THE INUTILITY OF SCOLDING.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1985, 5 July 1880, Page 2

THE INUTILITY OF SCOLDING.

[" Queen."] One of the strongest arguments against slavery ie the fact that it is a twofold wrong, inasmuch as, the brutality of absolutism matching the degradation of thraldom, the owner of human life and liberty ie as deeply demoralised as is the owned and subjected. Were slavery sorrow to the slave only, while of worth to the community at la'ge, then something might be said in its favor, seeing that we are all bound to sacrifice in some serge to the general good, and to give up part of our individual liking for the sake of others, but when we find that the debasement of the one is the brutalisation of other, then we have no plea for justification, and are so'nt back on the higher doctrine of froedom for all based on respect for humanity. This question of respeofc for humanity goes farther than the broad elemental principle of freedom as opposed to slavery, and is not yet quite fully understood or received. Even we in our own dear sturdy and independent England have still cause to contend for the abolition of certain survivals which mar the fair fabric of our society and civilisation ; and one of those survivals is the harshness of speech and manner which many permit themselves to use when dealing with servants and so-called inferiors. Do we not all know ladies whose intercourse with their servants is founded on imperative command, impatience when things go wrong, thanklessness when endeavors are made that they ' shall go right ladies who think that the best way of keeping up their authority is by dropping all the sweetness of their womanhood and all the delicato graciousnes9 of good breeding—this is, who think difference in conventional standing of more importance than the likeness of a oommon humanity ? It is because modern service still retains some of tho traditions of old-time serfdom, and the doctrine cf the dignity of human nature has not gono down deep enough, that employers allow themselves to be arbitrary and impolite. Let them be in the worst humor possible with an inferior, and passing it on impartially to all around, then brought suddenly into the presenoe of a person of superior social position, and the transformation would be complete—the ruffled foathera would be smoothed, frowns would becomo smiles, and the harsh bearing of a moment ago would lose itself in the softest manner and the most gracious courtesy. Those symbols which we call titles, and the conventional places assigned by society to persons, stand higher with most of us than the humanity which they were originally intended to honor, than the moral worth which thoy were meant to confess ; and we cringe or spurn, we kiss or strike, according to the title borne, not according to the merits of the bearer. The peer may be a snob and the groom a hero, but the one we touch only with velvet gloveß, while the other knows only the iron grip j the maid may be gentle, dutiful, modest, and unselfish, the mistress emphatically a good-for-nought, but who would treat the former as courteously as the latter ? who would respect the humanity of the one rather than the broad aores and fair thousands of the other ?—and what lady (save those very few exceptional creatures who think that self-respect is best shown in respecting others) would hesitate to scold and browbeat the worthiest and most delightful woman in the world who chanced to make a mistake to offend their humor, if she stood in the position of their own servant ?

Now we contend that scolding is both unladylike and unnecessary. It does no permanent good that would not have been done by simplo direction and reminder ; and in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred it does a great deal of harm. For it acts either as an rritant or an abasement—produces dislike'' recalcitratioc, pertneiss, maybo the desire for revenge only waiting its opportunity; or it makes the timid soul more craven still, and stamps out the small amount of self-respect there was there already. It makes a rebel or a slave j and in oither case deteriorates the nature. " Hard words break no bones," says the man with a shrug, the maid with a sniff; while certain juvenile imps in buttonß delight in nothing so much as in " making missis mad," sure she cannot go bo far as to "hit" them. If she is very mad indeed, Mary the maid will do their work, or mayhap tell a pretty little lie to soreen them, and cook will make up for their wigging by an extra spoonful of sugar in their tea or a thicker bit of bacon for supper. At all events, if they are "jawed" missis is "riled," and to their way of thinking tho latter is well bought by the former. We probably all know houseß Wihere tho style of service is provocation because the order of authority is scolding. Tho servants expect nothing cleo whatevor thoy may do; so they take it out in annoyance, and at least get their penny's worth. It is a little consolation to them to feel that it ia not all for nothing, and that when whirlwinds are abroad thoy have scattered their quota of sticks and straws. Uuwoariedncss in welldoing, when that well-doing meets with no reward, and only lapses and mistakes are taken up, is to be expected from the kitchen no more than wo fiud it in the parlor; and people have the trick of living up or down to estimate and treatment. Even criminals can be lifted' out of degradation by assuming their possibility of improvement; and the

severest trial of the martyr is not his perfOial sufferings, but the knowledge of how his fellows regard him, and of thi infamous character ascribed to him. Wo confess all these truths when discussing the broad principles of human life and action ; but we ignore them when we oome to the practical test of how best to manage our servants and inferiors, and go back on the bid fallacy of upholding our authority by harshness and disrespect. Yet, indeed, this fallacy is as stupid as it is ill-bred. The shrill voica raised beyond its natural pitch, the wild accusation of intentional misdeed, the hard word, both lower the dignity and weaken the authority of a mistress. Passionate reproof is as much want of self-oontrol in her as are tbe oath and the blow in the costermongor ; and, by force of example, excuses the want of self-con" rol in the men and women of lower rank with whom she deals. Many a servant or a workman would willingly accept tho quiet exposition of a fault, the calm direction of better method, the grave injunction to be more careful, more attentive, whoso temper not only rebels against a noisy storm of reproaohes, but whose respect for the employer is lost in contempt for her want of ladyhood. The people, as we call them, have a vory exalted notion of what is due to this quality of ladyhood ; and " she doesn't act like o lady " is about one of tho strongest forms of condemnation current among them. But how many think that quietness of manner is laxneas of discipline, and that authority is only to be enforced by angry empbaßiß ; as if the loud, rude, blustering north wind did as much for the growing grain and rooting flowers as the soft and gentle south; as if the greatest works o nature were not done by the quietest methods, while storms and tornadoeß were only exceptional agents of destruction, to be let loose when no milder influence would succeed. We may bo sure that, just as the soft answer turneth away wrath, so does the quiet manner command respect, and brawling violence de« stroy it. Even those well abused fellowcreatures of ours—domestic servants—have nerves and hearts, consciences and feelings, like the rest of us, and can be led into right and driven into wrong, according to the influences which may be about them. Wearing a livery or a "flag" does not alter the whole condition of human nature, and make uncatalogued monsters of our Jeameses and Mollies.

When dealing with fomale servants, too, it is so essentially unwomanly to treat them harshly. The majority of mistresses are older than their maids, and all are better edueated, and should therefore be better and wiser. But the inconsequence and thoughtlessness of youth, which the mistress would pass over without a word in her own daughters, she flies out against as crimes of set purpose in her young servants. They are expected to have all the virtues and none of the failings of humanity, to be perfeot in temper, in morality, and their work. They must be able to wake early and rise willingly with tho cold and dark of a London foggy winter's morning; and, if they over-sleep themselves —perhaps after an exceptionally hard day's work—the scolding mistress rates them roundly, and relieves her mind of a few epithets fuller of flavor than of human kindness. Yet Ethel may have her breakfast in bed, and Maud may oome down with sleepy eyes at ten o'clock, and Mabel lounge all day long on the sofa because she was out at a little dance list night; but Susan, just rising nineteen, must not own to fatigue or to weariness, to a sleepy head or a lagging foot, whatever she may have taken out of herself overnight. If she does, she is scolded, and the mother who indulges her daughters and rasps her servants takes no shame to herself for her injustice—her want of womanly tenderness for youth independent of condition. And what is all this but part of the evil wrought by slavery on the slave owner—that license given to one's own temper and arbitrariness by the possession of authority and the exercise of domination ?

We go back on the main thread of our argument; the truest self-respect, in which is included the highest civilisation, teaches politeness even to children, and respoot even to inferiors. The habit of rating belongs to the old brutal times of irresponsible tyranny, and should be discouraged by all who believe in progress and hold to fixed prinoiple as the leading influence of action. The gentlest spoken women are oftentimes the firmest, and with the greatest power of making themselves obeyed, and the soft voice carries farther and goes deeper into the heart than the shrewish, shrill, discordant scream. To teach is not to scold, and to use conscience and reason for a leverage is a better method of dealing with those who have to obey than to act on their fears or to dominate them by sheer force of position. Youth and ignorance alike demand some tenderness of nature in thoss who would best educate the one and instruct the other; and harshness is the worst teacher that either can have. But too many women take just the contrary view and act in just the opposite manner when dealing with their servants and inferiors—treating the natural consequences of the one as voluntary crimes, of the other as intentional wrong doing, and thinking to mend all by scolding in the place of direction, railing in the place of teaching. E. L. L.