The Continental Monthly, Vol. 6, No 3, September 1864 | Page 4

natural propensity, is extremely
difficult of eradication. It may be stated, however, that given an
average 'greenhorn,' Irish or German, the notable and tidy housewife
will make of her a very fair servant, as well instructed as her native
intelligence will allow, and, unless a downright incorrigible, whose
natural slatternliness is beyond the reach of improvement, a certainly
tolerably neat, and possibly a very tidy servant. And just here I will
remark that it is an unquestionable fact that the good housekeeper has a

much more encouraging prospect of making a useful servant out of one
of these same 'greenhorns' than of a girl who has been longer in the
country, and who has nevertheless yet to be 'licked into shape.' Of
course this remark covers the whole ground, and it is obvious that to
start a girl right in habits of economy, respectfulness, etc., is quite as
important as to start her right in any other good habit. It is not
necessary to say further that starting right is not of itself enough: there
must ever accompany the progress of the servant in improvement, the
watchful eye and guiding hand of the skilled mistress and head of the
family. I cannot, within the scope of this article, enter into the
consideration of the important correlative branch of my subject, which
includes the fitness of housekeepers to make good servants out of the
rough, to keep good what they so find, or to improve such as they
receive, be they good or bad. It is obvious that this fitness presupposes
a practical knowledge of the science of housekeeping--(how worthy it
is to be called a 'science'!)--and a willingness to accept and carry out
the responsibilities which devolve upon the mistress of a family. I
admit that very many of those who keep servants are utterly unfit in
many important senses for the responsibilities of family economists.
Yet I still believe it possible for even the most inexperienced
housekeepers to adopt and pursue, in their management of servants, one
or two cardinal principles which will save them a vast deal of vexation.
Of these, more hereafter.
The very prevalent pertness and 'independence' of servants are due,
primarily, unquestionably to the great demand for them, and the ease
with which situations are procured. This is not, in my judgment,
because the supply is inadequate; I do not believe it is. It is because the
frequent changings of servants by our families places it in the power of
every one of the former to procure a situation without the slightest
trouble. A girl about to leave a place has but to inquire for two or three
doors around, to find some family about to change 'help.' This
'independence' is also undoubtedly fostered by a false and exaggerated
idea which these girls imbibe from their brothers, 'cousins,' etc.--the
voting 'sovereigns' of the land--of the dignity of their new republican
relation. Most of the 'greenhorns' begin humbly enough, but, after a few
months' tutelage of fellow servants, and especially if they pass through

the experiences of the 'intelligence offices' (of which more anon), they
are thoroughly spoiled, and become too impudent and 'independent' for
endurance. The male adopted citizen, fawned upon by demagogues for
his vote, is 'as good as anybody;' and why not Bridget and Katrina?
Now I do not broach the abstract question of equality: I am willing to
admit that in the eye of our Maker we are, and before the law ought to
be, all equal--that is to say, ought all to have an equal chance; but to
abolish the idea of subordination in the employed to the employer, and
to abrogate the relation of dependence of the servant upon her or his
master or mistress, would simply be to reverse the teachings of
inspiration and nature. As well say that the child shall be independent
of the parent as that the servant shall not be subject in all reasonable
things to the master.
It is worthy of remark that this spirit of insubordination spoken of is far
more rife among girls of Irish birth who go out to service than among
the Germans, Scotch, or English. Neither is there among these latter so
much clannishness, or disposition to establish the feeling under
consideration as a class prejudice and principle of conduct, as there is
among the former. The absence of such a homogeneity of feeling
among German, English, and Scotch domestics makes them much more
favorable subjects for the operation of the rules I propose to suggest for
their improvement.
The clannishness just alluded to is a very important influence among
those which tend to produce insubordination and other serious faults
among servants. Every housekeeper must have observed that a
marvellous facility of intercommunication exists among the servant
classes, and more particularly