And the people asked him, saying, What shall we do
then?
He answereth and saith unto them, He that hath two coats, let
him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him
do likewise—Luke iii. 10.
11.
Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and
rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither
moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break
through nor steal:
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be
single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of
darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be
darkness, how great is that darkness!
No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one,
and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise
the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what
ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what
ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the
body than raiment?—Matt. vi.
19–25.
Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What
shall we drink? Or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?
(For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your
heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these
things.
But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness;
and all these things shall be added unto you.
Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall
take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the
day is the evil thereof.—Matt.
vi. 31–34.
For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s
eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of
God.—Matt. xix. 24; Mark x. 25; Luke
xviii. 25.
I had lived all my life out of town. When, in 1881, I
went to live in Moscow, the poverty of the town greatly surprised
me. I am familiar with poverty in the country; but city
poverty was new and incomprehensible to me. In Moscow it
was impossible to pass along the street without encountering
beggars, and especially beggars who are unlike those in the
country. These beggars do not go about with their pouches
in the name of Christ, as country beggars are accustomed to do,
but these beggars are without the pouch and the name of
Christ. The Moscow beggars carry no pouches, and do not ask
for alms. Generally, when they meet or pass you, they
merely try to catch your eye; and, according to your look, they
beg or refrain from it. I know one such beggar who belongs
to the gentry. The old man walks slowly along, bending
forward every time he sets his foot down. When he meets
you, he rests on one foot and makes you a kind of salute.
If you stop, he pulls off his hat with its cockade, and bows and
begs: if you do not halt, he pretends that that is merely his way
of walking, and he passes on, bending forward in like manner on
the other foot. He is a real Moscow beggar, a cultivated
man. At first I did not know why the Moscow beggars do not
ask alms directly; afterwards I came to understand why they do
not beg, but still I did not understand their position.
Once, as I was passing through Afanasievskaya Lane, I saw a
policeman putting a ragged peasant, all swollen with dropsy, into
a cab. I inquired: “What is that for?”
The policeman answered: “For asking alms.”
“Is that forbidden?”
“Of course it is forbidden,” replied the
policeman.
The sufferer from dropsy was driven off. I took another
cab, and followed him. I wanted to know whether it was true
that begging alms was prohibited and how it was prohibited.
I could in no wise understand how one man could be forbidden to
ask alms of any other man; and besides, I did not believe that it
was prohibited, when Moscow is full of beggars. I went to
the station-house whither the beggar had been taken. At a
table in the station-house sat a man with a sword and a
pistol. I inquired:
“For what was this peasant arrested?”
The man with the sword and pistol gazed sternly at me, and
said:
“What business is it of yours?”
But feeling conscious that it was necessary to offer me some
explanation, he added:
“The authorities have ordered that all such persons are
to be arrested; of course it had to be done.”
I went out. The policeman who had brought the beggar was
seated on the window-sill in the ante-chamber, staring gloomily
at a note-book. I asked him:
“Is it true that the poor are forbidden to ask alms in
Christ’s name?”
The policeman came to himself, stared at me, then did not
exactly frown, but apparently fell into a doze again, and said,
as he sat on the window-sill:—
“The authorities have so ordered, which shows that it is
necessary,” and betook himself once more to his
note-book. I went out on the porch, to the cab.
“Well, how did it turn out? Have they arrested
him?” asked the cabman. The man was evidently
interested in this affair also.
“Yes,” I answered. The cabman shook his
head. “Why is it forbidden here in Moscow to ask alms
in Christ’s name?” I inquired.
“Who knows?” said the cabman.
“How is this?” said I, “he is Christ’s
poor, and he is taken to the station-house.”
“A stop has been put to that now, it is not
allowed,” said the cab-driver.
On several occasions afterwards, I saw policemen conducting
beggars to the station house, and then to the Yusupoff house of
correction. Once I encountered on the Myasnitzkaya a
company of these beggars, about thirty in number. In front
of them and behind them marched policemen. I inquired:
“What for?”—“For asking alms.”
It turned out that all these beggars, several of whom you meet
with in every street in Moscow, and who stand in files near every
church during services, and especially during funeral services,
are forbidden to ask alms.
But why are some of them caught and locked up somewhere, while
others are left alone?
This I could not understand. Either there are among them
legal and illegal beggars, or there are so many of them that it
is impossible to apprehend them all; or do others assemble afresh
when some are removed?
There are many varieties of beggars in Moscow: there are some
who live by this profession; there are also genuine poor people,
who have chanced upon Moscow in some manner or other, and who are
really in want.
Among these poor people, there are many simple, common
peasants, and women in their peasant costume. I often met
such people. Some of them have fallen ill here, and on
leaving the hospital they can neither support themselves here,
nor get away from Moscow. Some of them, moreover, have
indulged in dissipation (such was probably the case of the
dropsical man); some have not been ill, but are people who have
been burnt out of their houses, or old people, or women with
children; some, too, were perfectly healthy and able to
work. These perfectly healthy peasants who were engaged in
begging, particularly interested me. These healthy, peasant
beggars, who were fit for work, also interested me, because, from
the date of my arrival in Moscow, I had been in the habit of
going to the Sparrow Hills with two peasants, and sawing wood
there for the sake of exercise. These two peasants were
just as poor as those whom I encountered on the streets.
One was Piotr, a soldier from Kaluga; the other Semyon, a peasant
from Vladimir. They possessed nothing except the wages of
their body and hands. And with these hands they earned, by
dint of very hard labor, from forty to forty-five kopeks a day,
out of which each of them was laying by savings, the Kaluga man
for a fur coat, the Vladimir man in order to get enough to return
to his village. Therefore, on meeting precisely such men in
the streets, I took an especial interest in them.
Why did these men toil, while those others begged?
On encountering a peasant of this stamp, I usually asked him
how he had come to that situation. Once I met a peasant
with some gray in his beard, but healthy. He begs. I
ask him who is he, whence comes he? He says that he came
from Kaluga to get work. At first he found employment
chopping up old wood for use in stoves. He and his comrade
finished all the chopping which one householder had; then they
sought other work, but found none; his comrade had parted from
him, and for two weeks he himself had been struggling along; he
had spent all his money, he had no saw, and no axe, and no money
to buy anything. I gave him money for a saw, and told him
of a place where he could find work. I had already made
arrangements with Piotr and Semyon, that they should take an
assistant, and they looked up a mate for him.
“See that you come. There is a great deal of work
there.”
“I will come; why should I not come? Do you
suppose I like to beg? I can work.”
The peasant declares that he will come, and it seems to me
that he is not deceiving me, and that he intents to come.
On the following day I go to my peasants, and inquire whether
that man has arrived. He has not been there; and in this
way several men deceived me. And those also deceived me who
said that they only required money for a ticket in order to
return home, and who chanced upon me again in the street a week
later. Many of these I recognized, and they recognized me,
and sometimes, having forgotten me, they repeated the same trick
on me; and others, on catching sight of me, beat a retreat.
Thus I perceived, that in the ranks of this class also deceivers
existed. But these cheats were very pitiable creatures: all
of them were but half-clad, poverty-stricken, gaunt, sickly men;
they were the very people who really freeze to death, or hang
themselves, as we learn from the newspapers.
When I mentioned this poverty of the town to inhabitants of
the town, they always said to me: “Oh, all that you have
seen is nothing. You ought to see the Khitroff
market-place, and the lodging-houses for the night there.
There you would see a regular ‘golden
company.’” [21a] One jester
told me that this was no longer a company, but a golden
regiment: so greatly had their numbers increased. The
jester was right, but he would have been still more accurate if
he had said that these people now form in Moscow neither a
company nor a regiment, but an entire army, almost fifty thousand
in number, I think. [The old inhabitants, when they spoke
to me about the poverty in town, always referred to it with a
certain satisfaction, as though pluming themselves over me,
because they knew it. I remember that when I was in London,
the old inhabitants there also rather boasted when they spoke of
the poverty of London. The case is the same with us.] [21b]
And I wanted to have a sight of this poverty of which I had
been told. Several times I set out in the direction of the
Khitroff market-place, but on every occasion I began to feel
uncomfortable and ashamed. “Why am I going to gaze on
the sufferings of people whom I cannot help?” said one
voice. “No, if you live here, and see all the charms
of city life, go and view this also,” said another
voice. In December three years ago, therefore, on a cold
and windy day, I betook myself to that centre of poverty, the
Khitroff market-place. This was at four o’clock in
the afternoon of a week-day. As I passed through the
Solyanka, I already began to see more and more people in old
garments which had not originally belonged to them, and in still
stranger foot-gear, people with a peculiar, unhealthy hue of
countenance, and especially with a singular indifference to every
thing around them, which was peculiar to them all. A man in
the strangest of all possible attire, which was utterly unlike
any thing else, walked along with perfect unconcern, evidently
without a thought of the appearance which he must present to the
eyes of others. All these people were making their way
towards a single point. Without inquiring the way, with
which I was not acquainted, I followed them, and came out on the
Khitroff market-place. On the market-place, women both old
and young, of the same description, in tattered cloaks and
jackets of various shapes, in ragged shoes and overshoes, and
equally unconcerned, notwithstanding the hideousness of their
attire, sat, bargained for something, strolled about, and
scolded. There were not many people in the market
itself. Evidently market-hours were over, and the majority
of the people were ascending the rise beyond the market and
through the place, all still proceeding in one direction. I
followed them. The farther I advanced, the greater in
numbers were the people of this sort who flowed together on one
road. Passing through the market-place and proceeding along
the street, I overtook two women; one was old, the other
young. Both wore something ragged and gray. As they
walked they were discussing some matter. After every
necessary word, they uttered one or two unnecessary ones, of the
most improper character. They were not intoxicated, but
merely troubled about something; and neither the men who met
them, nor those who walked in front of them and behind them, paid
any attention to the language which was so strange to me.
In these quarters, evidently, people always talked so.
Ascending the rise, we reached a large house on a corner.
The greater part of the people who were walking along with me
halted at this house. They stood all over the sidewalk of
this house, and sat on the curbstone, and even the snow in the
street was thronged with the same kind of people. On the
right side of the entrance door were the women, on the left the
men. I walked past the women, past the men (there were
several hundred of them in all) and halted where the line came to
an end. The house before which these people were waiting
was the Lyapinsky free lodging-house for the night. The
throng of people consisted of night lodgers, who were waiting to
be let in. At five o’clock in the afternoon, the
house is opened, and the people permitted to enter. Hither
had come nearly all the people whom I had passed on my way.
I halted where the line of men ended. Those nearest me
began to stare at me, and attracted my attention to them by their
glances. The fragments of garments which covered these
bodies were of the most varied sorts. But the expression of
all the glances directed towards me by these people was
identical. In all eyes the question was expressed:
“Why have you, a man from another world, halted here beside
us? Who are you? Are you a self-satisfied rich man
who wants to enjoy our wretchedness, to get rid of his tedium,
and to torment us still more? or are you that thing which does
not and can not exist,—a man who pities us?”
This query was on every face. You glance about, encounter
some one’s eye, and turn away. I wished to talk with
some one of them, but for a long time I could not make up my mind
to it. But our glances had drawn us together already while
our tongues remained silent. Greatly as our lives had
separated us, after the interchange of two or three glances we
felt that we were both men, and we ceased to fear each
other. The nearest of all to me was a peasant with a
swollen face and a red beard, in a tattered caftan, and patched
overshoes on his bare feet. And the weather was eight
degrees below zero. [24a] For the
third or fourth time I encountered his eyes, and I felt so near
to him that I was no longer ashamed to accost him, but ashamed
not to say something to him. I inquired where he came from?
he answered readily, and we began to talk; others
approached. He was from Smolensk, and had come to seek
employment that he might earn his bread and taxes.
“There is no work,” said he: “the soldiers have
taken it all away. So now I am loafing about; as true as I
believe in God, I have had nothing to eat for two
days.” He spoke modestly, with an effort at a
smile. A sbiten[24b]-seller, an old
soldier, stood near by. I called him up. He poured
out his sbiten. The peasant took a boiling-hot
glassful in his hands, and as he tried before drinking not to let
any of the heat escape in vain, and warmed his hands over it, he
related his adventures to me. These adventures, or the
histories of them, are almost always identical: the man has been
a laborer, then he has changed his residence, then his purse
containing his money and ticket has been stolen from him in the
night lodging-house; now it is impossible to get away from
Moscow. He told me that he kept himself warm by day in the
dram-shops; that he nourished himself on the bits of bread in
these drinking places, when they were given to him; and when he
was driven out of them, he came hither to the Lyapinsky house for
a free lodging. He was only waiting for the police to make
their rounds, when, as he had no passport, he would be taken to
jail, and then despatched by stages to his place of
settlement. “They say that the inspection will be
made on Friday,” said he, “then they will arrest
me. If I can only get along until Friday.” (The
jail, and the journey by stages, represent the Promised Land to
him.)
As he told his story, three men from among the throng
corroborated his statements, and said that they were in the same
predicament. A gaunt, pale, long-nosed youth, with merely a
shirt on the upper portion of his body, and that torn on the
shoulders, and a cap without a visor, forced his way sidelong
through the crowd. He shivered violently and incessantly,
but tried to smile disdainfully at the peasants’ remarks,
thinking by this means to adopt the proper tone with me, and he
stared at me. I offered him some sbiten; he also, on
taking the glass, warmed his hands over it; but no sooner had he
begun to speak, than he was thrust aside by a big, black,
hook-nosed individual, in a chintz shirt and waistcoat, without a
hat. The hook-nosed man asked for some sbiten
also. Then came a tall old man, with a mass of beard, clad
in a great-coat girded with a rope, and in bast shoes, who was
drunk. Then a small man with a swollen face and tearful
eyes, in a brown nankeen round-jacket, with his bare knees
protruding from the holes in his summer trousers, and knocking
together with cold. He shivered so that he could not hold
his glass, and spilled it over himself. The men began to
reproach him. He only smiled in a woe-begone way, and went
on shivering. Then came a crooked monster in rags, with
pattens on his bare feet; then some sort of an officer; then
something in the ecclesiastical line; then something strange and
nose-less,—all hungry and cold, beseeching and submissive,
thronged round me, and pressed close to the sbiten.
They drank up all the sbiten. One asked for money,
and I gave it. Then another asked, then a third, and the
whole crowd besieged me. Confusion and a press
resulted. The porter of the adjoining house shouted to the
crowd to clear the sidewalk in front of his house, and the crowd
submissively obeyed his orders. Some managers stepped out
of the throng, and took me under their protection, and wanted to
lead me forth out of the press; but the crowd, which had at first
been scattered over the sidewalk, now became disorderly, and
hustled me. All stared at me and begged; and each face was
more pitiful and suffering and humble than the last. I
distributed all that I had with me. I had not much money,
something like twenty rubles; and in company with the crowd, I
entered the Lyapinsky lodging-house. This house is
huge. It consists of four sections. In the upper
stories are the men’s quarters; in the lower, the
women’s. I first entered the women’s place; a
vast room all occupied with bunks, resembling the third-class
bunks on the railway. These bunks were arranged in two
rows, one above the other. The women, strange, tattered
creatures, both old and young, wearing nothing over their
dresses, entered and took their places, some below and some
above. Some of the old ones crossed themselves, and uttered
a petition for the founder of this refuge; some laughed and
scolded. I went up-stairs. There the men had
installed themselves; among them I espied one of those to whom I
had given money. [On catching sight of him, I all at once
felt terribly abashed, and I made haste to leave the room.
And it was with a sense of absolute crime that I quitted that
house and returned home. At home I entered over the
carpeted stairs into the ante-room, whose floor was covered with
cloth; and having removed my fur coat, I sat down to a dinner of
five courses, waited on by two lackeys in dress-coats, white
neckties, and white gloves.
Thirty years ago I witnessed in Paris a man’s head cut
off by the guillotine in the presence of thousands of
spectators. I knew that the man was a horrible
criminal. I was acquainted with all the arguments which
people have been devising for so many centuries, in order to
justify this sort of deed. I knew that they had done this
expressly, deliberately. But at the moment when head and
body were severed, and fell into the trough, I groaned, and
apprehended, not with my mind, but with my heart and my whole
being, that all the arguments which I had heard anent the
death-penalty were arrant nonsense; that, no matter how many
people might assemble in order to perpetrate a murder, no matter
what they might call themselves, murder is murder, the vilest sin
in the world, and that that crime had been committed before my
very eyes. By my presence and non-interference, I had lent
my approval to that crime, and had taken part in it. So
now, at the sight of this hunger, cold, and degradation of
thousands of persons, I understood not with my mind, but with my
heart and my whole being, that the existence of tens of thousands
of such people in Moscow, while I and other thousands dined on
fillets and sturgeon, and covered my horses and my floors with
cloth and rugs,—no matter what the wise ones of this world
might say to me about its being a necessity,—was a crime,
not perpetrated a single time, but one which was incessantly
being perpetrated over and over again, and that I, in my luxury,
was not only an accessory, but a direct accomplice in the
matter. The difference for me between these two impressions
was this, that I might have shouted to the assassins who stood
around the guillotine, and perpetrated the murder, that they were
committing a crime, and have tried with all my might to prevent
the murder. But while so doing I should have known that my
action would not prevent the murder. But here I might not
only have given sbiten and the money which I had with me,
but the coat from my back, and every thing that was in my
house. But this I had not done; and therefore I felt, I
feel, and shall never cease to feel, myself an accomplice in this
constantly repeated crime, so long as I have superfluous food and
any one else has none at all, so long as I have two garments
while any one else has not even one.] [28]
That very evening, on my return from the Lyapinsky house, I
related my impressions to a friend. The friend, an
inhabitant of the city, began to tell me, not without
satisfaction, that this was the most natural phenomenon of town
life possible, that I only saw something extraordinary in it
because of my provincialism, that it had always been so, and
always would be so, and that such must be and is the inevitable
condition of civilization. In London it is even
worse. Of course there is nothing wrong about it, and it is
impossible to be displeased with it. I began to reply to my
friend, but with so much heat and ill-temper, that my wife ran in
from the adjoining room to inquire what had happened. It
appears that, without being conscious of it myself, I had been
shouting, with tears in my voice, and flourishing my hands at my
friend. I shouted: “It’s impossible to live
thus, impossible to live thus, impossible!” They made
me feel ashamed of my unnecessary warmth; they told me that I
could not talk quietly about any thing, that I got disagreeably
excited; and they proved to me, especially, that the existence of
such unfortunates could not possibly furnish any excuse for
imbittering the lives of those about me.
I felt that this was perfectly just, and held my peace; but in
the depths of my soul I was conscious that I was in the right,
and I could not regain my composure.
And the life of the city, which had, even before this, been so
strange and repellent to me, now disgusted me to such a degree,
that all the pleasures of a life of luxury, which had hitherto
appeared to me as pleasures, become tortures to me. And try
as I would, to discover in my own soul any justification whatever
for our life, I could not, without irritation, behold either my
own or other people’s drawing-rooms, nor our tables spread
in the lordly style, nor our equipages and horses, nor shops,
theatres, and assemblies. I could not behold alongside
these the hungry, cold, and down-trodden inhabitants of the
Lyapinsky house. And I could not rid myself of the thought
that these two things were bound up together, that the one arose
from the other. I remember, that, as this feeling of my own
guilt presented itself to me at the first blush, so it persisted
in me, but to this feeling a second was speedily added which
overshadowed it.
When I mentioned my impressions of the Lyapinsky house to my
nearest friends and acquaintances, they all gave me the same
answer as the first friend at whom I had begun to shout; but, in
addition to this, they expressed their approbation of my kindness
of heart and my sensibility, and gave me to understand that this
sight had so especially worked upon me because I, Lyof
Nikolaevitch, was very kind and good. And I willingly
believed this. And before I had time to look about me,
instead of the feeling of self-reproach and regret, which I had
at first experienced, there came a sense of satisfaction with my
own kindliness, and a desire to exhibit it to people.
“It really must be,” I said to myself, “that
I am not especially responsible for this by the luxury of my
life, but that it is the indispensable conditions of existence
that are to blame. In truth, a change in my mode of life
cannot rectify the evil which I have seen: by altering my manner
of life, I shall only make myself and those about me unhappy, and
the other miseries will remain the same as ever. And
therefore my problem lies not in a change of my own life, as it
had first seemed to me, but in aiding, so far as in me lies, in
the amelioration of the situation of those unfortunate beings who
have called forth my compassion. The whole point lies
here,—that I am a very kind, amiable man, and that I wish
to do good to my neighbors.” And I began to think out
a plan of beneficent activity, in which I might exhibit my
benevolence. I must confess, however, that while devising
this plan of beneficent activity, I felt all the time, in the
depths of my soul, that that was not the thing; but, as often
happens, activity of judgment and imagination drowned that voice
of conscience within me. At that juncture, the census came
up. This struck me as a means for instituting that
benevolence in which I proposed to exhibit my charitable
disposition. I knew of many charitable institutions and
societies which were in existence in Moscow, but all their
activity seemed to me both wrongly directed and insignificant in
comparison with what I intended to do. And I devised the
following scheme: to arouse the sympathy of the wealthy for the
poverty of the city, to collect money, to get people together who
were desirous of assisting in this matter, and to visit all the
refuges of poverty in company with the census, and, in addition
to the work of the census, to enter into communion with the
unfortunate, to learn the particulars of their necessities, and
to assist them with money, with work, by sending them away from
Moscow, by placing their children in school, and the old people
in hospitals and asylums. And not only that, I thought, but
these people who undertake this can be formed into a permanent
society, which, by dividing the quarters of Moscow among its
members, will be able to see to it that this poverty and beggary
shall not be bred; they will incessantly annihilate it at its
very inception; then they will fulfil their duty, not so much by
healing as by a course of hygiene for the wretchedness of the
city. I fancied that there would be no more simply needy,
not to mention abjectly poor persons, in the town, and that all
of us wealthy individuals would thereafter be able to sit in our
drawing-rooms, and eat our five-course dinners, and ride in our
carriages to theatres and assemblies, and be no longer annoyed
with such sights as I had seen at the Lyapinsky house.
Having concocted this plan, I wrote an article on the subject;
and before sending it to the printer, I went to some
acquaintances, from whom I hoped for sympathy. I said the
same thing to every one whom I met that day (and I applied
chiefly to the rich), and nearly the same that I afterwards
printed in my memoir; proposed to take advantage of the census to
inquire into the wretchedness of Moscow, and to succor it, both
by deeds and money, and to do it in such a manner that there
should be no poor people in Moscow, and so that we rich ones
might be able, with a quiet conscience, to enjoy the blessings of
life to which we were accustomed. All listened to me
attentively and seriously, but nevertheless the same identical
thing happened with every one of them without exception. No
sooner did my hearers comprehend the question, than they seemed
to feel awkward and somewhat mortified. They seemed to be
ashamed, and principally on my account, because I was talking
nonsense, and nonsense which it was impossible to openly
characterize as such. Some external cause appeared to
compel my hearers to be forbearing with this nonsense of
mine.
“Ah, yes! of course. That would be very
good,” they said to me. “It is a
self-understood thing that it is impossible not to sympathize
with this. Yes, your idea is a capital one. I have
thought of that myself, but . . . we are so indifferent, as a
rule, that you can hardly count on much success . . . however, so
far as I am concerned, I am, of course, ready to
assist.”
They all said something of this sort to me. They all
agreed, but agreed, so it seemed to me, not in consequence of my
convictions, and not in consequence of their own wish, but as the
result of some outward cause, which did not permit them not to
agree. I had already noticed this, and, since not one of
them stated the sum which he was willing to contribute, I was
obliged to fix it myself, and to ask: “So I may count on
you for three hundred, or two hundred, or one hundred, or
twenty-five rubles?” And not one of them gave me any
money. I mention this because, when people give money for
that which they themselves desire, they generally make haste to
give it. For a box to see Sarah Bernhardt, they will
instantly place the money in your hand, to clinch the
bargain. Here, however, out of all those who agreed to
contribute, and who expressed their sympathy, not one of them
proposed to give me the money on the spot, but they merely
assented in silence to the sum which I suggested. In the
last house which I visited on that day, in the evening, I
accidentally came upon a large company. The mistress of the
house had busied herself with charity for several years.
Numerous carriages stood at the door, several lackeys in rich
liveries were sitting in the ante-chamber. In the vast
drawing-room, around two tables and lamps, sat ladies and young
girls, in costly garments, dressing small dolls; and there were
several young men there also, hovering about the ladies.
The dolls prepared by these ladies were to be drawn in a lottery
for the poor.
The sight of this drawing-room, and of the people assembled in
it, struck me very unpleasantly. Not to mention the fact
that the property of the persons there congregated amounted to
many millions, not to mention the fact that the mere income from
the capital here expended on dresses, laces, bronzes, brooches,
carriages, horses, liveries, and lackeys, was a hundred-fold
greater than all that these ladies could earn; not to mention the
outlay, the trip hither of all these ladies and gentlemen; the
gloves, linen, extra time, the candles, the tea, the sugar, and
the cakes had cost the hostess a hundred times more than what
they were engaged in making here. I saw all this, and
therefore I could understand, that precisely here I should find
no sympathy with my mission: but I had come in order to make my
proposition, and, difficult as this was for me, I said what I
intended. (I said very nearly the same thing that is
contained in my printed article.)
Out of all the persons there present, one individual offered
me money, saying that she did not feel equal to going among the
poor herself on account of her sensibility, but that she would
give money; how much money she would give, and when, she did not
say. Another individual and a young man offered their
services in going about among the poor, but I did not avail
myself of their offer. The principal person to whom I
appealed, told me that it would be impossible to do much because
means were lacking. Means were lacking because all the rich
people in Moscow were already on the lists, and all of them were
asked for all that they could possibly give; because on all these
benefactors rank, medals, and other dignities were bestowed;
because in order to secure financial success, some new dignities
must be secured from the authorities, and that this was the only
practical means, but this was extremely difficult.
On my return home that night, I lay down to sleep not only
with a presentment that my idea would come to nothing, but with
shame and a consciousness that all day long I had been engaged in
a very repulsive and disgraceful business. But I did not
give up this undertaking. In the first place, the matter
had been begun, and false shame would have prevented my
abandoning it; in the second place, not only the success of this
scheme, but the very fact that I was busying myself with it,
afforded me the possibility of continuing to live in the
conditions under which I was then living; failure entailed upon
me the necessity of renouncing my present existence and of
seeking new paths of life. And this I unconsciously
dreaded, and I could not believe the inward voice, and I went on
with what I had begun.
Having sent my article to the printer, I read the proof of it
to the City Council (Dum). I read it, stumbling, and
blushing even to tears, I felt so awkward. And I saw that
it was equally awkward for all my hearers. In answer to my
question at the conclusion of my reading, as to whether the
superintendents of the census would accept my proposition to
retain their places with the object of becoming mediators between
society and the needy, an awkward silence ensued. Then two
orators made speeches. These speeches in some measure
corrected the awkwardness of my proposal; sympathy for me was
expressed, but the impracticability of my proposition, which all
had approved, was demonstrated. Everybody breathed more
freely. But when, still desirous of gaining my object, I
afterwards asked the superintendents separately: Were they
willing, while taking the census, to inquire into the needs of
the poor, and to retain their posts, in order to serve as
go-betweens between the poor and the rich? they all grew uneasy
again. They seemed to say to me with their glances:
“Why, we have just condoned your folly out of respect to
you, and here you are beginning it again!” Such was
the expression of their faces, but they assured me in words that
they agreed; and two of them said in the very same words, as
though they had entered into a compact together: “We
consider ourselves morally bound to do this.”
The same impression was produced by my communication to the
student-census-takers, when I said to them, that while taking our
statistics, we should follow up, in addition to the objects of
the census, the object of benevolence. When we discussed
this, I observed that they were ashamed to look the kind-hearted
man, who was talking nonsense, in the eye. My article
produced the same impression on the editor of the newspaper, when
I handed it to him; on my son, on my wife, on the most widely
different persons. All felt awkward, for some reason or
other; but all regarded it as indispensable to applaud the idea
itself, and all, immediately after this expression of
approbation, began to express their doubts as to its success, and
began for some reason (and all of them, too, without exception)
to condemn the indifference and coldness of our society and of
every one, apparently, except themselves.
In the depths of my own soul, I still continued to feel that
all this was not at all what was needed, and that nothing would
come of it; but the article was printed, and I prepared to take
part in the census; I had contrived the matter, and now it was
already carrying me a way with it.
At my request, there had been assigned to me for the census, a
portion of the Khamovnitchesky quarter, at the Smolensk market,
along the Prototchny cross-street, between Beregovoy Passage and
Nikolsky Alley. In this quarter are situated the houses
generally called the Rzhanoff Houses, or the Rzhanoff
fortress. These houses once belonged to a merchant named
Rzhanoff, but now belong to the Zimins. I had long before
heard of this place as a haunt of the most terrible poverty and
vice, and I had accordingly requested the directors of the census
to assign me to this quarter. My desire was granted.
On receiving the instructions of the City Council, I went
alone, a few days previous to the beginning of the census, to
reconnoitre my section. I found the Rzhanoff fortress at
once, from the plan with which I had been furnished.
I approached from Nikolsky Alley. Nikolsky Alley ends on
the left in a gloomy house, without any gates on that side; I
divined from its appearance that this was the Rzhanoff
fortress.
Passing down Nikolsky Street, I overtook some lads of from ten
to fourteen years of age, clad in little caftans and great-coats,
who were sliding down hill, some on their feet, and some on one
skate, along the icy slope beside this house. The boys were
ragged, and, like all city lads, bold and impudent. I
stopped to watch them. A ragged old woman, with yellow,
pendent cheeks, came round the corner. She was going to
town, to the Smolensk market, and she groaned terribly at every
step, like a foundered horse. As she came alongside me, she
halted and drew a hoarse sigh. In any other locality, this
old woman would have asked money of me, but here she merely
addressed me.
“Look there,” said she, pointing at the boys who
were sliding, “all they do is to play their pranks!
They’ll turn out just such Rzhanoff fellows as their
fathers.”
One of the boys clad in a great-coat and a visorless cap,
heard her words and halted: “What are you scolding
about?” he shouted to the old woman.
“You’re an old Rzhanoff nanny-goat
yourself!”
I asked the boy:
“And do you live here?”
“Yes, and so does she. She stole boot-legs,”
shouted the boy; and raising his foot in front, he slid away.
The old woman burst forth into injurious words, interrupted by
a cough. At that moment, an old man, all clad in rags, and
as white as snow, came down the hill in the middle of the street,
flourishing his hands [in one of them he held a bundle with one
little kalatch and baranki [39]]. This old man bore the
appearance of a person who had just strengthened himself with a
dram. He had evidently heard the old woman’s
insulting words, and he took her part.
“I’ll give it to you, you imps, that I
will!” he screamed at the boys, seeming to direct his
course towards them, and taking a circuit round me, he stepped on
to the sidewalk. This old man creates surprise on the
Arbata by his great age, his weakness, and his indigence.
Here he was a cheery laboring-man returning from his daily
toil.
I followed the old man. He turned the corner to the
left, into Prototchny Alley, and passing by the whole length of
the house and the gate, he disappeared through the door of the
tavern.
Two gates and several doors open on Prototchny Alley: those
belonging to a tavern, a dram-shop, and several eating and other
shops. This is the Rzhanoff fortress itself. Every
thing here is gray, dirty, and malodorous—both buildings
and locality, and court-yards and people. The majority of
the people whom I met here were ragged and half-clad. Some
were passing through, others were running from door to
door. Two were haggling over some rags. I made the
circuit of the entire building from Prototchny Alley and
Beregovoy Passage, and returning I halted at the gate of one of
these houses. I wished to enter, and see what was going on
inside, but I felt that it would be awkward. What should I
say when I was asked what I wanted there? I hesitated, but
went in nevertheless. As soon as I entered the court-yard,
I became conscious of a disgusting odor. The yard was
frightfully dirty. I turned a corner, and at the same
instant I heard to my left and overhead, on the wooden balcony,
the tramp of footsteps of people running, at first along the
planks of the balcony, and then on the steps of the
staircase. There emerged, first a gaunt woman, with her
sleeves rolled up, in a faded pink gown, and little boots on her
stockingless feet. After her came a tattered man in a red
shirt and very full trousers, like a petticoat, and with
overshoes. The man caught the woman at the bottom of the
steps.
“You shall not escape,” he said laughing.
“See here, you cock-eyed devil,” began the woman,
evidently flattered by this pursuit; but catching sight of me,
she shrieked viciously, “What do you want?”
As I wanted nothing, I became confused and beat a
retreat. There was nothing remarkable about the place; but
this incident, after what I had witnessed on the other side of
the yard, the cursing old woman, the jolly old man, and the lads
sliding, suddenly presented the business which I had concocted
from a totally different point of view. I then comprehended
for the first time, that all these unfortunates to whom I was
desirous of playing the part of benefactor, besides the time,
when, suffering from cold and hunger, they awaited admission into
the house, had still other time, which they employed to some
other purpose, that there were four and twenty hours in every
day, that there was a whole life of which I had never thought, up
to that moment. Here, for the first time, I understood,
that all those people, in addition to their desire to shelter
themselves from the cold and to obtain a good meal, must still,
in some way, live out those four and twenty hours each day, which
they must pass as well as everybody else. I comprehended
that these people must lose their tempers, and get bored, show
courage, and grieve and be merry. Strange as this may seem,
when put into words, I understood clearly for the first time,
that the business which I had undertaken could not consist alone
in feeding and clothing thousands of people, as one would feed
and drive under cover a thousand sheep, but that it must consist
in doing good to them.
And then I understood that each one of those thousand people
was exactly such a man,—with precisely the same past, with
the same passions, temptations, failings, with the same thoughts,
the same perplexities,—exactly such a man as myself, and
then the thing that I had undertaken suddenly presented itself to
me as so difficult that I felt my powerlessness; but the thing
had been begun, and I went on with it.
On the first appointed day, the student enumerators arrived in
the morning, and I, the benefactor, joined them at twelve
o’clock. I could not go earlier, because I had risen
at ten o’clock, then I had drunk my coffee and smoked,
while waiting on digestion. At twelve o’clock I
reached the gates of the Rzhanoff house. A policeman
pointed out to me the tavern with a side entrance on Beregovoy
Passage, where the census-takers had ordered every one who asked
for them to be directed. I entered the tavern. It was
very dark, ill-smelling, and dirty. Directly opposite the
entrance was the counter, on the left was a room with tables,
covered with soiled cloths, on the right a large apartment with
pillars, and the same sort of little tables at the windows and
along the walls. Here and there at the tables sat men both
ragged and decently clad, like laboring-men or petty tradesmen,
and a few women drinking tea. The tavern was very filthy,
but it was instantly apparent that it had a good trade.
There was a business-like expression on the face of the clerk
behind the counter, and a clever readiness about the
waiters. No sooner had I entered, than one waiter prepared
to remove my coat and bring me whatever I should order. It
was evident that they had been trained to brisk and accurate
service. I inquired for the enumerators.
“Vanya!” shouted a small man, dressed in German
fashion, who was engaged in placing something in a cupboard
behind the counter; this was the landlord of the tavern, a Kaluga
peasant, Ivan Fedotitch, who hired one-half of the Zimins’
houses and sublet them to lodgers. The waiter, a thin,
hooked-nosed young fellow of eighteen, with a yellow complexion,
hastened up.
“Conduct this gentleman to the census-takers; they went
into the main building over the well.” The young
fellow threw down his napkin, and donned a coat over his white
jacket and white trousers, and a cap with a large visor, and,
tripping quickly along with his white feet, he led me through the
swinging door in the rear. In the dirty, malodorous
kitchen, in the out-building, we encountered an old woman who was
carefully carrying some very bad-smelling tripe, wrapped in a
rag, off somewhere. From the out-building we descended into
a sloping court-yard, all encumbered with small wooden buildings
on lower stories of stone. The odor in this whole yard was
extremely powerful. The centre of this odor was an
out-house, round which people were thronging whenever I passed
it. It merely indicated the spot, but was not altogether
used itself. It was impossible, when passing through the
yard, not to take note of this spot; one always felt oppressed
when one entered the penetrating atmosphere which was emitted by
this foul smell.
The waiter, carefully guarding his white trousers, led me
cautiously past this place of frozen and unfrozen uncleanness to
one of the buildings. The people who were passing through
the yard and along the balconies all stopped to stare at
me. It was evident that a respectably dressed man was a
curiosity in these localities.
The young man asked a woman “whether she had seen the
census-takers?” And three men simultaneously answered
his question: some said that they were over the well, but others
said that they had been there, but had come out and gone to
Nikita Ivanovitch. An old man dressed only in his shirt,
who was wandering about the centre of the yard, said that they
were in No. 30. The young man decided that this was the
most probable report, and conducted me to No. 30 through the
basement entrance, and darkness and bad smells, different from
that which existed outside. We went down-stairs, and
proceeded along the earthen floor of a dark corridor. As we
were passing along the corridor, a door flew open abruptly, and
an old drunken man, in his shirt, probably not of the peasant
class, thrust himself out. A washerwoman, wringing her
soapy hands, was pursuing and hustling the old man with piercing
screams. Vanya, my guide, pushed the old man aside, and
reproved him.
“It’s not proper to make such a row,” said
me, “and you an officer, too!” and we went on to the
door of No. 30.
Vanya gave it a little pull. The door gave way with a
smack, opened, and we smelled soapy steam, and a sharp odor of
spoilt food and tobacco, and we entered into total
darkness. The windows were on the opposite side; but the
corridors ran to right and left between board partitions, and
small doors opened, at various angles, into the rooms made of
uneven whitewashed boards. In a dark room, on the left, a
woman could be seen washing in a tub. An old woman was
peeping from one of these small doors on the right. Through
another open door we could see a red-faced, hairy peasant, in
bast shoes, sitting on his wooden bunk; his hands rested on his
knees, and he was swinging his feet, shod in bast shoes, and
gazing gloomily at them.
At the end of the corridor was a little door leading to the
apartment where the census-takers were. This was the
chamber of the mistress of the whole of No. 30; she rented the
entire apartment from Ivan Feodovitch, and let it out again to
lodgers and as night-quarters. In her tiny room, under the
tinsel images, sat the student census-taker with his charts; and,
in his quality of investigator, he had just thoroughly
interrogated a peasant wearing a shirt and a vest. This
latter was a friend of the landlady, and had been answering
questions for her. The landlady herself, an elderly woman,
was there also, and two of her curious tenants. When I
entered, the room was already packed full. I pushed my way
to the table. I exchanged greetings with the student, and
he proceeded with his inquiries. And I began to look about
me, and to interrogate the inhabitants of these quarters for my
own purpose.
It turned out, that in this first set of lodgings, I found not
a single person upon whom I could pour out my benevolence.
The landlady, in spite of the fact that the poverty, smallness
and dirt of these quarters struck me after the palatial house in
which I dwell, lived in comfort, compared with many of the poor
inhabitants of the city, and in comparison with the poverty in
the country, with which I was thoroughly familiar, she lived
luxuriously. She had a feather-bed, a quilted coverlet, a
samovar, a fur cloak, and a dresser with crockery. The
landlady’s friend had the same comfortable
appearance. He had a watch and a chain. Her lodgers
were not so well off, but there was not one of them who was in
need of immediate assistance: the woman who was washing linen in
a tub, and who had been abandoned by her husband and had
children, an aged widow without any means of livelihood, as she
said, and that peasant in bast shoes, who told me that he had
nothing to eat that day. But on questioning them, it
appeared that none of these people were in special want, and
that, in order to help them, it would be necessary to become well
acquainted with them.
When I proposed to the woman whose husband had abandoned her,
to place her children in an asylum, she became confused, fell
into thought, thanked me effusively, but evidently did not wish
to do so; she would have preferred pecuniary assistance.
The eldest girl helped her in her washing, and the younger took
care of the little boy. The old woman begged earnestly to
be taken to the hospital, but on examining her nook I found that
the old woman was not particularly poor. She had a chest
full of effects, a teapot with a tin spout, two cups, and caramel
boxes filled with tea and sugar. She knitted stockings and
gloves, and received monthly aid from some benevolent lady.
And it was evident that what the peasant needed was not so much
food as drink, and that whatever might be given him would find
its way to the dram-shop. In these quarters, therefore,
there were none of the sort of people whom I could render happy
by a present of money. But there were poor people who
appeared to me to be of a doubtful character. I noted down
the old woman, the woman with the children, and the peasant, and
decided that they must be seen to; but later on, as I was
occupied with the peculiarly unfortunate whom I expected to find
in this house, I made up my mind that there must be some order in
the aid which we should bestow; first came the most wretched, and
then this kind. But in the next quarters, and in the next
after that, it was the same story, all the people had to be
narrowly investigated before they could be helped. But
unfortunates of the sort whom a gift of money would convert from
unfortunate into fortunate people, there were none.
Mortifying as it is to me to avow this, I began to get
disenchanted, because I did not find among these people any thing
of the sort which I had expected. I had expected to find
peculiar people here; but, after making the round of all the
apartments, I was convinced that the inhabitants of these houses
were not peculiar people at all, but precisely such persons as
those among whom I lived. As there are among us, just so
among them; there were here those who were more or less good,
more or less stupid, happy and unhappy. The unhappy were
exactly such unhappy beings as exist among us, that is, unhappy
people whose unhappiness lies not in their external conditions,
but in themselves, a sort of unhappiness which it is impossible
to right by any sort of bank-note whatever.
The inhabitants of these houses constitute the lower class of
the city, which numbers in Moscow, probably, one hundred
thousand. There, in that house, are representatives of
every description of this class. There are petty employers,
and master-artisans, bootmakers, brush-makers, cabinet-makers,
turners, shoemakers, tailors, blacksmiths; there are cab-drivers,
young women living alone, and female pedlers, laundresses,
old-clothes dealers, money-lenders, day-laborers, and people
without any definite employment; and also beggars and dissolute
women.
Here were many of the very people whom I had seen at the
entrance to the Lyapinsky house; but here these people were
scattered about among the working-people. And moreover, I
had seen these people at their most unfortunate time, when they
had eaten and drunk up every thing, and when, cold, hungry, and
driven forth from the taverns, they were awaiting admission into
the free night lodging-house, and thence into the promised prison
for despatch to their places of residence, like heavenly manna;
but here I beheld them and a majority of workers, and at a time,
when by one means or another, they had procured three or five
kopeks for a lodging for the night, and sometimes a ruble for
food and drink.
And strange as the statement may seem, I here experienced
nothing resembling that sensation which I had felt in the
Lyapinsky house; but, on the contrary, during the first round,
both I and the students experienced an almost agreeable
feeling,—yes, but why do I say “almost
agreeable”? This is not true; the feeling called
forth by intercourse with these people, strange as it may sound,
was a distinctly agreeable one.
Our first impression was, that the greater part of the
dwellers here were working people and very good people at
that.
We found more than half the inhabitants at work: laundresses
bending over their tubs, cabinet-makers at their lathes, cobblers
on their benches. The narrow rooms were full of people, and
cheerful and energetic labor was in progress. There was an
odor of toilsome sweat and leather at the cobbler’s, of
shavings at the cabinet-maker’s; songs were often to be
heard, and glimpses could be had of brawny arms with sleeves
roiled high, quickly and skilfully making their accustomed
movements. Everywhere we were received cheerfully and
politely: hardly anywhere did our intrusion into the every-day
life of these people call forth that ambition, and desire to
exhibit their importance and to put us down, which the appearance
of the enumerators in the quarters of well-to-do people
evoked. It not only did not arouse this, but, on the
contrary, they answered all other questions properly, and without
attributing any special significance to them. Our questions
merely served them as a subject of mirth and jesting as to how
such and such a one was to be set down in the list, when he was
to be reckoned as two, and when two were to be reckoned as one,
and so forth.
We found many of them at dinner, or tea; and on every occasion
to our greeting: “bread and salt,” or “tea and
sugar,” they replied: “we beg that you will
partake,” and even stepped aside to make room for us.
Instead of the den with a constantly changing population, which
we had expected to find here, it turned out, that there were a
great many apartments in the house where people had been living
for a long time. One cabinet-maker with his men, and a
boot-maker with his journeymen, had lived there for ten
years. The boot-maker’s quarters were very dirty and
confined, but all the people at work were very cheerful. I
tried to enter into conversation with one of the workmen, being
desirous of inquiring into the wretchedness of his situation and
his debt to his master, but the man did not understand me and
spoke of his master and his life from the best point of view.
In one apartment lived an old man and his old woman.
They peddled apples. Their little chamber was warm, clean,
and full of goods. On the floor were spread straw mats:
they had got them at the apple-warehouse. They had chests,
a cupboard, a samovar, and crockery. In the corner there
were numerous images, and two lamps were burning before them; on
the wall hung fur coats covered with sheets. The old woman,
who had star-shaped wrinkles, and who was polite and talkative,
evidently delighted in her quiet, comfortable, existence.
Ivan Fedotitch, the landlord of the tavern and of these
quarters, left his establishment and came with us. He
jested in a friendly manner with many of the landlords of
apartments, addressing them all by their Christian names and
patronymics, and he gave us brief sketches of them. All
were ordinary people, like everybody else,—Martin
Semyonovitches, Piotr Piotrovitches, Marya
Ivanovnas,—people who did not consider themselves unhappy,
but who regarded themselves, and who actually were, just like the
rest of mankind.
We had been prepared to witness nothing except what was
terrible. And, all of a sudden, there was presented to us,
not only nothing that was terrible, but what was
good,—things which involuntarily compelled our
respect. And there were so many of these good people, that
the tattered, corrupt, idle people whom we came across now and
then among them, did not destroy the principal impression.
This was not so much of a surprise to the students as to
me. They simply went to fulfil a useful task, as they
thought, in the interests of science, and, at the same time, they
made their own chance observations; but I was a benefactor, I
went for the purpose of aiding the unfortunate, the corrupt,
vicious people, whom I supposed that I should meet with in this
house. And, behold, instead of unfortunate, corrupt, and
vicious people, I saw that the majority were laborious,
industrious, peaceable, satisfied, contented, cheerful, polite,
and very good folk indeed.
I felt particularly conscious of this when, in these quarters,
I encountered that same crying want which I had undertaken to
alleviate.
When I encountered this want, I always found that it had
already been relieved, that the assistance which I had intended
to render had already been given. This assistance had been
rendered before my advent, and rendered by whom? By the
very unfortunate, depraved creatures whom I had undertaken to
reclaim, and rendered in such a manner as I could not
compass.
In one basement lay a solitary old man, ill with the typhus
fever. There was no one with the old man. A widow and
her little daughter, strangers to him, but his neighbors round
the corner, looked after him, gave him tea and purchased medicine
for him out of their own means. In another lodging lay a
woman in puerperal fever. A woman who lived by vice was
rocking the baby, and giving her her bottle; and for two days,
she had been unremitting in her attention. The baby girl,
on being left an orphan, was adopted into the family of a tailor,
who had three children of his own. So there remained those
unfortunate idle people, officials, clerks, lackeys out of place,
beggars, drunkards, dissolute women, and children, who cannot be
helped on the spot with money, but whom it is necessary to know
thoroughly, to be planned and arranged for. I had simply
sought unfortunate people, the unfortunates of poverty, those who
could be helped by sharing with them our superfluity, and, as it
seemed to me, through some signal ill-luck, none such were to be
found; but I hit upon unfortunates to whom I should be obliged to
devote my time and care.
The unfortunates whom I noted down, divided themselves,
according to my ideas, into three sections, namely: people who
had lost their former advantageous position, and who were
awaiting a return to it (there were people of this sort from both
the lower and the higher class); next, dissolute women, of whom
there are a great many in these houses; and a third division,
children. More than all the rest, I found and noted down
people of the first division, who had forfeited their former
advantageous position, and who hoped to regain it. Of such
persons, especially from the governmental and official world,
there are a very great number in these houses. In almost
all the lodgings which we entered, with the landlord, Ivan
Fedotitch, he said to us: “Here you need not write down the
lodger’s card yourself; there is a man here who can do it,
if he only happens not to be intoxicated to-day.”
And Ivan Fedotitch called by name and patronymic this man, who
was always one of those persons who had fallen from a lofty
position. At Ivan Fedotitch’s call, there crawled
forth from some dark corner, a former wealthy member of the noble
or official class, generally intoxicated and always
undressed. If he was not drunk, he always readily acceded
to the task proposed to him, nodded significantly, frowned, set
down his remarks in learned phraseology, held the card neatly
printed on red paper in his dirty, trembling hands, and glanced
round at his fellow-lodgers with pride and contempt, as though
now triumphing in his education over those who had so often
humiliated him. He evidently enjoyed intercourse with that
world in which cards are printed on red paper, and with that
world of which he had once formed a part. Nearly always, in
answer to my inquiries about his life, the man began, not only
willingly, but eagerly, to relate the story of the misfortunes
which he had undergone,—which he had learned by rote like a
prayer,—and particularly of his former position, in which
he ought still to be by right of his education.
A great many such people were scattered over all the corners
of the Rzhanoff house. But one lodging was densely occupied
by them alone—both men and women. After we had
already entered, Ivan Fedotitch said to us: “Now, here are
some of the nobility.” The lodging was perfectly
crammed; nearly all of the people, forty in number, were at
home. More demoralized countenances, unhappy, aged, and
swollen, young, pallid, and distracted, were not to be seen in
the whole building. I conversed with several of them.
The story was nearly identical in all cases, only in various
stages of development. Every one of them had been rich, or
his father, his brother or his uncle was still wealthy, or his
father or he himself had had a very fine position. Then
misfortune had overtaken him, the blame for which rested either
on envious people, or on his own kind-heartedness, or some
special chance, and so he had lost every thing, and had been
forced to condescend to these surroundings to which he was not
accustomed, and which were hateful to him—among lice, rags,
among drunkards and corrupt persons, and to nourish himself on
bread and liver, and to extend his hand in beggary. All the
thoughts, desires, memories of these people were directed
exclusively to the past. The present appeared to them
something unreal, repulsive, and not worthy of attention.
Not one of them had any present. They had only memories of
the past, and expectations from the future, which might be
realized at any moment, and for the realization of which only a
very little was required; but this little they did not possess,
it was nowhere to be obtained, and this had been ruining their
whole future life in vain, in the case of one man, for a year, of
a second for five years, and of a third for thirty years.
All one needed was merely to dress respectably, so that he could
present himself to a certain personage, who was well-disposed
towards him another only needed to be able to dress, pay off his
debts, and get to Orel; a third required to redeem a small
property which was mortgaged, for the continuation of a law-suit,
which must be decided in his favor, and then all would be well
once more. They all declare that they merely require
something external, in order to stand once more in the position
which they regard as natural and happy in their own case.
Had my mind not been obscured by my pride as a benefactor, a
glance at their faces, both old and young, which were mostly weak
and sensitive, but amiable, would have given me to understand
that their misfortunes were irreparable by any external means,
that they could not be happy in any position whatever, if their
views of life were to remain unchanged, that they were in no wise
remarkable people, in remarkably unfortunate circumstances, but
that they were the same people who surround us on all sides, and
just like ourselves. I remember that intercourse with this
sort of unfortunates was peculiarly difficult for me. I now
understand why this was so; in them I beheld myself, as in a
mirror. If I had reflected on my own life and on the life
of the people in our circle, I should have seen that no real
difference existed between them.
If those about me dwell in spacious quarters, and in their own
houses on the Sivtzevy Vrazhok and on the Dimitrovka, and not in
the Rzhanoff house, and still eat and drink dainties, and not
liver and herrings with bread, that does not prevent them from
being exactly as unhappy. They are just as dissatisfied
with their own positions, they mourn over the past, and pine for
better things, and the improved position for which they long is
precisely the same as that which the inhabitants of the Rzhanoff
house long for; that is to say, one in which they may do as
little work as possible themselves, and derive the utmost
advantage from the labors of others. The difference is
merely one of degrees and time. If I had reflected at that
time, I should have understood this; but I did not reflect, and I
questioned these people, and wrote them down, supposing, that,
having learned all the particulars of their various conditions
and necessities, I could aid them later on. I did
not understand that such a man can only be helped by changing his
views of the world. But in order to change the views of
another, one must needs have better views himself, and live in
conformity with them; but mine were precisely the same as theirs,
and I lived in accordance with those views, which must undergo a
change, in order that these people might cease to be unhappy.
I did not see that these people were unhappy, not because they
had not, so to speak, nourishing food, but because their stomachs
had been spoiled, and because their appetites demanded not
nourishing but irritating viands; and I did not perceive that, in
order to help them, it was not necessary to give them food, but
that it was necessary to heal their disordered stomachs.
Although I am anticipating by so doing, I will mention here,
that, out of all these persons whom I noted down, I really did
not help a single one, in spite of the fact that for some of
them, that was done which they desired, and that which,
apparently, might have raised them. Three of their number
were particularly well known to me. All three, after
repeated rises and falls, are now in precisely the same situation
in which they were three years ago.
The second class of unfortunates whom I also expected to
assist later on, were the dissolute women; there were a very
great many of them, of all sorts, in the Rzhanoff
house—from those who were young and who resembled women, to
old ones, who were frightful and horrible, and who had lost every
semblance of humanity. The hope of being of assistance to
these women, which I had not at first entertained, occurred to me
later. This was in the middle of our rounds. We had
already worked out several mechanical tricks of procedure.
When we entered a new establishment, we immediately questioned
the landlady of the apartment; one of us sat down, clearing some
sort of a place for himself where he could write, and another
penetrated the corners, and questioned each man in all the nooks
of the apartment separately, and reported the facts to the one
who did the writing.
On entering a set of rooms in the basement, a student went to
hunt up the landlady, while I began to interrogate all who
remained in the place. The apartment was thus arranged: in
the centre was a room six arshins square, [59] and a small oven. From the oven
radiated four partitions, forming four tiny compartments.
In the first, the entrance slip, which had four bunks, there were
two persons—an old man and a woman. Immediately
adjoining this, was a rather long slip of a room; in it was the
landlord, a young fellow, dressed in a sleeveless gray woollen
jacket, a good-looking, very pale citizen. [60] On the left of the first corner,
was a third tiny chamber; there was one person asleep there,
probably a drunken peasant, and a woman in a pink blouse which
was loose in front and close-fitting behind. The fourth
chamber was behind the partition; the entrance to it was from the
landlord’s compartment.
The student went into the landlord’s room, and I
remained in the entrance compartment, and questioned the old man
and woman. The old man had been a master-printer, but now
had no means of livelihood. The woman was the wife of a
cook. I went to the third compartment, and questioned the
woman in the blouse about the sleeping man. She said that
he was a visitor. I asked the woman who she was. She
replied that she was a Moscow peasant. “What is your
business?” She burst into a laugh, and did not answer
me. “What do you live on?” I repeated, thinking
that she had not understood my question. “I sit in
the taverns,” she said. I did not comprehend, and
again I inquired: “What is your means of
livelihood?” She made no reply and laughed.
Women’s voices in the fourth compartment which we had not
yet entered, joined in the laugh. The landlord emerged from
his cabin and stepped up to us. He had evidently heard my
questions and the woman’s replies. He cast a stern
glance at the woman and turned to me: “She is a
prostitute,” said he, apparently pleased that he knew the
word in use in the language of the authorities, and that he could
pronounce it correctly. And having said this, with a
respectful and barely perceptible smile of satisfaction addressed
to me, he turned to the woman. And no sooner had he turned
to her, than his whole face altered. He said, in a
peculiar, scornful, hasty tone, such as is employed towards dogs:
“What do you jabber in that careless way for?
‘I sit in the taverns.’ You do sit in the
taverns, and that means, to talk business, that you are a
prostitute,” and again he uttered the word.
“She does not know the name for herself.” This
tone offended me. “It is not our place to abuse
her,” said I. “If all of us lived according to
the laws of God, there would be none of these women.”
“That’s the very point,” said the landlord,
with an awkward smile.
“Therefore, we should not reproach but pity them.
Are they to blame?”
I do not recollect just what I said, but I do remember that I
was vexed by the scornful tone of the landlord of these quarters
which were filled with women, whom he called prostitutes, and
that I felt compassion for this woman, and that I gave expression
to both feelings. No sooner had I spoken thus, than the
boards of the bed in the next compartment, whence the laugh had
proceeded, began to creak, and above the partition, which did not
reach to the ceiling, there appeared a woman’s curly and
dishevelled head, with small, swollen eyes, and a shining, red
face, followed by a second, and then by a third. They were
evidently standing on their beds, and all three were craning
their necks, and holding their breath with strained attention,
and gazing silently at us.
A troubled pause ensued. The student, who had been
smiling up to this time, became serious; the landlord grew
confused and dropped his eyes. All the women held their
breath, stared at me, and waited. I was more embarrassed
than any of them. I had not, in the least, anticipated that
a chance remark would produce such an effect. Like
Ezekiel’s field of death, strewn with dead men’s
bones, there was a quiver at the touch of the spirit, and the
dead bones stirred. I had uttered an unpremeditated word of
love and sympathy, and this word had acted on all as though they
had only been waiting for this very remark, in order that they
might cease to be corpses and might live. They all stared
at me, and waited for what would come next. They waited for
me to utter those words, and to perform those actions by reason
of which these bones might draw together, clothe themselves with
flesh, and spring into life. But I felt that I had no such
words, no such actions, by means of which I could continue what I
had begun; I was conscious, in the depths of my soul, that I had
lied [that I was just like them], [62] and there was
nothing further for me to say; and I began to inscribe on the
cards the names and callings of all the persons in this set of
apartments.
This incident led me into a fresh dilemma, to the thought of
how these unfortunates also might be helped. In my
self-delusion, I fancied that this would be very easy. I
said to myself: “Here, we will make a note of all these
women also, and later on when we [I did not specify to
myself who “we” were] write every thing out, we will
attend to these persons too.” I imagined that we, the
very ones who have brought and have been bringing these women to
this condition for several generations, would take thought some
fine day and reform all this. But, in the mean time, if I
had only recalled my conversation with the disreputable woman who
had been rocking the baby of the fever-stricken patient, I might
have comprehended the full extent of the folly of such a
supposition.
When we saw this woman with the baby, we thought that it was
her child. To the question, “Who was she?” she
had replied in a straightforward way that she was
unmarried. She did not say—a prostitute. Only
the master of the apartment made use of that frightful
word. The supposition that she had a child suggested to me
the idea of removing her from her position. I inquired:
“Is this your child?”
“No, it belongs to that woman yonder.”
“Why are you taking care of it?”
“Because she asked me; she is dying.”
Although my supposition proved to be erroneous, I continued my
conversation with her in the same spirit. I began to
question her as to who she was, and how she had come to such a
state. She related her history very readily and
simply. She was a Moscow myeshchanka, the daughter
of a factory hand. She had been left an orphan, and had
been adopted by an aunt. From her aunt’s she had
begun to frequent the taverns. The aunt was now dead.
When I asked her whether she did not wish to alter her mode of
life, my question, evidently, did not even arouse her
interest. How can one take an interest in the proposition
of a man, in regard to something absolutely impossible? She
laughed, and said: “And who would take me in with my yellow
ticket?”
“Well, but if a place could be found somewhere as
cook?” said I.
This thought occurred to me because she was a stout, ruddy
woman, with a kindly, round, and rather stupid face. Cooks
are often like that. My words evidently did not please
her. She repeated:
“A cook—but I don’t know how to make
bread,” said she, and she laughed. She said that she
did not know how; but I saw from the expression of her
countenance that she did not wish to become a cook, that she
regarded the position and calling of a cook as low.
This woman, who in the simplest possible manner was
sacrificing every thing that she had for the sick woman, like the
widow in the Gospels, at the same time, like many of her
companions, regarded the position of a person who works as low
and deserving of scorn. She had been brought up to live not
by work, but by this life which was considered the natural one
for her by those about her. In that lay her
misfortune. And she fell in with this misfortune and clung
to her position. This led her to frequent the
taverns. Which of us—man or woman—will correct
her false view of life? Where among us are the people to be
found who are convinced that every laborious life is more worthy
of respect than an idle life,—who are convinced of this,
and who live in conformity with this belief, and who in
conformity with this conviction value and respect people?
If I had thought of this, I might have understood that neither I,
nor any other person among my acquaintances, could heal this
complaint.
I might have understood that these amazed and affected heads
thrust over the partition indicated only surprise at the sympathy
expressed for them, but not in the least a hope of reclamation
from their dissolute life. They do not perceive the
immorality of their life. They see that they are despised
and cursed, but for what they are thus despised they cannot
comprehend. Their life, from childhood, has been spent
among just such women, who, as they very well know, always have
existed, and are indispensable to society, and so indispensable
that there are governmental officials to attend to their legal
existence. Moreover, they know that they have power over
men, and can bring them into subjection, and rule them often more
than other women. They see that their position in society
is recognized by women and men and the authorities, in spite of
their continual curses, and therefore, they cannot understand why
they should reform.
In the course of one of the tours, one of the students told me
that in a certain lodging, there was a woman who was bargaining
for her thirteen-year-old daughter. Being desirous of
rescuing this girl, I made a trip to that lodging
expressly. Mother and daughter were living in the greatest
poverty. The mother, a small, dark-complexioned, dissolute
woman of forty, was not only homely, but repulsively
homely. The daughter was equally disagreeable. To all
my pointed questions about their life, the mother responded
curtly, suspiciously, and in a hostile way, evidently feeling
that I was an enemy, with evil intentions; the daughter made no
reply, did not look at her mother, and evidently trusted the
latter fully. They inspired me with no sincere pity, but
rather with disgust. But I made up my mind that the
daughter must be rescued, and that I would interest ladies who
pitied the sad condition of these women, and send them
hither. But if I had reflected on the mother’s long
life in the past, of how she had given birth to, nursed and
reared this daughter in her situation, assuredly without the
slightest assistance from outsiders, and with heavy
sacrifices—if I had reflected on the view of life which
this woman had formed, I should have understood that there was,
decidedly, nothing bad or immoral in the mother’s act: she
had done and was doing for her daughter all that she could, that
is to say, what she considered the best for herself. This
daughter could be forcibly removed from her mother; but it would
be impossible to convince the mother that she was doing wrong, in
selling her daughter. If any one was to be saved, then it
must be this woman—the mother ought to have been saved;
[and that long before, from that view of life which is approved
by every one, according to which a woman may live unmarried, that
is, without bearing children and without work, and simply for the
satisfaction of the passions. If I had thought of this, I
should have understood that the majority of the ladies whom I
intended to send thither for the salvation of that little girl,
not only live without bearing children and without working, and
serving only passion, but that they deliberately rear their
daughters for the same life; one mother takes her daughter to the
taverns, another takes hers to balls. But both mothers hold
the same view of the world, namely, that a woman must satisfy
man’s passions, and that for this she must be fed, dressed,
and cared for. Then how are our ladies to reform this woman
and her daughter? [66] ]
Still more remarkable were my relations to the children.
In my rôle of benefactor, I turned my attention to
the children also, being desirous to save these innocent beings
from perishing in that lair of vice, and noting them down in
order to attend to them afterwards.
Among the children, I was especially struck with a
twelve-year-old lad named Serozha. I was heartily sorry for
this bold, intelligent lad, who had lived with a cobbler, and who
had been left without a shelter because his master had been put
in jail, and I wanted to do good to him.
I will here relate the upshot of my benevolence in his case,
because my experience with this child is best adapted to show my
false position in the rôle of benefactor. I
took the boy home with me and put him in the kitchen. It
was impossible, was it not, to take a child who had lived in a
den of iniquity in among my own children? And I considered
myself very kind and good, because he was a care, not to me, but
to the servants in the kitchen, and because not I but the cook
fed him, and because I gave him some cast-off clothing to
wear. The boy staid a week. During that week I said a
few words to him as I passed on two occasions and in the course
of my strolls, I went to a shoemaker of my acquaintance, and
proposed that he should take the lad as an apprentice. A
peasant who was visiting me, invited him to go to the country,
into his family, as a laborer; the boy refused, and at the end of
the week he disappeared. I went to the Rzhanoff house to
inquire after him. He had returned there, but was not at
home when I went thither. For two days already, he had been
going to the Pryesnensky ponds, where he had hired himself out at
thirty kopeks a day in some procession of savages in costume, who
led about elephants. Something was being presented to the
public there. I went a second time, but he was so
ungrateful that he evidently avoided me. Had I then
reflected on the life of that boy and on my own, I should have
understood that this boy was spoiled because he had discovered
the possibility of a merry life without labor, and that he had
grown unused to work. And I, with the object of benefiting
and reclaiming him, had taken him to my house, where he
saw—what? My children,—both older and younger
than himself, and of the same age,—who not only never did
any work for themselves, but who made work for others by every
means in their power, who soiled and spoiled every thing about
them, who ate rich, dainty, and sweet viands, broke china, and
flung to the dogs food which would have been a tidbit to this
lad. If I had rescued him from the abyss, and had
taken him to that nice place, then he must acquire those views
which prevailed in the life of that nice place; but by these
views, he understood that in that fine place he must so live that
he should not toil, but eat and drink luxuriously, and lead a
joyous life. It is true that he did not know that my
children bore heavy burdens in the acquisition of the declensions
of Latin and Greek grammar, and that he could not have understood
the object of these labors. But it is impossible not to see
that if he had understood this, the influence of my
children’s example on him would have been even
stronger. He would then have comprehended that my children
were being educated in this manner, so that, while doing no work
now, they might be in a position hereafter, also profiting by
their diplomas, to work as little as possible, and to enjoy the
pleasures of life to as great an extent as possible. He did
understand this, and he would not go with the peasant to tend
cattle, and to eat potatoes and kvas with him, but he went
to the zoölogical garden in the costume of a savage, to lead
the elephant at thirty kopeks a day.
I might have understood how clumsy I was, when I was rearing
my children in the most utter idleness and luxury, to reform
other people and their children, who were perishing from idleness
in what I called the den of the Rzhanoff house, where,
nevertheless, three-fourths of the people toil for themselves and
for others. But I understood nothing of this.
There were a great many children in the Rzhanoff house, who
were in the same pitiable plight; there were the children of
dissolute women, there were orphans, there were children who had
been picked up in the streets by beggars. They were all
very wretched. But my experience with Serozha showed me
that I, living the life I did, was not in a position to help
them.
While Serozha was living with us, I noticed in myself an
effort to hide our life from him, in particular the life of our
children. I felt that all my efforts to direct him towards
a good, industrious life, were counteracted by the examples of
our lives and by that of our children. It is very easy to
take a child away from a disreputable woman, or from a
beggar. It is very easy, when one has the money, to wash,
clean and dress him in neat clothing, to support him, and even to
teach him various sciences; but it is not only difficult for us,
who do not earn our own bread, but quite the reverse, to teach
him to work for his bread, but it is impossible, because we, by
our example, and even by those material and valueless
improvements of his life, inculcate the contrary. A puppy
can be taken, tended, fed, and taught to fetch and carry, and one
may take pleasure in him: but it is not enough to tend a man, to
feed and teach him Greek; we must teach the man how to
live,—that is, to take as little as possible from others,
and to give as much as possible; and we cannot help teaching him
to do the contrary, if we take him into our houses, or into an
institution founded for this purpose.
This feeling of compassion for people, and of disgust with
myself, which I had experienced in the Lyapinsky house, I
experienced no longer. I was completely absorbed in the
desire to carry out the scheme which I had concocted,—to do
good to those people whom I should meet here. And, strange
to say, it would appear, that, to do good—to give money to
the needy—is a very good deed, and one that should dispose
me to love for the people, but it turned out the reverse: this
act produced in me ill-will and an inclination to condemn
people. But during our first evening tour, a scene occurred
exactly like that in the Lyapinsky house, and it called forth a
wholly different sentiment.
It began by my finding in one set of apartments an unfortunate
individual, of precisely the sort who require immediate
aid. I found a hungry woman who had had nothing to eat for
two days.
It came about thus: in one very large and almost empty
night-lodging, I asked an old woman whether there were many poor
people who had nothing to eat? The old woman reflected, and
then told me of two; and then, as though she had just
recollected, “Why, here is one of them,” said she,
glancing at one of the occupied bunks. “I think that
woman has had no food.”
“Really? Who is she?”
“She was a dissolute woman: no one wants any thing to do
with her now, so she has no way of getting any thing. The
landlady has had compassion on her, but now she means to turn her
out . . . Agafya, hey there, Agafya!” cried the woman.
We approached, and something rose up in the bunk. It was
a woman haggard and dishevelled, whose hair was half gray, and
who was as thin as a skeleton, dressed in a ragged and dirty
chemise, and with particularly brilliant and staring eyes.
She looked past us with her staring eyes, clutched at her jacket
with one thin hand, in order to cover her bony breast which was
disclosed by her tattered chemise, and oppressed, she cried,
“What is it? what is it?” I asked her about her
means of livelihood. For a long time she did not
understand, and said, “I don’t know myself; they
persecute me.” I asked her,—it puts me to
shame, my hand refuses to write it,—I asked her whether it
was true that she had nothing to eat? She answered in the
same hurried, feverish tone, staring at me the
while,—“No, I had nothing yesterday, and I have had
nothing to-day.”
The sight of this woman touched me, but not at all as had been
the case in the Lyapinsky house; there, my pity for these people
made me instantly feel ashamed of myself: but here, I rejoiced
because I had at last found what I had been seeking,—a
hungry person.
I gave her a ruble, and I recollect being very glad that
others saw it. The old woman, on seeing this, immediately
begged money of me also. It afforded me such pleasure to
give, that, without finding out whether it was necessary to give
or not, I gave something to the old woman too. The old
woman accompanied me to the door, and the people standing in the
corridor heard her blessing me. Probably the questions
which I had put with regard to poverty, had aroused expectation,
and several persons followed us. In the corridor also, they
began to ask me for money. Among those who begged were some
drunken men, who aroused an unpleasant feeling in me; but, having
once given to the old woman, I had no might to refuse these
people, and I began to give. As long as I continued to
give, people kept coming up; and excitement ran through all the
lodgings. People made them appearance on the stairs and
galleries, and followed me. As I emerged into the
court-yard, a little boy ran swiftly down one of the staircases
thrusting the people aside. He did not see me, and
exclaimed hastily: “He gave Agashka a ruble!”
When he reached the ground, the boy joined the crowd which was
following me. I went out into the street: various
descriptions of people followed me, and asked for money. I
distributed all my small change, and entered an open shop with
the request that the shopkeeper would change a ten-ruble bill for
me. And then the same thing happened as at the Lyapinsky
house. A terrible confusion ensued. Old women,
noblemen, peasants, and children crowded into the shop with
outstretched hands; I gave, and interrogated some of them as to
their lives, and took notes. The shopkeeper, turning up the
furred points of the collar of his coat, sat like a stuffed
creature, glancing at the crowd occasionally, and then fixing his
eyes beyond them again. He evidently, like every one else,
felt that this was foolish, but he could not say so.
The poverty and beggary in the Lyapinsky house had horrified
me, and I felt myself guilty of it; I felt the desire and the
possibility of improvement. But now, precisely the same
scene produced on me an entirely different effect; I experienced,
in the first place, a malevolent feeling towards many of those
who were besieging me; and in the second place, uneasiness as to
what the shopkeepers and porters would think of me.
On my return home that day, I was troubled in my soul. I
felt that what I had done was foolish and immoral. But, as
is always the result of inward confusion, I talked a great deal
about the plan which I had undertaken, as though I entertained
not the slightest doubt of my success.
On the following day, I went to such of the people whom I had
inscribed on my list, as seemed to me the most wretched of all,
and those who, as it seemed to me, would be the easiest to
help. As I have already said, I did not help any of these
people. It proved to be more difficult to help them than I
had thought. And either because I did not know how, or
because it was impossible, I merely imitated these people, and
did not help any one. I visited the Rzhanoff house several
times before the final tour, and on every occasion the very same
thing occurred: I was beset by a throng of beggars in whose mass
I was completely lost. I felt the impossibility of doing
any thing, because there were too many of them, and because I
felt ill-disposed towards them because there were so many of
them; and in addition to this, each one separately did not
incline me in his favor. I was conscious that every one of
them was telling me an untruth, or less than the whole truth, and
that he saw in me merely a purse from which money might be
drawn. And it very frequently seemed to me, that the very
money which they squeezed out of me, rendered their condition
worse instead of improving it. The oftener I went to that
house, the more I entered into intercourse with the people there,
the more apparent became to me the impossibility of doing any
thing; but still I did not give up any scheme until the last
night tour.
The remembrance of that last tour is particularly mortifying
to me. On other occasions I had gone thither alone, but
twenty of us went there on this occasion. At seven
o’clock, all who wished to take part in this final night
round, began to assemble at my house. Nearly all of them
were strangers to me,—students, one officer, and two of my
society acquaintances, who, uttering the usual,
“C’est très intèressant!”
had asked me to include them in the number of the
census-takers.
My worldly acquaintances had dressed up especially for this,
in some sort of hunting-jacket, and tall, travelling boots, in a
costume in which they rode and went hunting, and which, in their
opinion, was appropriate for an excursion to a
night-lodging-house. They took with them special note-books
and remarkable pencils. They were in that peculiarly
excited state of mind in which men set off on a hunt, to a duel,
or to the wars. The most apparent thing about them was
their folly and the falseness of our position, but all the rest
of us were in the same false position. Before we set out,
we held a consultation, after the fashion of a council of war, as
to how we should begin, how divide our party, and so on.
This consultation was exactly such as takes place in councils,
assemblages, committees; that is to say, each person spoke, not
because he had any thing to say or to ask, but because each one
cudgelled his brain for something that he could say, so that he
might not fall short of the rest. But, among all these
discussions, no one alluded to that beneficence of which I had so
often spoken to them all. Mortifying as this was to me, I
felt that it was indispensable that I should once more remind
them of benevolence, that is, of the point, that we were to
observe and take notes of all those in destitute circumstances
whom we should encounter in the course of our rounds. I had
always felt ashamed to speak of this; but now, in the midst of
all our excited preparations for our expedition, I could hardly
utter the words. All listened to me, as it seemed to me,
with sorrow, and, at the same time, all agreed in words; but it
was evident that they all knew that it was folly, and that
nothing would come of it, and all immediately began again to talk
about something else. This went on until the time arrived
for us to set out, and we started.
We reached the tavern, roused the waiters, and began to sort
our papers. When we were informed that the people had heard
about this round, and were leaving their quarters, we asked the
landlord to lock the gates; and we went ourselves into the yard
to reason with the fleeing people, assuring them that no one
would demand their tickets. I remember the strange and
painful impression produced on me by these alarmed night-lodgers:
ragged, half-dressed, they all seemed tall to me by the light of
the lantern and the gloom of the court-yard. Frightened and
terrifying in their alarm, they stood in a group around the
foul-smelling out-house, and listened to our assurances, but they
did not believe us, and were evidently prepared for any thing,
like hunted wild beasts, provided only that they could escape
from us. Gentlemen in divers shapes—as policemen,
both city and rural, and as examining judges, and
judges—hunt them all their lives, in town and country, on
the highway and in the streets, and in the taverns, and in
night-lodging houses; and now, all of a sudden, these gentlemen
had come and locked the gates, merely in order to count them: it
was as difficult for them to believe this, as for hares to
believe that dogs have come, not to chase but to count
them. But the gates were locked, and the startled lodgers
returned: and we, breaking up into groups, entered also.
With me were the two society men and two students. In front
of us, in the dark, went Vanya, in his coat and white trousers,
with a lantern, and we followed. We went to quarters with
which I was familiar. I knew all the establishments, and
some of the people; but the majority of the people were new, and
the spectacle was new, and more dreadful than the one which I had
witnessed in the Lyapinsky house. All the lodgings were
full, all the bunks were occupied, not by one person only, but
often by two. The sight was terrible in that narrow space
into which the people were huddled, and men and women were mixed
together. All the women who were not dead drunk slept with
men; and women with two children did the same. The sight
was terrible, on account of the poverty, dirt, rags, and terror
of the people. And it was chiefly dreadful on account of
the vast numbers of people who were in this situation. One
lodging, and then a second like it, and a third, and a tenth, and
a twentieth, and still there was no end to them. And
everywhere there was the same foul odor, the same close
atmosphere, the same crowding, the same mingling of the sexes,
the same men and women intoxicated to stupidity, and the same
terror, submission and guilt on all faces; and again I was
overwhelmed with shame and pain, as in the Lyapinsky house, and I
understood that what I had undertaken was abominable and foolish
and therefore impracticable. And I no longer took notes of
anybody, and I asked no questions, knowing that nothing would
come of this.
I was deeply pained. In the Lyapinsky house I had been
like a man who has seen a fearful wound, by chance, on the body
of another man. He is sorry for the other man, he is
ashamed that he has not pitied the man before, and he can still
rise to the succor of the sufferer. But now I was like a
physician, who has come with his medicine to the sick man, has
uncovered his sore, and examined it, and who must confess to
himself that every thing that he has done has been in vain, and
that his remedy is good for nothing.
This visit dealt the final blow to my self-delusion. It
now appeared indisputable to me, that what I had undertaken was
not only foolish but loathsome.
But, in spite of the fact that I was aware of this, it seemed
to me that I could not abandon the whole thing on the spot.
It seemed to me that I was bound to carry out this enterprise, in
the first place, because by my article, by my visits and
promises, I had aroused the expectations of the poor; in the
second, because by my article also, and by my talk, I had aroused
the sympathies of benevolent persons, many of whom had promised
me their co-operation both in personal labor and in money.
And I expected that both sets of people would turn to me for an
answer to this.
What happened to me, so far as the appeal of the needy to me
is concerned, was as follows: By letter and personal application
I received more than a hundred; these applications were all from
the wealthy-poor, if I may so express myself. I went to see
some of them, and some of them received no answer. Nowhere
did I succeed in doing any thing. All applications to me
were from persons who had once occupied privileged positions (I
thus designate those in which people receive more from others
than they give), who had lost them, and who wished to occupy them
again. To one, two hundred rubles were indispensable, in
order that he might prop up a failing business, and complete the
education of his children which had been begun; another wanted a
photographic outfit; a third wanted his debts paid, and
respectable clothing purchased for him; a fourth needed a piano,
in order to perfect himself and support his family by giving
lessons. But the majority did not stipulate for any given
sum of money, and simply asked for assistance; and when I came to
examine into what was required, it turned out that their demands
grew in proportion to the aid, and that there was not and could
not be any way of satisfying them. I repeat, that it is
very possible that this arose from the fact that I did not
understand how; but I did not help any one, although I sometimes
endeavored to do so.
A very strange and unexpected thing happened to me as regards
the co-operation of the benevolently disposed. Out of all
the persons who had promised me financial aid, and who had even
stated the number of rubles, not a single one handed to me for
distribution among the poor one solitary ruble. But
according to the pledges which had been given me, I could reckon
on about three thousand rubles; and out of all these people, not
one remembered our former discussions, or gave me a single
kopek. Only the students gave the money which had been
assigned to them for their work on the census, twelve rubles, I
think. So my whole scheme, which was to have been expressed
by tens of thousands of rubles contributed by the wealthy, for
hundreds and thousands of poor people who were to be rescued from
poverty and vice, dwindled down to this, that I gave away,
haphazard, a few scores of rubles to those people who asked me
for them, and that there remained in my hands twelve rubies
contributed by the students, and twenty-five sent to me by the
City Council for my labor as a superintendent, and I absolutely
did not know to whom to give them.
The whole matter came to an end. And then, before my
departure for the country, on the Sunday before carnival, I went
to the Rzhanoff house in the morning, in order to get rid of
those thirty-seven rubles before I should leave Moscow, and to
distribute them to the poor. I made the round of the
quarters with which I was familiar, and in them found only one
sick man, to whom I gave five rubles. There was no one else
there to give any to. Of course many began to beg of
me. But as I had not known them at first, so I did not know
them now, and I made up my mind to take counsel with Ivan
Fedotitch, the landlord of the tavern, as to the persons upon
whom it would be proper to bestow the remaining thirty-two
rubies.
It was the first day of the carnival. Everybody was
dressed up, and everybody was full-fed, and many were already
intoxicated. In the court-yard, close to the house, stood
an old man, a rag-picker, in a tattered smock and bast shoes,
sorting over the booty in his basket, tossing out leather, iron,
and other stuff in piles, and breaking into a merry song, with a
fine, powerful voice. I entered into conversation with
him. He was seventy years old, he was alone in the world,
and supported himself by his calling of a rag-picker; and not
only did he utter no complaints, but he said that he had plenty
to eat and drink. I inquired of him as to especially needy
persons. He flew into a rage, and said plainly that there
were no needy people, except drunkards and lazy men; but, on
learning my object, he asked me for a five-kopek piece to buy a
drink, and ran off to the tavern. I too entered the tavern
to see Ivan Fedotitch, and commission him to distribute the money
which I had left. The tavern was full; gayly-dressed,
intoxicated girls were flitting in and out; all the tables were
occupied; there were already a great many drunken people, and in
the small room the harmonium was being played, and two persons
were dancing. Out of respect to me, Ivan Fedotitch ordered
that the dance should be stopped, and seated himself with me at a
vacant table. I said to him, that, as he knew his tenants,
would not he point out to me the most needy among them; that I
had been entrusted with the distribution of a little money, and,
therefore, would he indicate the proper persons?
Good-natured Ivan Fedotitch (he died a year later), although he
was pressed with business, broke away from it for a time, in
order to serve me. He meditated, and was evidently
undecided. An elderly waiter heard us, and joined the
conference.
They began to discuss the claims of persons, some of whom I
knew, but still they could not come to any agreement.
“The Paramonovna,” suggested the waiter.
“Yes, that would do. Sometimes she has nothing to
eat. Yes, but then she tipples.”—“Well,
what of that? That makes no
difference.”—“Well, Sidoron Ivanovitch has
children. He would do.” But Ivan Fedotitch had
his doubts about Sidoron Ivanovitch also. “Akulina
shall have some. There, now, give something to the
blind.” To this I responded. I saw him at
once. He was a blind old man of eighty years, without kith
or kin. It seemed as though no condition could be more
painful, and I went immediately to see him. He was lying on
a feather-bed, on a high bedstead, drunk; and, as he did not see
me, he was scolding his comparatively youthful female companion
in a frightful bass voice, and in the very worst kind of
language. They also summoned an armless boy and his
mother. I saw that Ivan Fedotitch was in great straits, on
account of his conscientiousness, for me knew that whatever was
given would immediately pass to his tavern. But I had to
get rid of my thirty-two rubles, so I insisted; and in one way
and another, and half wrongfully to boot, we assigned and
distributed them. Those who received them were mostly well
dressed, and we had not far to go to find them, as they were
there in the tavern. The armless boy appeared in wrinkled
boots, and a red shirt and vest. With this my charitable
career came to an end, and I went off to the country; irritated
at others, as is always the case, because I myself had done a
stupid and a bad thing. My benevolence had ended in
nothing, and it ceased altogether, but the current of thoughts
and feelings which it had called up with me not only did not come
to an end, but the inward work went on with redoubled force.
What was its nature?
I had lived in the country, and there I was connected with the
rustic poor. Not out of humility, which is worse than
pride, but for the sake of telling the truth, which is
indispensable for the understanding of the whole course of my
thoughts and sentiments, I will say that in the country I did
very little for the poor, but the demands which were made upon me
were so modest that even this little was of use to the people,
and formed around me an atmosphere of affection and union with
the people, in which it was possible to soothe the gnawing
sensation of remorse at the independence of my life. On
going to the city, I had hoped to be able to live in the same
manner. But here I encountered want of an entirely
different sort. City want was both less real, and more
exacting and cruel, than country poverty. But the principal
point was, that there was so much of it in one spot, that it
produced on me a frightful impression. The impression which
I experienced in the Lyapinsky house had, at the very first, made
me conscious of the deformity of my own life. This feeling
was genuine and very powerful. But, notwithstanding its
genuineness and power, I was, at that time, so weak that I feared
the alteration in my life to which this feeling commended me, and
I resorted to a compromise. I believed what everybody told
me, and everybody has said, ever since the world was
made,—that there is nothing evil in wealth and luxury, that
they are given by God, that one may continue to live as a rich
man, and yet help the needy. I believed this, and I tried
to do it. I wrote an essay, in which I summoned all rich
people to my assistance. The rich people all acknowledged
themselves morally bound to agree with me, but evidently they
either did not wish to do any thing, or they could not do any
thing or give any thing to the poor. I began to visit the
poor, and I beheld what I had not in the least expected. On
the one hand, I beheld in those dens, as I called them, people
whom it was not conceivable that I should help, because they were
working people, accustomed to labor and privation, and therefore
standing much higher and having a much firmer foothold in life
than myself; on the other hand, I saw unfortunate people whom I
could not aid because they were exactly like myself. The
majority of the unfortunates whom I saw were unhappy only because
they had lost the capacity, desire, and habit of earning their
own bread; that is to say, their unhappiness consisted in the
fact that they were precisely such persons as myself.
I found no unfortunates who were sick, hungry, or cold, to
whom I could render immediate assistance, with the solitary
exception of hungry Agafya. And I became convinced, that,
on account of my remoteness from the lives of those people whom I
desired to help, it would be almost impossible to find any such
unfortunates, because all actual wants had already been supplied
by the very people among whom these unfortunates live; and, most
of all, I was convinced that money cannot effect any change in
the life led by these unhappy people.
I was convinced of all this, but out of false shame at
abandoning what I had once undertaken, because of my
self-delusion as a benefactor, I went on with this matter for a
tolerably long time,—and would have gone on with it until
it came to nothing of itself,—so that it was with the
greatest difficulty that, with the help of Ivan Fedotitch, I got
rid, after a fashion, as well as I could, in the tavern of the
Rzhanoff house, of the thirty-seven rubles which I did not regard
as belonging to me.
Of course I might have gone on with this business, and have
made out of it a semblance of benevolence; by urging the people
who had promised me money, I might have collected more, I might
have distributed this money, and consoled myself with my charity;
but I perceived, on the one hand, that we rich people neither
wish nor are able to share a portion of our a superfluity with
the poor (we have so many wants of our own), and that money
should not be given to any one, if the object really be to do
good and not to give money itself at haphazard, as I had done in
the Rzhanoff tavern. And I gave up the whole thing, and
went off to the country with despair in my heart.
In the country I tried to write an essay about all this that I
had experienced, and to tell why my undertaking had not
succeeded. I wanted to justify myself against the
reproaches which had been made to me on the score of my article
on the census; I wanted to convict society of its in difference,
and to state the causes in which this city poverty has its birth,
and the necessity of combating it, and the means of doing so
which I saw.
I began this essay at once, and it seemed to me that in it I
was saying a very great deal that was important. But toil
as I would over it, and in spite of the abundance of materials,
in spite of the superfluity of them even, I could not get though
that essay; and so I did not finish it until the present year,
because of the irritation under the influence of which I wrote,
because I had not gone through all that was requisite in order to
bear myself properly in relation to this essay, because I did not
simply and clearly acknowledge the cause of all this,—a
very simple cause, which had its root in myself.
In the domain of morals, one very remarkable and too little
noted phenomenon presents itself.
If I tell a man who knows nothing about it, what I know about
geology, astronomy, history, physics, and mathematics, that man
receives entirely new information, and he never says to me:
“Well, what is there new in that? Everybody knows
that, and I have known it this long while.” But tell
that same man the most lofty truth, expressed in the clearest,
most concise manner, as it has never before been expressed, and
every ordinary individual, especially one who takes no particular
interest in moral questions, or, even more, one to whom the moral
truth stated by you is displeasing, will infallibly say to you:
“Well, who does not know that? That was known and
said long ago.” It really seems to him that this has
been said long ago and in just this way. Only those to whom
moral truths are dear and important know how important and
precious they are, and with what prolonged labor the elucidation,
the simplification, of moral truths, their transit from the state
of a misty, indefinitely recognized supposition, and desire, from
indistinct, incoherent expressions, to a firm and definite
expression, unavoidably demanding corresponding concessions, are
attained.
We have all become accustomed to think that moral instruction
is a most absurd and tiresome thing, in which there can be
nothing new or interesting; and yet all human life, together with
all the varied and complicated activities, apparently
independent, of morality, both governmental and scientific, and
artistic and commercial, has no other aim than the greater and
greater elucidation, confirmation, simplification, and
accessibility of moral truth.
I remember that I was once walking along the street in Moscow,
and in front of me I saw a man come out and gaze attentively at
the stones of the sidewalk, after which he selected one stone,
seated himself on it, and began to plane (as it seemed to me) or
to rub it with the greatest diligence and force.
“What is he doing to the sidewalk?” I said to
myself. On going close to him, I saw what the man was
doing. He was a young fellow from a meat-shop; he was
whetting his knife on the stone of the pavement. He was not
thinking at all of the stones when he scrutinized them, still
less was he thinking of them when he was accomplishing his task:
he was whetting his knife. He was obliged to whet his knife
so that he could cut the meat; but to me it seemed as though he
were doing something to the stones of the sidewalk. Just so
it appears as though humanity were occupied with commerce,
conventions, wars, sciences, arts; but only one business is of
importance to it, and with only one business is it occupied: it
is elucidating to itself those moral laws by which it
lives. The moral laws are already in existence; humanity is
only elucidating them, and this elucidation seems unimportant and
imperceptible for any one who has no need of moral laws, who does
not wish to live by them. But this elucidation of the moral
law is not only weighty, but the only real business of all
humanity. This elucidation is imperceptible just as the
difference between the dull and the sharp knife is
imperceptible. The knife is a knife all the same, and for a
person who is not obliged to cut any thing with this knife, the
difference between the dull and the sharp one is
imperceptible. For the man who has come to an understanding
that his whole life depends on the greater or less degree of
sharpness in the knife,—for such a man, every whetting of
it is weighty, and that man knows that the knife is a knife only
when it is sharp, when it cuts that which needs cutting.
This is what happened to me, when I began to write my
essay. It seemed to me that I knew all about it, that I
understood every thing connected with those questions which had
produced on me the impressions of the Lyapinsky house, and the
census; but when I attempted to take account of them and to
demonstrate them, it turned out that the knife would not cut, and
that it must be whetted. And it is only now, after the
lapse of three years, that I have felt that my knife is
sufficiently sharp, so that I can cut what I choose. I have
learned very little that is new. My thoughts are all
exactly the same, but they were duller then, and they all
scattered and would not unite on any thing; there was no edge to
them; they would not concentrate on one point, on the simplest
and clearest decision, as they have now concentrated
themselves.
I remember that during the entire period of my unsuccessful
efforts at helping the inhabitants of the city, I presented to
myself the aspect of a man who should attempt to drag another man
out of a swamp while he himself was standing on the same unstable
ground. Every attempt of mine had made me conscious of the
untrustworthy character of the soil on which I stood. I
felt that I was in the swamp myself, but this consciousness did
not cause me to look more narrowly at my own feet, in order to
learn upon what I was standing; I kept on seeking some external
means, outside myself, of helping the existing evil.
I then felt that my life was bad, and that it was impossible
to live in that manner. But from the fact that my life was
bad, and that it was impossible to live in that manner, I did not
draw the very simple and clear deduction that it was necessary to
amend my life and to live better, but I knew the terrible
deduction that in order to live well myself, I must needs reform
the lives of others; and so I began to reform the lives of
others. I lived in the city, and I wished to reform the
lives of those who lived in the city; but I soon became convinced
that this I could not by any possibility accomplish, and I began
to meditate on the inherent characteristics of city life and city
poverty.
“What are city life and city poverty? Why, when I
am living in the city, cannot I help the city poor?”
I asked myself. I answered myself that I could not do
any thing for them, in the first place, because there were too
many of them here in one spot; in the second place, because all
the poor people here were entirely different from the country
poor. Why were there so many of them here? and in what did
their peculiarity, as opposed to the country poor, consist?
There was one and the same answer to both questions. There
were a great many of them here, because here all those people who
have no means of subsistence in the country collect around the
rich; and their peculiarity lies in this, that they are not
people who have come from the country to support themselves in
the city (if there are any city paupers, those who have been born
here, and whose fathers and grandfathers were born here, then
those fathers and grandfathers came hither for the purpose of
earning their livelihood). What is the meaning of this:
to earn one’s livelihood in the city? In the
words “to earn one’s livelihood in the city,”
there is something strange, resembling a jest, when you reflect
on their significance. How is it that people go from the
country,—that is to say, from the places where there are
forests, meadows, grain, and cattle, where all the wealth of the
earth lies,—to earn their livelihood in a place where there
are neither trees, nor grass, nor even land, and only stones and
dust? What is the significance of the words “to earn
a livelihood in the city,” which are in such constant use,
both by those who earn the livelihood, and by those who furnish
it, as though it were something perfectly clear and
comprehensible?
I recall the hundreds and thousands of city people, both those
who live well and the needy, with whom I have conversed on the
reason why they came hither: and all without exception said, that
they had come from the country to earn their living; that in
Moscow, where people neither sow nor reap,—that in Moscow
there is plenty of every thing, and that, therefore, it is only
in Moscow that they can earn the money which they require in the
country for bread and a cottage and a horse, and articles of
prime necessity. But assuredly, in the country lies the
source of all riches; there only is real wealth,—bread, and
forests, and horses, and every thing. And why, above all,
take away from the country that which dwellers in the country
need,—flour, oats, horses, and cattle?
Hundreds of times did I discuss this matter with peasants
living in town; and from my discussions with them, and from my
observations, it has been made apparent to me, that the
congregation of country people in the city is partly
indispensable because they cannot otherwise support themselves,
partly voluntary, and that they are attracted to the city by the
temptations of the city.
It is true, that the position of the peasant is such that, for
the satisfaction of his demands made on him in the country, he
cannot extricate himself otherwise than by selling the grain and
the cattle which he knows will be indispensable to him; and he is
forced, whether he will or no, to go to the city in order there
to win back his bread. But it is also true, that the luxury
of city life, and the comparative ease with which money is there
to be earned, attract him thither; and under the pretext of
gaining his living in the town, he betakes himself thither in
order that he may have lighter work, better food, and drink tea
three times a day, and dress well, and even lead a drunken and
dissolute life. The cause of both is identical,—the
transfer of the riches of the producers into the hands of
non-producers, and the accumulation of wealth in the
cities. And, in point of fact, when autumn has come, all
wealth is collected in the country. And instantly there
arise demands for taxes, recruits, the temptations of vodka,
weddings, festivals; petty pedlers make their rounds through the
villages, and all sorts of other temptations crop up; and by this
road, or, if not, by some other, wealth of the most varied
description—vegetables, calves, cows, horses, pigs,
chickens, eggs, butter, hemp, flax, rye, oats, buckwheat, pease,
hempseed, and flaxseed—all passes into the hands of
strangers, is carried off to the towns, and thence to the
capitals. The countryman is obliged to surrender all this
to satisfy the demands that are made upon him, and temptations;
and, having parted with his wealth, he is left with an
insufficiency, and he is forced to go whither his wealth has been
carried and there he tries, in part, to obtain the money which he
requires for his first needs in the country, and in part, being
himself led away by the blandishments of the city, he enjoys, in
company with others, the wealth that has there accumulated.
Everywhere, throughout the whole of Russia,—yes, and not in
Russia alone, I think, but throughout the whole world,—the
same thing goes on. The wealth of the rustic producers
passes into the hands of traders, landed proprietors, officials,
and factory-owners; and the people who receive this wealth wish
to enjoy it. But it is only in the city that they can
derive full enjoyment from this wealth. In the country, in
the first place, it is difficult to satisfy all the requirements
of rich people, on account of the sparseness of the population;
banks, shops, hotels, every sort of artisan, and all sorts of
social diversions, do not exist there. In the second place,
one of the chief pleasures procured by wealth—vanity, the
desire to astonish and outshine other people—is difficult
to satisfy in the country; and this, again, on account of the
lack of inhabitants. In the country, there is no one to
appreciate elegance, no one to be astonished. Whatever
adornments in the way of pictures and bronzes the dweller in the
country may procure for his house, whatever equipages and toilets
he may provide, there is no one to see them and envy them, and
the peasants cannot judge of them. [And, in the third
place, luxury is even disagreeable and dangerous in the country
for the man possessed of a conscience and fear. It is an
awkward and delicate matter, in the country, to have baths of
milk, or to feed your puppies on it, when directly beside you
there are children who have no milk; it is an awkward and
delicate matter to build pavilions and gardens in the midst of
people who live in cots banked up with dung, which they have no
means of warming. In the country there is no one to keep
the stupid peasants in order, and in their lack of cultivation
they might disarrange all this.] [94]
And accordingly rich people congregate, and join themselves to
other rich people with similar requirements, in the city, where
the gratification of every luxurious taste is carefully protected
by a numerous police force. Well-rooted inhabitants of the
city of this sort, are the governmental officials; every
description of artisan and professional man has sprung up around
them, and with them the wealthy join their forces. All that
a rich man has to do there is to take a fancy to a thing, and he
can get it. It is also more agreeable for a rich man to
live there, because there he can gratify his vanity; there is
some one with whom he can vie in luxury; there is some one to
astonish, and there is some one to outshine. But the
principal reason why it is more comfortable in the city for a
rich man is that formerly, in the country, his luxury made him
awkward and uneasy; while now, on the contrary, it would be
awkward for him not to live luxuriously, not to live like all his
peers around him. That which seemed dreadful and awkward in
the country, here appears to be just as it should be. [Rich
people congregate in the city; and there, under the protection of
the authorities, they calmly demand every thing that is brought
thither from the country. And the countryman is, in some
measure, compelled to go thither, where this uninterrupted
festival of the wealthy which demands all that is taken from him
is in progress, in order to feed upon the crumbs which fall from
the tables of the rich; and partly, also, because, when he
beholds the care-free, luxurious life, approved and protected by
everybody, he himself becomes desirous of regulating his life in
such a way as to work as little as possible, and to make as much
use as possible of the labors of others.
And so he betakes himself to the city, and finds employment
about the wealthy, endeavoring, by every means in his power, to
entice from them that which he is in need of, and conforming to
all those conditions which the wealthy impose upon him, he
assists in the gratification of all their whims; he serves the
rich man in the bath and in the inn, and as cab-driver and
prostitute, and he makes for him equipages, toys, and fashions;
and he gradually learns from the rich man to live in the same
manner as the latter, not by labor, but by divers tricks, getting
away from others the wealth which they have heaped together; and
he becomes corrupt, and goes to destruction. And this
colony, demoralized by city wealth, constitutes that city
pauperism which I desired to aid and could not.
All that is necessary, in fact, is for us to reflect on the
condition of these inhabitants of the country, who have removed
to the city in order to earn their bread or their
taxes,—when they behold, everywhere around them, thousands
squandered madly, and hundreds won by the easiest possible means;
when they themselves are forced by heavy toil to earn
kopeks,—and we shall be amazed that all these people should
remain working people, and that they do not all of them take to
an easier method of getting gain,—by trading, peddling,
acting as middlemen, begging, vice, rascality, and even
robbery. Why, we, the participants in that never-ceasing
orgy which goes on in town, can become so accustomed to our life,
that it seems to us perfectly natural to dwell alone in five huge
apartments, heated by a quantity of beech logs sufficient to cook
the food for and to warm twenty families; to drive half a verst
with two trotters and two men-servants; to cover the polished
wood floor with rugs; and to spend, I will not say, on a ball,
five or ten thousand rubles, and twenty-five thousand on a
Christmas-tree. But a man who is in need of ten rubles to
buy bread for his family, or whose last sheep has been seized for
a tax-debt of seven rubles, and who cannot raise those rubles by
hard labor, cannot grow accustomed to this. We think that
all this appears natural to poor people there are even some
ingenuous persons who say in all seriousness, that the poor are
very grateful to us for supporting them by this luxury.] [96]
But poor people are not devoid of human understanding simply
because they are poor, and they judge precisely as we do.
As the first thought that occurs to us on hearing that such and
such a man has gambled away or squandered ten or twenty thousand
rubles, is: “What a foolish and worthless fellow he is to
uselessly squander so much money! and what a good use I could
have made of that money in a building which I have long been in
need of, for the improvement of my estate, and so
forth!”—just so do the poor judge when they behold
the wealth which they need, not for caprices, but for the
satisfaction of their actual necessities, of which they are
frequently deprived, flung madly away before their eyes. We
make a very great mistake when we think that the poor can judge
thus, reason thus, and look on indifferently at the luxury which
surrounds them.
They never have acknowledged, and they never will acknowledge,
that it can be just for some people to live always in idleness,
and for other people to fast and toil incessantly; but at first
they are amazed and insulted by this; then they scrutinize it
more attentively, and, seeing that these arrangements are
recognized as legitimate, they endeavor to free themselves from
toil, and to take part in the idleness. Some succeed in
this, and they become just such carousers themselves; others
gradually prepare themselves for this state; others still fail,
and do not attain their goal, and, having lost the habit of work,
they fill up the disorderly houses and the night-lodging
houses.
Two years ago, we took from the country a peasant boy to wait
on table. For some reason, he did not get on well with the
footman, and he was sent away: he entered the service of a
merchant, won the favor of his master, and now he goes about with
a vest and a watch-chain, and dandified boots. In his
place, we took another peasant, a married man: he became a
drunkard, and lost money. We took a third: he took to
drunk, and, having drank up every thing he had, he suffered for a
long while from poverty in the night-lodging house. An old
man, the cook, took to drink and fell sick. Last year a
footman who had formerly been a hard drinker, but who had
refrained from liquor for five years in the country, while living
in Moscow without his wife who encouraged him, took to drink
again, and ruined his whole life. A young lad from our
village lives with my brother as a table-servant. His
grandfather, a blind old man, came to me during my sojourn in the
country, and asked me to remind this grandson that he was to send
ten rubies for the taxes, otherwise it would be necessary for him
to sell his cow. “He keeps saying, I must dress
decently,” said the old man: “well, he has had some
shoes made, and that’s all right; but what does he want to
set up a watch for?” said the grandfather, expressing in
these words the most senseless supposition that it was possible
to originate. The supposition really was senseless, if we
take into consideration that the old man throughout Lent had
eaten no butter, and that he had no split wood because he could
not possibly pay one ruble and twenty kopeks for it; but it
turned out that the old man’s senseless jest was an actual
fact. The young fellow came to see me in a fine black coat,
and shoes for which he had paid eight rubles. He had
recently borrowed ten rubles from my brother, and had spent them
on these shoes. And my children, who have known the lad
from childhood, told me that he really considers it indispensable
to fit himself out with a watch. He is a very good boy, but
he thinks that people will laugh at him so long as he has no
watch; and a watch is necessary. During the present year, a
chambermaid, a girl of eighteen, entered into a connection with
the coachman in our house. She was discharged. An old
woman, the nurse, with whom I spoke in regard to the unfortunate
girl, reminded me of a girl whom I had forgotten. She too,
ten yeans ago, during a brief stay of ours in Moscow, had become
connected with a footman. She too had been discharged, and
she had ended in a disorderly house, and had died in the hospital
before reaching the age of twenty. It is only necessary to
glance about one, to be struck with terror at the pest which we
disseminate directly by our luxurious life among the people whom
we afterwards wish to help, not to mention the factories and
establishments which serve our luxurious tastes.
[And thus, having penetrated into the peculiar character of
city poverty, which I was unable to remedy, I perceived that its
prime cause is this, that I take absolute necessaries from the
dwellers in the country, and carry them all to the city.
The second cause is this, that by making use here, in the city,
of what I have collected in the country, I tempt and lead astray,
by my senseless luxury, those country people who come hither
because of me, in order in some way to get back what they have
been deprived of in the country.] [99]
I reached the same conclusion from a totally different
point. On recalling all my relations with the city poor
during that time, I saw that one of the reasons why I could not
help the city poor was, that the poor were disingenuous and
untruthful with me. They all looked upon me, not as a man,
but as means. I could not get near them, and I thought that
perhaps I did not understand how to do it; but without
uprightness, no help was possible. How can one help a man
who does not disclose his whole condition? At first I
blamed them for this (it is so natural to blame some one else);
but a remark from an observing man named Siutaeff, who was
visiting me at the time, explained this matter to me, and showed
me where the cause of my want of success lay. I remember
that Siutaeff’s remark struck me very forcibly at the time;
but I only understood its full significance later on. It
was at the height of my self-delusion. I was sitting with
my sister, and Siutaeff was there also at her house; and my
sister was questioning me about my undertaking. I told her
about it, and, as always happens when you have no faith in your
course, I talked to her with great enthusiasm and warmth, and at
great length, of what I had done, and of what might possibly come
of it. I told her every thing,—how we were going to
keep track of pauperism in Moscow, how we were going to keep an
eye on the orphans and old people, how we were going to send away
all country people who had grown poor here, how we were going to
smooth the pathway to reform for the depraved; how, if only the
matter could be managed, there would not be a man left in Moscow,
who could not obtain assistance. My sister sympathized with
me, and we discussed it. In the middle of our conversation,
I glanced at Siutaeff. As I was acquainted with his
Christian life, and with the significance which he attached to
charity, I expected his sympathy, and spoke so that he understood
this; I talked to my sister, but directed my remarks more at
him. He sat immovable in his dark tanned sheepskin
jacket,—which he wore, like all peasants, both out of doors
and in the house,—and as though he did not hear us, but
were thinking of his own affairs. His small eyes did not
twinkle, and seemed to be turned inwards. Having finished
what I had to say, I turned to him with a query as to what he
thought of it.
“It’s all a foolish business,” said he.
“Why?”
“Your whole society is foolish, and nothing good can
come out of it,” he repeated with conviction.
“Why not? Why is it a stupid business to help
thousands, at any rate hundreds, of unfortunate beings? Is
it a bad thing, according to the Gospel, to clothe the naked, and
feed the hungry?”
“I know, I know, but that is not what you are
doing. Is it necessary to render assistance in that
way? You are walking along, and a man asks you for twenty
kopeks. You give them to him. Is that alms? Do
you give spiritual alms,—teach him. But what is it
that you have given? It was only for the sake of getting
rid of him.”
“No; and, besides, that is not what we are talking
about. We want to know about this need, and then to help by
both money and deeds; and to find work.”
“You can do nothing with those people in that
way.”
“So they are to be allowed to die of hunger and
cold?”
“Why should they die? Are there many of them
there?”
“What, many of them?” said I, thinking that he
looked at the matter so lightly because he was not aware how vast
was the number of these people.
“Why, do you know,” said I, “I believe that
there are twenty thousand of these cold and hungry people in
Moscow. And how about Petersburg and the other
cities?”
He smiled.
“Twenty thousand! And how many households are
there in Russia alone, do you think? Are there a
million?”
“Well, what then?”
“What then?” and his eyes flashed, and he grew
animated. “Come, let us divide them among
ourselves. I am not rich, I will take two persons on the
spot. There is the lad whom you took into your kitchen; I
invited him to come to my house, and he did not come. Were
there ten times as many, let us divide them among us. Do
you take some, and I will take some. We will work
together. He will see how I work, and he will learn.
He will see how I live, and we will sit down at the same table
together, and he will hear my words and yours. This charity
society of yours is nonsense.”
These simple words impressed me. I could not but admit
their justice; but it seemed to me at that time, that, in spite
of their truth, still that which I had planned might possibly
prove of service. But the further I carried this business,
the more I associated with the poor, the more frequently did this
remark recur to my mind, and the greater was the significance
which it acquired for me.
I arrive in a costly fur coat, or with my horses; or the man
who lacks shoes sees my two-thousand-ruble apartments. He
sees how, a little while ago, I gave five rubles without
begrudging them, merely because I took a whim to do so. He
surely knows that if I give away rubles in that manner, it is
only because I have hoarded up so many of them, that I have a
great many superfluous ones, which I not only have not given
away, but which I have easily taken from other people.
[What else could he see in me but one of those persons who have
got possession of what belongs to him? And what other
feeling can he cherish towards me, than a desire to obtain from
me as many of those rubles, which have been stolen from him and
from others, as possible? I wish to get close to him, and I
complain that he is not frank; and here I am, afraid to sit down
on his bed for fear of getting lice, or catching something
infectious; and I am afraid to admit him to my room, and he,
coming to me naked, waits, generally in the vestibule, or, if
very fortunate, in the ante-chamber. And yet I declare that
he is to blame because I cannot enter into intimate relations
with him, and because me is not frank.
Let the sternest man try the experiment of eating a dinner of
five courses in the midst of people who have had very little or
nothing but black bread to eat. Not a man will have the
spirit to eat, and to watch how the hungry lick their chops
around him. Hence, then, in order to eat daintily amid the
famishing, the first indispensable requisite is to hide from
them, in order that they may not see it. This is the very
thing, and the first thing, that we do.
And I took a simpler view of our life, and perceived that an
approach to the poor is not difficult to us through accidental
causes, but that we deliberately arrange our lives in such a
fashion so that this approach may be rendered difficult.
Not only this; but, on taking a survey of our life, of the
life of the wealthy, I saw that every thing which is considered
desirable in that life consists in, or is inseparably bound up
with, the idea of getting as far away from the poor as
possible. In fact, all the efforts of our well-endowed
life, beginning with our food, dress, houses, our cleanliness,
and even down to our education,—every thing has for its
chief object, the separation of ourselves from the poor. In
procuring this seclusion of ourselves by impassable barriers, we
spend, to put it mildly, nine-tenths of our wealth. The
first thing that a man who was grown wealthy does is to stop
eating out of one bowl, and he sets up crockery, and fits himself
out with a kitchen and servants. And he feeds his servants
high, too, so that their mouths may not water over his dainty
viands; and he eats alone; and as eating in solitude is
wearisome, he plans how he may improve his food and deck his
table; and the very manner of taking his food (dinner) becomes a
matter for pride and vain glory with him, and his manner of
taking his food becomes for him a means of sequestering himself
from other men. A rich man cannot think of such a thing as
inviting a poor man to his table. A man must know how to
conduct ladies to table, how to bow, to sit down, to eat, to
rinse out the mouth; and only rich people know all these
things. The same thing occurs in the matter of
clothing. If a rich man were to wear ordinary clothing,
simply for the purpose of protecting his body from the
cold,—a short jacket, a coat, felt and leather boots, an
under-jacket, trousers, shirt,—he would require but very
little, and he would not be unable, when he had two coats, to
give one of them to a man who had none. But the rich man
begins by procuring for himself clothing which consists entirely
of separate pieces, and which is fit only for separate occasions,
and which is, therefore, unsuited to the poor man. He has
frock-coats, vests, pea-jackets, lacquered boots, cloaks, shoes
with French heels, garments that are chopped up into bits to
conform with the fashion, hunting-coats, travelling-coats, and so
on, which can only be used under conditions of existence far
removed from poverty. And his clothing also furnishes him
with a means of keeping at a distance from the poor. The
same is the case, and even more clearly, with his dwelling.
In order that one may live alone in ten rooms, it is
indispensable that those who live ten in one room should not see
it. The richer a man is, the more difficult is he of
access; the more porters there are between him and people who are
not rich, the more impossible is it to conduct a poor man over
rugs, and seat him in a satin chair.
The case is the same with the means of locomotion. The
peasant driving in a cart, or a sledge, must be a very
ill-tempered man when he will not give a pedestrian a lift; and
there is both room for this and a possibility of doing it.
But the richer the equipage, the farther is a man from all
possibility of giving a seat to any person whatsoever. It
is even said plainly, that the most stylish equipages are those
meant to hold only one person.
It is precisely the same thing with the manner of life which
is expressed by the word cleanliness.
Cleanliness! Who is there that does not know people,
especially women, who reckon this cleanliness in themselves as a
great virtue? and who is not acquainted with the devices of this
cleanliness, which know no bounds, when it can command the labor
of others? Which of the people who have become rich has not
experienced in his own case, with what difficulty he carefully
trained himself to this cleanliness, which only confirms the
proverb, “Little white hands love other people’s
work”?
To-day cleanliness consists in changing your shirt once a day;
to-morrow, in changing it twice a day. To-day it means
washing the face, and neck, and hands daily; to-morrow, the feet;
and day after to-morrow, washing the whole body every day, and,
in addition and in particular, a rubbing-down. To-day the
table-cloth is to serve for two days, to-morrow there must be one
each day, then two a day. To-day the footman’s hands
must be clean; to-morrow he must wear gloves, and in his clean
gloves he must present a letter on a clean salver. And
there are no limits to this cleanliness, which is useless to
everybody, and objectless, except for the purpose of separating
oneself from others, and of rendering impossible all intercourse
with them, when this cleanliness is attained by the labors of
others.
Moreover, when I studied the subject, I because convinced that
even that which is commonly called education is the very same
thing.
The tongue does not deceive; it calls by its real name that
which men understand under this name. What the people call
culture is fashionable clothing, political conversation, clean
hands,—a certain sort of cleanliness. Of such a man,
it is said, in contradistinction to others, that he is an
educated man. In a little higher circle, what they call
education means the same thing as with the people; only to the
conditions of education are added playing on the pianoforte, a
knowledge of French, the writing of Russian without
orthographical errors, and a still greater degree of external
cleanliness. In a still more elevated sphere, education
means all this with the addition of the English language, and a
diploma from the highest educational institution. But
education is precisely the same thing in the first, the second,
and the third case. Education consists of those forms and
acquirements which are calculated to separate a man from his
fellows. And its object is identical with that of
cleanliness,—to seclude us from the herd of poor, in order
that they, the poor, may not see how we feast. But it is
impossible to hide ourselves, and they do see us.
And accordingly I have become convinced that the cause of the
inability of us rich people to help the poor of the city lies in
the impossibility of our establishing intercourse with them; and
that this impossibility of intercourse is caused by ourselves, by
the whole course of our lives, by all the uses which we make of
our wealth. I have become convinced that between us, the
rich and the poor, there rises a wall, reared by ourselves out of
that very cleanliness and education, and constructed of our
wealth; and that in order to be in a condition to help the poor,
we must needs, first of all, destroy this wall; and that in order
to do this, confrontation after Siutaeff’s method should be
rendered possible, and the poor distributed among us. And
from another starting-point also I came to the same conclusion to
which the current of my discussions as to the causes of the
poverty in towns had led me: the cause was our wealth.] [108]
I began to examine the matter from a third and wholly personal
point of view. Among the phenomena which particularly
impressed me, during the period of my charitable activity, there
was yet another, and a very strange one, for which I could for a
long time find no explanation. It was this: every time that
I chanced, either on the street on in the house, to give some
small coin to a poor man, without saying any thing to him, I saw,
or thought that I saw, contentment and gratitude on the
countenance of the poor man, and I myself experienced in this
form of benevolence an agreeable sensation. I saw that I
had done what the man wished and expected from me. But if I
stopped the poor man, and sympathetically questioned him about
his former and his present life, I felt that it was no longer
possible to give three or twenty kopeks, and I began to fumble in
my purse for money, in doubt as to how much I ought to give, and
I always gave more; and I always noticed that the poor man left
me dissatisfied. But if I entered into still closer
intercourse with the poor man, then my doubts as to how much to
give increased also; and, no matter how much I gave, the poor man
grew ever more sullen and discontented. As a general rule,
it always turned out thus, that if I gave, after conversation
with a poor man, three rubles or even more, I almost always
beheld gloom, displeasure, and even ill-will, on the countenance
of the poor man; and I have even known it to happen, that, having
received ten rubles, he went off without so much as saying
“Thank you,” exactly as though I had insulted
him.
And thereupon I felt awkward and ashamed, and almost
guilty. But if I followed up a poor man for weeks and
months and years, and assisted him, and explained my views to
him, and associated with him, our relations became a torment, and
I perceived that the man despised me. And I felt that he
was in the right.
If I go out into the street, and he, standing in that street,
begs of me among the number of the other passers-by, people who
walk and ride past him, and I give him money, I then am to him a
passer-by, and a good, kind passer-by, who bestows on him that
thread from which a shirt is made for the naked man; he expects
nothing more than the thread, and if I give it he thanks me
sincerely. But if I stop him, and talk with him as man with
man, I thereby show him that I desire to be something more than a
mere passer-by. If, as often happens, he weeps while
relating to me his woes, then he sees in me no longer a
passer-by, but that which I desire that he should see: a good
man. But if I am a good man, my goodness cannot pause at a
twenty-kopek piece, nor at ten rubles, nor at ten thousand; it is
impossible to be a little bit of a good man. Let us suppose
that I have given him a great deal, that I have fitted him out,
dressed him, set him on his feet so that the can live without
outside assistance; but for some reason or other, though
misfortune or his own weakness or vices, he is again without that
coat, that linen, and that money which I have given him; he is
again cold and hungry, and he has come again to me,—how can
I refuse him? [For if the cause of my action consisted in
the attainment of a definite, material end, on giving him so many
rubles or such and such a coat I might be at ease after having
bestowed them. But the cause of my action is not this: the
cause is, that I want to be a good man, that is to say, I want to
see myself in every other man. Every man understands
goodness thus, and in no other manner.] [111] And therefore, if he should
drink away every thing that you had given him twenty times, and
if he should again be cold and hungry, you cannot do otherwise
than give him more, if you are a good man; you can never cease
giving to him, if you have more than he has. And if you
draw back, you will thereby show that every thing that you have
done, you have done not because you are a good man, but because
you wished to appear a good man in his sight, and in the sight of
men.
And thus in the case with the men from whom I chanced to
recede, to whom I ceased to give, and, by this action, denied
good, I experienced a torturing sense of shame.
What sort of shame was this? This shame I had
experienced in the Lyapinsky house, and both before and after
that in the country, when I happened to give money or any thing
else to the poor, and in my expeditions among the city poor.
A mortifying incident that occurred to me not long ago vividly
reminded me of that shame, and led me to an explanation of that
shame which I had felt when bestowing money on the poor.
[This happened in the country. I wanted twenty kopeks to
give to a poor pilgrim; I sent my son to borrow them from some
one; he brought the pilgrim a twenty-kopek piece, and told me
that he had borrowed it from the cook. A few days
afterwards some more pilgrims arrived, and again I was in want of
a twenty-kopek piece. I had a ruble; I recollected that I
was in debt to the cook, and I went to the kitchen, hoping to get
some more small change from the cook. I said: “I
borrowed a twenty-kopek piece from you, so here is a
ruble.” I had not finished speaking, when the cook
called in his wife from another room: “Take it,
Parasha,” said he. I, supposing that she understood
what I wanted, handed her the ruble. I must state that the
cook had only lived with me a week, and, though I had seen his
wife, I had never spoken to her. I was just on the point of
saying to her that she was to give me some small coins, when she
bent swiftly down to my hand, and tried to kiss it, evidently
imaging that I had given her the ruble. I muttered
something, and quitted the kitchen. I was ashamed, ashamed
to the verge of torture, as I had not been for a long time.
I shrank together; I was conscious that I was making grimaces,
and I groaned with shame as I fled from the kitchen. This
utterly unexpected, and, as it seemed to me, utterly undeserved
shame, made a special impression on me, because it was a long
time since I had been mortified, and because I, as an old man,
had so lived, it seemed to me, that I had not merited this
shame. I was forcibly struck by this. I told the
members of my household about it, I told my acquaintances, and
they all agreed that they should have felt the same. And I
began to reflect: why had this caused me such shame? To
this, something which had happened to me in Moscow furnished me
with an answer.
I meditated on that incident, and the shame which I had
experienced in the presence of the cook’s wife was
explained to me, and all those sensations of mortification which
I had undergone during the course of my Moscow benevolence, and
which I now feel incessantly when I have occasion to give any one
any thing except that petty alms to the poor and to pilgrims,
which I have become accustomed to bestow, and which I consider a
deed not of charity but of courtesy. If a man asks you for
a light, you must strike a match for him, if you have one.
If a man asks for three or for twenty kopeks, or even for several
rubles, you must give them if you have them. This is an act
of courtesy and not of charity.] [113]
This was the case in question: I have already mentioned the
two peasants with whom I was in the habit of sawing wood three
yeans ago. One Saturday evening at dusk, I was returning to
the city in their company. They were going to their
employer to receive their wages. As we were crossing the
Dragomilovsky bridge, we met an old man. He asked alms, and
I gave him twenty kopeks. I gave, and reflected on the good
effect which my charity would have on Semyon, with whom I had
been conversing on religious topics. Semyon, the Vladimir
peasant, who had a wife and two children in Moscow, halted also,
pulled round the skirt of his kaftan, and got out his purse, and
from this slender purse he extracted, after some fumbling, three
kopeks, handed it to the old man, and asked for two kopeks in
change. The old man exhibited in his hand two three-kopek
pieces and one kopek. Semyon looked at them, was about to
take the kopek, but thought better of it, pulled off his hat,
crossed himself, and walked on, leaving the old man the
three-kopek piece.
I was fully acquainted with Semyon’s financial
condition. He had no property at home at all. The
money which he had laid by on the day when he gave three kopeks
amounted to six rubles and fifty kopeks. Accordingly, six
rubles and twenty kopeks was the sum of his savings. My
reserve fund was in the neighborhood of six hundred
thousand. I had a wife and children, Semyon had a wife and
children. He was younger than I, and his children were
fewer in number than mine; but his children were small, and two
of mine were of an age to work, so that our position, with the
exception of the savings, was on an equality; mine was somewhat
the more favorable, if any thing. He gave three kopeks, I
gave twenty. What did he really give, and what did I really
give? What ought I to have given, in order to do what
Semyon had done? he had six hundred kopeks; out of this he gave
one, and afterwards two. I had six hundred thousand
rubles. In order to give what Semyon had given, I should
have been obliged to give three thousand rubles, and ask for two
thousand in change, and then leave the two thousand with the old
man, cross myself, and go my way, calmly conversing about life in
the factories, and the cost of liver in the Smolensk market.
I thought of this at the time; but it was only long afterwards
that I was in a condition to draw from this incident that
deduction which inevitably results from it. This deduction
is so uncommon and so singular, apparently, that, in spite of its
mathematical infallibility, one requires time to grow used to
it. It does seem as though there must be some mistake, but
mistake there is none. There is merely the fearful mist of
error in which we live.
[This deduction, when I arrived at it, and when I recognized
its undoubted truth, furnished me with an explanation of my shame
in the presence of the cook’s wife, and of all the poor
people to whom I had given and to whom I still give money.
What, in point of fact, is that money which I give to the
poor, and which the cook’s wife thought I was giving to
her? In the majority of cases, it is that portion of my
substance which it is impossible even to express in figures to
Semyon and the cook’s wife,—it is generally one
millionth part or about that. I give so little that the
bestowal of any money is not and cannot be a deprivation to me;
it is only a pleasure in which I amuse myself when the whim
seizes me. And it was thus that the cook’s wife
understood it. If I give to a man who steps in from the
street one ruble or twenty kopeks, why should not I give her a
ruble also? In the opinion of the cook’s wife, such a
bestowal of money is precisely the same as the flinging of
honey-cakes to the people by gentlemen; it furnishes the people
who have a great deal of superfluous cash with amusement. I
was mortified because the mistake made by the cook’s wife
demonstrated to me distinctly the view which she, and all people
who are not rich, must take of me: “He is flinging away his
folly, i.e., his unearned money.”
As a matter of fact, what is my money, and whence did it come
into my possession? A portion of it I accumulated from the
land which I received from my father. A peasant sold his
last sheep or cow in order to give the money to me. Another
portion of my money is the money which I have received for my
writings, for my books. If my books are hurtful, I only
lead astray those who purchase them, and the money which I
receive for them is ill-earned money; but if my books are useful
to people, then the issue is still more disastrous. I do
not give them to people: I say, “Give me seventeen rubles,
and I will give them to you.” And as the peasant
sells his last sheep, in this case the poor student or teacher,
or any other poor man, deprives himself of necessaries in order
to give me this money. And so I have accumulated a great
deal of money in that way, and what do I do with it? I take
that money to the city, and bestow it on the poor, only when they
fulfil my caprices, and come hither to the city to clean my
sidewalk, lamps, and shoes; to work for me in factories.
And in return for this money, I force from them every thing that
I can; that is to say, I try to give them as little as possible,
and to receive as much as possible from them. And all at
once I begin, quite unexpectedly, to bestow this money as a
simple gift, on these same poor persons, not on all, but on those
to whom I take a fancy. Why should not every poor person
expect that it is quite possible that the luck may fall to him of
being one of those with whom I shall amuse myself by distributing
my superfluous money? And so all look upon me as the
cook’s wife did.
And I had gone so far astray that this taking of thousands
from the poor with one hand, and this flinging of kopeks with the
other, to those to whom the whim moved me to give, I called
good. No wonder that I felt ashamed.] [116]
Yes, before doing good it was needful for me to stand outside
of evil, in such conditions that I might cease to do evil.
But my whole life is evil. I may give away a hundred
thousand rubles, and still I shall not be in a position to do
good because I shall still have five hundred thousand left.
Only when I have nothing shall I be in a position to do the least
particle of good, even as much as the prostitute did which she
nursed the sick women and her child for three days. And
that seemed so little to me! And I dared to think of good
myself! That which, on the first occasion, told me, at the
sight of the cold and hungry in the Lyapinsky house, that I was
to blame for this, and that to live as I live is impossible, and
impossible, and impossible,—that alone was true.
What, then, was I to do?
It was hard for me to come to this confession, but when I had
come to it I was shocked at the error in which I had been
living. I stood up to my ears in the mud, and yet I wanted
to drag others out of this mud.
What is it that I wish in reality? I wish to do good to
others. I wish to do it so that other people may not be
cold and hungry, so that others may live as it is natural for
people to live.
[I wish this, and I see that in consequence of the violence,
extortions, and various tricks in which I take part, people who
toil are deprived of necessaries, and people who do not toil, in
whose ranks I also belong, enjoy in superabundance the toil of
other people.
I see that this enjoyment of the labors of others is so
arranged, that the more rascally and complicated the trickery
which is employed by the man himself, or which has been employed
by the person from whom he obtained his inheritance, the more
does he enjoy of the labors of others, and the less does he
contribute of his own labor.
First come the Shtiglitzy, Dervizy, Morozovy, the Demidoffs,
the Yusapoffs; then great bankers, merchants, officials, landed
proprietors, among whom I also belong; then the poor—very
small traders, dramshop-keepers, usurers, district judges,
overseers, teachers, sacristans, clerks; then house-porters,
lackeys, coachmen, watch-carriers, cab-drivers, peddlers; and
last of all, the laboring classes—factory-hands and
peasants, whose numbers bear the relation to the first named of
ten to one. I see that the life of nine-tenths of the
working classes demands, by reason of its nature, application and
toil, as does every natural life; but that, in consequence of the
sharp practices which take from these people what is
indispensable, and place them in such oppressive conditions, this
life becomes more difficult every year, and more filled with
deprivations; but our life, the life of the non-laboring classes,
thanks to the co-operation of the arts and sciences which are
directed to this object, becomes more filled with superfluities,
more attractive and careful, with every year. I see, that,
in our day, the life of the workingman, and, in particular, the
life of old men, of women, and of children of the working
population, is perishing directly from their food, which is
utterly inadequate to their fatiguing labor; and that this life
of theirs is not free from care as to its very first
requirements; and that, alongside of this, the life of the
non-laboring classes, to which I belong, is filled more and more,
every year, with superfluities and luxury, and becomes more and
more free from anxiety, and has finally reached such a point of
freedom from care, in the case of its fortunate members, of whom
I am one, as was only dreamed of in olden times in
fairy-tales,—the state of the owner of the purse with the
inexhaustible ruble, that is, a condition in which a man is not
only utterly released from the law of labor, but in which he
possesses the possibility of enjoying, without toil, all the
blessings of life, and of transferring to his children, or to any
one whom he may see fit, this purse with the inexhaustible
ruble.
I see that the products of the people’s toil are more
and more transformed from the mass of the working classes to
those who do not work; that the pyramid of the social edifice
seems to be reconstructed in such fashion that the foundation
stones are carried to the apex, and the swiftness of this
transfer is increasing in a sort of geometrical ratio. I
see that the result of this is something like that which would
take place in an ant-heap if the community of ants were to lose
their sense of the common law, if some ants were to begin to draw
the products of labor from the bottom to the top of the heap, and
should constantly contract the foundations and broaden the apex,
and should thereby also force the remaining ants to betake
themselves from the bottom to the summit.
I see that the ideal of the Fortunatus’ purse has made
its way among the people, in the place of the ideal of a toilsome
life. Rich people, myself among the number, get possession
of the inexhaustible ruble by various devices, and for the
purpose of enjoying it we go to the city, to the place where
nothing is produced and where every thing is swallowed up.
The industrious poor man, who is robbed in order that the rich
may possess this inexhaustible ruble, yearns for the city in his
train; and there he also takes to sharp practices, and either
acquires for himself a position in which he can work little and
receive much, thereby rendering still more oppressive the
situation of the laboring classes, or, not having attained to
such a position, he goes to ruin, and falls into the ranks of
those cold and hungry inhabitants of the night-lodging houses,
which are being swelled with such remarkable rapidity.
I belong to the class of those people, who, by divers tricks,
take from the toiling masses the necessaries of life, and who
have acquired for themselves these inexhaustible rubles, and who
lead these unfortunates astray. I desire to aid people, and
therefore it is clear that, first of all, I must cease to rob
them as I am doing. But I, by the most complicated, and
cunning, and evil practices, which have been heaped up for
centuries, have acquired for myself the position of an owner of
the inexhaustible ruble, that is to say, one in which, never
working myself, I can make hundreds and thousands of people toil
for me—which also I do; and I imagine that I pity people,
and I wish to assist them. I sit on a man’s neck, I
weigh him down, and I demand that he shall carry me; and without
descending from his shoulders I assure myself and others that I
am very sorry for him, and that I desire to ameliorate his
condition by all possible means, only not by getting off of
him.
Surely this is simple enough. If I want to help the
poor, that is, to make the poor no longer poor, I must not
produce poor people. And I give, at my own selection, to
poor men who have gone astray from the path of life, a ruble, or
ten rubles, or a hundred; and I grasp hundreds from people who
have not yet left the path, and thereby I render them poor also,
and demoralize them to boot.
This is very simple; but it was horribly hard for me to
understand this fully without compromises and reservations, which
might serve to justify my position; but it sufficed for me to
confess my guilt, and every thing which had before seemed to me
strange and complicated, and lacking in cleanness, became
perfectly comprehensible and simple. But the chief point
was, that my way of life, arising from this interpretation,
became simple, clear and pleasant, instead of perplexed,
inexplicable and full of torture as before.] [122a]
Who am I, that I should desire to help others? I desire
to help people; and I, rising at twelve o’clock after a
game of vint [122b] with four
candles, weak, exhausted, demanding the aid of hundreds of
people,—I go to the aid of whom? Of people who rise
at five o’clock, who sleep on planks, who nourish
themselves on bread and cabbage, who know how to plough, to reap,
to wield the axe, to chop, to harness, to sew,—of people
who in strength and endurance, and skill and abstemiousness, are
a hundred times superior to me,—and I go to their
succor! What except shame could I feel, when I entered into
communion with these people? The very weakest of them, a
drunkard, an inhabitant of the Rzhanoff house, the one whom they
call “the idler,” is a hundred-fold more industrious
than I; [his balance, so to speak, that is to say, the relation
of what he takes from people and that which they give him, stands
on a thousand times better footing than my balance, if I take
into consideration what I take from people and what I give to
them.] [122c]
And these are the people to whose assistance I go. I go
to help the poor. But who is the poor man? There is
no one poorer than myself. I am a thoroughly enervated,
good-for-nothing parasite, who can only exist under the most
special conditions, who can only exist when thousands of people
toil at the preservation of this life which is utterly useless to
every one. And I, that plant-louse, which devours the
foliage of trees, wish to help the tree in its growth and health,
and I wish to heal it.
I have passed my whole life in this manner: I eat, I talk and
I listen; I eat, I write or read, that is to say, I talk and
listen again; I eat, I play, I eat, again I talk and listen, I
eat, and again I go to bed; and so each day I can do nothing
else, and I understand how to do nothing else. And in order
that I may be able to do this, it is necessary that the porter,
the peasant, the cook, male or female, the footman, the coachman,
and the laundress, should toil from morning till night; I will
not refer to the labors of the people which are necessary in
order that coachman, cooks, male and female, footman, and the
rest should have those implements and articles with which, and
over which, they toil for my sake; axes, tubs, brushes, household
utensils, furniture, wax, blacking, kerosene, hay, wood, and
beef. And all these people work hard all day long and every
day, so that I may be able to talk and eat and sleep. And
I, this cripple of a man, have imagined that I could help others,
and those the very people who support me!
It is not remarkable that I could not help any one, and that I
felt ashamed; but the remarkable point is that such an absurd
idea could have occurred to me. The woman who served the
sick old man, helped him; the mistress of the house, who cut a
slice from the bread which she had won from the soil, helped the
beggar; Semyon, who gave three kopeks which he had earned, helped
the beggar, because those three kopeks actually represented his
labor: but I served no one, I toiled for no one, and I was well
aware that my money did not represent my labor.
Into the delusion that I could help others I was led by the
fact that I fancied that my money was of the same sort as
Semyon’s. But this was not the case.
A general idea prevails, that money represents wealth; but
wealth is the product of labor; and, therefore, money represents
labor. But this idea is as just as that every governmental
regulation is the result of a compact (contrat
social).
Every one likes to think that money is only a medium of
exchange for labor. I have made shoes, you have raised
grain, he has reared sheep: here, in order that we may the more
readily effect an exchange, we will institute money, which
represents a corresponding quantity of labor, and, by means of
it, we will barter our shoes for a breast of lamb and ten pounds
of flour. We will exchange our products through the medium
of money, and the money of each one of us represents our
labor.
This is perfectly true, but true only so long as, in the
community where this exchange is effected, the violence of one
man over the rest has not made its appearance; not only violence
over the labors of others, as happens in wars and slavery, but
where he exercises no violence for the protection of the products
of their labor from others. This will be true only in a
community whose members fully carry out the Christian law, in a
community where men give to him who asks, and where he who takes
is not asked to make restitution. But just so soon as any
violence whatever is used in the community, the significance of
money for its possessor loses its significance as a
representative of labor, and acquires the significance of a right
founded, not on labor, but on violence.
As soon as there is war, and one man has taken any thing from
any other man, money can no longer be always the representative
of labor; money received by a warrior for the spoils of war,
which he sells, even if he is the commander of the warriors, is
in no way a product of labor, and possesses an entirely different
meaning from money received for work on shoes. As soon as
there are slave-owners and slaves, as there always have been
throughout the whole world, it is utterly impossible to say that
money represents labor.
Women have woven linen, sold it, and received money; serfs
have woven for their master, and the master has sold them and
received the money. The money is identical in both cases;
but in the one case it is the product of labor, in the other the
product of violence. In exactly the same way, a stranger or
my own father has given me money; and my father, when he gave me
that money, knew, and I know, and everybody knows, that no one
can take this money away from me; but if it should occur to any
one to take it away from me, or even not to hand it over at the
date when it was promised, the law would intervene on my behalf,
and would compel the delivery to me of the money; and, again, it
is evident that this money can in no wise be called the
equivalent of labor, on a level with the money received by Semyon
for chopping wood. So that in any community where there is
any thing that in any manner whatever controls the labor of
others, or where violence hedges in, by means of money, its
possessions from others, there money is no longer invariably the
representative of labor. In such a community, it is
sometimes the representative of labor, and sometimes of
violence.
Thus it would be where only one act of violence from one man
against others, in the midst of perfectly free relations, should
have made its appearance; but now, when centuries of the most
varied deeds of violence have passed for accumulations of money,
when these deeds of violence are incessant, and merely alter
their forms; when, as every one admits, money accumulated itself
represents violence; when money, as a representative of direct
labor, forms but a very small portion of the money which is
derived from every sort of violence,—to say nowadays that
money represents the labor of the person who possesses it, is a
self-evident error or a deliberate lie.
It may be said, that thus it should be; it may be said, that
this is desirable; but by no means can it be said, that thus it
is.
Money represents labor. Yes. Money does represent
labor; but whose? In our society only in the very rarest,
rarest of instances, does money represent the labor of its
possessor, but it nearly always represents the labor of other
people, the past or future labor of men; it is a representative
of the obligation of others to labor, which has been established
by force.
Money, in its most accurate and at the same the simple
application, is the conventional stamp which confers a right, or,
more correctly, a possibility, of taking advantage of the labors
of other people. In its ideal significance, money should
confer this right, or this possibility, only when it serves as
the equivalent of labor, and such money might be in a community
in which no violence existed. But just as soon as violence,
that is to say, the possibility of profiting by the labors of
others without toil of one’s own, exists in a community,
then that profiting by the labors of other men is also expressed
by money, without any distinction of the persons on whom that
violence is exercised.
The landed proprietor has imposed upon his serfs natural
debts, a certain quantity of linen, grain, and cattle, or a
corresponding amount of money. One household has procured
the cattle, but has paid money in lieu of linen. The
proprietor takes the money to a certain amount only, because he
knows that for that money they will make him the same quantity of
linen, (generally he takes a little more, in order to be sure
that they will make it for the same amount); and this money,
evidently, represents for the proprietor the obligation of other
people to toil.
The peasant gives the money as an obligation, to he knows not
whom, but to people, and there are many of them, who undertake
for this money to make so much linen. But the people who
undertake to make the linen, do so because they have not
succeeded in raising sheep, and in place of the sheep, they must
pay money; but the peasant who takes money for his sheep takes it
because he must pay for grain which did not bear well this
year. The same thing goes on throughout this realm, and
throughout the whole world.
A man sells the product of his labor, past, present or to
come, sometimes his food, and generally not because money
constitutes for him a convenient means of exchange. He
could have effected the barter without money, but he does so
because money is exacted from him by violence as a lien on his
labor.
When the sovereign of Egypt exacted labor from his slaves, the
slaves gave all their labor, but only their past and present
labor, their future labor they could not give. But with the
dissemination of money tokens, and the credit which had its rise
in them, it became possible to sell one’s future toil for
money. Money, with co-existent violence in the community,
only represents the possibility of a new form of impersonal
slavery, which has taken the place of personal slavery. The
slave-owner has a right to the labor of Piotr, Ivan, and
Sidor. But the owner of money, in a place where money is
demanded from all, has a right to the toil of all those nameless
people who are in need of money. Money has set aside all
the oppressive features of slavery, under which an owner knows
his right to Ivan, and with them it has set aside all humane
relations between the owner and the slave, which mitigated the
burden of personal thraldom.
I will not allude to the fact, that such a condition of things
is, possibly, necessary for the development of mankind, for
progress, and so forth,—that I do not contest. I have
merely tried to elucidate to myself the idea of money, and that
universal error into which I fell when I accepted money as the
representative of labor. I became convinced, after
experience, that money is not the representative of labor, but,
in the majority of cases, the representative of violence, or of
especially complicated sharp practices founded on violence.
Money, in our day, has completely lost that significance which
it is very desirable that it should possess, as the
representative of one’s own labor; such a significance it
has only as an exception, but, as a general rule, it has been
converted into a right or a possibility of profiting by the toil
of others.
The dissemination of money, of credit, and of all sorts of
money tokens, confirms this significance of money ever more and
more. Money is a new form of slavery, which differs from
the old form of slavery only in its impersonality, its
annihilation of all humane relations with the slave.
Money—money, is a value which is always equal to itself,
and is always considered legal and righteous, and whose use is
regarded as not immoral, just as the right of slavery was
regarded.
In my young days, the game of loto was introduced into the
clubs. Everybody rushed to play it, and, as it was said,
many ruined themselves, rendered their families miserable, lost
other people’s money, and government funds, and committed
suicide; and the game was prohibited, and it remains prohibited
to this day.
I remember to have seen old and unsentimental gamblers, who
told me that this game was particularly pleasing because you did
not see from whom you were winning, as is the case in other
games; a lackey brought, not money, but chips; each man lost a
little stake, and his disappointment was not visible . . .
It is the same with roulette, which is everywhere prohibited, and
not without reason.
It is the same with money. I possess a magic,
inexhaustible ruble; I cut off my coupons, and have retired from
all the business of the world. Whom do I injure,—I,
the most inoffensive and kindest of men? But this is
nothing more than playing at loto or roulette, where I do not see
the man who shoots himself, because of his losses, after
procuring for me those coupons which I cut off from the bonds so
accurately with a strictly right-angled corner.
I have done nothing, I do nothing, and I shall do nothing,
except cut off those coupons; and I firmly believe that money is
the representative of labor! Surely, this is amazing!
And people talk of madmen, after that! Why, what degree of
lunacy can be more frightful than this? A sensible,
educated, in all other respects sane man lives in a senseless
manner, and soothes himself for not uttering the word which it is
indispensably necessary that he should utter, with the idea that
there is some sense in his conclusions, and he considers himself
a just man. Coupons—the representatives of
toil! Toil! Yes, but of whose toil? Evidently
not of the man who owns them, but of him who labors.
Slavery is far from being suppressed. It has been
suppressed in Rome and in America, and among us: but only certain
laws have been abrogated; only the word, not the thing, has been
put down. Slavery is the freeing of ourselves alone from
the toil which is necessary for the satisfaction of our demands,
by the transfer of this toil to others; and wherever there exists
a man who does not work, not because others work lovingly for
him, but where he possesses the power of not working, and forces
others to work for him, there slavery exists. There too,
where, as in all European societies, there are people who make
use of the labor of thousands of men, and regard this as their
right,—there slavery exists in its broadest measure.
And money is the same thing as slavery. Its object and
its consequences are the same. Its object is—that one
may rid one’s self of the first born of all laws, as a
profoundly thoughtful writer from the ranks of the people has
expressed it; from the natural law of life, as we have called it;
from the law of personal labor for the satisfaction of our own
wants. And the results of money are the same as the results
of slavery, for the proprietor; the creation, the invention of
new and ever new and never-ending demands, which can never be
satisfied; the enervation of poverty, vice, and for the slaves,
the persecution of man and their degradation to the level of the
beasts.
Money is a new and terrible form of slavery, and equally
demoralizing with the ancient form of slavery for both slave and
slave-owner; only much worse, because it frees the slave and the
slave-owner from their personal, humane relations.]
I am always surprised by the oft-repeated words: “Yes,
this is so in theory, but how is it in practice?”
Just as though theory were fine words, requisite for
conversation, but not for the purpose of having all practice,
that is, all activity, indispensably founded on them. There
must be a fearful number of stupid theories current in the world,
that such an extraordinary idea should have become
prevalent. Theory is what a man thinks on a subject, but
its practice is what he does. How can a man think it
necessary to do so and so, and then do the contrary? If the
theory of baking bread is, that it must first be mixed, and then
set to rise, no one except a lunatic, knowing this theory, would
do the reverse. But it has become the fashion with us to
say, that “this is so in theory, but how about the
practice?”
In the matter which interests me now, that has been confirmed
which I have always thought,—that practice infallibly flows
from theory, and not that it justifies it, but it cannot possibly
be otherwise, for if I have understood the thing of which I have
been thinking, then I cannot carry out this thing otherwise than
as I have understood it.
I wanted to help the unfortunate only because I had money, and
I shared the general belief that money was the representative of
labor, or, on the whole, something legal and good. But,
having begun to give away this money, I saw, when I gave the
bills which I had accumulated from poor people, that I was doing
precisely that which was done by some landed proprietors who made
some of their serfs wait on others. I saw that every use of
money, whether for making purchases, or for giving away without
an equivalent to another, is handing over a note for extortion
from the poor, or its transfer to another man for extortion from
the poor. I saw that money in itself was not only not good,
but evidently evil, and that it deprives us of our highest
good,—labor, and thereby of the enjoyment of our labor, and
that that blessing I was not in a position to confer on any one,
because I was myself deprived of it: I do not work, and I take no
pleasure in making use of the labor of others.
It would appear that there is something peculiar in this
abstract argument as to the nature of money. But this
argument which I have made not for the sake of argument, but for
the solution of the problem of my life, of my sufferings, was for
me an answer to my question: What is to be done?
As soon as I grasped the meaning of riches, and of money, it
not only became clear and indisputable to me, what I ought to do,
but also clear and indisputable what others ought to do, because
they would infallibly do it. I had only actually come to
understand what I had known for a long time previously, the
theory which was given to men from the very earliest times, both
by Buddha, and Isaiah, and Lao-Tze, and Socrates, and in a
peculiarly clear and indisputable manner by Jesus Christ and his
forerunner, John the Baptist. John the Baptist, in answer
to the question of the people,—What were they to do?
replied simply, briefly, and clearly: “He that hath two
coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath
meat, let him do likewise” (Luke iii. 10, 11). In a
similar manner, but with even greater clearness, and on many
occasions, Christ spoke. He said: “Blessed are the
poor, and woe to the rich.” He said that it is
impossible to serve God and mammon. He forbade his
disciples to take not only money, but also two garments. He
said to the rich young man, that he could not enter into the
kingdom of heaven because he was rich, and that it was easier for
a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to
enter the kingdom of God. He said that he who should not
leave every thing, houses and children and lands, and follow him,
could not be his disciple. He told the parable of the rich
man who did nothing bad, like our own rich men, but who only
arrayed himself in costly garments, and ate and drank daintily,
and who lost his soul thereby; and of poor Lazarus, who had done
nothing good, but who was saved merely because he was poor.
This theory was sufficiently familiar to me, but the false
teachings of the world had so obscured it that it had become for
me a theory in the sense which people are fond of attributing to
that term, that is to say, empty words. But as soon as I
had succeeded in destroying in my consciousness the sophisms of
worldly teaching, theory conformed to practice, and the truth
with regard to my life and to the life of the people about me
became its conclusion.
I understood that man, besides life for his own personal good,
is unavoidably bound to serve the good of others also; that, if
we take an illustration from the animal kingdom,—as some
people are fond of doing, defending violence and conflict by the
conflict for existence in the animal kingdom,—the
illustration must be taken from gregarious animals, like bees;
that consequently man, not to mention the love to his neighbor
incumbent on him, is called upon, both by reason and by his
nature, to serve other people and the common good of
humanity. I comprehended that the natural law of man is
that according to which only he can fulfil destiny, and therefore
be happy. I understood that this law has been and is broken
hereby,—that people get rid of labor by force (like the
robber bees), make use of the toil of others, directing this
toil, not to the common weal, but to the private satisfaction of
swift-growing desires; and, precisely as in the case of the
robber bees, they perish in consequence. [I understood that
the original form of this disinclination for the law is the
brutal violence against weaker individuals, against women, wars
and imprisonments, whose sequel is slavery, and also the present
reign of money. I understood that money is the impersonal
and concealed enslavement of the poor. And, once having
perceived the significance of money as slavery, I could not but
hate it, nor refrain from doing all in my power to free myself
from it.] [135]
When I was a slave-owner, and comprehended the immorality of
my position, I tried to escape from it. My escape consisted
in this, that I, regarding it as immoral, tried to exercise my
rights as slave-owner as little as possible, but to live, and to
allow other people to live, as though that right did not
exist. And I cannot refrain from doing the same thing now
in reference to the present form of slavery,—exercising my
right to the labor of others as little as possible, i.e., hiring
and purchasing as little as possible.
The root of every slavery is the use of the labor of others;
and hence, the compelling others to it is founded indifferently
on my right to the slave, or on my possession of money which is
indispensable to him. If I really do not approve, and if I
regard as an evil, the employment of the labor of others, then I
shall use neither my right nor my money for that purpose; I shall
not compel others to toil for me, but I shall endeavor to free
them from the labor which they have performed for me, as far as
possible, either by doing without this labor or by performing it
for myself.
And this very simple and unavoidable deduction enters into all
the details of my life, effects a total change in it, and at one
blow releases me from those moral sufferings which I have
undergone at the sight of the sufferings and the vice of the
people, and instantly annihilates all three causes of my
inability to aid the poor, which I had encountered while seeking
the cause of my lack of success.
The first cause was the herding of the people in towns, and
the absorption there of the wealth of the country. All that
a man needs is to understand how every hiring or purchase is a
handle to extortion from the poor, and that therefore he must
abstain from them, and must try to fulfil his own requirements;
and not a single man will then quit the country, where all wants
can be satisfied without money, for the city, where it is
necessary to buy every thing: and in the country he will be in a
position to help the needy, as has been my own experience and the
experience of every one else.
The second cause is the estrangement of the rich from the
poor. A man needs but to refrain from buying, from hiring,
and, disdaining no sort of work, to satisfy his requirements
himself, and the former estrangement will immediately be
annihilated, and the man, having rejected luxury and the services
of others, will amalgamate with the mass of the working people,
and, standing shoulder to shoulder with the working people, he
can help them.
The third cause was shame, founded on a consciousness of
immorality in my owning that money with which I desired to help
people. All that is required is: to understand the
significance of money as impersonal slavery, which it has
acquired among us, in order to escape for the future from falling
into the error according to which money, though evil in itself,
can be an instrument of good, and in order to refrain from
acquiring money; and to rid one’s self of it in order to be
in a position to do good to people, that is, to bestow on them
one’s labor, and not the labor of another.
[I saw that money is the cause of suffering and vice among the
people, and that, if I desired to help people, the first thing
that was required of me was not to create those unfortunates whom
I wished to assist.
I came to the conclusion that the man who does not love vice
and the suffering of the people should not make use of money,
thus presenting an inducement to extortion from the poor, by
forcing them to work for him; and that, in order not to make use
of the toil of others, he must demand as little from others as
possible, and work as much as possible himself.] [138]
By dint of a long course of reasoning, I came to this
inevitable conclusion, which was drawn thousands of years ago by
the Chinese in the saying, “If there is one idle man, there
is another dying with hunger to offset him.”
[Then what are we to do? John the Baptist gave the
answer to this very question two thousand years ago. And
when the people asked him, “What are we to do?” he
said, “Let him that hath two garments impart to him that
hath none, and let him that hath meat do the same.”
What is the meaning of giving away one garment out of two, and
half of one’s food? It means giving to others every
superfluity, and thenceforth taking nothing superfluous from
people.
This expedient, which furnishes such perfect satisfaction to
the moral feelings, kept my eyes fast bound, and binds all our
eyes; and we do not see it, but gaze aside.
This is precisely like a personage on the stage, who had
entered a long time since, and all the spectators see him, and it
is obvious that the actors cannot help seeing him, but the point
on the stage lies in the acting characters pretending not to see
him, and in suffering from his absence.] [139]
Thus we, in our efforts to recover from our social diseases,
search in all quarters, governmental and anti-governmental, and
in scientific and in philanthropic superstitions; and we do not
see what is perfectly visible to every eye.
For the man who really suffers from the sufferings of the
people who surround us, there exists the very plainest, simplest,
and easiest means; the only possible one for the cure of the evil
about us, and for the acquisition of a consciousness of the
legitimacy of his life; the one given by John the Baptist, and
confirmed by Christ: not to have more than one garment, and not
to have money. And not to have any money, means, not to
employ the labor of others, and hence, first of all, to do with
our own hands every thing that we can possibly do.
This is so clear and simple! But it is clear and simple
when the requirements are simple. I live in the
country. I lie on the oven, and I order my debtor, my
neighbor, to chop wood and light my fire. It is very clear
that I am lazy, and that I tear my neighbor away from his
affairs, and I shall feel mortified, and I shall find it tiresome
to lie still all the time; and I shall go and split my wood for
myself.
But the delusion of slavery of all descriptions lies so far
back, so much of artificial exaction has sprung up upon it, so
many people, accustomed in different degrees to these habits, are
interwoven with each other, enervated people, spoiled for
generations, and such complicated delusions and justifications
for their luxury and idleness have been devised by people, that
it is far from being so easy for a man who stands at the summit
of the ladder of idle people to understand his sin, as it is for
the peasant who has made his neighbor build his fire.
It is terribly difficult for people at the top of this ladder
to understand what is required of them. [Their heads are
turned by the height of this ladder of lies, upon which they find
themselves when a place on the ground is offered to them, to
which they must descend in order to begin to live, not yet well,
but no longer cruelly, inhumanly; for this reason, this clear and
simple truth appears strange to these people. For the man
with ten servants, liveries, coachmen, cooks, pictures,
pianofortes, that will infallibly appear strange, and even
ridiculous, which is the simplest, the first act of—I will
not say every good man—but of every man who is not wicked:
to cut his own wood with which his food is cooked, and with which
he warms himself; to himself clean those boots with which he has
heedlessly stepped in the mire; to himself fetch that water with
which he preserves his cleanliness, and to carry out that dirty
water in which he has washed himself.] [140]
But, besides the remoteness of people from the truth, there is
another cause which prevents people from seeing the obligation
for them of the simplest and most natural personal, physical
labor for themselves: this is the complication, the
inextricability of the conditions, the advantage of all the
people who are bound together among themselves by money, in which
the rich man lives: “My luxurious life feeds people.
What would become of my old valet if I were to discharge
him? What! we must all do every thing necessary,—make
our clothes and hew wood? . . . And how about the division
of labor?”
[This morning I stepped out into the corridor where the fires
were being built. A peasant was making a fire in the stove
which warms my son’s room. I went in; the latter was
asleep. It was eleven o’clock in the morning.
To-day is a holiday: there is some excuse, there are no
lessons.
The smooth-skinned, eighteen-year-old youth, with a beard, who
had eaten his fill on the preceding evening, sleeps until eleven
o’clock. But the peasant of his age had been up at
dawn, and had got through a quantity of work, and was attending
to his tenth stove, while the former slept. “The
peasant shall not make the fire in his stove to warm that smooth,
lazy body of his!” I thought. But I immediately
recollected that this stove also warmed the room of the
housekeeper, a woman forty years of age, who, on the evening
before, had been making preparations up to three o’clock in
the morning for the supper which my son had eaten, and that she
had cleared the table, and risen at seven, nevertheless.
The peasant was building the fire for her also. And under
her name the lazybones was warming himself.
It is true that the interests of all are interwoven; but, even
without any prolonged reckoning, the conscience of each man will
say on whose side lies labor, and on whose idleness. But
although conscience says this, the account-book, the cash-book,
says it still more clearly. The more money any one spends,
the more idle he is, that is to say, the more he makes others
work for him. The less he spends, the more he works.] [142a] But trade, but public
undertakings, and, finally, the most terrible of words, culture,
the development of sciences, and the arts,—what of
them?
[If I live I will make answer to those points, and in detail;
and until such answer I will narrate the following.] [142b]
Last year, in March, I was returning home late at night.
As I turned from the Zubova into Khamovnitchesky Lane, I saw some
black spots on the snow of the Dyevitchy Pole (field).
Something was moving about in one place. I should not have
paid any attention to this, if the policeman who was standing at
the end of the street had not shouted in the direction of the
black spots,—
“Vasily! why don’t you bring her in?”
“She won’t come!” answered a voice, and then
the spot moved towards the policeman.
I halted and asked the police-officer, “What is
it?”
He said,—“They are taking a girl from the Rzhanoff
house to the station-house; and she is hanging back, she
won’t walk.” A house-porter in a sheepskin coat
was leading her. She was walking forward, and he was
pushing her from behind. All of us, I and the porter and
the policeman, were dressed in winter clothes, but she had
nothing on over her dress. In the darkness I could make out
only her brown dress, and the kerchiefs on her head and
neck. She was short in stature, as is often the case with
the prematurely born, with small feet, and a comparatively broad
and awkward figure.
“We’re waiting for you, you carrion. Get
along, what do you mean by it? I’ll give it to
you!” shouted the policeman. He was evidently tired,
and he had had too much of her. She advanced a few paces,
and again halted.
The little old porter, a good-natured fellow (I know him),
tugged at her hand. “Here, I’ll teach you to
stop! On with you!” he repeated, as though in
anger. She staggered, and began to talk in a discordant
voice. At every sound there was a false note, both hoarse
and whining.
“Come now, you’re shoving again. I’ll
get there some time!”
She stopped and then went on. I followed them.
“You’ll freeze,” said the porters
“The likes of us don’t freeze: I’m
hot.”
She tried to jest, but her words sounded like scolding.
She halted again under the lantern which stands not far from our
house, and leaned against, almost hung over, the fence, and began
to fumble for something among her skirts, with benumbed and
awkward hands. Again they shouted at her, but she muttered
something and did something. In one hand she held a
cigarette bent into a bow, in the other a match. I paused
behind her; I was ashamed to pass her, and I was ashamed to stand
and look on. But I made up my mind, and stepped
forward. Her shoulder was lying against the fence, and
against the fence it was that she vainly struck the match and
flung it away. I looked in her face. She was really a
person prematurely born; but, as it seemed to me, already an old
woman. I credited her with thirty years. A dirty hue
of face; small, dull, tipsy eyes; a button-like nose; curved
moist lips with drooping corners, and a short wisp of harsh hair
escaping from beneath her kerchief; a long flat figure, stumpy
hands and feet. I paused opposite her. She stared at
me, and burst into a laugh, as though she knew all that was going
on in my mind.
I felt that it was necessary to say something to her. I
wanted to show her that I pitied her.
“Are your parents alive?” I inquired.
She laughed hoarsely, with an expression which said,
“he’s making up queer things to ask.”
“My mother is,” said she. “But what do
you want?”
“And how old are you?”
“Sixteen,” said she, answering promptly to a
question which was evidently customary.
“Come, march, you’ll freeze, you’ll perish
entirely,” shouted the policeman; and she swayed away from
the fence, and, staggering along, she went down Khamovnitchesky
Lane to the police-station; and I turned to the wicket, and
entered the house, and inquired whether my daughters had
returned. I was told that they had been to an evening
party, had had a very merry time, had come home, and were in
bed.
Next morning I wanted to go to the station-house to learn what
had been done with this unfortunate woman, and I was preparing to
go out very early, when there came to see me one of those unlucky
noblemen, who, through weakness, have dropped from the
gentlemanly life to which they are accustomed, and who
alternately rise and fall. I had been acquainted with this
man for three years. In the course of those three years,
this man had several times made way with every thing that he had,
and even with all his clothes; the same thing had just happened
again, and he was passing the nights temporarily in the Rzhanoff
house, in the night-lodging section, and he had come to me for
the day. He met me as I was going out, at the entrance, and
without listening to me he began to tell me what had taken place
in the Rzhanoff house the night before. He began his
narrative, and did not half finish it; all at once (he is an old
man who has seen men under all sorts of aspects) he burst out
sobbing, and flooded has countenance with tears, and when he had
become silent, turned has face to the wall. This is what he
told me. Every thing that he related to me was absolutely
true. I authenticated his story on the spot, and learned
fresh particulars which I will relate separately.
In that night-lodging house, on the lower floor, in No. 32, in
which my friend had spent the night, among the various,
ever-changing lodgers, men and women, who came together there for
five kopeks, there was a laundress, a woman thirty years of age,
light-haired, peaceable and pretty, but sickly. The
mistress of the quarters had a boatman lover. In the summer
her lover kept a boat, and in the winter they lived by letting
accommodations to night-lodgers: three kopeks without a pillow,
five kopeks with a pillow.
The laundress had lived there for several months, and was a
quiet woman; but latterly they had not liked her, because she
coughed and prevented the women from sleeping. An old
half-crazy woman eighty years old, in particular, also a regular
lodger in these quarters, hated the laundress, and imbittered the
latter’s life because she prevented her sleeping, and
cleared her throat all night like a sheep. The laundress
held her peace; she was in debt for her lodgings, and was
conscious of her guilt, and therefore she was bound to be
quiet. She began to go more and more rarely to her work, as
her strength failed her, and therefore she could not pay her
landlady; and for the last week she had not been out to work at
all, and had only poisoned the existence of every one, especially
of the old woman, who also did not go out, with her cough.
Four days before this, the landlady had given the laundress
notice to leave the quarters: the latter was already sixty kopeks
in debt, and she neither paid them, nor did the landlady foresee
any possibility of getting them; and all the bunks were occupied,
and the women all complained of the laundress’s cough.
When the landlady gave the laundress notice, and told her that
she must leave the lodgings if she did not pay up, the old woman
rejoiced and thrust the laundress out of doors. The
laundress departed, but returned in an hour, and the landlady had
not the heart to put her out again. And the second and the
third day, she did not turn her out. “Where am I to
go?” said the laundress. But on the third day, the
landlady’s lover, a Moscow man, who knew the regulations
and how to manage, sent for the police. A policeman with
sword and pistol on a red cord came to the lodgings, and with
courteous words he led the laundress into the street.
It was a clear, sunny, but freezing March day. The
gutters were flowing, the house-porters were picking at the
ice. The cabman’s sleigh jolted over the icy snow,
and screeched over the stones. The laundress walked up the
street on the sunny side, went to the church, and seated herself
at the entrance, still on the sunny side. But when the sun
began to sink behind the houses, the puddles began to be skimmed
over with a glass of frost, and the laundress grew cold and
wretched. She rose, and dragged herself . . .
whither? Home, to the only home where she had lived so
long. While she was on her way, resting at times, dusk
descended. She approached the gates, turned in, slipped,
groaned and fell.
One man came up, and then another. “She must be
drunk.” Another man came up, and stumbled over the
laundress, and said to the potter: “What drunken woman is
this wallowing at your gate? I came near breaking my head
over her; take her away, won’t you?”
The porter came. The laundress was dead. This is
what my friend told me. It may be thought that I have
wilfully mixed up facts,—I encounter a prostitute of
fifteen, and the story of this laundress. But let no one
imagine this; it is exactly what happened in the course of one
night (only I do not remember which) in March, 1884. And
so, after hearing my friend’s tale, I went to the
station-house, with the intention of proceeding thence to the
Rzhanoff house to inquire more minutely into the history of the
laundress. The weather was very beautiful and sunny; and
again, through the stars of the night-frost, water was to be seen
trickling in the shade, and in the glare of the sun on
Khamovnitchesky square every thing was melting, and the water was
streaming. The river emitted a humming noise. The
trees of the Neskutchny garden looked blue across the river; the
reddish-brown sparrows, invisible in winter, attracted attention
by their sprightliness; people also seemed desirous of being
merry, but all of them had too many cares. The sound of the
bells was audible, and at the foundation of these mingling
sounds, the sounds of shots could be heard from the barracks, the
whistle of rifle-balls and their crack against the target.
I entered the station-house. In the station some armed
policemen conducted me to their chief. He was similarly
armed with sword and pistol, and he was engaged in taking some
measures with regard to a tattered, trembling old man, who was
standing before him, and who could not answer the questions put
to him, on account of his feebleness. Having finished his
business with the old man, he turned to me. I inquired
about the girl of the night before. At first he listened to
me attentively, but afterwards he began to smile, at my ignorance
of the regulations, in consequence of which she had been taken to
the station-house; and particularly at my surprise at her
youth.
“Why, there are plenty of them of twelve, thirteen, or
fourteen years of age,” he said cheerfully.
But in answer to my question about the girl whom I had seen on
the preceding evening, he explained to me that she must have been
sent to the committee (so it appeared). To my question
where she had passed the night, he replied in an undecided
manner. He did not recall the one to whom I referred.
There were so many of them every day.
In No. 32 of the Rzhanoff house I found the sacristan already
reading prayers over the dead woman. They had taken her to
the bunk which she had formerly occupied; and the lodgers, all
miserable beings, had collected money for the masses for her
soul, a coffin and a shroud, and the old women had dressed her
and laid her out. The sacristan was reading something in
the gloom; a woman in a long wadded cloak was standing there with
a wax candle; and a man (a gentleman, I must state) in a clean
coat with a lamb’s-skin collar, polished overshoes, and a
starched shirt, was holding one like it. This was her
brother. They had hunted him up.
I went past the dead woman to the landlady’s nook, and
questioned her about the whole business.
She was alarmed at my queries; she was evidently afraid that
she would be blamed for something; but afterwards she began to
talk freely, and told me every thing. As I passed back, I
glanced at the dead woman. All dead people are handsome,
but this dead woman was particularly beautiful and touching in
her coffin; her pure, pale face, with closed swollen eyes, sunken
cheeks, and soft reddish hair above the lofty brow,—a weary
and kind and not a sad but a surprised face. And in fact,
if the living do not see, the dead are surprised.
On the same day that I wrote the above, there was a great ball
in Moscow.
That night I left the house at nine o’clock. I
live in a locality which is surrounded by factories, and I left
the house after the factory-whistles had sounded, releasing the
people for a day of freedom after a week of unremitting toil.
Factory-hands overtook me, and I overtook others of them,
directing their steps to the drinking-shops and taverns.
Many were already intoxicated, many were women. Every
morning at five o’clock we can hear one whistle, a second,
a third, a tenth, and so forth, and so forth. That means
that the toil of women, children, and of old men has begun.
At eight o’clock another whistle, which signifies a
breathing-spell of half an hour. At twelve, a third: this
means an hour for dinner. And a fourth at eight, which
denotes the end of the day.
By an odd coincidence, all three of the factories which are
situated near me produce only articles which are in demand for
balls.
In one factory, the nearest, only stockings are made; in
another opposite, silken fabrics; in the third, perfumes and
pomades.
It is possible to listen to these whistles, and connect no
other idea with them than as denoting the time:
“There’s the whistle already, it is time to go to
walk.” But one can also connect with those whistles
that which they signify in reality; that first whistle, at five
o’clock, means that people, often all without exception,
both men and women, sleeping in a damp cellar, must rise, and
hasten to that building buzzing with machines, and must take
their places at their work, whose end and use for themselves they
do not see, and thus toil, often in heat and a stifling
atmosphere, in the midst of dirt, and with the very briefest
breathing-spells, an hour, two hours, three hours, twelve, and
even more hours in succession. They fall into a doze, and
again they rise. And this, for them, senseless work, to
which they are driven only by necessity, is continued over and
over again.
And thus one week succeeds another with the breaks of
holidays; and I see these work-people released on one of these
holidays. They emerge into the street. Everywhere
there are drinking-shops, taverns, and loose girls. And
they, in their drunken state, drag by the hand each other, and
girls like the one whom I saw taken to the station-house; they
drag with them cabmen, and they ride and they walk from one
tavern to another; and they curse and stagger, and say they
themselves know not what. I had previously seen such
unsteady gait on the part of factory-hands, and had turned aside
in disgust, and had been on the point of rebuking them; but ever
since I have been in the habit of hearing those whistles every
day, and understand their meaning, I am only amazed that they,
all the men, do not come to the condition of the “golden
squad,” of which Moscow is full, [152a] [and the women to the state of the
one whom I had seen near my house]. [152b]
Thus I walked along, and scrutinized these factory-hands, as
long as they roamed the streets, which was until eleven
o’clock. Then their movements began to calm
down. Some drunken men remained here and there, and here
and there I encountered men who were being taken to the
station-house. And then carriages began to make their
appearance on all sides, directing their course toward one
point.
On the box sits a coachman, sometimes in a sheepskin coat; and
a footman, a dandy, with a cockade. Well-fed horses in
saddle-cloths fly through the frost at the rate of twenty versts
an hour; in the carriages sit ladies muffled in round cloaks, and
carefully tending their flowers and head-dresses. Every
thing from the horse-trappings, the carriages, the gutta-percha
wheels, the cloth of the coachman’s coat, to the stockings,
shoes, flowers, velvet, gloves, and perfumes,—every thing
is made by those people, some of whom often roll drunk into their
dens or sleeping-rooms, and some stay with disreputable women in
the night-lodging houses, while still others are put in
jail. Thus past them in all their work, and over them all,
ride the frequenters of balls; and it never enters their heads,
that there is any connection between these balls to which they
make ready to go, and these drunkards at whom their coachman
shouts so roughly.
These people enjoy themselves at the ball with the utmost
composure of spirit, and assurance that they are doing nothing
wrong, but something very good. Enjoy themselves!
Enjoy themselves from eleven o’clock until six in the
morning, in the very dead of night, at the very hour when people
are tossing and turning with empty stomachs in the night-lodging
houses, and while some are dying, as did the laundress.
Their enjoyment consists in this,—that the women and
young girls, having bared their necks and arms, and applied
bustles behind, place themselves in a situation in which no
uncorrupted woman or maiden would care to display herself to a
man, on any consideration in the world; and in this half-naked
condition, with their uncovered bosoms exposed to view, with arms
bare to the shoulder, with a bustle behind and tightly swathed
hips, under the most brilliant light, women and maidens, whose
chief virtue has always been modesty, exhibit themselves in the
midst of strange men, who are also clad in improperly
tight-fitting garments; and to the sound of maddening music, they
embrace and whirl. Old women, often as naked as the young
ones, sit and look on, and eat and drink savory things; old men
do the same. It is not to be wondered at that this should
take place at night, when all the common people are asleep, so
that no one may see them. But this is not done with the
object of concealment: it seems to them that there is nothing to
conceal; that it is a very good thing; that by this merry-making,
in which the labor of thousands of toiling people is destroyed,
they not only do not injure any one, but that by this very act
they furnish the poor with the means of subsistence.
Possibly it is very merry at balls. But how does this come
about? When we see that there is a man in the community, in
our midst, who has had no food, or who is freezing, we regret our
mirth, and we cannot be cheerful until he is fed and warmed, not
to mention the impossibility of imagining people who can indulge
in such mirth as causes suffering to others. The mirth of
wicked little boys, who pitch a dog’s tail in a split
stick, and make merry over it, is repulsive and incomprehensible
to us.
In the same manner here, in these diversions of ours,
blindness has fallen upon us, and we do not see the split stick
with which we have pitched all those people who suffer for our
amusement.
[We live as though there were no connection between the dying
laundress, the prostitute of fourteen, and our own life; and yet
the connection between them strikes us in the face.
We may say: “But we personally have not pinched any tail
in a stick;” but we have no right, to deny that had the
tail not been pitched, our merry-making would not have taken
place. We do not see what connection exists between the
laundress and our luxury; but that is not because no such
connection does exist, but because we have placed a screen in
front of us, so that we may not see.
If there were no screen, we should see that which it is
impossible not to see.] [154]
Surely all the women who attended that ball in dresses worth a
hundred and fifty rubles each were born not in a ballroom, or at
Madame Minanguoit’s; but they have lived in the country,
and have seen the peasants; they know their own nurse and maid,
whose father and brother are poor, for whom the earning of a
hundred and fifty rubles for a cottage is the object of a long,
laborious life. Each woman knows this. How
could she enjoy herself, when she knew that she wore on her bared
body at that ball the cottage which is the dream of her good
maid’s father and brother? But let us suppose that
she could not make this reflection; but since velvet and silk and
flowers and lace and dresses do not grow of themselves, but are
made by people, it would seem that she could not help knowing
what sort of people make all these things, and under what
conditions, and why they do it. She cannot fail to know
that the seamstress, with whom she has already quarrelled, did
not make her dress in the least out of love for her; therefore,
she cannot help knowing that all these things were made for her
as a matter of necessity, that her laces, flowers, and velvet
have been made in the same way as her dress.
But possibly they are in such darkness that they do not
consider this. One thing she cannot fail to
know,—that five or six elderly and respectable, often sick,
lackeys and maids have had no sleep, and have been put to trouble
on her account. She has seen their weary, gloomy
faces. She could not help knowing this also, that the cold
that night reached twenty-eight degrees below zero, [155] and that the old coachman sat all
night long in that temperature on his box. But I know that
they really do not see this. And if they, these young women
and girls, do not see this, on account of the hypnotic state
superinduced in them by balls, it is impossible to condemn
them. They, poor things, have done what is considered right
by their elders; but how are their elders to explain away this
their cruelty to the people?
The elders always offer the explanation: “I compel no
one. I purchase my things; I hire my men, my maid-servants,
and my coachman. There is nothing wrong in buying and
hiring. I force no one’s inclination: I hire, and
what harm is there in that?”
I recently went to see an acquaintance. As I passed
through one of the rooms, I was surprised to see two women seated
at a table, as I knew that my friend was a bachelor. A
thin, yellow, old-fashioned woman, thirty years of age, in a
dress that had been carelessly thrown on, was doing something
with her hands and fingers on the table, with great speed,
trembling nervously the while, as though in a fit. Opposite
her sat a young girl, who was also engaged in something, and who
trembled in the same manner. Both women appeared to be
afflicted with St. Vitus’ dance. I stepped nearer to
them, and looked to see what they were doing. They raised
their eyes to me, but went on with their work with the same
intentness. In front of them lay scattered tobacco and
paper cases. They were making cigarettes. The woman
rubbed the tobacco between her hands, pushed it into the machine,
slipped on the cover, thrust the tobacco through, then tossed it
to the girl. The girl twisted the paper, and, making it
fast, threw it aside, and took up another. All thus was
done with such swiftness, with such intentness, as it is
impossible to describe to a man who has never seen it done.
I expressed my surprise at their quickness.
“I have been doing nothing else for fourteen
years,” said the woman.
“Is it hard?”
“Yes: it pains my chest, and makes my breathing
hard.”
It was not necessary for her to add this, however. A
look at the girl sufficed. She had worked at this for three
years, but any one who had not seen her at this occupation would
have said that here was a strong organism which was beginning to
break down.
My friend, a kind and liberal man, hires these women to fill
his cigarettes at two rubles fifty kopeks the thousand. He
has money, and he spends it for work. What harm is there in
that? My friend rises at twelve o’clock. He
passes the evening, from six until two, at cards, or at the
piano. He eats and drinks savory things; others do all his
work for him. He has devised a new source of
pleasure,—smoking. He has taken up smoking within my
memory.
Here is a woman, and here is a girl, who can barely support
themselves by turning themselves into machines, and they pass
their whole lives inhaling tobacco, and thereby running their
health. He has money which he never earned, and he prefers
to play at whist to making his own cigarettes. He gives
these women money on condition that they shall continue to live
in the same wretched manner in which they are now living, that is
to say, by making his cigarettes.
I love cleanliness, and I give money only on the condition
that the laundress shall wash the shirt which I change twice a
day; and that shirt has destroyed the laundress’s last
remaining strength, and she has died. What is there wrong
about that? People who buy and hire will continue to force
other people to make velvet and confections, and will purchase
them, without me; and no matter what I may do, they will hire
cigarettes made and shirts washed. Then why should I
deprive myself of velvet and confections and cigarettes and clean
shirts, if things are definitively settled thus? This is
the argument which I often, almost always, hear. This is
the very argument which makes the mob which is destroying
something, lose its senses. This is the very argument by
which dogs are guided when one of them has flung himself on
another dog, and overthrown him, and the rest of the pack rush up
also, and tear their comrade in pieces. Other people have
begun it, and have wrought mischief; then why should not I take
advantage of it? Well, what will happen if I wear a soiled
shirt, and make my own cigarettes? Will that make it easier
for anybody else? ask people who would like to justify their
course. If it were not so far from the truth, it would be a
shame to answer such a question, but we have become so entangled
that this question seems very natural to us; and hence, although
it is a shame, it is necessary to reply to it.
What difference will it make if I wear one shirt a week, and
make may own cigarettes, or do not smoke at all? This
difference, that some laundress and some cigarette-maker will
exert their strength less, and that what I have spent for washing
and for the making of cigarettes I can give to that very
laundress, or even to other laundresses and toilers who are worn
out with their labor, and who, instead of laboring beyond their
strength, will then be able to rest, and drink tea. But to
this I hear an objection. (It is so mortifying to rich and
luxurious people to understand their position.) To this
they say: “If I go about in a dirty shirt, and give up
smoking, and hand over this money to the poor, the poor will
still be deprived of every thing, and that drop in the sea of
yours will help not at all.”
Such an objection it is a shame to answer. It is such a
common retort. [158]
If I had gone among savages, and they had regaled me with
cutlets which struck me as savory, and if I should learn on the
following day that these savory cutlets had been made from a
prisoner whom they had slain for the sake of the savory cutlets,
if I do not admit that it is a good thing to eat men, then, no
matter how dainty the cutlets, no matter how universal the
practice of eating men may be among my fellows, however
insignificant the advantage to prisoners, prepared for
consumption, may be my refusal to eat of the cutlets, I will not
and I can not eat any more of them. I may, possibly, eat
human flesh, when hunger compels me to it; but I will not make a
feast, and I will not take part in feasts, of human flesh, and I
will not seek out such feasts, and pride myself on my share in
them.
But what is to be done? Surely it is not we who have
done this? And if not we, who then?
We say: “We have not done this, this has done
itself;” as the children say, when they break any thing,
that it broke itself. We say, that, so long as there is a
city already in existence, we, by living in it, support the
people, by purchasing their labor and services. But this is
not so. And this is why. We only need to look
ourselves, at the way we have in the country, and at the manner
in which we support people there.
The winter passes in town. Easter Week passes. On
the boulevards, in the gardens in the parks, on the river, there
is music. There are theatres, water-trips, walks, all sorts
of illuminations and fireworks. But in the country there is
something even better,—there are better air, trees and
meadows, and the flowers are fresher. One should go thither
where all these things have unfolded and blossomed forth.
And the majority of wealthy people do go to the country to
breathe the superior air, to survey these superior forests and
meadows. And there the wealthy settle down in the country,
and the gray peasants, who nourish themselves on bread and
onions, who toil eighteen hours a day, who get no sound sleep by
night, and who are clad in blouses. Here no one has led
these people astray. There have been no factories nor
industrial establishments, and there are none of those idle
hands, of which there are so many in the city. Here the
whole population never succeeds, all summer long, in completing
all their tasks in season; and not only are there no idle hands,
but a vast quantity of property is ruined for the lack of hands,
and a throng of people, children, old men, and women, will perish
through overstraining their powers in work which is beyond their
strength. How do the rich order their lives there? In
this fashion:—
If there is an old-fashioned house, built under the serf
régime, that house is repaired and embellished; if
there is none, then a new one is erected, of two or three
stories. The rooms, of which there are from twelve to
twenty, and even more, are all six arshins in height. [161a] Wood floors are laid
down. The windows consist of one sheet of glass.
There are rich rugs and costly furniture. The roads around
the house are macadamized, the ground is levelled, flower-beds
are laid out, croquet-grounds are prepared, swinging-rings for
gymnastics are erected, reflecting globes, often orangeries, and
hotbeds, and lofty stables always with complicated scroll-work on
the gables and ridges.
And here, in the country, an honest educated official, or
noble family dwells. All the members of the family and
their guests have assembled in the middle of June, because up to
June, that is to say, up to the beginning of mowing-time, they
have been studying and undergoing examinations; and they live
there until September, that is to say, until harvest and
sowing-time. The members of this family (as is the case
with nearly every one in that circle) have lived in the country
from the beginning of the press of work, the suffering time, not
until the end of the season of toil (for in September sowing is
still in progress, as well as the digging of potatoes), but until
the strain of work has relaxed a little. During the whole
of their residence in the country, all around them and beside
them, that summer toil of the peasantry has been going on, of
whose fatigues, no matter how much we may have heard, no matter
how much we may have heard about it, no matter how much we may
have gazed upon it, we can form no idea, unless we have had
personal experience of it. And the members of this family,
about ten in number, live exactly as they do in the city.
At St. Peter’s Day, [161b] a strict fast,
when the people’s food consists of kvas, bread, and onions,
the mowing begins.
The business which is effected in mowing is one of the most
important in the commune. Nearly every year, through the
lack of hands and time, the hay crop may be lost by rain; and
more or less strain of toil decides the question, as to whether
twenty or more per cent of hay is to be added to the wealth of
the people, or whether it is to rot or die where it stands.
And additional hay means additional meat for the old, and
additional milk for the children. Thus, in general and in
particular, the question of bread for each one of the mowers, and
of milk for himself and his children, in the ensuing winter, is
then decided. Every one of the toilers, both male and
female, knows this; even the children know that this is an
important matter, and that it is necessary to strain every nerve
to carry the jug of kvas to their father in the meadow at his
mowing, and, shifting the heavy pitcher from hand to hand, to run
barefooted as rapidly as possible, two versts from the village,
in order to get there in season for dinner, and so that their
fathers may not scold them.
Every one knows, that, from the mowing season until the hay is
got in, there will be no break in the work, and that there will
be no time to breathe. And there is not the mowing
alone. Every one of them has other affairs to attend to
besides the mowing: the ground must be turned up and harrowed;
and the women have linen and bread and washing to attend to; and
the peasants have to go to the mill, and to town, and there are
communal matters to attend to, and legal matters before the judge
and the commissary of police; and the wagons to see to, and the
horses to feed at night: and all, old and young, and sickly,
labor to the last extent of their powers. The peasants toil
so, that on every occasion, the mowers, before the end of the
third stint, whether weak, young, or old, can hardly walk as they
totter past the last rows, and only with difficulty are they able
to rise after the breathing-spell; and the women, often pregnant,
or nursing infants, work in the same way. The toil is
intense and incessant. All work to the extreme bounds of
their strength, and expend in this toil, not only the entire
stock of their scanty nourishment, but all their previous
stock. All of them—and they are not fat to begin
with—grow gaunt after the “suffering”
season.
Here a little association is working at the mowing; three
peasants,—one an old man, the second his nephew, a young
married man, and a shoemaker, a thin, sinewy man. This
hay-harvest will decide the fate of all of them for the
winter. They have been laboring incessantly for two weeks,
without rest. The rain has delayed their work. After
the rain, when the hay has dried, they have decided to stack it,
and, in order to accomplish this as speedily as possible, that
two women for each of them shall follow their scythes. On
the part of the old man go his wife, a woman of fifty, who has
become unfit for work, having borne eleven children, who is deaf,
but still a tolerably stout worker; and a thirteen-year-old
daughter, who is short of stature, but a strong and clever
girl. On the part of his nephew go his wife, a woman as
strong and well-grown as a sturdy peasant, and his
daughter-in-law, a soldier’s wife, who is about to become a
mother. On the part of the shoemaker go his wife, a stout
laborer, and her aged mother, who has reached her eightieth year,
and who generally goes begging. They all stand in line, and
labor from morning till night, in the full fervor of the June
sun. It is steaming hot, and rain threatens. Every
hour of work is precious. It is a pity to tear one’s
self from work to fetch water or kvas. A tiny boy, the old
woman’s grandson, brings them water. The old woman,
evidently only anxious lest she shall be driven away from her
work, will not let the rake out of her hand, though it is evident
that she can barely move, and only with difficulty. The
little boy, all bent over, and stepping gently, with his tiny
bare feet, drags along a jug of water, shifting it from hand to
hand, for it is heavier than he. The young girl flings over
her shoulder a load of hay which is also heavier than herself,
advances a few steps, halts, and drops it, without the strength
to carry it. The old woman of fifty rakes away without
stopping, and with her kerchief awry she drags the hay, breathing
heavily and tottering. The old woman of eighty only rakes
the hay, but even this is beyond her strength; she slowly drags
along her feet, shod with bast shoes, and, frowning, she gazes
gloomily before her, like a seriously ill or dying person.
The old man has intentionally sent her farther away than the
rest, to rake near the cocks of hay, so that she may not keep in
line with the others; but she does not fall in with this
arrangement, and she toils on as long as the others do, with the
same death-like, gloomy countenance. The sun is already
setting behind the forest; but the cocks are not yet all heaped
together, and much still remains to do. All feel that it is
time to stop, but no one speaks, waiting until the others shall
say it. Finally the shoemaker, conscious that his strength
is exhausted, proposes to the old man, to leave the cocks until
the morrow; and the old man consents, and the women instantly run
for the garments, jugs, pitchforks; and the old woman immediately
sits down just where she has been standings and then lies back
with the same death-like look, staring straight in front of
her. But the women are going; and she rises with a groan,
and drags herself after them. And this will go on in July
also, when the peasants, without obtaining sufficient sleep, reap
the oats by night, lest it should fall, and the women rise
gloomily to thresh out the straw for the bands to tie the
sheaves; when this old woman, already utterly cramped by the
labor of mowing, and the woman with child, and the young
children, injure themselves overworking and over-drinking; and
when neither hands, nor horses, nor carts will suffice to bring
to the ricks that grain with which all men are nourished, and
millions of poods [165] of which are daily
required in Russia to keep people from perishing.
And we live as though there were no connection between the
dying laundress, the prostitute of fourteen years, the toilsome
manufacture of cigarettes by women, the strained, intolerable,
insufficiently fed toil of old women and children around us; we
live as though there were no connection between this and our own
lives.
It seems to us, that suffering stands apart by itself, and our
life apart by itself. We read the description of the life
of the Romans, and we marvel at the inhumanity of those soulless
Luculli, who satiated themselves on viands and wines while the
populace were dying with hunger. We shake our heads, and we
marvel at the savagery of our grandfathers, who were serf-owners,
supporters of household orchestras and theatres, and of whole
villages devoted to the care of their gardens; and we wonder,
from the heights of our grandeur, at their inhumanity. We
read the words of Isa. v. 8: “Woe unto them that join house
to house, that lay field to field, till there be no place, that
they may be placed alone in the midst of the earth! (11.)
Woe unto them that rise up early in the morning, that they may
follow strong drink; that continue until night, till wine inflame
them! (12.) And the harp and the viol, and tabret and pipe,
and wine are in their feasts; but they regard not the work of the
Lord, neither consider the operation of his hands. (18.)
Woe unto them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as
it were with a cart-rope. (20.) Woe unto then that call
evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light
for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
(21.) Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent
in their own sight—(22.) Woe unto them that are mighty to
drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong
drink.”
We read these words, and it seems to us that this has no
reference to us. We read in the Gospels (Matt. iii. 10):
“And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees:
therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn
down and cast into the fire.”
And we are fully convinced that the good tree which bringeth
forth good fruit is ourselves; and that these words are not
spoken to us, but to some other and wicked people.
We read the words of Isa. vi. 10: “Make the heart of
this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes;
lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and
understand with their heart, and convert and be healed.
(11.) Then said I: Lord, how long? And he answered, Until
the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without
man, and the land be utterly desolate.”
We read, and are fully convinced that this marvellous deed is
not performed on us, but on some other people. And because
we see nothing it is, that this marvellous deed is performed, and
has been performed, on us. We hear not, we see not, and we
understand not with our heart. How has this happened?
Whether that God, or that natural law by virtue of which men
exist in the world, has acted well or ill, yet the position of
men in the world, ever since we have known it, has been such,
that naked people, without any hair on their bodies, without
lairs in which they could shelter themselves, without food which
they could find in the fields,—like Robinson [167] on his island,—have all been
reduced to the necessity of constantly and unweariedly contending
with nature in order to cover their bodies, to make themselves
clothing, to construct a roof over their heads, and to earn their
bread, that two or three times a day they may satisfy their
hunger and the hunger of their helpless children and of their old
people who cannot work.
Wherever, at whatever time, in whatever numbers we may have
observed people, whether in Europe, in America, in China, or in
Russia, whether we regard all humanity, or any small portion of
it, in ancient times, in a nomad state, or in our own times, with
steam-engines and sewing-machines, perfected agriculture, and
electric lighting, we behold always one and the same
thing,—that man, toiling intensely and incessantly, is not
able to earn for himself and his little ones and his old people
clothing, shelter, and food; and that a considerable portion of
mankind, as in former times, so at the present day, perish
through insufficiency of the necessaries of life, and intolerable
toil in the effort to obtain them.
Wherever we have, if we draw a circle round us of a hundred
thousand, a thousand, or ten versts, or of one verst, and examine
into the lives of the people comprehended within the limits of
our circle, we shall see within that circle prematurely-born
children, old men, old women, women in labor, sick and weak
persons, who toil beyond their strength, and who have not
sufficient food and rest for life, and who therefore die before
their time. We shall see people in the flower of their age
actually slain by dangerous and injurious work.
We see that people have been struggling, ever since the world
has endured, with fearful effort, privation, and suffering,
against this universal want, and that they cannot overcome it . .
. [168]