CHAPTER VII.
The Nobleman’s Journal becomes more and more Aristocratic.—Wistar Parties in Philadelphia.—Literary Gentlemen in Philadelphia.—The Girard College.—Character of the late Stephen Girard.—The Quakers.—Their Aristocratic Sentiments.—Quaker Dress.—Philadelphia Ladies.—Good Living in Philadelphia.—The Mansion-house in Third-street.—Apostrophe to the Fashionable Young Men and to the Men of Family.
The Nobleman’s Journal becomes more and more Aristocratic.—Wistar Parties in Philadelphia.—Literary Gentlemen in Philadelphia.—The Girard College.—Character of the late Stephen Girard.—The Quakers.—Their Aristocratic Sentiments.—Quaker Dress.—Philadelphia Ladies.—Good Living in Philadelphia.—The Mansion-house in Third-street.—Apostrophe to the Fashionable Young Men and to the Men of Family.
“Still stranger much, that when at last mankindHad reach’d the sinewy firmness of their youth,And could discriminate and argue wellOn subjects more mysterious, they were yetBabes in the cause of freedom, and should fearAnd quake before the gods themselves had made;But above measure strange that neither proofOf sad experience, nor example setBy some, whose patriot virtue had prevailed.Can even now, when they are grown matureIn wisdom, and with philosophic deedsFamiliar, serve t’ emancipate the rest!”
Cowper’sTask, Canto v.
The journal of my friend I found was too long for publication. Besides, I could discover his aristocratic propensities to grow stronger and stronger in exact proportion to his intercoursewith the higher classes; so that I was obliged to omit his notes on the society of Philadelphia and Baltimore, in order to find room for his observations on Washington. Two circumstances, however, I must not suffer to pass unnoticed; his admiration of the Quakers, and his dislike of the Wistar parties,—a sort of half literary, half fashionable, weekly convention of gentlemen, at which a tolerable supper is added to a great deal of indifferent conversation on ordinary topics.
“There is,” says my friend, in one of his notes, “a much greater number of literary and scientific gentlemen in Philadelphia than can be found in any other city of the United States; but they are, as yet, far from forming ‘a republic of letters.’ As long as literary and scientific men without fortune are merely tolerated by their wealthy but less clever colleagues; as long as science and literature in the United States are judged, not by their high intrinsic value, but by the advantages which may result from them in the common transactions of life; as long as arts and sciences remain without influential patrons or public consideration, it is in vain to attempt their promotion by pampering poets and painters with a weekly supper. These ‘literaryréunions,’as they are called in Philadelphia, are not calculated to put a man of letters at his ease, or to elicit new thoughts by familiar conversation. On the contrary, they are stiff, unsociable, full of thatgênante étiquettewhich prevails in all the higher American coteries to the exclusion of mirth and familiarity. The Athenæum and Garrick clubs in London contain daily a thousand times better opportunities of improvement to young literary men, than the Wistar parties of Philadelphia in the course of a century. There are, in fact, no establishments similar to those in the United States; though there arevery respectablegambling clubs in New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and even in the godly city of Boston.”
“The newly established Girard College,” observes my friend in another note, “will not prove so great a blessing to the Philadelphians as is generally imagined. With the munificent donation of its founder, and the truly royal splendour of its execution, it will, I am afraid, become after all little more than an ordinary school of arts and trades. The whole system of education in the United States, and the tone of society, must materially change, before an institution like the Polytechnic School of France can possibly succeed in forming scholars in the higher departmentsof science. The peculiar foundation and organization of Girard College does not seem to me to be much calculated to improve the system of hand-to-mouth learning produced by the material tendency, and the desire of pecuniary gain and profit, which form the index to the character of the greater part of professional men in America. The founder himself, though in many respects a public-spirited, and in his own way a clever man, had but a vulgar appreciation of genius, and a very high respect for money. This is undoubtedly the reason why he chose none but wealthy men for trustees of the college which was to bear his name, though it is more than probable some literary men might have been found in the United States, who, without being able to givebonds, would have proved of some advantage in establishing and organizing a college.
“All I have heard of that vain old Frenchman confirms me in the opinion that, even in his acts of generosity, he was but a vulgar plebeian; never consulting the feelings of those he wished to benefit, but first wounding with a rude hand their inmost soul, in order afterwards to apply the healing plaster in the shape of a bank-note. Thus, he would lecture one of hismost faithful servants engaged to be married, on the vexations and follies of matrimony; drawing in a brutal manner the veil from nature’s holiest mysteries, and refusing to give him aid and protection, until, perceiving that his victim, dreading the consequences of his temper, remained, like some obedient cur, silent at the abuses of his master, he signed a bank-check in his favour to the amount, I believe, of some thousand pounds. I have heard other anecdotes about him of a similar nature, from which I could not help drawing the conclusion that it was his peculiar delight to make his friends and clients forswear every other god and goddess before he introduced them to the temple of Mammon;—or did the cunning Gaul do so from a knowledge of the society in which he wished to gain an ascendency? What reason, after all, had the Philadelphians to be proud of such a man? And what difference is there between an American banker leaving several millions of dollars to a rich and populous city, in order that his name may be perpetuated by the building of a school; and an honest English boot-black, who leaves an hundred thousand pounds for the establishment of an hospital?[15]—I can see none; unless it be that the act of theformer proceeded from vanity, while that of the latter took its origin in charity and true Christian piety.
“The most interesting part of Philadelphia society are the Quakers; as a body the most singular, as individuals the most respectable, Christians in the United States. I do not here speak of their religious tenets, which are sufficiently known to the world; but of the fact of their being throughout a moral people, by mutual support almost universally in easy circumstances, and from their habits of industry and frugality seldom led into temptation. No other Christian society is held together by such strong ties of affection and brotherhood; no other set of men bear in their manners, habits, dress, and character so strongly the imprints of their faith. They carry their religion—a thing unknown in these times of moral and political advancement—into every act of their private and public lives; and, though they sometimes obtrude it in a manner not the most pleasant or refined on the notice of strangers, show at least on all occasions that Christianity with them is a living principle, not an abstract doctrine to be remembered only on the Sabbath.
“I like aristocracy in every shape, whenever ithas a solid foundation; but I despise aristocratic pretensions in a vulgar rich man. The aristocracy of the Quakers consists not so much in wealth as in family, and this circumstance has given to the society of Philadelphia a tone decidedly superior to that of New York. Though much more exclusive and less hospitable than the New-Yorkers, the Philadelphians are more agreeable and elegant in their manners. They have more of theà-plombof gentlemen. There is less motion and more dignity in their carriage; and you can see, from an hundred little circumstances, that the higher classes have the advantage of a generation over the ordinary run of aristocrats in the United States.
“The Quakers, who are still among those who directly or indirectly influence the fashions of society, have introduced a patrician simplicity in dress, manners, and habits, which forms a singular contrast with the gaudy ostentatious display of wealth with which one is occasionally struck in New York. The Philadelphia ladies dress with more taste than any others in the Union; they walk, dance, sing, and talk better than those of the Northern cities; and their manners in general are more finished. They do not study Latin and Greek, like some of the New England belles;but they prattle French and Spanish, and sometimes Italian, with tolerable facility. They cultivate theagrémensof society; while a great portion of the Northern women puzzle their heads, and those of their admirers, with philosophy and the classics. Yet it is but justice to say, that the women of New England, even those of the highest classes, remain unsurpassed as wives and mothers, and set, in this respect, the example to all other females in the United States.
“In point of shape, the ladies of Philadelphia are believed to be unrivalled; their necks, shoulders, and waists being admirably wrought, and their hands and feet of the most aristocratic littleness. Their complexions are not so clear and fresh as those of the women of New England; but the expression of their countenances is moredistinguée, inclining somewhat towards the Spanish. I was also told that they had a taste for the romantic; several ‘droll’ engagements taking place annually, and a small number of run-away matches furnishing from time to time sufficient matter for thechronique scandaleuseof the town. Things of this kind are of rare occurrence in the North; though, as I observed during my stay in Boston, there is no lack of imagination on thepart of thewomen. But where should a young Bostonian find time to run away with a lady? What business or matter-of-fact man is sufficiently amiable for a woman to risk her reputation on his account?
“The Quaker ladies, in general, are renowned for their beauty. They dress plainly, but in the richest materials; showing that their aristocracy consists in substance, not in forms. The colour of their dresses, which is usually of a light grey, is not ill suited to a fair complexion; but the cut is too Old-English not to form a glaring contrast with the Paris fashions weekly imported into the United States. At the time of William Penn, the Quaker dress was not distinguished from the fashions of the day by all that was inelegant, odd, contrary to the prevailing taste; and on that account did not obtrude itself on every one’s notice. But at present the case is reversed; the very simplicity of the apparel becomes an arrogant distinction, or may at least be considered as such by those who do not look upon it as a part of their religious creed. Every man or woman owes something to society, so that a total disregard of its established rules and customs is usually considered as proceeding either from extreme vulgarity, or a degree of elevation which neednot descend to the level of others: a wise person avoids the dilemma.
“For this reason, and perhaps also because the French fashions of the day are far more becoming to a pretty face, and exhibittaille,tournure, &c. to much greater advantage, a portion of ‘the Society of Friends’ have of late relaxed from their original severity, and adopted certain unobjectionable parts of Parisian millinery. The selection they made shows their tact and sense of propriety; and it is now a common saying with travelled men, that, in order to see a well-dressed lady, one must either see a Parisian woman of the higher classes, or a ‘gay Quakeressof Philadelphia.’ The gentlemen, too, begin to trim their hats, and allow the fashionable scissors to be applied to their coats, without dreading the immediate downfal of Christianity. They are also said to have grown more attentive to ladies; having at last arrived at the conviction that the hearts of women are more easily attached by the silken thread of trifling cares and attentions, than by the chain-cable of constant toil and sacrifice.
“A number of Quakers of Philadelphia occupy themselves exclusively with science and literature; few of them are not members of some charitableor other association for the benefit of mankind. Yet they have, from the commencement of the revolutionary war, been denounced asTories: partly because they did not take an active part in the struggle for independence; and partly because, as politicians, they have always been in favour of a federal government. If it be true that family, education, and even property, are, from the principle of self-preservation, inclined towards a strong protective government, the Quakers as a body must naturally be advocates of Conservatism; but in a country like America, where political principles and parties are constantly changing, where the power of the government and the opposition are so nearly balanced, and where the clashing interests of society sometimes completely paralyze the course of politics adopted by the Congress of the nation, I can see no evil come from a small part of the community being attached to existing forms, or united, if this were possible, for the purpose of resisting the rapidity of public events.
“The American government, as I have often said, requires, more than any other, a strong opposition. The aristocratic and democratic principles mutually excite and increase one another, like positive and negative electricity in the metallicplates of a galvanic chain; only, that from time to time they requirecleaning. Each principle without the presence of the other would soon degenerate; and it is, in this situation of public affairs, perhaps a fortunate circumstance that there should exist at leastoneclass of society capable of representing with some sort of dignity the aristocratic element of State.
“The time, after all, must come when the United States will have their history; when the present will be linked to the past; when the names of American statesmen and patriots will go for something in the estimation of the public. Then the influence of family will and must be felt by the people as the historical representative of their political existence. This period is now delayed by the apparent opposition between the higher and lower classes; but it will arrive as soon as the realéliteof society willjointhe lower orders against the tyranny of mediocrity—in the shape of the government of the richbourgeoisie.
“The society of Philadelphia is, on the whole, better than that of Boston or New York. There is less vulgar aristocracy than in other Northern cities. Not that I mean to say that there are not people to be found in Boston and New Yorkthat could rival the Philadelphians in point of ‘gentility;’ but in the good ‘city of brotherly love’ there is, probably owing to a seasonable admixture of a large number of European, and especially French families, a higher tone, greater elegance, and, in every respect, moreagrémens. The New-Englanders are an arguing people, and annoy you, even in society, with mathematical and political demonstrations. The Philadelphians have more taste, andhave the best cooks in the United States.
“There is nothing more aristocratic than the keeping of an excellent cook; nothing so vulgar as not to care what one is eating or drinking. ‘Dis-moi ce que tu manges, et je te dirai qui tu es,’ said the celebrated author of ‘La Physiologie du Goút;’ and, certes, no Philadelphian will in this respect be found wanting in the scale. There is a nice little house in Third-street, kept by a man, or, as I should say, ‘a gentleman,’ who spent upwards of an hundred thousand dollars in Europe in learning how to eat and drink, and who is now teaching the same science to a select circle of his countrymen; charging them for his trouble a little less than some of the quack professors of the culinary art in New York and Boston, who think a dinner excellent when it consists ofjoints, and show their barbarism by putting ice in their claret.
“Mr.H—d, of the Mansion-house in Philadelphia, has been long enough in Europe to know the difference between gravy and melted butter; and if every American that goes to Europe to improve himself wouldonly learn as much, there would be no harm, and much substantial benefit, arising from it to the country. I have, at his house, eaten fricassees that would have done credit to old Véry;—his son inherited the money, not the taste of his father;—and sauces with which, as Prince Puckler Muskau has it, ‘a man could have eaten his own grandfather!’ In short, one is more comfortable at the neat little house in Third-street, than anywhere else in the United States. An Englishman himself could live there without missing any of the luxuries of his own country, if the bar-keeper were not a stupid old negro, andMr.H—d, jun. more of a gentleman than a landlord.
“A word in parting to you,” says my German traveller, apostrophising the fashionable young men of Philadelphia; “you are much mistaken if you take the terms ‘idler,’ and ‘gentleman,’ for synonymous. There is a vast difference between a gentleman of leisure, and a vagrant that walksup and down Chestnut-street, and stares women out of countenance. You seem to think that a certain bold unabashed look marks the gentleman ofton,—the fashionable rake, whose position in society enables him to disregard the prejudices of the multitude. You pamper your fancy in thesalons, in order afterwards to feed upon a common pasture. This is but a miserable way of imitating the refinedrouéof Europe. If you cannot affect sentiment, conceal at least your passion, or curb your inordinate fancy. There is nothing so vulgar as imagination without taste.—And you men of family, without fashion! study aristocracy in the classics, rather than in the newspaper polemics of the day; or, if this should prove too tedious, read the history of the Italian republics. There was a time in Florence when every nobleman was obliged to have a trade, and yet Florence produced theMedici; why should you be ashamed to imitate so high an example? or are you afraid lest all your tradespeople should wish to become noblemen?”[16]
FOOTNOTES:[15]Mr.Day, of the firm of Day and Martin.[16]Trade and traffic are less popular in Philadelphia than in other parts of the Union; the young men delighting in being called “gentlemen of leisure.”
[15]Mr.Day, of the firm of Day and Martin.
[15]Mr.Day, of the firm of Day and Martin.
[16]Trade and traffic are less popular in Philadelphia than in other parts of the Union; the young men delighting in being called “gentlemen of leisure.”
[16]Trade and traffic are less popular in Philadelphia than in other parts of the Union; the young men delighting in being called “gentlemen of leisure.”