at all like it, one must go to something very different from a village.  As you stand in the Court of Heroes at Versailles and look down the broad and noble avenue that leads to Paris, the effect of the vista is much like that of a New England village street.  As American villages grow into cities, the increase in the value of land usually tends to crowd the houses together into blocks as in a European city.  But in some of our western cities founded and settled by people from New England, this spacious fashion of building has been retained for streets occupied by dwelling-houses.  In Cleveland—­a city on the southern shore of Lake Erie, with a population about equal to that of Edinburgh—­there is a street some five or six miles in length and five hundred feet in width, bordered on each side with a double row of arching trees, and with handsome stone houses, of sufficient variety and freedom in architectural design, standing at intervals of from one to two hundred feet along the entire length of the street.  The effect, it is needless to add, is very noble indeed.  The vistas remind one of the nave and aisles of a huge cathedral.

Now this generous way in which a New England village is built is very closely associated with the historical origin of the village and with the peculiar kind of political and social life by which it is characterized.  First of all, it implies abundance of land.  As a rule the head of each family owns the house in which he lives and the ground on which it is built.  The relation of landlord and tenant, though not unknown, is not commonly met with.  No sort of social distinction or political privilege is associated with the ownership of land; and the legal differences between real and personal property, especially as regards ease of transfer, have been reduced to the smallest minimum that practical convenience will allow.  Each householder, therefore, though an absolute proprietor, cannot be called a miniature lord of the manor, because there exists no permanent dependent class such as is implied in the use of such a phrase.  Each larger proprietor attends in person to the cultivation of his own land, assisted perhaps by his own sons or by neighbours working for hire in the leisure left over from the care of their own smaller estates.  So in the interior of the house there is usually no domestic service that is not performed by the mother of the family and the daughters.  Yet in spite of this universality of manual labour, the people are as far as possible from presenting the appearance of peasants.  Poor or shabbily-dressed people are rarely seen, and there is no one in the village whom it would be proper to address in a patronizing tone, or who would not consider it a gross insult to be offered a shilling.  As with poverty, so with dram-drinking and with crime; all alike are conspicuous by their absence.  In a village of one thousand inhabitants there will be a poor-house where five or six decrepit old people