if I were more familiar with the language, I might appreciate Corneille, Racine, and even Voltaire, because I can definitely enjoy Molière now; but to be honest, all the performers of heroic French poetry seem to rely on grand, showy delivery to make up for the limitations of the language and the lack of nobility in the expressions. I’ve never heard anyone—whether a poet or an actor, someone reading their own verses, or reciting those of others—who didn’t seem to overact, and all their tragic performances have felt overly dramatic. Napoleon said that from the sublime to the ridiculous is just a step. This is especially true in France compared to many other countries, as the sublime is often so refined that it doesn’t allow for much expansion. Racine, in a very touching scene, has one of his heroic characters offer to wipe the tears off a heroine's face to prevent them from ruining her rouge! I had a college classmate who was so extremely formal in his speech that he always remembered to say, Mr. Julius Caesar and Mr. Homer.

There exists a perfect mania for letters throughout Europe, in this "piping time of peace." Statesmen, soldiers, peers, princes, and kings, hardly think themselves illustrated, until each has produced his book. The world never before saw a tithe of the names of people of condition, figuring in the catalogues of its writers. "Some thinks he writes Cinna—he owns to Panurge," applies to half the people one meets in society. I was at a dinner lately, given by the Marquis de ——, when the table was filled with peers, generals, ex-ministers, ex-ambassadors, naturalists, philosophers, and statesmen of all degrees. Casting my eyes round the circle, I was struck with the singular prevalence of the cacoethes scribendi, among so many men of different educations, antecedents, and pursuits. There was a soldier present who had written on taste, a politician on the art of war, a diplomate who had dabbled in poetry, and a jurist who pretended to enlighten the world in ethics, it was the drollest assemblage in the world, and suggested many queer associations, for, I believe, the only man at table, who had not dealt in ink, was an old Lieutenant-General, who sat by me, and who, when I alluded to the circumstance, strongly felicitated himself that he had escaped the mania of the age, as it was an illustration of itself. Among the convives were Cuvier, Villemain, Daru, and several others who are almost as well known to science and letters.

There’s an absolute obsession with writing all over Europe during this "peaceful time." Politicians, soldiers, nobles, royals, and kings hardly feel accomplished until they’ve released their own book. The world has never seen so many notable names listed among its writers. “Some think he’s writing Cinna—he admits to Panurge,” applies to half the people you meet in society. I recently went to a dinner hosted by the Marquis de ——, where the table was crowded with nobles, generals, former ministers, ex-ambassadors, naturalists, philosophers, and politicians of all kinds. Looking around the table, I was amazed by the strong urge to write among such a diverse group of individuals with different backgrounds and careers. There was a soldier who had written about taste, a politician writing about warfare, a diplomat who had tried his hand at poetry, and a lawyer claiming to teach the world about ethics. It was the most amusing gathering imaginable and sparked many strange thoughts, as I believe the only person at the table who hadn’t put pen to paper was an old Lieutenant-General sitting next to me, who, when I mentioned this, congratulated himself on avoiding the craze of the era, seeing it as an example of itself. Among the guests were Cuvier, Villemain, Daru, and several others who are also well-known in the fields of science and literature.

Half the voluntary visits I receive are preceded by a volume of some sort or other, as a token of my new acquaintance being a regularly initiated member of the fraternity of the quill. In two or three instances, I have been surprised at subsequently discovering that the regular profession of the writer is arms, or some other pursuit, in which one would scarcely anticipate so strong a devotion to letters. In short, such is the actual state of opinion in Europe, that one is hardly satisfied with any amount, or any quality of glory, until it is consummated by that of having written a book. Napoleon closed his career with the quill, and his successor was hardly on his throne, before he began to publish. The principal officers of the Empire, and émigrés without number, have fairly set to work as so many disinterested historians, and even a lady, who, by way of abbreviation, is called "The Widow of the Grand Army," is giving us regularly volumes, whose eccentricities and periodicity, as the astronomers say, can be reduced to known laws, by the use of figures.

Half the voluntary visits I get are preceded by some kind of book, showing that my new acquaintance is a fully initiated member of the writing community. In a few cases, I've been surprised to find out later that the writer's main career is in the military or another field where you'd hardly expect such a strong commitment to writing. In short, the general opinion in Europe is that no one feels truly accomplished in any measure of fame or success until they’ve published a book. Napoleon ended his career with a pen, and as soon as his successor took the throne, he started publishing right away. The main leaders of the Empire and countless émigrés have jumped into action as unbiased historians, and even a woman known simply as "The Widow of the Grand Army" is regularly producing volumes whose oddities and patterns, as astronomers would say, can be understood through known laws by using numbers.

In the middle ages golden spurs were the object of every man's ambition. Without them, neither wealth, nor birth, nor power was properly esteemed; and, at the present time, passing from the lance to the pen, from the casque and shield to the ink-pot and fool's cap, we all seek a passport from the order of Letters. Does this augur good or evil, for the world? The public press of France is conducted with great spirit and talents, on all sides. It has few points in common with our own, beyond the mere fact of its general character. In America, a single literary man, putting the best face on it, enters into a compact with some person of practical knowledge, a printer perhaps, and together they establish a newspaper, the mechanical part of which is confided to the care of the latter partner, and the intellectual to the former. In the country, half the time, the editor is no other than the printer himself, the division of labour not having yet reached even this important branch of industry. But looking to the papers that are published in the towns, one man of letters is a luxury about an American print. There are a few instances in which there are two, or three; but, generally, the subordinates are little more than scissors-men. Now, it must be apparent, at a glance, that no one individual can keep up the character of a daily print, of any magnitude; the drain on his knowledge and other resources being too great. This, I take it, is the simple reason why the press of America ranks no higher than it does. The business is too much divided; too much is required, and this, too, in a country where matters of grave import are of rare occurrence, and in which the chief interests are centred in the vulgar concerns of mere party politics, with little or no connexion with great measures, or great principles. You have only to fancy the superior importance that attaches to the views of powerful monarchs, the secret intrigues of courts, on whose results, perhaps, depend the fortunes of Christendom, and the serious and radical principles that are dependent on the great changes of systems that are silently working their way, in this part of the world, and which involve material alterations in the very structure of society, to get an idea of how much more interest a European journal, ceteris paribus, must be, compared to an American journal, by the nature of its facts alone. It is true that we get a portion of these facts, as light finally arrives from the remoter stars, but mutilated, and necessarily shorn of much of their interest, by their want of importance to our own country. I had been in Europe some time, before I could fully comprehend the reason why I was ignorant of so many minor points of its political history, for, from boyhood up, I had been an attentive reader of all that touched this part of the world, as it appeared in our prints. By dint of inquiry, however, I believe I have come at the fact. The winds are by no means as regular as the daily prints; and it frequently happens, especially in the winter and spring months, that five or six packets arrive nearly together, bringing with them the condensed intelligence of as many weeks. Now, newspaper finders notoriously seek the latest news, and in the hurry and confusion of reading and selecting, and bringing out, to meet the wants of the day, many of the connecting links are lost, readers get imperfect notions of men and things, and, from a want of a complete understanding of the matter, the mind gives up, without regret, the little and unsatisfactory knowledge it had so casually obtained. I take it, this is a principal cause of the many false notions that exist among us, on the subject of Europe and its events.

In the Middle Ages, golden spurs were the goal of every man's ambition. Without them, wealth, birth, and power weren't truly valued. Nowadays, we've shifted from using lances and shields to pens and paper hats; we're all looking for a ticket into the realm of Letters. Does this bode well or poorly for the world? The public press in France is run with great energy and talent from all sides. It has few similarities with ours, apart from its general nature. In America, a single writer, making the best of the situation, teams up with someone practical, perhaps a printer, and they launch a newspaper where the latter handles the mechanical side and the former the intellectual side. In rural areas, often the editor is simply the printer himself, as the division of labor hasn’t even reached this important sector yet. However, in the cities, having even one writer is a luxury in an American publication. There are a few cases with two or three, but usually, the assistants are little more than copy editors. It should be clear at a glance that no single person can sustain the quality of a sizable daily newspaper; the pressure on their knowledge and other resources is just too great. This, I believe, is the straightforward reason why American press isn’t ranked higher. The work is overly divided, too much is demanded, particularly in a country where significant issues are rare, and where the main interests are tied up in the trivialities of party politics, with little or no connection to major measures or principles. Just think about the importance given to the views of powerful monarchs and the secret intrigues of courts, where outcomes might affect the fortune of Christendom, along with the serious principles tied to the significant systemic changes quietly developing in this part of the world, which involve real shifts in the structure of society. This gives you an idea of how much more compelling a European newspaper, ceteris paribus, is compared to an American one, based purely on the nature of the facts reported. It’s true that we receive some of these facts, much like light eventually reaches us from distant stars, but they are cut short and lose their interest due to their lesser relevance to our country. I spent some time in Europe before I could grasp why I was so unaware of many minor aspects of its political history since I had been an attentive reader about this part of the world since childhood. Through inquiries, I believe I've uncovered the truth. The news isn’t nearly as consistent as daily newspapers, and it often happens, particularly in winter and spring, that several packets arrive almost simultaneously, delivering the summarized news of multiple weeks. Newspaper readers notoriously chase the latest information, and in the rush and confusion of reading, selecting, and publishing to meet daily demands, many connecting links are lost. Readers get incomplete ideas about people and events, and without a full understanding, they're quick to dismiss the trivial and vague knowledge they’ve loosely acquired. I think this is a major reason for the many misconceptions we have about Europe and its happenings.

In France, a paper is established by a regular subscription of capital; a principal editor is selected, and he is commonly supported, in the case of a leading journal, by four or five paid assistants. In addition to this formidable corps, many of the most distinguished men of France are known to contribute freely to the columns of the prints in the interest of their cause.

In France, a newspaper is created through regular capital subscriptions; a main editor is appointed, and they are usually backed, especially in the case of a major publication, by four or five paid assistants. On top of this strong team, many of the most prominent figures in France are known to contribute freely to the articles in support of their cause.

The laws of France compel a journal that has admitted any statement involving facts concerning an individual, to publish his reply, that the antidote may meet the poison. This is a regulation that we might adopt with great advantage to truth and the character of the country.

The laws of France require a publication that has included any statements about an individual to print their response, so the remedy can address the harm. This is a rule we could adopt for the benefit of truth and the reputation of the country.

There is not at this moment, within my knowledge, a single critical literary journal of received authority in all France. This is a species of literature to which the French pay but little attention just now, although many of the leading daily prints contain articles on the principal works as they appear.

There isn't currently, to my knowledge, a single well-respected literary journal in all of France. This type of literature doesn't seem to attract much attention from the French at the moment, although many of the major daily newspapers feature articles on the key works as they come out.

By the little that has come under my observation, I should say the fraudulent and disgusting system of puffing and of abusing, as interest or pique dictates, is even carried to a greater length in France than it is in either England or America. The following anecdote, which relates to myself, may give you some notion of the modus operandi.

From what I've seen, I’d say that the dishonest and gross practice of promoting and criticizing, based on personal interest or spite, is taken to an even greater extreme in France than in either England or America. The following story about my own experience might give you an idea of the modus operandi.

All the works I had written previously to coming to Europe had been taken from the English editions and translated, appearing simultaneously with their originals. Having an intention to cause a new book to be printed in English in Paris, for the sake of reading the proofs, the necessity was felt of getting some control over the translation, lest, profiting by the interval necessary to send the sheets home to be reprinted, it might appear as the original book. I knew that the sheets of previous books had been purchased in England, and I accordingly sent a proposition to the publishers that the next bargain should be made with me. Under the impression that an author's price would be asked, they took the alarm, and made difficulties. Finding me firm, and indisposed to yield to some threats of doing as they pleased, the matter was suspended for a few days. Just at this moment, I received through the post a single number of an obscure newspaper, whose existence, until then, was quite unknown to me. Surprised at such an attention, I was curious to know the contents. The journal contained an article on my merits and demerits as a writer, the latter being treated with a good deal of freedom. When one gets a paper in this manner, containing abuse of himself, he is pretty safe in believing its opinions dishonest. But I had even better evidence than common in this particular case, for I happened to be extolled for the manner in which I had treated the character of Franklin, a personage whose name even had never appeared in anything I had written. This, of course, settled the character of the critique, and the next time I saw the individual who had acted as agent in the negociation just mentioned, I gave him the paper, and told him I was half disposed to raise my price on account of the pitiful manoeuvre it contained. We had already come to terms, the publishers finding that the price was little more than nominal, and the answer was a virtual conclusion that the article was intended to affect my estimate of the value of the intended work in France, and to bring me under subjection to the critics.[20]

All the work I had done before coming to Europe was taken from English editions and translated, appearing at the same time as the originals. Planning to get a new book printed in English in Paris so I could read the proofs, I realized I needed to gain some control over the translation. This was to prevent, during the time it would take to send the sheets back home for reprinting, for it to be published as the original book. I knew the sheets of previous books had been bought in England, so I sent a proposal to the publishers that the next deal should be made with me. Thinking they would be offered the author's price, they became alarmed and created difficulties. When they saw I was firm and not inclined to back down from their threats to act as they pleased, the matter was put on hold for a few days. At that moment, I received a single copy of an obscure newspaper in the mail, which I hadn’t even known existed. Surprised by this attention, I was curious to see its contents. The paper had an article discussing my strengths and weaknesses as a writer, the latter addressed quite freely. When you get a paper like this that criticizes you, you can reasonably assume its opinions are biased. However, I had even better evidence of this in this case because it praised me for how I portrayed the character of Franklin, a person whose name I hadn’t even mentioned in anything I had written. This, of course, confirmed the article's lack of credibility, and the next time I saw the person who had acted as the agent in our previous negotiations, I showed him the paper and told him I was tempted to raise my price because of the pathetic maneuver it contained. We had already reached an agreement, with the publishers realizing that the price was barely more than nominal, and the response was essentially a conclusion that the article was meant to shape my perception of the value of the upcoming work in France, and to put me under the influence of the critics.[20]

[Footnote 20: The writer suffers this anecdote to stand as it was written nine years since; but since his return home, he has discovered that we are in no degree behind the French in the corruption and frauds that render the pursuits of a writer one of the most humiliating and revolting in which a man of any pride of character can engage, unless he resolutely maintains his independence, a temerity that is certain to be resented by all those who, unequal to going alone in the paths of literature, seek their ends by clinging to those who can, either as pirates or robbers.]

[Footnote 20: The writer lets this anecdote stand as it was written nine years ago; however, since returning home, he has realized that we are in no way less corrupt than the French, with the deceit and fraud making the pursuits of a writer one of the most humiliating and disgusting endeavors a person with any pride can undertake, unless they firmly maintain their independence, a boldness that is sure to provoke resentment from those who, unable to navigate the paths of literature on their own, try to achieve their goals by attaching themselves to those who can, either as thieves or bandits.]

I apprehend that few books are brought before the public in France, dependent only on their intrinsic merits; and the system of intrigue, which predominates in everything, is as active in this as in other interests.

I realize that only a few books get introduced to the public in France based solely on their true value; the system of intrigue that runs through everything is just as strong here as in other areas.

In France, a book that penetrates to the provinces may be said to be popular; and as for a book coming from the provinces, it is almost unheard of. The despotism of the trade on this point is unyielding. Paris appears to deem itself the arbiter in all matters of taste and literature, and it is almost as unlikely that a new fashion should come from Lyon, or Bordeaux, or Marseilles, as that a new work should be received with favour that was published in either of those towns. The approbation of Paris is indispensable, and the publishers of the capital, assisted by their paid corps of puffers and detractors, are sufficiently powerful to prevent that potent public, to whom all affect to defer, from judging for itself.

In France, a book that reaches the provinces can be considered popular; however, it's almost unheard of for a book to come from the provinces. The control of the industry on this matter is strict. Paris sees itself as the authority on all things related to taste and literature, and it's just as unlikely for a new trend to emerge from Lyon, Bordeaux, or Marseilles as it is for a new book from those cities to be well-received. The approval of Paris is essential, and the publishers in the capital, along with their team of promoters and critics, are powerful enough to prevent the influential public, to whom everyone pretends to listen, from making their own judgments.

We have lately had a proof here of the unwillingness of the Parisians to permit others to decide for them, in anything relating to taste, in a case that refers to us Americans. Madame Malibran arrived from America a few months since. In Europe she was unknown, but the great name of her father stood in her stead. Unluckily it was whispered that she had met with great success in America. America! and this, too, in conjunction with music and the opera! The poor woman was compelled to appear under the disadvantage of having brought an American reputation with her, and seriously this single fact went nigh to destroy her fortunes. Those wretches who, as Coleridge expresses it, are "animalculae, who live by feeding on the body of genius," affected to be displeased, and the public hesitated, at their suggestions, about accepting an artist from the "colonies," as they still have the audacity to call the great Republic. I have no means of knowing what sacrifices were made to the petty tyrants of the press before this woman, who has the talents necessary to raise her to the summit of her profession, was enabled to gain the favour of a "generous and discerning public!"

We’ve recently seen how resistant Parisians are to letting others make decisions for them, especially when it comes to matters of taste, in a situation involving us Americans. Madame Malibran arrived from America a few months ago. In Europe, she was unknown, but her father's impressive name carried weight. Unfortunately, it was rumored that she had achieved great success in America. America! And this, along with music and opera! The poor woman had to deal with the disadvantage of bringing an American reputation with her, and honestly, this single fact nearly ruined her career. Those miserable critics, as Coleridge puts it, "little creatures who feed off the body of genius," pretended to be unimpressed, and the public hesitated, following their suggestions, about accepting an artist from the "colonies," as they still audaciously call our great Republic. I have no way of knowing what sacrifices were made to the petty tyrants of the press before this woman, who has the talent to elevate her to the peak of her profession, could win the favor of a "generous and discerning public!"

LETTER XVI.

Environs of Paris.—Village of St. Ouen.—Our House there.—Life on the
River.—Parisian Cockneys.—A pretty Grisette.—Voyage across the Seine.
—A rash Adventurer.—Village Fête.—Montmorency.—View near Paris.

Environs of Paris.—Village of St. Ouen.—Our House there.—Life on the
River.—Parisian Locals.—A pretty Young Woman.—Trip across the Seine.
—A reckless Adventurer.—Village Festival.—Montmorency.—View near Paris.

TO JAMES STEVENSON, ESQUIRE, ALBANY.

We have been the residents of a French village ever since the 1st of June, and it is now drawing to the close of October. We had already passed the greater part of a summer, and entire autumn, winter and spring, within the walls of Paris, and then we thought we might indulge our tastes a little, by retreating to the fields, to catch a glimpse of country life. You will smile when I add that we are only a league from the Barrière de Clichy. This is the reason I have not before spoken of the removal, for we are in town three or four times every week, and never miss an occasion, when there is anything to be seen. I shall now proceed, however, to let you into the secret of our actual situation.

We’ve been living in a French village since June 1st, and now it’s almost the end of October. We spent most of the summer, all of autumn, winter, and spring in Paris, and then we thought we’d treat ourselves a little by heading out to the countryside to experience country life. You might laugh when I mention that we’re only about a mile from the Barrière de Clichy. That’s why I haven’t mentioned our move before; we go into the city three or four times a week and never miss a chance to see something interesting. But now I’ll share the details about our current situation.

I passed the month of May examining the environs of the capital in quest of an house. As this was an agreeable occupation, we were in no hurry; but having set up my cabriolet, we killed two birds with one stone, by making ourselves familiarly acquainted with nearly every village or hamlet within three leagues of Paris, a distance beyond which I did not wish to go.

I spent the month of May exploring the areas around the capital looking for a house. Since this was an enjoyable activity, we took our time; but after getting my cabriolet ready, we accomplished two goals at once by getting to know almost every village or small town within three leagues of Paris, which was the farthest I wanted to go.

On the side of St. Cloud, which embraces Passy, Auteuil, and all the places that encircle the Bois de Boulogne, the Hyde Park of Paris, there are very many pleasant residences, but from one cause or another, no one suited us exactly, and we finally took a house in the village of St. Ouen, the Runnymeade of France. When Louis XVIII. came, in 1814, to his capital, in the rear of the allies, he stopped for a few days at St. Ouen, a league from the barriers, where there was a small chateau that was the property of the crown. Here he was met by M. de Talleyrand and others, and hence he issued the celebrated charter, that is to render France for evermore a constitutional country.

On the side of St. Cloud, which includes Passy, Auteuil, and all the areas surrounding the Bois de Boulogne, the Hyde Park of Paris, there are many nice homes, but for various reasons, none of them felt just right for us. In the end, we settled on a house in the village of St. Ouen, the Runnymede of France. When Louis XVIII returned to his capital in 1814, accompanied by the allies, he stayed for a few days in St. Ouen, just a league from the barriers, where there was a small chateau owned by the crown. There, he was greeted by M. de Talleyrand and others, and from there he issued the famous charter that established France as a constitutional country forever.

The chateau has since been razed, and a pavilion erected in its place, which has been presented to the Comtesse de ——, a lady who, reversing the ordinary lot of courtiers, is said to cause majesty to live in the sunshine of her smiles. What an appropriate and encouraging monument to rear on the birth-place of French liberty! At the opposite extremity of the village is another considerable house, that was once the dwelling of M. Necker, and is now the property and country residence of M. Ternaux, or the Baron Ternaux, if it were polite to style him thus, the most celebrated manufacturer of France. I say polite, for the mere fanfaronnade of nobility is little in vogue here. The wags tell a story of some one, who was formally announced as "Monsieur le Marquis d'un tel," turning short round on the servant, and exclaiming with indignation, "Marquis toi-même!" But this story savours of the Bonapartists; for as the Emperor created neither marquis nor vicomtes, there was a sort of affectation of assuming these titles at the restoration as proofs of belonging to the old régime.

The chateau has since been torn down, and a pavilion has been built in its place, which has been given to the Comtesse de —, a lady who, unlike typical courtiers, is said to bring a sense of majesty with her bright smiles. What a fitting and uplifting tribute to erect at the birthplace of French liberty! At the other end of the village is another notable house that used to belong to M. Necker and is now the property and country home of M. Ternaux, or Baron Ternaux, if it’s considered polite to call him that, the most famous manufacturer in France. I mention "polite" because the mere showiness of nobility isn’t really in style here. The jokers tell a story about someone who was formally introduced as "Monsieur le Marquis d'un tel," suddenly turning to the servant and angrily saying, "Marquis yourself!" But this tale has a Bonapartist flavor, since the Emperor didn’t create any marquises or vicomtes, which led to a certain pretentiousness in adopting these titles during the restoration as a way of showing allegiance to the old regime.

St. Ouen is a cluster of small, mean, stone houses, stretched along the right bank of the Seine, which, after making a circuit of near twenty miles, winds round so close to the town again, that they are actually constructing a basin, near the village, for the use of the capital; it being easier to wheel articles from this point to Paris, than to contend with the current and to tread its shoals. In addition to the two houses named, however, it has six or eight respectable abodes between the street and the river, one of which is our own.

St. Ouen is a group of small, shabby stone houses lined along the right bank of the Seine, which winds around nearly twenty miles before coming back close to the town. They're actually building a basin near the village for the city's use, as it's easier to transport goods from this point to Paris than to fight against the current and navigate its shallow parts. Besides the two mentioned houses, there are six or eight decent homes between the street and the river, one of which is ours.

This place became a princely residence about the year 1800, since which time it has been more or less frequented as such down to the 4th June, 1814, the date of the memorable charter.[21] Madame de Pompadour possessed the chateau in 1745, so you see it has been "dust to dust" with this place, as with all that is frail.

This place became a royal residence around 1800, and since then, it has been visited more or less as such until June 4, 1814, the date of the significant charter.[21] Madame de Pompadour owned the chateau in 1745, so you can see that it has gone through its cycles, just like everything that is fragile.

[Footnote 21: The chateau of St. Ouen, rather less than two centuries since, passed into the possession of the Duc de Gesvre. Dulaure gives the following,—a part of a letter from this nobleman,—as a specimen of the education of a duc in the seventeenth century:—"Monsieur, me trouvant obligé de randre une bonne party de largan que mais enfant ont pris de peuis qu'il sont au campane, monsieur, cela moblige a vous suplier tres humblemant monsieur de me faire la grasse de commander monsieur quant il vous plera que lon me pay la capitenery de Monsaux monsieur vous asseurant que vous mobligeres fort sansiblement monsieur comme ausy de me croire avec toute sorte de respec, etc." This beats Jack Cade out and out. The great connétable Anne de Montmorency could not write his name, and as his signature became necessary, his secretary stood over his shoulder to tell him when he had made enough piès de mouche to answer the purpose.]

[Footnote 21: The chateau of St. Ouen, less than two centuries ago, came into the hands of the Duc de Gesvre. Dulaure provides the following—a part of a letter from this nobleman—as an example of the education of a duke in the seventeenth century:—"Sir, I find myself obliged to return a good portion of the money that my children have taken since they have been at camp, sir, this forces me to humbly ask you to kindly instruct my lord, whenever it pleases you, to ensure I am paid for the captaincy of Monsaux, assuring you that you will greatly oblige me, as well as expect my utmost respect, etc." This completely outshines Jack Cade. The great constable Anne de Montmorency couldn't write his name, and when it was necessary for him to sign, his secretary stood by his side to tell him when he had made enough squiggles to suffice.]

The village of St. Ouen, small, dirty, crowded and unsavoury as it is, has a place, like every other French village. When we drove into it, to look at the house, I confess to having laughed outright, at the idea of inhabiting such a hole. Two large portes-cochères, however, opened from the square, and we were admitted, through the best-looking of the two, into a spacious and an extremely neat court. On one side of the gate was a lodge for a porter, and on the other, a building to contain gardeners' tools, plants, etc. The walls that separate it from the square and the adjoining gardens are twelve or fourteen feet high, and once within them, the world is completely excluded. The width of the grounds does not exceed a hundred and fifty feet; the length, the form being that of a parallelogram, may be three hundred, or a little more; and yet in these narrow limits, which are planted à l'Anglaise, so well is everything contrived, that we appear to have abundance of room. The garden terminates in a terrace that overhangs the river, and, from this point, the eye ranges over a wide extent of beautiful plain, that is bounded by fine bold hills which are teeming with gray villages and bourgs.

The village of St. Ouen, small, dirty, crowded, and a bit rough around the edges, has its own charm, like every other French village. When we drove in to check out the house, I have to admit I laughed out loud at the thought of living in such a dump. However, two large gates opened from the square, and we were let in through the nicer one into a spacious and very tidy courtyard. On one side of the gate was a porter’s lodge, and on the other side, a building for storing gardening tools, plants, and so on. The walls separating it from the square and the neighboring gardens are twelve or fourteen feet high, and once you’re inside, the outside world feels completely cut off. The grounds are about a hundred and fifty feet wide; the length, in a rectangular shape, may be three hundred feet or a bit more, and yet within these narrow confines, which are planted in an English style, everything is arranged so well that it feels quite spacious. The garden ends at a terrace overlooking the river, and from this spot, you can see a wide expanse of beautiful plains bordered by impressive hills filled with gray villages and small towns.

The house is of stone, and not without elegance. It may be ninety feet in length, by some forty in width. The entrance is into a vestibule, which has the offices on the right, and the great staircase on the left. The principal salon is in front. This is a good room, near thirty feet long, fifteen or sixteen high, and has three good windows, that open on the garden. The billiard-room communicates on one side, and the salle à manger on the other; next the latter come the offices again, and next the billiard-room is a very pretty little boudoir. Up stairs, are suites of bed-rooms and dressing-rooms; every thing is neat, and the house is in excellent order, and well furnished for a country residence. Now, all this I get at a hundred dollars a month, for the five summer months. There are also a carriage-house, and stabling for three horses. The gardener and porter are paid by the proprietor. The village, however, is not in much request, and the rent is thought to be low.

The house is made of stone and has a certain elegance. It’s about ninety feet long and roughly forty feet wide. You enter into a foyer, with the utility rooms on the right and a grand staircase on the left. The main salon is straight ahead. It’s a spacious room, nearly thirty feet long and fifteen or sixteen feet high, featuring three nice windows that open onto the garden. There's a billiard room on one side and a dining room on the other; next to the dining room are the utility rooms again, and next to the billiard room is a charming little boudoir. Upstairs, there are suites of bedrooms and dressing rooms; everything is tidy, and the house is in excellent condition, well-furnished for a country home. I rent all this for a hundred dollars a month for the five summer months. There’s also a carriage house and stabling for three horses. The gardener and porter are paid by the owner. However, the village isn’t very popular, and the rent is considered low.

Among the great advantages enjoyed by a residence in Europe, are the facilities of this nature. Furnished apartments, or furnished houses, can be had in almost every town of any size; and, owning your own linen and plate, nearly every other necessary is found you. It is true, that one sometimes misses comforts to which he has been accustomed in his own house; but, in France, many little things are found, it is not usual to meet with elsewhere. Thus, no principal bedroom is considered properly furnished in a good house, without a handsome secretary, and a bureau. These two articles are as much matters of course, as are the eternal two rooms and folding doors, in New York.

Among the great advantages of living in Europe are the amenities available. Furnished apartments or houses can be found in almost every sizable town, and if you bring your own linens and dishes, you’ll have nearly everything else you need. It's true that sometimes you miss the comforts you're used to at home, but in France, there are many small conveniences that you won't typically find elsewhere. For example, in a good house, a main bedroom is not considered properly furnished without an attractive desk and a chest of drawers. These two items are just as essential as the usual two rooms and folding doors you find in New York.

This, then, has been our Tusculum since June. M. Ternaux enlivens the scene, occasionally, by a dinner; and he has politely granted us permission to walk in his grounds, which are extensive and well laid out, for the old French style. We have a neighbour on our left, name unknown, who gives suppers in his garden, and concerts that really are worthy of the grand opera. Occasionally, we get a song, in a female voice, that rivals the best of Madame Malibran's. On our right lives a staid widow, whose establishment is as tranquil as our own.

This has been our Tusculum since June. M. Ternaux makes things lively now and then with a dinner, and he has kindly let us walk around his large, well-designed grounds, which reflect the classic French style. To our left, we have a neighbor whose name we don’t know, who hosts garden suppers and concerts that are truly worthy of the grand opera. Sometimes, we hear a female voice singing that competes with the best performances of Madame Malibran. On our right lives a reserved widow whose household is as calm as ours.

One of our great amusements is to watch the living life on the river, —there is no still life in France. All the washerwomen of the village assemble, three days in the week, beneath our terrace, and a merrier set of grisettes is not to be found in the neighbourhood of Paris. They chat, and joke, and splash, and scream from morning to night, lightening the toil by never-ceasing good humour. Occasionally an enormous scow-like barge is hauled up against the current, by stout horses, loaded to the water's edge, or one, without freight, comes dropping down the stream, nearly filling the whole river as it floats broad-side to. There are three or four islands opposite, and, now and then, a small boat is seen paddling among them. We have even tried punting ourselves, but the amusement was soon exhausted.

One of our favorite pastimes is watching the living life on the river—there's no still life in France. All the washerwomen in the village gather three days a week under our terrace, and you won't find a livelier group of grisettes anywhere near Paris. They chat, joke, splash, and shout from morning to night, making their work lighter with their constant good humor. Occasionally, a huge barge is pulled upstream by strong horses, loaded right to the water's edge, or one without any cargo drifts down the stream, almost blocking the entire river as it floats sideways. There are three or four islands across from us, and now and then, you can see a small boat paddling around them. We even tried punting ourselves, but that entertainment wore off quickly.

Sunday is a great day with us, for then the shore is lined with Parisians, as thoroughly cockney as if Bow-bells could be heard in the Quartier Montmartre! These good people visit us, in all sorts of ways; some on donkeys, some in cabriolets, some in fiacres, and by far the larger portion on foot. They are perfectly inoffensive and unobtrusive, being, in this respect, just as unlike an American inroad from a town as can well be. These crowds pass vineyards on their way to us, unprotected by any fences. This point in the French character, however, about which so much has been said to our disadvantage, as well as to that of the English, is subject to some explanation. The statues, promenades, gardens, etc. etc. are, almost without exception, guarded by sentinels; and then there are agents of the police, in common clothes, scattered through the towns, in such numbers as to make depredations hazardous. In the country each commune has one, or more, gardes champêtres, whose sole business it is to detect and arrest trespassers. When to these are added the gendarmes à pied and à cheval, who are constantly in motion, one sees that the risk of breaking the laws is attended with more hazard here than with us. There is no doubt, on the other hand, that the training and habits, produced by such a system of watchfulness, enter so far into the character of the people, that they cease to think of doing that which is so strenuously denied them.

Sunday is a fantastic day for us, because the shore is filled with Parisians, as if you could hear the Bow Bells all the way in Montmartre! These lovely people come to visit us in all sorts of ways: some on donkeys, some in convertibles, some in horse-drawn carriages, and most of them on foot. They're completely harmless and unobtrusive, making them very different from an American invasion from a town. These crowds stroll past vineyards on their way to us, without any fences to protect them. This aspect of French character, often criticized for us and the English, can be explained. Almost all the statues, promenades, gardens, etc., are guarded by sentinels; plus, there are plainclothes police officers spread throughout the towns in such numbers that committing crimes becomes risky. In the countryside, each commune has at least one rural guard whose job is to catch and arrest trespassers. When you add the foot and mounted gendarmes who are always on the move, it becomes clear that breaking the laws here carries more risks than it does back home. However, it’s also true that the vigilance created by such a system influences the people's behavior to the point where they stop considering actions that are strictly forbidden.

Some of our visitors make their appearance in a very quaint style. I met a party the other day, among whom the following family arrangement had obtained:—The man was mounted on a donkey, with his feet just clear of the ground. The wife, a buxom brunette, was trudging afoot in the rear, accompanied by the two younger children, a boy and girl, between twelve and fourteen, led by a small dog, fastened to a string like the guide of a blind mendicant; while the eldest daughter was mounted on the crupper, maintaining her equilibrium by a masculine disposition of her lower limbs. She was a fine, rosy-cheeked grisette, of about seventeen; and, as they ambled along, just fast enough to keep the cur on a slow trot, her cap flared in the wind, her black eyes flashed with pleasure, and her dark ringlets streamed behind her, like so many silken pennants. She had a ready laugh for every one she met, and a sort of malicious pleasure in asking, by her countenance, if they did not wish they too had a donkey? As the seat was none of the most commodious, she had contrived to make a pair of stirrups of her petticoats. The gown was pinned up about her waist, leaving her knees, instead of her feet, as the points d'appui. The well-turned legs, and the ankles, with such a chaussure as at once marks a Parisienne, were exposed to the admiration of a parterre of some hundreds of idle wayfarers. Truly, it is no wonder that sculptors abound in this country, for capital models are to be found, even in the highways. The donkey was the only one who appeared displeased with this monture, and he only manifested dissatisfaction by lifting his hinder extremities a little, as the man occasionally touched his flanks with a nettle, that the ass would much rather have been eating.

Some of our visitors show up in a pretty unique way. I ran into a group the other day, and their family setup was as follows: The man was riding a donkey, with his feet barely off the ground. The wife, a full-figured brunette, was walking behind with their two younger kids, a boy and a girl around twelve to fourteen, accompanied by a small dog on a leash, like a guide for a blind beggar. Meanwhile, the oldest daughter sat on the back of the donkey, balancing herself in a somewhat masculine way. She was a lovely, rosy-cheeked girl, about seventeen, and as they strolled along at just the right pace to keep the dog at a slow trot, her cap fluttered in the wind, her dark eyes sparkled with joy, and her curly hair streamed behind her like silken banners. She gave a cheerful laugh to everyone she passed and had a playful glint in her eye, almost asking if they wished they had a donkey too. The seat wasn’t the most comfortable, so she had cleverly turned her petticoats into a pair of stirrups. Her dress was pinned up around her waist, leaving her knees, instead of her feet, as the support points. Her nicely shaped legs and ankles, paired with shoes that clearly marked her as a Parisian, were on display for hundreds of idle onlookers. It’s no wonder there are so many sculptors in this country since there are great models everywhere, even on the streets. The donkey was the only one that seemed unhappy with this arrangement, and he showed his displeasure by slightly raising his back legs whenever the man occasionally poked him with a nettle, which the donkey would much rather have been eating.

Not long since I passed half an hour on the terrace, an amused witness of the perils of a voyage across the Seine in a punt. The adventurers were a bourgeois, his wife, sister, and child. Honest Pierre, the waterman, had conditioned to take the whole party to the island opposite and to return them safe to the main for the modicum of five sous. The old fox invariably charged me a franc for the same service. There was much demurring, and many doubts about encountering the risk; and more than once the women would have receded, had not the man treated the matter as a trifle. He affirmed parole d'honneur that his father had crossed the Maine a dozen times, and no harm had come of it! This encouraged them, and, with many pretty screams, mes fois, and oh, Dieu, they finally embarked. The punt was a narrow scow that a ton weight would not have disturbed, the river was so low and sluggish that it might have been forded two-thirds of the distance, and the width was not three hundred feet. Pierre protested that the danger was certainly not worth mentioning, and away he went, as philosophical in appearance as his punt. The voyage was made in safety, and the bows of the boat had actually touched the shore on its return, before any of the passengers ventured to smile. The excursion, like most travelling, was likely to be most productive of happiness by the recollections. But the women were no sooner landed, than that rash adventurer, the husband, brother, and father, seized an oar, and began to ply it with all his force. He merely wished to tell his confrères of the Rue Montmartre how a punt might be rowed. Pierre had gallantly landed to assist the ladies, and the boat, relieved of its weight, slowly yielded to the impulse of the oar, and inclined its bows from the land. "Oh! Edouard! mon mari! mon frère!—que fais-tu?" exclaimed the ladies. "Ce n'est rien," returned the man, puffing, and giving another lusty sweep, by which he succeeded in forcing the punt fully twenty feet from the shore. "Edouard! cher Edouard!" "Laisse-moi m'amuser,—je m'amuse, je m'amuse," cried the husband in a tone of indignant remonstrance. But Edouard, a tight, sleek little épicier, of about five-and-thirty, had never heard that an oar on each side was necessary in a boat, and the harder he pulled the less likely was he to regain the shore. Of this he began to be convinced, as he whirled more into the centre of the current; and his efforts now really became frantic, for his imagination probably painted the horrors of a distant voyage in an unknown bark to an unknown land, and all without food or compass. The women screamed, and the louder they cried, the more strenuously he persevered in saying, "Laisse-moi m'amuser—je m'amuse, je m'amuse." By this time the perspiration poured from the face of Edouard, and I called to the imperturbable Pierre, who stood in silent admiration of his punt while playing such antics, and desired him to tell the man to put his oar on the bottom, and to push the boat ashore. "Oui, Monsieur," said the rogue, with a leer, for he remembered the francs, and we soon had our adventurer safe on terra firma again. Then began the tender expostulations, the affectionate reproaches, and the kind injunctions for the truant to remember that he was a husband and a father. Edouard, secretly cursing the punt and all rivers in his heart, made light of the matter, however, protesting to the last that he had only been enjoying himself.

Not long ago, I spent half an hour on the terrace, entertained by the challenges of crossing the Seine in a small boat. The travelers were a middle-class man, his wife, sister, and child. Honest Pierre, the boatman, had agreed to take the whole group to the island across the river and bring them back for just five sous. Meanwhile, the old fox always charged me a franc for the same trip. There was a lot of hesitation and concern about the potential dangers, and more than once the women would have pulled back if the man hadn't downplayed it. He confidently stated, on his honor, that his father had crossed the Maine dozens of times without any issues! This encouraged them, and with many charming screams of "my word" and "oh, God," they finally got in the boat. The punt was a narrow barge that barely budged with a ton of weight. The river was so low and sluggish that you could have walked two-thirds of the way across, and it wasn't even three hundred feet wide. Pierre insisted that the danger was negligible, and off they went, looking as relaxed as his little boat. They made the trip safely, and the boat had actually touched the shore on the return before any of the passengers dared to smile. The outing, like most adventures, would likely generate more happiness through memories. But as soon as the women got out, that reckless adventurer—the husband, brother, and father—grabbed an oar and started rowing with all his might. He just wanted to show his friends from Rue Montmartre how to row a boat. Pierre had gallantly disembarked to help the ladies, and with the boat lighter, it slowly began to drift away from the shore. “Oh! Edouard! my husband! my brother!—what are you doing?” the ladies exclaimed. “It's nothing,” the man replied, puffing and giving another strong stroke that pushed the punt a solid twenty feet from the shore. “Edouard! dear Edouard!” “Let me have some fun—I’m having fun, I’m having fun,” the husband protested indignantly. But Edouard, a neat little grocer in his mid-thirties, didn’t realize that he needed an oar on each side to effectively row, and the harder he pulled, the less likely he was to get back to shore. He started to realize this as he was swept further into the current, and his efforts became frantic, probably imagining the horrors of being lost in a strange boat heading to an unknown land, devoid of food or compass. The women screamed, and the louder they shouted, the more determined he was to insist, “Let me have fun—I’m having fun, I’m having fun.” By this point, sweat was pouring down Edouard's face, and I called over to the unflappable Pierre, who stood there admiring his boat while this scene unfolded, asking him to tell the man to put his oar down and push the boat back to shore. “Yes, Sir,” the rogue replied with a grin, remembering the francs, and soon we had our adventurer safe on solid ground again. Then came the gentle scolding, the loving reproaches, and the kind reminders for the wayward husband to remember he was a husband and a father. Edouard, secretly cursing the punt and all rivers in his heart, played it off, insisting until the end that he had simply been enjoying himself.

We have had a fête too; for every village in the vicinity of Paris has its fête. The square was filled with whirligigs and flying-horses, and all the ingenious contrivances of the French to make and to spend a sou pleasantly. There was service in the parish church, at which our neighbours sang in a style fit for St. Peter's, and the villagers danced quadrilles on the green with an air that would be thought fine in many a country drawing-room.

We had a festival too, because every village near Paris has its own celebration. The square was packed with spinning rides and merry-go-rounds, showcasing all the clever ways the French find to enjoy and spend a little money. There was a service at the local church, where our neighbors sang beautifully, as if they were performing at St. Peter's. The villagers danced quadrilles on the green with a poise that would impress many people in a country drawing room.

I enjoy all this greatly; for, to own the truth, the crowds and mannered sameness of Paris began to weary me. Our friends occasionally come from town to see us, and we make good use of the cabriolet. As we are near neighbours to St. Denis, we have paid several visits to the tombs of the French kings, and returned each time less pleased with most of the unmeaning obsequies that are observed in their vaults. There was a ceremony, not long since, at which the royal family and many of the great officers of the court assisted, and among others M. de Talleyrand. The latter was in the body of the church, when a man rushed upon him and actually struck him, or shoved him to the earth, using at the same time language that left no doubt of the nature of the assault. There are strange rumours connected with the affair. The assailant was a Marquis de ——, and it is reported that his wrongs, real or imaginary, are connected with a plot to rob one of the dethroned family of her jewels, or of some crown jewels, I cannot say which, at the epoch of the restoration. The journals said a good deal about it at the time, but events occur so fast here that a quarrel of this sort produces little sensation. I pretend to no knowledge of the merits of this affair, and only give a general outline of what was current in the public prints at the time.

I really enjoy all of this; to be honest, the crowds and predictable atmosphere of Paris started to bore me. Our friends occasionally come out from the city to visit us, and we make great use of the cabriolet. Since we're close neighbors to St. Denis, we've visited the tombs of the French kings several times, and each visit leaves us less impressed by the meaningless rituals performed in their vaults. Recently, there was a ceremony attended by the royal family and many high-ranking officials, including M. de Talleyrand. While he was in the church, a man suddenly rushed at him and actually hit him, or pushed him to the ground, using language that made it clear the assault was serious. There are strange rumors about the incident. The attacker was a Marquis de ——, and it's said that his grievances, whether real or imagined, are linked to a plot to steal jewelry from one of the dethroned family members, or some crown jewels—I can’t say which—during the restoration period. The newspapers talked a lot about it at the time, but things happen so quickly here that a feud like this hardly causes a stir. I don't claim to know the details of the case, and I'm just providing a general outline of what was reported in the press back then.

We have also visited Enghien, and Montmorency. The latter, as you know already, stands on the side of a low mountain, in plain view of Paris. It is a town of some size, with very uneven streets, some of them being actually sharp acclivities, and a Gothic church that is seen from afar and that is well worth viewing near by. These quaint edifices afford us deep delight, by their antiquity, architecture, size, and pious histories. What matters it to us how much or how little superstition may blend with the rites, when we know and feel that we are standing in a nave that has echoed with orisons to God, for a thousand years! This of Montmorency is not quite so old, however, having been rebuilt only three centuries since.

We also visited Enghien and Montmorency. The latter, as you already know, is located on the side of a low mountain, with a clear view of Paris. It's a medium-sized town with very uneven streets, some of which are actually steep inclines, and a Gothic church that stands out from a distance and is definitely worth seeing up close. These charming buildings bring us great joy with their age, architecture, size, and spiritual histories. It doesn't matter to us how much superstition may mix with the rituals when we know and feel that we are standing in a nave that has echoed with prayers to God for a thousand years! However, the church in Montmorency isn't quite as old since it was rebuilt only three centuries ago.

Dulaure, a severe judge of aristocracy, denounces the pretension of the Montmorencies to be the Premiers Barons Chrétiens, affirming that they were neither the first barons, nor the first Christians, by a great many. He says, that the extravagant title has most probably been a war-cry, in the time of the crusaders. According to his account of the family it originated, about the year 1008, in a certain Borchard, who, proving a bad neighbour to the Abbey of St. Denis, the vassals of which he was in the habit of robbing, besides, now and then, despoiling a monk, the king caused his fortress in the Isle St. Denis to be razed; after which, by a treaty, he was put in possession of the mountain hard by, with permission to erect another hold near a fountain, at a place called in the charters, Montmorenciacum. Hence the name, and the family. This writer thinks that the first castle must have been built of wood!

Dulaure, a harsh critic of the aristocracy, criticizes the Montmorencies for claiming to be the Premiers Barons Chrétiens, asserting that they were not the first barons or the first Christians by a long shot. He suggests that this extravagant title was probably used as a battle cry during the time of the crusaders. According to his account of the family, it traces back to around the year 1008, with a certain Borchard, who was a troublesome neighbor to the Abbey of St. Denis. He routinely robbed its vassals and occasionally pillaged a monk, which led the king to have his fortress on the Isle St. Denis destroyed. Later, through a treaty, he was granted possession of the nearby mountain and allowed to build another stronghold near a fountain, in a location referred to in the charters as Montmorenciacum. This is how the name and the family came to be. This writer believes that the first castle was likely made of wood!

We took a road that led us up to a bluff on the mountain, behind the town, where we obtained a new and very peculiar view of Paris and its environs. I have said that the French towns have no straggling suburbs. A few winehouses (to save the octroi) are built near the gates, compactly, as in the town itself, and there the buildings cease as suddenly as if pared down by a knife. The fields touch the walls, in many places, and between St. Ouen and the guinguettes and winehouses, at the Barrière de Clichy, a distance of two miles, there is but a solitary building. A wide plain separates Paris, on this side, from the mountains, and of course our view extended across it. The number of villages was absolutely astounding. Although I did not attempt counting them, I should think not fewer than a hundred were in sight, all grey, picturesque, and clustering round the high nave and church tower, like chickens gathering beneath the wing. The day was clouded, and the hamlets rose from their beds of verdure, sombre but distinct, with their faces of wall, now in subdued light, and now quite shaded, resembling the glorious darks of Rembrandt's pictures.

We took a road that led us up to a bluff on the mountain, behind the town, where we got a new and very unique view of Paris and its surroundings. I’ve mentioned that French towns don’t have sprawling suburbs. A few winehouses (to avoid the octroi) are built near the gates, closely packed like in the town itself, and then the buildings stop as abruptly as if cut by a knife. In many places, the fields touch the walls, and between St. Ouen and the guinguettes and winehouses at the Barrière de Clichy, a distance of two miles, there’s just one building. A wide plain separates Paris, on this side, from the mountains, and naturally, our view extended across it. The number of villages was simply astounding. Although I didn’t try to count them, I would guess there were no fewer than a hundred in sight, all grey, picturesque, and clustering around the tall nave and church tower like chickens gathering under a wing. The day was cloudy, and the hamlets emerged from their beds of greenery, dark but distinct, with their walls now in soft light and now completely shaded, resembling the rich darks in Rembrandt's paintings.

LETTER XVII.

Rural Drives.—French Peasantry.—View of Montmartre.—The Boulevards.
—The Abattoirs.—Search for Lodgings.—A queer Breakfast.—Royal
Progresses and Magnificence.—French Carriages and Horses.—Modes of
Conveyance.—Drunkenness.—French Criminal Justice.—Marvellous Stories
of the Police.

Rural Drives.—French Peasantry.—View of Montmartre.—The Boulevards.
—The Slaughterhouses.—Searching for Places to Stay.—A Strange Breakfast.—Royal
Progress and Grandeur.—French Carriages and Horses.—Ways of
Getting Around.—Drunkenness.—French Criminal Justice.—Amazing Stories
of the Police.

To CAPT. M. PERRY, U.S.N.

To Capt. M. Perry, U.S.N.

I am often in the saddle since our removal to St. Ouen. I first commenced the business of exploring in the cabriolet, with my wife for a companion, during which time, several very pretty drives, of whose existence one journeying along the great roads would form no idea, were discovered. At last, as these became exhausted, I mounted, and pricked into the fields. The result has been a better knowledge of the details of ordinary rural life, in this country, than a stranger would get by a residence, after the ordinary fashion, of years.

I spend a lot of time in the saddle since moving to St. Ouen. I started exploring in a cabriolet with my wife as my companion, during which we discovered several lovely drives that you wouldn't even know existed by just traveling along the main roads. Eventually, as we ran out of those options, I got on a horse and ventured into the fields. As a result, I've gained a better understanding of the everyday rural life in this country than a stranger would get after living here for years in the usual way.

I found the vast plain intersected by roads as intricate as the veins of the human body. The comparison is not unapt, by the way, and may be even carried out much further; for the grandes routes can be compared to the arteries, the chemins vicinaux, or cross-roads, to the veins, and the innumerable paths that intersect the fields, in all directions, to the more minute blood-vessels, circulation being the object common to all.

I found the vast plain crisscrossed by roads as complex as the veins in the human body. This comparison works well and can be taken even further; the grandes routes can be likened to arteries, the chemins vicinaux, or cross-roads, to veins, and the countless paths cutting across the fields in every direction to the smaller blood vessels, with circulation being the common goal for all.

I mount my horse and gallop into the fields at random, merely taking care not to quit the paths. By the latter, one can go in almost any direction; and as they are very winding there is a certain pleasure in following their sinuosities, doubtful whither they tend. Much of the plain is in vegetables, for the use of Paris; though there is occasionally a vineyard, or a field of grain. The weather has become settled and autumnal, and is equally without the chilling moisture of the winter, or the fickleness of the spring. The kind-hearted peasants see me pass among them without distrust, and my salutations are answered with cheerfulness and civility. Even at this trifling distance from the capital, I miss the brusque ferocity that is so apt to characterise the deportment of its lower classes, who are truly the people that Voltaire has described as "ou singes, ou tigres." Nothing, I think, strikes an American more than the marked difference between the town and country of France. With us, the towns are less town-like, and the country less country-like, than is usually the case. Our towns are provincial from the want of tone that can only be acquired by time, while it is a fault with our country to wish to imitate the towns. I now allude to habits only, for nature at home, owing to the great abundance of wood, is more strikingly rural than in any other country I know. The inhabitant of Paris can quit his own door in the centre of the place, and after walking an hour he finds himself truly in the country, both as to the air of external objects, and as to the manners of the people. The influence of the capital doubtless has some little effect on the latter, but not enough to raise them above the ordinary rusticity, for the French peasants are as rustic in their appearance and habits as the upper classes are refined.

I hop on my horse and ride through the fields randomly, just making sure to stay on the paths. Those paths allow you to go almost anywhere, and since they twist and turn, there's a certain joy in following their curves, unsure of where they lead. Much of the land is used for growing vegetables for Paris, though there are sometimes vineyards or fields of grain. The weather has settled into a nice autumn vibe, free from the chilly dampness of winter or the unpredictability of spring. The kind-hearted farmers see me passing by without suspicion, and they respond to my greetings with warmth and politeness. Even at this small distance from the capital, I notice the roughness that often characterizes the behavior of its lower classes, the kind of people Voltaire described as "either monkeys or tigers." I think nothing strikes an American more than the clear contrast between urban and rural life in France. In our country, towns feel less like traditional towns, and the countryside feels less rural than is typically the case. Our towns lack the character that only time can bring, and our countryside often tries too hard to mimic the towns. I’m only referring to habits here because, in terms of nature, our homeland is notably more picturesque due to the abundance of forests. A Parisian can step out of their front door in the heart of the city and, after walking for an hour, genuinely find themselves in the countryside, both in terms of the scenery and the behavior of the people. The influence of the capital does have some effect on them, but not enough to elevate them above the usual rural simplicity, as French peasants are as down-to-earth in their looks and ways as the upper classes are polished.

One of my rides is through the plain that lies between St. Ouen and Montmartre, ascending the latter by its rear to the windmills that, night and day, are whirling their ragged arms over the capital of France. Thence I descend into the town by the carriage road. A view from this height is like a glimpse into the pages of history; for every foot of land that it commands, and more than half the artificial accessories, are pregnant of the past. Looking down into the fissures between the houses, men appear the mites they are; and one gets to have a philosophical indifference to human vanities by obtaining these bird's-eye views of them in the mass. It was a happy thought that first suggested the summits of mountains for religious contemplation; nor do I think the father of evil discovered his usual sagacity when he resorted to such a place for the purposes of selfish temptation: perhaps, however, it would be better to say, he betrayed the grovelling propensities of his own nature. The cathedral of Notre Dame should have been reared on this noble and isolated height, that the airs of heaven might whisper through its fane, breathing the chaunts in honour of God.

One of my rides is through the flat land between St. Ouen and Montmartre, climbing up to the back of Montmartre to reach the windmills that are constantly turning their tattered arms above the heart of France. From there, I make my way down into the town along the road. The view from this height feels like a glimpse into history; every piece of land below and more than half of the man-made structures are steeped in the past. Looking down into the gaps between buildings, people seem tiny, and you start to see human vanities with a philosophical detachment when you view them from such a height. It was a brilliant idea to think of mountain tops for religious reflection; I doubt the devil was as clever when he chose such a setting for his own selfish temptations. Perhaps it's more accurate to say he revealed the lowly instincts of his own nature. The Notre Dame cathedral should have been built on this majestic and secluded height, so the heavenly breezes could flow through its structure, carrying songs in praise of God.

Dismounting manfully, I have lately undertaken a far more serious enterprise—that of making the entire circuit of Paris on foot. My companion was our old friend Captain ——. We met by appointment at eleven o'clock, just without the Barrière de Clichy, and ordering the carriage to come for us at five, off we started, taking the direction of the eastern side of the town. You probably know that what are commonly called the boulevards of Paris, are no more than a circular line of wide streets through the very heart of the place, which obtain their common appellation from the fact that they occupy the sites of the ancient walls. Thus the street within this circuit is called by its name, whatever it may happen to be, and if continued without the circuit, the term of faubourg or suburb is added; as in the case of the Rue St. Honoré and the Rue du Faubourg St. Honoré, the latter being strictly a continuation of the former, but lying without the site of the ancient walls. As the town has increased, it has been found necessary to enlarge its enceinte, and the walls are now encircled with wide avenues that are called the outer boulevards. There are avenues within and without the walls, and immediately beneath them; and in many places both are planted. Our route was on the exterior.

Dismounting bravely, I recently took on a much bigger challenge—walking all the way around Paris. My companion was our old friend, Captain ____. We met as planned at eleven o'clock, just outside the Barrière de Clichy, and arranged for the carriage to pick us up at five. Off we went, heading towards the eastern side of town. You probably know that what are commonly called the boulevards of Paris are actually just a circular line of wide streets running through the heart of the city, getting their name because they’re built on the sites of the old walls. So, the street within this circuit goes by its name, whatever that may be, and if it continues beyond the circuit, it's tagged with the term faubourg or suburb; take Rue St. Honoré and Rue du Faubourg St. Honoré, for example—the latter is simply an extension of the former but lies outside the ancient walls. As the city has grown, it’s been necessary to expand its enceinte, and now the walls are surrounded by broad avenues called the outer boulevards. There are avenues both inside and outside the walls, and some right below them; in many places, both are lined with trees. Our path was on the outside.

We began the march in good spirits, and by twelve we had handsomely done our four miles and a half. Of course we passed the different barrières, and the gate of Père Lachaise. The captain commenced with great vigour, and for near two hours, as he expressed himself, he had me a little on his lee quarter; not more, however, he thought, than was due to his superior rank, for he had once been my senior as a midshipman. At the Barrière du Trône we were compelled to diverge a little from the wall, in order to get across the river by the Pont d'Austerlitz. By this time I had ranged up abeam of the commodore, and I proposed that we should follow the river up as far as the wall again, in order to do our work honestly; but to this he objected that he had no wish to puzzle himself with spherical trigonometry; that plane sailing was his humour at the moment; and that he had, moreover, just discovered that one of his boots pinched his foot. Accordingly we proceeded straight from the bridge, not meeting the wall again until we were beyond the abattoir. These abattoirs are slaughter-houses, that Napoleon caused to be built near the walls, in some places within, and in others without them, according to the different localities. There are five or six of them, that of Montmartre being the most considerable. They are kept in excellent order, and the regulations respecting them appear to be generally good. The butchers sell their meats, in shops, all over the town, a general custom in Europe, and one that has more advantages than disadvantages, as it enables the inhabitant to order a meal at any moment. This independence in the mode of living distinguishes all the large towns of this part of the world from our own; for I greatly question if there be any civilized people among whom the individual is as much obliged to consult the habits and tastes of all, in gratifying his own, as in free and independent America. A part of this uncomfortable feature in our domestic economy is no doubt the result of circumstances unavoidably connected with the condition of a young country; but a great deal is to be ascribed to the practice of referring everything to the public, and not a little to those religious sects who extended their supervision to all the affairs of life, that had a chief concern in settling the country, and who have entailed so much that is inconvenient and ungraceful (I might almost say, in some instances, disgraceful) on the nation, blended with so much that forms its purest sources of pride. Men are always an inconsistent medley of good and bad.

We started the march in high spirits, and by noon we had easily covered four and a half miles. Naturally, we passed the various barrières and the gate of Père Lachaise. The captain began with great enthusiasm, and for nearly two hours, as he put it, he had me a bit to his side; however, he felt it was only right given his superior rank, since he had once been my senior as a midshipman. At the Barrière du Trône, we had to veer away from the wall to cross the river at the Pont d'Austerlitz. By this point, I had lined up alongside the commodore, and I suggested that we follow the river back to the wall to do our job properly; but he insisted he didn't want to complicate things with spherical trigonometry; he was in the mood for straightforward sailing and had just realized that one of his boots was pinching his foot. So, we proceeded directly from the bridge, not encountering the wall again until we passed beyond the abattoir. These abattoirs are slaughterhouses that Napoleon had built near the walls, some inside and others outside, depending on the area. There are five or six of them, with Montmartre being the largest. They are kept in excellent condition, and the regulations concerning them seem to be generally good. The butchers sell their meat in shops all over the city, which is a standard practice in Europe and comes with more advantages than disadvantages, as it allows residents to order a meal at any moment. This independence in living sets all the larger cities in this part of the world apart from our own; for I seriously doubt there's any civilized society where individuals must consider the habits and preferences of everyone when satisfying their own needs, like we do in free and independent America. Part of this uncomfortable feature in our domestic life is undoubtedly due to circumstances related to the state of a young country; but much can be attributed to the tendency to refer everything to the public, and not a little to those religious groups that oversaw all aspects of life, especially in settling the country, and who have bequeathed so many inconvenient and unattractive (I might even say, in some cases, disgraceful) aspects to the nation, mixed with many elements that form its greatest sources of pride. People are always an inconsistent mix of good and bad.

The captain and myself had visited the abattoir of Montmartre only a few days previously to this excursion, and we had both been much gratified with its order and neatness. But an unfortunate pile of hocks, hoofs, tallow, and nameless fragments of carcasses, had caught my companion's eye. I found him musing over this omnium gatherum, which he protested was worse than a bread-pudding at Saratoga. By some process of reasoning that was rather material than philosophical, he came to the conclusion that the substratum of all the extraordinary compounds he had met with at the restaurans was derived from this pile, and he swore as terribly as any of "our army in Flanders," that not another mouthful would he touch, while he remained in Paris, if the dish put his knowledge of natural history at fault. He had all along suspected he had been eating cats and vermin, but his imagination had never pictured to him such a store of abominations for the casserole as were to be seen in this pile. In vain I asked him if he did not find the dishes good. Cats might be good for anything he knew, but he was too old to change his habits. On the present occasion, he made the situation of the Abattoir d'Ivry an excuse for not turning up the river by the wall. I do not think, however, we gained anything in the distance, the détour to cross the bridge more than equalling the ground we missed.

The captain and I had visited the abattoir in Montmartre just a few days before this trip, and we had both been really impressed with its organization and cleanliness. But an unfortunate pile of hocks, hooves, tallow, and unrecognizable bits of carcasses had caught my companion's attention. I found him deep in thought over this omnium gatherum, which he declared was worse than a bread pudding at Saratoga. Through some reasoning that was more practical than philosophical, he concluded that the basis of all the strange dishes he had encountered at the restaurans came from this pile, and he swore, as fiercely as any soldier from "our army in Flanders," that he wouldn't eat another bite while in Paris if it meant questioning his knowledge of natural history. He had always suspected he was eating cats and vermin, but he had never imagined such a collection of horrors for the casserole as what was in this pile. I tried in vain to ask him if he didn’t find the dishes tasty. Cats might be good for all he knew, but he was too set in his ways to change his habits. This time, he used the location of the Abattoir d'Ivry as an excuse for not going up the river along the wall. However, I don't think we made any gain in distance; the detour to cross the bridge was about equal to the ground we missed.

We came under the wall again at the Barrière de Ville Juif, and followed it, keeping on the side next the town until we fairly reached the river once more, beyond Vaugirard. Here we were compelled to walk some distance to cross the Pont de Jena, and again to make a considerable circuit through Passy, on account of the gardens, in order to do justice to our task. About this time the commodore fairly fell astern; and he discovered that the other boot was too large. I kept talking to him over my shoulder, and cheering him on, and he felicitated me on frogs agreeing so well with my constitution. At length we came in at the Barrière de Clichy, just as the clocks struck three, or in four hours, to a minute, from the time we had left the same spot. We had neither stopped, eaten, nor drunk a mouthful. The distance is supposed to be about eighteen miles, but I can hardly think it is so much, for we went rather further than if we had closely followed the wall.

We arrived back at the wall by the Barrière de Ville Juif and followed it, staying on the town side until we reached the river again, past Vaugirard. We had to walk quite a distance to cross the Pont de Jena, and then take a significant detour through Passy because of the gardens, to do our task properly. Around this time, the commodore fell behind, realizing that the other boot was too big. I kept encouraging him over my shoulder, and he complimented me on how well frogs suited my health. Finally, we entered through the Barrière de Clichy just as the clocks struck three, exactly four hours after we left that same spot. We hadn’t stopped, eaten, or had a single drink. The distance is estimated to be about eighteen miles, but I doubt it's that much, since we actually traveled a bit further than if we had closely followed the wall.

Our agility having greatly exceeded my calculations, we were obliged to walk two miles further, in order to find the carriage. The time expended in going this distance included, we were just four hours and a half on our feet. The captain protested that his boots had disgraced him, and forthwith commanded another pair; a subterfuge that did him no good.

Our speed was much greater than I expected, so we had to walk two more miles to find the carriage. Including the time it took to cover that distance, we were on our feet for four and a half hours. The captain complained that his boots had let him down, and immediately ordered another pair; a tactic that didn’t help him at all.

One anecdote connected with the sojourn of this eccentric, but really excellent-hearted and intelligent man,[22] at Paris is too good not to be told. He cannot speak a word of pure French; and of all Anglicizing of the language I have ever heard, his attempts at it are the most droll. He calls the Tuileries, Tully_rees_; the Jardin des Plantes, the Garden dis Plants; the guillotine, gully_teen_; and the garçons of the cafés, gassons. Choleric, with whiskers like a bear, and a voice of thunder, if anything goes wrong, he swears away, starboard and larboard, in French and English, in delightful discord.

One funny story about this quirky but genuinely kind-hearted and smart man during his time in Paris is too good not to share. He can't speak a word of proper French, and of all the English adaptations of the language I've ever heard, his attempts are the funniest. He calls the Tuileries, Tully_rees_; the Jardin des Plantes, the Garden dis Plants; the guillotine, gully_teen_; and the garçons of the cafés, gassons. Quick-tempered, with a bear-like beard and a booming voice, if anything goes wrong, he swears left and right, in both French and English, creating a delightful chaos.

[Footnote 22: He is since dead.]

[Footnote 22: He has since passed away.]

He sought me out soon after his arrival, and carried me with him, as an interpreter, in quest of lodgings. We found a very snug little apartment of four rooms, that he took. The last occupant was a lady, who, in letting the rooms, conditioned that Marie, her servant, must be hired with them, to look after the furniture, and to be in readiness to receive her at her return from the provinces. A few days after this arrangement I called, and was surprised, on ringing the bell, to hear the cry of an infant. After a moment's delay the door was cautiously opened, and the captain, in his gruffest tone, demanded, "Cur vully voo?" An exclamation of surprise at seeing me followed; but instead of opening the door for my admission, he held it for a moment, as if undecided whether to be "at home" or not. At this critical instant an infant cried again, and the thing became too ridiculous for further gravity. We both laughed outright. I entered, and found the captain with a child three days old tucked under his right arm, or that which had been concealed by the door. The explanation was very simple, and infinitely to his credit.

He looked for me shortly after he arrived and took me along as his interpreter in search of a place to stay. We found a cozy little four-room apartment that he decided to rent. The last tenant was a woman who required that Marie, her servant, be hired along with the rooms to take care of the furniture and be ready to welcome her back from the provinces. A few days later, I visited and was surprised to hear the cry of a baby when I rang the bell. After a brief wait, the door was slowly opened, and the captain, in his gruffest voice, asked, "What do you want?" He was surprised to see me, but instead of letting me in, he hesitated, holding the door as if unsure whether he wanted to be "at home" or not. Just then, the baby cried again, and it all became too ridiculous for us to stay serious. We both laughed out loud. I stepped inside and saw the captain holding a three-day-old baby tucked under his right arm, which had been hidden behind the door. The explanation was quite simple and definitely made him look good.

Marie, the locum tenens of the lady who had let the apartment, and the wife of a coachman who was in the country, was the mother of the infant. After its birth she presented herself to her new master; told her story; adding, by means of an interpreter, that if he turned her away, she had no place in which to lay her head. The kind-hearted fellow made out to live abroad as well as he could for a day or two—an easy thing enough in Paris, by the way,—and when I so unexpectedly entered, Marie was actually cooking the captain's breakfast in the kitchen while he was nursing the child in the salon!

Marie, the temporary stand-in for the lady who rented the apartment, and the wife of a coachman who was away in the countryside, was the mother of the baby. After giving birth, she approached her new employer and shared her situation, explaining through an interpreter that if he dismissed her, she would have nowhere to stay. The kind-hearted man managed to get by on his own for a day or two—quite easy to do in Paris, by the way—and when I unexpectedly walked in, Marie was actually making the captain's breakfast in the kitchen while he was taking care of the baby in the living room!

The dialogues between the captain and Marie were to the last degree amusing. He was quite unconscious of the odd sounds he uttered in speaking French, but thought he was getting on very well, being rather minute and particular in his orders; and she felt his kindness to herself and child so sensibly, that she always fancied she understood his wishes. I was frequently compelled to interpret between them; first asking him to explain himself in English, for I could make but little of his French myself. On one occasion he invited me to breakfast, as we were to pass the day exploring in company. By way of inducement, he told me that he had accidentally found some cocoa in the shell, and that he had been teaching Marie how to cook it "ship-fashion." I would not promise, as his hour was rather early, and the distance between us so great; but before eleven I would certainly be with him. I breakfasted at home therefore, but was punctual to the latter engagement. "I hope you have breakfasted?" cried the captain, rather fiercely, as I entered. I satisfied him on this point; and then, after a minute of demure reflection, he resumed, "You are lucky; for Marie boiled the cocoa, and, after throwing away the liquor, she buttered and peppered the shells, and served them for me to eat! I don't see how she made such a mistake, for I was very particular in my directions, and be d——d to her! I don't care so much about my own breakfast neither, for that can be had at the next café; but the poor creature has lost hers, which I told her to cook out of the rest of the cocoa." I had the curiosity to inquire how he had made out to tell Marie to do all this. "Why, I showed her the cocoa, to be sure, and then told her to boily vous-même." There was no laughing at this, and so I went with the captain to a café; after which we proceeded in quest of the gullyteen, which he was particularly anxious to see.

The conversations between the captain and Marie were incredibly entertaining. He had no idea how funny he sounded speaking French, but he thought he was doing really well, being quite detailed in his orders. She appreciated his kindness toward her and her child so much that she often believed she understood what he wanted. I often had to translate between them, first asking him to explain himself in English since I could barely make sense of his French. One time he invited me to breakfast since we planned to spend the day exploring together. To entice me, he mentioned that he had accidentally found some cocoa in the shell and had been teaching Marie how to cook it “ship-style.” I wouldn’t promise, since his timing was a bit early and the distance between us was quite far, but I did assure him I would be there before eleven. So, I had breakfast at home but made sure to keep my promise for our later meeting. “I hope you’ve had breakfast?” the captain exclaimed rather aggressively as I walked in. I confirmed that I had, and after a moment of serious contemplation, he continued, “You’re lucky; Marie boiled the cocoa and, after pouring away the liquid, she buttered and peppered the shells, serving them for me to eat! I don’t know how she messed that up; I was really clear with my instructions, and damn her! I don’t care that much about my breakfast because I can get that at the next café, but the poor thing has lost hers, which I told her to cook with the rest of the cocoa.” I was curious about how he managed to tell Marie to do all that. “Well, I showed her the cocoa, of course, and then told her to boily vous-même.” There was nothing funny about that, so I went with the captain to a café; after which we set out to find the gullyteen, which he was especially eager to see.

My rides often extend to the heights behind Malmaison and St. Cloud, where there is a fine country, and where some of the best views in the vicinity of Paris are to be obtained. As the court is at St. Cloud, I often meet different members of the royal family dashing to or from town, or perhaps passing from one of their abodes to another. The style is pretty uniform, for I do not remember to have ever met the king but once with less than eight horses. The exception was quite early one morning, when he was going into the country with very little éclat, accompanied by the Dauphine. Even on this occasion he was in a carriage and six, followed by another with four, and attended by a dozen mounted men. These royal progresses are truly magnificent; and they serve greatly to enliven the road, as we live so near the country palace. The king has been quite lately to a camp formed at St. Omer, and I happened to meet a portion of his equipages on their return. The carriages I saw were very neatly built post-chaises, well leathered, and contained what are here called the "officers of the mouth," alias "cooks and purveyors." They were all drawn by four horses. This was a great occasion—furniture being actually sent from the palace of Compiègne for the king's lodgings, and the court is said to have employed seventy different vehicles to transport it. I saw about a dozen.

My rides often take me to the heights behind Malmaison and St. Cloud, where the countryside is beautiful, and some of the best views near Paris can be seen. Since the court is at St. Cloud, I frequently encounter different members of the royal family hurrying to or from the city, or perhaps moving from one of their residences to another. The style is pretty consistent; I can’t recall ever seeing the king with less than eight horses, except for one early morning when he was heading to the countryside with very little fanfare, accompanied by the Dauphin. Even then, he was in a carriage drawn by six horses, followed by another carriage with four, and attended by a dozen mounted men. These royal processions are truly magnificent and really liven up the road, especially since we live so close to the country palace. The king has recently been to a camp set up at St. Omer, and I happened to see some of his carriages on their way back. The carriages I saw were very nicely built post-chaises, well-leathered, and held what are known here as the "officers of the mouth," or "cooks and suppliers." They were all pulled by four horses. This was quite an occasion—furniture was actually sent from the palace of Compiègne for the king's accommodations, and it’s said that the court used seventy different vehicles to transport it. I saw about a dozen.

Returning the other night from a dinner-party, given on the banks of the Seine, a few miles above us, I saw flaring lights gleaming along the highway, which, at first, caused nearly as much conjecture as some of the adventures of Don Quixotte. My horse proving a little restive, I pulled up, placing the cabriolet on one side of the road, for the first impression was that the cattle employed at some funeral procession had taken flight and were running away. It proved to be the Dauphine dashing towards St. Cloud. This was the first time I had ever met any of the royal equipages at night, and the passage was much the most picturesque of any I had hitherto seen. Footmen, holding flaming flambeaux, rode in pairs in front, by the side of the carriage, and in its rear; the piqueur scouring along the road in advance, like a rocket. By the way, a lady of the court told me lately that Louis XVIII. had lost some of his French by the emigration, for he did not know how to pronounce this word piqueur.

Returning home the other night from a dinner party by the Seine, a few miles upstream, I noticed bright lights flashing along the highway, which sparked as much curiosity as some of Don Quixote's adventures. My horse became a bit restless, so I pulled over and parked the cabriolet to the side of the road, initially thinking that cattle from a funeral procession had gotten loose and were running away. It turned out to be the Dauphine speeding towards St. Cloud. This was the first time I had ever seen any royal carriages at night, and it was definitely the most picturesque sight I had encountered so far. Footmen carrying flaming torches rode in pairs in front of, beside, and behind the carriage, while the piqueur raced ahead like a rocket. By the way, a court lady recently mentioned to me that Louis XVIII had lost some of his French due to emigration, as he didn't know how to pronounce the word piqueur.

On witnessing all this magnificence, the mind is carried back a few generations, in the inquiry after the progress of luxury, and the usages of our fathers. Coaches were first used in England in the reign of Elizabeth. It is clear enough, by the pictures in the Louvre, that in the time of Louis XIV. the royal carriages were huge, clumsy vehicles, with at least three seats. Mademoiselle de Montpensier, in her Memoirs, tells us how often she took her place at the window, in order to admire the graceful attitudes of M. de Lauzun, who rode near it. There is still in existence, in the Bibliothèque du Roi, a letter of Henry IV. to Sully, in which the king explains to the grand master the reason why he could not come to the arsenal that day; the excuse being that the queen was using the carriage! To-day his descendant seldom moves at a pace slower than ten miles the hour, is drawn by eight horses, and is usually accompanied by one or more empty vehicles of equal magnificence to receive him, in the event of an accident.

On seeing all this splendor, the mind goes back a few generations, pondering the evolution of luxury and the customs of our ancestors. Coaches were first introduced in England during Elizabeth's reign. The paintings in the Louvre clearly show that during Louis XIV's time, royal carriages were large, cumbersome vehicles with at least three seats. Mademoiselle de Montpensier, in her Memoirs, shares how often she took her spot by the window to admire the stylish postures of M. de Lauzun, who rode nearby. There is still a letter from Henry IV. to Sully in the Bibliothèque du Roi, where the king explains to the grand master why he couldn’t get to the arsenal that day; his excuse was that the queen was using the carriage! Today, his descendant rarely moves slower than ten miles an hour, is pulled by eight horses, and typically travels with one or more equally magnificent empty carriages to accommodate him in case of an accident.

Notwithstanding all this regal splendour, the turn-outs of Paris, as a whole, are by no means remarkable. The genteelest and the fashionable carriage is the chariot. I like the proportions of the French carriages better than those of the English or our own, the first being too heavy, and the last too light. The French vehicles appear to me to be in this respect a happy medium. But the finish is by no means equal to that of the English carriages, nor at all better than that of ours. There are relatively a large proportion of shabby-genteel equipages at Paris. Even the vehicles that are seen standing in the court of the Tuileries on a reception day are not at all superior to the better sort of American carriages, though the liveries are much more showy.

Despite all this royal splendor, the turnout in Paris isn’t really impressive as a whole. The fanciest and most fashionable carriage is the chariot. I prefer the proportions of French carriages to those of the English or our own; the first tend to be too heavy, and the latter too light. The French vehicles strike a nice balance in this regard. However, the quality isn’t anywhere near as good as that of English carriages, nor is it significantly better than ours. There are quite a few shabby-genteel carriages in Paris. Even the vehicles parked outside the Tuileries on a reception day aren’t much better than the nicer American carriages, even though the liveries are much flashier.

Few people here own the carriages and horses they use. Even the strangers, who are obliged to have travelling vehicles rarely use them in town, the road and the streets requiring very different sorts of equipages. There are certain job-dealers who furnish all that is required for a stipulated sum. You select the carriage and horses on trial and contract at so much a month, or at so much a year. The coachman usually comes with the equipage, as does the footman sometimes, though both are paid by the person taking the coach. They will wear your livery, if you choose, and you can have your arms put on the carriage if desirable. I pay five hundred francs a month for a carriage and horses, and forty francs for a coachman. I believe this is the usual price. I have a right to have a pair of horses always at my command, finding nothing but the stable, and even this would be unnecessary in Paris. If we go away from our own stable, I pay five francs a day extra. There is a very great convenience to strangers, in particular, in this system, for one can set up and lay down a carriage, without unnecessary trouble or expense, as it may be wanted. In everything of this nature, we have no town that has the least character, or the conveniences, of a capital.

Few people here own the carriages and horses they use. Even the visitors, who are required to have vehicles for travel, rarely use them in the city, as the roads and streets call for very different types of transportation. There are certain rental services that provide everything needed for an agreed price. You can choose the carriage and horses for a trial and sign a contract for a monthly or yearly fee. The coachman usually comes with the carriage, and sometimes a footman does as well, though both are paid by the person who rents the coach. They can wear your livery if you want, and you can have your coat of arms added to the carriage if desired. I pay five hundred francs a month for a carriage and horses, and forty francs for a coachman. I believe that’s the standard rate. I have the right to always have a pair of horses at my disposal, only needing to arrange for the stable, which is often not necessary in Paris. If I need to go away from my own stable, I pay an extra five francs a day. This system is particularly convenient for visitors, as you can set up and drop off a carriage without unnecessary hassle or cost when you need it. In all things of this nature, we don’t have a city that possesses the character or conveniences of a capital.

The French have little to boast of in the way of horseflesh. Most of the fine coach and cabriolet cattle of Paris come from Mecklenburgh, though some are imported from England. It is not common to meet with a very fine animal of the native breed. In America, land is so plenty and so cheap, that we keep a much larger proportion of brute force than is kept here. It is not uncommon with us to meet with those who live by day's work, using either oxen or horses. The consequence is that many beasts are raised with little care, and with scarcely any attention to the breeds. We find many good ones. In spite of bad grooming, little training, and hard work, I greatly question if even England possesses a larger proportion of good horses, comparing the population of the two countries, than America. Our animals are quicker footed, and at trotting, I suspect, we could beat the world; Christendom, certainly. The great avenue between the garden of the Tuileries and the Bois de Boulogne, with the allées of the latter, are the places to meet the fast-goers of the French capital, and I am strongly of opinion that there is no such exhibition of speed, in either, as one meets on the Third Avenue of New York. As for the Avenue de Neuilly, our sulky riders would vanish like the wind from anything I have seen on it; although one meets there, occasionally, fine animals from all parts of Europe.

The French don't have much to brag about when it comes to horses. Most of the nice coach and cab horses in Paris come from Mecklenburgh, though some are imported from England. It’s rare to find a really great horse of the native breed. In America, land is so abundant and affordable that we have a much larger number of working animals than they do here. It's common for us to encounter people who make a living doing day labor, using either oxen or horses. As a result, many animals are raised with minimal care and little attention to their breeds. We do find many good ones. Despite poor grooming, little training, and hard work, I seriously doubt that even England has a higher proportion of good horses, relative to the population of both countries, than America does. Our horses are quicker, and when it comes to trotting, I suspect we could outpace anyone; certainly in Christendom. The main avenue between the Tuileries Garden and the Bois de Boulogne, along with the paths in the latter, are where you find the fast horses of the French capital, but I firmly believe there’s no display of speed in either of those places that compares to what you see on the Third Avenue of New York. As for the Avenue de Neuilly, our sulky riders would disappear like the wind compared to anything I’ve seen there, although you do occasionally spot fine animals from all over Europe.

The cattle of the diligences, of the post-houses, and even of the cavalry of France, are solid, hardy and good feeders, but they are almost entirely without speed or action. The two former are very much the same, and it is a hard matter to get more than eight miles out of them without breaking into a gallop, or more than ten, if put under the whip. Now, a short time previously to leaving home, I went eleven measured miles, in a public coach, in two minutes less than an hour, the whip untouched. I sat on the box, by the side of the driver, and know that this was done under a pull that actually disabled one of his arms, and that neither of the four animals broke its trot. It is not often our roads will admit of this, but, had we the roads of England, I make little doubt we should altogether outdo her in speed. As for the horses used here in the public conveyances, and for the post routes, they are commonly compact, clumsy beasts, with less force than their shape would give reason to suppose. Their manes are long and shaggy, the fetlocks are rarely trimmed, the shoes are seldom corked, and, when there is a little coquetry, the tail is braided. In this trim, with a coarse harness, that is hardly ever cleaned, traces of common rope, and half the time no blinkers or reins, away they scamper, with their heads in all directions, like the classical representation of a team in an ancient car, through thick and thin, working with all their might to do two posts within an hour, one being the legal measure. These animals appear to possess a strange bonhomie, being obedient, willing and tractable, although, in the way of harness and reins, they are pretty much their own masters.

The cattle of the diligences, the post-houses, and even the cavalry of France are sturdy, tough, and good at eating, but almost entirely lack speed and energy. The first two are pretty much the same, and it’s tough to get more than eight miles out of them without breaking into a gallop, or more than ten if you really push them. Recently, just before I left home, I traveled eleven measured miles in a public coach in just under an hour, without the whip being used. I sat on the box next to the driver and know this was accomplished under such a strain that it actually disabled one of his arms, and none of the four animals broke their trot. It's not common for our roads to allow this, but if we had the roads in England, I’m pretty sure we would definitely outperform them in speed. As for the horses used in public transport and for post routes here, they are usually compact, clumsy animals, with less strength than their build would suggest. Their manes are long and shaggy, their fetlocks are rarely trimmed, their shoes are seldom corked, and when there’s a bit of flair, their tails are braided. In this state, with a rough harness that almost never gets cleaned, using common rope for traces, and often without blinkers or reins, they take off with their heads all over the place, like the classic image of a team in an ancient chariot, doing their utmost to cover two posts in under an hour, one being the official measure. These animals seem to have a strange bonhomie, being obedient, eager, and adaptable, although when it comes to harness and reins, they pretty much do as they please.

My excursions in the environs have made me acquainted with a great variety of modes of communication between the capital and its adjacent, villages. Although Paris is pared down so accurately, and is almost without suburbs, the population, within a circuit of ten miles in each direction, is almost equal to that of Paris itself. St. Denis has several thousands, St. Germain the same, and Versailles is still a town of considerable importance. All these places, with villages out of number, keep up daily intercourse with the city, and in addition to the hundreds of vegetable carts that constantly pass to and fro, there are many conveyances that are exclusively devoted to passengers. The cheapest and lowest is called a coucou for no reason that I can see, unless it be that a man looks very like a fool to have a seat in one of them. They are large cabriolets, with two and even three seats. The wheels are enormous, and there is commonly a small horse harnessed by the side of a larger, in the hills, to drag perhaps eight or nine people. One is amazed to see the living carrion that is driven about a place like Paris, in these uncouth vehicles. The river is so exceedingly crooked, that it is little used by travellers above Rouen.

My trips around the area have introduced me to many ways of getting between the capital and its nearby villages. Even though Paris is tightly packed and almost has no suburbs, the population within ten miles in every direction is almost the same as that of Paris itself. St. Denis has several thousand residents, St. Germain has a similar number, and Versailles is still an important town. All these places, along with countless villages, maintain daily communication with the city. In addition to the hundreds of vegetable trucks that are constantly coming and going, there are many vehicles specifically for passengers. The cheapest and least fancy option is called a coucou for reasons I can't quite understand, unless it's that a person looks a bit foolish sitting in one. They are large carriages with two or even three seats. The wheels are huge, and typically there's a small horse alongside a larger one to help pull around eight or nine people up the hills. It’s surprising to see the living cargo being transported around a place like Paris in these awkward vehicles. The river is so winding that it’s hardly used by travelers beyond Rouen.

The internal transportation of France, where the lines of the rivers are not followed, is carried on, almost exclusively, in enormous carts, drawn by six and even eight heavy horses, harnessed in a line. The burthen is often as large as a load of hay, not quite so high, perhaps, but generally longer, care being had to preserve the balance in such a manner as to leave no great weight on the shaft horse. These teams are managed with great dexterity, and I have often stopped and witnessed, with admiration, the entrance of one of them into a yard, as it passed from a crowded street probably not more than thirty feet wide. But the evolutions of the diligence, guided as it chiefly is by the whip, and moving on a trot, are really nice affairs. I came from La Grange, some time since, in one, and I thought that we should dash everything to pieces in the streets, and yet nothing was injured. At the close of the journey, our team of five horses, two on the pole and three on the lead, wheeled, without breaking its trot, into a street that was barely wide enough to receive the huge vehicle, and this too without human direction, the driver being much too drunk to be of any service. These diligences are uncouth objects to the eye; but, for the inside passengers, they are much more comfortable, so far as my experience extends than either the American stage or the English coach.

The internal transportation in France, where river paths aren't utilized, is mainly carried out using huge carts pulled by six or even eight heavy horses, aligned in a single file. The load is often as large as a hay bale—maybe not quite as high, but generally longer, with care taken to keep it balanced so that the shaft horse bears minimal weight. These teams are handled with impressive skill, and I've often stopped to admire how one of them maneuvers into a yard, transitioning from a crowded street that’s probably only about thirty feet wide. The movements of the diligence, primarily directed by the whip and trotting along, are quite remarkable. I traveled from La Grange in one of them a while back, and I thought we would smash everything in our path, yet nothing was damaged. At the end of the trip, our team of five horses—two on the pole and three at the lead—wheeled into a street that was just barely wide enough for the massive vehicle, all without any guidance since the driver was too drunk to help. These diligences may look awkward, but from my experience, they are much more comfortable for inside passengers than either the American stagecoach or the English coach.

The necessity of passing the barrière two or three times a day, has also made me acquainted with the great amount of drunkenness that prevails in Paris. Wine can be had outside of the walls, for about half the price which is paid for it within the town, as it escapes the octroi, or city duty. The people resort to these places for indulgence, and there is quite as much low blackguardism and guzzling here, as is to be met with in any sea-port I know.

The need to cross the barrière two or three times a day has also made me aware of the high level of drunkenness that exists in Paris. Wine can be purchased outside the city for about half the price of what it costs inside, as it avoids the octroi, or city tax. People go to these places to indulge, and there's as much low behavior and heavy drinking here as you’d find in any seaport I know.

Provisions of all sorts, too, are cheaper without the gates, for the same reason; and the lower classes resort to them to celebrate their weddings, and on other eating and drinking occasions. "Ici on fait festins et noces,"[23] is a common sign, no barrier being without more or less of these houses. The guinguettes are low gardens, answering to the English tea-gardens of the humblest class, with a difference in the drinkables and other fare. The base of Montmartre is crowded with them.

Provisions of all kinds are cheaper without the gates for the same reason, and the lower classes go there to celebrate their weddings and for other eating and drinking occasions. "Ici on fait festins et noces," is a common sign, found at almost every establishment. The guinguettes are casual gardens similar to English tea gardens for the less affluent, but with different drinks and food options. The base of Montmartre is packed with them.

[Footnote 23: Weddings and merry-makings are kept here.]

[Footnote 23: Weddings and celebrations are held here.]

One sometimes meets with an unpleasant adventure among these exhilarated gentry; for, though I think a low Frenchman is usually better natured when a little grisé than when perfectly sober, this is not always the case. Quite lately I had an affair that might have terminated seriously, but for our good luck. It is usual to have two sets of reins to the cabriolets, the horses being very spirited, and the danger from accidents in streets so narrow and crowded being great. I had dined in town, and was coming out about nine o'clock. The horse was walking up the ascent to the Barrière de Clichy, when I observed, by the shadow cast from a bright moon, that there was a man seated on the cabriolet, behind. Charles was driving, and I ordered him to tell the man to get off. Finding words of no effect, Charles gave him a slight tap with his whip. The fellow instantly sprang forward, seized the horse by the reins, and attempted to drag him to one side of the road. Failing in this, he fled up the street. Charles now called out that he had cut the reins. I seized the other pair and brought the horse up, and, as soon as he was under command, we pursued our assailant at a gallop. He was soon out of breath, and we captured him. As I felt very indignant at the supposed outrage, which might have cost, not us only, but others, their lives, I gave him in charge to two gendarmes at the gate, with my address, promising to call at the police office in the morning.

One sometimes encounters an unpleasant situation among these lively folks; for, while I believe a tipsy Frenchman is usually more good-natured than when completely sober, that’s not always true. Recently, I had an incident that could have ended badly, but luck was on our side. It’s common to have two sets of reins for the cabriolets, since the horses can be quite spirited, and the risk of accidents in such narrow and crowded streets is significant. I had dinner in the city and was leaving around nine o'clock. The horse was walking up the incline to the Barrière de Clichy when I noticed, thanks to the shadow cast by a bright moon, that there was a man sitting on the back of the cabriolet. Charles was driving, and I told him to ask the man to get off. When words didn't work, Charles gave him a light tap with his whip. The guy immediately jumped forward, grabbed the horse by the reins, and tried to pull him to one side of the road. When that failed, he ran up the street. Charles then shouted that he had cut the reins. I grabbed the other set of reins and brought the horse under control, and as soon as he was steady, we chased after the guy at a gallop. He quickly got out of breath, and we caught him. I was really angry about the supposed attack, which could have endangered not just us, but others’ lives, so I handed him over to two gendarmes at the gate, with my address, promising to go to the police station in the morning.

Accordingly, next day I presented myself, and was surprised to find that the man had been liberated. I had discovered, in the interval, that the leather had broken, and had not been cut, which materially altered the animus of the offence, and I had come with an intention to ask for the release of the culprit, believing it merely a sally of temper, which a night's imprisonment sufficiently punished; but the man being charged with cutting the rein, I thought the magistrate had greatly forgotten himself in discharging him before I appeared. Indeed I made no scruple in telling him so. We had some warm words, and parted. I make no doubt I was mistaken for an Englishman, and that the old national antipathy was at work against me.

Accordingly, the next day I showed up and was surprised to find that the man had been released. I had discovered in the meantime that the leather had broken and hadn’t been cut, which changed the nature of the offense significantly. I came with the intention of asking for the culprit's release, thinking it was just a moment of anger that a night in jail was enough punishment for. However, since the man was charged with cutting the rein, I thought the magistrate had seriously overstepped by letting him go before I arrived. I certainly didn’t hesitate to tell him that. We exchanged some heated words and parted ways. I have no doubt I was mistaken for an Englishman, and that the old national prejudice was working against me.

I was a good deal surprised at the termination of this, my first essay in French criminal justice. So many eulogiums have been passed on the police, that I was not prepared to find this indifference to an offence like that of wantonly cutting the reins of a spirited cabriolet horse, in the streets of Paris; for such was the charge on which the man stood committed. I mentioned the affair to a friend, and he said that the police was good only for political offences, and that the government rather leaned to the side of the rabble, in order to find support with them, in the event of any serious movement. This, you will remember, was the opinion of a Frenchman, and not mine; for I only relate the facts (one conjecture excepted), and to do justice to all parties, it is proper to add that my friend is warmly opposed to the present régime.

I was quite surprised by the outcome of my first experience with the French criminal justice system. So many praises have been sung about the police that I didn't expect to see such indifference toward an offense like willfully cutting the reins of an energetic cab horse in the streets of Paris; that was the charge against the man. I brought up the situation with a friend, and he said that the police only deal with political offenses, and that the government tends to side with the masses to secure their support in case of any major unrest. This, as you’ll recall, was the opinion of a Frenchman, not mine; I’m just sharing the facts (with one exception) and to be fair to everyone, I should mention that my friend is strongly against the current régime.

I have uniformly found the gendarmes civil, and even obliging; and I have seen them show great forbearance on various occasions. As to the marvellous stories we have heard of the police of Paris, I suspect they have been gotten up for effect, such things being constantly practised here. One needs be behind the curtain, in a great many things, to get a just idea of the true state of the world. A laughable instance has just occurred, within my knowledge, of a story that has been got up for effect. The town was quite horrified lately, with an account, in the journals, of a careless nurse permitting a child to fall into the fossé of the great bears, in the Jardin des Plantes, and of the bears eating up the dear little thing, to the smallest fragment, before succour could be obtained. Happening to be at the garden soon after, in the company of one connected with the establishment, I inquired into the circumstances, and was told that the nurses were very careless with the children, and that the story was published in order that the bears should not eat up any child hereafter, rather than because they had eaten up a child heretofore!

I have consistently found the police polite and even helpful; and I have witnessed them show a lot of patience on several occasions. As for the incredible stories we’ve heard about the police in Paris, I suspect they’ve been exaggerated for effect, as such things are commonly done here. You really need to be behind the scenes in many situations to get an accurate picture of the true state of the world. A funny example just happened, which I know about, of a story that was made up for effect. Recently, the town was quite shocked by a report in the newspapers about a careless nurse letting a child fall into the bear pit at the Jardin des Plantes, and the bears supposedly devouring the poor child before help arrived. I happened to be at the garden shortly after, with someone connected to the zoo, and when I asked about the situation, I was told that the nurses were indeed very careless with the children. The story was published not because the bears had eaten a child in the past, but to prevent them from eating one in the future!

LETTER XVIII.

Personal Intercourse.—Parisian Society and Hospitality.—Influence of
Money.—Fiacres.—M. de Lameth.—Strife of Courtesy.—Standard of
Delicacy.—French Dinners.—Mode of Visiting.—The Chancellor of
France.—The Marquis de Marbois.—Political Côteries.—Paris Lodgings.
—A French Party.—An English Party.—A splendid Ball.—Effects of good
Breeding.—Characteristic Traits.—Influence of a Court.

Personal Interaction.—Parisian Society and Hospitality.—Impact of
Money.—Taxis.—M. de Lameth.—Conflict of Manners.—Level of
Sensitivity.—French Dinners.—Visiting Etiquette.—The Chancellor of
France.—The Marquis de Marbois.—Political Circles.—Paris Accommodations.
—A French Gathering.—An English Gathering.—An extravagant Ball.—Effects of good
Manners.—Distinctive Traits.—Influence of a Court.

To MRS. POMEROY, COOPERSTOWN.

To Mrs. Pomeroy, Cooperstown.

I have said very little, in my previous letters, on the subject of our personal intercourse with the society of Paris. It is not always easy for one to be particular in these matters, and maintain the reserve that is due to others. Violating the confidence he may have received through his hospitality, is but an indifferent return from the guest to the host. Still there are men, if I may so express it, so public in their very essence, certainly in their lives, that propriety is less concerned with a repetition of their sentiments, and with delineations of their characters, than in ordinary cases; for the practice of the world has put them so much on their guard against the representations of travellers, that there is more danger of rendering a false account, by becoming their dupes, than of betraying them in their unguarded moments. I have scarcely ever been admitted to the presence of a real notoriety, that I did not find the man, or woman—sex making little difference—an actor; and this, too, much beyond the everyday and perhaps justifiable little practices of conventional life. Inherent simplicity of character is one of the rarest, as, tempered by the tone imparted by refinement, it is the loveliest of all our traits, though it is quite common to meet with those who affect it, with an address that is very apt to deceive the ordinary, and most especially the flattered, observer.

I haven't talked much in my previous letters about our interactions with the society in Paris. It's not always easy to be specific about these things while keeping the necessary boundaries. Breaking the trust given by one's host is not a great way to repay their hospitality. However, there are people who are so public by nature, definitely in their lives, that it's less concerning to share their opinions and describe their personalities than it normally would be. Society has made them so cautious about how travelers portray them that there's a greater risk of giving a false account by being misled than of exposing them in their vulnerable moments. I’ve rarely been in the presence of a true celebrity without finding them—regardless of being a man or a woman—putting on a performance, and this goes far beyond the ordinary and maybe justifiable social norms. Genuine simplicity of character is one of the rarest traits, and when combined with the nuances of refinement, it’s one of our most beautiful qualities. Yet, it’s quite common to encounter those who pretend to have it, often fooling the average observer, especially those who are flattered.

Opportunity, rather than talents, is the great requisite for circulating gossip; a very moderate degree of ability sufficing for the observation which shall render private anecdotes, more especially when they relate to persons of celebrity, of interest to the general reader. But there is another objection to being merely the medium of information of this low quality, that I should think would have great influence with every one who has the common self-respect of a gentleman. There is a tacit admission of inferiority in the occupation, that ought to prove too humiliating to a man accustomed to those associations, which imply equality. It is permitted to touch upon the habits and appearance of a truly great man; but to dwell upon the peculiarities of a duke, merely because he is a duke, is as much as to say he is your superior; a concession, I do not feel disposed to make in favour of any mere duke in Christendom.

Opportunity, rather than talent, is what you really need to spread gossip; even a little ability is enough to notice private stories, especially when they involve famous people, to make them interesting to the general reader. However, there's another issue with just being the source of this low-quality information that I think would matter to anyone who values their self-respect as a gentleman. There is a silent acknowledgment of inferiority in this role that should feel too degrading for someone used to associations that indicate equality. It's acceptable to comment on the habits and appearance of a truly great man, but to focus on the quirks of a duke just because he is a duke implies that he is superior to you; that’s a concession I’m not willing to make for any mere duke in Christendom.

I shall not, however, be wholly silent on the general impressions left by the little I have seen of the society of Paris; and, occasionally, when it is characteristic, an anecdote may be introduced, for such things sometimes give distinctness, as well as piquancy, to a description.

I won’t be completely silent about the overall impressions I've gotten from the little I've seen of Parisian society; and sometimes, when it feels relevant, I may share an anecdote because these stories can add clarity as well as interest to a description.

During our first winter in Paris, our circle, never very large, was principally confined to foreign families intermingled with a few French; but since our return to town, from St. Ouen, we have seen more of the people of the country. I should greatly mislead you, however, were I to leave the impression that our currency in the French capital has been at all general, for it certainly has not. Neither my health, leisure, fortune, nor opportunities, have permitted this. I believe few, perhaps no Americans, have very general access to the best society of any large European town; at all events, I have met with no one who I have had any reason to think was much better off than myself in this respect; and, I repeat, my own familiarity with the circles of the capital is nothing to boast of. It is in Paris, as it is everywhere else, as respects those who are easy of access. In all large towns there is to be found a troublesome and pushing set, who, requiring notoriety, obtrude themselves on strangers, sometimes with sounding names, and always with offensive pretensions of some sort or other; but the truly respectable and estimable class, in every country, except in cases that cannot properly be included in the rule, are to be sought. Now, one must feel that he has peculiar claims, or be better furnished with letters than happened to be my case, to get a ready admission into this set, or, having obtained it, to feel that his position enabled him to maintain the intercourse, with the ease and freedom that could alone render it agreeable. To be shown about as a lion, when circumstances offer the means; to be stuck up at a dinner-table, as a piece of luxury, like strawberries in February, or peaches in April,—can hardly be called association: the terms being much on a par with that which forms the liaisons, between him who gives the entertainment, and the hired plate with which his table is garnished. With this explanation, then, you are welcome to an outline of the little I know on the subject.

During our first winter in Paris, our social circle, which was never very large, mainly consisted of foreign families mixed with a few locals; but since we've come back to the city from St. Ouen, we've met more of the local people. However, I would mislead you if I gave the impression that our connections in the French capital have been at all extensive, because they definitely have not. Neither my health, free time, finances, nor opportunities have allowed for that. I believe few, if any, Americans have widespread access to the best society in any major European city; in any case, I haven't met anyone who I believe is significantly better connected than I am in this regard, and I repeat, my own familiarity with the circles in the capital is nothing to brag about. It's the same in Paris as it is everywhere else regarding those who are easy to access. In all large cities, there's a bothersome and pushy group that craves attention and forces themselves on newcomers, sometimes with impressive names but always with some kind of off-putting pretensions; however, the truly respectable and admirable people in every country, except in rare circumstances, are ones you have to seek out. One must feel that they have special connections or have better letters of introduction than I had to gain easy entry into this group, or if they do get in, have the position to maintain relationships with the comfort and ease that would make it enjoyable. Being paraded around as a spectacle when the situation allows, being placed at a dinner table as a novelty, like strawberries in February or peaches in April, can hardly be called genuine association; it's much like the relation between the host and the hired silverware that decorates his table. With this explanation, you're welcome to a glimpse of the little I know on the subject.

One of the errors respecting the French, which has been imported into America, through England, is the impression that they are not hospitable. Since my residence here, I have often been at a loss to imagine how such a notion could have arisen, for I am acquainted with no town, in which it has struck me there is more true hospitality than in Paris. Not only are dinners, balls, and all the minor entertainments frequent, but there is scarcely a man, or a woman, of any note in society, who does not cause his or her doors to be opened, once a fortnight at least, and, in half the cases, once a week. At these soirées invitations are sometimes given, it is true, but then they are general, and for the whole season; and it is not unusual, even, to consider them free to all who are on visiting terms with the family. The utmost simplicity and good taste prevail at these places, the refreshments being light and appropriate, and the forms exacting no more than what belongs to good breeding. You will, at once, conceive the great advantages that a stranger possesses in having access to such social resources. One, with a tolerable visiting list, may choose his circle for any particular evening, and if, by chance, the company should not happen to be to his mind, he has still before him the alternative of several other houses, which are certain to be open. It is not easy to say what can be more truly hospitable than this.

One of the misconceptions about the French that has been brought to America through England is the belief that they aren’t welcoming. Ever since I’ve lived here, I’ve often wondered how this idea emerged because I find that there’s no place with more genuine hospitality than Paris. Not only are dinners, parties, and various gatherings common, but practically everyone of any importance in society opens their doors at least every two weeks, and often once a week. At these soirées, invitations may be given, it’s true, but they are usually general and cover the entire season; it's not unusual to consider them open to anyone who has a friendly relationship with the family. These gatherings are marked by simplicity and good taste, with light and suitable refreshments, and the expected decorum is no more than what good manners require. You can easily see the significant advantages a newcomer has in accessing such social opportunities. Someone with a decent list of acquaintances can select their circle for any given evening, and if the company doesn’t suit them, there are plenty of other homes guaranteed to be welcoming. It’s hard to imagine something more genuinely hospitable than that.

The petits soupers, once so celebrated, are entirely superseded by the new distribution of time, which is probably the most rational that can be devised for a town life. The dinner is at six, an hour that is too early to interfere with the engagements of the evening, it being usually over at eight, and too late to render food again necessary that night; an arrangement that greatly facilitates the evening intercourse, releasing it at once from all trouble and parade.

The petits soupers, once highly esteemed, have been completely replaced by the new way of scheduling time, which is likely the most sensible option for city living. Dinner is at six, a time that is early enough not to conflict with evening plans, usually wrapping up by eight, and late enough that you don't need to eat again that night. This setup makes it much easier to socialize in the evening, eliminating any hassle or fuss.

It has often been said in favour of French society, that once within the doors of a salon, all are equal. This is not literally so, it being impossible that such a state of things can exist; nor is it desirable that it should, since it is confounding all sentiment and feeling, overlooking the claims of age, services, merit of every sort, and setting at nought the whole construction of society. It is not absolutely true that even rank is entirely forgotten in French society, though I think it sufficiently so to prevent any deference to it from being offensive. The social pretensions of a French peer are exceedingly well regulated, nor do I remember to have seen an instance in which a very young man has been particularly noticed on account of his having claims of this sort. Distinguished men are so very numerous in Paris, that they excite no great feeling, and the even course of society is little disturbed on their account.

It’s often said that in French society, once you step into a salon, everyone is equal. This isn't literally true, as such a situation can't exist, nor is it desirable, since it blurs all emotions and feelings, ignoring the importance of age, contributions, and all kinds of merit, undermining the entire structure of society. It's not entirely accurate to say that rank is completely overlooked in French society, but I think it’s enough to prevent any respect for it from being offensive. The social status of a French peer is very well defined, and I don’t recall seeing a case where a very young man was singled out just because of his status. There are so many distinguished people in Paris that they don’t create much fuss, and the regular flow of society isn’t greatly disrupted because of them.

Although all within the doors of a French salon are not perfectly equal, none are made unpleasantly to feel the indifference. I dare say there are circles in Paris, in which the mere possession of money may be a source of evident distinction, but it must be in a very inferior set. The French, while they are singularly alive to the advantages of money, and extremely liable to yield to its influence in all important matters, rarely permit any manifestations of its power to escape them in their ordinary intercourse. As a people, they appear to me to be ready to yield everything to money but its external homage. On these points they are the very converse of the Americans, who are hard to be bought, while they consider money the very base of all distinction. The origin of these peculiarities may be found in the respective conditions of the two countries.

Although everyone in a French salon isn't perfectly equal, no one feels unpleasantly ignored. I would say there are social circles in Paris where just having money brings noticeable status, but those would be considered quite low tier. The French, while very aware of the benefits of money and often swayed by it in major decisions, usually don't let its influence show in everyday interactions. As a culture, they seem willing to give up everything to money except for showing it respect. In this regard, they are the opposite of Americans, who are not easily bought but view money as the foundation of all status. The roots of these differences can be traced back to the unique conditions of the two countries.

In America, fortunes are easily and rapidly acquired; pressure reduces few to want; he who serves is, if anything, more in demand than he who is to be served; and the want of temptation produces exemption from the liability to corruption. Men will, and do, daily corrupt themselves in the rapacious pursuit of gain, but comparatively few are in the market to be bought and sold by others. Notwithstanding this, money being every man's goal, there is a secret, profound, and general deference for it, while money will do less than in almost any other country in Christendom. Here, few young men look forward to gaining distinction by making money; they search for it as a means, whereas with us it is the end. We have little need of arms in America, and the profession is in less request than that of law or merchandize. Of the arts and letters the country possesses none, or next to none; and there is no true sympathy with either. The only career that is felt as likely to lead, and which can lead, to distinction independently of money, is that of politics, and, as a whole, this is so much occupied by sheer adventurers, with little or no pretentions to the name of statesmen, that it is scarcely reputable to belong to it. Although money has no influence in politics, or as little as well may be, even the successful politician is but a secondary man in ordinary society in comparison with the millionnaire. Now all this is very much reversed in Paris: money does much, while it seems to do but little. The writer of a successful comedy would be a much more important personage in the côteries of Paris than M. Rothschild; and the inventor of a new bonnet would enjoy much more éclat than the inventor of a clever speculation. I question if there be a community on earth in which gambling risks in the funds, for instance, are more general than in this, and yet the subject appears to be entirely lost sight of out of the Bourse.

In America, it's easy and quick to make money; pressure leaves few wanting. Those who serve are often more sought after than those being served, and the lack of temptation leads to a lower chance of corruption. People will, and do, compromise their values every day in the greedy chase for profit, but not many are available to be bought and sold by others. Despite this, with money being everyone's goal, there’s a deep, widespread respect for it, even though money doesn’t carry as much weight here as it does in almost any other Christian country. Here, few young men aspire to make a name for themselves by acquiring wealth; they pursue it as a means, while for us it’s the ultimate goal. We don’t have much need for weapons in America, and the armed profession is less in demand than law or trade. The arts and literature here are virtually non-existent, and there’s little genuine appreciation for either. The only field that seems capable of leading to distinction without relying on money is politics, and this area is largely filled with adventurers who barely deserve to be called statesmen, making it hardly reputable to be part of it. Although money has little influence in politics, or as little as possible, even a successful politician is considered less important in regular society compared to a millionaire. This all flips around in Paris: money has significant power, even if it seems to have little impact. The writer of a successful comedy would hold much more importance in Parisian social circles than M. Rothschild; similarly, the creator of a new hat would gain much more recognition than an inventor of a clever scheme. I wonder if there’s any place on earth where risky investments in the stock market are as common as they are here, yet the discussion seems to disappear outside of the stock exchange.

The little social notoriety that is attached to military distinction here has greatly surprised me. It really seems as if France has had so much military renown as to be satiated with it. One is elbowed constantly by generals, who have gained this or that victory, and yet no one seems to care anything about them. I do not mean that the nation is indifferent to military glory, but society appears to care little or nothing about it. I have seen a good deal of fuss made with the writer of a few clever verses, but I have never seen any made with a hero. Perhaps it was because the verses were new, and the victories old.

The little social recognition that comes with military achievement here has really surprised me. It seems like France has had so much military fame that it’s lost its appeal. You’re constantly surrounded by generals who have won this or that battle, and yet nobody seems to care about them. I don't mean that the country is indifferent to military glory, but society seems to be pretty indifferent about it. I've seen a lot of attention given to a writer of a few clever lines, but I’ve never seen much focus on a hero. Maybe it’s because the verses are new, and the victories are old.

The perfect good taste and indifference which the French manifest concerning the private affairs, and concerning the mode of living, of one who is admitted to the salons, has justly extorted admiration, even from the English, the people of all others who most submit to a contrary feeling. A hackney-coach is not always admitted into a court-yard, but both men and women make their visits in them, without any apparent hesitation. No one seems ashamed of confessing poverty. I do not say that women of quality often use fiacres to make their visits, but men do, and I have seen women in them openly whom I have met in some of the best houses in Paris. It is better to go in a private carriage, or in a remise, if one can, but few hesitate, when their means are limited, about using the former. In order to appreciate this self-denial, or simplicity, or good sense, it is necessary to remember that a Paris fiacre is not to be confounded with any other vehicle on earth. I witnessed, a short time since, a ludicrous instance of the different degrees of feeling that exist on this point among different people. A—— and myself went to the house of an English woman our acquaintance who is not very choice in her French. A Mrs. ——, the wife of a colonel in the English army, sat next A——, as a French lady begged that her carriage might be ordered. Our hostess told her servant to order the fiacre of Madame ——. Now Madame —— kept her chariot, to my certain knowledge, but she disregarded the mistake. A—— soon after desired that our carriage might come next. The good woman of the house, who loved to be busy, again called for the fiacre of Madame ——. I saw the foot of A—— in motion, but catching my eye, she smiled, and the thing passed off. The "voiture de Madame ——," or our own carriage, was announced just as Mrs. —— was trying to make a servant understand she wished for hers. "Le fiacre de Madame ——," again put in the bustling hostess. This was too much for a colonel's lady, and, with a very pretty air of distress, she took care to explain, in a way that all might hear her, that it was a remise.

The perfect taste and indifference that the French show regarding the private lives and lifestyles of those who are welcomed into the salons has rightfully earned admiration, even from the English, who tend to feel quite differently. A hackney carriage isn't always allowed into a courtyard, but both men and women use them for visits without any hesitation. No one seems embarrassed to admit they are poor. I'm not saying that women of high status frequently take fiacres for their visits, but men do, and I've seen women in them openly who I have met in some of the finest homes in Paris. It’s better to arrive in a private carriage or a remise if you can, but few hesitate to use the former when their finances are tight. To fully appreciate this self-denial, or simplicity, or good sense, it's important to remember that a Paris fiacre is unlike any other vehicle you’ll find. I recently witnessed a humorous example of the varying attitudes toward this subject among different people. A—— and I visited the home of an English woman we know who isn't very particular about her French. Mrs. ——, the wife of a colonel in the English army, was seated next to A—— when a French lady asked for her carriage to be called. Our hostess told her servant to order Madame ——'s fiacre. Now, Madame —— owned a chariot, of that I am certain, but she ignored the mistake. Shortly after, A—— asked for our carriage to come next. The kind hostess, who loved to keep busy, again called for Madame ——'s fiacre. I noticed A—— moving her foot, but when she caught my eye, she smiled, and we let it go. The "voiture de Madame ——," or our carriage, was announced just as Mrs. —— was trying to make a servant understand that she wanted hers. "Le fiacre de Madame ——," the bustling hostess said again. This was too much for the colonel's wife, who, with a very charming expression of distress, made sure to explain loudly enough for everyone to hear her that it was a remise.

I dare say, vulgar prejudices influence vulgar minds, here, as elsewhere, and yet I must say, that I never knew any one hesitate about giving an address on account of the humility of the lodgings. It is to be presumed that the manner in which families that are historical, and of long-established rank, were broken down by the revolution, has had an influence in effecting this healthful state of feeling.

I have to say, common prejudices affect ordinary people, just like anywhere else, and yet I’ve never seen anyone hesitate to give a speech because of the modesty of the place. It’s likely that the way families with history and established status were brought down by the revolution has contributed to this positive outlook.

The great tact and careful training of the women, serve to add very much to the grace of French society. They effectually prevent all embarrassments from the question of precedency, by their own decisions. Indeed, it appears to be admitted, that when there is any doubt on these points, the mistress of the house shall settle it in her own way. I found myself lately, at a small dinner, the only stranger, and the especially invited guest, standing near Madame la Marquise at the moment the service was announced. A bishop made one of the trio. I could not precede a man of his years and profession, and he was too polite to precede a stranger. It was a nice point. Had it been a question between a duke and myself, as a stranger, and under the circumstances of the invitation, I should have had the pas, but even the lady hesitated about discrediting a father of the church. She delayed but an instant, and, smiling, she begged us to follow her to the table, avoiding the decision altogether. In America such a thing could not have happened, for no woman, by a fiction of society, is supposed to know how to walk in company without support; but, here, a woman will not spoil her curtsey, on entering a room, by leaning on an arm, if she can well help it. The practice of tucking up a brace of females (liver and gizzard, as the English coarsely, but not inaptly, term it), under one's arms, in order to enter a small room that is crowded in a way to render the movements of even one person difficult, does not prevail here, it being rightly judged that a proper tenue, a good walk, and a graceful movement, are all impaired by it. This habit also singularly contributes to the comfort of your sex, by rendering them more independent of ours. No one thinks, except in very particular cases, of going to the door to see a lady into her carriage, a custom too provincial to prevail in a capital, anywhere. Still, there is an amusing assiduity among the men, on certain points of etiquette, that has sometimes made me laugh; though, in truth, every concession to politeness being a tribute to benevolence, is respectable, unless spoiled in the manner. As we are gossiping about trifles, I will mention a usage or two, that to you will at least be novel.

The great skill and careful training of women greatly enhance the elegance of French society. They effectively prevent any awkwardness regarding issues of precedence by making their own decisions. It's commonly accepted that when there's any uncertainty in these situations, the hostess will resolve it in her own way. I recently found myself at a small dinner as the only outsider and the special guest, standing next to Madame la Marquise at the moment the meal was served. A bishop was part of the trio. I couldn't go ahead of a man of his age and status, and he was too courteous to go before a stranger. It was a tricky situation. If it had been a matter between a duke and me as a stranger, given the circumstances of the invitation, I would have had the priority, but even the lady hesitated to overlook a church leader. She paused for just a moment, then smiling, invited us to follow her to the table, sidestepping the decision entirely. In America, such a situation wouldn't occur since no woman, by social convention, is considered capable of entering a room without assistance; but here, a woman won't ruin her curtsy by resting on an arm when entering a room if she can avoid it. The practice of carrying two women (as the English somewhat crudely but not inaccurately describe it) under one’s arms to squeeze into a crowded small room doesn’t happen here, as it’s rightly seen as detrimental to proper posture, a good walk, and graceful movement. This habit also notably enhances the comfort of women by making them less reliant on men. No one thinks, except in very specific cases, about going to the door to help a lady into her carriage—a custom too old-fashioned to occur in a capital city. Still, there is an amusing attention to certain points of etiquette among men that has sometimes made me chuckle; although, in truth, every act of politeness is a testament to kindness and is admirable unless done poorly. As we're chatting about small matters, I’ll mention a couple of customs that will certainly be new to you.

I was honoured with a letter from le Chevalier Alexandre de Lameth,[24] accompanied by an offering of a book, and I took an early opportunity to pay my respects to him. I found this gentleman, who once played so conspicuous a part in the politics of France, and who is now a liberal deputy, at breakfast, in a small cabinet, at the end of a suite of four rooms. He received me politely, conversed a good deal of America, in which country he had served as a colonel, under Rochambeau, and I took my leave. That M. de Lameth should rise, and even see me into the next room, was what every one would expect, and there I again took my leave of him. But he followed me to each door, in succession, and when, with a little gentle violence, I succeeded in shutting him in the ante-chamber, he seemed to yield to my entreaties not to give himself any further trouble. I was on the landing, on my way down, when, hearing the door of M. de Lameth's apartment open, I turned and saw its master standing before it, to give and receive the last bow. Although this extreme attention to the feelings of others, and delicacy of demeanour, rather marks the Frenchman of the old school, perhaps, it is by no means uncommon here. General Lafayette, while he permits me to see him with very little ceremony, scarcely ever suffers me to leave him without going with me as far as two or three doors. This, in my case, he does more from habit than anything else, for he frequently does not even rise when I enter; and, sometimes, when I laughingly venture to say so much ceremony is scarcely necessary between us, he will take me at my word, and go back to his writing, with perfect simplicity.

I received a letter from Chevalier Alexandre de Lameth,[24] along with a book as a gift, and I quickly arranged to pay my respects to him. I found this gentleman, who once played a significant role in French politics and is now a liberal deputy, having breakfast in a small room at the end of a suite of four rooms. He welcomed me warmly and chatted a lot about America, where he had served as a colonel under Rochambeau, and then I took my leave. It was expected that Mr. de Lameth would stand and even walk me to the next room, which I did before saying goodbye again. However, he followed me to each door in turn, and when I finally managed to gently shut him in the ante-room, he seemed to give in to my request not to trouble himself any further. I was on the landing, heading down, when I heard Mr. de Lameth's door open. I turned to see him standing there for one last bow. While this level of attention to others and courteous behavior is a trait of the old-school Frenchman, it’s not uncommon here. General Lafayette allows me to see him with very little formality, yet he rarely lets me leave without walking me to two or three doors. In my case, he does this more out of habit than anything else since he often doesn’t even stand when I arrive. Sometimes, when I jokingly suggest that such ceremony isn’t necessary between us, he takes me seriously and returns to his writing without any fuss.

[Footnote 24: Since dead.]

[Footnote 24: Since deceased.]

The reception between the women, I see plainly, is graduated with an unpretending but nice regard to their respective claims. They rise, even to men, a much more becoming and graceful habit than that of America, except in evening circles, or in receiving intimates. I never saw a French woman offer her hand to a male visitor, unless a relative, though it is quite common for females to kiss each other, when the réunion is not an affair of ceremony. The practice of kissing among men still exists, though it is not very common at Paris. It appears, to be gradually going out with the earrings. I have never had an offer from a Frenchman, of my own age, to kiss me, but it has frequently occurred with my seniors. General Lafayette practises it still, with all his intimates.

The way the women interact, I can clearly see, is marked by a simple yet respectful acknowledgment of each other's status. Their manner is much more attractive and graceful compared to that of American women, except in evening gatherings or when hosting close friends. I've never seen a French woman extend her hand to a male guest unless he’s family, although it’s very common for women to kiss each other when it’s not a formal event. The tradition of men kissing each other still exists, but it’s becoming less common in Paris. It seems to be fading, like the trend of wearing earrings. I’ve never been offered a kiss by a French man my age, but it has happened often with older men. General Lafayette still practices this with all his close friends.

I was seated, the other evening, in quiet conversation, with Madame la Princesse de ——. Several people had come and gone in the course of an hour, and all had been received in the usual manner. At length the huissier, walking fast through the ante-chamber, announced the wife of an ambassador. The Princesse, at the moment, was seated on a divan, with her feet raised so as not to touch the floor. I was startled with the suddenness and vehemence of her movements. She sprang to her feet, and rather ran than walked across the vast salon to the door, where she was met by her visitor, who, observing the empressement of her hostess, through the vista of rooms, had rushed forward as fast as decorum would at all allow, in order to anticipate her at the door. It was my impression, at first, that they were bosom friends, about to be restored to each other, after a long absence, and that the impetuosity of their feelings had gotten the better of their ordinary self-command. No such thing; it was merely a strife of courtesy, for the meeting was followed by an extreme attention to all the forms of society, profound curtsies, and the elaborated demeanour which marks ceremony rather than friendship.

I was sitting the other evening, having a quiet conversation with Madame la Princesse de —. Several people had come and gone over the course of an hour, and all had been welcomed in the usual way. Finally, the huissier, walking quickly through the anteroom, announced the wife of an ambassador. The Princesse was sitting on a divan, with her feet raised off the floor. I was taken aback by the suddenness and intensity of her movements. She jumped to her feet and practically ran across the expansive salon to the door, where her visitor was waiting. The ambassador's wife, noticing the eagerness of her hostess through the layout of rooms, rushed forward as quickly as politeness would allow to meet her at the door. Initially, I thought they were close friends reuniting after a long time apart, and that their excitement had overcome their usual composure. That wasn’t the case; it was just a display of courtesy, as the meeting was followed by strict adherence to social etiquette, deep curtsies, and the formal behavior that highlights ceremony rather than friendship.

Much has been said about the latitude of speech among the women of France, and comparisons have been made between them and our own females, to the disadvantage of the former. If the American usages are to be taken as the standard of delicacy in such matters, I know of no other people who come up to it. As to our mere feelings, habit can render anything proper, or anything improper, and it is not an easy matter to say where the line, in conformity with good sense and good taste, should be actually drawn. I confess a leaning to the American school, but how far I am influenced by education it would not be easy for me to say myself. Foreigners affirm that we are squeamish, and that we wound delicacy oftener by the awkward attempts to protect it, than if we had more simplicity. There may be some truth in this, for though cherishing the notions of my youth, I never belonged to the ultra school at home, which, I believe you will agree with me, rather proves low breeding than good breeding. One sees instances of this truth, not only every day, but every hour of the day. Yesterday, in crossing the Tuileries, I was witness of a ludicrous scene that sufficiently illustrates what I mean. The statues of the garden have little or no drapery. A countryman, and two women of the same class, in passing one, were struck with this circumstance, and their bursts of laughter, running and hiding their faces, and loud giggling, left no one in ignorance of the cause of their extreme bashfulness. Thousands of both sexes pass daily beneath the same statue, without a thought of its nudity, and it is looked upon as a noble piece of sculpture.

Much has been said about how openly women in France speak, and comparisons have been made between them and women in our country, which often put the French at a disadvantage. If American customs are considered the standard for decency in these matters, I don’t know of any other people who reach that standard. When it comes to our feelings, habit can make anything seem acceptable or unacceptable, and it’s not easy to determine where the line should be drawn when it comes to good sense and good taste. I find myself leaning toward the American viewpoint, but it would be difficult for me to say just how much my education has influenced that. Foreigners say we are overly sensitive and that our clumsy attempts to protect delicacy often offend it more than if we were more straightforward. There might be some truth to this because, while I hold onto the beliefs of my youth, I never belonged to the ultra-sensitive crowd at home, which I believe you’ll agree indicates poor breeding rather than good breeding. You see examples of this not just daily but rather every hour. Just yesterday, while crossing the Tuileries, I witnessed a comical scene that clearly illustrates my point. The statues in the garden have little to no clothing. A farmer and two women from the same background passed by one and were struck by its nudity, bursting into laughter, running while trying to hide their faces, and giggling loudly, making it obvious to everyone why they felt so bashful. Thousands of people of all genders walk by that same statue every day without a thought about its nudity, and it’s regarded as a magnificent piece of art.

In dismissing this subject, which is every way delicate, I shall merely say that usage tolerates a license of speech, of which you probably have no idea, but that I think one hears very rarely from a French woman of condition little that would not be uttered by an American female under similar circumstances. So far as my experience goes, there is a marked difference in this particular between the women of a middle station and those of a higher rank; by rank, however, I mean hereditary rank, for The revolution has made a pêle mêle in the salons of Paris.

In addressing this sensitive topic, I’ll just say that there’s a certain flexibility in speech that you probably aren't aware of, but I believe you rarely hear a French woman of high social status say anything that an American woman wouldn't express in similar situations. From my experience, there’s a notable difference in this regard between women of the middle class and those of the upper class; by upper class, I mean hereditary status, since the revolution has mixed things up in the Parisian salons.

Although the petits soupers have disappeared, the dinners are very sufficient substitutes: they are given at a better hour; and the service of a French entertainment, so quiet, so entirely free from effort, or chatter about food, is admirably adapted to rendering them agreeable. I am clearly of opinion that no one ought to give any entertainment that has not the means of making it pass off as a matter-of-course thing, and without effort. I have certainly seen a few fussy dinners here, but they are surprisingly rare. At home, we have plenty of people who know that a party that has a laboured air is inherently vulgar, but how few are there that know how to treat a brilliant entertainment as a mere matter of course! Paris is full of those desirable houses in which the thing is understood.

Although the petits soupers are no longer around, the dinners are great substitutes: they happen at a better time, and the relaxed, effortless service of a French meal—completely free from fuss or chatter about the food—makes them very enjoyable. I firmly believe that no one should host an event without being able to make it feel effortless and natural. I've definitely seen a few over-the-top dinners here, but they’re surprisingly rare. At home, we have many people who realize that a party that feels forced is inherently tacky, but how few actually know how to handle a fantastic gathering as if it’s second nature! Paris is full of those wonderful homes where this is understood.

The forms of the table vary a little, according to the set one is in. In truly French houses, until quite lately, I believe, it was not the custom to change the knife,—the duty of which, by the way, is not great, the cookery requiring little more than the fork. In families that mingle more with strangers, both are changed, as with us. A great dinner is served very much as at home, so far as the mere courses are concerned, though I have seen the melons follow the soup. This I believe to be in good taste, though it is not common; and it struck me at first as being as much out of season as the old New England custom of eating the pudding before the meat. But the French give small dinners (small in name, though certainly very great in execution), in which the dishes are served singly or nearly so, the entertainment resembling those given by the Turks, and being liable to the same objection; for when there is but a single dish before one, and it is not known whether there is to be any more, it is an awkward thing to decline eating. Such dinners are generally of the best quality, but I think they should never be given, except where there is sufficient intimacy to embolden the guest to say jam satis.

The layout of the table varies a bit depending on the setting. In traditional French homes, until recently, it wasn’t common to switch knives—though it’s not really necessary since cooking mostly requires just a fork. In families that interact more with outsiders, both the knife and fork are changed like they are with us. A fancy dinner is served pretty much the same as it is at home regarding the courses, although I’ve seen melons come after the soup. I think this is good taste, even if it’s not typical; at first, it seemed as odd to me as the old New England custom of having pudding before the meat. However, the French do small dinners (small in name, but very impressive in reality), where the dishes are served one at a time or almost one at a time, resembling the style of Turkish meals and facing the same issue; if there’s only one dish in front of you and you don’t know if more are coming, it’s awkward to refuse to eat. These dinners tend to be of the highest quality, but I believe they should only be held when there’s enough familiarity for the guest to say jam satis.

The old devotion to the sex is not so exclusively the occupation of a French salon as it was probably half a century since. I have been in several, where the men were grouped in a corner talking politics, while the women amused each other as best they could, in cold, formal lines, looking like so many figures placed there to show off the latest modes of the toilette. I do not say this is absolutely common, but it is less rare than you might be apt to suppose.

The old obsession with sex isn't just confined to a French salon like it used to be about fifty years ago. I've been in a few where the men huddled in a corner discussing politics while the women entertained themselves as best they could, sitting in stiff, formal lines, resembling figures meant to showcase the latest fashion trends. I'm not saying this happens all the time, but it's definitely more common than you might think.

I can tell you little of the habit of reading manuscripts in society. Such things are certainly done, for I have been invited to be present on one or two occasions; but having a horror of such exhibitions, I make it a point to be indisposed, the choice lying between the megrims before or after them. Once, and once only, I have heard a poet recite his verses in a well-filled drawing-room; and though I have every reason to think him clever, my ear was so little accustomed to the language, that, in the mouthing of French recitation, I lost nearly all of it.

I can't tell you much about the habit of reading manuscripts in social settings. People definitely do it, as I've been invited to a few events; but since I have a strong dislike for such performances, I always find a way to avoid them, choosing between feeling unwell before or after. Once, and only once, I heard a poet read his verses in a crowded living room; and even though I have every reason to believe he was talented, I wasn't used to the language, and in the flow of the French recitation, I missed almost all of it.

I have had an odd pleasure in driving from one house to another, on particular evenings, in order to produce as strong contrasts as my limited visiting-list will procure. Having a fair opportunity a few nights since, in consequence of two or three invitations coming in for the evening on which several houses where I occasionally called were opened, I determined to make a night of it, in order to note the effect. As A—— did not know several of the people, I went alone, and you may possibly be amused with an account of my adventures: they shall be told.

I’ve found it strangely enjoyable to drive from one house to another on certain evenings, trying to create some strong contrasts with my limited list of friends to visit. A few nights ago, I had a good chance since I received a couple of invitations for the evening, and many of the homes I usually visit were open. So, I decided to make a night of it and see how it all felt. Since A—— didn’t know some of the people, I went by myself, and you might find my adventures entertaining: I’ll share the details.

In the first place, I had to dress, in order to go to dinner at a house that I had never entered, and with a family of which I had never seen a soul. These are incidents which frequently come over a stranger, and at first were not a little awkward; but use hardens us to much greater misfortunes. At six, then, I stepped punctually into my coupé, and gave Charles the necessary number and street. I ought to tell you that the invitation had come a few days before, and in a fit of curiosity I had accepted it, and sent a card, without having the least idea who my host and hostess were, beyond their names. There was something piquant in this ignorance, and I had almost made up my mind to go in the same mysterious manner, leaving all to events, when happening, in an idle moment, to ask a lady of my acquaintance, and for whom I have a great respect, if she knew a Madame de ——, to my surprise, her answer was, "Most certainly; she is my cousin, and you are to dine there to-morrow." I said no more, though this satisfied me that my hosts were people of some standing. While driving to their hotel, it struck me, under all the circumstances, it might be well to know more of them, and I stopped at the gate of a female friend, who knows everybody, and who, I was certain, would receive me even at that unseasonable hour. I was admitted, explained my errand, and inquired if she knew a M. de ——. "Quelle question!" she exclaimed—"M. de —— est Chancelier de France!" Absurd and even awkward as it might have proved, but for this lucky thought, I should have dined with the French Lord High Chancellor, without having the smallest suspicion of who he was!

First of all, I had to get dressed to go to dinner at a house I had never been to, with a family I had never met. These situations often happen to strangers, and at first, they were quite awkward; but experience toughens us for much bigger challenges. So, at six o'clock, I got into my coupé on time and gave Charles the address. I should mention that I got the invitation a few days earlier and, out of curiosity, accepted it and sent a card, having no idea who my host and hostess were, other than their names. There was something intriguing about this ignorance, and I almost decided to go in the same mysterious way, leaving everything to chance. However, while idly asking a lady I knew and respected if she knew a Madame de ——, to my surprise, she replied, "Of course; she's my cousin, and you're having dinner there tomorrow." I didn't say anything more, but this reassured me that my hosts were people of some importance. While on my way to their place, I thought it might be wise to learn more about them, so I stopped by the house of a female friend who knows everyone and would surely welcome me at this odd hour. I was let in, explained my reason for being there, and asked if she knew a M. de ——. "What a question!" she exclaimed—"M. de —— is the Chancellor of France!" Absurd and awkward as it might have been, without this fortunate thought, I would have dined with the French Lord High Chancellor, completely unaware of who he was!

The hotel was a fine one, though the apartment was merely good, and the reception, service, and general style of the house were so simple that neither would have awakened the least suspicion of the importance of my hosts. The party was small and the dinner modest. I found the chancelier a grave dignified man, a little curious on the subject of America, and his wife apparently a woman of great good sense, and I should think, of a good deal of attainment. Everything went off in the quietest manner possible, and I was sorry when it was time to go.

The hotel was nice, but the apartment was just okay, and the reception, service, and overall vibe of the place were so simple that nothing hinted at the significance of my hosts. The gathering was small and the dinner modest. I found the chancelier to be a serious and dignified man, somewhat curious about America, and his wife seemed to be very sensible and quite accomplished. Everything went smoothly and quietly, and I was sad when it was time to leave.

From this dinner, I drove to the hotel of the Marquis de Marbois, to pay a visit of digestion. M. de Marbois retires so early, on account of his great age, that one is obliged to be punctual, or he will find the gate locked at nine. The company had got back into the drawing-room, and as the last week's guests were mostly there, as well as those who had just left the table, there might have been thirty people present, all of whom were men but two. One of the ladies was Madame de Souza, known in French literature as the writer of several clever novels of society. In the drawing-room were grouped, in clusters, the Grand Referendary, M. Cuvier, M. Daru, M. Villemain, M. de Plaisance, Mr. Brown, and many others of note. There seemed to be something in the wind, as the conversation was in low confidential whispers, attended by divers ominous shrugs. This could only be politics, and watching an opportunity, I questioned an acquaintance. The fact was really so. The appointed hour had come and the ministry of M. de Villèle was in the agony. The elections had not been favourable, and it was expedient to make an attempt to reach the old end, by what is called a new combination. It is necessary to understand the general influence of political intrigues on certain côteries of Paris, to appreciate the effect of this intelligence, on a drawing-room filled, like this, with men who had been actors in the principal events of France for forty years. The name of M. Cuvier was even mentioned as one of the new ministers. Comte Roy was also named as likely to be the new premier. I was told that this gentleman was one of the greatest landed proprietors of France, his estates being valued at four millions of dollars. The fact is curious, as showing, not on vulgar rumour, but from a respectable source, what is deemed a first-rate landed property in this country. It is certainly no merit, nor do I believe it is any very great advantage; but I think we might materially beat this, even in America. The company soon separated, and I retired.

After dinner, I drove to the Marquis de Marbois’s hotel for a visit. M. de Marbois goes to bed early because of his age, so you have to be on time, or you’ll find the gate locked by nine. The guests had returned to the drawing-room, and since most of last week's guests were there along with those who had just finished eating, there were about thirty people present, all men except for two. One of the ladies was Madame de Souza, known for writing several clever society novels in French literature. In the drawing-room, prominent figures like the Grand Referendary, M. Cuvier, M. Daru, M. Villemain, M. de Plaisance, Mr. Brown, and many others were clustered together. There was clearly something going on, as conversations were happening in low, confidential whispers, accompanied by various ominous shrugs. It was undoubtedly political, and seizing the moment, I asked an acquaintance. It turned out to be true. The appointed hour had arrived, and M. de Villèle’s ministry was in crisis. The elections hadn't gone well, and it was necessary to try to salvage things with what they called a new combination. To appreciate how political intrigues impact certain circles in Paris, you need to understand the significance of this information in a drawing-room filled with men who had participated in France's major events for the last forty years. The name M. Cuvier was even mentioned as a potential new minister, and Comte Roy was also suggested as a likely new prime minister. I was told that this man was one of the largest landowners in France, with properties valued at four million dollars. This fact is intriguing as it shows, not through common rumor but from a credible source, what is considered top-tier land property in this country. It’s certainly not a huge advantage, and I believe we could easily surpass that, even in America. The group soon dispersed, and I took my leave.

From the Place de la Madeleine, I drove to a house near the Carrousel, where I had been invited to step in, in the course of the evening. All the buildings that remain within the intended parallelogram, which will some day make this spot one of the finest squares in the world, have been bought by the government, or nearly so, with the intent to have them pulled down, at a proper time; and the court bestows lodgings, ad interim, among them, on its favourites. Madame de —— was one of these favoured persons, and she occupies a small apartment in the third story of one of these houses. The rooms were neat and well-arranged, but small. Probably the largest does not exceed fifteen feet square. The approach to a Paris lodging is usually either very good, or very bad. In the new buildings may be found some of the mediocrity of the new order of things; but in all those which were erected previously to the revolution, there is nothing but extremes in this, as in most other things: great luxury and elegance, or great meanness and discomfort. The house of Madame de —— happens to be of the latter class, and although all the disagreeables have disappeared from her own rooms, one is compelled to climb up to them, through a dark well of a staircase, by flights of steps not much better than those we use in our stables. You have no notion of such staircases as those I had just descended in the hotels of the chancelier and the président premier;[25] nor have we any just idea, as connected with respectable dwellings, of these I had now to clamber up. M. de —— is a man of talents and great respectability, and his wife is exceedingly clever, but they are not rich. He is a professor, and she is an artist. After having passed so much of my youth on top-gallant yards, and in becketting royals, you are not to suppose, however, I had any great difficulty in getting up these stairs, narrow, steep, and winding as they were.

From the Place de la Madeleine, I drove to a house near the Carrousel, where I had been invited to stop by later that evening. All the buildings within the planned area, which will someday make this spot one of the most beautiful squares in the world, have been purchased by the government, or almost entirely so, with the intention of tearing them down when the time is right; and the court grants temporary accommodations among them to its favorites. Madame de —— was one of these favored individuals, and she lives in a small apartment on the third floor of one of these buildings. The rooms were tidy and well-organized but small. Probably the largest one doesn’t exceed fifteen feet square. The access to a Paris apartment is usually either really nice or really bad. In the new constructions, you might find some of the mediocrity of the new order; but in all the buildings that were built before the revolution, there’s nothing but extremes in this aspect, as in most other things: either great luxury and elegance or great poverty and discomfort. Madame de ——’s house happens to fall into the latter category, and although all the unpleasantness has been removed from her own rooms, you still have to reach them by climbing up a dark, winding staircase with steps that are not much better than those we use in stables. You can’t imagine staircases like those I just came down in the hotels of the chancelier and the président premier; nor do we have any real understanding, related to respectable homes, of the ones I had to climb now. M. de —— is a talented and highly respected man, and his wife is extremely clever, but they aren’t wealthy. He’s a professor, and she’s an artist. After spending so much of my youth on top-gallant yards and in rigging sails, don’t think I had any real trouble getting up those narrow, steep, and winding stairs.

[Footnote 25: M. de Marbois was the first president of the Court of
Accounts.]

[Footnote 25: M. de Marbois was the first president of the Court of
Accounts.]

We are now at the door, and I have rung. On whom do you imagine the curtain will rise? On a réunion of philosophers come to discuss questions in botany, with M. de ——, or on artists, assembled to talk over the troubles of their profession, with his wife? The door opens, and I enter.

We are now at the door, and I have rung the bell. Who do you think will be on the other side? A gathering of philosophers discussing botany questions with Mr. de ——, or artists getting together to chat about the challenges of their work, along with his wife? The door opens, and I step inside.

The little drawing-room is crowded; chiefly with men. Two card-tables are set, and at one I recognize a party, in which are three dukes of the vieille cour, with M. de Duras at their head! The rest of the company was a little more mixed, but, on the whole, it savoured strongly of Coblentz and the émigration. This was more truly French than anything I had yet stumbled on. One or two of the grandees looked at me as if, better informed than Scott, they knew that General Lafayette had not gone to America to live. Some of these gentlemen certainly do not love us; but I had cut out too much work for the night to stay and return the big looks of even dukes, and, watching an opportunity, when the eyes of Madame de —— were another way, I stole out of the room.

The small drawing room is packed, mostly with men. There are two card tables set up, and at one of them, I spot a group that includes three dukes from the old court, led by M. de Duras! The rest of the guests were a bit more mixed, but overall, it had a strong vibe of Coblentz and the émigration. This was more genuinely French than anything I had encountered so far. One or two of the nobles looked at me like they knew, unlike Scott, that General Lafayette hadn’t gone to America to settle down. Some of these gentlemen definitely don’t like us; however, I had too much to do that night to stick around and return the glares of even dukes, so when Madame de —— glanced away, I seized the chance and slipped out of the room.

Charles now took his orders, and we drove down into the heart of the town somewhere near the general post-office, or into those mazes of streets that near two years of practice have not yet taught me to thread. We entered the court of a large hotel, that was brilliantly lighted, and I ascended, by a noble flight of steps, to the first floor. Ante-chambers communicated with a magnificent saloon, which appeared to be near forty feet square. The ceilings were lofty, and the walls were ornamented with military trophies, beautifully designed, and which had the air of being embossed and gilded. I had got into the hotel of one of Napoleon's marshals, you will say, or at least into one of a marshal of the old régime. The latter conjecture may be true, but the house is now inhabited by a great woollen manufacturer, whom the events of the day has thrown into the presence of all these military emblems. I found the worthy industriel surrounded by a group, composed of men of his own stamp, eagerly discussing the recent changes in the government. The women, of whom there might have been a dozen, were ranged, like a neglected parterre, along the opposite side of the room. I paid my compliments, staid a few minutes, and stole away to the next engagement.

Charles took his orders, and we drove into the heart of town, somewhere near the main post office, or into those confusing streets that I still haven’t mastered even after almost two years. We entered the courtyard of a large, brightly lit hotel, and I climbed a grand set of stairs to the first floor. There were ante-chambers leading to a magnificent lounge that must have been nearly forty feet square. The ceilings were high, and the walls were decorated with military trophies, beautifully designed and looking embossed and gilded. You might think I had entered the hotel of one of Napoleon's marshals, or at least a marshal from the old regime. The latter guess could be true, but the place is now home to a prominent wool manufacturer, who has found himself amidst all these military symbols due to the events of the day. I found the industrious host surrounded by a group of men like him, eagerly discussing the recent changes in the government. The women, about a dozen of them, were lined up like neglected flowers along the opposite side of the room. I paid my respects, stayed for a few minutes, and slipped away to my next appointment.

We had now to go to a little retired house on the Champs Elysées. There were only three or four carriages before the door, and on ascending to a small but very near apartment, I found some twenty people collected. The mistress of the house was an English lady, single, of a certain age, and a daughter of the Earl of ——, who was once governor of New York. Here was a very different set. One or two ladies of the old court, women of elegant manners, and seemingly of good information,—several English women, pretty, quiet, and clever, besides a dozen men of different nations. This was one of those little réunions that are so common in Paris, among the foreigners, in which a small infusion of French serves to leaven a considerable batch of human beings from other parts of the world. As it is always a relief to me to speak my own language, after being a good while among foreigners, I staid an hour at this house. In the course of the evening an Irishman of great wit and of exquisite humour, one of the paragons of the age in his way, came in. In the course of conversation, this gentleman, who is the proprietor of an Irish estate, and a Catholic, told me of an atrocity in the laws of his country, of which until then I was ignorant. It seems that any younger brother, next heir, might claim the estate by turning Protestant, or drive the incumbent to the same act. I was rejoiced to hear that there was hardly an instance of such profligacy known.[26] To what baseness will not the struggle for political ascendency urge us!

We now had to go to a small, secluded house on the Champs Elysées. There were only three or four carriages outside the door, and when I went up to a small but nearby apartment, I found about twenty people gathered. The hostess was an English woman, single, of a certain age, and a daughter of the Earl of ——, who had once been the governor of New York. This was a very different crowd. One or two ladies from the old court, elegant and seemingly well-informed, several English women who were pretty, quiet, and clever, along with a dozen men from various countries. This was one of those little réunions that are so common in Paris among foreigners, where a small mix of French mingles with a large group of people from other parts of the world. Since it always feels like a relief to speak my own language after spending time with foreigners, I stayed for an hour at this house. During the evening, a witty and humorous Irishman, one of the exceptional people of his time, joined us. As our conversation flowed, this gentleman, who owned an Irish estate and was a Catholic, told me about a shocking aspect of the laws in his country that I hadn’t known before. Apparently, any younger brother, as the next heir, could claim the estate by converting to Protestantism, or compel the current holder to do the same. I was glad to hear that there were hardly any instances of such shamefulness reported.[26] To what depths will the fight for political power drive us!

[Footnote 26: I believe this infamous law, however, has been repealed.]

[Footnote 26: I think this notorious law has been repealed.]

In the course of the evening, Mr. ——, the Irish gentleman, gravely introduced me to a Sir James ——, adding, with perfect gravity, "a gentleman whose father humbugged the Pope—humbugged infallibility." One could not but be amused with such an introduction, urged in a way so infinitely droll, and I ventured, at a proper moment, to ask an explanation, which, unless I was also humbugged, was as follows:—

In the course of the evening, Mr. ——, the Irish gentleman, seriously introduced me to a Sir James ——, adding, with complete seriousness, "a gentleman whose father fooled the Pope—fooled infallibility." One couldn't help but be amused by such an introduction, presented in such an incredibly funny way, and I dared, at an appropriate moment, to ask for an explanation, which, unless I was also fooled, was as follows:—

Among the détenus in 1804, was Sir William ——, the father of Sir James ——, the person in question. Taking advantage of the presence of the Pope at Paris, he is said to have called on the good-hearted Pius, with great concern of manner, to state his case. He had left his sons in England, and through his absence they had fallen under the care of two Presbyterian aunts; as a father he was naturally anxious to rescue them from this perilous situation. "Now Pius," continued my merry informant, "quite naturally supposed that all this solicitude was in behalf of two orthodox Catholic souls, and he got permission from Napoleon for the return of so good a father to his own country, never dreaming that the conversion of the boys, if it ever took place, would only be from the Protestant Episcopal Church of England, to that of Calvin; or a rescue from one of the devil's furnaces, to pop them into another." I laughed at this story, I suppose with a little incredulity, but my Irish friend insisted on its truth, ending the conversation with a significant nod, Catholic as he was, and saying—"humbugged infallibility!"

Among the détenus in 1804 was Sir William ——, the father of Sir James ——, the person we’re discussing. He took advantage of the Pope’s presence in Paris and reportedly approached the kind-hearted Pius with a lot of concern to explain his situation. He had left his sons in England, and during his absence, they ended up in the care of two Presbyterian aunts. Naturally, as a father, he was worried about getting them out of this risky situation. "Now Pius," my cheerful informant continued, "assumed that all this concern was for two solid Catholic souls, so he got Napoleon’s permission for this good father to return home, never suspecting that if the boys were converted, it would just be from the Protestant Episcopal Church of England to Calvinism; or that he would be rescuing them from one furnace of hell to shove them into another." I laughed at this story, probably a bit skeptically, but my Irish friend insisted it was true, wrapping up the conversation with a meaningful nod, being Catholic himself, and said—"humbugged infallibility!"

By this time it was eleven o'clock, and as I am obliged to keep reasonable hours, it was time to go to the party of the evening. Count ——, of the —— Legation, gave a great ball. My carriage entered the line at the distance of near a quarter of a mile from the hotel; gendarmes being actively employed in keeping us all in our places. It was half an hour before I was set down, and the quadrilles were in full motion when I entered. It was a brilliant affair, much the most so I have ever yet witnessed in a private house. Some said there were fifteen hundred people present. The number seems incredible, and yet, when one comes to calculate, it may be so. As I got into my carriage to go away, Charles informed me that the people at the gates affirmed that more than six hundred carriages had entered the court that evening. By allowing an average of little more than two to each vehicle, we get the number mentioned.

By this time it was eleven o'clock, and since I had to keep reasonable hours, it was time to head to the party of the evening. Count —— from the —— Legation was hosting a grand ball. My carriage joined the line nearly a quarter of a mile from the hotel, with gendarmes actively making sure we all stayed in our spots. It took half an hour before I was dropped off, and the quadrilles were already in full swing when I arrived. It was an amazing event, definitely the most extravagant I’ve ever seen in a private home. Some people claimed there were fifteen hundred attendees. That number seems unbelievable, but when you think about it, it could be possible. As I got into my carriage to leave, Charles told me that the people at the gates said more than six hundred carriages had entered the courtyard that evening. If we assume a little over two people per vehicle, that would lead to the number mentioned.

I do not know exactly how many rooms were opened on this occasion, but I should think there were fully a dozen. Two or three were very large salons, and the one in the centre, which was almost at fever-heat, had crimson hangings, by way of cooling one. I have never witnessed dancing at all comparable to that of the quadrilles of this evening. Usually there is either too much or too little of the dancing-master, but on this occasion every one seemed inspired with a love of the art. It was a beautiful sight to see a hundred charming young women, of the first families of Europe, for they were there of all nations, dressed with the simple elegance that is so becoming to the young of the sex, and which is never departed from here until after marriage, moving in perfect time to delightful music, as if animated by a common soul. The men, too, did better than usual, being less lugubrious and mournful than our sex is apt to be in dancing. I do not know how it is in private, but in the world, at Paris, every young woman seems to have a good mother; or, at least, one capable of giving her both a good tone and good taste.

I’m not exactly sure how many rooms were opened for this event, but I’d guess there were at least a dozen. Two or three were quite large salons, and the one in the center, which was almost boiling, had crimson drapes to cool it down a bit. I've never seen dancing that matched the quadrilles of this evening. Usually, there’s either too much or too little involvement from the dance master, but tonight everyone seemed inspired by a love for the art. It was a beautiful sight to see a hundred charming young women from the top families across Europe, representing all nations, dressed in the simple elegance that looks so great on young women, which they maintain until marriage, moving in perfect sync to lovely music, as if driven by a shared spirit. The men also performed better than usual, appearing less gloomy and mournful than men typically do while dancing. I can’t speak for private gatherings, but in public, in Paris, every young woman seems to have a great mother, or at least one who can instill in her both good manners and good taste.

At this party I met the ——, an intimate friend of the ambassador, and one who also honours me with a portion of her friendship. In talking over the appearance of things, she told me that some hundreds of applications for invitations to this ball had been made. "Applications! I cannot conceive of such meanness. In what manner?" "Directly; by note, by personal intercession—almost by tears. Be certain of it, many hundreds have been refused." In America we hear of refusals to go to balls, but we have not yet reached the pass of sending refusals to invite! "Do you see Mademoiselle ——, dancing in the set before you?" She pointed to a beautiful French girl, whom I had often seen at her house, but whose family was in a much lower station in society than herself, "Certainly—pray how came she here?" "I brought her. Her mother was dying to come, too, and she begged me to get an invitation for her and her daughter; but it would not do to bring the mother to such a place, and I was obliged to say no more tickets could be issued. I wished, however, to bring the daughter, she is so pretty, and we compromised the affair in that way." "And to this the mother assented!" "Assented! How can you doubt it—what funny American notions you have brought with you to France!"

At this party, I met the ——, a close friend of the ambassador, who also shares some of her friendship with me. While discussing the situation, she mentioned that several hundred applications for invitations to this ball had been submitted. "Applications! I can't believe such pettiness. How did that happen?" "Directly; through notes, personal requests—almost begging. You can be sure that many hundreds have been turned down." In America, we hear about declines to attend balls, but we haven't reached the point of sending declines for invitations! "Do you see Mademoiselle ——, dancing in the group in front of you?" She pointed to a beautiful French girl I had often seen at her house, but whose family was much lower in social standing than hers. "Certainly—how did she get here?" "I brought her. Her mother was dying to come, too, and she asked me to get an invitation for both of them. But it wouldn't do to bring the mother to a place like this, so I had to say no more tickets could be issued. However, I wanted to bring the daughter because she's so pretty, and we worked it out that way." "And the mother agreed to that?" "Agreed! How can you doubt it—what strange American ideas you've brought with you to France!"

I got some droll anecdotes from my companion, concerning the ingredients of the company on this occasion, for she could be as sarcastic as she was elegant. A young woman near us attracted attention by a loud and vulgar manner of laughing. "Do you know that lady?" demanded my neighbour. "I have seen her before, but scarcely know her name." "She is the daughter of your acquaintance, the Marquise de ——." "Then she is, or was, a Mademoiselle de ——." "She is not, nor properly ever was, a Mademoiselle de ——. In the revolution the Marquis was imprisoned by you wicked republicans, and the Marquise fled to England, whence she returned, after an absence of three years, bringing with her this young lady, then an infant a few months old." "And Monsieur le Marquis?" "He never saw his daughter, having been beheaded in Paris, about a year before her birth." "Quelle contretems!" "N'est-ce pas?"

I heard some amusing stories from my friend about the people at this gathering, as she was just as sarcastic as she was graceful. A young woman nearby caught our attention with her loud and crude laughter. "Do you know that lady?" my neighbor asked. "I've seen her before, but I hardly know her name." "She’s the daughter of your friend, the Marquise de ——." "So she is, or was, a Mademoiselle de ——." "Actually, she is not, nor has she ever truly been, a Mademoiselle de ——. During the revolution, the Marquis was imprisoned by you wicked republicans, and the Marquise escaped to England, returning after three years with this young lady, who was then just a few months old." "And Monsieur le Marquis?" "He never got to see his daughter, having been beheaded in Paris about a year before she was born." "Quelle contretems!" "N'est-ce pas?"

It is a melancholy admission, but it is no less true, that good breeding is sometimes quite as active a virtue as good principles. How many more of the company present were born about a year after their fathers were beheaded, I have no means of knowing; but had it been the case with all of them, the company would have been of as elegant demeanour, and of much more retenue of deportment, than we are accustomed to see, I will not say in good, but certainly in general society at home. One of the consequences of good breeding is also a disinclination, positively a distaste, to pry into the private affairs of others. The little specimen to the contrary just named was rather an exception, owing to the character of the individual, and to the indiscretion of the young lady in laughing too loud, and then the affair of a birth so very posthumous was rather too patent to escape all criticism.

It's a sad truth, but good manners can sometimes be just as important as good values. I can't say how many people in the room were born about a year after their fathers were executed, but if that were true for all of them, their behavior would be much more refined and composed than what we're used to seeing, not just in good society, but definitely in general society at home. One effect of good manners is a real aversion, even a dislike, for snooping into other people's private lives. The one exception I mentioned earlier was due to the person involved and the young lady's indiscretion of laughing too loudly, which made the situation of a birth so notably posthumous hard to ignore.

My friend was in a gossiping mood this evening, and as she was well turned of fifty, I ventured to continue the conversation. As some of the liaisons which exist here must be novel to you, I shall mention one or two more.

My friend was in a gossiping mood this evening, and since she was well over fifty, I decided to keep the conversation going. Since some of the liaisons that exist here might be new to you, I'll mention a couple more.

A Madame de J—— passed us, leaning on the arm of M. de C——. I knew the former, who was a widow; had frequently visited her, and had been surprised at the intimacy which existed between her and M. de C——, who always appeared quite at home in her house. I ventured to ask my neighbour if the gentleman were the brother of the lady. "Her brother! It is to be hoped not, as he is her husband." "Why does she not bear his name, if that be the case?" "Because her first husband is of a more illustrious family than her second; and then there are some difficulties on the score of fortune. No, no. These people are bona fide married. Tenez—do you see that gentleman who is standing so assiduously near the chair of Madame de S——? He who is all attention and smiles to the lady?" "Certainly—his politeness is even affectionate." "Well it ought to be, for it is M. de S——_, her husband." "They are a happy couple, then." "_Hors de doute—he meets her at soirées and balls; is the pink of politeness; puts on her shawl; sees her safe into her carriage, and—" "Then they drive home together, as loving as Darby and Joan." "And then he jumps into his cabriolet, and drives to the lodgings of ——. Bon soir, Monsieur;—you are making me fall into the vulgar crime of scandal."

A Madame de J—— walked by us, leaning on the arm of M. de C——. I knew her; she was a widow and I had visited her often, surprised by the closeness between her and M. de C——, who always seemed quite at home in her place. I decided to ask my neighbor if the man was the lady's brother. "Her brother? Hopefully not, since he is her husband." "Then why doesn’t she use his last name?" "Because her first husband comes from a more prominent family than her second; and there are some complications regarding wealth. No, no. These people are bona fide married. Tenez—do you see that gentleman standing so attentively near Madame de S——’s chair? The one who's all smiles and attention towards her?" "Of course—his politeness is almost affectionate." "Well, it should be, because he is M. de S——, her husband." "So they are a happy couple?" "_Hors de doute—they meet at soirées and dances; he is the epitome of politeness; helps her with her shawl; ensures she gets safely into her carriage, and—" "Then they ride home together, as loving as Darby and Joan." "And then he hops into his cabriolet and drives off to the lodgings of ——. Bon soir, Monsieur; you’re making me fall into the common sin of gossip."

Now, as much as all this may sound like invention, it is quite true, that I repeat no more to you than was said to me, and no more than what I believe to be exact. As respects the latter couple, I have been elsewhere told that they literally never see each other, except in public, where they constantly meet, as the best friends in the world.

Now, as much as all this might sound made up, it’s actually true that I'm telling you nothing more than what was told to me, and nothing more than what I believe to be accurate. Regarding the last couple, I've been told elsewhere that they never see each other, except in public, where they always meet as the closest friends.

I was lately in some English society, when Lady G—— bet a pair of gloves with Lord R—— that he had not seen Lady R—— in a fortnight. The bet was won by the gentleman, who proved satisfactorily that he had met his wife at a dinner-party, only ten days before.

I was recently in some social event in England, when Lady G—— bet a pair of gloves with Lord R—— that he hadn't seen Lady R—— in two weeks. The gentleman won the bet, as he showed clearly that he had seen his wife at a dinner party just ten days earlier.

After all I have told you, and all that you may have heard from others, I am nevertheless inclined to believe, that the high society of Paris is quite as exemplary as that of any other large European town. If we are any better ourselves, is it not more owing to the absence of temptation, than to any other cause? Put large garrisons into our towns, fill the streets with idlers, who have nothing to do but to render themselves agreeable, and with women with whom dress and pleasure are the principal occupations, and then let us see what protestantism and liberty will avail us, in this particular. The intelligent French say that their society is improving in morals. I can believe this, of which I think there is sufficient proof by comparing the present with the past, as the latter has been described to us. By the past, I do not mean the period of the revolution, when vulgarity assisted to render vice still more odious—a happy union, perhaps, for those who were to follow—but the days of the old régime. Chance has thrown me in the way of three or four old dowagers of that period, women of high rank, and still in the first circles, who, amid all their finesse of breeding, and ease of manner, have had a most desperate roué air about them. Their very laugh, at times, has seemed replete with a bold levity, that was as disgusting as it was unfeminine. I have never, in any other part of the world, seen loose sentiments affichés with more effrontery. These women are the complete antipodes of the quiet, elegant Princesse de ——, who was at Lady —— ——'s, this evening; though some of them write Princesses on their cards, too.

After everything I've told you and what you might have heard from others, I still believe that high society in Paris is just as respectable as in any other major European city. If we think we’re any better, isn’t it mostly because there’s less temptation here rather than for any other reason? Put large military garrisons in our towns, fill the streets with idle people just trying to be charming, and surround them with women who are mainly focused on fashion and fun, and let's see how much our values and freedom can really do in that situation. Intelligent French people say their society is improving morally. I can believe that, as I think there’s enough evidence comparing the present to the past as it has been described to us. By “the past,” I don’t mean the revolutionary era, when crassness made vice even more repulsive—perhaps a fortunate combo for those who came after—but rather the days of the old régime. I've happened to meet three or four older women from that time, high-ranking and still in elite circles, who despite their sophisticated manners and poise, have a truly desperate air of decadence about them. Their laughter sometimes seems to carry a bold recklessness that is both off-putting and unladylike. I’ve never seen such openly lascivious attitudes displayed with more audacity anywhere else in the world. These women are the complete opposite of the composed, elegant Princesse de ——, who was at Lady —— ——'s this evening, although some of them also put Princesses on their cards.

The influence of a court must be great on the morals of those who live in its purlieus. Conversing with the Duc de ——, a man who has had general currency in the best society of Europe, on this subject, he said, —"England has long decried our manners. Previously to the revolution, I admit they were bad; perhaps worst than her own; but I know nothing in our history as bad as what I lately witnessed in England. You know I was there quite recently. The king invited me to dine at Windsor. I found every one in the drawing-room, but His Majesty and Lady ——. She entered but a minute before him, like a queen. Her reception was that of a queen; young, unmarried females kissed her hand. Now, all this might happen in France, even now: but Louis XV. the most dissolute of our monarchs, went no farther. At Windsor, I saw the husband, sons, and daughters of the favourite, in the circle! Le parc des Cerfs was not as bad as this."

The impact of a court is significant on the morals of those who live nearby. While talking with the Duc de ——, a man who has been well-regarded in the best social circles in Europe, he said, "England has long criticized our manners. Before the revolution, I admit they were bad—maybe worse than England's; but I haven't seen anything in our history as bad as what I recently witnessed in England. You know I was there not long ago. The king invited me to dinner at Windsor. I found everyone in the drawing room except for His Majesty and Lady ——. She walked in just a minute before him, like a queen. She was received like a queen; young, unmarried women kissed her hand. Now, all of this could happen in France even today; but Louis XV, the most debauched of our kings, never went that far. At Windsor, I saw the husband, sons, and daughters of the favorite right there in the circle! Le parc des Cerfs wasn’t this bad."

"And yet, M. de ——, since we are conversing frankly, listen to what I witnessed, but the other day, in France. You know the situation of things at St. Ouen, and the rumours that are so rife. We had the Fête Dieu, during my residence there. You, who are a Catholic, need not be told that your sect believe in the doctrine of the 'real presence.' There was a reposoir erected in the garden of the chateau, and God, in person, was carried, with religious pomp, to rest in the bowers of the ex-favourite. It is true, the husband was not present: he was only in the provinces!"

"And yet, M. de ——, since we're speaking openly, let me share what I saw just the other day in France. You know how things are at St. Ouen and the rumors going around. We had the Fête Dieu while I was staying there. You, being Catholic, are aware that your faith holds the belief in the doctrine of the 'real presence.' There was a reposoir set up in the garden of the chateau, and God Himself was carried, with great religious ceremony, to rest in the arbours of the ex-favourite. It's true, the husband wasn’t there: he was just in the provinces!"

"The influence of a throne makes sad parasites and hypocrites," said M. de ——, shrugging his shoulders.

"The power of a throne creates sad parasites and hypocrites," said M. de ——, shrugging his shoulders.

"And the influence of the people, too, though in a different way. A courtier is merely a well-dressed demagogue."

"And the influence of the people is significant as well, though in a different way. A courtier is just a well-dressed demagogue."

"It follows, then, that man is just a poor devil."

"It follows, then, that a person is just a poor soul."

But I am gossiping away with you, when my Asmodean career is ended, and it is time I went to bed. Good night!

But I'm just chatting with you while my time in this job is over, and it's time for me to go to bed. Good night!

LETTER XIX.

Garden of the Tuileries.—The French Parliament.—Parliamentary
Speakers.—The Tribune.—Royal Initiative.—The Charter.—Mongrel
Government.—Ministerial Responsibility.—Elections in
France.—Doctrinaires.—Differences of Opinion.—Controversy.

Garden of the Tuileries.—The French Parliament.—Parliamentary
Speakers.—The Tribune.—Royal Initiative.—The Charter.—Mixed
Government.—Ministerial Responsibility.—Elections in
France.—Doctrinaires.—Differences of Opinion.—Controversy.

TO JACOB SUTHERLAND, ESQ. NEW YORK.

The Chambers have been opened with the customary ceremonies and parade. It is usual for the king, attended by a brilliant cortège, to go, on these occasions, from the Tuileries to the Palais Bourbon, through lines of troops, under a salute of guns. The French love spectacles, and their monarch, if he would be popular, is compelled to make himself one, at every plausible opportunity.

The Chambers have been opened with the usual ceremonies and parade. It's common for the king, accompanied by a dazzling cortège, to travel from the Tuileries to the Palais Bourbon on these occasions, passing through lines of soldiers and under a salute of cannons. The French love spectacles, and their monarch, if he wants to be popular, has to present himself as one at every reasonable opportunity.

The garden of the Tuileries is a parallelogram, of, I should think, fifty acres, of which one end is bounded by the palace. It has a high vaulted terrace on the side next the river, as well as at the opposite end, and one a little lower, next the Rue de Rivoli. There is also a very low broad terrace, immediately beneath the windows of the palace, which separates the buildings from the parterres. You will understand that the effect of this arrangement is to shut out the world from the persons in the garden, by means of the terraces, and, indeed, to enable them, by taking refuge in the woods that fill quite half the area, to bury themselves almost in a forest. The public has free access to this place, from an early hour in the morning to eight or nine at night, according to the season. When it is required to clear them, a party of troops marches, by beat of drum, from the chateau, through the great allée, to the lower end of the garden. This is always taken as the signal to disperse, and the world begins to go out, at the different gates. It is understood that the place is frequently used as a promenade, by the royal family, after this hour, especially in the fine season; but, as it would be quite easy for any one, evilly disposed, to conceal himself among the trees, statues, and shrubs, the troops are extended in very open order, and march slowly back to the palace, of course driving every one before them. Each gate is locked, as the line passes it.

The Tuileries Garden is shaped like a parallelogram, probably around fifty acres, with one end next to the palace. There’s a high vaulted terrace by the river and another at the opposite end, plus a slightly lower one next to the Rue de Rivoli. There’s also a very low wide terrace right under the palace windows, separating the buildings from the flowerbeds. This setup prevents the outside world from seeing people in the garden, thanks to the terraces, and it allows visitors to escape into the woods that take up nearly half the space, almost creating a forest hideaway. The public can access this place from early morning until eight or nine at night, depending on the season. When it’s time to clear the area, a group of soldiers marches, with drums beating, from the chateau through the main allée to the lower end of the garden. This is the sign for everyone to leave, and people begin to exit through the various gates. It’s known that the royal family often uses the garden for walks after hours, especially in nice weather; however, since it would be easy for someone with bad intentions to hide among the trees, statues, and shrubs, the troops spread out in a loose formation and slowly make their way back to the palace, ushering everyone out. Each gate is locked as they pass through.

The only parts of the garden, which appear, on the exterior, to be on a level with the street, though such is actually the fact with the whole of the interior, are the great gate opposite the palace, and a side gate near its southern end; the latter being the way by which one passes out, to cross the Pont Royal.

The only parts of the garden that look level with the street from the outside—though the entire interior is actually the same—are the large gate facing the palace and a side gate near the southern end; the latter being the exit that leads to the Pont Royal.

In attempting to pass in at this gate the other morning, for the first time, at that hour, I found it closed. A party of ladies and gentlemen were walking on the low terrace, beneath the palace windows, and a hundred people might have been looking at them from without. A second glance showed me, that among some children, were the heir presumptive, and his sister Mademoiselle d'Artois. The exhibition could merely be an attempt to feel the public pulse, for the country-house of La Bagatelle, to which the children go two or three times a week, is much better suited to taking the air. I could not believe in the indifference that was manifested, had I not seen it. The children are both engaging, particularly the daughter, and yet these innocent and perfectly inoffensive beings were evidently regarded more with aversion than with affection.

The other morning, when I tried to go through that gate for the first time at that hour, I found it closed. A group of ladies and gentlemen were walking on the low terrace beneath the palace windows, and a hundred people might have been watching them from outside. A closer look revealed that among the children were the heir apparent and his sister, Mademoiselle d'Artois. The display seemed like just an attempt to gauge public interest, since their country house at La Bagatelle, where the kids go two or three times a week, is much better for fresh air. I couldn’t believe the indifference I saw, had I not witnessed it myself. The children are both charming, especially the daughter, yet these innocent and completely harmless kids seemed to be regarded more with dislike than with affection.

The display of the opening of the session produced no more effect on the public mind, than the appearance on the terrace of les Enfans de France. The Parisians are the least loyal of Charles's subjects, and though the troops, and a portion of the crowd, cried "Vive le Roi!" it was easy to see that the disaffected were more numerous than the well-affected.

The show of the session's opening had no more impact on the public than the sight of les Enfans de France on the terrace. The Parisians are the least loyal among Charles's subjects, and although the troops and some of the crowd shouted "Vive le Roi!", it was clear that the dissatisfied outnumbered the supporters.

I have attended some of the sittings since the opening, and shall now say a word on the subject of the French Parliamentary proceedings. The hall is an amphitheatre, like our own; the disposition of the seats and speaker's chair being much the same as at Washington. The members sit on benches, however, that rise one behind the other, and through which they ascend and descend, by aisles. These aisles separate the different shades of opinion, for those who think alike sit together. Thus the gauche or left is occupied by the extreme liberals; the centre gauche, by those who are a shade nearer the Bourbons. The centre droit, or right centre, by the true Bourbonists, and so on, to the farthest point of the semi-circle. Some of the members affect even to manifest the minuter shades of their opinions by their relative positions in their own sections, and I believe it is usual for each one to occupy his proper place.

I have attended some of the meetings since the opening, and now I want to say a little about the French parliamentary proceedings. The hall is an amphitheater, similar to ours; the layout of the seats and the speaker's chair is pretty much the same as in Washington. However, the members sit on benches that rise one behind the other, using aisles to move up and down. These aisles separate different opinions, as those who think alike sit together. So, the gauche or left is occupied by the extreme liberals; the centre gauche, by those who align a bit closer to the Bourbons. The centre droit, or right center, is for the true Bourbonists, and so on, to the farthest point of the semi-circle. Some members even show the finer shades of their opinions by their positions within their own sections, and I believe it’s common for each person to sit in their designated spot.

You probably know that the French members speak from a stand immediately beneath the chair of the president, called a tribune. Absurd as this may seem, I believe it to be a very useful regulation, the vivacity of the national character rendering some such check on loquacity quite necessary. Without it, a dozen would often be on their feet at once; as it is, even, this sometimes happens. No disorder that ever occurs in our legislative bodies, will give you any just notion of that which frequently occurs here. The president rings a bell as a summons to keep order, and as a last resource he puts on his hat, a signal that the sitting is suspended.

You probably know that the French members speak from a platform right under the president's chair, called a tribune. As odd as this may sound, I think it's a really useful rule since the lively national character makes some kind of control over chatter necessary. Without it, there would often be a dozen people on their feet at the same time; even now, this sometimes happens. No chaos that ever happens in our legislative bodies will give you a true idea of what often occurs here. The president rings a bell to call for order, and as a last resort, he puts on his hat, which signals that the session is suspended.

The speaking of both chambers is generally bad. Two-thirds of the members read their speeches, which gives the sitting a dull, monotonous character, and, as you may suppose, the greater part of their lectures are very little attended to. The most parliamentary speaker is M. Royer Collard, who is, just now, so popular that he has been returned for seven different places at the recent election.

The speeches in both chambers are usually pretty terrible. Two-thirds of the members read their speeches, which makes the sessions dull and monotonous, and as you can imagine, most of their talks don't get much attention. The most effective speaker is M. Royer Collard, who is currently so popular that he has been elected from seven different places in the recent election.

M. Constant is an exceedingly animated speaker, resembling in this particular Mr. M'Duffie. M. Constant, however, has a different motion from the last gentleman, his movement being a constant oscillation over the edge of the tribune, about as fast, and almost as regular, as that of the pendulum of a large clock. It resembles that of a sawyer in the Mississippi. General Lafayette speaks with the steadiness and calm that you would expect from his character, and is always listened to with respect. Many professional men speak well, and exercise considerable influence in the house; for here, as elsewhere, the habit of public and extemporaneous speaking gives an immediate ascendency in deliberative bodies.

M. Constant is a very lively speaker, similar in this way to Mr. M'Duffie. However, M. Constant has a different style of motion from the latter, as his movement is a constant sway over the edge of the platform, almost as fast and nearly as steady as a pendulum of a large clock. It’s like the motion of a sawyer along the Mississippi. General Lafayette speaks with the steadiness and calmness that you would expect from his character and is always listened to with respect. Many professionals speak well and have significant influence in the chamber; for here, as elsewhere, the practice of public and impromptu speaking gives an immediate advantage in deliberative assemblies.

Some of the scenes one witnesses in the Chamber of Deputies are amusing by their exceeding vivacity. The habit of crying "Écoutez!" prevails, as in the English parliament, though the different intonations of that cry are not well understood. I have seen members run at the tribune, like children playing puss in a corner; and, on one occasion, I saw five different persons on its steps, in waiting for the descent of the member in possession. When a great question is to be solemnly argued, the members inscribe their names for the discussion, and are called on to speak in the order in which they stand on the list.

Some of the scenes you see in the Chamber of Deputies are amusing because of their high energy. The habit of shouting "Écoutez!" is common, just like in the English Parliament, although the different tones of that shout aren’t well understood. I’ve seen members rush to the podium like kids playing tag, and once, I saw five different people waiting on the steps for the current speaker to finish. When a significant issue is up for serious debate, members sign up to discuss it and are called to speak in the order they registered.

The French never sit in committee of the whole, but they have adopted in its place an expedient, that gives power more control over the proceedings of the two houses. At the commencement of the session, the members draw for their numbers in the bureaux, as they are called. Of these bureaux, there are ten or twelve, and, as a matter of course, they include all the members. As soon as the numbers are drawn, the members assemble in their respective rooms, and choose their officers; a president and secretary. These elections are always supposed to be indicative of the political tendency of each bureau; those which have a majority of liberals, choosing officers of their own opinions, and vice versa. These bureaux are remodelled, periodically, by drawing anew; the term of duration being a month or six weeks. I believe the chamber retains the power to refer questions, or not, to these bureaux; their institution being no more than a matter of internal regulation, and not of constitutional law. It is, however, usual to send all important laws to them, where they are discussed and voted on; the approbation of a majority of the bureaux being, in such cases, necessary for their reception in the chambers.

The French never sit as a whole committee, but instead, they have adopted a system that gives the government more control over the workings of both houses. At the start of the session, members draw for their numbers in the bureaux, as they’re called. There are ten or twelve of these bureaux, and naturally, they include all members. Once the numbers are drawn, the members gather in their assigned rooms and select their officers: a president and a secretary. These elections are usually seen as reflecting the political leanings of each bureau; those with a majority of liberals electing officers who share their views, and vice versa. The bureaux are reshuffled periodically by drawing again, with a duration of about a month or six weeks. I believe the chamber can decide whether to refer questions to these bureaux; their establishment is just a matter of internal regulation, not rooted in constitutional law. However, it is common to send all significant laws to them for discussion and voting; the approval of a majority of the bureaux is required for those laws to be accepted in the chambers.

The great evil of the present system is the initiative of the king. By this reservation in the charter, the crown possesses more than a veto, all laws actually emanating from the sovereign. The tendency of such a regulation is either to convert the chambers into the old lits de justice, or to overthrow the throne, an event which will certainly accompany any serious change here. As might have been, as would have been anticipated, by any one familiar with the action of legislative bodies, in our time, this right is already so vigorously assailed, as to give rise to constant contentions between the great powers of the state. All parties are agreed that no law can be presented, that does not come originally from the throne; but the liberals are for putting so wide a construction on the right to amend, as already to threaten to pervert the regulation. This has driven some of the Bourbonists to maintain that the chambers have no right, at all, to amend a royal proposition. Any one may foresee, that this is a state of things which cannot peaceably endure for any great length of time. The ministry are compelled to pack the chambers, and in order to effect their objects, they resort to all the expedients of power that offer. As those who drew up the charter had neither the forethought, nor the experience, to anticipate all the embarrassments of a parliamentary government, they unwittingly committed themselves, and illegal acts are constantly resorted to, in order that the system may be upheld. The charter was bestowed ad captandum, and is a contradictory mélange of inexpedient concessions and wily reservations. The conscription undermined the popularity of Napoleon, and Louis XVIII. in his charter says, "The conscription is abolished; the recruiting for the army and navy shall be settled by a law." Now the conscription is not abolished; but, if pushed on this point, a French jurist would perhaps tell you it is now established by law. The feudal exclusiveness, on the subject of taxation, is done away with, all men being equally liable to taxation. The nett pay of the army is about two sous a day; this is settled by law, passed by the representatives of those who pay two hundred francs a year, in direct taxation. The conscription, in appearance, is general and fair enough; but he who has money can always hire a substitute, at a price quite within his power. It is only the poor man, who is never in possession of one or two thousand francs, that is obliged to serve seven years at two sous a day, nett.

The main problem with the current system is the king's initiative. Thanks to the charter, the crown has more than just a veto; all laws actually come from the sovereign. This rule either turns the chambers into the old lits de justice or leads to the downfall of the throne, which will definitely happen with any serious changes. As expected by anyone familiar with how legislative bodies work, this right is currently under intense attack, leading to ongoing conflicts between the major powers of the state. Everyone agrees that no law can be put forward unless it comes directly from the throne, but the liberals want to interpret the right to amend so broadly that it could distort the regulation. This has prompted some Bourbonists to argue that the chambers have no authority to amend a royal proposal at all. It's easy to see that this situation cannot last peacefully for long. The ministry has to manipulate the chambers, and to achieve their aims, they resort to any means of power available to them. Those who created the charter lacked the foresight and experience to anticipate all the challenges of a parliamentary government, and as a result, they unintentionally trapped themselves. Illegal actions are often taken just to keep the system going. The charter was granted ad captandum and is a contradictory mélange of impractical concessions and clever reservations. The conscription damaged Napoleon's popularity, and in his charter, Louis XVIII states, "The conscription is abolished; the recruiting for the army and navy shall be determined by law." However, the conscription is not abolished; if pressed on this issue, a French legal expert might say it is now established by law. The feudal exclusiveness regarding taxation has been eliminated, with all men now equally liable for taxes. The net pay for soldiers is about two sous a day; this is determined by law, enacted by representatives of those who pay two hundred francs a year in direct taxes. On the surface, conscription seems general and fair, but those with money can always pay for a substitute, which is an amount they can afford. It's only the poor man, who never has one or two thousand francs, that ends up serving seven years for two sous a day, net.

France has gained, beyond estimate, by the changes from the old to the present system, but it is in a manner to render further violent changes necessary. I say violent, for political changes are everywhere unavoidable, since questions of polity are, after all, no other than questions of facts, and these are interests that will regulate themselves, directly or indirectly. The great desideratum of a government, after settling its principles in conformity with controlling facts, is to secure to itself the means of progressive change, without the apprehension of convulsion. Such is not the case with France, and further revolutions are inevitable. The mongrel government which exists, neither can stand, nor does it deserve to stand. It contains the seeds of its own destruction. Here, you will be told, that the King is a Jesuit, that he desires to return to the ancient regime, and that the opposition wishes merely to keep him within the limits of the charter. My own observations lead to a very different conclusion. The difficulty is in the charter itself, which leaves the government neither free nor despotic; in short, without any distinctive character.

France has benefited greatly from the shift from the old system to the current one, but this has created a situation that makes further dramatic changes necessary. I say dramatic, because political changes are unavoidable everywhere; after all, political issues are just factual issues, and these are interests that will regulate themselves, either directly or indirectly. The main goal of a government, after establishing its principles based on uncontested facts, is to ensure it can progress without fearing upheaval. Unfortunately, that isn't the case in France, and more revolutions are certain. The hybrid government in place can't last, nor does it deserve to. It has the seeds of its own downfall. You'll hear that the King is a Jesuit, that he wants to revert to the old regime, and that the opposition just wants to keep him within the limits of the charter. However, from my observations, the issue lies with the charter itself, which leaves the government neither truly free nor truly authoritarian; in short, it lacks any distinct identity.

This defect is so much felt, that, in carrying out the details of the system, much that properly belongs to it has been studiously omitted. The king can do no wrong, here, as in England, but the ministers are responsible. By way of making a parade of this responsibility, every official act of the king is countersigned by the minister of the proper department, and, by the theory of the government, that particular minister is responsible for that particular act. Now, by the charter, the peers are the judges of political crimes. By the charter, also, it is stipulated that no one can be proceeded against except in cases expressly provided for by law and in the forms prescribed by the law. You will remember that, all the previous constitutions being declared illegal, Louis XVIII. dates his reign from the supposed death of Louis XVII. and that there are no fundamental precedents that may be drawn in to aid the constructions, but that the charter must be interpreted by its own provisions. It follows, then, as a consequence, that no minister can be legally punished until a law is enacted to dictate the punishment, explain the offences, and point out the forms of procedure. Now, no such law has ever been proposed, and although the chambers may recommend laws to the king, they must await his pleasure in order even to discuss them openly, and enlist the public feeling in their behalf. The responsibility of the ministers was proposed ad captandum, like the abolition of the conscription, but neither has been found convenient in practice.[27]

This issue is so noticeable that, in implementing the details of the system, a lot of what should be included has been deliberately left out. The king is not at fault here, just like in England, but the ministers are accountable. To showcase this accountability, every official action of the king is signed off by the appropriate minister, and according to the government’s theory, that minister is responsible for that specific action. According to the charter, the peers judge political crimes. The charter also states that no one can be prosecuted except in cases specifically outlined by law and in the forms established by law. You’ll recall that since all previous constitutions were deemed illegal, Louis XVIII starts his reign from the supposed death of Louis XVII, and there are no fundamental precedents to guide interpretations; the charter must be understood based on its own rules. Consequently, no minister can be legally punished until a law is created to define the punishment, clarify the offenses, and outline the procedures. No such law has ever been proposed, and while the chambers can recommend laws to the king, they must wait for his approval before they can even discuss them openly and garner public support for them. The accountability of ministers was suggested ad captandum, much like the elimination of conscription, but neither has proven practical.

[Footnote 27: When the ministers of Charles X. were tried, it was without law, and they would probably have escaped punishment altogether, on this plea, had not the condition of the public mind required a concession.]

[Footnote 27: When the ministers of Charles X were put on trial, it was without legal basis, and they likely would have avoided punishment entirely on this grounds, if not for the public's demand for accountability.]

The electors of France are said to be between eighty and one hundred thousand. The qualifications of a deputy being much higher than those of an elector, it is computed that the four hundred and fifty members must be elected from among some four or five thousand available candidates. It is not pretended that France does not contain more than this number of individuals who pay a thousand francs a year in direct taxes, for taxation is so great that this sum is soon made up; but a deputy must be forty years old, a regulation which at once excludes fully one half the men, of itself; and then it will be recollected that many are superannuated, several hundreds are peers, others cannot quit their employments, etc. etc. I have seen the number of available candidates estimated as low, even, as three thousand.

The voters in France are believed to number between eighty and one hundred thousand. The qualifications to be a deputy are much higher than those to be a voter, so it’s estimated that the four hundred and fifty members have to be chosen from around four or five thousand potential candidates. It's not suggested that France doesn't have more people than this who pay a thousand francs a year in direct taxes, since taxes are so high that this amount is quickly reached; however, a deputy must be at least forty years old, which immediately disqualifies about half the men. Additionally, many are retiring due to age, several hundred are peers, and others can’t leave their jobs, and so on. I've seen estimates for the number of available candidates drop as low as three thousand.

The elections in France are conducted in a mode peculiar to the nation. The electors of the highest class have two votes, or for representatives of two descriptions. This plan was an after-thought of the king, for the original charter contains no such regulation, but the munificent father of the national liberties saw fit, subsequently, to qualify his gift. Had Louis XVIII. lived a little longer, he would most probably have been dethroned before this; the hopes and expectations which usually accompany a new reign having, most probably, deferred the crisis for a few years. The electors form themselves into colleges, into which no one who is not privileged to vote is admitted. This is a good regulation, and might be copied to advantage at home. A law prescribing certain limits around each poll, and rendering it penal for any but those authorized to vote at that particular poll, to cross it, would greatly purify our elections. The government, here, appoints the presiding officer of each electoral college, and the selection is always carefully made of one in the interests of the ministry; though in what manner such a functionary can influence the result, is more than I can tell you. It is, however, thought to be favourable to an individual's own election to get this nomination. The vote is by ballot, though the charter secures no such privilege. Indeed that instrument is little more than a declaration of rights, fortified by a few general constituent laws.

The elections in France are carried out in a way that's unique to the country. The top-tier voters have two votes, or they can choose representatives from two different categories. This system was a late addition by the king, as the original charter didn’t include such a rule, but the generous leader of national freedoms decided later to adjust his offering. If Louis XVIII had lived a bit longer, he likely would have been overthrown by now; the hopes and expectations that typically come with a new reign probably delayed the crisis for a few years. The voters organize themselves into colleges, and only those who are allowed to vote can enter. This is a smart rule and could be beneficial if implemented at home. A law setting specific boundaries around each voting area and making it illegal for anyone not authorized to vote there to enter would significantly clean up our elections. Here, the government appoints the head of each electoral college, and the choice is always carefully made to support the ministry; though how such an official can affect the outcome is unclear. However, it’s believed that getting this nomination can help someone’s own election chances. Voting is done by ballot, even though the charter doesn’t guarantee that right. In fact, the charter is mostly just a declaration of rights, strengthened by a few general foundational laws.

The same latitude exists here, in the constructions of the charter, as exists at home, in the constructions of the constitution. The French have, however, one great advantage over us, in daring to think for themselves; for, though there is a party of doctrinaires, who wish to imitate England, too, it is neither a numerous nor a strong party. These doctrinaires, as the name implies, are men who wish to defer to theories, rather than facts; a class that is to be found all over the world. For obvious reasons, the English system has admirers throughout Europe, as well as in America, since nothing can be more agreeable, for those who are in a situation to look forward to such an advantage, than to see themselves elevated into, as Lafayette expresses, so many "little legitimacies." The peerage, with its exclusive and hereditary benefits, is the aim of all the nobility of Europe, and wishes of this sort make easy converts to any philosophy that may favour the desire.

The same freedom exists here, in how we interpret the charter, as it does back home, in how we interpret the constitution. However, the French have a significant advantage over us because they dare to think for themselves; although there is a group of doctrinaires who want to imitate England, they are neither numerous nor powerful. These doctrinaires, as the name suggests, are people who prefer following theories instead of facts; a group found all over the world. For obvious reasons, the English system has fans across Europe and America since it's appealing for those who anticipate such benefits to envision themselves rising to, as Lafayette puts it, so many "little legitimacies." The peerage, with its exclusive and hereditary privileges, is the goal of all European nobility, and desires like this easily lead to acceptance of any philosophy that might support that aspiration.

One meets, here, with droll evidences of the truth of what I have just told you. I have made the acquaintance of a Russian of very illustrious family, and he has always been loud and constant in his eulogiums of America and her liberty. Alluding to the subject, the other day, he amused me by naïvely observing, "Ah, you are a happy people—you are free—and so are the English. Now, in Russia, all rank depends on the commission one bears in the army, or on the will of the Emperor. I am a Prince; my father was a Prince; my grandfather, too; but it is of no avail. I get no privileges by my birth; whereas, in England, where I have been, it is so different—And I dare say it is different in America, too?" I told him it was, indeed, "very different in America." He sighed, and seemed to envy me.

One comes across amusing evidence of the truth of what I've just told you. I've met a Russian from a very illustrious family, and he has always been loud and consistent in his praise of America and its freedom. Referring to the topic the other day, he amusingly remarked, "Ah, you are a happy people—you are free—and so are the English. Now, in Russia, all rank depends on the commission one holds in the army or on the Emperor's will. I am a Prince; my father was a Prince; my grandfather as well; but it doesn’t matter. I get no privileges from my birth; while in England, where I've been, it’s so different—and I suppose it’s different in America too?" I told him it was indeed "very different in America." He sighed and seemed to envy me.

The party of the doctrinaires is the one that menaces the most serious evil to France. It is inherently the party of aristocracy; and, in a country as far advanced as France, it is the combinations of the few, that, after all, are most to be apprehended. The worst of it is, that, in countries where abuses have so long existed, the people get to be so disqualified for entertaining free institutions, that even the disinterested and well-meaning are often induced to side with the rapacious and selfish, to prevent the evils of reaction.

The party of the doctrinaires poses the greatest threat to France. It is fundamentally a party of the aristocracy; and in a country as developed as France, it's the alliances of the few that are most concerning. The worst part is that in nations where problems have persisted for so long, the people become unfit to embrace free institutions. This often leads even the well-intentioned to ally with the greedy and selfish in order to avoid the dangers of a backlash.

In a country so much inclined to speculate, to philosophize, and to reason on everything, it is not surprising that a fundamental law, as vaguely expressed as the charter, should leave ample room for discussion. We find that our own long experience in these written instruments does not protect us from violent differences of opinion, some of which are quite as extravagant as any that exist here, though possibly less apt to lead to as grave consequences.[28]

In a country that loves to speculate, philosophize, and reason about everything, it's no surprise that a fundamental law, expressed as vaguely as the charter, leaves plenty of room for debate. Our own extensive experience with these legal documents doesn’t shield us from sharp disagreements, some of which are as extreme as any that exist here, although they may be less likely to result in serious consequences.[28]

[Footnote 28: The discussion which grew out of the law to protect American industry, affords a singular instance of the manner in which clever men can persuade themselves and others into any notion, however extravagant. The uncouth doctrine of nullification turned on the construction that might be put on the intimacy of the relations created by the Union, and on the nature of the sovereignties of the states.

[Footnote 28: The debate that arose from the law to protect American industry provides a striking example of how clever individuals can convince themselves and others of any idea, no matter how outlandish. The awkward doctrine of nullification relied on the interpretation of the close relationship established by the Union and the nature of the states' sovereign powers.]

Because the constitution commences with a declaration, that it is formed and adopted by "we the people of the United States," overlooking, not only all the facts of the case, but misconceiving the very meaning of the words they quote, one party virtually contended, that the instrument was formed by a consolidated nation. On this point their argument, certainly sustained in part by unanswerable truth, mainly depends.

Because the constitution starts with a statement that it is created and accepted by "we the people of the United States," ignoring all the facts and misunderstanding the true meaning of the words they use, one side essentially argued that the document was created by a united nation. Their argument, which is partly supported by undeniable truths, mainly relies on this point.

The word "people" has notoriously several significations. It means a "population;" it means the "vulgar;" it means any particular portion of a population, as, "rich people," "poor people," "mercantile people," etc. etc. In a political sense, it has always been understood to mean that portion of the population of a country, which is possessed of political rights. On this sense, then, it means a constituency in a representative government, and so it has always been understood in England, and is understood to-day in France. When a question is referred to the "people" at an election in England, it is not referred to a tithe of the population, but to a particular portion of it. In South Carolina and Louisiana, in the popular sense of Mr. Webster, there is no "people" to refer to, a majority of the men of both states possessing no civil rights, and scarcely having civil existence. Besides, "people," in its broad signification, includes men, women, and children, and no one will contend, that the two latter had anything to do with the formation of our constitution. It follows, then, that the term has been used in a limited sense, and we must look to incidental facts to discover its meaning.

The word "people" has several well-known meanings. It refers to a "population;" it refers to the "common folk;" it can represent any specific part of a population, such as "rich people," "poor people," "business people," etc. Politically, it has always been understood to refer to that segment of a country's population that holds political rights. In this context, it signifies a constituency in a representative government, which has been the understanding in England and is still understood this way today in France. When a question is put to the "people" during an election in England, it doesn't refer to just a small part of the population, but rather to a specific segment of it. In South Carolina and Louisiana, according to Mr. Webster's definition, there is no "people" to refer to, as the majority of men in both states lack civil rights and barely have a civil existence. Additionally, "people," in its broader meaning, includes men, women, and children, and no one would argue that the latter two had any role in creating our constitution. Therefore, it follows that the term has been used in a limited way, and we have to look at related facts to understand its meaning.

The convention was chosen, not by any common constituency, but by the constituencies of the several states, which, at that time, embraced every gradation between a democratical and an aristocratically polity. Thirteen states existed in 1787, and yet the constitution was to go into effect when it was adopted by any nine of them. It will not be pretended that this decision would be binding on the other four, and yet it is possible that these four dissenting states should contain more than half of all the population of the confederation. It would be very easy to put a proposition, in which it might be demonstrated arithmetically, that the constitution could have been adopted against a considerable majority of whole numbers. In the face of such a fact, it is folly to suppose the term "people" is used in any other than a conventional sense. It is well known, in addition to the mode of its adoption, that every provision of the constitution can be altered, with a single exception, by three-fourths of the states. Perhaps more than half of the entire population (excluding the Territories and the District), is in six of the largest states, at this moment. But whether this be so or not, such a combination could easily he made, as would demonstrate that less than a third of the population of the country can at any time alter the constitution.

The convention was chosen, not by any common group, but by the different states, which, at that time, had every level of government from democratic to aristocratic. Thirteen states were in existence in 1787, yet the constitution was set to take effect when adopted by just nine of them. It's unreasonable to think this decision would be binding for the other four, but those four dissenting states might hold more than half of the total population of the confederation. It would be quite straightforward to argue, using numbers, that the constitution could have been adopted against a significant majority of the population. Given this fact, it's foolish to think "people" is meant in anything but a conventional way. Furthermore, aside from how it was adopted, every part of the constitution can be changed, with one exception, by three-fourths of the states. At this point, it's possible that more than half of the total population (not counting the Territories and the District) resides in six of the largest states. Regardless of whether that's true, a combination could easily form that would show that less than a third of the country's population can change the constitution at any time.

It is probable that the term "we the people," was used in a sort of contradistinction to the old implied right of the sovereignty of the king, just as we idly substituted the words "God save the people" at the end of a proclamation, for "God save the king." It was a form. But, if it is desirable to affix to them any more precise signification, it will not do to generalize according to the argument of one party; but we are to take the words, in their limited and appropriate meaning and with their accompanying facts. They can only allude to the constituencies, and these constituencies existed only through the states, and were as varied as their several systems. If the meaning of the term "we the people" was misconceived, it follows that the argument which was drawn from the error was worthless. The constitution of the United States was not formed by the people of the United States, but by such a portion of them as it suited the several states to invest with political powers, and under such combinations as gave the decision to anything but a majority of the nation. In other words, the constitution was certainly formed by the states as political bodies, and without any necessary connexion with any general or uniform system of polity.

It’s likely that the phrase "we the people" was used as a contrast to the old implied right of the king's sovereignty, similar to how we casually replaced "God save the king" with "God save the people" at the end of a proclamation. It was a formality. However, if we want to give these words a more precise meaning, we can’t generalize based on one side's argument; we need to understand the words in their specific context and with the relevant facts. They can only refer to the constituencies, which only existed through the states and were as diverse as their various systems. If the meaning of "we the people" was misunderstood, then any argument based on that misunderstanding is worthless. The Constitution of the United States was not created by the entire population but by a segment of them that the individual states chose to empower politically, and under conditions that allowed decisions to be made without reflecting a majority of the nation. In other words, the Constitution was definitely created by the states as political entities, without any necessary connection to a general or uniform system of governance.

Any theory based on the separate sovereignties of the states, has, on the other hand, a frail support. The question was not who formed the constitution, but what was formed. All the great powers of sovereignty, such as foreign relations, the right to treat, make war and peace, to control commerce, to coin money, etc. etc. are expressly ceded. But these are not, after all, the greatest blows that are given to the doctrine of reserved sovereignty. A power to alter the constitution, as has just been remarked, has been granted, by which even the dissenting states have become bound. The only right reserved, is that of the equal representation in the senate, and it would follow, perhaps, as a legitimate consequence, the preservation of the confederated polity; but South Carolina could, under the theory of the constitution, be stripped of her right to control nearly every social interest; every man, woman and child in the state dissenting. It is scarcely worth while to construct a sublimated theory, on the sovereignty of a community so situated by the legitimate theory of the government under which it actually exists!

Any theory based on the separate powers of the states is, on the other hand, very weak. The question isn’t who created the constitution, but what was created. All the major powers of sovereignty, like foreign relations, the right to negotiate treaties, make war and peace, control trade, issue money, etc., are specifically given up. However, these aren’t even the biggest challenges to the idea of reserved sovereignty. A power to change the constitution has been granted, which means even the dissenting states are now bound by it. The only right retained is equal representation in the Senate, which could lead to the preservation of the federated system; yet, South Carolina could, under the framework of the constitution, lose its power to govern nearly all social interests—even if every man, woman, and child in the state disagrees. It hardly makes sense to create a complicated theory about the sovereignty of a community that is governed by the actual government it operates under!

No means can be devised, that will always protect the weak from the aggressions of the strong, under the forms of law; and nature has pointed out the remedy, when the preponderance of good is against submission; but one cannot suppress his expression of astonishment, at finding any respectable portion of a reasoning community, losing sight of this simple and self-evident truth, to uphold a doctrine as weak as that of nullification, viewed as a legal remedy.

No method can be created that will always shield the weak from the strong's aggression under the law; nature has shown the solution when the majority of good is against submission. However, it's hard not to be astonished to see any respectable part of a rational community overlook this simple and obvious truth to support a doctrine as weak as nullification, especially when seen as a legal remedy.

If the American statesmen (quasi and real) would imitate the good curate and the bachelor of Don Quixote, by burning all the political heresies, with which their libraries, not to say their brains, are now crammed, and set seriously about studying the terms and the nature of the national compact, without reference to the notions of men who had no connexion with the country, the public would be the gainers, and occasionally one of them might stand a chance of descending to posterity in some other light than that of the mere leader of a faction.]

If American politicians (both fake and genuine) would take a cue from the good curate and the bachelor from Don Quixote, by getting rid of all the political nonsense that fills their libraries, and even their minds, and actually focus on understanding the terms and the nature of the national agreement, without being influenced by ideas from people who have no connection to the country, the public would benefit, and maybe one of them would have the opportunity to be remembered for something more than just being the head of a party.

LETTER XX.

Excursion with Lafayette.—Vincennes.—The Donjon.—Lagrange.—The
Towers.—Interior of the House—the General's Apartments.—the Cabinet.
—Lafayette's Title.—Church of the Chateau.—Ruins of Vivier.—Roman
Remains.—American Curiosity.—The Table at Lagrange.—Swindling.

Excursion with Lafayette.—Vincennes.—The Dungeon.—Lagrange.—The
Towers.—Inside the House—the General's Rooms.—the Office.
—Lafayette's Title.—Chapel of the Chateau.—Ruins of Vivier.—Roman
Remains.—American Curiosity.—The Table at Lagrange.—Con Artists.

To R. COOPER, ESQ. COOPERSTOWN.

To R. COOPER, ESQ. COOPERSTOWN.

I have said nothing to you of Lagrange, though I have now been there no less than three times. Shortly after our arrival in Paris, General Lafayette had the kindness to send us an invitation; but we were deterred from going for sometime, by the indisposition of one of the family. In the autumn of 1826, I went, however, alone; in the spring I went again, carrying Mrs. —— with me; and I have now just returned from a third visit, in which I went with my wife, accompanied by one or two more of the family.

I haven't mentioned Lagrange to you, although I've been there three times now. Shortly after we arrived in Paris, General Lafayette kindly invited us, but we hesitated to go for a while due to one family member being unwell. In the autumn of 1826, I went by myself; in the spring, I went again with Mrs. ——; and I've just returned from a third visit, this time with my wife and one or two other family members.

It is about twenty-seven miles from Paris to Rosay, a small town that is a league from the castle. This is not a post-route, the great road ending at Rosay, and we were obliged to go the whole distance with the same horses. Paris is left by the Boulevard de la Bastille, the Barrière du Trône, and the chateau and woods of Vincennes. The second time I went into Brie, it was with the General himself, and in his own carriage. He showed me a small pavilion that is still standing in a garden near the old site of the Bastille, and which he told me, once belonged to the hotel that Beaumarchais inhabited, when in his glory, and in which pavilion this witty writer was accustomed to work. The roof was topped by a vane to show which way the wind blew; and, in pure fanfaronnade, or to manifest his contempt for principles, the author of "Figaro" had caused a large copper pen to do the duty of a weathercock; and there it stands to this day, a curious memorial equally of his wit and of his audacity.

It’s about twenty-seven miles from Paris to Rosay, a small town that's a league away from the castle. This isn’t a postal route; the main road ends at Rosay, so we had to travel the entire distance with the same horses. You leave Paris via the Boulevard de la Bastille, the Barrière du Trône, and the chateau and woods of Vincennes. The second time I went into Brie, it was with the General himself in his own carriage. He showed me a small pavilion that still stands in a garden near the old site of the Bastille, which he said once belonged to the hotel where Beaumarchais lived during his glory days, and in which this clever writer would often work. The roof was topped with a weathervane to show which way the wind was blowing; and, in pure fanfaronnade, or to flaunt his disregard for principles, the author of "Figaro" had a large copper pen made to serve as a weathercock; and it still stands there today, a curious reminder of both his wit and his boldness.

At the Barrière du Trône the General pointed out to me the spot where two of his female connexions suffered under the guillotine during the Reign of Terror. On one occasion, in passing, we entered the Castle of Vincennes, which is a sort of citadel for Paris, and which has served for a state prison since the destruction of the Bastille. Almost all of these strong old places were formerly the residences of the kings, or of great nobles, the times requiring that they should live constantly protected by ditches and walls.

At the Barrière du Trône, the General showed me the site where two of his female relatives were executed by the guillotine during the Reign of Terror. Once, while passing through, we visited the Castle of Vincennes, a fortress for Paris that has been used as a state prison since the Bastille was taken down. Most of these stronghold buildings were once homes for kings or powerful nobles, who needed to live securely behind moats and walls.

Vincennes, like the Tower of London, is a collection of old buildings, enclosed within a wall, and surrounded by a ditch. The latter, however, is dry. The most curious of the structures, and the one which gives the place its picturesque appearance, in the distance, is a cluster of exceedingly slender, tall, round towers, in which the prisoners are usually confined, and which is the donjon of the hold. This building, which contains many vaulted rooms piled on each other, was formerly the royal abode; and it has, even now, a ditch of its own, though it stands within the outer walls of the place. There are many other high towers on the walls; and, until the reign of Napoleon, there were still more; but he caused them to be razed to the level of the walls, which of themselves are sufficiently high.

Vincennes, like the Tower of London, is a collection of old buildings, enclosed by a wall and surrounded by a dry ditch. The most interesting structure, which gives the place its charming look from a distance, is a group of very tall, slim, round towers where prisoners are usually held, known as the donjon of the fortress. This building has many vaulted rooms stacked on top of each other and was once the royal residence; it even has its own ditch, despite being within the outer walls. There are several other tall towers on the walls, and up until Napoleon's reign, there were even more, but he ordered them to be torn down to the level of the walls, which are already quite tall.

The chapel is a fine building, being Gothic. It was constructed in the time of Charles V. There are also two or three vast corps de bâtimens, which are almost palaces in extent and design, though they are now used only as quarters for officers, etc. etc. The donjon dates from the same reign. The first room in this building is called the "salle de la question," a name which sufficiently denotes its infernal use. That of the upper story is the room in which the kings of France formerly held their councils. The walls are sixteen feet thick, and the rooms are thirty feet high. As there are five stories, this donjon cannot be less than a hundred and forty or fifty feet in elevation. The view from the summit is very extensive; though it is said that, in the time of Napoleon, a screen was built around the battlement, to prevent the prisoners, when they took the air, from enjoying it. As this conqueror was cruel from policy alone, it is probable this was merely a precaution against signals; for it is quite apparent, if he desired, to torment his captives, France has places better adapted to the object than even the donjon of Vincennes. I am not his apologist, however; for, while I shall not go quite as far as the Englishman who maintained, in a laboured treatise, that Napoleon was the beast of the Revelations, I believe he was anything but a god.

The chapel is a beautiful Gothic building. It was built during the time of Charles V. There are also two or three large corps de bâtimens, which are almost palaces in size and design, although they are now only used as quarters for officers, etc. The donjon comes from the same period. The first room in this building is called the "salle de la question," a name that clearly indicates its dreadful purpose. The room on the upper floor was where the kings of France used to hold their councils. The walls are sixteen feet thick, and the rooms are thirty feet high. With five stories, this donjon is at least one hundred and forty to fifty feet tall. The view from the top is quite extensive; however, it's said that during Napoleon's time, a screen was erected around the battlements to stop prisoners from enjoying it while they got some fresh air. Since this conqueror was cruel for strategic reasons, it likely was just a precaution against any signaling; it's clear that if he wanted to torment his captives, France has places far better suited for that than even the donjon of Vincennes. I'm not here to defend him, though; while I won't go as far as the Englishman who argued in a lengthy essay that Napoleon was the beast from Revelation, I do believe he was far from being a god.

Vincennes was a favourite residence of St. Louis, and there is a tradition that he used to take his seat under a particular oak, in the adjoining forest, where, all who pleased were permitted to come before him, and receive justice from himself. Henry V. of England, died in the donjon of Vincennes; and I believe his successor, Henry VI. was born in the same building. One gets a better notion of the state of things in the ages of feudality, by passing an hour in examining such a hold, than in a week's reading. After going through this habitation, and studying its barbarous magnificence, I feel much more disposed to believe that Shakspeare has not outraged probability in his dialogue between Henry and Catharine, than if I had never seen it, bad as that celebrated love-scene is.

Vincennes was a favorite residence of St. Louis, and there’s a tradition that he used to sit under a specific oak tree in the nearby forest, where anyone who wanted could come to him and receive justice. Henry V of England died in the donjon of Vincennes; and I believe his successor, Henry VI, was born in the same building. You get a better idea of life during the feudal ages by spending an hour exploring such a fortress than in a week of reading. After touring this place and observing its rough elegance, I feel much more inclined to believe that Shakespeare didn’t stretch the bounds of possibility in his dialogue between Henry and Catherine, than if I had never seen it, no matter how bad that famous love scene is.

Shortly after quitting Vincennes the road crosses the Marne, and stretches away across a broad bottom. There is little of interest between Paris and Rosay. The principal house is that of Grosbois, which once belonged to Moreau, I believe, but is now the property of the Prince de Wagram, the young son of Berthier. The grounds are extensive, and the house is large, though I think neither in very good taste, at least, so far as one could judge in passing.

Shortly after leaving Vincennes, the road crosses the Marne and stretches across a wide area. There's not much to see between Paris and Rosay. The main house is Grosbois, which I believe used to belong to Moreau but is now owned by the Prince de Wagram, the young son of Berthier. The grounds are large, and the house is big, although I don’t think either is particularly great in style, at least, based on what you can tell just by passing by.

There are two or three ruins on this road of some historical interest, but not of much beauty. There is usually a nakedness, unrelieved by trees or other picturesque accessories, about the French ruins, which robs them of half their beauty, and dirty, squalid hamlets and villages half the time come in to render the picture still less interesting.

There are a couple of ruins on this road that are historically interesting, but not very beautiful. The French ruins often feel bare, lacking trees or other scenic elements, which takes away a lot of their charm. Additionally, run-down, dirty hamlets and villages frequently show up, making the overall view even less appealing.

At Rosay another route is taken, and Lagrange is approached by the rear, after turning a small bit of wood. It is possible to see the tops of the towers for an instant, on the great road, before reaching the town.

At Rosay, a different path is taken, and Lagrange is approached from the back, after navigating a small section of woods. For a brief moment, you can spot the tops of the towers from the main road before arriving in the town.

It is not certainly known in what age the chateau was built; but, from its form, and a few facts connected with its origin, whose dates are ascertained, it is thought to be about five hundred years old. It never was more than a second-rate building of its class, though it was clearly intended for a baronial hold. Originally, the name was Lagrange en Brie; but by passing into a new family, it got the appellation of Lagrange Bléneau, by which it is known at present. You are sufficiently familiar with French to understand that grange means barn or granary, and that a liberal translation would make it Bléneau Farm.

It’s not exactly known when the chateau was built, but based on its design and a few facts about its origins, which have confirmed dates, it’s believed to be about five hundred years old. It was never more than a second-rate building of its type, even though it was clearly meant to be a baronial residence. Originally, it was called Lagrange en Brie; however, after it passed to a new family, it was renamed Lagrange Bléneau, which is what it’s known as today. You’re familiar enough with French to know that grange means barn or granary, and a loose translation would be Bléneau Farm.

In 1399 a marriage took place between the son of the lord of Lagrange en Brie with a daughter of a branch of the very ancient and great family of Courtenay, which had extensive possessions, at that time, in Brie. It was this marriage which gave the new name to the castle, the estate in consequence passing into the line of Courtenay-Bléneau. In 1595, the property, by another marriage with an heiress, passed into the well-known family D'Aubussons, Comtes de la Feuillade. The first proprietor of this name was the grandfather of the Mareschal de la Feuillade, the courtier who caused the Place des Victoires to be constructed at Paris; and he appropriated the revenues of the estate, which, in 1686, were valued at nine thousand francs, to the support and completion of his work of flattery. The property at that time was, however, much more extensive than it is at present. The son of this courtier dying without issue, in 1726, the estate was purchased by M. Dupré, one of the judges of France.

In 1399, a marriage occurred between the son of the lord of Lagrange en Brie and a daughter from a branch of the ancient and prominent family of Courtenay, which owned significant land in Brie at the time. This marriage led to the castle being renamed, and the estate subsequently became part of the Courtenay-Bléneau lineage. In 1595, the property changed hands again through another marriage, this time to an heiress, and became part of the well-known D'Aubusson family, Comtes de la Feuillade. The first owner from this family was the grandfather of the Mareschal de la Feuillade, the courtier who commissioned the construction of the Place des Victoires in Paris; he used the estate's revenues, valued at nine thousand francs in 1686, to support and complete his project of self-promotion. At that time, the property was much larger than it is now. When this courtier's son died without heirs in 1726, the estate was bought by M. Dupré, one of France's judges.

With this magistrate commences, I believe, the connexion of the ancestors of the Lafayettes with the property. The only daughter married M. d'Aguesseau; and her daughter, again, married the Duc de Noailles-d'Ayen, [29] carrying with her, as a marriage portion, the lands of Fontenay, Lagrange, etc. etc., or, in other words, the ancient possessions of M. de Lafeuillade. The Marquis de Lafayette married one of the Mesdemoiselles de Noailles, while he was still a youth, and when the estate, after a short sequestration, was restored to the family, General Lafayette received the chateau of Lagrange, with some six or eight hundred acres of land around it, as his wife's portion.

With this magistrate begins, I believe, the connection of the Lafayette ancestors to the property. The only daughter married M. d'Aguesseau; and her daughter then married the Duc de Noailles-d'Ayen, [29] bringing with her as a marriage portion the lands of Fontenay, Lagrange, etc. or, in other words, the old possessions of M. de Lafeuillade. The Marquis de Lafayette married one of the Mesdemoiselles de Noailles when he was still a young man, and when the estate was restored to the family after a brief sequestration, General Lafayette received the chateau of Lagrange, along with about six or eight hundred acres of land surrounding it, as his wife's portion.

[Footnote 29: Mr. Adams, in his Eulogy on Lafayette, has called the Duc de Noailles, the first peer of France. The fact is of no great moment, but accuracy is always better than error. I believe the Duc de Noailles was the youngest of the old ducs et pairs of France. The Duc d'Uzès, I have always understood, was the oldest.]

[Footnote 29: Mr. Adams, in his Eulogy on Lafayette, referred to the Duc de Noailles as the first peer of France. This detail isn't particularly significant, but being accurate is always preferable to being incorrect. I think the Duc de Noailles was the youngest of the old ducs et pairs of France. From what I've always understood, the Duc d'Uzès was the oldest.]

Although the house is not very spacious for a chateau of the region in which it stands, it is a considerable edifice, and one of the most picturesque I have seen in this country. The buildings stand on three sides of an irregular square. The fourth side must have been either a high wall or a range of low offices formerly, to complete the court and the defences, but every vestige of them has long since been removed. The ditch, too, which originally encircled the whole castle, has been filled in, on two sides, though still remaining on the two others, and greatly contributing to the beauty of the place, as the water is living, and is made to serve the purposes of a fishpond. We had carp from it, for breakfast, the day after our arrival.

Although the house isn't very large for a chateau in this area, it is a significant building and one of the most picturesque I've seen in this country. The structures sit on three sides of an irregular square. The fourth side must have once been a high wall or a row of low buildings to complete the courtyard and the defenses, but every trace of them has long since been removed. The moat, which originally surrounded the entire castle, has been filled in on two sides, though it still exists on the other two, greatly adding to the beauty of the place, as the water is lively and is used as a fishpond. We had carp from it for breakfast the day after we arrived.

Lagrange is constructed of hewn stone, of a good greyish colour, and in parts of it there are some respectable pretensions to architecture. I think it probable that one of its fronts has been rebuilt, the style being so much better than the rest of the structure. There are five towers, all of which are round, and have the plain, high, pyramidal roof, so common in France. They are without cornices, battlements of any sort, or, indeed, any relief to the circular masonry. One, however, has a roof of a square form, though the exterior of the lower itself is, at least in part, round. All the roofs are of slate.

Lagrange is made of cut stone with a nice greyish hue, and some parts show decent architectural style. I suspect that one of its facades has been redone, as its style is much better than the rest of the building. There are five round towers, each topped with a plain, high, pyramidal roof that’s typical in France. They lack cornices, battlements, or any sort of relief in the circular stonework. One, however, has a square-shaped roof, even though the lower part is at least partly round. All the roofs are made of slate.

The approach to the castle is circuitous, until quite near it, when the road enters a little thicket of evergreens, crosses a bridge, and passes beneath an arch to the court, which is paved. The bridge is now permanent, though there was once a draw, and the grooves of a portcullis are still visible beneath the arch. The shortest side of the square is next the bridge, the building offering here but little more than the two towers, and the room above the gateway. One of these towers forms the end of this front of the castle, and the other is, of course, at an angle. On the exterior, they are both buried in ivy, as well as the building which connects them. This ivy was planted by Charles Fox, who, in company with General Fitzpatrick, visited Lagrange, after the peace of Amiens. The windows, which are small and irregular on this side, open beautifully through the thick foliage, and as this is the part of the structure that is occupied by the children of the family, their blooming faces thrust through the leafy apertures have a singularly pleasing effect. The other three towers stand, one near the centre of the principal corps de bâtiment, one at the other angle, and the third at the end of the wing opposite that of the gate. The towers vary in size, and are all more or less buried in the walls, though still so distinct as greatly to relieve the latter, and everywhere to rise above them. On the open side of the court there is no ditch, but the ground, which is altogether park-like, and beautifully arranged, falls away, dotted with trees and copses, towards a distant thicket.

The path to the castle winds around until it gets close, then it goes through a small grove of evergreens, crosses a bridge, and goes under an archway into the courtyard, which is paved. The bridge is now permanent, although there used to be a drawbridge, and you can still see the grooves for a portcullis under the arch. The shortest side of the square is next to the bridge, where the building shows only the two towers and the room above the gateway. One of these towers is at the end of this side of the castle, while the other is at an angle. On the outside, both are covered in ivy, along with the building that connects them. This ivy was planted by Charles Fox, who went to Lagrange with General Fitzpatrick after the peace of Amiens. The windows on this side are small and irregular, beautifully framed by the thick greenery. Since this is where the family’s children live, their cheerful faces peeking through the leafy openings create a particularly charming scene. The other three towers are positioned: one near the center of the main building, one at the opposite angle, and the third at the end of the wing that is not near the gate. The towers vary in size and are all somewhat embedded in the walls, yet they still stand out, greatly enhancing the walls and rising above them. On the open side of the courtyard, there is no ditch, but the land, which is very much like a park and beautifully landscaped, slopes down dotted with trees and small groves, leading to a distant thicket.

Besides the rez-de-chaussée, which is but little above the ground, there are two good stories all round the building, and even more in the towers. The dining-room and offices are below, and there is also a small oratory, or chapel, though I believe none of the family live there. The entrance to the principal apartments is opposite the gate, and there is also here an exterior door which communicates directly with the lawn, the ditch running behind the other wing, and in front of the gate only. The great staircase is quite good, being spacious, easy of ascent, and of marble, with a handsome iron railing. It was put there by the mother of Madame Lafayette, I believe, and the General told me, it was nearly the only thing of value that he found among the fixtures, on taking possession. It had escaped injury.

Besides the rez-de-chaussée, which is only slightly above ground level, the building has two good stories all around, and even more in the towers. The dining room and offices are on the lower level, and there’s also a small oratory, or chapel, though I don't think anyone from the family lives there. The entrance to the main apartments is across from the gate, and there’s also an exterior door here that leads directly to the lawn, with the ditch running behind the other wing and in front of the gate only. The grand staircase is quite nice, being spacious, easy to climb, and made of marble, with a beautiful iron railing. I believe it was installed by Madame Lafayette's mother, and the General told me it was almost the only valuable thing he found among the fixtures when he took possession. It had been protected from damage.

I should think the length of the house on the side of the square which contains the staircase might be ninety feet, including the tower at the end, and the tower at the angle; and perhaps the side which contains the offices may be even a little longer; though this will also include the same tower in the same angle, as well as the one at the opposite corner; while the side in which is the gateway can scarcely exceed sixty feet. If my estimates, which are merely made by the eye, are correct, including the towers, this would give an outside wall of two hundred and fifty feet, in circuit. Like most French buildings, the depth is comparatively much less. I question if the outer drawing-room is more than eighteen feet wide, though it is near thirty long. This room has windows on the court and on the lawn, and is the first apartment one enters after ascending the stairs. It communicates with the inner drawing-room, which is in the end tower of this side of the chateau, is quite round, of course, and may be twenty feet in diameter.

I think the length of the house on the side of the square with the staircase is about ninety feet, including the tower at the end and the tower at the corner. The side with the offices might actually be a bit longer, although that also includes the same tower at the corner, as well as the one at the opposite corner. The side with the gateway probably doesn’t exceed sixty feet. If my estimates, which are just based on what I see, are right, including the towers, that would give an outer wall of two hundred and fifty feet around. Like most French buildings, it’s much less deep. I doubt the outer drawing-room is more than eighteen feet wide, even though it’s nearly thirty feet long. This room has windows facing the courtyard and the lawn, and it’s the first room you enter after going up the stairs. It connects to the inner drawing-room, which is in the round tower at the end of this side of the chateau and might be about twenty feet in diameter.

The General's apartments are on the second floor. They consist of his bed-room, a large cabinet, and the library. The latter is in the tower at the angle, on the side of the staircase. It is circular, and from its windows overlooks the moat, which is beautifully shaded by willows and other trees. It contains a respectable collection of books, besides divers curiosities.

The General's apartments are on the second floor. They include his bedroom, a large cabinet, and the library. The library is located in the tower at the corner, by the staircase. It is circular and has windows that look out over the moat, which is beautifully shaded by willows and other trees. It has a nice collection of books, along with various curiosities.

The only bed-rooms I have occupied are, one in the tower, immediately beneath the library, and the other in the side tower, or the only one which does not stand at an angle, or at an end of the building. I believe, however, that the entire edifice, with the exception of the oratory, the offices, the dining-room, which is a large apartment on the rez-de-chaussée, the two drawing-rooms, two or three cabinets, and the library, and perhaps a family-room or two, such as a school-room, painting-room, etc., is subdivided into sleeping apartments, with the necessary cabinets and dressing-rooms. Including the family, I have known thirty people to be lodged in the house, besides servants, and I should think it might even lodge more. Indeed its hospitality seems to know no limits, for every newcomer appears to be just as welcome as all the others.

The only bedrooms I've stayed in are one in the tower, right below the library, and the other in the side tower, which is the only one that doesn’t stand at an angle or at the end of the building. However, I believe that the whole building, except for the oratory, the offices, the dining room—which is a large space on the ground floor—the two drawing rooms, a couple of small rooms, and the library, and maybe a family room or two like a schoolroom or art room, is divided into sleeping areas, with the necessary closets and dressing rooms. Including the family, I've seen thirty people stay in the house, not counting the servants, and I think it could accommodate even more. In fact, its hospitality seems endless, as every newcomer appears to be just as welcome as everyone else.

The cabinet of Lafayette communicates with the library, and I passed much of the time during our visit, alone with him, in these two rooms. I may say that this was the commencement of a confidence with which he has since continued to treat me, and of a more intimate knowledge of the amiable features and simple integrity of his character, that has greatly added to my respect. No one can be pleasanter in private, and he is full of historical anecdotes, that he tells with great simplicity, and frequently with great humour. The cabinet contains many portraits, and, among others, one of Madame de Staël, and one of his own father. The former I am assured is exceedingly like; it is not the resemblance of a very fascinating woman. In the latter I find more resemblance to some of the grandchildren than to the son, although there is something about the shape of the head that is not unlike that of Lafayette's.

The cabinet of Lafayette connects with the library, and I spent a lot of time during our visit, alone with him, in these two rooms. I can say this was the start of a trust that he has maintained with me, and I gained a more intimate understanding of the charming traits and straightforward honesty of his character, which has greatly increased my respect for him. No one is more pleasant in private, and he is full of historical stories that he shares with great ease, often with a lot of humor. The cabinet has many portraits, including one of Madame de Staël and one of his father. I’ve been told the former looks very much like her; it’s not the likeness of a very captivating woman. In the latter, I see more similarity to some of the grandchildren than to the son, though there is something about the shape of the head that isn’t too different from Lafayette's.

General Lafayette never knew his father, who was killed, when he was quite an infant, at the battle of Minden. I believe the general was an only child, for I have never heard him speak of any brother or sister, nor indeed of any relative at all, as I can remember, on his own side, though he often alludes to the connexions he made by his marriage. I asked him how his father happened to be styled the Comte de Lafayette, and he to be called the Marquis. He could not tell me: his grandfather was the Marquis de Lafayette, his father the Comte, and he again was termed the Marquis. "I know very little about it," said be, "beyond this: I found myself a little Marquis, as I grew to know anything, and boys trouble themselves very little about such matters; and then I soon got tired of the name after I went to America. I cannot explain all the foolish distinctions of the feudal times, but I very well remember that when I was quite a boy, I had the honour to go through the ceremony of appointing the curé of a very considerable town in Auvergne, of which I was the Seigneur. My conscience has been quite easy about the nomination, however, as my guardians must answer for the sin, if there be any."

General Lafayette never knew his father, who was killed when he was just a baby at the battle of Minden. I believe the general was an only child, as I've never heard him mention any siblings or relatives on his side, although he often talks about the connections he made through his marriage. I asked him why his father was called the Comte de Lafayette and he was called the Marquis. He couldn't tell me: his grandfather was the Marquis de Lafayette, his father the Comte, and he was again referred to as the Marquis. "I don't know much about it," he said, "other than this: I found myself a little Marquis as I started to understand things, and boys don't really think about such stuff; plus, I quickly grew tired of the title after I went to America. I can't explain all the silly distinctions from feudal times, but I clearly remember when I was just a boy, I had the honor of going through the ceremony to appoint the curé of a significant town in Auvergne, of which I was the Seigneur. I've been pretty at ease about the nomination, though, since my guardians would take the responsibility for any wrongdoing, if there is any."

I was at a small dinner given by the Comte de Ségur, just before we went to Lagrange, and at which General Lafayette and M. Alexander de Lameth were also guests. The three had served in America, all of them having been colonels while little more than boys. In the course of the conversation, M. de Lameth jokingly observed that the Americans paid the greater deference to General Lafayette because he was a Marquis. For a long time there had been but one Marquis in England (Lord Rockingham), and the colonist appreciating all other Marquises by this standard, had at once thought they would do no less than make the Marquis de Lafayette a general. "As for myself, though I was the senior colonel, and (as I understood him to say) his superior in personal rank, I passed for nobody, because I was only a chevalier." This sally was laughed at, at the time, though there is something very unsettled in the use of those arbitrary personal distinctions on which the French formerly laid so much stress. I shall not attempt to explain them. I contented myself by whispering to M. de Lameth, that we certainly knew very little of such matters in America, but I questioned if we were ever so ignorant as to suppose there was only one Marquis in France. On the contrary, we are little too apt to fancy every Frenchman a Marquis.

I was at a small dinner hosted by the Comte de Ségur, just before we headed to Lagrange, and General Lafayette and M. Alexander de Lameth were also there. All three had served in America, having been colonels while they were still quite young. During the conversation, M. de Lameth jokingly remarked that Americans showed more respect to General Lafayette because he was a Marquis. For a long time, there was only one Marquis in England (Lord Rockingham), and the colonists measured all other Marquises by that standard, so they thought it only right to make the Marquis de Lafayette a general. "As for me, even though I was the senior colonel and, as I understood him to say, had a higher personal rank, I wasn't considered important because I was just a chevalier." This joke got a laugh at the time, although there's something quite unsettled about the arbitrary personal distinctions that the French used to emphasize so much. I won't try to explain them. I simply whispered to M. de Lameth that we really knew very little about such things in America, but I wondered if we were ever so clueless as to think there was only one Marquis in France. On the contrary, we're often a bit too quick to assume every Frenchman is a Marquis.

There was formerly a regular parish church attached to the chateau, which is still standing. It is very small, and is within a short distance of the gateway. The congregation was composed solely of the inhabitants of the chateau, and the people of the farm. The church contains epitaphs and inscriptions in memory of three of the D'Aubussons whose hearts were buried here, viz. Leon, Comte de Lafeuillade, a lieutenant-general; Gabriel, Marquis de Montargis; and Paul D'Aubussons, a Knight of Malta; all of whom were killed young, in battle.

There used to be a regular parish church by the chateau, which still stands today. It's quite small and located just a short distance from the gateway. The congregation was made up entirely of the chateau residents and the farm workers. The church has epitaphs and inscriptions honoring three of the D'Aubussons who were buried here: Leon, Comte de Lafeuillade, a lieutenant-general; Gabriel, Marquis de Montargis; and Paul D'Aubusson, a Knight of Malta; all of whom died young in battle.

The General has about three hundred and fifty acres in cultivation, and more than two in wood, pasture, and meadow. The place is in very excellent condition, and seems to be well attended to. I have galloped all over it, on a little filly belonging to one of the young gentlemen, and have found beauty and utility as nicely blended, as is often to be met with, even in England, the true country of fermes ornées, though the name is imported.

The General has around three hundred and fifty acres of farmland, plus over two acres of woods, pasture, and meadows. The property is in great shape and seems well-maintained. I rode all around it on a young filly owned by one of the young gentlemen and found beauty and practicality combined as well as you often see, even in England, the true home of fermes ornées, though the term is borrowed.

The third day of our visit, we all drove three or four leagues across the country, to see an old ruin of a royal castle called Vivier. This name implies a pond, and sure enough we found the remains of the buildings in the midst of two or three pools of water. This has been a considerable house, the ruins being still quite extensive and rather pretty. It was originally the property of a great noble, but the kings of France were in possession of it, as early as the year 1300. Charles V. had a great affection for Vivier, and very materially increased its establishment. His son, Charles VI. who was at times deranged, was often confined here, and it was after his reign, and by means of the long wars that ravaged France, that the place came to be finally abandoned as a royal abode. Indeed, it is not easy to see why a king should ever have chosen this spot at all for his residence, unless it might be for the purpose of hunting, for even now it is in a retired, tame, and far from pleasant part of the country.

On the third day of our visit, we all drove about three or four leagues across the countryside to check out an old ruin of a royal castle called Vivier. The name suggests a pond, and sure enough, we found the remains of the buildings amid two or three pools of water. This used to be a significant place, with the ruins still quite extensive and somewhat charming. It was originally owned by a great noble, but the kings of France had it in their possession as early as the year 1300. Charles V had a strong affection for Vivier and significantly improved it. His son, Charles VI, who was sometimes unstable, was often confined here. After his reign and due to the long wars that devastated France, the place was eventually abandoned as a royal residence. In fact, it’s hard to understand why a king would have chosen this spot for his home at all, unless it was for hunting, since even now it’s in a secluded, quiet, and rather uninviting part of the country.

There are the ruins of a fine chapel and of two towers of considerable interest, beside extensive fragments of more vulgar buildings. One of these towers, being very high and very slender, is a striking object; but, from its form and position, it was one of those narrow wells that were attached to larger towers, and which contained nothing but the stairs. They are commonly to be seen in the ruins of edifices built in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, in France; and what is worthy of remark, in several instances, notwithstanding their slender forms, I have met with them standing, although their principals have nearly disappeared. I can only account for it, by supposing that their use and delicacy of form have required more than ordinary care in the construction.

There are the ruins of a nice chapel and two interesting towers, alongside remnants of more ordinary buildings. One of these towers, being very tall and slim, catches the eye; however, due to its shape and position, it was one of those narrow wells that were attached to larger towers, serving only as a staircase. You often see these in the ruins of structures built in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in France; notably, I've encountered several of them still standing, even though the main towers have nearly vanished. I can only explain this by suggesting that their design and slender shape required extra care in their construction.

The ruins of Vivier belong to M. Parquin, a distinguished lawyer of Paris. This gentleman has a small country-house near by, and General Lafayette took us all to see him. We found him at home, and met, quite as a matter of course, with a polite reception. M. Parquin gave us much curious information about the ruin, and took us to see some of the subterraneous passages that he has caused to be opened.

The ruins of Vivier belong to Mr. Parquin, a respected lawyer from Paris. This gentleman has a small country house nearby, and General Lafayette took us all to see him. We found him at home and received a polite welcome, as expected. Mr. Parquin shared a lot of interesting information about the ruin and took us to explore some of the underground passages he had opened up.

It is thought that some of these artificial caverns were prisons, and that others were intended merely as places for depositing stores. The one we entered was of beautiful masonry, vaulted with the nicest art, and seemed to communicate with the ruins although the outlet was in the open field, and some distance from the walls. It might have been intended for the double purpose of a store-house and an outlet; for it is rare to meet with a palace, or a castle, that has out, more or less, of these private means of entrance and retreat. The Tuileries is said to abound with them, and I have been shown the line of an under-ground passage, between that palace and one of the public hotels, which must be fully a quarter of a mile in length.

It’s believed that some of these artificial caves were used as prisons, while others were just storage spaces. The one we went into was beautifully built, with a vaulted ceiling crafted with great skill, and it seemed to connect with the ruins, although the exit was out in the open field and quite a distance from the walls. It could have served both as a storage area and an exit; it’s uncommon to find a palace or castle that doesn’t have these private entrances and exits. The Tuileries is said to have many of them, and I’ve seen the outline of an underground passage connecting that palace to one of the public hotels, which must be about a quarter of a mile long.

Dulaure gives an extract from a report of the state of the Chateau of Vivier, made about the year 1700, with a view to know whether its conditions were such as to entitle the place to preserve certain of its privileges. In this document, the castle is described as standing in the centre of a marsh, surrounded by forest, and as so remote from all civilization, as to be nearly forgotten. This, it will be remembered, is the account of a royal abode, that stands within thirty miles of Paris.

Dulaure shares an excerpt from a report on the state of the Chateau of Vivier, dated around 1700, to determine if the conditions were enough to maintain certain privileges for the place. This document describes the castle as being in the middle of a marsh, surrounded by forest, and so far from civilization that it’s almost forgotten. This, it’s important to note, is the description of a royal residence located just thirty miles from Paris.

In the very heart of the French capital, are the remains of an extensive palace of one of the Roman Emperors, and yet it may be questioned if one in a thousand, of those who live within a mile of the spot, have the least idea of the origin of the buildings. I have inquired about it, in its immediate neighbourhood, and it was with considerable difficulty I could discover any one who even knew that there was such a ruin at all, in the street. The great number of similar objects, and the habit of seeing them daily, has some such effect on one, as the movement of a crowd in a public thoroughfare, where images pass so incessantly before the eye, as to leave no impression of their peculiarities. Were a solitary bison to scamper through the Rue St. Honoré, the worthy Parisians would transmit an account of his exploits to their children's children, while the wayfarer on the prairies takes little heed of the flight of a herd.

In the heart of the French capital, there are the remains of a large palace belonging to one of the Roman Emperors, yet it’s questionable whether even one in a thousand people living within a mile of it have any idea about the origins of the buildings. I’ve asked around in the nearby area, and it took a lot of effort to find even one person who knew there was a ruin on that street. The sheer number of similar sites and the daily habit of seeing them have an effect similar to that of a crowd in a busy street, where images constantly pass by, leaving no lasting impression of their uniqueness. If a lone bison were to run through Rue St. Honoré, the proud Parisians would share stories of its antics with future generations, while a traveler on the plains would hardly notice a herd of them passing by.

As we went to Lagrange, we stopped at a tavern, opposite to which was the iron gate of a small chateau. I asked the girl who was preparing our goûter, to whom the house belonged. "I am sorry I cannot tell you, sir," she answered; and then seeing suspicion in my face, she promptly added—"for, do you see, sir, I have only been here six weeks." Figure to yourself an American girl, set down opposite an iron gate, in the country, and how long do you imagine she would be ignorant of the owner's name? If the blood of those pious inquisitors, the puritans, were in her veins, she would know more, not only of the gate, but of its owner, his wife, his children, his means, his hopes, wishes, intentions and thoughts, than he ever knew himself, or would be likely to know. But if this prominent love of meddling must of necessity in its very nature lead to what is worse than contented ignorance, gossiping error, and a wrong estimate of our fellow-creatures, it has, at least, the advantage of keeping a people from falling asleep over their everyday facts. There is no question that the vulgar and low-bred propensity of conjecturing, meddling, combining, with their unavoidable companion, inventing, exist to a vice, among a portion of our people; but, on the other hand, it is extremely inconvenient when one is travelling, and wishes to know the points of the compass, as has happened to myself, if he should ask a full-grown woman whereabouts the sun rises in that neighbourhood, he is repulsed with the answer, that—"Monsieur ought to know that better than a poor garden-woman like me!"

As we headed to Lagrange, we stopped at a tavern, across from which was the iron gate of a small chateau. I asked the girl who was preparing our goûter to whom the house belonged. "I'm sorry, I can't tell you, sir," she replied; and then noticing the suspicion on my face, she quickly added, "because, you see, sir, I've only been here six weeks." Imagine an American girl sitting opposite an iron gate in the countryside; how long do you think she would remain unaware of the owner's name? If the blood of the pious inquisitors, the Puritans, ran in her veins, she would know more not just about the gate, but about its owner, his wife, his children, his resources, his hopes, wishes, intentions, and thoughts than he could ever know himself or would be likely to. But while this intense need to meddle often leads to worse than simple ignorance—like misguided gossip and a skewed perception of others—it at least keeps people from becoming complacent about their everyday realities. There's no doubt that the common and uncultured tendency to speculate, meddle, and combine, along with their unavoidable partner, inventing, can be a vice among some of us; however, it becomes extremely inconvenient while traveling when you want to know directions. It has happened to me that if I ask a grown woman where the sun rises in that area, I'm met with the response, "Monsieur should know that better than a simple garden woman like me!"

We returned to Paris, after a pleasant visit of three days at Lagrange, during which we had delightful weather, and altogether a most agreeable time. The habits of the family are very regular and simple, but the intercourse has the freedom and independence of a country-house. We were all in the circular drawing-room a little before ten, breakfast being served between ten and eleven. The table was French, the morning repast consisting of light dishes of meat, compotes, fruits, and sometimes soupe au lait, one of the simplest and best things for such a meal than can be imagined. As a compliment to us Americans, we had fish fried and broiled, but I rather think this was an innovation. Wine, to drink with water, as a matter of course, was on the table. The whole ended with a cup of café au lait. The morning then passed as each one saw fit. The young men went shooting, the ladies drove out, or read, or had a little music, while the general and myself were either walking about the farm, or were conversing in the library. We dined at six, as at Paris, and tea was made in the drawing-room about nine.

We returned to Paris after a nice three-day visit at Lagrange, where we had beautiful weather and an altogether enjoyable time. The family's routines are very regular and straightforward, but the atmosphere had the freedom and independence of a country house. We all gathered in the round drawing room a little before ten, with breakfast served between ten and eleven. The breakfast spread was French, featuring light dishes of meat, compotes, fruits, and sometimes soupe au lait, one of the simplest and best options for such a meal that you can imagine. In honor of us Americans, we had fried and broiled fish, though I think this was a bit of a change from the norm. Wine was served alongside water, as was customary. The meal wrapped up with a cup of café au lait. The morning then unfolded as everyone chose to spend it. The young men went shooting, the ladies took drives, read, or enjoyed some music, while the general and I either walked around the farm or chatted in the library. We dined at six, just like in Paris, and tea was served in the drawing room around nine.

I was glad to hear from General Lafayette, that the reports of Americans making demands on his purse, like so many other silly rumours that are circulated, merely because some one has fancied such a thing might be so, are untrue. On the contrary, he assures me that applications of this nature are very seldom made, and most of those that have been made have proved to come from Englishmen, who have thought they might swindle him in this form. I have had at least a dozen such applications myself, but I take it nothing is easier, in general, than to distinguish between an American and a native of Great Britain. It was agreed between us, that in future all applications of this nature should be sent to me for investigation.[30]

I was happy to hear from General Lafayette that the stories about Americans asking him for money, like so many other silly rumors that get spread just because someone imagined it, are false. On the contrary, he reassures me that requests like this are rare, and most of those that have come in are from Englishmen who thought they could scam him this way. I've received at least a dozen of these requests myself, but I think it's generally quite easy to tell the difference between an American and a Brit. We agreed that from now on, any requests like this should be sent to me for review.[30]

[Footnote 30: Under this arrangement, two or three years later, an applicant was sent for examination, under very peculiar circumstances. The man represented himself to be a shopkeeper of Baltimore, who had come to England with his wife and child, to purchase goods. He had been robbed of all he had, according to his account of the matter, about a thousand pounds in sovereigns, and was reduced to want, in a strange country. After trying all other means in vain, he bethought him of coming to Paris, to apply to General Lafayette for succour. He had just money enough to do this, having left his wife in Liverpool. He appeared with an English passport, looked like an Englishman, and had even caught some of the low English idioms, such as, "I am agreeable," for "It is agreeable to me," or, "I agree to do so," etc. etc. The writer was exceedingly puzzled to decide as to this man's nationality. At length, in describing his journey to Paris, he said, "they took my passport from me, when we got to the lines." This settled the matter, as no one but an American would call a frontier the lines. He proved, in the end, to be an American, and a great rogue.]

[Footnote 30: A couple of years later, an applicant was brought in for examination under unusual circumstances. The man claimed to be a shopkeeper from Baltimore who had come to England with his wife and child to buy goods. He said he had been robbed of everything he owned, about a thousand pounds in sovereigns, and was left in need in a foreign country. After exhausting all other options, he decided to come to Paris to ask General Lafayette for help. He had just enough money for this, having left his wife in Liverpool. He showed up with an English passport, looked like an Englishman, and had even picked up some of the lower-class English phrases, like "I am agreeable," meaning "It is agreeable to me," or "I agree to do so," etc. The writer was quite confused about this man's nationality. Eventually, while describing his journey to Paris, he mentioned, "they took my passport from me when we got to the lines." This clarified everything, as only an American would refer to a frontier as the lines. In the end, he turned out to be an American and quite a rogue.]

LETTER XXI.

Insecurity of the Bourbons.—Distrust of Americans.—Literary Visitor.
—The Templars.—Presents and Invitations.—A Spy—American Virtue.
—Inconsistency.—Social Freedom in America,—French Mannerists
—National Distinctions.—A lively Reaction.

Insecurity of the Bourbons.—Distrust of Americans.—Literary Visitor.
—The Templars.—Gifts and Invitations.—A Spy—American Values.
—Inconsistency.—Social Freedom in America,—French Stylists
—National Differences.—A strong Response.

To R. COOPER, ESQ. COOPERSTOWN.

To R. Cooper, Esq. Cooperstown.

We all went to bed, a night or two since, as usual, and awoke to learn that there had been a fight in the capital. One of the countless underplots had got so near the surface, that it threw up smoke. It is said, that about fifty were killed and wounded, chiefly on the part of the populace.

We all went to bed a night or two ago, like usual, and woke up to find out there had been a fight in the capital. One of the many undercurrents had surfaced enough to cause a commotion. It's said that around fifty people were killed and injured, mostly from the crowd.

The insecurity of the Bourbons is little understood in America. It is little understood even by those Americans who pass a few months in the country, and in virtue of frequenting the cafés, and visiting the theatres, fancy they know the people. Louis XVIII. was more than once on the point of flying, again, between the year 1815 and his death; for since the removal of the allied troops, there is really no force for a monarch to depend on, more especially in and around the capital, the army being quite as likely to take sides against them as for them.

The insecurity of the Bourbons is not well understood in America. Even those Americans who spend a few months in the country and think they know the people by hanging out in the cafés and going to the theatres miss a lot. Louis XVIII was close to fleeing more than once between 1815 and his death; since the allied troops left, there really isn't any support for a monarch to rely on, especially in and around the capital, as the army could just as easily turn against them as support them.

The government has determined on exhibiting vigour, and there was a great show of troops the night succeeding the combat. Curious to see the effect of all this, two or three of us got into a carriage and drove through the streets, about nine o'clock. We found some two or three thousand men on the Boulevards, and the Rue St. Denis, in particular, which had been the scene of the late disorder, was watched with jealous caution. In all, there might have been four or five thousand men under arms. They were merely in readiness, leaving a free passage for carriages, though in some of the narrow streets we found the bayonets pretty near our faces.

The government has decided to show strength, and there was a big display of troops the night after the battle. A few of us, curious about the impact of all this, hopped in a carriage and drove through the streets around nine o'clock. We encountered about two or three thousand men on the Boulevards, and especially on Rue St. Denis, which had been the site of the recent unrest and was being closely monitored. In total, there were probably four or five thousand armed troops. They were simply on standby, allowing carriages to pass freely, although in some of the narrow streets, we found bayonets quite close to us.

An American being supposed ex officio, as it were, to be a well-wisher to the popular cause, there is, perhaps, a slight disposition to look at us with distrust. The opinion of our travellers' generally favouring liberty is, in my judgment, singularly erroneous, the feelings of a majority being, on the whole, just the other way, for, at least, the first year or two of their European experience; though, I think, it is to be noticed, by the end of that time, that they begin to lose sight of the personal interests which, at home, have made them anything but philosophers on such subjects, and to see and appreciate the immense advantages of freedom over exclusion, although the predominance of the former may not always favour their own particular views. Such, at least, has been the result of my own observations, and so far from considering a fresh arrival from home, as being likely to be an accession to our little circle of liberal principles, I have generally deemed all such individuals as being more likely to join the side of the aristocrats or the exclusionists in politics. This is not the moment to enter into an examination of the causes that have led to so singular a contradiction between opinions and facts, though I think the circumstance is not to be denied, for it is now my intention to give you an account of the manner in which matters are managed here, rather than enter into long investigations of the state of society at home.

An American is generally expected to be a supporter of the popular cause, which may cause some suspicion towards us. I believe the view that our travelers typically support liberty is quite mistaken; most of them actually feel quite the opposite during at least their first year or two in Europe. However, by the end of that period, they seem to start overlooking the personal interests that have made them anything but philosophical about these topics back home. They begin to recognize and appreciate the significant advantages of freedom over exclusion, even if the dominance of freedom doesn’t always align with their specific views. This has been my observation, and rather than seeing a newcomer from home as likely to embrace our liberal ideals, I often view such individuals as more inclined to side with the aristocrats or exclusionists in politics. This isn't the right time to explore the reasons behind this striking contradiction between opinions and reality, but I acknowledge it exists. My goal now is to share how things are managed here instead of delving into lengthy examinations of the social conditions at home.

Not long after my arrival in France, a visit was announced, from a person who was entirely unknown to me, but who called himself a littérateur. The first interview passed off as such interviews usually do, and circumstances not requiring any return on my part, it was soon forgotten. Within a fortnight, however, I received visit the second, when the conversation took a political turn, my guest freely abusing the Bourbons, the aristocrats, and the present state of things in France. I did little more than listen. When the way was thus opened, I was asked if I admired Sir Walter Scott, and particularly what I thought of Ivanhoe, or, rather, if I did not think it an indifferent book. A little surprised at such a question, I told my littérateur, that Ivanhoe appeared to me to be very unequal, the first half being incomparably the best, but that, as a whole, I thought it stood quite at the head of the particular sort of romances to which it belonged. The Antiquary, and Guy Mannering, for instance, were both much nearer perfection, and, on the whole, I thought both better books; but Ivanhoe, especially its commencement, was a noble poem. But did I not condemn the want of historical truth in its pictures? I did not consider Ivanhoe as intended to be history; it was a work of the imagination, in which all the fidelity that was requisite, was enough to be probable and natural, and that requisite I thought it possessed in an eminent degree. It is true, antiquarians accused the author of having committed some anachronisms, by confounding the usages of different centuries, which was perhaps a greater fault, in such a work, than to confound mere individual characters; but of this I did not pretend to judge, not being the least of an antiquary myself. Did I not think he had done gross injustice to the noble and useful order of the Templars? On this point I could say no more than on the preceding, having but a very superficial knowledge of the Templars, though I thought the probabilities seemed to be perfectly well respected. Nothing could seem to be more true, than Scott's pictures. My guest then went into a long vindication of the Templars, stating Scott had done them gross injustice, and concluding with an exaggerated compliment, in which it was attempted to persuade me that I was the man to vindicate the truth, and to do justice to at subject that was so peculiarly connected with liberal principles. I disclaimed the ability to undertake such a task, at all; confessed that I did not wish to disturb the images which Sir Walter Scott had left, had I the ability; and declared I did not see the connexion between his accusation, admitting it to be true, and liberal principles.

Not long after I arrived in France, someone I didn't know but who called himself a littérateur announced that he would visit me. The first meeting went as these things usually do, and because it didn’t require any follow-up from me, it was soon forgotten. However, within two weeks, he visited me again, and the conversation turned political, with my guest openly criticizing the Bourbons, the aristocrats, and the current state of affairs in France. I mostly just listened. Once the topic was opened, he asked me if I admired Sir Walter Scott, specifically what I thought of Ivanhoe, or rather, if I didn’t think it was an average book. A bit surprised by this question, I told my littérateur that Ivanhoe seemed very uneven, the first half being far superior, but overall, I thought it was at the forefront of its genre of romances. I mentioned that The Antiquary and Guy Mannering, for instance, were both much closer to perfection, and I considered both better books; still, Ivanhoe, especially its beginning, was a noble poem. But didn’t I condemn the lack of historical accuracy in its depictions? I didn’t see Ivanhoe as meant to be history; it was a work of imagination, where all that was necessary was to be plausible and natural, and I thought it had that in abundance. It's true that antiquarians accused the author of some anachronisms by mixing up the customs of different centuries, which might be a bigger fault in such a work than mixing up individual characters; but I didn’t feel qualified to judge that, not being an antiquarian myself. Did I not think he had wronged the noble and valuable order of the Templars? On that point, I could only say as much as I did on the previous one, having only a very superficial understanding of the Templars, though I thought the probabilities seemed well respected. Nothing could seem more true than Scott's portrayals. My guest then launched into a lengthy defense of the Templars, claiming Scott had done them a great injustice, and concluded with an exaggerated compliment, attempting to persuade me that I was the one to vindicate the truth and do justice to a subject closely tied to liberal principles. I pushed back, saying I had no ability to take on such a task at all; I admitted I didn’t want to disrupt the images that Sir Walter Scott had created, even if I could; and I stated I didn’t see the connection between his accusation, assuming it was true, and liberal principles.

My visitor soon after went away, and I saw no more of him for a week, when he came again. On this occasion, he commenced by relating several piquant anecdotes of the Bourbons and their friends, gradually and ingeniously leading the conversation, again, round to his favourite Templars. After pushing me, for half an hour, on this point, always insisting on my being the man to vindicate the order, and harping on its connexion with liberty, he took advantage of one of my often-repeated protestations of ignorance of the whole matter, suddenly to say, "Well, then, Monsieur, go and see for yourself, and you will soon be satisfied that my account of the order is true." "Go and see what?" "The Templars." "There are no longer any." "They exist still." "Where?" "Here, in Paris." "This is new to me: I do not understand it." "The Templars exist; they possess documents to prove how much Scott has misrepresented them, and—but, you will remember that the actual government has so much jealousy of everything it does not control, that secrecy is necessary—and, to be frank with you, M. ——, I am commissioned by the Grand Master, to invite you to be present at a secret meeting, this very week."

My visitor left soon after, and I didn’t see him again for a week, when he returned. This time, he started by sharing several interesting stories about the Bourbons and their associates, skillfully steering the conversation back to his favorite subject: the Templars. After pushing me on this topic for half an hour, always insisting that I should be the one to defend the order and emphasizing its connection to liberty, he seized the opportunity from one of my repeated claims of ignorance on the subject to suddenly say, “Well, then, Monsieur, go see for yourself, and you’ll soon see that my account of the order is true.” “See what?” “The Templars.” “They don’t exist anymore.” “They still exist.” “Where?” “Here, in Paris.” “That’s new to me: I don’t get it.” “The Templars exist; they have documents that prove how much Scott has misrepresented them, and—but you should know that the current government is very jealous of anything it doesn’t control, so secrecy is necessary—and to be honest with you, M. ——, I’m tasked by the Grand Master to invite you to attend a secret meeting this very week.”

Of course, I immediately conjectured that some of the political agitators of the day had assumed this taking guise, in order to combine their means, and carry out their plans.[31] The proposition was gotten rid of, by my stating, in terms that could not be misunderstood, that I was a traveller, and did not wish to meddle with anything that required secrecy, in a foreign government; that I certainly had my own political notions, and if pushed, should not hesitate to avow them anywhere; that the proper place for a writer to declare his sentiments, was in his books, unless under circumstances which authorized him to act; that I did not conceive foreigners were justifiable in going beyond this; that I never had meddled with the affairs of foreign countries, and that I never would; and that the fact of this society's being secret, was sufficient to deter me from visiting it. With this answer, my guest departed, and he never came again.

Of course, I immediately thought that some of the political activists of the time had taken on this disguise to pool their resources and execute their plans.[31] I got rid of the proposition by clearly stating that I was a traveler and didn’t want to get involved in anything that required secrecy in a foreign government. I definitely had my own political opinions, and if pressed, I wouldn’t hesitate to express them anywhere; the right place for a writer to share their views is in their books, unless circumstances allow them to act. I didn’t believe that foreigners had the right to go beyond that; I had never interfered in the affairs of other countries, and I never would. The fact that this society was secret was enough to dissuade me from visiting it. With that response, my guest left, and he never returned.

[Footnote 31: Since the revolution of 1830, these Templars have made public, but abortive efforts, to bring themselves into notice, by instituting some ceremonies, in which they appeared openly in their robes.]

[Footnote 31: Since the revolution of 1830, these Templars have made public but unsuccessful attempts to get attention by holding some ceremonies where they appeared openly in their robes.]

Now, the first impression was, as I have told you, and I supposed my visitor, although a man of fifty, was one of those who innocently lent himself to these silly exaggerations; either as a dupe, or to dupe others. I saw reason, however, to change this opinion.

Now, my first impression was, as I mentioned, and I thought my visitor, even though he was a man in his fifties, was one of those people who unwittingly played along with these silly exaggerations; either as someone being fooled or as someone trying to fool others. However, I found reasons to reconsider this view.

At the time these visits occurred, I scarcely knew any one in Paris, and was living in absolute retirement—being, as you know already, quite without letters. About ten days after I saw the last of my littérateur, I got a letter from a high functionary of the government, sending me a set of valuable medals. The following day these were succeeded by his card, and an invitation to dinner. Soon after, another person, notoriously connected with court intrigues, sought me out, and overwhelmed me with civilities. In a conversation that shortly after occurred between us, this person gave a pretty direct intimation, that by pushing a little, a certain decoration that is usually conferred on literary men was to be had, if it were desired. I got rid of all these things, in the straight-forward manner, that is the best for upsetting intrigues; and having really nothing to conceal, I was shortly permitted to take my own course.

At the time these visits happened, I barely knew anyone in Paris and was living in complete solitude—being, as you already know, totally without connections. About ten days after I last saw my littérateur, I received a letter from a high-ranking government official, sending me a set of valuable medals. The next day, I got his card along with an invitation to dinner. Shortly after, another person, well-known for being involved in court intrigues, sought me out and showered me with kindness. In a conversation we had soon after, this person hinted quite directly that with a little push, a certain decoration typically given to literary figures could be obtained if I wanted it. I dismissed all of this plainly, which is the best way to disrupt intrigues; and having genuinely nothing to hide, I was soon allowed to follow my own path.

I have now little doubt that the littérateur was a spy, sent either to sound me on some points connected with Lafayette and the republicans, or possibly to lead me into some difficulty, though I admit that this is no more than conjecture. I give you the facts, which, at the time, struck me as, at least, odd, and you may draw your own conclusions. This, however, is but one of a dozen adventures, more or less similar, that have occurred, and I think it well to mention it, by way of giving you an insight into what sometimes happens here.[32]

I have little doubt now that the littérateur was a spy, either sent to probe me about some issues related to Lafayette and the republicans or possibly to get me into trouble, though I admit that this is just speculation. I'll give you the facts, which at the time seemed, at least, strange to me, and you can draw your own conclusions. However, this is just one of a dozen similar experiences that have happened, and I think it’s important to mention it to give you a glimpse into what sometimes goes on here.[32]

[Footnote 32: A conversation, which took place after the revolution of 1830, with one of the parties named, leaves little doubt as to the truth of the original conjecture.]

[Footnote 32: A conversation that happened after the revolution of 1830 with one of the involved parties leaves little doubt about the accuracy of the original speculation.]

My rule has been, whenever I am pushed on the subject of politics, to deal honestly and sincerely with all with whom I am brought in contact, and in no manner to leave the impression, that I think the popular form of government an unavoidable evil, to which America is obliged to submit. I do not shut my eyes to the defects of our own system, or to the bad consequences that flow from it, and from it alone; but, the more I see of other countries, the more I am persuaded, that, under circumstances which admit but of a choice of evils, we are greatly the gainers by having adopted it. Although I do not believe every other nation is precisely fitted to imitate us, I think it is their misfortune they are not so. If the inhabitants of other countries do not like to hear such opinions, they should avoid the subject with Americans.

My approach has always been, whenever politics come up, to be honest and straightforward with everyone I interact with, and not to give the impression that I consider popular government an unavoidable curse that America just has to accept. I recognize the flaws in our system and the negative outcomes that stem from it, but the more I learn about other countries, the more convinced I am that, when faced with choices that are all less than ideal, we benefit significantly from having adopted this system. While I don’t think every other nation is perfectly suited to copy us, it’s unfortunate for them that they aren’t. If people from other countries don’t want to hear these views, they should steer clear of discussing it with Americans.

It is very much the custom here, whenever the example of America is quoted in favour of the practicability of republican institutions, to attribute our success to the fact of society's being so simple, and the people so virtuous. I presume I speak within bounds, when I say that I have heard the latter argument urged a hundred times, during the last eighteen months. One lady, in particular, who is exceedingly clever, but who has a dread of all republics, on account of having lost a near friend during the reign of terror, was especially in the practice of resorting to this argument, whenever, in our frequent playful discussions of the subject, I have succeeded in disturbing her inferences, by citing American facts. "Mais, Monsieur, l'Amérique est si jeune, et vous avez les vertus que nous manquons," etc. etc. has always been thought a sufficient answer. Now I happen to be one of those who do not entertain such extravagant notions of the exclusive and peculiar virtues of our own country. Nor have I been so much struck with the profound respect of the Europeans, in general, for those very qualities that, nevertheless, are always quoted as the reason of the success of what is called the "American experiment." Quite the contrary: I have found myself called on, more than once, to repel accusations against our morality of a very serious nature; accusations that we do not deserve; and my impression certainly is, that the American people, so far as they are at all the subjects of observation, enjoy anything but a good name, in Europe. Struck by this flagrant contradiction, I determined to practise on my female friend, a little; a plan that was successfully carried out, as follows.

It’s a common thing around here that whenever America is mentioned to support the idea that republican institutions can work, people tend to say our success is because society is simple and the people are virtuous. I think it’s fair to say I've heard this argument a hundred times over the past eighteen months. One woman, in particular, who is very smart but afraid of all republics because she lost a close friend during the Reign of Terror, often used this argument whenever I challenged her reasoning with facts from America during our frequent light-hearted debates. "But, sir, America is so young, and you have the virtues we lack," and so on, has always seemed to her to be a sufficient response. Now, I happen to be one of those who doesn’t hold such extreme views about the unique and special virtues of our own country. I also haven’t been nearly as impressed by the deep respect Europeans generally have for those very qualities that are often cited as the reasons for the success of what is called the "American experiment." Just the opposite: I've found myself having to defend against serious accusations regarding our morality that we don’t deserve; and my impression is that, as far as they are observed, the American people don’t have a great reputation in Europe. Noticing this glaring contradiction, I decided to experiment a bit with my female friend, and my plan worked out successfully as follows.

Avoiding all allusion to politics, so as to throw her completely off her guard, I took care to introduce such subjects as should provoke comparisons on other points, between France and America; or rather, between the latter and Europe generally. As our discussions had a tinge of philosophy, neither being very bigoted, and both preserving perfect good humour, the plot succeeded admirably. After a little time, I took occasion to fortify one of my arguments by a slight allusion to the peculiar virtues of the American people. She was too well-bred to controvert this sort of reasoning at first, until, pushing the point, little by little, she was so far provoked as to exclaim, "You lay great stress on the exclusive virtues of your countrymen, Monsieur, but I have yet to learn that they are so much better than the rest of the world!" "I beg a thousand pardons, Madame, if I have been led into an indiscretion on this delicate subject; but you must ascribe my error to your own eloquence, which, contrary to my previous convictions, had persuaded me into the belief that we have some peculiar unction of this nature, that is unknown in Europe. I now begin to see the mistake, and to understand "que nous autres Américains" are to be considered virtuous only where there is question of the practicability of maintaining republican form of government, and as great rogues on all other occasions." Madame de —— was wise enough, and good-tempered enough, to laugh at the artifice, and the allusion to "nous autres vertueux" has got to be a mot d'ordre with us. The truth is, that the question of politics is exclusively one of personal advantages, with a vast majority of the people of Europe; one set selfishly struggling to maintain their present superiority, while the other is as selfishly, and in some respects as blindly, striving to overturn all that is established, in order to be benefited by the scramble that will follow; and religion, justice, philosophy, and practical good are almost equally remote from the motives of both parties.

Avoiding any mention of politics to keep her completely off guard, I made sure to bring up topics that would encourage comparisons between France and America—or rather, between America and Europe in general. Since our conversations had a philosophical touch, with neither of us being too rigid and both maintaining a friendly tone, the plan worked perfectly. After a while, I found an opportunity to strengthen one of my points by making a slight reference to the unique virtues of the American people. She was too polite to challenge this kind of reasoning at first, but as I pressed the issue gently, she eventually exclaimed, "You put a lot of emphasis on the special virtues of your countrymen, Monsieur, but I still don’t see that they are any better than the rest of the world!" "I sincerely apologize, Madame, if I have stumbled into a faux pas on this sensitive topic; but you must attribute my error to your own eloquence, which, contrary to my previous beliefs, has convinced me that we possess some unique quality in this regard that is unknown in Europe. I now begin to realize my mistake and understand that 'we Americans' are only considered virtuous when it comes to the feasibility of maintaining a republican form of government, and great rogues in all other situations." Madame de —— was wise enough and good-natured enough to laugh at the trickery, and the reference to "we virtuous ones" has become a mot d'ordre for us. The truth is that the issue of politics is primarily about personal gain for the vast majority of people in Europe; one group is selfishly fighting to keep their current dominance, while the other is just as selfish, and in some ways as blind, trying to overthrow everything established to benefit from the resulting chaos; and religion, justice, philosophy, and practical good are almost equally distant from the motivations of both sides.

From reflecting on such subjects, I have been led into a consideration of the influence of political institutions on the more ordinary relations of society. If the conclusions are generally in favour of popular rights, and what is called freedom, there can be little question that there are one or two weak spots, on our side of the question, that it were better did they not exist. Let us, for the humour of the thing, look a little into these points.

From thinking about these topics, I’ve started to consider how political institutions affect everyday social interactions. While the overall conclusions tend to support popular rights and what’s referred to as freedom, there are definitely a couple of flaws on our side of the argument that would be better off not existing. For the sake of a good discussion, let’s take a closer look at these points.

It is a common remark of all foreigners, that there is less social freedom in America than in most other countries of Christendom. By social freedom, I do not mean as relates to the mere forms of society, for in these we are loose rather than rigid; but that one is less a master of his own acts, his own mode of living, his own time, being more rigidly amenable to public opinion, on all these points, than elsewhere. The fact, I believe, out of all question, is true; at least it appears to be true, so far as my knowledge of our own and of other countries extends. Admitting then the fact to be so, it is worth while to throw away a moment in inquiring into the consequent good and evil of such a state of things, as well as in looking for the causes. It is always a great assistant in our study of others, to have some tolerable notions of ourselves.

It’s a common comment from foreigners that there’s less social freedom in America than in most other Christian countries. By social freedom, I don’t mean the basic social interactions, because in those we are more relaxed than strict. I mean that people have less control over their own actions, lifestyle, and time, as they are more strictly influenced by public opinion on all these matters than in other places. I believe this fact is indisputable; at least, it seems true based on what I know about our country and others. So, if we accept this reality, it’s worth taking a moment to consider the resulting pros and cons of such a situation, along with exploring the reasons behind it. Having a decent understanding of ourselves is always very helpful when studying others.

The control of public opinion has, beyond question, a salutary influence on the moral exterior of a country. The great indifference which the French, and indeed the higher classes of most European countries, manifest to the manner of living of the members of their different circles, so long as certain appearances are respected, may do no affirmative good to society, though at the same time it does less positive harm than you may be disposed to imagine. But this is not the point to which I now allude. Europeans maintain that, in things innocent in themselves, but which are closely connected with the independence of action and tastes of men, the American is less his own master than the inhabitant of this part of the world; and this is the fact I, for one, feel it necessary to concede to them. There can be no doubt that society meddles much more with the private affairs of individuals, and affairs, too, over which it properly has no control, in America than in Europe. I will illustrate what I mean, by an example.

The control of public opinion definitely has a positive impact on the moral landscape of a country. The great indifference shown by the French, and indeed by the upper classes of most European countries, towards the lifestyles of their various social circles, as long as certain appearances are maintained, may not bring any real benefit to society, but it also causes less harm than you might think. However, that's not the main point I want to discuss. Europeans argue that, in things that are innocent in themselves but closely linked to people's independence in their actions and tastes, Americans are less in control of themselves than people in this part of the world; and I must admit that this is true. There's no doubt that society interferes much more in the private lives of individuals, and in matters that it really shouldn't control, in America than in Europe. Let me illustrate what I mean with an example.

About twenty years since there lived in one of our shiretowns a family, which, in its different branches, had numerous female descendants, then all children. A member of this family, one day, went to a respectable clergyman, his friend, and told him that he and his connexions had so many female children, whom it was time to think of educating, that they had hit upon the plan of engaging some suitable instructress, with the intention of educating their girls all together, both for economy's sake and for convenience, as well as that such near connexions might be brought up in a way to strengthen the family tie. The clergyman warmly remonstrated against the scheme, assuring his friend, that the community would not bear it, and that it would infallibly make enemies! This was the feeling of a very sensible man, and of an experienced divine, and I was myself the person making the application. This is religiously true, and I have often thought of the circumstance since, equally with astonishment and horror.

About twenty years ago, there was a family in one of our towns that had many female descendants, all of whom were children at that time. One day, a member of this family approached a respected clergyman, who was his friend, and shared that they had so many young girls that it was time to consider their education. They had come up with a plan to hire a suitable teacher to educate all the girls together for economic reasons and convenience, as well as to strengthen the family bond. The clergyman strongly opposed the idea, warning his friend that the community wouldn't accept it and that it would definitely create enemies! This was the opinion of a very sensible man and an experienced clergyman, and I was the one making the request. This is completely true, and I have often reflected on this incident with both surprise and fear.

There are doubtless many parts of America, even, where such an interference with the private arrangement of a family would not be dreamt of; but there is a large portion of the country in which the feeling described by my clerical friend does prevail. Most observers would refer all this to democracy, but I do not. The interference would not proceed from the humblest classes of society at all, but from those nearer one's own level. It would proceed from a determination to bring all within the jurisdiction of a common opinion, or to be revenged on delinquents, by envy, hatred, and all uncharitableness. There is no disposition in America, to let one live as he or she may happen to please to live; the public choosing, though always in its proper circle, to interfere and say how you must live. It is folly to call this by terms as sounding as republicanism or democracy, which inculcate the doctrine of as much personal freedom as at all comports with the public good. He is, indeed, a most sneaking democrat, who finds it necessary to consult a neighbourhood before he can indulge his innocent habits and tastes. It is sheer meddling, and no casuistry can fitly give it any other name.

There are definitely many places in America where nobody would ever think of interfering with a family's private matters; however, there is a significant part of the country where the feeling described by my clergyman friend is common. Most people would attribute this to democracy, but I don't. The interference doesn't come from the lower classes at all, but from those who are closer to one's own social level. It arises from a desire to bring everyone under a common opinion or to take revenge on those who step out of line, driven by envy, hatred, and a lack of charity. There is no inclination in America to allow someone to live however they choose; the public chooses, always within its own circle, to interfere and dictate how you must live. It's foolish to label this with grand terms like republicanism or democracy, which suggest the idea of as much personal freedom as is compatible with the public good. A truly cowardly democrat is someone who feels they need to check with their neighbors before they can enjoy their harmless habits and preferences. It's just meddling, and no amount of rationalizing can properly call it anything else.

A portion of this troublesome quality is owing, beyond question, to our provincial habits, which are always the most exacting; but I think a large portion, perhaps I ought to say the largest, is inherited from those pious but exaggerated religionists who first peopled the country. These sectaries extended the discipline of the church to all the concerns of life. Nothing was too minute to escape their cognizance, and a parish sat in judgment on the affairs of all who belonged to it. One may easily live so long in the condition of society that such an origin has entailed on us, as to be quite unconscious of its peculiarities, but I think they can hardly escape one who has lived much beyond its influence.

A part of this annoying quality definitely comes from our local customs, which are always the most demanding; but I believe a big part, maybe the biggest part, comes from those devout but extreme religious folks who first settled the country. These sect members applied the church's rules to every aspect of life. Nothing was too small for their attention, and a local congregation judged the matters of everyone who belonged to it. It’s easy to live for so long in a society shaped by such origins that you become completely unaware of its quirks, but I think it’s hard to miss them if you've spent significant time away from its influence.

Here, perhaps, the fault is to be found in the opposite extreme; though there are so many virtues consequent on independence of thought and independence of habits, that I am not sure the good does not equal the evil. There is no canting, and very little hypocrisy, in mere matters of habits, in France; and this, at once, is abridging two of our own most besetting vices. Still the French can hardly be called a very original people. Convention ties them down mercilessly in a great many things. They are less under the influence of mere fashion, in their intercourse, it is true, than some of their neighbours, reason and taste exercising more influence over such matters, in France, than almost anywhere else; but they are mannerists in the fine arts, in their literature, and in all their feelings, if one can use such an expression. The gross exaggerations of the romantic school that is, just now, attracting so much attention, are merely an effort to liberate themselves. But, after allowing for the extreme ignorance of the substratum of society, which, in France, although it forms so large a portion of the whole, should no more be taken into the account in speaking of the national qualities, than the slaves of Carolina should be included in an estimate of the character of the Carolinians, there is, notwithstanding this mannerism, a personal independence here, that certainly does not exist with us. The American goes and comes when he pleases, and no one asks for a passport; he has his political rights, talks of his liberty, swaggers of his advantages, and yet does less as he pleases, even in innocent things, than the Frenchman. His neighbours form a police, and a most troublesome and impertinent one it sometimes proves to be. It is also unjust, for having no legal means of arriving at facts, it half the time condemns on conjecture.

Here, maybe the problem lies in the opposite extreme; although there are so many virtues that come from independent thinking and habits, I’m not sure the good doesn’t balance out the bad. In France, there’s little pretense and very little hypocrisy when it comes to habits, which helps reduce two of our own biggest vices. Still, the French can’t really be called a very original people. Convention binds them down mercilessly in many ways. They are less influenced by mere fashion in their interactions, it’s true, than some of their neighbors, with reason and taste having more impact on these matters in France than almost anywhere else; but they are indeed mannered in the fine arts, literature, and in all their feelings, if you can use that term. The extreme exaggerations of the romantic school, which is currently getting a lot of attention, are just an attempt to break free. However, even considering the significant ignorance within the lower strata of society, which in France, although it makes up such a large part of the whole, shouldn't be factored in when discussing national qualities, just as the slaves of Carolina shouldn’t be included in assessing the character of Carolinians, there is, despite this mannerism, a personal independence here that definitely doesn’t exist with us. The American comes and goes as he pleases, and no one asks for a passport; he has his political rights, talks about his freedom, boasts about his advantages, and yet does less as he likes, even in harmless ways, than the Frenchman. His neighbors act like a police force, and sometimes they're a very annoying and intrusive one. It’s also unfair because, lacking any legal way to get to the truth, it often judges based on assumptions.

The truth is, our institutions are the result of facts and accidents, and, being necessarily an imitative people, there are often gross inconsistencies between our professions and our practice; whereas the French have had to struggle through their apprenticeship in political rights, by the force of discussions and appeals to reason, and theory is still too important to be entirely overlooked. Perhaps no people understand the true private characters of their public men so little as the Americans, or any people so well as the French. I have never known a distinguished American, in whom it did not appear to me that his popular character was a false one; or a distinguished Frenchman, whom the public did not appear to estimate very nearly as he deserved to be. Even Napoleon, necessary as he is to the national pride, and dazzling as is all military renown, seems to me to be much more justly appreciated at Paris than anywhere else. The practice of meddling can lead to no other result. They who wish to stand particularly fair before the public, resort to deception, and I have heard a man of considerable notoriety in America confess, that he was so much afraid of popular comments, that he always acted as if an enemy were looking over his shoulder. With us, no one scruples to believe that he knows all about a public man, even to the nicest traits of his character; all talk of him, as none should talk but those who are in his intimacy, and, what between hypocrisy on his part—an hypocrisy to which he is in some measure driven by the officious interference with his most private interests—and exaggerations and inventions, that ingenious tyrant, public opinion, comes as near the truth as a fortune-teller who is venturing his prediction in behalf of a stranger.[33]

The truth is, our institutions come from facts and coincidences, and since we tend to imitate others, there are often significant inconsistencies between what we say and what we do. In contrast, the French have had to work hard through their learning process in political rights by engaging in debates and reasoning, and theory still plays a crucial role. Perhaps no one understands the true private characteristics of their public figures as poorly as Americans do, or as well as the French do. I've never met a prominent American who didn't seem to have a public persona that was misleading; on the other hand, distinguished French individuals seem to be mostly recognized for what they actually are. Even Napoleon, vital for national pride and brilliant in his military acclaim, seems to be more accurately regarded in Paris than anywhere else. The tendency to meddle leads to no different outcome. Those who want to appear particularly admirable in public often resort to deception, and I've heard a well-known American acknowledge that he was so fearful of public scrutiny that he always acted as if an enemy were watching him. Here, no one hesitates to believe they know everything about a public figure, even the most subtle aspects of their character; everyone discusses them as if they are close friends, and between the hypocrisy that the public figure is somewhat forced into due to the intrusive involvement with their private matters, along with exaggerations and fabrications, that clever tyrant, public opinion, gets as close to the truth as a fortune-teller making predictions about a stranger.[33]

[Footnote 33: I can give no better illustration of the state of dependence to which men are reduced in America, by this spirit of meddling, than by the following anecdote: A friend was about to build a new town-house, and letting me know the situation, he asked my advice as to the mode of construction. The inconveniences of an ordinary American town-house were pointed out to him,—its unfitness for the general state of society, the climate, the other domestic arrangements, and its ugliness. All were admitted, and the plan proposed in place of the old style of building was liked, but still my friend hesitated about adopting it. "It will be a genteeler and a better-looking house than the other." "Agreed." "It will be really more convenient." "I think so, too." "It will be cheaper." "Of that there is no question." "Then why not adopt it?" "To own the truth, I dare not build differently from my neighbour!"]

[Footnote 33: I can’t give a better example of how dependent people are in America because of this meddling attitude than this story: A friend was planning to build a new town house and asked for my advice on how to do it. I pointed out the issues with a typical American town house—it doesn’t fit the general state of society, the climate, the other living arrangements, and it’s ugly. He agreed with all of this, and he liked the new plan I suggested instead of the old style. But my friend still hesitated. "It will look nicer and be classier than the other." "Agreed." "It will really be more convenient." "I think so, too." "It will be cheaper." "That’s definitely true." "So why not go for it?" "To be honest, I dare not build differently from my neighbor!"]

In France the right of the citizen to discuss all public matters is not only allowed, but felt. In America it is not felt, though it is allowed. A homage must be paid to the public, by assuming the disguise of acting as a public agent, in America; whereas, in France, individuals address their countrymen, daily, under their own signatures. The impersonality of we, and the character of public journalists, is almost indispensable, with us, to impunity, although the mask can deceive no one, the journalists notoriously making their prints subservient to their private passions and private interests, and being impersonal only in the use of the imperial pronoun. The representative, too, in America, is privileged to teach, in virtue of his collective character, by the very men who hold the extreme and untenable doctrine of instruction! It is the fashion to say in America, that the people will rule! it would be nearer the truth, however, to say, the people will seem to rule.

In France, citizens not only have the right to discuss all public matters, but they also actively engage in it. In America, while this right exists, it is not actively embraced. In America, one has to pretend to be acting as a public representative to gain public respect, whereas in France, individuals communicate directly with their fellow citizens every day under their own names. The use of “we” and the role of public journalists is almost essential here for avoiding accountability, even though the pretense is transparent—journalists often make their publications serve their personal passions and interests, being “impersonal” only when using the royal pronoun. Furthermore, in America, representatives are considered entitled to educate, thanks to their collective identity, by those who claim the extreme and questionable belief in public teaching! It's a common saying in America that “the people will rule!” However, it might be more accurate to say, “the people will appear to rule.”

I think that these distinctions are facts, and they certainly lead to odd reflections. We are so peculiarly situated as a nation, that one is not to venture on conclusions too hastily. A great deal is to be imputed to our provincial habits; much to the circumstance of the disproportion between surface and population, which, by scattering the well-bred and intelligent, a class at all times relatively small, serves greatly to lessen their influence in imparting tone to society; something to the inquisitorial habits of our pious forefathers, who appear to have thought that the charities were nought, and, in the very teeth of revelation, that Heaven was to be stormed by impertinences; while a good deal is to be conceded to the nature of a popular government whose essential spirit is to create a predominant opinion, before which, right or wrong, all must bow until its cycle shall be completed. Thus it is, that we are always, more or less, under one of two false influences, the blow or its rebound; action that is seldom quite right, or reaction that is always wrong; sinning heedlessly, or repeating to fanaticism. The surest process in the world, of "riding on to fortune" in America, is to get seated astride a lively "reaction," which is rather more likely to carry with it a unanimous sentiment, than even the error to which it owes its birth.

I believe these differences are real, and they definitely lead to unusual thoughts. As a nation, we're in such a unique position that we shouldn't jump to conclusions too quickly. A lot of this can be attributed to our local habits; much of it stems from the mismatch between our land size and population, which spreads out the well-mannered and educated people—always a relatively small group—greatly reducing their influence in shaping societal norms. Some of it relates to the probing nature of our devout ancestors, who seemed to think that charity was of little value and, contrary to what was revealed, that Heaven could be won through annoyance. Additionally, we must acknowledge the nature of a popular government whose core essence is to establish a dominant opinion that everyone must follow, right or wrong, until its cycle ends. Because of this, we often find ourselves under one of two misleading influences: the impact or its backlash; actions that are rarely entirely correct or reactions that are always incorrect; carelessly sinning or fanatically repeating ideas. The most reliable way to "ride on to fortune" in America is to jump onto a vigorous "reaction," which is more likely to carry with it a unanimous sentiment than even the mistake that brought it into existence.

As much of this weakness as is inseparable from humanity exists here, but it exists under so many modifying circumstances, as, in this particular, to render France as unlike America as well may be. Liberty is not always pure philosophy nor strict justice, and yet, as a whole, it is favourable to both. These are the spots on the political sun. To the eye which seeks only the radiance and warmth of the orb, they are lost; but he who studies it, with calmness and impartiality, sees them too plainly to be in any doubt of their existence.

As much of this weakness that’s part of being human is present here, but it comes with so many different factors that it makes France quite different from America. Freedom isn’t always just a clear-cut philosophy or absolute justice, but overall, it supports both. These are the blemishes on the political landscape. For those who only focus on the light and warmth of the sun, they go unnoticed; however, someone who observes it with a calm and unbiased perspective can see them clearly enough to be certain they exist.

LETTER XXII.

Animal Magnetism.—Somnambules.—Magnetised Patients.—My own
Examination.—A Prediction.—Ventriloquism.—Force of the Imagination.

Animal Magnetism.—Sleepwalkers.—Magnetized Patients.—My own
Examination.—A Prediction.—Ventriloquism.—Power of the Imagination.

To JAMES E. DE KAY, M.D.

To JAMES E. DE KAY, M.D.

Although we have not been without our metaphysical hallucinations in America, I do not remember to have heard that "animal magnetism" was ever in vogue among us. A people who are not very quick to feel the poetry of sentiment, may well be supposed exempt from the delusions of a doctrine which comprehends the very poetry of physics. Still, as the subject is not without interest, and as chance has put me in the way of personally inquiring into this fanciful system, I intend, in this letter, to give you an account of what I have both heard and seen.

Although we haven't been without our share of metaphysical illusions in America, I don't remember ever hearing that "animal magnetism" was popular here. A people who aren't very quick to appreciate the beauty of sentiment might be expected to be untouched by the delusions of a doctrine that involves the very beauty of physics. Still, since the subject is interesting and I've had the opportunity to personally explore this fanciful system, I intend to share in this letter what I've both heard and seen.

I shall premise by saying that I rank "animal magnetism" among the "arts" rather than among the "sciences." Of its theory I have no very clear notion, nor do I believe that I am at all peculiar in my ignorance; but until we can say what is that other "magnetism" to which the world is indisputably so much indebted for its knowledge and comforts, I do not know that we are to repudiate this, merely because we do not understand it. Magnetism is an unseen and inexplicable influence, and that is "metallic," while this is "animal;" voilà tout. On the whole, it may be fairly mooted which most controls the world, the animal or the metallic influence.

I want to start by saying that I see "animal magnetism" as more of an "art" than a "science." I don't have a clear understanding of its theory, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in my confusion. But until we can explain that other "magnetism" that the world relies on so much for its knowledge and comforts, I don't think we should dismiss this just because we don't get it. Magnetism is an unseen and mysterious force, and while that is "metallic," this one is "animal;" voilà tout. Overall, it’s worth considering which influence is more powerful in the world, the animal or the metallic.

To deal gravely with a subject that, at least, baffles our comprehension, there are certainly very extraordinary things related of animal magnetism, and apparently on pretty good testimony. Take, for instance, a single fact. M. Jules Cloquet is one of the cleverest practitioners of Paris, and is in extensive business. This gentleman publicly makes the following statement. I write it from memory, but have heard it and read it so often, that I do not think my account will contain any essential error.

To seriously address a topic that, at the very least, confounds our understanding, there are certainly some remarkable claims made about animal magnetism, and they seem to be backed by solid evidence. For example, consider one specific case. M. Jules Cloquet is one of the most skilled practitioners in Paris and has a thriving practice. This gentleman publicly states the following. I’m writing this from memory, but I've heard and read it so many times that I believe my account won’t have any major inaccuracies.

A woman, who was subject to the magnetic influence, or who was what is commonly called a somnambule, had a cancer in the breast. M. ——, one of the principal magnetisers of Paris, and from whom, among others, I have had an account of the whole affair, was engaged to magnetise this woman, while M. Cloquet operated on the diseased part. The patient was put asleep, or rather into the magnetic trance, for it can scarcely be called sleep, and the cancer was extracted, without the woman's manifesting the least terror, or the slightest sense of pain! To the truth of the substance of this account, M. Cloquet, who does not pretend to explain the reason, nor profess to belong, in any way, to the school, simply testifies. He says that he had such a patient, and that she was operated on, virtually, as I have told you. Such a statement, coming from so high a source, induced the Academy, which is certainly not altogether composed of magnetisers, but many of whose members are quite animal enough to comprehend the matter, to refer the subject to a special committee, which committee, I believe, was comprised of very clever men. The substance of their report was pretty much what might have been anticipated. They said that the subject was inexplicable, and that "animal magnetism" could not be brought within the limits of any known laws of nature. They might have said the same thing of the comets! In both cases we have facts, with a few established consequences, but are totally without elementary causes.

A woman who was under the influence of magnetism, commonly referred to as a somnambulist, had breast cancer. M. ——, one of the leading magnetizers in Paris, who provided me with details about the incident, was assigned to magnetize this woman while M. Cloquet performed surgery on the affected area. The patient was put into a trance, which is more accurate than calling it sleep, and the cancer was removed without the woman showing any signs of fear or feeling any pain! M. Cloquet, who doesn’t attempt to explain it and doesn’t identify with any particular school, confirms the essence of this account. He states that he had such a patient and that the procedure was conducted as I described. Such a claim from a reputable source prompted the Academy, which isn’t solely made up of magnetizers and has many members who can understand the topic, to form a special committee, which I believe consisted of very intelligent individuals. Their report was largely what you might expect. They concluded that the subject was beyond explanation and that "animal magnetism" couldn’t be confined to any known natural laws. They could have said the same about comets! In both situations, we have facts and a few established outcomes but are completely lacking in basic causes.

Animal magnetism is clearly one of three things: it is what it pretends to be, an unexplained and as yet incomprehensible physical influence; it is delusion, or it is absolute fraud.

Animal magnetism is clearly one of three things: it is what it claims to be, an unexplained and still incomprehensible physical influence; it is a delusion, or it is outright fraud.

A young countryman of ours, having made the acquaintance of M. C——, professionally, and being full of the subject, I have so far listened to his entreaties as to inquire personally into the facts, a step I might not have otherwise been induced to take.

A young guy from our country, after getting to know M. C—— professionally, and really diving into the topic, I've decided to listen to his requests and personally look into the facts, something I might not have done otherwise.

I shall now proceed to the history of my own experience in this inexplicable mystery. We found M. C—— buried in the heart of Paris, in one of those vast old hotels, which give to this town the air of generations of houses, commencing with the quaint and noble of the sixteenth century, and ending with the more fashionable pavilion of our own times. His cabinet looked upon a small garden, a pleasant transition from the animal within to the vegetable without. But one meets with gardens, with their verdure and shrubbery and trees, in the most unexpected manner, in this crowded town.

I will now share the story of my own experience with this baffling mystery. We found M. C—— buried in the heart of Paris, in one of those large old hotels that give the city its charm, showcasing generations of architecture, starting with the quaint and noble styles of the sixteenth century and ending with the trendier pavilions of our time. His office overlooked a small garden, a nice shift from the hustle of city life to a bit of nature. But you can come across gardens, filled with greenery and trees, in the most surprising places in this bustling city.

M. C—— received us politely, and we found with him one of his somnambules; but as she had just come out of a trance, we were told she could not be put asleep again that morning. Our first visit, therefore, went no farther than some discourse on the subject of "animal magnetism," and a little practical by-play, that shall be related in its place.

M. C—— welcomed us kindly, and we met one of his sleepwalkers; however, since she had just woken up from a trance, we were informed that she couldn’t be put back to sleep that morning. So our first visit ended up being just a discussion about "animal magnetism," along with some practical demonstrations, which I’ll describe later.

M. C—— did not attempt ascending to first principles, in his explanations. Animal magnetism was animal magnetism—it was a fact, and not a theory. Its effects were not to be doubted; they depended on testimony of sufficient validity to dispose of any mere question of authenticity. All that he attempted was hypothesis, which he invited us to controvert. He might as well have desired me to demonstrate that the sun is not a carbuncle. On the modus operandi, and the powers of his art, the doctor was more explicit. There were a great many gradations in quality in his somnambules, some being better and some worse; and there was also a good deal of difference in the intensity of the magnetiser's. It appears to be settled that the best somnambules are females, and the best magnetisers males, though the law is not absolute. I was flattered with being, by nature, a first-rate magnetiser, and the doctor had not the smallest doubt of his ability to put me to sleep; and ability, so far as his theory went, I thought it was likely enough he might possess, though I greatly questioned his physical means.

M. C—— didn’t try to get into the fundamental principles in his explanations. Animal magnetism was simply animal magnetism—it was a fact, not a theory. Its effects were undeniable; they relied on credible testimony that was enough to settle any doubts about authenticity. All he offered was a hypothesis, which he encouraged us to challenge. He might as well have asked me to prove that the sun isn’t a carbuncle. When it came to the modus operandi and the powers of his practice, the doctor was more detailed. There were several levels of quality among his somnambules, with some being better and others worse; there was also a noticeable variation in the intensity of the magnetisers. It seems to be agreed that the best somnambules are females, and the best magnetisers are males, though this rule isn’t absolute. I felt flattered to be, by nature, a top-notch magnetiser, and the doctor had no doubt about his ability to put me to sleep; while I thought he might have that ability according to his theory, I seriously questioned his physical methods.

I suppose it is primâ facie evidence of credulity, to take the trouble to inquire into the subject at all; at any rate it was quite evident I was set down as a good subject, from the moment of my appearance. Even the somnambule testified to this, though she would not then consent to be put into a trance in order to give her opinion its mystical sanction.

I guess it's clear evidence of gullibility to even bother looking into this subject; anyway, it was obvious that I was seen as an easy target from the moment I showed up. Even the sleepwalker confirmed this, although she wouldn’t agree to be put in a trance to give her opinion its mystical approval.

The powers of a really good somnambule are certainly of a very respectable class. If a lock of hair be cut from the head of an invalid, and sent a hundred leagues from the provinces, such a somnambule, properly magnetised, becomes gifted with the faculty to discover the seat of the disease, however latent; and, by practice, she may even prescribe the remedy, though this is usually done by a physician, like M. C——, who is regularly graduated. The somnambule is, properly, only versed in pathology, any other skill she may discover being either a consequence of this knowledge, or the effects of observation and experience. The powers of a somnambule extend equally to the morale as well as to the physique. In this respect a phrenologist is a pure quack in comparison with a lady in a trance. The latter has no dependence on bumps and organs, but she looks right through you, at a glance, and pronounces ex cathedrâ, whether you are a rogue, or an honest man; a well-disposed, or an evil-disposed child of Adam. In this particular, it is an invaluable science, and it is a thousand pities all young women were not magnetised before they pronounce the fatal vows, as not a few of them would probably wake up, and cheat the parson of his fee. Our sex is difficult to be put asleep, and are so obstinate, that I doubt if they would be satisfied with a shadowy glimpse of the temper and dispositions of their mistresses.

The abilities of a really good somnambule are undeniably impressive. If a lock of hair is taken from the head of a sick person and sent a hundred leagues away, such a somnambule, properly magnetized, can identify the source of the illness, no matter how hidden it is; and with enough practice, she might even suggest a treatment, although this is typically the job of a qualified physician like M. C——. The somnambule is primarily knowledgeable about diseases, and any other skills she exhibits are generally a result of this understanding or the product of keen observation and experience. A somnambule's abilities extend to both the morale and the physique. In this regard, a phrenologist is a total fraud compared to a woman in a trance. The latter doesn't rely on bumps and organs; she can see right through you in an instant and declares ex cathedrâ whether you are dishonest or a good person, well-meaning or ill-intentioned. In this context, it's a valuable skill, and it's a real shame that all young women aren't magnetized before making those serious vows, as quite a few of them would likely snap out of it and deny the officiant his fee. Our gender is hard to put to sleep and so stubborn that I doubt they would be content with just a fleeting insight into the nature and character of their partners.

You may possibly think I am trifling with you, and that I invent as I write. On the contrary, I have not related one half of the miraculous powers which being magnetised imparts to the thoroughly good somnambule, as they were related to me by M. C——, and vouched for by four or five of his patients who were present, as well as by my own companion, a firm believer in the doctrine. M. C—— added that somnambules improve by practice, as well as magnetisers, and that he has such command over one of his somnambules that he can put her to sleep, by a simple effort of the will, although she may be in her own apartment, in an adjoining street. He related the story of M. Cloquet and the cancer, with great unction, and asked me what I thought of that? Upon my word, I did not very well know what I did think of it, unless it was to think it very queer. It appeared to me to be altogether extraordinary, especially as I knew M. Cloquet to be a man of talents, and believe him to be honest.

You might think I’m messing with you and making things up as I go. But actually, I haven’t even covered half of the amazing abilities that being magnetized gives to a truly good somnambulist, as M. C—— told me, backed up by four or five of his patients who were there, along with my own companion, who fully believes in this idea. M. C—— mentioned that somnambulists get better with practice, just like magnetizers do, and he has such control over one of his somnambulists that he can put her to sleep with just a simple effort of his will, even if she’s in her own room on the next street. He recounted the story of M. Cloquet and the cancer with great enthusiasm and asked me what I thought about it. Honestly, I wasn’t quite sure what to think, except that it seemed really strange to me. It struck me as completely extraordinary, especially since I knew M. Cloquet was a talented man and I believe he is honest.

By this time I was nearly magnetised with second-hand facts; and I became a little urgent for one or two that were visible to my own sense. I was promised more testimony, and a sight of the process of magnetising some water that a patient was to drink. This patient was present; the very type of credulity. He listened to everything that fell from M. C—— with a gusto and a faith that might have worked miracles truly, had it been of the right sort, now and then turning his good-humoured marvel-eating eyes on me, as much as to say, "What do you think of that, now?" My companion told me, in English, he was a man of good estate, and of proved philanthropy, who had no more doubt of the efficacy of animal magnetism than I had of my being in the room. He had brought with him two bottles of water, and these M. C—— magnetised, by pointing his fingers at their orifices, rubbing their sides, and ringing his hands about them as if washing them, in order to disengage the subtle fluid that was to impart to them their healing properties, for the patient drank no other water.

By this point, I was almost overwhelmed with second-hand information, and I really wanted to see some evidence for myself. I was promised more proof and a demonstration of how they were magnetizing some water for a patient to drink. This patient was there; the perfect example of gullibility. He absorbed everything M. C—— said with enthusiasm and a belief that could have performed real miracles if it had been the right kind, occasionally turning his cheerful, intrigued eyes toward me, as if to ask, "What do you think of that?" My companion informed me, in English, that he was a wealthy man with a history of philanthropy, who had no more doubt about the effectiveness of animal magnetism than I had about being in the room. He had brought two bottles of water with him, which M. C—— magnetized by pointing his fingers at the openings, rubbing the sides, and waving his hands around them as if he were washing them, in order to release the subtle energy that would give the water its healing properties, since the patient drank no other water.

Presently a young man came in, of a good countenance and certainly of a very respectable exterior. As the somnambule had left us, and this person could not consult her, which was his avowed intention in coming, M. C—— proposed to let me see his own power as a magnetiser, in an experiment on this patient. The young man consenting, the parties were soon prepared. M. C—— began by telling me, that he would, by a transfusion of his will, into the body of the patient, compel him to sit still, although his own desire should be to rise. In order to achieve this, he placed himself before the young man and threw off the fluid from his fingers' ends, which he kept in a cluster, by constant forward gestures of the arms. Sometimes he held the fingers pointed at some particular part of the body, the heart in preference, though the brain would have been more poetical. The young man certainly did not rise; neither did I, nor any one else in the room. As this experiment appeared so satisfactory to everybody else, I was almost ashamed to distrust it, easy as it really seemed to sit still, with a man flourishing his fingers before one's eyes.

A young man walked in, looking good and definitely respectable. Since the somnambule had left us and this guy couldn’t consult her, which was his stated reason for coming, M. C—— suggested that I watch him demonstrate his ability as a magnetizer on this young man. After the young man agreed, they quickly got ready. M. C—— started by telling me that he would, through a transfusion of his will into the patient’s body, make him sit still, even if he wanted to get up. To do this, he positioned himself in front of the young man and sent out energy from his fingertips, which he kept gathered by constantly moving his arms forward. Sometimes he pointed his fingers at specific parts of the body, mainly the heart, though the brain might have been a more poetic choice. The young man definitely didn’t get up; nor did I, or anyone else in the room. Since everyone else seemed satisfied with the experiment, I almost felt embarrassed to doubt it, even though it really felt quite easy to sit still with a guy waving his fingers in front of me.

I proposed that the doctor should see if he could pin me down, in this invisible fashion, but this he frankly admitted he did not think he could do so soon, though he foresaw I would become a firm believer in the existence of animal magnetism, ere long, and a public supporter of its wonders. In time, he did not doubt his power to work the same miracle on me. He then varied the experiment, by making the young man raise his arm contrary to his wishes. The same process was repealed, all the fluid being directed at the arm, which, after a severe trial, was slowly raised, until it pointed forward like a finger-board. After this he was made to stand up, in spite of himself. This was the hardest affair of all, the doctor throwing off the fluid in handfuls; the magnetised refusing for some time to budge an inch. At length he suddenly stood up, and seemed to draw his breath like one who finally yields after a strong trial of his physical force.

I suggested that the doctor try to pin me down in this invisible way, but he honestly admitted that he didn't think he could do that so soon. However, he believed that I would soon become a strong believer in animal magnetism and a public supporter of its wonders. Eventually, he was confident that he could perform the same miracle on me. He then changed the experiment by having the young man raise his arm against his own wishes. The same process was repeated, with all the energy directed at the arm, which, after a tough struggle, was slowly raised until it pointed forward like a signpost. After this, he was made to stand up, despite his own resistance. This was the hardest part, with the doctor releasing energy in handfuls while the subject refused to move for some time. Finally, he suddenly stood up, taking a deep breath like someone who has finally given in after a strong test of their physical strength.

Nothing, certainly, is easier than for a young man to sit still and to stand up, pretending that he strives internally to resist the desire to do either. Still, if you ask me, if I think this was simple collusion, I hardly know what to answer. It is the easiest solution, and yet it did not strike me as being the true one. I never saw less of the appearance of deception than in the air of this young man; his face, deportment, and acts being those of a person in sober earnest. He made no professions, was extremely modest, and really seemed anxious not to have the experiments tried. To my question, if he resisted the will of M. C——, he answered, as much as he could, and said, that when he rose, he did it because he could not help himself. I confess myself disposed to believe in his sincerity and good faith.

Nothing is easier for a young man than to sit still and stand up, pretending that he's struggling internally to resist the urge to do either. Still, if you ask me whether I think this was just a simple act, I'm not sure how to respond. It seems like the simplest explanation, yet it didn’t feel like the real one to me. I’ve never seen less deception in someone than in this young man; his face, behavior, and actions showed he was genuinely serious. He made no grand statements, was very humble, and honestly seemed reluctant to have the experiments conducted. When I asked him if he resisted M. C——’s will, he replied that he did as much as he could and said that when he stood up, it was because he couldn’t help it. I have to admit I’m inclined to believe in his sincerity and honesty.

I had somewhat of a reputation, when a boy, of effecting my objects by pure dint of teasing. Many is the shilling I have abstracted, in this way, from my mother's purse, who, constantly affirmed that it was sore against her will. Now, it seems to me, that M. C—— may, very easily, have acquired so much command over a credulous youth, as to cause him to do things of this nature, as he may fancy, against his own will. Signs are the substitutes of words, which of themselves are purely conventional, and, in his case, the flourishing of the fingers are merely so many continued solicitations to get up. When the confirmation of a theory that is already received, and which is doubly attractive by its mysticisms, depends, in some measure, on the result, the experiment becomes still less likely to fail. It is stripping one of all pretensions to be a physiognomist, to believe that this young man was not honest; and I prefer getting over the difficulty in this way. As to the operator himself, he might, or might not, be the dupe of his own powers. If the former, I think it would, on the whole, render him the more likely to succeed with his subject.

I had a bit of a reputation as a kid for getting what I wanted just by teasing. I've taken many shillings from my mother's purse this way, even though she always insisted it was against her will. Now, it seems to me that M. C—— could easily have gained enough influence over a gullible young person to make him do things he might think he doesn't want to do. Signs are just stand-ins for words, which are purely conventional, and in his case, the waving of fingers is just a series of persistent nudges to get up. When the confirmation of a theory that is already accepted—and even more appealing because of its mysteries—relies, in some way, on the outcome, the chance of it failing becomes even slimmer. It takes away any pretense of being able to read faces to believe that this young man wasn’t honest; I’d rather deal with it this way. As for the operator himself, he might or might not be fooled by his own abilities. If he is, I think that would actually make him more likely to succeed with his subject.

After a visit or two, I was considered sufficiently advanced to be scientifically examined. One of the very best of the somnambules was employed on the occasion, and everything being in readiness, she was put to sleep. There was a faith-shaking brevity in this process, which, to say the least, if not fraudulent, was ill-judged. The doctor merely pointed his fingers at her once or twice, looking her intently in the eye, and the woman gaped; this success was followed up by a flourish or two of the hand, and the woman slept, or was magnetised. Now this was hardly sufficient even for my theory of the influence of the imagination. One could have wished the somnambule had not been so drowsy. But there she was, with her eyes shut, giving an occasional hearty gape, and the doctor declared her perfectly lit for service. She retained her seat, however, moved her body, laughed, talked, and, in all other respects, seemed to be precisely the woman she was before he pointed his fingers at her. At first, I felt a disposition to manifest that more parade was indispensable to humbugging me (who am not the Pope, you will remember), but reflection said, the wisest way was to affect a little faith, as the surest means of securing more experiments. Moreover, I am not certain, on the whole, that the simplicity of the operation is not in favour of the sincerity of the parties; for, were deception deliberately planned, it would be apt to call in the aid of more mummery, and this, particularly, in a case in which there was probably a stronger desire than usual to make a convert.

After a visit or two, I was considered advanced enough to be scientifically examined. One of the best somnambules was called in for the occasion, and once everything was ready, she was put to sleep. The process was surprisingly quick, and frankly, if it wasn’t a trick, it was poorly thought out. The doctor simply pointed his fingers at her a couple of times, looking directly into her eyes, and the woman yawned; this was followed by a few hand movements, and then she slept, or was hypnotized. This hardly seemed sufficient, even for my theory about the influence of imagination. I wished the somnambule hadn’t been so drowsy. But there she was, with her eyes closed, occasionally yawning, and the doctor claimed she was perfectly ready for service. However, she stayed seated, moved her body, laughed, talked, and in every other way, appeared to be exactly the same woman she was before he pointed his fingers at her. Initially, I felt like I should express that more theatrics were necessary to fool me (who am not the Pope, remember), but then I realized that it would be wiser to pretend to have some faith in order to secure more experiments. Also, I’m not entirely convinced that the simplicity of the process doesn’t support the sincerity of those involved; if there were a deliberate deception, they’d likely introduce more theatrics, especially in a situation where there was likely a stronger urge to make a convert.

I gave the somnambule my hand, and the examination was commenced, forthwith. I was first physically inspected, and the report was highly favourable to the condition of the animal. I had the satisfaction of hearing from this high authority, that the whole machinery of the mere material man was in perfect order, everything working well and in its proper place. This was a little contrary to my own experience, it is true, but as I had no means of seeing the interior clock-work of my own frame, like the somnambule, had I ventured to raise a doubt, it would have been overturned by the evidence of one who had ocular proofs of what she said, and should, beyond question, have incurred the ridicule of being accounted a malade imaginaire.

I held out my hand to the somnambule, and the examination began immediately. I was first physically checked, and the report was very positive about my health. I was pleased to hear from this expert that the entire system of my physical body was working perfectly, with everything functioning properly. This was somewhat at odds with my own feelings, it's true, but since I had no way of seeing the inner workings of my own body like the somnambule could, if I dared to question it, my doubt would have been dismissed by the evidence from someone who had firsthand knowledge of what she was saying, and I would have surely faced ridicule for being seen as a malade imaginaire.

Modesty must prevent my recording all that this obliging somnambule testified to, on the subject of my morale. Her account of the matter was highly satisfactory, and I must have been made of stone, not to credit her and her mysticisms. M. C—— looked at me again and again, with an air of triumph, as much as to say, "What do you think of all that now?—are you not really the noble, honest, virtuous, disinterested, brave creature, she has described you to be?" I can assure you, it required no little self-denial to abstain from becoming a convert to the whole system. As it is very unusual to find a man with a good head, who has not a secret inclination to believe in phrenology, so does he, who is thus purified by the scrutiny of animal magnetism, feel disposed to credit its mysterious influence. Certainly, I might have gaped, in my turn, and commenced the moral and physical dissection of the somnambule, whose hand I held, and no one could have given me the lie, for nothing is easier than to speak ex cathedrâ, when one has a monopoly of knowledge.

Modesty keeps me from sharing everything this helpful somnambule said about my morale. Her account was quite satisfying, and I must have been made of stone not to believe her and her mystic ideas. M. C—— kept looking at me with a triumphant expression, as if to say, "What do you think of all that now?—aren't you really the noble, honest, virtuous, selfless, brave person she described?" I can assure you it took a lot of self-control not to become a believer in the whole system. Just like it's rare to find a man with a good head who doesn't secretly lean towards phrenology, someone who has been cleansed by the examination of animal magnetism feels inclined to believe in its mysterious influence. Certainly, I could have stared in amazement and started to analyze the somnambule whose hand I held, and no one could have called me out on it, because it’s easy to speak ex cathedrâ when you have exclusive knowledge.

Encouraged by this flattering account of my own condition, I begged hard for some more indisputable evidence of the truth of the theory. I carried a stop-watch, and as I had taken an opportunity to push the stop on entering the room, I was particularly desirous that the somnambule should tell me the time indicated by its hands, a common test of their powers, I had been told; but to this M. C—— objected, referring everything of this tangible nature to future occasions. In fine, I could get nothing during three or four visits, but pretty positive assertions, expressions of wonder that I should affect to doubt what had been so often and so triumphantly proved to others, accounts physical and moral, like the one of which I had been the subject myself, and which did not admit of either confirmation or refutation, and often-repeated declarations, that the time was not distant when, in my own unworthy person, I was to become one of the most powerful magnetisers of the age. All this did very well to amuse, but very little towards convincing; and I was finally promised, that at my next visit, the somnambule would be prepared to show her powers, in a way that would not admit of cavil.

Encouraged by this flattering account of my condition, I eagerly asked for more concrete evidence supporting the theory. I had a stopwatch with me, and since I had started it when I entered the room, I really wanted the somnambule to tell me the time on it, a common test of their abilities, I had been told. However, M. C—— dismissed this, saying we could address anything like that during future visits. In the end, over three or four visits, I got nothing more than strong assertions, expressions of disbelief that I would doubt what had been so often and successfully proven to others, physical and moral accounts, like my own experience, which couldn’t be confirmed or denied. There were also repeated statements that it wouldn't be long before I, in my own unworthy self, would become one of the most powerful magnetizers of the age. All of this was entertaining, but it did little to convince me; I was finally promised that during my next visit, the somnambule would demonstrate her abilities in a way that would leave no room for doubt.

I went to the appointed meeting with a good deal of curiosity to learn the issue, and a resolution not to be easily duped. When I presented myself (I believe it was the fourth visit), M. C—— gave me a sealed paper, that was not to be opened for several weeks, and which, he said, contained the prediction of an event that was to occur to myself, between the present time and the day set for the opening of the letter, and which the somnambule had been enabled to foresee, in consequence of the interest she took in me and mine. With this sealed revelation, then, I was obliged to depart, to await the allotted hour.

I went to the scheduled meeting feeling pretty curious to find out what was going on, and I was determined not to be fooled easily. When I arrived (I think it was my fourth visit), M. C—— handed me a sealed envelope that I wasn't supposed to open for several weeks. He said it contained a prediction about something that would happen to me between now and the date set for opening the letter, and that the somnambule was able to foresee it because of her interest in me and my situation. So, with this sealed revelation, I had to leave and wait for the designated time.

M. C—— had promised to be present at the opening of the seal, but he did not appear. I dealt fairly by him, and the cover was first formally removed, on the evening of the day endorsed on its back, as the one when it would be permitted. The somnambule had foretold that, in the intervening time, one of my children would be seriously ill, that I should magnetise it, and the child would recover. Nothing of the sort had occurred. No one of the family had been ill, I had not attempted to magnetise any one, or even dreamed of it, and, of course, the whole prediction was a complete failure.

M. C—— had promised to be there for the opening of the seal, but he didn't show up. I treated him fairly, and the cover was officially removed on the evening of the date written on its back, which was when it was supposed to be allowed. The somnambule had predicted that during that time, one of my children would become seriously ill, that I would magnetize them, and the child would get better. None of that happened. No one in the family got sick, I didn't try to magnetize anyone, or even think about it, and obviously, the whole prediction was a total failure.

To do M. C—— justice, when he heard the result, he manifested surprise rather than any less confident feeling. I was closely questioned, first, as to whether either of the family had not been ill, and secondly, whether I had not felt a secret desire to magnetise any one of them. To all these interrogatories, truth compelled me to give unqualified negatives. I had hardly thought of the subject during the whole time. As this interview took place at my own house, politeness compelled me to pass the matter off as lightly as possible. There happened to be several ladies present, however, the evening M. C—— called, and, thinking the occasion a good one for him to try his powers on some one besides his regular somnambules, I invited him to magnetise any one of the party who might be disposed to submit to the process. To this he made no difficulty, choosing an English female friend as the subject of the experiment. The lady in question raised no objection, and the doctor commenced with great zeal, and with every appearance of faith in his own powers. No effect, however, was produced on this lady, or on one or two more of the party, all of whom obstinately refused even to gape. M. C—— gave the matter up, and soon after took his leave, and thus closed my personal connexion with animal magnetism.

To give M. C—— his due, when he heard the outcome, he looked surprised rather than less confident. I was closely questioned, first about whether anyone in the family had been ill, and secondly about whether I felt a secret urge to magnetize any of them. To all these questions, I was forced to answer with clear no's. I hardly thought about the topic at all during that time. Since this conversation took place in my own home, I had to brush it off as lightly as possible. However, there were several ladies present when M. C—— visited, and thinking it would be a good opportunity for him to demonstrate his abilities on someone other than his usual somnambules, I invited him to magnetize anyone in the group who was willing to give it a try. He had no objections and chose an English female friend as the subject for his experiment. The lady didn’t mind, and the doctor started with great enthusiasm, fully believing in his own abilities. However, there was no effect on her or one or two others, all of whom stubbornly refused to even yawn. M. C—— gave up and soon after left, thus ending my personal experience with animal magnetism.

If you ask me for the conclusions I have drawn from these facts, I shall be obliged to tell you, that I am in doubt how far the parties concerned deceived others, and how far they deceived themselves. It is difficult to discredit entirely all the testimony that has been adduced in behalf of this power; and one is consequently obliged to refer all the established facts to the influence of the imagination. Then testimony itself is but a precarious thing, different eyes seeing the same objects in different lights.

If you want to know what conclusions I've come to based on these facts, I have to say I'm unsure about how much the people involved misled others and how much they misled themselves. It's hard to completely dismiss all the evidence that has been presented in support of this power; therefore, we end up having to attribute all the established facts to the power of imagination. On top of that, testimony itself is quite unreliable, as different people see the same things in various ways.

Let us take ventriloquism as a parallel case to that of animal magnetism. Ventriloquism is neither more nor less than imitation; and yet, aided by the imagination, perhaps a majority of those who know anything about it, are inclined to believe there is really such a faculty as that which is vulgarly attributed to ventriloquism. The whole art of the ventriloquist consists in making such sounds as would be produced by a person, or thing, that should be actually in the circumstances that he wishes to represent. Let there be, for instance, five or six sitting around a table, in a room with a single door; a ventriloquist among them wishes to mislead his companions, by making them believe that another is applying for admission. All he has to do, is to make a sound similar to that which a person on the outside would make, in applying for admission. "Open the door, and let me in," uttered in such a manner, would deceive any one who was not prepared for the experiment, simply because men do not ordinarily make such sounds when sitting near each other, because the words themselves would draw the attention to the door, and because the sounds would be suited to the fictitious application. If there were two doors, the person first moving his head towards one of them, would probably give a direction to the imaginations of all the others; unless, indeed, the ventriloquist himself, by his words, or his own movements, as is usually the case, should assume the initiative. Every ventriloquist takes especial care to direct the imagination of his listener to the desired point, either by what he says, by some gesture, or by some movement. Such, undeniably, is the fact in regard to ventriloquism; for we know enough of the philosophy of sound, to be certain it can he nothing else. One of the best ventriloquists of this age, after affecting to resist this explanation of his mystery, candidly admitted to me, on finding that I stuck to the principles of reason, that all his art consisted of no more than a power to control the imagination by imitation supported occasionally by acting. And yet I once saw this man literally turn a whole family out of doors, in a storm, by an exercise of his art. On that occasion, so complete was the delusion, that the good people of the house actually fancied sounds which came from the ventriloquist, came from a point considerably beyond the place where they stood, and on the side opposite to that occupied by the speaker, although they stood at the top of a flight of steps, and he stood at the bottom. All this time, the sounds appeared to me to come from the place whence, by the laws of sound, except in cases of reverberation, and of the influence of the imagination, they only could appear to come; or, in other words, from the mouth of the ventriloquist himself. Now, if the imagination can effect so much, even in crowded assemblies, composed of people of all degrees of credulity, intelligence, and strength of mind, and when all are prepared, in part at least, for the delusion, what may it not be expected to produce on minds peculiarly suited to yield to its influence, and this, too, when the prodigy takes the captivating form of mysticism and miracles!

Let’s look at ventriloquism as a comparable example to animal magnetism. Ventriloquism is basically just imitation; yet, with the help of imagination, many who know a bit about it tend to think there's actually a special ability linked to ventriloquism. The whole skill of a ventriloquist is about making sounds that would be made by a person or thing actually in the situation they’re trying to portray. For instance, if there are five or six people sitting around a table in a room with only one door, and a ventriloquist among them wants to trick his friends into thinking someone is trying to get in, all he needs to do is create a sound that mimics what someone outside would make to ask to be let in. Saying, "Open the door, and let me in," in a certain way could fool anyone unprepared for the trick, simply because people typically don’t make such sounds when they’re close to each other, because those words might draw attention to the door, and the sounds match the made-up request. If there were two doors, the first person to turn their head toward one of them would likely guide the imaginations of everyone else; unless the ventriloquist himself, through his words or actions, as is usually the case, takes the lead. Every ventriloquist carefully makes sure to direct the listener's imagination to the intended focus through what he says, a gesture, or some movement. This is undeniably true regarding ventriloquism; we know enough about the science of sound to be certain it can't be anything else. One of the best ventriloquists of our time, after pretending to resist this explanation of his trick, honestly told me, when I stuck to rationality, that all his skill was just about controlling the imagination through imitation, sometimes backed up by acting. Yet, I once saw this man literally drive a whole family outside during a storm using his skill. On that occasion, the illusion was so convincing that the people in the house really believed the sounds from the ventriloquist were coming from a point well beyond where they stood, on the side opposite to the speaker, even though they were at the top of a staircase while he was at the bottom. All the while, I perceived the sounds were coming from the place that, according to the laws of sound, only they could actually come from, or in other words, from the mouth of the ventriloquist himself. Now, if the imagination can achieve so much, even in crowded settings filled with all kinds of people—varying in credulity, intelligence, and mental strength—when they all are at least somewhat primed for the illusion, what can it not be expected to do with minds particularly inclined to succumb to its influence, especially when the wonder takes the enchanting form of mysticism and miracles!

In the case of the patient of M. Cloquet, we are reduced to the alternatives of denying the testimony, of believing that recourse was had to drugs, of referring all to the force of the imagination, or of admitting the truth of the doctrine of animal magnetism. The character of M. Cloquet, and the motiveless folly of such a course, compel us to reject the first; the second can hardly be believed, as the patient had not the appearance of being drugged, and the possession of such a secret would be almost as valuable as the art in question itself. The doctrine of animal magnetism we cannot receive, on account of the want of uniformity and exactitude in the experiments; and I think, we are fairly driven to take refuge in the force of the imagination. Before doing this, however, we ought to make considerable allowances for exaggerations, colouring, and the different manner in which men are apt to regard the same thing. My young American friend, who did believe in animal magnetism, viewed several of the facts I have related with eyes more favourable than mine, although even he was compelled to allow that M. C—— had much greater success with himself, than with your humble servant.

In the case of M. Cloquet's patient, we are faced with the options of disregarding the evidence, believing drugs were used, attributing it all to the power of imagination, or accepting the reality of animal magnetism. M. Cloquet’s reputation and the sheer absurdity of such a choice force us to reject the first option; the second is hard to accept since the patient didn’t seem drugged, and having such a secret would be nearly as valuable as the technique itself. We can't accept the theory of animal magnetism due to the lack of consistency and precision in the experiments; therefore, we are likely pushed to rely on the power of imagination. Before we do that, though, we should consider possible exaggerations, biases, and the different ways people might perceive the same situation. My young American friend, who actually believed in animal magnetism, looked at several of the facts I shared with a more favorable perspective than I did, although even he had to admit that M. C—— had much more success with him than with me.

LETTER XXIII.

Preparations for Departure.—My Consulate.—Leave
Paris.—Picardy.—Cressy.—Montreuil.—Gate of Calais.—Port of
Calais.—Magical Words.

Preparations for Departure.—My Consulate.—Leave
Paris.—Picardy.—Cressy.—Montreuil.—Gate of Calais.—Port of
Calais.—Magical Words.

To R. COOPER, ESQ., COOPERSTOWN.

To R. Cooper, Esq., Cooperstown.

We entered France in July, 1826, and having remained in and about the French capital until February, 1828, we thought it time to change the scene. Paris is effectually the centre of Europe, and a residence in it is the best training an American can have, previously to visiting the other parts of that quarter of the world. Its civilisation, usages, and facilities take the edge off our provincial admiration, remove prejudices, and prepare the mind to receive new impressions, with more discrimination and tact. I would advise all our travellers to make this their first stage, and then to visit the North of Europe, before crossing the Alps or the Pyrenees. Most people, however, hurry into the South, with a view to obtain the best as soon as possible; but it is with this, as in most of our enjoyments, a too eager indulgence defeats its own aim.

We entered France in July 1826 and stayed in and around Paris until February 1828. We felt it was time for a change of scenery. Paris is basically the center of Europe, and living there is the best preparation an American can have before exploring the rest of that part of the world. Its culture, customs, and amenities diminish our provincial admiration, dispel biases, and ready the mind to absorb new experiences with greater discernment and sensitivity. I would recommend that all travelers make this their first destination, then visit Northern Europe before crossing the Alps or the Pyrenees. However, most people rush into the South, eager to enjoy it as quickly as possible; but, like many things in life, being too impatient often spoils the experience.

We had decided to visit London, where the season, or winter, would soon commence. The necessary arrangements were made, and we sent round our cards of p.p.c. and obtained passports. On the very day we were to quit Paris, an American friend wrote me a note to say that a young connexion of his was desirous of going to London, and begged a place for her in my carriage. It is, I believe, a peculiar and a respectable trait in the national character, that we so seldom hesitate about asking, or acceding to, favours of this sort. Whenever woman is concerned, our own sex yield, and usually without murmuring. At all events, it was so with W——, who cheerfully gave up his seat in the carriage to Miss ——, in order to take one in the coupé of the diligence. The notice was so short, and the hour so late, that there was no time to get a passport for him, and, as he was included in mine, I was compelled to run the risk of sending him to the frontiers without one. I was a consul at the time,—a titular one as to duties, but in reality as much of a consul as if I had ever visited my consulate.[34] The only official paper I possessed, in connexion with the office, the commission and exequatur excepted, was a letter from the Préfet of the Rhône, acknowledging the receipt of the latter. As this was strictly a French document, I gave it to W—— as proof of my identity, accompanied by a brief statement of the reasons why he was without a passport, begging the authorities at Need to let him pass as far as the frontier, where I should be in season to prove his character. This statement I signed as consul, instructing W—— to show it, if applied to for a passport; and if the gendarmes disavowed me, to show the letter, by way of proving who I was. The expedient was clumsy enough, but it was the best that offered.

We decided to visit London, where the season, or winter, would soon start. We made all the necessary arrangements, sent out our p.p.c. cards, and got our passports. On the very day we were about to leave Paris, an American friend wrote me a note saying that a young relative of his wanted to go to London and asked if she could have a spot in my carriage. I think it’s a unique and respectable part of our national character that we rarely hesitate to ask for or grant favors like this. Whenever a woman is involved, our own gender tends to yield, and usually without complaint. At least, that’s how it was with W——, who gladly gave up his seat in the carriage to Miss —— so he could take one in the coupé of the diligence. The notice was so short and the hour so late that there was no time to get him a passport, and since he was included on mine, I had to take the risk of sending him to the border without one. At the time, I was a consul—officially in title, but in reality, as much of a consul as if I had ever visited my consulate.[34] The only official document I had related to the office, aside from the commission and exequatur, was a letter from the Préfet of the Rhône acknowledging receipt of the latter. Since this was purely a French document, I gave it to W—— as proof of my identity, along with a brief note explaining why he didn’t have a passport, asking the authorities at Need to allow him to pass as far as the border, where I would be available to vouch for him. I signed this document as consul, instructing W—— to show it if anyone asked for a passport; and if the gendarmes rejected my authority, he should show the letter to prove who I was. The solution was a bit awkward, but it was the best I could come up with.

[Footnote 34: There being so strong a propensity to cavil at American facts, lest this book might fall into European hands, it may be well to explain a little. The consulate of the writer was given to him solely to avoid the appearance of going over to the enemy, during his residence abroad. The situation conferred neither honour nor profit, there being no salary, and, in his case, not fees enough to meet the expense of the office opened by a deputy. The writer suspects he was much too true to the character and principles of his native country, to be voluntarily selected by its Government as the object of its honours or rewards, and it is certain he never solicited either. There are favours, it would seem, that are reserved, in America, for those who most serve the interests of her enemies! A day of retribution will come.]

[Footnote 34: Since there's a strong tendency to criticize American facts, in case this book ends up in European hands, it might be good to clarify a bit. The author was given the consulate role solely to avoid the appearance of switching sides while living abroad. The position brought neither honor nor profit, with no salary, and in his case, not enough fees to cover the expenses of the office handled by a deputy. The author suspects he was too committed to the character and principles of his home country to be willingly chosen by its Government for honors or rewards, and he certainly never asked for either. There seem to be favors in America reserved for those who best serve the interests of her enemies! A day of reckoning will come.]

This arrangement settled, we got into the carriage, and took our leave of Paris. Before quitting the town, however, I drove round to the Rue d'Anjou, to take my leave of General Lafayette. This illustrious man had been seriously ill for some weeks, and I had many doubts of my ever seeing him again. He did not conceive himself to be in any danger, however; but spoke of his speedy recovery as a matter of course, and made an engagement with me for the ensuing summer. I bade him adieu, with a melancholy apprehension that I should never see him again.

This settled, we got into the carriage and said our goodbyes to Paris. Before leaving the city, though, I drove by Rue d'Anjou to say goodbye to General Lafayette. This remarkable man had been seriously ill for a few weeks, and I had serious doubts about ever seeing him again. He didn’t think he was in any danger, though; he talked about his quick recovery as if it were just a given, and made plans with me for the coming summer. I said goodbye to him, feeling a deep sadness that I might never see him again.

We drove through the gates of Paris, amid the dreariness of a winter's evening. You are to understand that everybody quits London and Paris just as night sets in. I cannot tell you whether this is caprice, or whether it is a usage that has arisen from a wish to have the day in town, and a desire to relieve the monotony of roads so often travelled, by sleep; but so it is. We did not fall into the fashion simply because it is a fashion, but the days are so short in February in these high latitudes, that we could not make our preparations earlier.

We drove through the gates of Paris on a gloomy winter evening. You should understand that everyone leaves London and Paris just as night falls. I can't say if this is just a whim or if it's something people do because they want to spend the day in the city and break the boredom of roads they travel often by getting some sleep; but that's how it is. We didn't follow this trend just because it's a trend, but because the days are so short in February at this latitude that we couldn't get ready any sooner.

I have little agreeable to say concerning the first forty miles of the journey. It rained; and the roads were, as usual, slippery with mud, and full of holes. The old pavés are beginning to give way, however, and we actually got a bit of terre within six posts of Paris. This may be considered a triumph of modern civilisation; for, whatever may be said and sung in favour of Appian ways and Roman magnificence, a more cruel invention for travellers and carriage-wheels, than these pavés, was never invented. A real Paris winter's day is the most uncomfortable of all weather. If you walk, no device of leather will prevent the moisture from penetrating to your heart; if you ride, it is but an affair of mud and gras de Paris. We enjoyed all this until nine at night, by which time we had got enough of it; and in Beauvais, instead of giving the order à la poste, the postilion was told to go to an inn. A warm supper and good beds put us all in good-humour again.

I don't have much positive to say about the first forty miles of the journey. It rained, and the roads were slippery with mud and filled with holes, as usual. The old cobblestones are starting to break down, though, and we actually hit some dirt within six miles of Paris. This might be considered a triumph of modern civilization; because, despite all the praise for Roman roads and grandeur, nothing is worse for travelers and carriage wheels than these cobblestones. A real Paris winter day is the most uncomfortable weather of all. If you walk, no leather gear will keep the moisture from soaking through to your bones; if you ride, it's just a mess of mud and Paris grime. We dealt with all this until nine at night, by which time we had had enough; and in Beauvais, instead of calling for the post, the driver was told to go to an inn. A warm dinner and cozy beds put us all in a good mood again.

In putting into the mouth of Falstaff the words, "Shall I not take mine ease in mine inn?" Shakspeare may have meant no more than the drowsy indolence of a glutton; but they recur to me with peculiar satisfaction whenever I get unbooted, and with a full stomach before the warm fire of an hotel, after a fatiguing and chilling day's work. If any man doubt whether Providence has not dealt justly by all of us in rendering our enjoyments dependent on comparative rather than on positive benefits, let him travel through a dreary day, and take his comfort at night in a house where everything is far below his usual habits, and learn to appreciate the truth. The sweetest sleep I have ever had has been caught on deck, in the middle watch, under a wet pee-jacket, and with a coil of rope for a pillow.

In having Falstaff say, "Shouldn't I just relax in my inn?" Shakespeare might have only intended to convey the lazy indulgence of a glutton. Yet, those words come to mind with particular pleasure whenever I kick off my boots and sit in front of a warm hotel fire with a full belly after a tiring, cold day. If anyone questions whether fate has been fair to us by making our pleasures depend on relative rather than absolute advantages, they should experience a dreary day and find comfort at night in a place that falls far short of their usual standards, and come to appreciate this truth. The best sleep I've ever had was on deck, during the midnight watch, under a wet raincoat, using a coil of rope as my pillow.

Our next day's work carried us as far as Abbeville, in Picardy. Here we had a capital supper of game, in a room that set us all shivering with good honest cold. The beds, as usual, were excellent. The country throughout all this part of France, is tame and monotonous, with wide reaches of grain-lands that are now brown and dreary, here and there a wood, and the usual villages of dirty stonehouses. We passed a few hamlets, however, that were more than commonly rustic and picturesque, and in which the dwellings seemed to be of mud, and were thatched. As they were mostly very irregular in form, the street winding through them quite prettily, they would have been good in their way, had there been any of the simple expedients of taste to relieve their poverty. But the French peasants of this province appear to think of little else but their wants. There was occasionally a venerable and generous old vine clinging about the door, however, to raise some faint impressions of happiness.

Our work the next day took us all the way to Abbeville, in Picardy. Here we had a great dinner of game in a room that made us all shiver from the genuine cold. The beds, as usual, were excellent. The countryside in this part of France is flat and dull, with vast stretches of grain fields that are now brown and dreary, a few woods here and there, and the usual villages of dirty stone houses. We did pass a few hamlets that were more rustic and picturesque than others, where the homes appeared to be made of mud and had thatched roofs. Since they were mostly very irregular in shape, with the street winding charmingly through them, they could have been lovely if only they had some simple touches of style to brighten up their poverty. But the French peasants in this region seem to focus on little else but their basic needs. Occasionally, there was an old, generous vine clinging to a door, giving off some faint hints of happiness.

We passed through, or near, the field of Cressy. By the aid of the books, we fancied we could trace the positions of the two armies; but it was little more than very vague conjecture. There was a mead, a breadth of field well adapted to cavalry, and a wood. The river is a mere brook, and could have offered but little protection, or resistance, to the passage of any species of troops. I saw no village, and we may not have been within a mile of the real field, after all. Quite likely; no one knows where it is. It is very natural that the precise sites of great events should be lost, though our own history is so fresh and full, that to us it is apt to appear extraordinary. In a conversation with a gentleman of the Stanley family, lately, I asked him if Latham-House, so celebrated for its siege in the civil wars, was still in the possession of its ancient proprietors. I was told it no longer existed, and that, until quite recently, its positive site was a disputed point, and one which had only been settled by the discovery of a hole in a rock, in which shot had been cast during the siege, and which hole was known to have formerly been in a court. It is no wonder that doubts exist as to the identity of Homer, or the position of Troy.

We passed through or near the Cressy field. With the help of books, we thought we could figure out where the two armies were positioned, but it was mostly just vague guesses. There was a meadow, a stretch of land that was great for cavalry, and a woods. The river is just a stream and wouldn't have provided much protection or resistance to any kind of troops crossing. I didn't see any village, and we might not have been within a mile of the actual battlefield after all. It’s quite possible; no one really knows where it is. It’s natural that the exact locations of significant events get lost over time, even though our own history is so recent and detailed that it can seem strange to us. Recently, I talked with a member of the Stanley family and asked him if Latham-House, famous for its siege during the civil wars, was still owned by its original family. I was told it no longer exists, and until very recently, its exact location was debated. That was only resolved when a hole in rock was discovered, a place where cannonballs were made during the siege, and it was known to have once been in a courtyard. It’s no wonder there are questions about the identity of Homer or the location of Troy.

We have anglicised the word Cressy, which the French term Crécy, or, to give it a true Picard orthography, Créci. Most of the names that have this termination are said to be derived from this province. Many of them have become English, and have undergone several changes in the spelling. Tracy, or Tracey; de Courcy, or de Courcey; Montmorency; and Lacy, or Lacey, were once "Traci," "Courci," "Montmorenci," and "Laci." [35] The French get over the disgrace of their ancient defeats very ingeniously, by asserting that the English armies of old were principally composed of Norman soldiers, and that the chivalrous nobility which performed such wonders were of purely Norman blood. The latter was probably more true than the former.

We have adjusted the word Cressy, which the French call Crécy, or, to reflect its true Picard spelling, Créci. Most names that end with this suffix are believed to come from this region. Many of them have become English and have gone through various changes in spelling. Tracy, or Tracey; de Courcy, or de Courcey; Montmorency; and Lacy, or Lacey, were once "Traci," "Courci," "Montmorenci," and "Laci." [35] The French cleverly deal with the embarrassment of their past defeats by claiming that the English armies back then were mainly made up of Norman soldiers, and that the noble knights who achieved such feats were of purely Norman heritage. The latter is probably more accurate than the former.

[Footnote 35: The celebrated Sir William Draper was once present when the subject turned on the descent of families, and the changes that names underwent. "Now my own is a proof of what I say," he continued, with the intention to put an end to a discourse that was getting to savour of family pride; "my family being directly derived from King Pepin." "How do you make that out, Sir William?" "By self-evident orthographical testimony, as you may see,—Pepin, Pipkin, Napkin, Diaper, Draper."]

[Footnote 35: The well-known Sir William Draper was once in a conversation about family lineages and the changes that names go through. "Now my own is an example of what I mean," he said, wanting to wrap up a discussion that was starting to sound a bit boastful about family status; "my family is directly descended from King Pepin." "How do you figure that, Sir William?" "By clear spelling evidence, as you can see—Pepin, Pipkin, Napkin, Diaper, Draper."]

As we drew nearer to the coast, the country became more varied. Montreuil and Samer are both fortified; and one of these places, standing on an abrupt, rocky eminence, is quite picturesque and quaint. But we did not stop to look at anything very minutely, pushing forward, as fast as three horses could draw us, for the end of our journey. A league or two from Boulogne we were met by a half-dozen mounted runners from the different inns, each inviting us to give our custom to his particular employer. These fellows reminded me of the wheat-runners on the hill at Albany; though they were as much more clamorous and earnest, as a noisy protestation-making Frenchman is more obtrusive, than a shrewd, quiet, calculating Yankee. We did not stop in Boulogne to try how true were the voluble representations of these gentry, but, changing horses at the post, went our way. The town seemed full of English; and we gazed about us, with some curiosity, at a place that has become so celebrated by the great demonstration of Napoleon. There is a high monument standing at no great distance from the town, to commemorate one of his military parades. The port is small and crowded, like most of the harbours on both sides of the Channel.

As we got closer to the coast, the landscape became more diverse. Montreuil and Samer are both fortified, and one of these places, perched on a steep, rocky hill, is quite picturesque and charming. But we didn’t stop to take a close look at anything, pushing forward as fast as three horses could carry us towards the end of our journey. A mile or two from Boulogne, we were met by half a dozen mounted runners from different inns, each inviting us to choose his particular establishment. These guys reminded me of the wheat runners on the hill in Albany; they were much more vocal and eager, just as a loud, protesting Frenchman is more conspicuous than a shrewd, quiet, calculating New Yorker. We didn’t stop in Boulogne to see how accurate these guys’ enthusiastic pitches were; instead, we switched horses at the post and carried on. The town seemed filled with English people, and we looked around with some curiosity at a place that has become so famous because of Napoleon's grand demonstration. There is a tall monument standing not far from the town to commemorate one of his military parades. The port is small and crowded, like most of the harbors on both sides of the Channel.

We had rain, and chills, and darkness, for the three or four posts that succeeded. The country grew more and more tame, until, after crossing an extensive plain of moist meadow-land, we passed through the gate of Calais. I know no place that will give you a more accurate notion of this celebrated port than Powles Hook. It is, however, necessary to enlarge the scale greatly, for Calais is a town of some size, and the hommock on which it stands, and the low land by which it is environed, are much more considerable in extent than the spot just named.

We had rain, chills, and darkness for the three or four posts that followed. The countryside became more and more civilized until, after crossing a large plain of wet meadows, we went through the gate of Calais. I can’t think of a place that gives you a better idea of this famous port than Powles Hook. However, it’s important to significantly enlarge the scale because Calais is a fairly large town, and the hill it's built on and the low land surrounding it are much more extensive than the spot just mentioned.

We drove to the inn that Sterne has immortalised, or one at least that bears the same name, and found English comfort united with French cookery and French taste. After all, I do not know why I may not say French comforts too; for in many respects they surpass their island neighbours even in this feature of domestic comfort. It is a comfort to have a napkin even when eating a muffin; to see one's self entire in a mirror, instead of edging the form into it, or out of it, sideways; to drink good coffee; to eat good côtelettes; and to be able to wear the same linen for a day, without having it soiled. The Bible says, "Comfort me with flagons, or apples," I really forget which,—and if either of these is to be taken as authority, a côtelette may surely be admitted into the carte de conforts.

We drove to the inn that Sterne made famous, or at least one that has the same name, and found English comfort combined with French cooking and style. After all, I don’t see why I can’t mention French comforts too; because in many ways they even outdo their island neighbors when it comes to domestic comfort. It’s nice to have a napkin even when eating a muffin; to see your whole self in a mirror instead of having to turn sideways to catch a glimpse; to drink good coffee; to eat good chops; and to be able to wear the same linen for a day without it getting dirty. The Bible says, "Comfort me with flagons, or apples," I really forget which—and if either of these is taken as authority, a chop can surely be included in the comfort menu.

We found Calais a clear town, and pressing a certain medium aspect, that was as much English as French. The position is strong, though I was not much struck with the strength of the works. England has no motive to wish to possess it, now that conquest on the Continent is neither expedient nor possible. The port is good for nothing, in a warlike sense, except to protect a privateer or two; though the use of steam will probably make it of more importance in any future war, than it has been for the last two centuries.

We found Calais to be a clear town, with a certain balance that felt as much English as it did French. Its location is strong, but I wasn't very impressed by the fortifications. England has no reason to want to take it over now that conquering on the continent isn’t practical or achievable. The port isn’t really useful for anything military, except to shelter a privateer or two; however, the advent of steam power will likely make it more significant in any future conflict than it has been for the past two hundred years.

We found W—— safely arrived. At one of the frontier towns he had been asked for his passport, and in his fright he gave the letter of the Préfet of the Rhône, instead of the explanation I had so cleverly devised. This letter commenced with the words "Monsieur le Consul" in large letters, and occupying, according to French etiquette, nearly half of the first page. The gendarme, a vieux moustache, held his lantern up to read it, and seeing this ominous title, it would seem that Napoleon, and Marengo, and all the glories of the Consulate, arose in his imagination. He got no further than those three words, which he pronounced aloud; and then folding the letter, he returned it with a profound bow, asking no further questions. As the diligence drove on, W—— heard him say, "Apparemment vous avez un homme très-considérable là-dedans, Monsieur le Conducteur." So much for our fears, for passports, and for gendarmes!

We found W—— had arrived safely. At one of the border towns, he was asked for his passport, and in his panic, he handed over the letter from the Préfet of the Rhône instead of the explanation I had cleverly come up with. This letter started with the words "Monsieur le Consul" in large letters, taking up almost half of the first page, according to French etiquette. The gendarme, an old guy with a mustache, held up his lantern to read it, and upon seeing that ominous title, it seemed that Napoleon, Marengo, and all the glories of the Consulate appeared in his mind. He didn’t read past those three words, which he pronounced aloud, and then folding the letter, he handed it back with a deep bow, asking no more questions. As the coach moved on, W—— heard him say, "Apparently you have a very important man in there, Monsieur le Conducteur." So much for our fears, passports, and gendarmes!

We went to bed, with the intention of embarking for England in the morning.

We went to bed, planning to head to England in the morning.

THE END

Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!