Copyright
Francis Hall.

The Century, Volume 11 online

. (page 46 of 163)
Online LibraryFrancis HallThe Century, Volume 11 → online text (page 46 of 163)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


North " 738.52

South *« 738.52

West ** 949.74

South-east angle to center of triple gate;

east half length of wall 302.79

Center of triple gate to west of double gate ;

west half length of wall 302.79

TOWER LYING OUT.

North side 184.64

South « 184.64

East " 103.39

South wall without tower 420.9k

Total length of south wall 005.58

Total length inclosed by wall . .. 590.82

HEROD*S INCLOSURK.

Western wall I533-I7

Eastern " 1220.04

Northem" 923.15

Southern " 923. 15

Length of north-west cloister 324.95

Width of north-west cloister 3^*45

Width of Antonia Fortress 59.08

Length of Antonia Fortress 59.08

Totid length of western wall . . . 1533. 17
South-west angle from south side

of Antonia 1308.66

Scarped rock north of Antonia. . . 351.54

Ditcn between scarp and wall 57.01

Space between Antonia and north-
em wall 100.44

Space between Antonia and Tem-
ple Area 100.44

Height of rock and scarp of An-
tonia 73*85

Width of scarp 32.49

Length of scarp 124.07

COURT OF GENTILES.

East wall 327-H

North « 782.83

South *« 782.83

Width of court * 44*3i

No west side of court.



Digitized by



Google



/



272



THE SITE OF SOLOMON'S TEMPLE DISCOVERED.



THE SAKHRA IN CENTER OF TEMPLE AREA.
» Fe(t

Center from North side of area 4i3'57

« " South " " 413-57

M East •* " 413-57

" " West wall of inclosure 369.26

«' South « " 794-65

Between Temple Courts and south wall. . . 381,07

IDENTIFICATION OF NUMEROUS SITES.

Mr. Beswick has extended his researches
beyond the site of the Temple ; he has traced
Neheraiah's builders from end to end of the
great wall, and has identified the sites of the
gates and towers enumerated in the narrative
of that patriotic leader (Nehemiah iii.),
including the Sheep-gate, Comer-gate, Fish-
gate, Valley-gate, Dung-gate ; also the Tow-
ers of Meah, Hananeel, Furnaces, Siloam,
and the Great Tower which lieth out from
the King's house. But the most important
identification is the site of David's sepul-
cher. Mr. Beswick proposes to publish a
work in which these subjects are discussed
separately.

The rock was found to be scarped and
cut down where it had cropped up too
high, so as to reduce it to the required
level of either platform or steps. This is
especially the case at the northern end of
the mosque platform, and for a short dis-
tance at the southern* end near the Cup, and
at the same distance from the Sakhra in
both cases. The direction and location of
the sides of the courts, as laid down in this
plan when traced on the Ordnance Map of
the Haram, led at once to the means of
identifying a number of important sites, and
furnished a satisfactory reason for the exist-
ence and location of many rock-<:ut struct-
ures and scarpings which have baffled all
attempts at explanation. The two cruciform
tanks, Nos. 6 and 36, in the Ordnance Sur-
vey Map, fall into their proper place, and
become the two gates or entrances, for male
and female, from the Court of Gentiles to
the Court of Israel, the smaller cruciform
tank, No. 6, being to the east of the larger
entrance, and in the proper place for the
women to enter the women's court, with



their entrances to the south, as the case
required.

The Jews' Wailing Place also falls into
position with the rest. The outer wall of
the Old Temple Area under Solomon, if
prolonged, would strike the very gate-way
to the Wailing Place, and the outer wall of
the Court of Gentiles would cut the Wailing
Place into two equal parts of 30 cubitsr=
44.31134 feet each length. Doubtless the
old Jews who selected this spot as the Wail-
ing Place knew something of the location
of the Temple Courts, for it could hardly
have been lost to the Jews of those times,
in whose memories every vestige would be
cherished and held as a landmark by which
to identify the limits and site of that Temple
whose history has filled the world with its
glory and renown.

It is impossible to foresee the important
changes in Biblical literature which must
necessarily grow out of this discovery. The
men and women of Biblical times will no
longer be mere puppets, Uving in a mythical
temple whose site no one can identify. A
reality will now pervade the narrative ; its
stories will come to us like a new revelation,
with a location and name, making the actions
of those whose deeds were done in the Temple
intelligible and dear, which beforetime were
seemingly fantastic, and oftentimes inexpli-
cable. Fact will take the place of fancy, and
topographical knowledge and clearness will
take the place of conjecture and ignorance.
To know this Temple intimately, to be able
to describe its peculiarities, to illustrate the
ancient story and narrative of the Old and
New Testament, and to give life-like reality
to incidents occurring in the Holy City and
Temple, are results of the very highest order.
Every writer on Biblical geography and his-
tory, every minister who attempts an illustra-
tion of his text, every teacher in a Simday-
school who associates the Gospel history
with illustrations, does this more or less
vaguely only because the maps mislead, or
the standard text-books are defective in their
descriptions and inaccurate in their pictorial
representations.



Digitized by



Google



OUR DOMESTIC SERVICE.



273



OUR DOMESTIC SERVICE.



I DO not propose to sing the woes of the
American housekeeper. If aught needs to
be added to the body of recent literature on
that theme, the impidse to write must come
from fuller hearts than mine. Let those
who suffer relate how slatternly is Dinah,
how impudent Bridget, how stupid Wilhel-
mina, and, alas ! how fleeting were the delu-
sive jo)rs of Chang- Wang, son of the Sun.
Propria qua maribus. Because women in-
vade the forum, and crowd us from our
places on the public platform, shall we,
therefore, take refuge in the kitchen, or be so
base as seem to know what passes in that
realm of blackness and smoke ? Perish the
thought! The object of this paper is to
present fects that are not of personal expe-
rience, are authenticated by the testimony of
no single witness, and are of no private
interpretation; facts which pertain to the
life, not of individuals and families, but of
communities and States; ^u:ts gathered by
thousands of men, who had as litde notion
what should be the aggregate purport of
their contributions as my postman has of
the tale of joy, of sorrow, or of debt, which
lies snugly folded in the brown paper envel-
ope he IS leaving this moment at my door.
No momentary fretfulness of a mistress
overburdened with cares; no freak of inso-
lence in a maid elated by a sudden access of
lovers ; no outbreak of marital indignation
at underdone bread, or overdone steak, can
disturb the serenity of this impersonal and
unconscious testimony of the Census. The
many millions of ra3rs that fall confusedly
upon the lens which every tenth year is held
up before the nation, are cast upon the
screen in one broad, unbroken beam of light,
truth pure, dispassionate, uncolored.

The English Census discriminates many
varieties of domestic service. TTiere are,
besides " the domestic servant in general,"
male or female, the "coachman," the
" groom," the " gardener," all of the sterner
sex ; while gentle woman contributes to the
list the "housekeeper," the "cook," the
"housemaid," the "nurse," the "laundry-
maid," and the " char- woman." All these
titles are respectably filled in the Census, as
might be expected in a country where the
distinctions of wealth are so marked, and
where the household among the upper
classes is organized with a completeness
Vol. XL— 18.



approaching that of the Roman familia
under the Empire.

In the United States, however, the dis-
tinctions of domestic service have not pro-
ceeded far enough to make it worth while
to maintain such a classification of rank and
work; nor are the agencies provided for our
Census adequate to collect facts in any
direction where discrimination is required.
It was, indeed, attempted in the publication
of the Eighth Census (i860) to preserve a
few of the simpler forms. Thus "cooks"
were separately reported; but the number
of the class was disappointing, being but
353 for the United States; of whom 10 were
found in Arkansas, 24 in Delaware, 6 in
Florida, 3 in Georgia, 18 in Kansas, 14 in
KedlUcky, 337 in Louisiana, and 41 in
Michigan. ' The considerable States of New
York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, IKinois, Indiana,
Missouri, and Massachusetts, had, if t^e ^
may trust this account, no cooks in i860.
The universal consumption of raw food by
such large communities cannot fail to excite
the astonishment of the future historian.

The attempt to preserve the dass " house-
keeper" resulted m the report of a larger
^^greg&te number than of cooks; but the
distribution of that number was hardly
more reasonable. Alabama, Maine, Ohio,
Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Vir-
ginia had none, individually or collectively.
Think of several thousand "first families " of
Virginia, — of the Rhetts and Bamwells, die
Ruffins and Pettigrews of South Carolina
without a housekeeper among them !' The
remaining States of the Union were, indeed,
allowed to boast theii" housekeepers ;. but the
figures were such as to excite incredulity.
New Hampshire had 1,245* Connecticut,
25; Pennsylvaniia, 2^795; New York, 940;
Massachusetts, 4,092; Michigan, 20. Still
another distinction was attempteid, the pre-
cise idea of which is not at this date mani-
fest, between " domestics " and " servants."
Alabama had no domestics, any more than
it had cooks; Arkansas had 797 ; California
and Connecticut, none; Delaware, 1,688;
Florida, 631 ; Georgia, Illinois and Indiana,
none; Iowa, 358; Kansas, none; Kentucky,
1,782. This completed the tale of domes-
tics in the United States. New York, Penn-
sylvania, Massachusetts, Virginia were as
destitute of domestics as before the discov-



Digitized by



^Joogle



^74



OUR DOMESTIC SERVICE.



ery of America by Christopher Columbus.
When it came to "servants," these States
were more than made good. New York
counted her 155,282 ; Pennsylvania, 81,233;
Massachusetts, 37,464,

This brief recital will probably suffice to
show Uie inexpediency, in the present social
condition of our people, of attempting to
divide the class of domestic servants accord-
ing to distinctions of occupation, which are
certain to be afiRscted where they do not
exist, and disregarded quite as generally
where they do exist In the further course
of this paper, this class, whether at 1870 or
at i860, will, therefore, be treated as a
whole, without discrimination of cook or
chambermaid, butler or scullion, gorgeous
flunky or simple drudge. Prior to the
enumeration of 1870, it was an interesting
subject of speculation whether the social
^^^onomical causes which had produced
such marked effects upon the ways of busi-
ness throughout the country, upon the gen-
eral scale of expenditure, and upon the hab-
its of domestic life, would be found to have
increased materially the number of hired
servants in femiUes. At the South, indeed,
where Ae negroes, who mainly supplied the
domestic service of i860, had come to own
themselves, and hence to be in a position not
only to demand wages, but to take on airs;
where, moreover, the general impoverish-
moit of the proprietor class, and the slow
and painful recovery of industrial produc-
tion necessitated the retrenchment of ex-
penditure, it required no careful count of
the people to maice it certain that more per-
sons, in proportion to population, were not
employed in the offices of the household in
1S70 than at the earlier date.

But of the Northern and Middle States,
the reverse was reasonably to be assumed.
Not only had rapid progress been made in
the Upper Ten Thousand toward Europesui
standanls of equipage and service, but it
was generally claimed and admitted that the
middle class of our population had made a
decided movement in the same direction;
that life was freer with us than it used to be,
fomily expenditure more liberal, luxuries more
widely difiiised, assistance more readily com-
manded in all departments, industrial or
domestic. Few would have ventured to
predict that the results of the Census
would show that, while social require-
ments have increased on every hand ; while
the appetites and tastes of the household
have been rendered more difficult and exact-
ing by the diversification of the national



diet, and by the popularization of foreign
fiiiits and spices, of condiments and game;
while we are everywhere taking on the sem-
blance of greater ease and indulgence, — ^with
these facts in view few would luive thought
the tendency of the age is not more and more
to place servants in the houses of the people,
or believed that, however it may be with the
abodes of luxury and fashion, the wives and
the mothers of the great middle class are
discharging their daily duties, and keeping
up their outward conformity to the demancb
of society, with a diminishing, rather than an
increasing, body of hired help. Yet such is the
fact, as revealed by the count of 1870. The
sixteen firee States in i860 showed 474,857
domestic servants of all descriptions. The
same States, ten years later, showed but
57o»o54, being a gain of only 20^ per cent
Meanwhile the aggregate population of these
States had increased upward of 27 per cent.

The States in which this relative decrease
in the number of servants has been most
marked, are the New England States,
together with New Yoik, New Jersey, and
Pennsylvania. The Western and Nortii-
westem States, on the other hand, have,
without exception, increased the proportion
of tiieir domestic service largely smce i860,
showing that, while the commercial and
manufacturing States are coming to feel the
necessity of economizing in tlus direction
of expenditure, the well-to-do inhabitants
of the agricultural States are just beginning
to indulge themselves somewhat freely in
the luxury of being served and waited on.

Abandoning now the retrospect, and
grouping the States of the Union according
to the facts of the present time, we shall in
our further comparisons set the number of
domestic servants in each State, not against
the total population, but against the number
of ^unilies, as affording the best measure of
tiie amount of service secured.

Let us turn first to the old slave-breeding
States. Here, in former times, the tendency
to a plethora of domestic service was very
marked. '* Niggers" were native and to the
manor bom. lliey represented no expendi-
ture but that of the com and pork necessary
to bring them to the age, and size, and
strength to perform the anluous duties of
lying around on the floor or in the sun, and
answering an occasional call to some per-
sonal service. In '* one of the first families''
cook had her legion of minor functionaries;
the coachman was at the head of a litde
state; every member of the &mily, fixnn
youngest to eldest, had his or her own body-



Digitized by



Google



OUR DOMESTIC SERVICE.



27s



servant ; while a black host of " unattached "
swanned through the house, the kitchens,
the quarters, the stables, the sties, and over-
ran the fiel<^ and roads in every direction.

Such having been the custom of the
period preceding the war, we shall naturally
expect to find it influencing the present situ-
ation in these States, despite impoverish-
ment of planter and emancipation of slave,
and should look to see here an excess of
domestic service, due partly to an acciunu-
lation which has not had time to drain ofi^
and partiy to the force of habits deeply bred
in master and in man. And so we And it.
The Census statistics show that in 1870 there
were but 4.29 femilies, high and low, rich
and poor, white and black, to one domestic
servant in Virginia; in Kentucky, 5.58; in
Delaware, 4.83 ; in Maryland, 4.03.

We have spoken of Vu-ginia, This is the
present State of that name. West Virginia
has 11.75 families to one servant Is any-
thing ftuther necessary, to a student of his-
tory, to explain the cleavage that took place
during the war in the old State — ^the adhe-
sion of the north-western counties to the
cause of the Union, while the southern and
eastern counties followed the fortunes of
that Confederacy "whose keystone was
slavery," than such a contrast as is thus pre-
sented in the statistics of domestic service in
the two sections of the Virginia of i860 ?

When we leave the slave-breeding, and
tiuTi to the slave-consuming States, the cot-
ton, rice, and sugar-raising regions of the
country, we should expect to find, and we
do find, a decided change of conditions.
The system of human chattelism tended to
bring out the same results in the multiplica-
tion of domestic servants ; but, on the other
hand, there was opposed a most substantial
and emphatic resistance, in the fact that the
colored population of those States was only
kept up by continuous importation. Speak-
ing broadly, every able-bodied black repre-
sented a direct outlay of from eight to
twelve hundred dollars. But more than
this : twenty-five per cent could be realized
fix)m that investment in a single season by
proper employment Even the women and
the half-grown boys represented a net pro-
ductive capacity of one or two hundred dol-
lars a year if put into the field. Under
such conditions, it was pretty certain that
the number of house hands would be kept
down to the real demands either of neces-
sity or of luxury, not suffered to increase
wantonly and wasteftiUy to the degree of a
podtive nuisance, as was often the case



under the good-naturedly shifUess system
prevailing in the border States.

The statistics of the Census bear out this
view of the reason of the case. Alabama
has 9.05 families to one servant ; Arkansas,
14.64; Florida, 9.84; Georgia, 6.42; Louis-
iana, 5.89; Mississippi, 10.54; South Caro-
lina, 9.32; Texas, n.28. The apparent
exceptions here are Louisiana and Georgia.
Ifi however, we exclude New Orieans, a
city which belongs rather to the whole cot-
ton-growing region than to any one State,
Louisiana ceases to be an exception. New
Orleans has but 2.89 ^milies to a servant,
and the remainder of the State no less than
9.83.

We have spoken of all the former slave
States except three. Missouri never was
more than half a slave State. The practical
area of slavery was limited to less than a
quarter of its soil. The number of &milies
to a servant in Missouri is 10.8. If we
exclude St. Louis, the number rises to
13.61. North Carolina and Tennessee have
respectively 7.72, and 9.42 families to a ser-
vant Their position in this respect is
undoubtedly due to the £act that they lay
geographically between the old slave-breed-
ing and slave-consuming States, and, par-
taking in a degree of the character of both,
exhibited some of the characteristics of
each.

Leaving now the former slave States, we
find among the original free States an even
greater variety in the matter of domestic
service. The system of human chattelism
did not enter here. Domestics were no
longer property, to be worked at the will of
their owners. Throughout &e States we
are about to consider, servants were free to
go or to stay — ^free to enter the mill and the
shop, free to ask their own price, and firee
to be just as disagreeable as they pleased.
Even tfie words master and servant were
in some sections taken as offensive. It is
evident that under such conditions domestic
service is never likely to be in excess from
sheer indifference to accumulation. In such
communities, servants will be employed
only as the result of distinct efforts and sac-
rifices on the part of ^milies to attract and
retain them, bidding over the factories and
the shops in respect to the amount of wages,
or to ease of occupation, or both — such
efforts and sacrifices becoming greater in
the newer portions of the country, until, as
we approach the extreme North-west, domes-
tic service is almost forbidden by the indus-
trial conditions which are there found to



Digitized by



Google



276



OUR DOMESTIC SERVICE,



exist. In the Middle and Eastern States
we should expect to find communities
employing domestic servants somewhat in
proportion to the extent and success of their
manufactures and commerce, the presence
of a considerable city being almost inevita-
bly indicated by an increase in this form of
expenditure.

The facts revealed by the Census corre-
spond in general with great exactness to the
reason of the case as we have sought to rep-
resent it. Beginning at the extreme East, we
have Maine, a State chiefly agricultural, and
having no large city to bring up its average,
with 11.57 families to one servant New
Hampshure, approaching in its southern
parts the industrial conditions of Massachu-
setts, has but 9.64. Connecticut, Rhode
Island, and Vermont have, respectively,
7.61, 7.44, and 7.35. If, however, we
exclude New Haven and Providence, Con-
necticut goes up to 8.08, and Rhode Island
^o 9*33- Massachusetts, with a population
two-diirds that of the other New England
States combined, has one servant to every
6.67 families. If, however, we exclude
the cities of Boston and Worcester, we have
for the remainder of the State but one to
8.24.

Of the States known in the geographies of
our school days as the Middle States, New
York has but 5.79 families to one servant;
New Jersey, 6.97, and Pennsylvania^ 8.01.
If we exclude the seven principal cities of
New York, the remainder of the State shows
7.31 femilies to a servant If we exclude
Philadelphia, Allegheny and Pittsburgh, the
remainder of Pennsylvania shows 9.86.

Proceeding westward to Ohio and Michi-
gan, we find, as we should expect, a smaller
number of domestic servants in these States,
the ratios being but one to 9.73 and to 9.74,
respectively, or, if we exclude Cincinnati
and Clevdand in Ohio, and Detroit in
Michigan, but one to 10.^2 and 10.31, re-
spectively. Ohio and Michigan are, how-
ever, much older States than Illinois, which
shows but one to 10.57, or, excluding Chi-
cago, but one to 12.72. Indiana, a State of
equal age, but of a more exclusively agri-
cultural population, shows but one to 14.02
families. This is nearly the ratio of Iowa
(one to 14. 14). Wisconsin, with larger man-
ufacturing interests, has one to 10.46, or,
excluding Milwaukee, one to 11.26.

The six States remaining may be passed
over with brief mention. Cahfomia, with
its great body of " Chinese cheap labor,"
naturally shows a large proportion of do-



mestic service, having one servant to 8.37
families, though, if we exclude San Fran-
cisco, the remainder of the State has but one
to 11.32 families, which is very close to the
ratio for Nevada (one to 11.13), where, also,
the Chinese element largely enters. Three
of the other four States show the condition
proper to pioneer communities, where luxu-
ries are not expected, and labor is scarce
and high. Nebraska has but one servant
to 16.92 families; Kansas, one to 16.18;
Oregon, one to 22.29. Minnesota, how-
ever, forms a distinct exception, and one not
easily explained. The ratio of domestic ser-
vice here (one to 9.64 families) is precisely
that of New Hampshire, and exceeds by a
trifle that of Ohio. Unless the cause of
this be found in the proportion of Swedes
and Norwegians within the State, it must be
left to some social investigator on the spot,
to account for this indulgence of the far Min-
nesotians in the luxury of domestic service so
much beyond the customs of their neighbors.

Heretofore we have had under consider-
ation the domestic servants in the several
States, and in certain important cities, in
their aggregate number only.* But it may
not be without interest to follow this general
class into the details of its nationality, and
inquire what races and coimtries contribute,
and in what measure severally, to this total
of 951,334 persons, big and little, male and
female, white, black and yellow, who min-
ister in the households of our people.

At sight the statements of the Census in
this respect appear scarcely credible. Thus,
at the outset, we meet tiie assertion that
704,780 of the 951,334 were bom within
the United States. To one who has been
accustomed to think of pretty much the
whole body of domestic servants as of for-
eign birth, the first feeling must be that of
mcredulity. What, can it be true that all the
Irish, Germans, Swedes, Canadians and Chi-



Online LibraryFrancis HallThe Century, Volume 11 → online text (page 46 of 163)