as it was in the story.
For by common agreement women are appointed to work in the house, and men to work out doors.
Then it is God decides what our lot shall be when we are born into the world. God determines who shall be born of poor parents and who of rich, and this decides what kind of work each one shall do, and what kind of accommodations and furniture each shall possess. It was thus in the story. By casting lots, the company gave to God the business of deciding what stations and employments each should take, and this determined what clothes and accommodations each should take. But more depends on our intelligence, industry, and virtue, than on the particular lot in which we are born, so that the people in this country are in exactly the situation of the shipwrecked company after they began to trade at the store. Though some few keep the place they got by the lot of birth, almost every thing depends on intelligence, skill, industry and virtue. In this country, any man who is well educated, active, skillful and industrious can become comparatively rich. Of course, in this land, men have more inducements to become well educated, virtuous, and industrious than the people of any other nation on earth.
In like manner, each kind of work has overseers appointed to direct others. Who these overseers shall be, in most cases, also, is decided on the same plan as in the story. Those who know the most, generally, become overseers. In cases where persons hire laborers to work on farms, or in their families, then the master of the house, or the farm, is the overseer, and directs those he hires, because they agree, for a reward, to do as he directs. But in almost all trades and professions, it is those who know the most, who rise to stations where they are overseers to others.
This is a great benefit to all the community, because it is an encouragement to all persons to improve their minds, and to be industrious in acquiring skill and knowledge.
In this country too, we have men who spend all their time in studying about diseases and in attending to the sick, and others who educate the young, and others who discharge the duties performed by the good minister in the story.
And we find among us too, some people who think that it would be much better for us if every body earned money for the common stock, instead of laying it out for themselves, so that nobody should have any handsomer rooms, or furniture, or clothing than all the others have. Such persons think it would be wise to give up carpets, sofas, china, glass and all ornaments, and to have every body live very plainly, and all fare just alike.
But the great body of the people know better than this. They see that if all the manufactories of carpets, sofas, glass, china, silks, muslins and ornaments were stopped, that all the persons now employed in making, and in trading in these articles, would be thrown out of employ, and having nothing to do, would become lazy and wicked.
They, therefore, conclude that it is best that all kinds of rich and beautiful things should be made, in order to keep one set of persons busy in making them, and another set busy in earning money to buy them. This view of the subject should keep persons from complaining that so many needless and extravagant things are made and sold. It is true that many are thus tempted to buy more than is wise or right, yet on the whole, great good results to the community. For if nobody bought any thing but what was barely necessary to life and comfort, half the world would become lazy beggars, for want of something to do. In this country, also, we find the same trouble that the good minister in the story saw among his people. For everywhere we find persons associating together in different classes, that refuse to admit other classes to join them. Thus, domestics form one class, farmers another, mechanics another, merchants another, and literary persons another. Now, in some parts of the country, all these classes mingle together, without any distinctions of class. But this is not generally the case. For, in most places, we find various circles who consider themselves as above or below others, in certain respects, and who are very apt to feel wrong towards each other on this account. Thus domestics in a family will often feel very much above persons who are mulattos, and refuse to eat or associate with them, and yet they think it very hard if mechanics’ wives and daughters have the same sort of feelings towards them. In like manner, mechanics’ daughters and sempstresses refuse to eat or to associate with domestics, and yet they think it very wrong if merchants’ or lawyers’ daughters refuse to associate with them. And even in those circles who call themselves the very first, the same feeling is often to be met. I have been in places where there was a rich and fashionable set, that felt above every other class, and yet there was another class who called themselves literary, who felt quite as much above the fashionable set, whom they called the vulgar rich, and whom they would not associate with, even if urged to do so.
Now it cannot be denied that there often is something wrong on both sides in these cases. For all should be allowed to choose who shall associate with them, and who shall not, and none should feel wronged or injured, because others do not wish to have them come into their circle. Every one should grant to others the same right as he claims for himself. No one has a right to force his company on us, when we do not wish it, and we have no right to claim that others shall admit us into their circle, unless they wish it.
But the great mischief is, that those who feel above another set, are very apt to treat those they fancy to be below them, with discourtesy or contempt, while those who feel below others, are apt to indulge in suspicious, envious, or revengeful feelings.
How has it been with you who read this? Are there not persons whom you refuse to associate with, and would you not be offended if they were set to eat at the same table with you? And yet have you not felt angry when others have used the same right in regard to you? Is not this a place where you very much need the golden rule, “Do unto others as ye would that others should do unto you?”
LETTER V.
Reasons for regarding the station of a domestic as honourable and respectable.
My Friends:
The preceding letters were designed to give you some general views of the state of things in this country, and of the station which you are called to occupy. I will now point out reasons for regarding your station and employment as honourable and respectable.
It is sometimes the case that persons will speak of the place of a domestic as the humblest and least desirable of any; and some young girls will go into shops and manufactories, and work much longer, and for lower wages, because they fancy that it is more respectable than the place of a domestic. And not unfrequently “shop girls” and “factory girls” will show much pride and folly, in shunning the society of domestics, and in treating them with disrespect and contempt, as if they were very much below themselves. All these things are owing to a want of correct notions as to the real usefulness and respectability of this important station in life. And I will now point out the reasons for considering your situation as far more honourable, desirable, and useful than that of a sempstress, a shop girl, or a factory girl; and even as superior in respectability to that of many persons who consider themselves as belonging to the “very first society.”
There are two things that make a station honourable; one is the power to do good, and the other is using this power in the right manner.
Why is the office of a king or queen the most honourable of any in the nation? Because it secures the most power to confer benefits and enjoyment on others? Why is the station of a president, a governor, or a judge so honourable? Because they have great power given them to use for the happiness of others. Why is the office of a minister of the gospel honourable? Because his education, character and office give him great powers to do good. Why are rich men considered more honourable than poor? Because their money gives them power to increase the happiness of others. They can give employment to the poor, can give custom to the shopkeepers
