Kootut teokset | Samlade skrifter | Selected Works
Writing: The Causes of Emigration

The Causes of Emigration, § 4

Previous Section:

Next Section:

Font size: A A A A


Viewing Options:

§ 4

We will therefore begin by considering a form of migration of which we are daily aware, is quite a delicate matter for us and of the causes of which no one is ignorant, in order to see whether that may not perhaps provide us with tangible reasons.

Servants constitute a significant part of Sweden’s productive population, and as unimportant as many regard them, they are in fact indispensable to us. Under Swedish law they have one moving-day and in some places two every year, not in order that they necessarily have to move then but so that, should the master find himself dissatisfied with his servant or the latter with his or her master, they then both possess the freedom to terminate their relationship. In that regard a fair number of separations do take place every year, of servants from their former masters and of masters from their servants, for changing servants is in this respect nothing but a replacement of the social intercourse with those of whose services we have made use during the past year by one with others whom we have recently employed.

Now come! Let us look at the reasons for these moves. Before we give a servant notice at the time of St Laurence’s Fair1 we must have some objection to him or her and moreover entertain hopes of obtaining a better one as a replacement; otherwise we carefully avoid doing so. The servants must in that case have made us dissatisfied with their service because of their laziness, temper, arrogance, unreliability, the expense of their hire or something else; it would thus be a constraint to be bound to such an individual any longer.

The farmhand knows his master equally well from one or more years’ personal experience, and from what has happened he draws conclusions concerning the future. He also acquaints himself with the manner in which various masters treat, feed and reward their servants. If he then discovers how amenable and reasonable his master is compared to the others, of which he becomes most aware by comparing them, he regards himself as lucky to be able to remain; but if he finds the situation to be the opposite, he cannot be retained unless he is offered better conditions than before or else is persuaded by fine promises to serve for a further year, which will probably be his last one with that master.

The advantages and inconveniences on both sides compared to each other thus provide both masters and servants with the true yardstick as to whether they are to part company or stay together.

If one now sees a master who is always approached by more people than he needs, while his neighbours suffer from a shortage of hired servants, then it is clear that they have more freedom and opportunity with the former to pursue their fortune, in any way whatsoever, than with any of the latter. He who suffers such a shortage may blame the shortage of working people or their wilfulness or whatever he chooses, yet every sensible person knows that it is oppressiveness that drives one away and oppressiveness that prevents another servant from taking his or her place. But if these men would only learn from their neighbours to treat their own people with more patience than rancour, more affection than blows, more guidance and freedom than servitude, they would soon share them equably with their neighbours.

If we believe that they are born to be bondsmen and we to be masters and imagine that we are in irrevocable possession of that superiority, never recalling that they can live without us but that we cannot do so without them, for they are able to maintain themselves and others by their work while we consume what several households are able to gather in by their sweat and toil, then it is not surprising that all the officers of the Crown are scarcely able to round up as many vagrants as are required to serve us, and if they do, it is even more difficult to persuade the latter to remain until the next moving-day; for beyond that it is impossible.

The issue is exactly the same in the question proposed. A kingdom is nothing but a large household or association of people, in which the Sovereign Power is the master and the subjects are his household servants. Several kingdoms in relation to one another are the same as several masters in this locality. If one observes extensive emigration, one may safely conclude that there must be some oppressiveness there; but if inhabitants congregate in some area, it is nothing but freedom that can be attracting them there. I am not really speaking here of a free constitution, for in so-called free societies the people are often in the deepest bondage, but on the other hand they enjoy protection and are treated considerately by astute monarchs.


  1. St Laurence’s Fair was an important yearly fair in Sweden up to the nineteenth century, held on 10 August. It signalled the end of the period starting on 29 July, under which either the master or the servant was allowed to give notice to the other party. During the following seven weeks the servant was obliged to seek new employment and the master could look for a replacement. The yearly employment period ended on 29 September, which was followed by a week of leave during which those who had changed their place of employment were to look up their new masters.

Original documents

Previous Section:

Next Section:

Places:

Names:

Biblical references:

Subjects: