She and I Volume II Part 17

To commence with, during the early morning we had warped into dock at Hoboken, the Rotherhithe--and, in some respects, Rosherville--of New York, being situated on the opposite side of the river; and here, the _Herzog von Gottingen_ lay, with her bowsprit jammed into a coal shed and her decks, aforetime so white and clean, all bespattered with dirt, and enc.u.mbered with hawsers and cables. These latter coiling and uncoiling themselves here, there, and everywhere, like so many writhing sea-serpents, and, tripping you up suddenly just when you believed you had discovered a clear s.p.a.ce on which you might stand without imperilling your valuable life.

Besides, the crew were engaged in getting up luggage from the lower hold by the aid of a donkey engine, which made a great deal of clattering fuss over doing a minimum amount of work--in which respect it resembled a good many people of my acquaintance, by the way. It was not pleasant to have the iron-bound cover of a heavy chest poked into the small of one's back without leave or licence, and the entire article being subsequently deposited on one's toes! No, it was not. And, to make matters worse, the escape steam, puffing off in volumes from the waste pipe in a hollow roar of relief at being no longer compelled to earn its living, was condensing an additional shower for our benefit--that was not more agreeable, in consequence of being warm--as if the drizzling rain that was falling was not deemed sufficient for wetting purposes!

After settling matters with the Custom House, and crossing the ferry from Hoboken, myself and all my goods packed in a hackney carriage hung on very high springs--like the old "gla.s.s coaches" that were used in London during the early part of the century, although, unlike them, drawn by a pair of remarkably fine horses--my drive through the back slums of New York to one of the Broadway hotels was not of a nature to dispel my vapours.

The lower parts of the town, adjacent to the Hudson, are about as odoriferous and architecturally beautiful as a sixth-rate seaport in "the old country." While, as for Broadway itself--that much be-praised- boulevard--Broadway, the "great," the "much pumpkins, I guess"--to see which, I had been told by enthusiastic Americans, was to behold the very thirteenth wonder of the world!--Well, the less I say about it, perhaps the better!

If you are still inquisitive, however, and would kindly imagine what your feelings would be on beholding Upper Oxford Street on a November day--with a few draggling flags hung across it, one or two "blocks" of brown-stone buildings interspersed between its rows of uneven shops, and a lofty-spired church, like Saint Margaret's, jutting out into the roadway by the Marble Arch--you will have a general idea of my impressions when first looking at the magnificent thoroughfare that our cousins love.

It has evidently secured its reputation, from being the only decent street in New York--just as Sackville Street in Dublin is "a foine place entirely," on account of its being the only one of any respectable length or width in the city on the Liffey--if you will kindly permit the comparison for a moment?

I was disappointed, I confess.

Ever since boyhood I had pictured America, and everything belonging to it, from Fennimore Cooper's standpoint. I thought I was going to a spot quite different from any locality I had previously been accustomed to; and, lo! New York was altogether commonplace. Nothing original, nothing tropical, nothing "New World"-like about it. It was only an ordinary town of the same stamp as many I have noticed on this side of the water--a European city in a slop suit--"Yankee" all over in _that_ way!

In regard to its extent, which I had been led to believe was quite equal to, if not surpa.s.sing, our metropolis, I found that I could walk from one side of it to the other in half an hour; and traverse its length in twice that time--the entire island on which it is built being only nine miles long. "Why," thought I, when I had arrived at this knowledge, "some of our suburbs could beat that!"

When bright days came, Broadway undoubtedly looked a little better-- Barnum's streamers, "up town," floating out bravely over the heads of the "stage" drivers--but I was never able to overcome my first impressions of it and New York generally; and, to make an end of the matter, I may say now, that the longer I stayed in the "land of the settin' sun," north, south, east, and west--I had experience of all--the less I saw to like in it.

The country and the scenery are well enough; but the people!

Ah! if the Right Honourable John Bright and other ardent admirers of everything connected with the "great Republic" on the other side of the ocean, would but go over, as I did, and study it honestly from every point of view for three years, say, they _must_ come to a different opinion about the nation which they are so constantly eulogising at the expense of their own!

Don't let them merely run over to see it in gala trim, however, and have its workings explained only to them through a transatlantic section of the same clique of which they are members at home; but let them go in a private capacity and see things for themselves, mixing amongst all cla.s.ses of the American community, and not only in one circle.

They won't, though.

The Manchester manufacturer of "advanced views" visits the Ma.s.sachusetts manufacturer;--and, derives all _his_ knowledge of America and her inst.i.tutions from him. The trades' union delegate of England palavers with the working-men's societies of the eastern states; whence he gets _his_ information of Transatlantic polemics. The ballot enthusiast over here talks, and only _talks_, mind you! with the believer in the ballot over there; and so arrives at _his_ conclusions on the subject of secret voting--and then, all these return to this "down-trodden," "aristocracy- ridden," "effete old kingdom," and prate about the glorious way in which their several theories work across the ocean--not one of them having resided long enough beneath the stars and stripes to be able to judge of the truth of what they allege, as they are quite contented to take for gospel the hearsay with which they bolster up their own opinions!

If these respective persons would only go out and live, I say, for three years consecutively in the States, and move about outside of their respective bigotted grooves, they would find out, in time, that, the boasted free, liberty-loving, advanced, progressive commonwealth on the other side of "the big pond," is?--one of the most despotic, intolerant, morally-and-politically-rotten republics that ever existed, bar none!

What will your ballot-advocate--who anathematises "Tory coercion," and is continually urging into notice the "purity of election" that characterises the system of our "cousins"--say, to the fact, that one party of "free and enlightened citizens" of the model cosmos of his admiration regularly sell their votes to the highest bidder; while, another set, under a military despotism, are compelled to exercise the franchise only in a manner pleasing to a dominant faction? What will your Democratic Dilke, or Ouvrier Odger--who may, in this "speech- gagged," "oppressed" country, heap scurrilous abuse on royalty and overhaul the was.h.i.+ng bills of her Majesty without let or hindrance--say, for the "liberty of speech" on the other side; where, if they were to utter a word in favour of the conquered Confederates, amongst a certain school of "black republicans," they would run the risk of having a revolver bullet in their epigastric region before they knew where they were?

How would your communistic enthusiast, who bawls out about the equality of all men, like to see, as I have seen, "respectable cullered pussons,"

representatives of the beloved "man and a brother," _wearing livery_, the "badge of servitude," which is only supposed to be donned by the "menials of European tyrants?" And yet, these darkey flunkeys are in the service of free and equal citizens of a "Great Republic," strange to say!

What does your Manchester "Spinning Jenney," the earnest upholder of free trade, say to the "Protection" policy of his congeners in the States?

How can he reconcile his statements _here_ with facts _there_?

Where is the "Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite," now, when you really come to dive below the surface, and see things as they are in America, eh?--

But, bless you, these reformers will _not_ so regard the objects of their veneration. They will only see them in the light in which they choose to see them; and would swear black was white in order to answer their purpose!

Your true radical or republican--the name "liberal" is a misnomer--is, as I have often heard the vicar say, one of the most intolerant, illiberal persons under the sun. His idea of freedom, is, that everybody should be free to do as _he_ pleases:--if they object to his programme, they are evidently not sufficiently "advanced" to suit him!

His liberty of speech, is, for himself to spout away ad libitum on his hobby, and everybody else who may not agree with him to hold his tongue!

His theory of equality is, for all above him in station to be brought down to _his_ level, and then, for _him_ to remain c.o.c.k of the walk!

I have studied the animal. That's his view of it, depend upon it! He will not be convinced. He will not even "argue the point," nor listen to a word said on the side contrary to that which he espouses. He has _his_ opinions, he says; and will stick to them, right or wrong-- notwithstanding the home truths that may lie in those of others opposed to him. Dogged, certainly:--liberal, no! Do you doubt what I say?--Let us go to particulars then.

Your candid disestablishers, for instance,--will they meet your outspoken churchmen, who stand up for the old faith in the const.i.tution, on an open platform; and discuss the question of a national church on a common footing, where both its opponents and its supporters can be heard?

Will your would--be--republican, foregathering at some Hole-in-the-Wall meeting, allow a conservative speaker to say a word in opposition to his progressive puerilities? Your teetotal-alliancer, in a quorum of water- drinkers, will he _let_ a licensed victualler utter a protest against his scheme for universal abstinence?

No.

Each and all of these several cliques are, in common with all cliques, narrow-minded and intolerant. They prefer being kings of their respective small companies and enjoying the mutual admiration of a packed a.s.sembly, to coming out boldly like men and letting the pros and cons of their schemes be ventilated in free discussion at genuine meetings, composed of diverse elements.--Do you want any further proof?

I confess, I don't like republics or republicans. Once upon a time, before seeing how they worked, I undoubtedly had a leaning towards the "liberalism," as I thought it, of this school; but a thorough exposure of the "inst.i.tution" and the character of its partisans in America and in France have completely opened my eyes to their real nature.

Were I asked, now, to define a republic, I should say that it was a general scramble for power and perquisites, by a lot of ragged rascals with empty pockets, who have everything to gain by success, and nothing to lose by failure.--A sort of "rough and tumble" fight, in which those with the easiest consciences, the loudest tongues and the wildest promises, come to the fore, letting "the devil take the hindmost!"

It is a so-called commonwealth, wherein the welfare of the ma.s.s is subordinated to party spirit; and in which each aspirant for place and power, well knowing that his chief ambition is to "feather his own nest"

without any afterthought of patriotism, kicks down his struggling brother--likewise on the lookout for the loaves and fishes of office-- ostracising him, if he doesn't put up with the treatment quietly!

I may be wrong, certainly, and I'm open to argument on the point, but I like our old system best. I infinitely prefer a gentleman with a reputation, to a sn.o.b with none; and a clean s.h.i.+rt to a dirty one! and if you allow that I possess the right of selecting my future rulers, I would much rather have those whom birth and education have taught at least toleration, than a parcel of grubby-nailed democrats, innocent of soap-and-water, who wish to choke their one-sided creed, w.i.l.l.y-nilly, down my throat, in defiance of my inclinations and better judgment; and whose sole interest in "their fellow man" is centred in the problem--how to line their own pockets at his cost, in the neatest way!

"Sans culottes" and the "Bonnet Rouge" for those who like them; but, as a matter of choice, I prefer a pair of decent "inexpressibles" and a Lincoln and Bennett "chapeau!" As the elder Capulet's first scullion sagely remarked to his fellow-servant--

"When good manners shall lie all in one or two men's hands, and they unwashed too, 'tis a foul thing!"

There are men calling themselves "politicians"--save the mark! that would have us pull down the old const.i.tutional machine, (lumbering it may be,) which has served our purpose for generations, and whose working and capabilities we have tested some odd thousand years; to replace it with the newfangled gimcrack model which is continually getting out of gear across the Atlantic; and I have no patience with them. I do not particularly desire to run America and its people down; but, when we are in the habit of criticising the deeds and doings of our continental neighbours, without much reticence as to our likes and dislikes, I do not see why any especial immunity should be placed over Americans to taboo them from honest judgment!

I must say that when I hear and read the fulsome admiration that it has been the fas.h.i.+on of late to express and write concerning our so-called "cousins," it fairly makes my blood boil. If n.o.body else _will_ "take the gilt off the gingerbread," why shouldn't I try to do so?

The truth of the matter, with regard to America, is that the Columbian eagle makes such a tremendous cackling over every little _egg_ it lays, that we cis-Atlantic folks rate its achievements much higher than they deserve!

We do not kick up a fuss about our general proceedings; consequently, we imagine something very great must have happened to cause the Bird o'

Freedom to burst into such gallinacious paeans of delight.

The "advancement" of the first Republic, you say?--Why, it has taken over a hundred years to grow, and it _ought_ to be arriving at maturity by this time!

The determination of its citizens displayed in crus.h.i.+ng out secession?-- They took four years to do it in, although they had an army and navy provided to their hand, and were receiving recruits in hundreds from the ma.s.ses of incoming emigrants, up to the very end of the struggle; while, the Southerners had to improvise everything, and their forces dwindled down day by day.

We put down the Indian mutiny in 1857 with a little handful of troops, that had to confront thousands upon thousands of insurgent Hindoos before a single reinforcement could arrive from England:--_we_ never triumphed so loudly about what we did on that occasion; and yet, our campaign against the Sepoys was fought over a far more extended territory than the war for the "Union."

Their progress, you remark?

Pooh, my dear sir! One would almost think, to hear you talk, that the old world had stood still in sheer astonishment ever since the "new" was ushered into being!

Granted, that a few wooden shanties are run up "out west" on the prairies, and styled "towns," and that these towns grow into "cities"

by-and-by:--what then? Are there not miles of streets, and houses without number, added to London, and other little villages over here every year, which do not attract any comment--except in the annual report of the Registrar General?

Their Union Pacific Railway, connecting New York with Saint Francisco; and hence abridging the distance between Europe and Asia!

A "big thing," certainly; but have you forgotten our Underground line, and the Holborn Viaduct, and the Thames Embankment--either and all of which can vie with the n.o.blest relics of ancient Rome?

Bah! Don't talk to me in that strain, please. Has not France also achieved the Suez Ca.n.a.l, and Italy the Mont Cenis tunnel--both works surpa.s.sing any feat of Transatlantic engineering ever attempted. Why, their Hoosaic tunnel, which is not near the size of the Alpine one, and which has been talked of and worked at for the last twenty years, is not yet half completed! Have we not, too, run railways through the jungles of India, and spanned the wastes of Australia with the electric wire?