[DR] Gov. Lumpkin.
[DS] An editor of a newspaper was lately driven from Boston by a mob, on account of his abolition principles, and not long since another was subjected to the same ostracism in New Orleans for having offended a militia company by his remarks.
[DT] The question of an armed police has for some time attracted the attention of enlightened individuals in the United States; the constable's staff and the posse comitatus of the sheriff are no longer sufficient to maintain order and keep the peace. Independently of political difficulties, however, economical considerations stand in the way of the project. Virginia, for example, has nearly two-fifths of the superficial area of France. An armed police of one thousand men, which would be inconsiderable for that extent of country, would cost her about 800,000 dollars a year, a sum, say the calculators, which would more than pay the interest of a loan that would enable us to construct a canal or a railroad from Richmond to the Ohio. So the canal is made, and the armed police put off for another day. Meanwhile if some travellers from the North are hanged or flogged as abolitionists by the slaveholders, in a moment of excitement, the affair is regretted at first, but it is thought to be more important to have a canal or railroad which shall make Richmond the rival of New York, than to save two or three fanatics from the lash or the halter. This system is deplorable. But I know not that we have a right to denounce it, for we must confess, that something analogous prevails amongst us. We demand money without hesitation for war, for organising and keeping up a large military force, for filling our arsenals with cannon; but how difficult is it to procure any for useful enterprises, roads, canals, railroads, schools, penitentiaries, to which the United States devote almost all their resources?
[LETTER XXXI.]
THE MIDDLE CLASSES.
Baltimore, Oct. 8, 1835.
American society is composed of quite different elements, from those of which European society in general, and French society in particular, consists. On analysing the latter, we find, in the first place, the shadow of an aristocracy, comprising the wrecks of the great families of the old order that have been saved from the revolutionary storm, and the descendants of the Imperial nobility, who seem to be already separated from their fathers by the distance of ages.
Next below this is a numerous body of the Middle Classes (bourgeoisie), consisting of two distinct sets; the one, the active class, is engaged in commerce, manufactures, agriculture, and the liberal professions; the other, generally designated amongst us as the bourgeoisie oisive, consists of men without active employment, landholders who derive an income of 500 or 1500 dollars from their estates, by rents or sharing the produce with the cultivator, without attempting to increase it, and the small body of holders of public stock.
These two divisions of the Middle Class differ essentially from each other, the one labouring, the other only consuming and enjoying what they have. The one increases its means, and consequently is able to keep itself above the waves, and maintain, if not to raise, its level; the other, as M. Lafitte has said, successively transported by time into one stage of society after another, in each of which large additions are made to the general wealth, finds itself growing relatively poorer, and must decrease in numbers. They differ no less in their origin; the one belongs essentially to the commons; the other has some pretensions to nobility, it is the offspring, or at least the heir and successor of the country-gentry. During the period of the Restoration, they differed also in their political views; the members of the one class for the most part took the left side, those of the other preferred the right side. At present, the former accepts the new dynasty without reluctance; the latter, more difficult to be satisfied in regard to the preservation of order, and ready to take alarm at every violation of old established privileges, still preserves a secret preference for the legitimate line. In respect to religious sentiments, the latter is sceptical, and prone to believe that the Voltairean philosophy and the theories broached by the Opposition during the fifteen years, are the nec plus ultra of the human understanding; the former, shaken in its faith, still keeps alive the sacred fire of religious feeling, rejects the disorganising doctrines of the 18th century, and holds in scorn the lucubrations of the liberal publicists of the Restoration. The one piques itself on its adherence to the positive, the material; the other concerns itself about the great conservative principles of society, but refuses to recognise the new interests, which must be allowed to share in the privileges of those of the past.
These two sections of the Middle Class are not wholly and sharply separated from each other; but they run into and across each other. A large proportion partakes somewhat of both characters, and joins one side or the other, according to times and circumstances. Yet, although often confounded in the same individual, the two interests are, nevertheless, substantially distinct from each other. The base of the pyramid is occupied by the peasants and operatives, divided into two sections; the one of which has become possessed of property, the other has not yet reached that point but aspires after it with eagerness. On one side, we have the mechanics and small proprietors; on the other, the labourers. It is universally acknowledged that the Middle Class, at present, rules in France. The aristocracy is driven from power or keeps itself aloof. The mechanics and small proprietors hardly yet begin to raise their heads. The labourers are nothing.