The reasons why the station of a domestic is not regarded as so honourable as it really is.

My Friends:

It is probable that, while reading the previous letter, you have thought to yourselves, but why, if domestics are so honourable in station and office, are they not regarded so? Why are they not treated with honour and respect? Why is their situation spoken of as one of the lowest and least honourable?

I will point out some of the reasons for this.

One reason is, the remains of aristocratic notions in our country, which lead people to feel that labour is degrading, and to honour persons, rather for the kind of work they are employed in, than for their character.

I will first explain what I mean by aristocratic notions. We are descended from the English nation, and their plan of government is exactly opposite to ours. I have shown you [63]that our plan of government is like that adopted by the shipwrecked company. Nobody is required to give up any thing, or to do any thing but what is for the good of the whole community. Though our lot in life is decided by the God of Heaven, yet we make our own rules and laws, choose our own rulers and overseers, and nobody is obliged to do any thing, which is not as necessary for his own good, as it is for the good of all the rest.

But in aristocratic lands, it is very much as it was in the story when the strongest, by fighting, got the best of every thing, while the weakest were obliged to take the poorest of every thing. In England all the power is in the hands of the queen, a few nobles, and a small portion of the richest and best educated people, and for age after age it has been so. In consequence of this, the laws and customs of that nation have been made to benefit this small portion of the nation, so that most of the wealth has been accumulated in their hands, while the great body of the people are miserably poor.

The wealth is so unequally divided, that while some receive incomes from their parents, [64]or from the king or queen, large enough to support whole villages, thousands around them, though ever so industrious and virtuous, cannot earn more than a few cents a day by twelve or fourteen hours of hard labour.

This has been the state of things in England for hundreds of years. In consequence of this, those who have had the most wealth have lived in ease and indolence, and have considered labour as degrading. The rich and the noble have felt as if it was the business of poor and ignorant people to toil, and that living in indolence was a privilege, and the mark to distinguish the gentleman and the lady, from the vulgar and low born.

As we are descended from that nation, we have inherited a good deal of this feeling, so that even now, when a woman lives in perfect idleness, it is very common to say, that she “is living like a lady, with nothing to do but enjoy herself.” So we often find that a lounging, ignorant coxcomb, if he happens to have money to enable him to dress well, is called “a gentleman;” while a man of ten times the sense, education and usefulness is not so regarded, [65]because he works with his hands for his own support. But things are gradually altering in this country, in regard to this matter, and it is becoming more and more honourable to work, and more and more discreditable to be useless and idle.

Yet a great change is to be accomplished before all aristocratic notions are so shaken off, that a man or woman will be honoured for usefulness, good manners, good sense and good principles, without any regard to the kind of work by which a livelihood is earned. When this time comes, if a woman has a refined education, good manners, and good principles, she will be as much honoured and respected as a domestic, as she would be in any other sphere of life.

Another reason why the station of a domestic is not regarded as honourable is, because most persons have wrong ideas about doing good and being useful.

To understand this, you will observe that when ladies have a great deal of money and leisure, they spend the greater part of their time in dressing, visiting, reading, and enjoying [66]themselves in various ways. And yet if they take one afternoon in a week to go around and visit the poor and sick—if they distribute tracts, and give a very small portion of their income for benevolent purposes, they are spoken of as remarkably useful persons, and are honoured because they do so much good.

But if a woman goes around day after day to help mothers make up clothes for their children, or if a woman works from morning till night in the kitchen, to make a family comfortable, this is not called doing good. Though the sempstress and domestic spend the whole of their time in earning their own support, and at the same time, contribute more than almost any class of persons to the comfort and enjoyment of others, they are not spoken of as persons who are living to do good. But if a woman is supported by the labour of others, and spends the most of her time in occupations that merely gratify herself, and not one tenth part of her time or money, in a way that benefits others, still she is commended and admired as one who is eminent for “doing good.”

Now this is a mistaken mode of estimating [67]usefulness. Those who are constantly doing something to promote the comfort of others should feel that they are “doing good,” as their daily business; while those who give only odd intervals for the benefit of others, and seek their own pleasure the rest of the time, should feel that they are the least useful part of the community. According to this, when the young ladies of a family, who have wealth, education and leisure, spend most of their time in seeking their own amusement, then those domestics, who toil all day in the kitchen for the comfort of others, are the most useful persons; and if they perform their duties properly, deserve to be the most respected and esteemed.

The last reason why the station of domestics is not regarded as honourable is, that the persons who have been in this station have, ordinarily, been persons destitute of education and good manners. This has been more their misfortune than their fault, and it is a difficulty not easily remedied. But it is very certain that a person who has a good education and good manners, is deserving of more respect, and always will receive more respect, than one [68]who is ignorant, rude, vulgar and ill-mannered. And if all the domestics in this land were suddenly changed into refined, well bred, well educated persons, you would find that there would be as sudden a change in public feeling, and then the station of a domestic would be regarded as genteel, honourable, and respectable, far more than it now is.

This is an advantage rather than an evil, for it tends to influence domestics to improve their minds and cultivate their manners, so that they may be worthy of the respect and honour which they would thus secure.