July 7 - Leave Syracuse
Journal entry

Leave Syracuse at 2 o'clock. On horseback. Umbrella, gun, game-bag. We plunge through new clearings. We arrive at 6 o'clock at Fort Brewerton. General look round. The forest is permanent contest with man. Birds killed. View of Lake Oneida. Stretches beyond the horizon to the East between little wooded hills. Not a house nor clearing in view. Monotonous, lonely look. We sleep in a detestable inn.

(Tocqueville, p. 127)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

Frenchman's Island: July 8

Journal entry about Frenchman's Island

Departure at 6 o'clock in the morning.

We plunge through an immense forest where the path is hardly traceable. Delicious freshness that reigns there. Sight wonderful and impossible to describe. Astonishing vegetation. Enormous trees of all species. A disorder of grasses, plants, bushes. America in all her glory, waters (?) running on every side, huge pines uprooted by the wind, twisted among plants of every sort. In two hours we came to South Bay.

Conversation on a Frenchman's island. They settled in these parts thirty-five (?) years ago. At that time the Frenchman's presence was already only a tradition. Had been in the island thirty-one (?) years ago. She remembers some flowers and an apple tree near which were the remains of a wooden house.

We embarked by ourselves in a little boat. With difficulty we reached the island. Emotion we felt on setting foot there. Different look of the country we had just been through. Land gone wild again. Traces of man. We force our way through a belt of immense trees. We arrive at a clearing where trees, already big, had clearly once been cut. Some old, rotting trunks, leaning among brambles, plants and branches. In the middle of the island we find an old apple tree. Near there a vine, gone wild again, twining right up to the top of the neighboring trees like a liana. A house was there. There is no trace left of it.

We wrote our names on a plane tree. We set out again. Profound silence of the island only broken by the birds that live there free. We traversed the whole island without finding any trace of the two beings who had made it there universe. This expedition is what has most vividly interested and moved me, not only since I have been in America, but since I have been traveling.

(Tocqueville, p. 127)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

July 12 - Visit with Governor Throop

Journal entry about Governor Throop's salary and lifestyle

Visit to Governor Throop

We paid a visit today to the Governor of New York State. We found him living in a very small wooden farmhouse of one story, and occupied in personally supervising the cultivation of his fields. Mr. Elam Lynds was telling us that the position of Governor was so badly paid (5,000) that if Mr. Throop were not able to spend six months of the year on his farm, he would be ruined. He criticized this parsimony which, he said, prevented men of distinction from canvassing for so badly paid a post, whereas with their ability they could make more in some business. An idea characteristic of both the social state and of the state of morals in the United States.

(Tocqueville, p. 200)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

Interview with Mr. Wainwright, an Anglican clergyman

Conversation with Mr. Wainwright, an Anglican clergyman

Mr. Wainwright seems a man of sense. He has (a rare thing in America) the manners of the best society and does the duty for the most fashionable church in New York.

Q. Is there any point of contact here between religious ideas and political doctrines?
A. None. They are like two worlds entirely apart in each of which one lives in peace.

Q. How does that state of affairs arise?
A. Because the ministers of the different sects have never interfered in politics, and have never been, nor claim to be, a political power. We feel that we do our standing harm if we meddle with any political matter. A great many of us even abstain from voting at the elections. That is what I, for my part, am always careful to do.

Mr. Smith, chaplain of the Auburn prison, told me the same thing. He added: "I am convinced that if it was suggested to the body of the Presbyterian Ministers that their members should be given some political importance, they would turn down the suggestion without hesitation."

Mr. Smith is a young Presbyterian Minister of a fairly ordinary turn of mind, but full of zeal and good intentions.

(Tocqueville, p. 213)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

Excerpt from Beaumont's letter to his sister Eugenie about their visit to Governor Throop

A few days ago we went to pay a visit to Mr. Troop [Throop] Governor of New York, who at this moment is living on a small country place a league from Auburn. He is a man of very simple manners. He has little money; the state gives him only twenty thousand francs as salary, which is very little for a man in his position. Therefore he spends only five or six months of the year at Albany (capital of the state), the time during which the legislature is in session. He passes the rest of the time in the country.

This country place is but a farm which he cultivates. The house he lives in with his wife hardly appears sufficient to lodge them, so tiny it is. It stands, however, on a charming site. Owasco Lake touches its garden, and on the other side it is surrounded by great high trees. He took us for a walk in his woods.

While admiring the beauty of the trees we caught sight of a squirrel. At that the governor began to run as fast as his legs would carry him to get his gun at the house. He soon came back, all out of breath, with his murderous weapon. The small animal had the patience to wait for him, but the big man had the clumsiness to miss him four times in succession.

This governor is a fine fellow, but undistinguished. Mr. Elam Lynds, who came to see us at Auburn and to whom I confided my opinion of Mr. Troop, replied that he thought as I did. Why then, I said to him, did the people of New York choose him for governor? Because, answered Mr. Lynds, the men of great talent would not accept such employ; they prefer trade and business in which one makes more money. There in two words you have the American character. ...

[written] July 14, 1831

(Pierson, p. 215)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

July 13 - Auburn

Journal entry about religion

"I do not believe that a republic can exist without morals, and I do not believe that a people can have morals when it has no religion. I judge then that the maintenance of the religious spirit is one of our greatest political interests."

That is a literal resume of a conversation we have just had with Mr. Richard, the head of the Presbyterian seminary at Auburn. Mr. Richard is an old man whose piety seemed to us sincere and even ardent (a rare thing in America). We had asked him whether, in his opinion, the religious principle were not losing its power. "Perhaps in the large towns, not in the small ones and in the countryside. I think, on the contrary, that during the last thirty years we have made headway." (I am much afraid that he deludes himself).

(Tocqueville, p. 214)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

July 16 - Travel by horseback to Canandaigua

Journal entry

First visit to Mr. Spencer. Difficulty about sleeping accommodation and dinner. Long conversations with him. Lake very picturesque. Red-Jacket [conversation about a member of the Seneca tribe].

(Tocqueville, p. 129)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

July 17 - Interview with John Canfield Spencer

Interview with John Canfield Spencer about the press, politics, lawyers and judges

Anglican Church. Visit to the Alms-house of the county. Walk. Very agreeable evening.

(Tocqueville, p. 129)
****

Conversation with Mr. [John Canfield] Spencer

Mr. Spencer is a distinguished man of law. He has been successively a lawyer, district attorney and a member of Congress and is at the moment a member of the New York legislature. He has been one of the editors of the Revised Statutes [a periodic official publication of all the laws of the U.S.] Clearness and perspicacity seem to be the guiding lights of his spirit.

Q. Are the members of the two chambers of the various legislatures chosen in the same way and according to the same rules of eligibility?
A. Yes. In the State of New York in particular there is just the same type of man filling both chambers.

Q. But what then is the point of having two chambers?
A. It is immensely useful and so well appreciated that now everyone in America accepts it as an axiom that a single legislative body is a detestable institution. Pennsylvania, which began by making the mistake of having only one assembly, has had to give it up.

Here are the chief advantages of a legislative body with two houses: the first and most important is to make a resolution pass two tests; between the two discussions time passes to the advantage of good sense and moderation. It is continually happening that the Senate, although composed of similar elements and moved by the same spirit as the legislature, sees the matter in a different light and corrects mistakes which the former, prejudiced as it is by a first vote, would not be able to correct.

The second advantage which I see in the institution of our Senate is that the senators hold office for longer than the Representatives and since they are replaced in batches, always form a body of men within the legislature who are knowledgeable about precedents and have already been through their political education.

They give our legislative assemblies a practical skill and a sense of continuity which without them would often be lacking.

Q. What generally speaking is the corporate attitude of the lawyers?
A. People complain that it is conservative. I know that the opposite complaint is made in France. I see these reasons for the difference: first, the body of lawyers in America have no interest in change. Our social organization, as it is now, is the best possible one for them. Besides I think our civil laws have a different general principle from yours and that should give our lawyers an opposite turn of mind. Our civil law is entirely founded on precedents.

A judge is completely bound by what another has decided before. As a result one can almost say that there are no arguments about law with us; everything reduces itself in some sort to a question of fact. One has to know what was decided in a similar case and argue for or against the application of that example. You can see that work of that sort is not apt to develop a taste for theories. Often it even narrows the mind. Your lawyers on the other hand, if I can judge by the reports of proceedings, feel they must delve down to the basis of society even in respect of a hole in a dunghill.

Q. Have the judges any disciplinary powers over them?
A. Yes. They can reprimand them, fine them, strike them off the roll, and even in extreme cases send them to prison. Otherwise the judges have no superior standing. Out of court they are on a footing of complete equality.

Q. What criticism is made of your judges?
A. The only criticism which I should feel able to make is that they are a little too fond of flattering the people, and they will not fight courageously against a view that they believe is shared by the masses. We have seen some examples of that in cases with a political side to them. Usually and in ordinary cases they are inclined to leniency for this reason and not from their own convictions.

Q. What influence has the press on public opinion?
A. It has great influence, but it is not exercised in the same way as in France. For instance we attach very little importance to the opinions of journalists. They only gain influence by the facts they make known and the turn they give to them. Thus they sometimes manage to mislead public opinion about a man or a measure. To sum up, in all countries and under all governments the press will always be a formidable weapon.

Q. What limits do you impose on its freedom?
A. We have a very simple principle in this matter. Everything which is a question of opinion is perfectly free. One could go to print daily in America saying that monarchy is the best of all forms of government. But when a paper publishes libelous facts, when it gratuitously suggests culpable motives, then it is prosecuted and generally punished with a heavy fine. I recently had experience of an example.

At the time of the case in connection with the disappearance of Morgan [a Mason who disappeared in August, 1826 - fellow masons were accused of drowning him in Lake Ontario to prevent him from revealing Masonic secrets. The affair gave rise to the formation of the anti-masonic party], a newspaper printed that the jurors had pronounced their verdict of guilty from motives of "party spirit." I prosecuted the writer of the article and had him punished.

Q. What in your view is the way to diminish the power of the press?
A. I am completely convinced that the most effective way is to increase the number of newspapers as much as possible and not to prosecute them except in extreme cases. Their power gets less as their number gets more, a fact which experience has incontrovertibly proved to us. I have heard it said that in France there were only two or three newspapers that carried weight. I should suppose that in such a situation the press in an agent of destruction. Besides I think your social situation will always make the action of the press more to be feared with you than with us. Paris will always exercise immense influence over the rest of the kingdom.With us there an immense influence over the rest of the kingdom. With us there are an immense number of factors dividing our interests.

There is no great center of activity; it is almost impossible to get public opinion excited over a large area. New York papers have no more influence over us than those of the nearest village. Another reason why the personal opinions of journalists carry very little weight is the bad use they made of them in the first years of Independence. It was then proved that most of them had been bought by England. Since then they have lost public confidence.

Q. Are there influential men who write in your newspapers?
A. Party leaders often do, but they do not sign their articles.

Q. What causes the religious tolerance prevailing in the United States?
A. Principally the extreme diversity of sects (there is almost no end to it). If two religions faced each other, we should be cutting each others' throats. But as none has as much as a majority, all need toleration.

Besides there is a general belief among us, a belief which I share, that some religion or other is needed by man as a social being. And all the more freer he is. I have heard it said that in France there has been an attempt to dispense with all definite religion. If that is so, in spite of all your feeling for liberty, you will not quickly see free institutions firmly established, and you must rest your hopes on the next generation.

Q. What do you think can be done so that religion should regain its natural sway?
A. I think the Catholic religion less suited than the Protestant to come to terms with ideas of liberty: but if the clergy were completely cut off from all worldly concern, I think that in time they would win back the power over the mind which naturally belongs to them. I think that they seem to forget about the church without being hostile to it, is the best and perhaps the only way of serving it. If you act so, little by little you will see public education falling into its hands, and in time young people will have a different turn of mind.

Q. Do the clergy control public education with you?
A. Completely. I know of only two exceptions in the State of New York. That seems to me nature's way.

Q. What is your poor law?
A. In that as in many matter we long followed the English example. We have ended by giving up their system which we thought too costly. This is the new system introduced in the last few years in the State of New York: every county has an almshouse to which vagabonds are forced by court orders to go, and which are also bound to receive those whom an official called the overseer of the poor sends as having no means of subs istence. A piece of land is attached to the almshouse, which the vagabonds and the local people shut up there to cultivate. The object of the law is that this farmland should in time cover the expenses of this institution. We have great hopes of succeeding in this. It is not the place of birth but the place of residence which is taken to decide where the pauper should be sent.

Q. How do you manage about public education?
A. The State has special funds of _____ [gap in manuscript] set aside for this purpose. It makes grants from this fund to the local authorities who need them, in proportion to the efforts they promise to make on their own behalf. For it is generally accepted among us that the State should always help and never do everything. It is felt that people who give their money and who are on the spot, can and will give more careful attention to the way money is spent than is possible for a central administration. Moreover one wants to create as many local interests as possible. This combination of money from the State with money from the locality serves both these aims admirably. Here education rouses universal concern. The populace being really king, everyone feels the need to enlighten it.

Q. Have you noticed ill effects from the recent law abolishing all property qualification for electors?
A. No, just the opposite. The people being completely satisfied disregards the schemes of agitators.

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

Excerpt from letter Tocqueville wrote to his sister-in-law, Alexandrine, about John Spencer's daughters

We spent the most interesting mornings, and besides a very fine library he [John Canfield Spencer] also had two daughters with whom we cordions very well, as the lower classes say. Although they knew not the smallest word of French they had among other charms four blue eyes, not the same but two apiece. As I am certain that you have scarce seen their like on the other side of the water I would describe them to you, were I not afraid of being insipid. Let is suffice you to know that we gazed on them even more willingly than on the books of the father.

Having confided this discovery to each other, Beau. and I resolved, with all the sagacity which characterizes us, to be on our way as soon as possible, resolution which we executed the next morning by crossing the lake, not by swimming as Mentor and Telemachus might have done, but in a steamboat, which is much more certain and comfortable. Here we are today at Batavia, anything to be no longer at Canandaigua, and all things considered glad to have left. ... We shall leave tomorrow for Buffalo, whence we intend to visit the Falls of Niagara and, crossing Lake Ontario, return through Canada.

(Pierson, p. 224)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

Excerpt from Beaumont's letter to his mother about their travels and John Canfield Spencer

From Auburn we have come in a straight line to Canandagua [sic] and during this journey of ten to twelve leagues we saw nothing which merits particular mention unless it be the three charming lakes near which we passed. The first is Lake Seneca* which is not far from Auburn; the second is Lake Geneva situated a little farther on. It lies at the foot of a hill on which a charming little town, which bears its name, is being built. To reach the town you have to cross the lake on a bridge which is half a league long. This bridge is rudely constructed and has nothing remarkable about it except its length. My third lake is Lake Cananda[i]gua, which has given its name to a small town near by where I am at this moment.

This last lake is the prettiest of the three; perhaps even above all those I have seen to date, not excepting Lake Oneida. You see here and there on its banks country houses placed on the most picturesque sites, and three mountain ranges at varying distances forming a fine background for the rest of the picture. Cananda[i]gua is on the road from Auburn to Buffalo, whither we wish to go in order then to betake ourselves to Niagara, whose famous falls must necessarily have our visit.

Now you must know why we have stopped here on our way. There is at Cananda[i]gua a Mr. Spencer, member of the New York legislature, who wanted us to come spend some days with him and to whose wishes we have yielded. He is the most distinguished whom I have yet met in America. He is well versed in all the political questions which interest his country and possesses the most precise understanding of the judiciary institutions of the United States. He is one of the three commissioners to whom the New York legislature has confided the trust of revising the laws of the state.

We spend all our time with him in conversations from which we have everything to gain; as soon as we are alone we write down what he has said. I have not yet seen a single person from whom we have drawn as much as from him. There are at his house two charming women, his daughters Mary and Catherine, who would give us terrible distractions if once and for all we hadn't made up our minds to have none. Mary is the prettier of the two; she has that white and rose complexion, occasionally to be found with Englishwomen but almost unknown in France. I have not yet seen in the United States such pretty eyes as hers, they have a velvet softness it is impossible to describe. But why talk so long about her? Were I to continue you would think me in love, and the truth is that I am not. A long sojourn with her might be unhealthy, but in three or four days I shall quit Cananda[i]gua never to come back. After all, a woman, perfectly beautiful and possessing that bonte which is almost banal with American women, is a thing so rare that it is altogether natural to speak of it.

Mr. Spencer puts himself out (se met en quatre) to render our stay in Cananda[i]gua agreeable. Tomorrow we are to make an excursion by boat on the lake. ...


(Pierson, p. 216)

Note: Pierson marks this date with a question mark, and it may be incorrect, because they did not travel by boat on the 23rd. Also, with regard to the lakes, the first lake they would have encountered would have been Cayuga, the second lake, Seneca, and the third lake, Canandaigua.

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

July 18 - Travel from Canandaigua to Bufflalo, stopping in Batavia along the way

Journal entry

Appearance of the country peopled as far as Batavia. After that scattered houses. Marsh. Road of tree trunks. Arrival at Buffalo. Walk through the town. A crowd of savages in the streets (day of a payment) new idea which they suggest. Their ugliness. Their strange look. Their oily, bronzed skin. Their long, black, stiff hair. Their European clothes worn in savage fashion. Scene of a drunk Indian. Brutality of his fellow Indians and of the Indian woman who accompanies him.

Population brutalized by our wines and spirits. More horrible than the equally brutalized populations of Europe. Besides, something of the wild beast. Contrast with the moral and civilized population in the midst of which they are found.

(Tocqueville, p. 129)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

Tocqueville's first impressions of Native Americans

The first Indians we met lived at Oneida Castle, a village about 270 miles from New York. They ran after our carriage asking for alms and we did not have leisure to observe them. But on arriving in the evening of 18th July at Buffalo, we came upon a considerable gathering of them. They came, we were told, to receive the price of the lands which they had ceded to the United States, and for which the latter were paying the rent.

Never, I think, have I suffered a more complete disappointment than in seeing these Indians. I was full of recollections of M. de Chateaubriand and of Cooper, and I was expecting to find the natives of America savages, but savages on whose face natured had stamped the marks of some of the proud virtues which liberty brings forth. I expected to find a race of men little different from Europeans, whose bodies had been developed by the strenuous exercise of hunting and war, and who would lose nothing by being seen naked.

Judge my amazement at seeing the picture that follows. The Indians whom I saw that evening were small in stature, their limbs, as far as one could tell under their clothes, were thin and not wiry, their skin instead of being red as is generally thought, was dark bronze and such as at first sight seemed very like that of Negroes. Their black hair fell with singular stiffness on their neck and sometimes on their shoulders. Generally their mouths were disproportionately large, and the expression on their faces ignoble and mischievous.

There was however a great deal of European in their features, but one would have said that they came from the lowest mob of our great European cities. Their physiognomy told of that profound degradation which only long abuse of the benefits of civilization can give, but yet they were still savages. Mixed with the vices which they got from us was something barbarous and uncivilized which made them a hundred times more repulsive still.

These Indians were covered in European clothes, but they did not use them in the same way we do. (Some dressed themselves in blankets; the women with breeches and hats; the men in women's clothes.) One could see that they were not yet at all accustomed to wearing them and felt themselves imprisoned in their folds. To European ornaments they added the products of barbarian luxury, feathers, necklaces, enormous earrings. Their movements were quick and jerky, their voices shrill and discordant, their glances restless and savage. At first sight one might have been tempted to mistake each of them for some wild beast of the forest to whom education had been able to give some slight look of a human being, but who nonetheless remained an animal.

Having wandered some distance from the town, we ran into a crowd of Indians who were returning to their village. Most of them were more or less drunk. An Indian woman was rolling in the dust of the road, uttering savage cries. Close to the last houses we saw an Indian lying at the edge of the road. It was a young man. He was motionless and, we thought, dead. Some stifled groans that painfully broke from his breast showed that he was still alive and struggling against one of those dangerous fits of drunkenness brought on by brandy. The sun had already sunk, and the ground was damp. Everything indicated that the wretched man would breathe his last sigh there, if he was not helped.

From time to time a group of Indians came past. They came up, roughly turned their compatriot's body over, felt his heart to see if he was still alive, and then continued on their way without condescending even to answer our questions. All my life I shall remember a young Indian woman who seemed at first to come up to him with interest; I thought it was the wife or sister of the dying man. She looked at him attentively, called his name aloud, felt his heart and being assured that he was alive, tried to shake him out of his lethargy. But seeing that her efforts were useless, she burst out in fury against the inanimate body lying in front of her; she struck his head against the ground, twisted his face in her hands, and kicked him with her feet.

As she gave herself over to these acts of ferocity, she uttered inarticulate and savage cries which I think I can still hear echoing in my ears at the moment I am writing these lines. Finally we thought we must intervene, and peremptorily ordered her to be off. We heard her as she went away uttering bursts of barbarous laughter. When we got back to the town, we told several people about the young Indian whose body was stretched on the road. We spoke of the imminent danger to which he was exposed; we even offered to pay the expense of an inn. All that was useless. We could not persuade anyone to budge.

Some said to us: "Those men are used to drink to excess and sleep on the ground; they never die from accidents like that."

Others recognized that the Indian would probably die, but one could read on their lips this half-expressed thought: "What is the life of an Indian?"

The fact is that that was the basis of the general feeling. In the midst of this American society, so well policed, so sententious, so charitable, a cold selfishness and complete insensibility prevails when it is a question of the natives of the country.

The Americans of the United States do not let their dogs hunt the Indians as do the Spaniards in Mexico, but at bottom it is the same pitiless feeling which here, as everywhere else, animates the European race. This world here belongs to us, they tell themselves every day: the Indian race is destined for final destruction which one cannot prevent and which it is not desirable to delay. Heaven has not made them to become civilized; it is necessary that they die. Besides I do not want to get mixed up in it. I will not do anything against them: I will limit myself to providing everything that will hasten their ruin. In time I will have their lands and will be innocent of their death.

Satisfied with his reasoning, the American goes to church where he hears the minister of the gospel repeat every day that all men are brothers, and that the Eternal Being who has made them all in like image, has given them all the duty to help one another.

- [written] July 20

(Tocqueville, p. 203-206)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

Leave Buffalo for Detroit: July 19

Journal entry

Second walk through Buffalo. Pretty shops. French goods. Refinement of European luxury. Second sight of Indians. Impression less disagreeable than the day before. Some of them having more or less the looks of our peasants (but with a savage touch), color of Sicilians. Not one good-looking Indian woman.

Departure for Detroit. Little steamboat. No one knew us. Notable change in the manners of the Americans towards us. Violent, contrary wind. The lake rough as a sea in a heavy storm.

(Tocqueville, p. 130)

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry

August 19 - Niagara Falls

Excerpt from Beaumont's letter to his father about a woman who pursued him and Tocqueville

Hardly arrived at Buffalo, we left again for Niagara. We had for traveling companions Mr. Vi[g]ne, and an Englishwoman Miss Clemens. I think I spoke to Achille of these two persons, who figured among the passengers of Green Bay. The first is an altogether likeable man; he travels for instruction and pleasure both. The second is the best person on earth; but it is impossible to be more boring. She has an altogether romantic imagination; she lives only on fictions, emotions and moonlight. When she sees something which pleases her, she expresses herself only by exclamations, and with here there is no admiration without ecstasy. At twenty she would be charming; she is at least forty, which makes her only ridiculous. She has taken a passionate liking for us. I had the misfortune to be polite; she believed I wanted to be gallant.

When we were on the steamboat, I was driven to many maneuvers to escape the charms of her conversation. Now it was verses that I had to hear her declaim; sometimes a charming point of view that she wanted to admire with me. Usually I got rid of her on pretexts good or bad. But there was no easy way to escape her on leaving Buffalo.

"I shall go," said she, "show you my favorite location (sejour), and do you the honors of the place."

It is certain that she spends half her life near the cataract; one might call her la folle de Niagara. Why doesn't she place herself under the Falls? Perhaps the douche would cure her.

However that may be, we thus embarked with our elderly traveling companion, and in three hours we arrived at the place nearest to the Falls. ... We explored the two banks successively, in order to judge all the views. I made a sketch which I hope will give you an idea of them. Miss clemens bothered us a great deal during our sojourn in her domain. She was always proposing walks, boat rides, etc., etc., etc., ... One day she was so impatient to go with us, that at the moment when Mr. Vi[g]ne, Tocqueville and I were leaving, gun on shoulder, to go see a very picturesque site called the Whirlpull [sic], she attached herself to our steps in spite of all our efforts to make her remain behind. Seeing that reason could do nothing with her spirit, we thought that it was necessary to convince her by the aid of arguments of another nature.

Consequently we began to walk with extreme speed. It was perhaps the hottest day of the year. It was noon. We were dying of the heat., The need of avoiding a sentimental old woman gave us spur. [?] I, especially, kept at the head of the company, because I had suffered more than the others from strokes of boredom. We really had the appearance of a band of deer pursued by a fierce hound. We were all breathless. We leapt barriers like stags. I believe that in like case I should have jumped the reservoir of Beaumont-la-Chartre twenty times in succession. But more tireless than we, like unto a pack of hounds who have been promised their part (la curee), our beautiful Englishwoman cleared all obstacles with unbelievable legerity and, in spite of all our efforts, after a good hour's run, we hadn't gained fifty yards on her. In despair, we halted.

At length, having seen what we wished to see, we returned with our intrepid Dulcinee. We began a flight of the same kind. This time we were more happy, and we maneuvered so well that she lost sight of us and we fled like convicts who have broken the prison gate. On our return we were nearly all ashamed of our rudeness. But while, to console ourselves, we were eating a good dinner, we received a small note in which she begged for our pardon for having separated from us. We were much tempted not to pardon her. However we thought she would profit by the lesson. If I had known how much she would annoy us the next day, I should certainly not have forgiven her.

The poor woman has overwhelmed me with benefits, and I blush to think how ungrateful I am. She has given me a very good work on the art of perspective, a charming book containing a poem of Thomas Moore, various biographical sketches of the great men of England, and finally a few verses of her own composition, some of which are remarkably well made. I should reproach myself for having received all that, if it had been in my power to refuse. But I declare that no power on earth could resist the will of Miss Clemens, and I suffered veritable violence. ...

We passed the eighteenth and nineteenth of August at Niagara, the twentieth we embarked on Lake Ontario on the steamboat Great Britain. ...

[written] Aug. 21, 1831

Return to Travel Itinerary

Next Entry

Previous Entry