Chapter II: Part 2

Again, in a subsequent letter, the Lieutenant, after describing a New England sleighing frolic, says: "In England this would be esteemed extremely imprudent, and attended with dangerous consequences; but, after what I have related respecting _bundling_, I need not say, in how innocent a view this is looked upon. Apropos, as to that custom, along the sea coast, by a continual intercourse among Europeans, it is in some measure abolished; but they still retain one something similar, which is termed _tarrying_. When a young man is enamored of a woman, and wishes to marry her, he proposes the affair to her parents (without whose consent no marriage, in this colony, can take place); if they have no objections, he is allowed to tarry with her one night, in order to make his court. At the usual time the old couple retire to bed, leaving the young ones to settle matters as they can, who having sat up as long as they think proper, get into bed together also, but without putting off their under garments; to prevent scandal. If the parties agree, it is all very well, the banns are published, and they married without delay; if not, they part, and possibly never see each other again, unless, which is an accident that seldom happens, the forsaken fair proves pregnant, in which case the man, unless he absconds, is obliged to marry her, on pain of excommunication."[30]

The word _tarry_, in the sense of _to stop_ or _to stay_, was more used by our ancestors than by the present generation; yet we think that Lieut. Anbury was mistaken in his idea that the _tarrying_ was but for a single night. It is true that marriages were early, and probably the courtships were short, but we all know enough of New England _sparking_ to know that a single night was cutting it rather short; and yet it is easy to see how Anbury should get his erroneous idea. True, if the lover was so unlucky as to get his final dismissal the first night, there was an end of the matter, and well might they fail to meet again; but, in that case, it is not likely that the favors of which he could boast would be such as to seriously affect the reputation of the girl with whom he tarried. The fact that in the custom of _tarrying_, the parties also _bundled_, does not authorize the synonymous use of the two words, which have nothing in common. For, doubtless many young men _tarried_ with their sweethearts, who did not _bundle_ with them.

Again, when, on a sabbath night, the faithful swain arrived, having, perhaps, walked ten or more weary miles, to enjoy the company of his favorite lass, in the few brief hours which would elapse before the morning light should call him again to his homeward walk and his week of toil, was it not the dictate of humanity as well as of economy, which prompted the _old folks_ to allow the approved and accepted suitor of their daughter to pursue his wooing under the downy coverlid of a good feather bed (oftentimes, too, in the very same room in which they themselves slept), rather than to have them _sit up_ and _burn out uselessly_ firewood and _candles_, to say nothing of the risk of catching their _death a' cold_? Indeed, was not the sanction of bundling in such cases a tacit admission, on the part of the parents, of their perfect confidence in the young folks, which necessarily acted upon the latter as, at once, a strong restraint from wrong, and a strong incentive to right doing? The influence of early religious training, the powerful control which the church had obtained upon the social and domestic life of the people, and the superstitious aspect which, in those days, the gospel was made to wear, must also be taken into the account. And, moreover, is it not probable that the universality of the custom, which certainly cleared it from anything like odium or reproach, would naturally tend to preclude, in a degree, any improper ideas in the minds of those who practiced it? Such, then, we consider the _status_ of the custom in the earlier history of the colonies, and among the _first generation_ of settlers.

"But," if the reader will allow us to quote from a previous work, "the emigration from a civilized to a new country,[31] is necessarily a step backward into barbarism. The _second generation_ did not fill the place of the fathers. Reared amid the trials and dangers of a new settlement, they were in a great measure deprived of the advantages, both social and educational, which their parents had enjoyed. Nearly all of the former could write, which cannot be said of their children. Neither did the latter possess that depth of religious feeling, or earnest practical piety which distinguished the first comers. Religion was to them less a matter of the heart than of social privilege, and in the _half way covenant_ controversy we behold the gradual _letting down of bars_ between a pure church and a grasping world.

"The _third_ generation followed in the footsteps of their predecessors. Then came war; and young New England brought from the long Canadian campaigns, stores of loose camp vices, and recklessness, which soon flooded the land with immorality and infidelity. The church was neglected, drunkenness fearfully increased, and social life was sadly corrupted."[32]

It is not, therefore, a matter of surprise that bundling should, in the increased laxity of public morals, become more frequently abused. Its pernicious effects became constantly more apparent, and more decidedly challenged the attention of the comparatively few godly men who endeavored to stem and to control the rapidly widening current of immorality which threatened to overwhelm the land.[33] The powerful intellect of Jonathan Edwards thundered its anathemas upon it; pious divines prayed against it in their closets, and wrestled with it in their pulpits; while many attempted by a revision of their church polity, by greater carefulness in the admission of members; by rules more stringently framed and enforced, to preserve, as best they might, the purity of the churches committed to their charge, and to make them, if it were possible, beacon lights amid the surrounding darkness of the times.[34] The task, however, was well nigh hopeless. The French wars were succeeded by that of the American Revolution, and not before the close of that struggle, may the custom of bundling be said to have received its deathblow, and even then it _died hard_.

Its final disuse was brought about by a variety of causes, among which may be named the improved condition of the people after the Revolution, enabling many to live in larger and better warmed houses, and in the very few places where the ministers dared to touch the subject in the pulpit, as in Dedham, already referred to, a decided effect was produced, but it was confined to the neighborhood, having very little effect on the general custom. Probably no single thing tended so much to break up the practice as the publication of a song, or ballad, in an almanac, about 1785.

This ballad described in a free and easy style the various plans adopted by those who bundled, and rather more than hinted at the results in certain cases. Being published in an almanac, it had a much larger circulation than could have been obtained for it in any other way (tract societies not being then in vogue), and the descriptions were so _pat_, that each one who saw them was disposed to apply them in a joking way to any other who was known to practice bundling; and the result was, such a general storm of banter and ridicule that no girl had the courage to stand against it, and continue to admit her lovers to her bed.

We have found many persons who distinctly remember the publication of this song, and the effect which it had on the public mind, but all our efforts to find the almanac containing it, have proved of no avail.

We have, however, been favored with the use of a broadside copy of a ballad, preserved among the treasures of the American Antiquarian Society, at Worcester, Massachusetts, which several of our ancient friends have recognized as identical with that in the almanac, one of them proving it by repeating from memory several lines from the Almanac version, which were precisely like that of the broadside, a copy of which we give herewith.

A NEW BUNDLING SONG;

_Or a reproof to those Young Country Women, who follow that reproachful Practice, and to their Mothers for upholding them therein_.

Since bundling very much abounds, In many parts in country towns, No doubt but some will spurn my song, And say I'd better hold my tongue; But none I'm sure will take offence, Or deem my song impertinence, But only those who guilty be, And plainly here their pictures see. Some maidens say, if through the nation, Bundling should quite go out of fashion, Courtship would lose its sweets; and they Could have no fun till wedding day. It shant be so, they rage and storm, And country girls in clusters swarm, And fly and buz, like angry bees, And vow they'll bundle when they please. Some mothers too, will plead their cause, And give their daughters great applause, And tell them, 'tis no sin nor shame, For we, your mothers, did the same; We hope the custom ne'er will alter, But wish its enemies a halter. Dissatisfaction great appear'd, In several places where they've heard Their preacher's bold, aloud disclaim That bundling is a burning shame; This too was cause of direful rout And talk'd and told of, all about, That ministers should disapprove Sparks courting in a bed of love, So justified the custom more, Than e'er was heard or known before. The pulpit then it seems must yield, And female valor take the field, In places where their custom long Increasing strength has grown so strong; When mothers herein bear a sway, And daughters joyfully obey. And young men highly pleased too, Good Lord! what can't the devil do. Can this vile practice ne'er be broke? Is there no way to give a stroke, To wound it or to strike it dead. And girls with sparks not go to bed 'Twill strike them more than preacher's tongue, To let the world know what they've done And let it be in common fame, Held up to view a noted shame. Young miss if this your practice be, I'll teach you now yourself to see: You plead you're honest, modest too, But such a plea will never do; For how can modesty consist, With shameful practice such as this? I'll give your answer to the life: "You don't undress, like man wife," That is your plea, I'll freely own, But whose your bondsmen when alone, That further rules you will not break, And marriage liberties partake? Some really do, as I suppose, Upon design keep on some clothes, And yet in truth I'm not afraid For to describe a bundling maid; She'll sometimes say when she lies down, She can't be cumber'd with a gown, And that the weather is so warm, To take it off can be no harm: The girl it seems had been at strift; For widest bosom to her shift, She gownless, when the bed they're in, The spark, nought feels but naked skin. But she is modest, also chaste, While only bare from neck to waist, And he of boasted freedom sings, Of all above her apron strings. And where such freedoms great are shar'd And further freedoms feebly bar'd, I leave for others to relate, How long she'll keep her virgin state. Another pretty lass we'll scan, That loves to bundle with a man, For many different ways they take, Through modest rules they all will break. Some clothes I'll keep on, she will say, For that has always been my way, Nor would I be quite naked found, With spark in bed, for thousand pound. But petticoats, I've always said, Were never made to wear in bed, I'll take them off, keep on my gown, And then I dare defy the town, To charge me with immodesty, While I so ever cautious be. The spark was pleased with his maid, Of apprehension quick he said, Her witty scheme was keen he swore, Lying in gown open before. Another maid when in the dark, Going to bed with her dear spark, She'll tell him that 'tis rather shocking, To bundle in with shoes and stockings. Nor scrupling but she's quite discreet, Lying with naked legs and feet, With petticoat so thin and short, That she is scarce the better for't; But you will say that I'm unfair, That some who bundle take more care, For some we may with truth suppose, Bundle in bed with all their clothes. But bundler's clothes are no defence, Unly[35] horses push the fence; A certain fact I'll now relate, That's true indeed without debate. A bundling couple went to bed. With all their clothes from foot to head, That the defence might seem complete, Each one was wrapped in a sheet. But O! this bundling's such a witch The man of her did catch the itch, And so provoked was the wretch, That she of him a bastard catch'd. Ye bundle misses don't you blush, You hang your heads and bid me hush. If you wont tell me how you feel, I'll ask your sparks, they best can tell. But it is custom you will say, And custom always bears the sway, If I wont take my sparks to bed, A laughing stock I shall be made; A vulgar custom 'tis, I own, Admir'd by many a slut and clown, But 'tis a method of proceeding, As much abhorr'd by those of breeding. You're welcome to the lines I've penn'd, For they were written by a friend, Who'll think himself quite well rewarded, If this vile practice is discarded.

The party in favor of bundling were able, too, to _keep a poet_, as is shown by the following ballad, which we transcribe from a printed copy preserved by the American Antiquarian Society.

A NEW SONG IN FAVOUR OF COURTING.

Adam at first was form'd of dust, As scripture doth record; And did receive a wife call'd Eve, From his Creator Lord.

From Adam's side a crooked bride, The Lord was pleas'd to form; Ordain'd that they in bed might lay to keep each other warm.

To court indeed they had no need, She was his wife at first, And she was made to be his aid, Whose origin was dust.

This new made pair full happy were, And happy might remain'd, If his help mate had never ate, The fruit that was restrain'd.

Tho' Adam's wife destroy'd his life, In manner that was awful; Yet marriage now we all allow To be both just and lawful.

But women must be courted first, Because it is the fashion, And so at times commit great crimes, Caus'd by a lustful passion.

And now a days there are two ways, Which of the two is right, To lie between sheets sweet and clean, Or sit up all the night;

But some suppose bundling in clothes Do heaven sorely vex; Then let me know which way to go, To court the female sex.

Whether they must be hugg'd or kiss'd When sitting by the fire Or whether they in bed may lay, Which doth the Lord require?

But some pretend to recommend The sitting up all night; Courting in chairs as doth appear To them to be most right.

Nature's request is, grant me rest, Our bodies seek repose; Night is the time, and 'tis no crime To bundle in your clothes,

Since in a bed a man and maid, May bundle and be chaste, It does no good to burn out wood, It is a needless waste.

Let coats and gowns be laid aside, And breeches take their flight, An honest man and woman can Lay quiet all the night.

In Genesis no knowledge is Of this thing to be got, Whether young men did bundle then, Or whether they did not.

The sacred book says wives they took, It don't say how they courted, Whether that they in bed did lay, Or by the fire sported.

But some do hold in times of old, That those about to wed, Spent not the night, nor yet the light By fire, or in the bed.

They only meant to say they sent A man to chuse a bride, Isaac did so, but let me know Of any one beside.

Man don't pretend to trust a friend, To choose him sheep and cows, Much less a wife which all his life He doth expect to house.

Since it doth stand each man in hand, To happify his life, I would advise each to be wise, And chuse a prudent wife.

Since bundling is not the thing, That judgments will procure, Go on young men and bundle then, But keep your bodies pure.

(Printed and sold by Nathaniel Coverly, Jun. Boston.)

The foregoing version is evidently not complete, several verses having been left out on account of their containing _more truth than poetry_, but these may be supplied from a manuscript copy, evidently made from memory, with considerable variations from the printed copy, which by no means improve it, though the schoolmaster did his best, and probably saved for us a very complete version of the ballad as it passed from mouth to mouth before the printed copy was made.

It was transcribed from a volume of manuscript ballads in the handwriting of Israel Perkins, of Connecticut, written in 1786, when he was eighteen years old, and teaching school.

THE WHORE ON THE SNOW CRUST.

1. Adam at first was formed of dust,
As we find on record;
And did receive a wife cal'd Eve,
By a creative word.

2. From Adam's side a crooked bride,
We find complete in form;
Ordained that they in bed might lay
And keep each other warm.

3. To court indeed they had no need,
She was his wife at first,
And she was made to be his aid,
Whose origin was dust.

4. This new made pair full happy were,
And happy might remained,
If his help meet had never eat
The fruit that was restrained.

5. Tho' Adam's wife destroyed his life
In manner that is awfull;
Yet marriage now we all allow
[To] Be both just and lawfull.

6. And now a days there is two ways,
Which of the two is write
To lie between sheets sweet and clean
Or sit up all the night.

7. But some suppose bundling in clothes
The good and wise doth vex;
Then let me know which way to go
To court the fairer sex.

8. Whether they must be hug'd and buss'd
When setting up all night;
Or whether [they] in bed may lay,
Which doth reason invite?

9. Nature's request is, give me rest,
Our bodies seek repose;
Night is the time, and 'tis no crime
To bundle in our cloaths.

10. Since in a bed, a man and maid
May bundle and be chaste:
It doth no good to burn up wood
It is a needless waste.

11. Let coat and shift be turned adrift,
And breeches take their flight,
An honest man and virgin can
Lie quiet all the night.

12. But if there be dishonesty
Implanted in the mind,
Breeches nor smocks, nor scarce padlocks
The rage of lust can bind.

13. Cate, Nance and Sue proved just and true,
Tho' bundling did practise;
But Ruth beguil'd and proved with child,
Who bundling did despise.

14. Whores will be whores, and on the floor
Where many has been laid,
To set and smoke and ashes poke,
Wont keep awake a maid.

15. Bastards are not at all times got
In feather beds we know;
The strumpet's oath convinces both
Oft times it is not so.

16. One whorish dame, I fear to name
Lest I should give offence,
But in this town she was took down
Not more than eight months sence.

17. She was the first, that on snow crust,
I ever knew to gender
I'll hint no more about this whore
For fear I should offend her.

18. 'Twas on the snow when Sol was low,
And was in Capricorn,
A child was got, and it will not
Be long ere it is born.

19. Now unto those that do oppose
The bundling traid, I say
Perhaps there's more got on the floor,
Than any other way.

20. In ancient books no knowledge is
Of these things to be got;
Whether young men did bundle then,
Or whether they did not.

21. Sence ancient book says wife they took,
It dont say how they courted;
Whether young men did bundle then,
Or by the fire sported.

[But some do hold in times of old,
That those about to wed,
Spent not the night, nor yet the light,
By fire, or in the bed.]

22. They only meant to say they sent
A man to choose a bride;
Isaac was so, but let me know,
If any one beside.

23. Men don't pretend to trust a friend
To choose him sheep or cows;
Much more a wife whom all his life
He does expect to house.

24. Sence it doth stand each one in hand
To happyfy his life;
I would advise each to be wise,
And choose a prudent wife.

25. Sence bundling is not a thing
That judgment will procure;
Go on young men and bundle then,
But keep your bodies pure.

Since this work went to press we have been favored, by one of our antiquarian friends in Massachusetts, with a copy of another poetical blast against the practice of bundling. It was written in the latter part of the last, or the first decade of the present century, by a learned and distinguished clergyman settled in Bristol county, Massachusetts, who was a graduate of Harvard University, and a doctor of divinity. The original manuscript from which our copy is made, is very carefully written out, with corrections apparently of a later date, and now undoubtedly appears for the first time in printed form.

A POEM AGAINST BUNDLING._Dedicated to ye Youth of both Sexes_.

1. Hail giddy youth, inclined to mirth,
To guilty amours prone,
Come blush with me, to think and see
How shameless you are grown.

2. 'Tis not amiss to court and kiss,
Nor friendship do we blame,
But bundling in, women with men,
Upon the bed of shame;

3. And there to lay till break of day,
And think it is no sin,
Because a smock and petticoat
Have chance to lie between.

4. Such rank disgrace and scandal base,
All modest youth will shun,
For 'twill infest, like plague or pest,
And you will be undone.

5. Let boars and swine lie down and twine,
And grunt, and sleep, and snore,
But modest girls should not wear tails
Nor bristles any more.

6. Let rams the sheep mount up and leap,
Without restraint or blame,
But will young men act just like them;
Oh, 'tis a burning shame!

7. It is not strange that horses range
Unfettered to the last,
But youthful lusts in fetters must
Be chained to virtue fast.

8. Dogs and bitches wear no breeches,
Clothing for man was made,
Yet men and women strip to their linen,
And tumble into bed.

9. Yes, brutal youth, it is the truth,
Your modesty is gone,
And could you blush, you'd think as much,
And curse what you have done.

10. To have done so some years ago,
Was counted more disgrace
Than 'tis of late to propagate
A spurious bastard race.

11. Quit human kind and herd with swine,
Confess yourself an whore;
Go fill the stye, there live and die,
Or never bundle more.

12. Shall gentlemen with ladies join
To practice like the brutes,
Then let them keep with cattle and sheep,
And fodder on their fruits.

13. This cursed course is one great source
Of matches undesigned,
Quarrels and strife twixt man and wife,
And bastards of their kind.

14. But in excuse of this abuse
It oftentimes is said,
Father and mother did no other
Than strip and go to bed.

15. But grant some did as you have said,
Yet do they not repent,
And wish that you may never do
What they so much lament?

16. A stupid ass can't be more base
Than are those guilty youth
Who fill with smart a parent's heart,
And turn it into mirth.

17. Others do plead hard for the bed,
Their health and weariness,
So drunkards will drink down their swill,
And call it no excess.

18. Under pretense of self defense,
Others will scold and say,
An honest maid is chaste abed
As any other way.

19. But where's the man that fire can
Into his bosom take,
Or go through coals on his foot soles
And not a blister make?

20. Temptation's way has led astray
The likeliest of you all,
And yet you'r found on slippery ground,
And think you cannot fall.

21. A female meek, with blushing cheek,
Seized in some lover's arms,
Has oft grown weak with Cupid's heat
And lost her virgin charms.

22. But last of all, up speaks romp Moll
And pleads to be excused,
For how can she e'er married be,
If bundling be refused?

23. What strange mistake young women,
To hope for sparks this way!
Your fond bold acts can't lay a tax
That men will ever pay.

24. So cheap and free some women be,
That men are cloyed with sweet,
As horse or cow starve at the mow
With fodder under feet.

25. 'Tis therefore vain yourselves to screen,
The practice is accurst,
It is condemned by God and man,
The pious and the just.

26. Should you go on, the day will come,
When Christ your Judge will say,
In _bundles_ bind each of this kind,
And cast them all away.

27. Down deep in hell there let them dwell,
And bundle on that bed;
There burn and roll without control,
'Till all their lusts are fed.

The evidence presented in the preceding pages, establishes, as we think, the following facts:

1st. That the custom, so far as it pertained to the American States, had its origin as a matter of convenience and necessity.

2d. That in all stages of its history it was chiefly confined to the humbler classes of society.

3d. That its prevalence may be said to have closed with the eighteenth century.

It is our opinion that it came nearest to being a universal custom from 1750 to 1780, and that it was, at all times, regarded by the better classes as a serious evil, and was no more countenanced by them then the frequenting of grog shops is by the better class of the present day.

This opinion is corroborated by the remarks of several old persons whom we have consulted as to their recollections of the custom. Among these, Mr. B., of East Haddam, Ct., now in his 95th year, says that he well remembers it; that it could not be called general, though frequent. It was not practiced among the more intelligent, educated classes, nor among those who lived in large, well warmed houses. He says it was not the fashion to bundle with any chap who might call on a girl, but that it was a special favor, granted only to a favorite lover, who might consider it a proof of the high regard which the damsel had for him; in short, it was _only accepted lovers_ who were thus admitted to the bed of the fair one, and, as he expresses it, only after long continued urging in most cases.[36] He thinks the fashion ceased about 1790 to 1800, and in consequence of education and refinement; and that _no more mischief was done then than there is now-a-days_.

In the same strain, also, spoke the genial Colonel H., a native of Berlin, Ct., born in 1775. He was perfectly conversant with the custom, had known the old ladies, in some cases, to go up stairs before retiring, to see that the bundling couple were comfortable, _tuck 'em up_, and put on more bedclothes! And stoutly asseverated his belief "that there wasn't any more mischief done in those days than there is now."

Indeed, all the old people with whom we have conversed on the matter, although in some cases a little unwilling to own that they had ever practiced it themselves, were unanimous in their belief that the abuse of chastity under the bundling regime was no more frequent than it is now. One old gentleman of whom we have heard, in reply to the half reproachful, half joking question of his grandson, whether he wasn't ashamed, replied: "Why, no! What is the use of sitting up all night and burning out fire and lights, when you could just as well get under kiver and keep warm; and, when you get tired, take a nap and wake up fresh, and go at it again? Why, d--n it, there wasn't half as many bastards then as there are now!"[37]

Even within the present century we have found traces of the continuance of the practice of bundling, though the instances are perhaps few, and in some measure exceptional. Until a very late day the custom (as a matter of convenience) was prevalent among the Dutch settlers of Pennsylvania, and it is not improbable that traces may still continue to exist in some of the more remote counties of that state. An old schoolmaster who flourished in Glastenbury, Ct., some twenty years ago, when relating his experiences in teaching in southern Pennsylvania, and speaking of _boarding around_, informed us that when for any reason he did not choose to go to his boarding place for the time being, he was accustomed to stop at a tavern kept by an honest old Dutchman. On one occasion, having asked the landlord if he could stay over night, he was told that he could; and after chatting with his host through the evening, was shown to bed. The landlord set down the candle and had gone out of the room, when our friend noticed the only bed in the room was already occupied, and calling to the host, notified him of the fact; when he cried back: "Oh! dat ish only mine taughter; she won't hurt nopoty," and coolly went his way. And our friend affirmed that he found the daughter not only harmless, but also quite competent to take care of herself.

In New England, we believe that Cape Cod has the dubious honor of holding out the longest against the advance of civilization, bundling, as we have it on good authority, having been practiced there as late as 1827.[38] In Greenwich, New Jersey, it was in vogue in 1816. In the state of New York this custom came under judicial cognizance in the year 1804, when the supreme court held, that although bundling was admitted to be the custom in some parts of the state, it being proven that the parents of the girl, for whose seduction the suit was brought, countenanced her practicing it, they had no right to complain, or ask satisfaction for the consequences, which, the court say, "_naturally followed it_!"[39]

APPENDIX I.

BUNDLING.

[From _The Yankee_ of August 13, 1828, published at Portland, Maine, and edited by John Neal.]

By Rochefoucault, in accounting for the populousness of Massachusetts, the New Englanders are charged with bundling.

By Chastelleux, whose book I am not able to refer to now, the charge is repeated, and by half a score of other honest, good natured people, who have made books about the New World.

But, if you enquire into the business, you are pretty sure to be told, inquire where you may, that bundling is not known _there_, but somewhere further back in the woods, or further _down east_. Nay, while in every part of the United States the multitude speak of bundling as the habit of their neighbors, either east, west, north, or south, where the witches of the country were _located_ about a century ago by the grandfathers of this generation, I, myself, though I have taken trouble enough to learn the truth, have never yet been able to meet with a case of bundling--of bundling proper, I should say--in the United States, nor with but one trustworthy individual who had ever met with so much as one case, and he had met with _but_ one, for which he would give his word. These things are trifles; but when they are told in books that are read and trusted to throughout Europe; such books, too, as that of the Marquis de Chastelleux, or that of De Rouchefoucault, it becomes a matter of serious inquiry. The truth must be told, whatever it is, for the truth cannot be so bad, whatever it may be, as the untruth which is now repeated of us.

The travels of Chastelleux are translated by an Englishman who had been a long while in this country. The book was undoubtedly written with great care, by a very honest, able man, who had very good opportunities of knowing the truth; and is now set off by another very honest, able man, who was, if anything, rather partial to America--enough to make one wary of trusting the report of any traveler who does not say in so many words, after establishing a character for himself--I saw this; I heard this; I take nobody's word for what I now say, etc., etc. It would be easy to enumerate a multitude of other stories which are now believed in, about the people of the United States, not only by the people of Europe, and of Great Britain particularly, but by the people of the United States themselves. But a dry catalogue of such things would be of little use.

[Here he refers to the charge reported of New Englanders, that that they _eat pork and molasses--pork and molasses_ TOGETHER, which is here denied as a ridiculous story. H. R. S.]

They bundle in Wales; bundling there is a serious matter. A lady--a Welsh woman whose word is truth itself--assured me not long ago, that in her country they do not think a bit the worse, of a girl for anticipating her duties, in other words, for being a mother before she has been a wife; they have discovered, perhaps, that cause and effect may be convertible terms; that in such a serious matter, none but a fool would buy a pig in the poke, and that, after all, maternity may lead to marriage there, as marriage leads to maternity here. And why not? for after the establishment of the lying-in hospitals of Russia, the unmarried who bore _children to the state_ were proud of the duty, and were looked upon, we are told, with great favor by the public. She added, also, that she was once at a party made up of sixteen or eighteen females, and females of good characters, all but one or two of whom were mothers, or had been so, before they were married. By Chastelleux and his English translator it would appear to have been very much the same in America about the years 1780-1-2. It is not so now. To have had a child before marriage would now be fatal to a woman here, whatever might be her condition or beauty; fatal in every shape. No man would have courage to marry her; no woman of character would associate with her. Ask the first individual you meet, above the age of twelve or thirteen here, and you may have the name and history of every poor girl in the neighborhood who has been so unlucky as to have a child of her own without leave, perhaps, within a period of six or eight years in a populous neighborhood of twenty or thirty miles about. A widow with half a score of children, forty years ago, if we may believe Dr. Franklin, was an object for the fortune hunters of America. It is not so now. The demand for widows, and for every sort of ready made family is beginning to be over.

That which is called bundling here, though bad enough, is not a twentieth part so bad. Here it is only a mode of courtship. The parties instead of sitting up together, go to bed together; but go to bed with their clothes on. This would appear to be a perilous fashion; but I have been assured by the individual above, that he had proof to the contrary; for in the particular case alluded to, the only case I ever heard of on good authority, although he was invited by the parents of a pretty girl who stood near him, to bundle with her, and although he _did_ bundle with her, he had every reason to believe, that if he had been very free, or more free than he might have been at a country frolick after they had invited him to escort her, to sit up with her, to dance with her, he would have been treated as a traitor by all parties. He had a fair opportunity of knowing the truth, and he spoke of the matter as if he would prefer the etiquette of sitting up to the etiquette of going to bed with a girl who had been so brought up. He complained of her as a prude. The following communication appears, however, to be one that may be depended on:[40]

"MR. NEAL--If you wish to know the truth about bundling, I think
your correspondent V. could tell you all about it--it seems by his
confession that he has practiced it on a large scale. I never heard
of the thing till about three years ago; an acquaintance of mine had
gone to spend the summer with an aunt, who lived somewhere near
Sandy river.[41] The following is a copy of one of her letters while
there:

"'I should have written sooner, so don't think me unkind, for I have
been waiting for something to write about. You requested me to give
you a faithful description of the country, the manners and customs
of the inhabitants, etc. I have not been here quite three months,
but I have been everywhere, seen everything, and got acquainted with
everybody. I shall certainly inform you of everything I have seen or
heard that is worth relating.

"'You remember how you told me, before I left home, that I was so
well looking that if I went so far back in the country I should be
very much admired and flattered, and have as many lovers as I could
wish for. I find it all true. The people here are remarkably kind
and attentive to me; they seem to think that I must be something
more than common because I have always lived so near Portland.

"'But I must tell you that since I have been here I have had a beau.
You must know that the young men, _in particular_, are very
attentive to me. Well, among these is _one_ who is considered the
finest young man in the place, and well he may be--he owns a good
farm, which has a large barn upon it, and a neat two story house,
all finished. These are the fruits of his own industry; besides he
is remarkably good looking, is very large but well-proportioned, and
has a good share of what I call real manly beauty. Soon after my
arrival here I was introduced to this man--no, not _introduced_
neither, for they never think of such a thing here. They all know me
of course, because I am a _stranger_. Some days, three, four, or
half a dozen, call to see me, whom I never before saw or heard of;
they come and speak to me as if I were an old acquaintance, and I
converse with them as freely as if I had always known them from
childhood. In this kind of a way I got acquainted with my beau, that
_was_; he was very attentive to me from our first meeting. If we
happened to be going anywhere in company he was sure to offer me his
arm--no, I am wrong again, he never offered me his arm in his life.
If you go to walk with a young man here, instead of offering you his
arm as the young men do up our way, he either takes your hand in
his, or passes one arm around your waist; and this he does with such
a provoking, careless honesty, that you cannot for your life be
offended with him. Well, I had walked with my Jonathan several times
in this kind of style. I confess there was something in him I could
not but like--he does not lack for wit, and has a good share of
common sense; his language is never studied--he always seems to
speak from the heart. So when he asked what sort of a companion he
would make, I very candidly answered, that I thought he would make a
very agreeable one. "I think just so of you," said he, "and it shall
not be my fault," he continued, "if we are not companions for life."
"We shall surely make a bargain," said he, after sitting silent a
few moments, "so we'll _bundle_ to-night." "_Bundle_ what?" I asked.
"_We_ will bundle together," said he; "you surely know what I mean."
I know that our farmers bundle _wheat_, _cornstalks_ and _hay_; do
you mean that you want me to help you bundle any of these?" inquired
I. "I mean that I want you to stay with me to-night! It is the
custom in this place, when a man stays with a girl, if it is warm
weather, for them to throw themselves on the bed, outside the bed
clothes; if the weather is cold, they crawl under the clothes, then
if they have anything to _say_, they say it--when they get tired of
talking they go to sleep; this is what we call bundling--now what do
you call it in your part of the world?" "We have no such works,"
answered I; "not amongst respectable people, nor do I think that any
people would, that either thought themselves respectable, or wished
to be thought so."

"'Don't be too severe upon us, Miss ----, I have always observed
that those who _make believe_ so much modesty, have in reality but
little. I always act as I feel, and speak as I think. I wish you to
do the same, but have none of your make-believes with me--you
smile--you begin to think you have been a little too scrupulous--you
have no objection to bundling _now_, have you?" "Indeed I have." "I
am not to be trifled with; so, if you refuse, I have done with you
forever." "Then be done as quick as you please, for I'll not bundle
with you nor with any other man." "Then farewell, proud girl," said
he. "Farewell, honest man," said I, and off he went sure enough.

"'I have since made inquiries about _bundling_, and find that it is
_really_ the custom here, and that they think no more harm of it,
than we do our way of a young couple sitting up together. I have
known an instance, since I have been here, of a girl's taking her
sweetheart to a neighbor's house and asking for a bed or two to
lodge in, or rather to _bundle_ in. They had company at her
father's, so that their beds were occupied; she thought no harm of
it. She and her family are respectable.

"'Grandmother says bundling was a very common thing in our part of
the country, in old times; that most of the first settlers lived in
log houses, which seldom had more than one room with a fire place;
in this room the old people slept, so if one of their girls had a
sweetheart in the winter she must either sit with him in the room
where her father and mother slept, or take him into her sleeping
room. She would choose the latter for the sake of being alone with
him; but sometimes when the cold was very severe, rather than freeze
to death, they would crawl under the bed-clothes; and this, after a
while, became a habit, a custom, or a fashion. The man that I am
going to send this by, is just ready to start, so I cannot stop to
write more now. In my next I'll give you a more particular account
of the people here. Adieu.'

"_Mr. Editor_, you may be sure that what is related in the foregoing
letter is the truth. I know that there is considerable _other_
information in it, mixed up with _that_ about which you wished to be
informed, but I could not very well separate it."

So after all that has been said of the practice of bundling in our country, by foreign writers, travelers, and reviewers--after all the reproach that has been heaped upon us, now that we are able to get at the plain truth, it appears to be, though certainly a bad practice, not half so bad as the junketing and sitting up courtships that are known elsewhere. Nay, more. Though in the present state of society it is a practice that should be utterly discountenanced everywhere, still it would seem to have grown up out of the peculiar circumstances of our first settlers; to be confined _now_ to remote and small districts (for I have heard of only three instances, after all my inquiry); and to be rapidly going out of practice. Yet more; there can be no bad intentions, there can be no evil consequences, where respectable and modest women are not ashamed to acknowledge that they bundle. I am anxious to know the truth for the purpose of correcting both the _misrepresentations_ that are abroad, and the _practices_ that prevail here. Bundling, however, is known in other countries, where they have less excuse, and in Wales where they do _not_ bundle, as I have said before, it is no reproach for a woman to have had a child before marriage. It was so in Russia after Catharine established her lying-in hospitals.

In the next number of _The Yankee_ (August 20th) there is the following editorial paragraph:

BUNDLING.

There is a great outcry just now about the paper on bundling which
was in the last _Yankee_. Now this very outcry proves the want of
the very paper alluded to. The article is about bundling; and people
who imagine bundling to be what it is not, a highly improper and
unchaste familiarity, are offended with it; but the very purpose of
that paper is to show that bundling is not what it is believed to
be, that it is neither so common nor so bad, not a fiftieth part so
bad as people have imagined.

APPENDIX II.

That the customs of courtship in many parts of the United Kingdom at the present day, are precisely what they were in some parts of New England, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, fifty years ago, is evident from the revelations of the _Royal Commission on the Marriage Laws_, in the year 1868. Dr. Strahan, a physician and surgeon, who for nearly forty years has practiced in the Scottish county of Stirling, testifies before the commission, that his attention was first drawn to the subject in consequence of observing the very great extent of immorality among the working classes, not only as evidenced by the large number of illegitimate children, but also by the still larger number of marriages after the woman was with child; and the number of children born within eight months of wedlock. He found, to his astonishment, that among the working classes (i.e., the agricultural laborers), nine out of ten women, when married, either had had illegitimate children, or were pregnant at the time of marriage. "I have," he says, "a large midwifery practice, and I very rarely attend a woman with her first child, where the child is not born within a few months of wedlock, or else she has had an illegitimate child before." He believes it is very common for women to allow themselves to be seduced in the hope of being married. They go on until they are _enceinte_, and then, if the young man is at all a decent fellow, the friends interfere and the marriage is hurried on. The sketch which Dr. Strahan supplies of Scotch courtships, explains all this part of his observation. Young men and women meet together at night, and the ordinary time is the middle of the night, when every one else is in bed. "It is universal," says Dr. Strahan to the commission, "among the working classes, to have this manner of courtship of which I speak; there is no other courtship, in any other form; the fathers and mothers will not allow their daughters to meet a young man in the day-time; the young man never visits the family, but the parents quite allow this; they have done it themselves before, and there is no objection to it. The young man comes, makes a noise at the window; the young woman goes out, they go to some outhouse; or perhaps the young man is admitted to the young woman's bedroom after all are in bed, and there is an hour or two of what is called courtship, but which would more properly be called flirtation, because it is not necessary that there should be any engagement to marry in these cases."

Lord Lyveden inquired: "Do these meetings take place at particular periods, such as harvest time, or is it over the whole of the year?"

_Answer_: "The whole of the year; very commonly the young man visits the young woman once a week."

Lord Chelmsford said: "In England that would be called _keeping company_. It is a very extraordinary way of keeping company when the parents allow their daughter to go out with the young man at midnight, or the young man to come into her bedroom."

_Answer_: "Yes; the parents know no other way of doing it. I have reasoned with the parents often when attending a case of illegitimate birth, pointing out to the parents how it is they have been led on, but they cannot imagine any other way of doing it; their daughters must have husbands, and there is no other way of courting."

Mr. Justice O'Hagan asking--"Does it prevail generally in Scotland?" was answered--"Universally among the agricultural laborers."

In reply to an inquiry by Mr. Dunlop, whether these young men lived under any kind of supervision and knowledge of their masters, or whether they could go out and in as they pleased, Dr. Strahan stated that "plowmen, for instance, very often live in _bothies_, or in the farm house; they get out after all are in bed, out of the window; or, if they live in a bothie, without any trouble. They go to the neighboring farm-house, they knock at the window, the girl comes to the window, and, if she know the young man--or, after a little parley, if she does not know him--she either comes out and goes with him to an outhouse, or he comes into her bedroom. You must remember that they have no other means of intercourse."

"That is the point you press so much?"

"Yes; a young woman cannot see either a sweetheart or an acquaintance in any other way. I believe if it was not for fear of being out at night, the girls would visit one another in the same way; they have no other means of visiting; the customs of the country are such that a young man could not be seen going in day-light to visit his sweetheart."

Mr. Justice O'Hagan: "If the father knew that the young man was coming into the house, and knew that he was with his daughter, would he not interfere?"

"He would lie comfortably in his bed, knowing that his daughter was in an out-house or barn with a young man, for perhaps two hours; shutting his eyes to it in the same way that a person in the higher ranks would shut his eyes to his daughter going out for a walk with a young man."

Dr. Strahan said also: "When you come to the middle class a young man would not marry a girl that had had a child to another man; and very probably he would not marry a girl that had had a child to himself; but in the lower classes it is not so; it is almost universal to marry a woman that has had a child, or that is with child to himself; but it is very frequent to marry a woman that has had a child to another man; the only objection is the burden of the child; the burden of the child might be an obstacle, but the disgrace would be none."

"Is it supposed," asked a commissioner, "that the woman, by marrying this other man, wipes off her disgrace with the former?"

"Yes; but it is so common that the disgrace is not so much as to prevent the young man marrying her."