The characters were invariably true to their creator’s original drawing. A good girl was good from morning to night; a naughty child began and ended the day in disobedience, and by it bottles were smashed, strawberries spilled, and lessons disregarded in unbroken sequence. In later life Miss Edgeworth confessed to having occasionally introduced in “Harry and Lucy” some nonsense as an “alloy to make the sense work well;” but as all her earlier children’s tales were subjected to the pruning scissors of Mr. Edgeworth, this amalgam is to-day hardly noticeable in “Popular Tales,” “Early Lessons,” and “Frank,” which preceded the six volumes of “Harry and Lucy.”
Although a contemporary of Mrs. Barbauld, who had written for little children “Easy Lessons,” Miss Edgeworth does not seem to have been well known in America until about eighteen hundred and five. Then “Harry and Lucy” was brought out by Jacob Johnson, a Philadelphia book-dealer. This was issued in six small red and blue marbled paper volumes, although other parts were not completed until eighteen hundred and twenty-three. Between the first and second parts of volume one the educational hand of Mr. Edgeworth is visible in the insertion of a “Glossary,” “to give a popular meaning of the words.” “This Glossary,” the editor, Mr. Edgeworth, thought, “should be read to children a little at a time, and should be made the subject of conversation. Afterwards they will read it with more pleasure.” The popular meaning of words may be succinctly given by one definition: “Dry, what is not wet.” Could anything be more lucid?
Among the stories by Miss Edgeworth are three rarely mentioned by critics, and yet among the most natural and entertaining of her short tales. They were also printed by Jacob Johnson in Philadelphia, in eighteen hundred and five, under the simple title, “Three Stories for Children.” “Little Dog Trusty” is a dog any small child would like to read about; “The Orangeman” was a character familiar to English children; and “The Cherry Orchard” is a tale of a day’s pleasure whose spirit American children could readily seize. In each Miss Edgeworth had a story to tell, and she told it well, even though “she walked,” as has been often said, “as mentor beside her characters.”
Of Miss Edgeworth’s many tales, “Waste Not, Want Not” was long considered a model. In it what Mr. Edgeworth styled the “shafts of ridicule” were aimed at the rich nephew of Mr. Gresham. Mr. Gresham (whose prototype we strongly suspect was Mr. Edgeworth himself) “lived neither in idleness nor extravagance,” and was desirous of adopting an heir to his considerable property. Therefore, he invited two nephews to visit him, with the object of choosing the more suitable for his purpose; apparently he had only to signify his wish and no parental objection to his plan would be interposed. The boys arrive: Hal, whose mama spends her days at Bath over cards with Lady Diana Sweepstake, is an ill-bred child, neither deferential to his uncle, nor with appetite for buns when queen-cakes may be had. His cousin Ben, on the contrary, has been taught those virtuous habits that make for a respectful attitude toward rich uncles and assure a dissertation upon the beneficial effect of buns versus queen-cakes. The boys, having had their characters thus definitely shown, proceed to live up to them in every particular. From start to finish it is the virtuous Ben—his generosity, thrift, and foresight are never allowed to lapse for an instant—who triumphs in every episode. He saves his string, “good whipcord,” when requested by Mr. Gresham to untie a parcel, and it thereafter serves to spin a fine new top, to help Hal out of a difficulty with his toy, and in the final incident of the story, an archery contest, our provident hero, finding his bowstring “cracked,” calmly draws from his pocket the still excellent piece of cord, and affixing it to his bow, wins the match. Hal betrays his great lack of self-control by exclaiming, “The everlasting whipcord, I declare,” and thereupon Patty, Mr. Gresham’s only child, who has suffered from Hal’s defects of character, openly rejoices when the prize is given to Ben. As is usual with Miss Edgeworth’s badly behaved children, the reader now sees the error of Hal’s ways, and perceives also that in the lad’s acknowledgment of the truth of the formerly scorned motto, “Waste not, want not,” the era of his reformation has begun.
Perpetual action was the key to the success of Miss Edgeworth’s writings. If to us her fictitious children seem like puppets whose strings are too obviously jerked, the monotonous moral cloaked in the variety of incident was liked by her own generation,
Miss Edgeworth not only pleased the children, but received the applause of their parents and friends. Sir Walter Scott, the prince of story-tellers, found much to admire in her tales, and wrote of “Simple Susan:” “When the boy brings back the lamb to the little girl, there is nothing for it but to put down the book and cry.” Susan was the pattern child in the tale, “clean as well as industrious,” while Barbara—a violent contrast—was conceited and lazy, and a lady who “could descend without shame from the height of insolent pride to the lowest measure of fawning familiarity.” Therefore it is small wonder that Sir Walter passed her by without mention.
However much we may value an English author’s admiration for Miss Edgeworth’s story-telling gifts, it is to America that we naturally turn to seek contemporary opinion. In educational circles there is no doubt that Miss Edgeworth won high praise. That her books were not always easy to procure, however, we know from a letter written from Washington by Mrs. Josiah Quincy, whose life as a child during the Revolution has already been described. When Mrs. Quincy was living in the capital city in eighteen hundred and ten, during her husband’s term as Congressman, she found it difficult to provide her family with books. She therefore wrote to Boston to a friend, requesting to have sent her Miss Edgeworth’s “Moral Tales,” “if the work can be obtained in one of the bookstores. If not,” she continued, “borrow one ... and I will replace it with a new copy. Cut the book out of its binding and enclose the pages in packets.... Be careful to send the entire text and title page.” The scarcity in Washington of books for young people Mrs. Quincy thought justified the hope that reprinting these tales would be profitable to a bookseller in whose efforts to introduce a better taste among the inhabitants she took a keen interest. But Mrs. Quincy need not have sent to Boston for them. Jacob Johnson in Philadelphia had issued most of the English author’s books by eighteen hundred and five, and New York publishers probably made good profit by printing them.
Reading aloud was both a pastime and an education to families in those early days of the Republic. Although Mrs. Quincy made every effort to procure Miss Edgeworth’s stories for her family because, in her opinion, “they obtained a decided preference to the works of Hannah More, Mrs. Trimmer and Mrs. Chapone,” for reading aloud she chose extracts from Shakespeare, Milton, Addison, and Goldsmith. Indeed, if it were possible to ask our great-grandparents what books they remembered reading in their childhood, I think we should find that beyond somewhat hazy recollections of Miss Edgeworth’s books and Berquin’s “The Looking Glass for the Mind,” they would either mention “Robinson Crusoe,” Newbery’s tales of “Giles Gingerbread,” “Little King Pippin,” and “Goody Two-Shoes” (written fifty years before their own childhood), or remember only the classic tales and sketches read to them by their parents.
Certainly this is the case if we may take as trustworthy the recollections of literary people whose childhood was passed in the first part of the nineteenth century. Catharine Sedgwick, for instance, has left a charming picture of American family life in a country town in eighteen hundred—a life doubtless paralleled by many households in comfortable circumstances. Among the host of little prigs and prudes in story-books of the day, it is delightful to find in Catharine Sedgwick herself an example of a bookish child who was natural. Her reminiscences include an account of the way the task of sweeping out the schoolhouse after hours was made bearable by feasts of Malaga wine and raisins. These she procured from the store where her father kept an open account, until the bill having been rendered dotted over with such charges “per daughter Catharine,” these treats to favorite schoolmates ceased. Also a host of intimate details of this large family’s life in the country brings us in touch with the times: fifteen pairs of calfskin shoes ordered from the village shoemaker, because town-bought morocco slippers were few and far between; the excitement of a silk gown; the distress of a brother, whose trousers for fête occasions were remodelled from an older brother’s “blue broadcloth worn to fragility—so that Robert [the younger brother] said he could not look at them without making a rent;” and again the anticipation of the father’s return from Philadelphia with gifts of necessaries and books.
After seventeen hundred and ninety-five Mr. Sedgwick was compelled as a member of Congress to be away the greater part of each year, leaving household and farm to the care of an invalid wife. Memories of Mr. Sedgwick’s infrequent visits home were mingled in his daughter’s mind with the recollections of being kept up until nine o’clock to listen to his reading from Shakespeare, Don Quixote, or Hudibras. “Certainly,” wrote Miss Sedgwick, “I did not understand them, but some glances of celestial light reached my soul, and I caught from his magnetic sympathy some elevation of feeling, and that love of reading which has been to me an ‘education.’” “I was not more than twelve years old,” she continues, “I think but ten—when one winter I read Rollin’s Ancient History. The walking to our schoolhouse was often bad, and I took my lunch (how well I remember the bread and butter, and ‘nut cake’ and cold sausage, and nuts and apples that made the miscellaneous contents of that enchanting lunch-basket!), and in the interim between morning and afternoon school I crept under my desk (the desks were so made as to afford little close recesses under them) and read and munched and forgot myself in Cyrus’ greatness.”