The star of the north. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1849-1866, 1857-08-19
what ls vuIsar, and wha, Not.


Whasis vuIsaL aud What Not.
"What vulgar psopls 4" sald bosrdius-
school miss, su2erciliousy, the. other day,
as an honest farmer and bis dsugh,eis took
their seats nssr her IN the drawing room Of q
watering placs ho.ei Ystefhe l@o parties,
she was Really lhe more vulgar, If words are
10 be used in their true Specification. For
the farmer, though plain i'm his attire and
\ speech, was kindly y-hearted, sensible, and
good citizen, vhila the fashiopabIe miss was
pert, an idleT, possip, extrassgani and FOOL
ish. II was because the, FORMER, like the
great mass Of Americans, Isbored for bis
fiivelihcod, and bore abou, him, ia face and
dress and manner. the unmistakabIe signs of
his calling, that he was called vulgar. But
are things vulgar because they are common?
Then are light and air and water vulgar, the
trees and mountains, the everlasting ocean
Or if man is vulgar because he Is not a
drone, but performs we'll and slurdily his
TASK 10 life, then the wisest statesmen, and
I greatest heroes, In common with the hum.
blest peasant, have been vulgar. 1t is a mis-.
nomer 10 call those who laber vulgar, be.
cause Of that labor. II is more, II is an In
suit 10 honest toll. '' lshl 'Te
We are left in no difficulty, however, as
10 the origin Of the epiihet. 1t had its birth
10 a different state Of society from our own.
II is relic Of dominant caste. II was a
terms Of opprobrium, applied to the com.
mon people, by race Of insolent, supercili.
Gus and cruel conque:ors. II we had here,
as Saxon England had, a small body OF
victorious soldiers, who had subjugated the
inhabitants of the soil, and had parcelled
out The lands between themselves, there
might, perhaps, be some Appropriateness in
the use of the word. The mass Of tie peo-
pie would then be vulgar, in the sense in
which the Saxon churl was vulgar in the
eyes of his Roman oppressor. What Gunh
was 10 The Templar, what Cade was ID
Richard the Second, that the operative or
day-laborer would be 10 the wealthy and
supercilous lord of the soil. But no such
relations exist between man and man in
our Northern States. Before the law all are
equal Abslraclly, too, he who works,
whether with hand or brain, and SO adds to
the wealth of The community, is more wor-
ihy than he who does nothing for the gen.
eral veal If all were consumers, and none
producers, society would perish, self-de-
siroyed; and consequently the producer is
really superior to the mere consumer. II
either is to be called vulgar, in any appro-
brious sense of that term, it should he the
latter.
We may seem to treat this matter too Sc
riously. We may appear to enlarge, over
thing 10 admit. Intellectually, tina, thing is
true, and quite another to reduce that Huism
10 practice. In spite Of its being in contra.
diclion to The whole spirit Of our republican
institutions, the prejudice against labor, as
contrasled with life of opulent idleness,
fingers yet even in the northern sections of
these United States. II is colonial habit,
imported originally from England, from
which society has never entirely emancipa-
ted itseif. Men, VINO woufu be tus r1rst TO
| i0Puu'oeo w "ooty suCu uoiicl, pIdCttCdiiy
ok down upon all who earn their subsisl.
ence by mechanical or manual arts. To be
a lawyer, doctor, preacher, Office holder, or
merchant, is considered genteel, while TO be
a farmer, an operative, or day-laborer, is
regarded as vulgar. The blunt YET sincere,
manners of the yeoman, by the same vici-
ous rule, are called vulgar, while the dis.
stimulation OF those, who figure in fashion.
able life is pronounced weli-bred. Yet, be-
fore the impartial tribunal OF truth, that is
really vulgar which is false and hollow. Il
is the frivolous, idle drones of society, not
the sturdy and honestly toiling mass, who
ought 10 be considered vulgar; and the soon.
erthe epiihst stbus applied, The more con-
sistent will be It's use, and The better and
purer will be the republic.-Ledgr.