Here is the root of the difference.  In a climate that keeps the pulses in full leap and the nerves tense, we call upon pride to lash on the quivering body and spirit to run the unrighteous race, the goal of which is to seem richer than we are, and make “smartness” (American smartness) cover the want of capital.  Having created false standards of respectability, we crowd insane asylums and cemeteries in trying to live up to them.

The tradesman who begins to acknowledge the probability that he will become a rich citizen, and whose wife has “feelings” on the subject of living as her neighbors do, takes the conventional step toward asserting himself and gratifying her aspirations by moving into a bigger house than that which has satisfied him up to now, and furnishing it well—­that is, smartly, according to the English acceptance of the word.

Silks and moquette harmonize as well as calico and ingrain once did.  A three-story-and-a-half-with-a-high-stoop house, without a piano in the back parlor, and a long mirror between the front parlor windows, would be a forlorn contradiction of the genius of American progress.  As flat a denial would be the endeavor to live without what an old lady once described to me as, a “pair of parlors.”  The stereotyped brace is senseless and ugly, but one of the necessaries of life to our ambitious housewife.  She would scout as vulgar the homely cheerfulness of the middle-class Englishman’s single “parlor” where the table is spread and the family receives visitors.  Having saddled himself with a house too big for his family, and stocked the showrooms with plenishings so fine that the family are afraid to use them unless when there is company, the prudent citizen satisfies the economic side of him by making menials of wife and daughters without thought of the opposing circumstance that he has practically endorsed their intention to make fine ladies of themselves.  Neither he nor the chief slave of her own gentility, the wife, who will maintain her reputation for “faculty” or perish in the attempt, has a suspicion that the strain to make meet the ends of frugality and pretension, is palpably and criminally absurd.  By keeping up a certain appearance of affluence and fashion, they assume the obligation to employ servants enough to carry out the design, yet in nine hundred and ninety-nine times out of every thousand, they ignore the duty.

I admit without demur that, as American domestics go, they are a burden, an expense and a vexation.  Notwithstanding all these drawbacks, she who will not risk them should not live in such a way that she must make use of such instruments or overwork herself physically and mentally.

The entire social and domestic system of American communities calls loudly for the reform of simplicity and congruity.  We begin to build and are not able to finish.  Our economics are false and mischievous, our aims are petty and low.  The web of our daily living is not round and even-threaded.  The homes which are constructed upon the foundations of deranged, dying and dead women, are a mockery of the holy name.  Our houses should be planned and kept for those who are to live in them, not for those who tarry within the doors for a night or an hour.  When housekeeping becomes an intolerable care there is sin somewhere and danger everywhere.