London, Thursday, May 15, 1851.
Apart from the Great Exhibition, this is a season of intellectual activity in London. Parliament is (languidly) in session; the Aristocracy are in town; the Queen is lavishly dispensing the magnificent hospitalities of Royalty to those of the privileged caste who are invited to share them; and the several Religious and Philanthropic Societies, whether of the City or the Kingdom, are generally holding their Anniversaries, keeping Exeter Hall in blast almost night and day. I propose to give a first hasty glance at intellectual and general progress in Great Britain, leaving the subject to be more fully and thoroughly treated after I shall have made myself more conversant with the facts in the case.
A spirit of active and generous philanthropy is widely prevalent in this country. While the British pay more in taxes for the support of Priests and Paupers than any other people on earth, they at the same time give more for Religious and Philanthropic purposes. Their munificence is not always well guided; but on the whole very much is accomplished by it in the way of diffusing Christianity and diminishing Human Misery. But I will speak more specifically.
TheReligious Anniversarieshave mainly been held, but few or none of them are reported—indeed, they are scarcely alluded to—in the Daily press, whose vauntedsuperiority over American journals in the matter of Reporting amounts practically to this—that the debates in Parliament are here reportedverbatim, and again presented in a condensed form under the Editorial head of each paper, while scarcely anything else (beside Court doings) is reported at all. I am sure this is consistent neither with reason nor with the public taste—that if the Parliamentary debates were condensed one-half, and the space so saved devoted to reports of the most interesting Public Meetings, Lectures, &c., after the New-York fashion, the popular interest in the daily papers would become wider and deeper, and their usefulness as aids to General Education would be largely increased. To a great majority of the reading class, even here, political discussions—and especially of questions so trite and so unimportant as those which mainly engross the attention of Parliament—are of quite subordinate interest; and I think less than one reader in four ever peruses any more of these debates than is given in the Editorial synopsis, leaving theverbatimreport a sheer waste of costly print and paper.—I believe, however, that in the aggregate, the collections of the last year for Religious purposes have just about equaled the average of the preceding two or three years; some Societies having received less, others more. I think the public interest in comprehensive Religious and Philanthropic efforts does not diminish.
ForPopular Education, there is much doing in this Country, but in a disjointed, expensive, inefficient manner. Instead of one all-pervading, straight-forward, State-directed system, there are three or four in operation, necessarily conflicting with and damaging each other. And yet a vast majority really desire the Education of All, and are willing to pay for it. John Bull is good at paying taxes, wherein he has had large experience; and if he grumbles a little now and then at their amount as oppressive, it is only because he takes pleasure in grumbling, and thisseems to afford him a good excuse for it. He would not be deprived of it if he could: witness the discussions of the Income Tax, which every body denounces while no one justifies it abstractly; and yet it is always upheld, and I presume always will be. If the question could now be put to a direct vote, even of the tax-payers alone—"Shall or shall not a system of Common School Education for the United Kingdoms be maintained by a National Tax?"—I believe Free Schools would be triumphant. Even if such a system were matured, put in operation, and to be sustained by Voluntary Contributions alone or left to perish, I should not despair of the result.
But there is a lion in the path, in the shape of the Priesthood of the Established Church, who insist that the children shall be indoctrinated in the dogmas of their creed, or there shall be no State system of Common Schools; and, behind these, stand the Roman Catholic Clergy, who virtually make a similar demand with regard to the children of Catholics. The unreasonableness, as well as the ruinous effects of these demands, is already palpable on our side of the Atlantic. If, when our City was meditating the Croton Water Works, the Episcopal and Catholic Priesthood had each insisted that those works should be consecrated by their own Hierarchy and by none other, or, in default of this, we should have no water-works at all, the case would be substantially parallel to this. Or if there were in some city a hundred children, whose parents were of diverse creeds, all blind with cataract, whom it was practicable to cure altogether, but not separately, and these rival Priesthoods were respectively to insist—"They shall be taught our Creed and Catechism, and no other, while the operation is going on, or there shall be no operation and no cure," that case would not be materially diverse from this. In vain does the advocate of Light say to them, "Pray, let us give the children the inestimable blessing of sight, and thenyoumay teach your creed andcatechism to all whom you can persuade to learn them," they will have the closed eyes opened according to Loyola or to Laud, or not opened at all! Do they not provoke us to say that their insisting on an impossible, a suicidal condition, is but a cloak, a blind, a fetch, and that their real object is to keep the multitude in darkness? I am thankful that we have few clergymen in America who manifest a spirit akin to that which to this day deprives half the children of these Kingdoms of any considerable school education whatever.
I think nothing unsusceptible of mathematical demonstration, can be clearer than the imperative necessity of Universal Education, as a matter simply of Public Economy. In these densely peopled islands, where service is cheap, and where many persons qualified to teach are maintaining a precarious struggle for subsistence, a system of General Education need not cost half so much as in the United States, while wealth is so concentrated that taxes bear less hardly here, in proportion to their amount, than with us. Every dollar judiciously spent on the education of poor children, would be more than saved in the diminution of the annual cost of pauperism and crime, while the intellectual and industrial capacity of the people would be vastly increased by it. I do not see how even Clerical bigotry, formidable as it deplorably is, can long resist this consideration among a people so thrifty and saving, as are in the main the wielders of political power in this country.
Political Reformsmove slowly here. Mr. Hume's motion for Household Suffrage, Vote by Ballot, Triennial Parliaments, &c. was denied a consideration, night before last, by the concerted absence from the House of nearly all the members—only twenty-one appearing when forty (out of over six hundred) are required to constitute a quorum. So the subject lost its place as a set motion, and probably will not come up again this Session. The Ministry opposed its consideration now, promising themselves tobring forward a measure for the Extension of the Franchisenext Session, when it is very unlikely that they will be in a position to bring forward anything. It seems to me that the current sets strongly against their continuance in office, and that, between the hearty Reformers on one side and the out-spoken Conservatives on the other, they must soon surrender their semblance of power. Still, they are skillful in playing off one extreme against another, and may thus endure or be endured a year longer; but the probability is against this. To my mind, it seems clear that their retirement is essential to the prosecution of Liberal Reforms. So long as they remain in power, they will do, in the way of the People's Enfranchisement, as near nought as possible.
(——"Nothing could liveTwixt that and silence.")
Their successors, the avowed Conservatives, will of course do nothing; but they cannot hold power long in the Britain of to-day; and whoever shall succeed them must come in on a popular tide and on the strength of pledges to specific and comprehensive Reforms which cannot well be evaded. Slow work, say you? Well, there is no quicker practicable. When the Tories shall have been in once more and gone out again, there will be another great forward movement like the Reform Bill, and I think not till then, unless the Continent shall meantime be convulsed by the throes of a general Revolution.
I should like to see a chance for the defeat of that most absurd of all Political stupidities, theEcclesiastical Titles Assumption Bill, but I do not. Persecution for Faith's sake is most abhorrent, yet sincerity and zeal may render it respectable; but this bill has not one redeeming feature. While it insults the Catholics, it is perfectly certain to increase their numbers and power; and it will do this without inflicting on them the least substantial injury.Cardinal Wiseman will be the local head of the Catholic Church in England, whether he is legally forbidden to be styled "Archbishop of Westminster" or not, and so of the Irish Catholic prelates. The obstacles which the ministerial bill attempts to throw in the way of bequests to the Catholic Bishops as such, will be easily evaded; these Bishops will exercise every function of the Episcopate whether this Bill shall pass or fail: and their moral power will be greatly increased by its passage. But the Ministry, which has found the general support of the Catholics, and especially of the Irish Catholic Members, very opportune at certain critical junctures, will henceforth miss that support—in fact, it has already been transformed into a most virulent and deadly hostility. Rural England was hostile to the ministry before, on account of the depressing effect of Free Trade on the agricultural interest; and now Ireland is turned against them by their own act—an act which belies the professions of Toleration in matters of Faith which have given them a great hold of the sympathies of the best men in the country throughout the last half century. I do not see how they can ride out the storm which they by this bill have aroused.
The cause ofTemperance—of Total Abstinence from all that can intoxicate—is here about twenty years behind its present position in the United States. I think there are not more absolute drunkards here than in our American cities, but the habit of drinking for drink's sake is all but universal. The Aristocracy drink almost to a man; so do the Middle Class; so do the Clergy; so alas! do the Women! There is less of Ardent Spirits imbibed than with us; but Wines are much cheaper and in very general use among the well-off; while the consumption of Ale, Beer, Porter, &c. (mainly by the Poor) is enormous. Only think of £5,000,000 orTwenty-Five Millions of Dollars, paid into the Treasury in a single year by the People of these Islands as Malt-Tax alone, while the other ingredients used in the manufacture of Malt Liquors probablyswell the aggregate to Thirty Millions of Dollars. If we suppose this to be a little more than one-third of the ultimate cost of these Liquors to the consumers, that cost cannot be less thanOne Hundred Millions of Dollars per annum!—a sum amply sufficient, if rightly expended, to banish Pauperism and Destitution for ever from the British Isles. And yet the poor trudge wearily on, loaded to the earth with exactions and burdens of every kind, yet stupifying their brains, emptying their pockets and ruining their constitutions with these poisonous, brutalizing liquors! I see no hope for them short of a System of Popular Education which shall raise them mentally above their present low condition, followed by a few years of systematic, energetic, omnipresent Temperance Agitation. A slow work this, but is there any quicker that will be effective? The Repeal of the Taxes on Knowledge would greatly contribute to the Education of the Poor, but that Reform has yet to be struggled for.
OfSocial Reformin England, the most satisfactory agency at present is the Society for improving the Dwellings of the Poor. This Society has the patronage of the Queen, is presided over (I believe) by her husband, and is liberally patronized by the better portion of the Aristocracy and the higher order of the Clergy. These, aided by wealthy or philanthropic citizens, have contributed generously, and have done a good work, even though they should stop where they are. The work would not, could not stop with them. They have already proved that good, substantial, cleanly, wholesome, tight-roofed, well ventilated dwellings for the Poor are absolutely cheaper than any other, so that Shylock himself might invest his fortune in the construction of such with the moral certainty of receiving a large income therefrom, while at the same time rescuing the needy from wretchedness, disease, brutalization and vice. Shall not New-York, and all her sister cities, profit by the lesson?
Of the correlative doings of the organized Promoters of Working Men's Associations, Coöperative Stores, &c., I would not be justified in speaking so confidently, at least until I shall have observed more closely. My present impression is that they are both far less mature in their operations, and that, as they demand of the Laboring Class more confidence in themselves and each other, than, unhappily, prevails as yet, they are destined to years of struggle and chequered fortunes before they will have achieved even the measure of success which the Model Lodging and the Bathing and Washing Houses have already achieved. Still, I have not yet visited the strongest and most hopeful of the Working Men's Associations.
I spent last evening with the friends ofRobert Owen, who celebrated his 80th birthday by a dinner at the Cranbourne Hotel. Among those present were Thornton Hunt, son of Leigh Hunt, and one of the Editors of "The Leader;" Gen. Houg, an exile from Germany from Freedom's sake; Mr. Fleming, Editor of the Chartist "Northern Star;" Mons. D'Arusmont and his daughter, who is the daughter also of Frances Wright. Mr. Owen was of course present, and spoke quite at length in reiteration and enforcement of the leading ideas wherewith he has so long endeavored to impress the world respecting the absolute omnipotence of circumstances in shaping the Human Character, the impossibility of believing or disbelieving save as one must, &c. &c. Mr. Owen has scarcely looked younger or heartier at any time these ten years; he did not seem a shade older than when I last before met him, at least three years ago. And not many young men are more buoyant in spirit, more sanguine as to the immediate future, more genial in temper, more unconquerable in resolution, than he is. I cannot see many things as he does; it seems to me that he is stone blind on the side of Faith in the Invisible, and exaggerates the truths he perceives until they almost become falsehoods; but I love hissunny, benevolent nature, I admire his unwearied exertions for what he deems the good of Humanity; and, believing with the great Apostle to the Gentiles, that "Now abide Faith, Hope, Charity: these three; but the greatest of these is Charity," I consider him practically a better Christian than half those who, professing to be such, believe more and do less. I trust his life may be long spared, and his sun beam cloudless and rosy to the last.
London, Monday, May 15, 1851.
I have now been fifteen days in this magnificent Babel, but so much engrossed with the Exhibition that I have seen far less of the town than I otherwise should. Of the City proper (in the center) I know a little; and I have made my way thence out into the open country on the North and on the West respectively, but toward the South lies a wilderness of buildings which I have not yet explored; while Eastward the metropolitan districts stretch further than I have ever been. The south side of Hyde Park and the main line of communication thence with the City proper is the only part of London with which I can claim any real acquaintance. Yet, on the strength of what little Idoknow, I propose to say something of London as it strikes a stranger; and in so doing I shall generally refer to New-York as a standard of comparison, so as to render my remarks more lucid to a great portion of their readers.
TheBuildingshere are generally superior to those of our City—more substantial, of better materials, and more tasteful. There are, I think, as miserable rookeries here as anywhere; but they are exceptions; while most of the houses are built solidly, faithfully, and with a thickness of walls which would be considered sheer waste in our City. Among the materials most extensively used is a fine whitemarble[A]of a peculiarly soft, creamy appearance, which looks admirably until blackened by smoke and time. Regent-street and several of the aristocratic quarters west of it are in good part built of this marble; but one of the finest, freshest specimens of it is St. George's Hospital, Piccadilly, which to my eye is among the most tasteful edifices in London. If (as I apprehend) St. Paul's Church, Somerset House, and the similarly smoke-stained dwellings around Finsbury Oval were built of this same marble, then the murky skies of London have much to answer for.
Throughout the Western and Northern sections of the Metropolis, the dwellings are far less crowded than is usual in the corresponding or up-town portion of New-York, are more diverse in plan, color and finish, and better provided with court-yards, shrubbery, &c. In the matter of Building generally, I think our City would profit by a study of London, especially if our lot-owners, builders, &c., would be satisfied with London rates of interest on their respective investments. I think four per cent. is considered a tolerable and five a satisfactory interest on money securely invested in houses in London.
By the way: the apostles of Sanitary Reform here are anticipating very great benefits from the use of the Hollow Brick just coming into fashion. I am assured by a leading member of the Sanitary Commission that the hollow brick cost much less than the solid ones, and are a perfect protection against the dampness so generally experienced in brick houses, and often so prejudicial to health. That there is a great saving in the cost of their transportation is easily seen; and, as they are usually made much larger than the solid brick, they can be laid up much faster. I think Dr. Southwood Smith assured me that the saving in the first cost of the brickwork of a house isone-third; if that is a mistake, the error is one of misapprehension on my part. The hollow brick is a far less perfect conductor of heat and cold than the solid one; consequently, a house built of the former is much cooler in Summer and warmer in Winter. It is confidently and reasonably hoped here that very signal improvements, in the dwellings especially of the Poor, are to be secured by means of this invention. Prince Albert has caused two Model Cottages of this material to be erected at his cost in Hyde Park near the Great Exhibition in order to attract general attention to the subject.
TheStreetsof London are generally better paved, cleaner and better lighted than those of New-York. Instead of our round or cobble stone, the material mainly used for paving here is a hard flint rock, split and dressed into uniform pieces about the size of two bricks united by their edges, so as to form a surface of some eight inches square with a thickness of two inches. This of course wears much more evenly and lasts longer than cobble-stone pavements. I do not know that we could easily procure an equally serviceable material, even if we were willing to pay for it. One reason of the greater cleanness of the streets here is the more universal prevalence of sewerage; another is the positive value of street-offal here for fertilizing purposes. And as Gas is supplied here to citizens at 4s. 6d. ($1.10) per thousand feet, while the good people of New-York must bend to the necessity of paying $3.50, or more than thrice as much for the like quantity, certainly of no better quality, it is but reasonable to infer that the Londoners can afford to light their streets better than the New-Yorkers.
But there are other aspects in whichourstreets have a decided superiority. There are half a dozen streets and places here having the same name, and only distinguished by appending the name of a neighboring street, as "St. James-place, St. James-st.," to distinguish it from severalother St. James-places, and so on. This subjects strangers to great loss of time and vexation of spirit. I have not yet delivered half the letters of introduction which were given me at home to friends of the writers in this city, and can't guess when I shall do it. Then the numbering of the streets is absurdly vicious—generally 1, 2, 3, 4, &c., up one side and down the other side, so that 320 will be opposite 140, and 412 opposite 1, and so throughout. Of course, if any street so numbered is extended beyond its original limit, the result is inextricable confusion. But the Londoners seem not to have caught the idea of numbering by lots at all, but to have numbered only the houses that actually existed when the numbering was undertaken; so that, if a street happened to be numbered when only half built up, every house erected afterward serves to render confusion worse confounded. On this account I spent an hour and a half a few evenings since in fruitless endeavors to find William and Mary Howitt, though I knew they lived at No. 28 Upper Avenue Road, which is less than half a mile long. I found Nos. 27, 29, 30, and 31, and finally found 28 also, but in another part of the street, with a No. 5 near it on one side and No. 16 ditto on the other—and this in a street quite recently opened. I think New-York has nothing equal to this in perplexing absurdity.
ThePolicehere is more omnipresent and seems more efficient than ours. I think the use of a common and conspicuous uniform has a good effect. No one can here pretend that he defied or resisted a policeman in ignorance of his official character. The London police appears to be quite numerous, is admirably organized, and seems to be perfectly docile to its superiors. Always to obey and never to ask the reason of a command, is the rule here; it certainly has its advantages, but is not well suited to the genius of our people.
TheHotelsof London are decidedly inferior to those of New-York. I do not mean by this that every comfortand reasonable luxury may not be obtained in the London inns for money enough, but simply that the same style of living costs more in this city than in ours. I think $5 per day would be a fair estimate for the cost of living (servants' fees included) as well in a London hotel as you may live in a first-class New-York hotel for half that sum. One main cause of this disparity is the smallness of the inns here. A majority of them cannot accommodate more than twenty to forty guests comfortably; I think there are not four in the entire Metropolis that could find room for one hundred each. Of course, the expense of management, supervision, attendance, &c., in small establishments is proportionably much greater than in large ones, and the English habit of eating fitfullysolusinstead of at a common hour and table increases the inevitable cost. Considering the National habits, it might be hazardous to erect and open such a hotel as the Astor, Irving or New-York in this city; but if it were once well done, and the experiment fairly maintained for three years, it could not fail to work a revolution.Wines(I understand) cost not more than half as much here, in the average, as they do in New-York.
InCabsand other Carriages for Hire, London is ahead of New-York. The number here is immense; they are of many varieties, some of them better calculated for fine weather than any of ours; while the legal rates of fare are more moderate and not so outrageously exceeded. While the average New-York demand is fully double the legal fare, the London cabman seldom asks more than fifty per cent. above what the law allows him; and this (by Americans, at least) is considered quite reasonable and cheerfully paid. If our New-York Jehus could only be made to realize that they keep their carriages empty by their exorbitant charges, and really double-lock their pockets against the quarters that citizens would gladly pour into them, I think a reform might be hoped for.
TheOmnibusesof London are very numerous and well governed, but I prefer those of New-York. The charges are higher here, though still reasonable; but the genius of this people is not so well adapted to the Omnibus system as ours is. For example: an Omnibus (the last for the night) was coming down from the North toward Charing Cross the other evening, when a lady asked to be taken up. The stage was full; the law forbids the taking of more than twelve passengers inside; a remonstrance was instantly raised by one or more of the passengers against taking her; and she was left to plod her weary way as she could. I think that could not have happened in New-York. In another instance, a stage-full of passengers started eastward from Hyde Park, one of the women having a basket of unwashed clothes on her knee. It was certainly inconvenient, and not absolutely inoffensive; but the hints, the complaints, the slurs, the sneers, with which the poor woman was annoyed and tortured throughout—from persons certainly well-dressed and whom I should otherwise have considered well-bred—were a complete surprise to me. In vain did the poor woman explain that she was not permitted to deposit her basket on the roof of the stage, as it was raining; the growls and witticisms at her expense continued, and women were foremost in this rudeness. I doubt that a woman was ever exposed to the like in New-York, unless she was suspected of having Ethiopian blood in her veins.
TheParks,SquaresandPublic Gardensof London beat us clean out of sight. The Battery is very good, but it is not Hyde Park; Hobokenwasdelightful; Kensington Gardensareand ever will remain so. Our City ought to have made provision, twenty years ago, for a series of Parks and Gardens extending quite across the island somewhere between Thirtieth and Fiftieth streets. It is now too late for that; but all that can be should be done immediately to secure breathing-space and grounds forhealthful recreation to the Millions who will ultimately inhabit New-York. True, the Bay, the North and East Rivers, will always serve as lungs to our City, but these of themselves will not suffice. Where is or where is to be the Public Garden of New York? where the attractive walks, and pleasure-grounds of the crowded denizens of the Eastern Wards? These must be provided, and the work cannot be commenced too soon.
[A]It seems that this plain marble is but animitation—a stone or brick wall covered with a composition, which gives it a smooth and creamy appearance.
[A]It seems that this plain marble is but animitation—a stone or brick wall covered with a composition, which gives it a smooth and creamy appearance.
London, Wednesday, May 21, 1851.
"All the world"—that is to say, some scores of thousands who would otherwise be in London—are off to-day to the Epsom Races, this being the "Derby Day," a great holiday here. Our Juries at the Fair generally respect it, and I suppose I ought to have gone, since the opportunity afforded for seeing out-door "life" in England may not occur to me again. As, however, I have very much to do at home, and do not care one button which of twenty or thirty colts can run fastest, I stay away; and the murky, leaden English skies conspire to justify my choice. I understand the regulations at these races are superior and ensure perfect order; but Gambling, Intoxication and Licentiousness—to say nothing of Swindling and Robbery—always did regard a horse-race with signal favor and delight, and probably always will. Other things being equal, I prefer that their delight and mine should not exactly coincide.
I am away from the Exhibition to-day for the second time since it opened; yet I understand that, in spite of the immense number gone to Epsom (perhaps in consequence of the general presumption that few would be left to attend), the throng is as great as ever. Yesterday there were so many in the edifice that the Juries which kept together often found themselves impeded by the eddying tide of Humanity; and yet there have been noadmissions paid for with so little as one dollar each. Next Monday the charge comes down tooneshilling (24 cents), and it is already evident that extraordinary measures must be taken to preserve the Exhibition from choking up. I presume it will be decreed that no more than Forty, Fifty or at most Sixty Thousand single admissions shall be sold in one day, and that each apartment, lane or avenue in the building shall be entered from one prescribed end only and vacated from the other. The necessity for some such regulation is obviously imperative.
The immense pecuniary success of the Exhibition is of course assured. I presume the Commissioners will be able to pay all fair charges upon them, and very nearly, if not quite, clear the Crystal Palace from the proceeds, over $15,000 having been taken yesterday, and an average of more than $10,000 per day since the commencement. If we estimate the receipts of May inclusive at $400,000 only, and those of June and July, at $150,000 each, the total proceeds will, on the 1st of August, have reached $700,000—a larger sum than was ever before realized in a like period by any Exhibition whatever. But then no other was ever comparable to this in extent, variety or magnificence. For example: a single London house hasOne Million Dollars'worth of the most superb Plate and Jewelry in the Exhibition, in a by no means unfavorable position; yet I had spent the better portion of five days there, roaming and gazing at will, before I saw this lot. There are three Diamonds exhibited which are worth, according to the standard method of computing the value of Diamonds, at least Thirty millions of Dollars, and probably could be sold in a week for Twenty Millions; I have seen but one of them as yet, and that stands so conspicuously in the center of the Exhibition that few who enter can help seeing it. And there are several miles of cases and lots of costly wares and fabrics exposed here, a good share of which are quite as attractive as the greatDiamonds, and intrinsically far more valuable. Is there cause for wonder, then, that the Exhibition is daily thronged by tens of thousands, even at the present high prices?
Yet very much of this immediate and indisputable success is due to the personal influence and example of the Queen. Had she not seen fit to open the display in person, and with unusual and imposing formalities, there would have been no considerable attendance on that occasion; and nothing less than her repeated and almost daily visits since, reaching the building a little past nine in the morning (sometimes after being engrossed with one of her State Balls or other festivities till long after midnight), could have secured so general and constant an attendance of the Aristocratic and Fashionable classes. No American who has not been in Europe can conceive the extent of Royal influence in this direction. What the Queen does every one who aspires to Social consideration makes haste to imitate if possible. This personal deference is often carried to an extent quite inconsistent with her comfort and freedom, as I have observed in the Crystal Palace; where, though I have never crowded near enough to recognize her, I have often seen a throng blockading the approaches to the apartment or avenue in which she and her cortege were examining the articles exhibited, and there (being kept back from a nearer approach by the Police) they have stood gaping and staring till she left, often for half an hour. This may be intense loyalty, but it is dubious civility. Even on Saturday mornings, when none but the Royal visiters are admitted till noon, and only Jurors, Police and those Exhibitors whose wares or fabrics she purposes that day to inspect are allowed to be present, I have noted similar though smaller crowds facing the Police at the points of nearest approach to her. At such times, her desire to be left to herself is clearly proclaimed, and this gazing by the half hour amounts to positive rudeness.
I remarked the other evening to Charles Lane that, while I did not doubt the sincerity of the Queen's interest in the articles exhibited, I thought there was some purpose in these continual and protracted visits—that, for England's sake and that of her husband, whose personal stake in the undertaking was so great, she had resolved that it should not fail if she could help it—and she knew how to help it. Lane assentingly but more happily observed: "Yes: though she seems to be standing onthisside of the counter, she is perhaps really standing onthe other."—As I regard such Exhibitions as among the very best pursuits to which Royalty can addict itself, I should not give utterance to this presumption if I did not esteem it creditable to Victoria both as a Briton and a Queen. And it is very plain that her conduct in the premises is daily, among her subjects, diffusing and deepening her popularity.
The London Commissioners gave a great Dinner at Richmond, yesterday, to the foreign Commissioners in attendance on the Exhibition: Lord Ashburton presiding, flanked by Foreign Ministers and Nobles. The feast was of course superb; the speaking generally fair; the Music abundant and faultless. Good songs were capitally given by eminent vocalists, well sustained by instruments, between the several toasts with their responses—a fashion which I suggest for adoption in our own country, especially with the condition that the Speeches be shortened to give time for the Songs. At this dinner, no Speech exceeded fifteen minutes in duration but that of Baron Dupin, which may have consumed half an hour, but in every other respect was admirable. The Englishmen who spoke were Lords Ashburton and Granville, Messrs. Crace and Paxton; of the Foreigners, Messrs. Dupin (France), Van de Weyer(Belgian Chargé), Von Viebhan (Prussian), and myself. Lord Ashburton spoke with great good sense and good feeling, but without fluency. Lord Granville's remarks were admirable in matter but also defective in manner. Barons Van de Weyer and Dupin were very happy. The contrast in felicity of expression between the British and the Continental speakers was very striking, though the latter had no advantage in other respects.
I went there at the pressing request of Lord Ashburton, who had desired that an American should propose the health of Mr. Paxton, the designer of the Crystal Palace, and Mr. Riddle, our Commissioner, had designated me for the service; so I spoke about five minutes, and my remarks were most kindly received by the entire company; yetThe Timesof to-day, in its report of the festival, suppresses not merely what I said, but the sentiment I offered and even my name, merely stating that "Mr. Paxton was then toasted and replied as follows." TheDaily Newsdoes likewise, only it says Mr. Paxton's health was proposed by a Mr.Wedding(a Prussian who sat near me). I state these facts to expose the falsehood of the boast lately made byThe Timesin its championship of dear newspapers like the British against cheap ones like the American that "In this country fidelity in newspaper reporting is a religion, and its dictates are never disregarded," &c. The pains taken to suppress not merely what I said but its substance, and even my name, while inserting Mr. Paxton's response, refutes the Pharisaic assumption of The Times so happily that I could not let it pass.—Nay, I am willing to brave the imputation of egotism by appending a faithful transcript of what Ididsay on that occasion, that the reader may guesswhyThe Times deemed its suppression advisable:
After Baron Dupin had concluded,
Horace Greeley, being next called upon by the chair, arose and said:
"In my own land, my lords and gentlemen, where Nature is stillso rugged and unconquered, where Population is yet so scanty and the demands for human exertion are so various and urgent, it is but natural that we should render marked honor to Labor, and especially to those who by invention or discovery contribute to shorten the processes and increase the efficiency of Industry. It is but natural, therefore, that this grand conception of a comparison of the state of Industry in all Nations, by means of a World's Exhibition, should there have been received and canvassed with a lively and general interest—an interest which is not measured by the extent of our contributions. Ours is still one of the youngest of Nations, with few large accumulations of the fruits of manufacturing activity or artistic skill, and these so generally needed for use that we were not likely to send them three thousand miles away, merely for show. It is none the less certain that the progress of this great Exhibition from its original conception to that perfect realization which we here commemorate, has been watched and discussed not more earnestly throughout the saloons of Europe, than by the smith's forge and the mechanic's bench in America. Especially the hopes and fears alternately predominant on this side with respect to the edifice required for this Exhibition—the doubts as to the practicability of erecting one sufficiently capacious and commodious to contain and display the contributions of the whole world—the apprehension that it could not be rendered impervious to water—the confident assertions that it could not be completed in season for opening the Exhibition on the first of May as promised—all found an echo on our shores; and now the tidings that all these doubts have been dispelled, these difficulties removed, will have been hailed there with unmingled satisfaction."I trust, gentlemen, that among the ultimate fruits of this Exhibition we are to reckon a wider and deeper appreciation of the worth of Labor, and especially of those 'Captains of Industry' by whose conceptions and achievements our Race is so rapidly borne onward in its progress to a loftier and more benignant destiny. We shall not be likely to appreciate less fully the merits of the wise Statesman, by whose measures a People's thrift and happiness are promoted—of the brave Soldier who joyfully pours out his blood in defense of the rights or in vindication of the honor of his Country—of the Sacred Teacher by whose precepts and example our steps are guided in the pathway to heaven—if we render fit honor also to those 'Captains of Industry' whose tearless victories redden no river and whose conquering march is unmarked by the tears of the widow and the cries of the orphan. I give you, therefore,"The Health of Joseph Paxton, Esq.,Designer of the Crystal Palace—Honor to him whose genius does honor to Industry and to Man!"
"In my own land, my lords and gentlemen, where Nature is stillso rugged and unconquered, where Population is yet so scanty and the demands for human exertion are so various and urgent, it is but natural that we should render marked honor to Labor, and especially to those who by invention or discovery contribute to shorten the processes and increase the efficiency of Industry. It is but natural, therefore, that this grand conception of a comparison of the state of Industry in all Nations, by means of a World's Exhibition, should there have been received and canvassed with a lively and general interest—an interest which is not measured by the extent of our contributions. Ours is still one of the youngest of Nations, with few large accumulations of the fruits of manufacturing activity or artistic skill, and these so generally needed for use that we were not likely to send them three thousand miles away, merely for show. It is none the less certain that the progress of this great Exhibition from its original conception to that perfect realization which we here commemorate, has been watched and discussed not more earnestly throughout the saloons of Europe, than by the smith's forge and the mechanic's bench in America. Especially the hopes and fears alternately predominant on this side with respect to the edifice required for this Exhibition—the doubts as to the practicability of erecting one sufficiently capacious and commodious to contain and display the contributions of the whole world—the apprehension that it could not be rendered impervious to water—the confident assertions that it could not be completed in season for opening the Exhibition on the first of May as promised—all found an echo on our shores; and now the tidings that all these doubts have been dispelled, these difficulties removed, will have been hailed there with unmingled satisfaction.
"I trust, gentlemen, that among the ultimate fruits of this Exhibition we are to reckon a wider and deeper appreciation of the worth of Labor, and especially of those 'Captains of Industry' by whose conceptions and achievements our Race is so rapidly borne onward in its progress to a loftier and more benignant destiny. We shall not be likely to appreciate less fully the merits of the wise Statesman, by whose measures a People's thrift and happiness are promoted—of the brave Soldier who joyfully pours out his blood in defense of the rights or in vindication of the honor of his Country—of the Sacred Teacher by whose precepts and example our steps are guided in the pathway to heaven—if we render fit honor also to those 'Captains of Industry' whose tearless victories redden no river and whose conquering march is unmarked by the tears of the widow and the cries of the orphan. I give you, therefore,
"The Health of Joseph Paxton, Esq.,Designer of the Crystal Palace—Honor to him whose genius does honor to Industry and to Man!"
If the reader shall discern in the above (which is as nearly literal as may be—I having only recollection to depend on) thereasonwhyThe Timessaw fit to suppress not merely the remarks, but the words of the toast and the name of the proposer, I shall be satisfied; though I think the exposure of that journal's argument for dear newspapers as preferable to cheap ones, on the ground that the former always gave fair and accurate reports ofpublic meetings while the latter never did, is worth the space I have given to this matter. I am very sure that if my remarks had been deemed discreditable to myself or my country, they would have been fully reported inThe Times.
The Queen and Prince Albert spent an hour in the American department a few mornings since, and appeared to regard the articles there displayed with deep interest. Prince Albert (who is esteemed here not merely a man of sterling good sense, but thoroughly versed in mechanics and manufactures) expressed much surprise at the variety of our contributions and the utility and excellence of many of them. I mention this because there are some Americans here who declare themselvesashamed of their countrybecause of the meagerness of its share in the Exhibition. I do not suppose their country will deem it worth while to return the compliment; but I should have been far more ashamed of the prodigality and want of sense evinced in sending an indiscriminate profusion of American products here than I am of the actual state of the case. It is true, as I have already stated, that we are deficient in some things which might have been sent here with advantage to the contributors and with credit to the country; but for Americans to send here articles of luxury and fashion to be exhibited in competition with all the choicest wares and fabrics of Europe, which must have beaten them if only by the force of mere quantity alone, would have evinced a want of sense and consideration which I trust is not our National characteristic. If I everdofeel ashamed in the American department, it is on observing a pair of very well shaped and exquisitely finished oars, labeled, "A Present for the Prince of Wales," or something of the sort. Spare me the necessity of blushing for what wehavethere, and I am safe enough from shame on account of our deficiencies.
Mr. A. C. Hobbs, of the lock-making concern of Day & Newell, has improved his leisure here in picking a six-tumbler Bank Lock of Mr. Chubb, the great English locksmith, and he now gives notice that he can pickanyof Chubb's locks, or any other based on similar principles, as he is willing to demonstrate in any fair trial. I trust he will have a chance.
The Queen quits the Exhibition for a time this week, and retires to her house on the Isle of Wight, where she will spend some days in private with her family. I presume the Aristocracy will generally follow her example, so far as the Exhibition is concerned, leaving it to the poorer class, to whom five shillings is a consideration. Absurd speculations are rife as to what "the mob" will do in such a building—whether they will evacuate it quietly and promptly at night—whether there will not be a rush made at the diamonds and other precious stones by bands of thieves secretly confederated for plunder, &c. &c. I do not remember that like apprehensions were ever entertained in our country; but faith in Man abstractly is weak here, while faith in the Police, the Horse-Guards and the Gallows, is strong.—There are always two hundred soldiers and three hundred policemen in the building while it is open to the public; and in case of any attempt at robbery, every outlet would (by means of the Telegraph) be closed and guarded within a few seconds, while hundreds if not thousands of soldiers are at all times within call. But they will not be needed.