The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1858-02-16
THE AMERICAN GENTLEMAN.


ton of our Constitution. such an order of
men is impossible. Supreme selishness is
not here allowed the privilege of getting
the higher seats in the sinagogue" to the
exclusion of the less fortunate, and this
devil take the hndermest'' principle is,
at any rate, not sanctioned by the Govern
ment. But were it not so, and on the sup
position that we had legitimate arist"cracy,
whence could its members derive their orr
gin /? Our nation is but a little over hun
dred years old. and that is hardly suffi-
cient antiquity ON which to found re-
spectacle reputation for ancestry. Why
the descendant in some cases would have
the privilege of conversing with the origin
al ancestor in the body. But that would
never do. and we would be obliged to hunt
up an Indian pedigree ifwe wanted oh in
digenous aristocracy. Yet what man
could be nationally proud of descent from
a tattooed savage-a naked. painted demon
with hatchet in his hand and turf Of
feathers in his head! A wretched savage
who rushed bowling through the wilderness
like lion, would make pretty ancestor
for some illustrious line of militia colonels
and bogus State Governors. That gentry
would fairly shudder and shake in its shoes
at tn, very idea of snch ferocious pro-
| genitor. No, we fear we would be obliged
| to renounce the indigenous aristocracy and
begin new one of our own. Our true ar
| istocracy would consist of the descendants
of our Revolutionary heroes. TO those
heroes do we owe our national existence,
| and of such an ancestry no one could feel
| ashamed. Poor and humble though they
| may have been, still they were men : earn
/ est, resolute men, and if their descendants
| neccessarily inherit their virtues, we might
| we'll be proud of them as an aristccracy.-
! But the Declaration did away with such
| distinc tons, and the theory is that we have
no aristocracy in this country. Yet what
/ is the fact! A very lamentable one, that
though we have no Legitimate aristocracy,
we most decidedly have pseudo one
Ridiculous, too as it may appear, there is
| silent strife going on between two con-
! tending factions for the superiorty-be-
tween what are called 1.-The old Dutch fami-
! lies and class of wealthy ''parvcnus,"
I who. in some cases. can trace back as far
as their grandfuthers. On analysing the
pretensious of these two parties, We hnd
that the .old Dutch families have an an
! tiouity of about two hundred years OH
which to found their claims while the ''par-
venus depend their wealth. and on
what they call their ''mdnors," the posses
! sion of a "manor'' necessarily conveying
with it the possession Of manner. The
| Dutch families being for the most pnrt
quiet and unobtrusive class rather have the
worst of it, and though we by no means in
tend to insinuate that all Dutchmen arc
angels, still there is room for the line that
'.fools rush in where angels fear to tread
and so the .'parvenus" have obtained the
superiority of pre- occupation. That nsi-
ther however of these classes constitute the
aristocracy in reality, is proved by the
/ Constitution, for, to speak in plain terms,
where there can be no aristocracy, there
can be no aristocracy, an apophthegm
which migh satisfy even Bunsby. But in
any country where aristocracy is allowed,
they would both be in most deplerablr
plight. Two hundred years make but
small count in old countries, and at the be-
| ginning of that short period, ''the old
Dutch families would only find some
Dutch burgher-a short fat man in small
clothes, cultivating a cabbage garden and
| e LII ~,
and sour-krout. AS for the "parvenus.' a
Methodist parson in the time of the Ameri
can Revolution may have been very
worthy and estimable individual, but he
could hardly flourish with any degree of
magnfcence on genealogical tree; not
even though he may have acquired a small
property by fortunate sprculations, for
though his little property may have increas-
ed with the progress of the country till his
descendants were at length enabled to pur-
chase tract of ground and call it a ''man-
ora singular "manor" that which had
its origin in no feudal tenure. As well
might you call cabbage garden or COW
| pasture "manor."
The fact is that we have no conventional
aristocracy. The true nobility of the
American is founded solely on his personal
qualities, and there being no titles in this
country he is in reality the peer of the
proudest noble in Europe. Taking this
stand we need not be ashamed tn compare
ourselves with other countries. butifwe ac-
cept their standard we must of course fall.
At the most we are bat tive centuries old,
and then spring from the humber classes.
But we acknowledge no such test of superb
ority as antiquity. We con6de only in
personal qualities. We are not to be con-
quored by the mere chance of birth. The
laborer should not hang his head merely
because he is a laborer. Shame on the We
ry thought. He is noble for his labor
Let him be frank, open and self possessed
Jet him be gentleman. A gentleman is
not necessarily man with white hands
!, and does not work in any wav Such a