Restaurant Chains in China: The

Dilemma of Standardisation versus

Authenticity Guojun Zeng
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/restaurant-chains-in-china-the-dilemma-of-standardis
ation-versus-authenticity-guojun-zeng/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Top Secret Restaurant Recipes 2 More Amazing Clones of

Famous Dishes from America s Favorite Restaurant Chains
Wilbur Todd

https://textbookfull.com/product/top-secret-restaurant-
recipes-2-more-amazing-clones-of-famous-dishes-from-america-s-
favorite-restaurant-chains-wilbur-todd/

Your Restaurant Sucks Embrace The Suck Unleash Your

Restaurant Become Outstanding Donald Burns

https://textbookfull.com/product/your-restaurant-sucks-embrace-
the-suck-unleash-your-restaurant-become-outstanding-donald-burns/

English Learning in the Digital Age Agency Technology

and Context Shuang Zeng

https://textbookfull.com/product/english-learning-in-the-digital-
age-agency-technology-and-context-shuang-zeng/

Irresolvable norm conflicts in international law : the

concept of a legal dilemma First Edition Valentin
Jeutner

https://textbookfull.com/product/irresolvable-norm-conflicts-in-
international-law-the-concept-of-a-legal-dilemma-first-edition-
valentin-jeutner/
Advanced Data Mining and Applications 14th
International Conference ADMA 2018 Nanjing China
November 16 18 2018 Proceedings Guojun Gan

https://textbookfull.com/product/advanced-data-mining-and-
applications-14th-international-conference-adma-2018-nanjing-
china-november-16-18-2018-proceedings-guojun-gan/

Graphics sequenced interpretation of ECG 1st Edition

Rui Zeng (Eds.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/graphics-sequenced-
interpretation-of-ecg-1st-edition-rui-zeng-eds/

Authenticity in the Psychoanalytic Encounter The Work

of Irma Brenman Pick 1st Edition Irma Brenman Pick

https://textbookfull.com/product/authenticity-in-the-
psychoanalytic-encounter-the-work-of-irma-brenman-pick-1st-
edition-irma-brenman-pick/

Security Privacy and Anonymity in Computation

Communication and Storage SpaCCS 2017 International
Workshops Guangzhou China December 12 15 2017
Proceedings 1st Edition Guojun Wang
https://textbookfull.com/product/security-privacy-and-anonymity-
in-computation-communication-and-storage-
spaccs-2017-international-workshops-guangzhou-china-
december-12-15-2017-proceedings-1st-edition-guojun-wang/

Dependability in Sensor Cloud and Big Data Systems and

Applications 5th International Conference DependSys
2019 Guangzhou China November 12 15 2019 Proceedings
Guojun Wang
https://textbookfull.com/product/dependability-in-sensor-cloud-
and-big-data-systems-and-applications-5th-international-
conference-dependsys-2019-guangzhou-china-
GUOJUN ZENG
HENK J. DE VRIES
FRANK M. GO

DIL EMMA TION

THE NDARDISA ITY
A IC
OF ST AUTHENT
US
VERS
Restaurant Chains in China
 Guojun Zeng • Henk J. de Vries
Frank M. Go

Restaurant Chains in
China
The Dilemma of Standardisation versus Authenticity
Guojun Zeng Henk J. de Vries
School of Tourism Management Rotterdam School of Management
Sun Yat-sen University Erasmus University
Guangzhou, China Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Frank M. Go
Rotterdam School of Management
Erasmus University
Rotterdam, The Netherlands

ISBN 978-981-13-0985-4    ISBN 978-981-13-0986-1 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0986-1

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018954230

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2019

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the pub-
lisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the
material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institu-
tional affiliations.

Cover illustration: © The Picture Pantry / Getty Images

Cover design: Tom Howey

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-­01/04 Gateway East, Singapore
189721, Singapore
 Acknowledgments

Many people contributed to this book in different ways. We would like to

thank professors Yunshi Mao, Jigang Bao, Ning Wang, and Qing Peng
and Dr. Richard Robinson and various anonymous reviewers for reading
this manuscript, or parts of it, or for supporting our study in the hospital-
ity management area.
One of the main struggles in empirical research is to obtain access to
companies. We were lucky to be able to get access and collect data in very
interesting companies. This would not have been possible without the
help of several individuals from these organizations, to whom we are very
grateful. Our special thanks go to Jiumaojiu Shanxi Restaurant, Dongting
Hunan Restaurant, Little Sheep, Kungfu, Qianlizoudanji, Aqiang’s Fish,
and many others for opening doors, providing feedback, and showing
responsiveness in providing additional data for us.
We also thank all the interviewees for their time and the information
they provided at different stages of our research. We were fortunate to
meet other experienced researchers who offered us additional advice and
feedback on our work. We are very grateful to professors Shanyi Zhou and
Hong Zhu for helping us to link different aspects of our research.
We want to thank the National Science Fund Committee in China for
their financial support for the investigation process (No. 41201140; No.
41571129).
We are very sorry that our co-author Frank Go passed away before this
manuscript was finished. He inspired both of us to continue the research
in this intriguing and important field of authenticity and standardization

v
vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

in hospitality management. He would have been happy to see this result.

We thank him for his great support and involvement, and we wish all the
best to his wife and sons.

Guangzhou Guojun Zeng

Rotterdam Henk J. de Vries
August 2018
 Abstract

Purpose
Restaurant customers demand not only personal and innovative products
and services, but also cost-effective ones. Enterprises have the option to
meet the former demand by offering authentic products and services. For
achieving cost-effectiveness, they can use standardization. So they may
want to use both concepts but these seem to contradict each other: does
not standardization affect authenticity? So suppliers face an authenticity-
standardization dilemma. Or is it a paradox? This book aims to identify
and discuss the authenticity-standardization dilemma for restaurants
against the background of translocality.

Design
The case study method is adopted for this study. Empirical data come
from China, a country with an increasing number of inner immigrants.
Four restaurants have been selected to exhibit four extreme combinations
of authenticity and standardization. Another two cases have been chosen
to explore the paradoxical combination of high levels of both authenticity
and standardization. Semi-structured interviews with both producers and
consumers are used.

vii
viii ABSTRACT

Findings
Findings show that authenticity and standardization do not exclude each
other but the two may be combined in a coordinated way. The resulting
expansion strategies of restaurant groups are classified into four extreme
categories: Heterogeneity, Standardized Chains, Authentic Alliance, and
Standardized Authenticity. The core competence of restaurant groups
with the most challenging strategy ‘standardized authenticity’ is to stan-
dardize the core set of authentic elements. Our case studies reveal that
authenticity is a dynamic concept. The staging of authenticity in a recom-
posed format to accommodate variety leads to objective authenticity, stan-
dardized authenticity, and symbolic authenticity which can be adopted by
local restaurants, restaurant groups, and translocal restaurants, respec-
tively. Findings are informative for other service industries as well, such as
hotel groups, hospitals, and airlines.

Originality
The study constructs an authenticity-standardization framework as a new
way to reconcile the tension between the two concepts and to understand
the strategic choices in the restaurant industry under translocality.
Restaurant groups can innovatively match different categories of con-
sumer groups to develop their expansion strategies. The authenticity-stan-
dardization paradox challenges the existing methodologies that are
constrained by limiting binaries, such as authentic-fake and back-front for
instance.

Research Implication/Limitations
This research advances the understanding of the relationship between
authenticity and standardization. However, due to the limitation related
to the limited number of cases in this present study, future research should
include a greater diversity of restaurant groups in order to increase exter-
nal validity of findings. A next step could be survey research: more system-
atic and comprehensive sampling would contribute to higher reliability
and validity of the examination. A consumer-based approach that is cur-
rently neglected in most research of restaurants should be given more
attention. Future researchers can put our analysis further and learn more
from the perspective of customers.
 ABSTRACT ix

Practical Implications
The authenticity-standardization framework can be applied to underpin
decision-making in the complex context of restaurant group expansion,
that is, subsidiaries of restaurant groups, and be related to different growth
stages. The conclusions are also helpful for restaurant groups to reconsider
their service concept and achieve a sustainable competitive advantage.

Keywords
Authenticity, China, Restaurants, Standardization, Translocality
 Contents

1 Introduction   1
1.1 Introduction: Why Research the Authenticity–
Standardization Paradox?  1
1.1.1 Consumers and Producers in the Hospitality
Industry  1
1.1.2 Authenticity–Standardization Paradox  3
1.2 A Gap in the Literature  6
1.3 Research Objective and Central Question  8
1.4 Research Approach and Outline of the Book  9
1.4.1 Research Method  9
1.4.2 Outline of the Book  9
References 11

2 Authenticity Versus Standardization  15

2.1 Authenticity 15
2.1.1 Concept of Authenticity 15
2.1.2 Restaurant Group Authenticity 19
2.2 Standardization 22
2.2.1 Concept of Standardization 22
2.2.2 Restaurant Group Standardization 24

xi
xii Contents

2.3 Authenticity: Standardization Paradox 25

2.3.1 Introduction of the Paradox 25
2.3.2 Authenticity: Standardization Paradox of
Restaurants 26
References 29

3 Translocality  35
3.1 Concept of Translocality 35
3.2 Authenticity of Translocal Restaurants 36
3.3 Standardization of Translocal Restaurants 40
3.4 Paradox of Standardization and Authenticity of Translocal
Restaurants 40
3.5 Symbolic Authenticity in Translocal Restaurants 41
References 46

4 Methodology  53
4.1 Research Approach 53
4.2 Country Selection: China 55
4.3 Case Selection 57
References 59

5 Authenticity–Standardization Paradox: Case Study of

Expansion Strategies of Restaurant Groups in China  61
5.1 Introduction 61
5.2 Data Collection 62
5.3 Restaurant Groups’ Expansion Strategies in China 66
5.3.1 Standardized Chain 66
5.3.2 Authentic Alliance 68
5.3.3 Standardization of Authenticity 70
5.3.4 Heterogeneity 73
5.4 Conclusions and Implications 74
Reference 76

6 Case Study of Authentic Shanxi Cuisine in Guangzhou  77

6.1 Introduction 77
6.2 Data Collection 78
 Contents  xiii

6.2.1 Case Company 78

6.2.2 Investigation Process 81
6.3 Standardized Authenticity of Jiumaojiu 83
6.3.1 Dishes 83
6.3.2 Environment and Atmosphere 88
6.3.3 Standardized Authenticity: Service and Value 90
6.4 Discussion, Conclusions, and Implications 91
References 94

7 Case Study of Authentic Hunan Cuisine in Guangzhou  97

7.1 Introduction 97
7.2 Data Collection 98
7.2.1 Case Company 98
7.2.2 Investigation Process 99
7.3 The Dongting Hunan Restaurant Case100
7.3.1 Producer’s Perspective100
7.3.2 Consumers’ Perspective103
7.4 Conclusions and Implications105
References108

8 Conclusion and Discussion 109

8.1 Cross-Case Analysis, Discussion, and Conclusions109
8.1.1 Authenticity and Standardization109
8.1.2 Authenticity as a Dynamic Concept Under Different
Consumption Contexts112
8.1.3 Translocality and Authenticity114
8.2 Contributions and Recommendations116
8.2.1 Theoretical Contributions116
8.2.2 Implications119
8.3 Limitations and Future Research121
References124
 List of Figures

Fig. 1.1 Authenticity–standardization paradox 4

Fig. 1.2 Analytical framework for studying authenticity and
standardization of restaurant groups (with possible extreme
combinations)5
Fig. 1.3 Research focus 9
Fig. 1.4 Book structure and research design 10
Fig. 2.1 Four strategies of restaurant groups 28
Fig. 4.1 Composition of top 50 best taste restaurants in Guangzhou.
(Source: Dianping.com)57
Fig. 4.2 Strategic position of the case companies 59
Fig. 5.1 Strategic position of the case companies 63
Fig. 5.2 Number of Kungfu subsidiaries between 2005 and 2011.
(Source: Interview with the managers of Kungfu restaurant
group)66
Fig. 5.3 Advertisement and menu in Kungfu subsidiaries. (Source:
Kungfu’s advertisement) 67
Fig. 5.4 Restaurant at Qian Li Zou Dan Ji headquarters. (Source: First
author)69
Fig. 5.5 Qian Li Zou Dan Ji (Dream Lijiang). (Source: First author) 69
Fig. 5.6 Hotpot soup and mutton at Little Sheep. (Source: First author) 71
Fig. 5.7 Different image and service in two subsidiaries of Aqiang’s.
(Source: First author) 74
Fig. 6.1 Location of Shanxi and Guangzhou in China. (Source: First
author)79
Fig. 6.2 Subsidiaries of Jiumaojiu from 1995 to 2012. (Source:
Interview with the managers of Jiumaojiu) 80

xv
xvi List of Figures

Fig. 6.3 Jiangnanxi shop and Zhongshansi shop of Jiumaojiu in

Guangzhou. (Source: First author) 81
Fig. 6.4 Braised beef noodles and beef noodles with prime soup in
Jiumaojiu. (Source: First author’s own collection of Jiumaojiu’s
advertisements)84
Fig. 6.5 Eight kinds of handmade noodles in Jiumaojiu. (Source:
Jiumaojiu’s advertisements) 85
Fig. 6.6 Decorations of Saimachang restaurant of Jiumaojiu. (Source:
First author) 88
Fig. 6.7 The kitchens of Jiangnanxi and Zhongshansi restaurants of
Jiumaojiu. (Source: First author) 89
Fig. 7.1 Location of Hunan and Guangzhou in China. (Source: First
author)99
Fig. 7.2 Three typical dishes of Hunan cuisine from the producers’
perspective. (Source: First author) 101
Fig. 7.3 Three created dishes of Hunan Cuisine in Canton. (Source:
First author) 103
Fig. 8.1 Strategic position of the case companies 110
Fig. 8.2 Evolution from objective authenticity to symbolic authenticity 113
 List of Tables

Table 4.1 Overview of case companies 58

Table 5.1 Size and number of Chinese restaurant groups 63
Table 5.2 Measurements of authenticity and standardization of four
cases65
Table 5.3 Kinds of Little Sheep subsidiaries 71

xvii
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

1.1   Introduction: Why Research

the Authenticity–Standardization Paradox?

Business and consumption are subject to the influences of globalization,

and this applies to food consumption as well (Symons 1993; Torres 2002).
There exists a concern that cultural imperialism (Tomlinson 1991) and
McDonaldization (Ritzer 1996) may lead to homogenization that, in
turn, can result in a ‘global palate’ as well as a ‘global cuisine’ (Ritzer
1996; Symons 1993; Mak et al. 2012). The homogenizing force of glo-
balization is often viewed as a threat to the authenticity of food (Leitch
2009). However, the preliminary evidence suggests that globalization can
provide an impetus for reinventing local gastronomic products and iden-
tity as well (Torres 2002; Mak et al. 2012). For example, Appadurai
(1996) holds that increased global and local interactions can result in a
heterogenization process. This tension between homogenization and
authenticity forms the context of this book, in which we will focus on
restaurants, a key part of the hospitality industry.

1.1.1  Consumers and Producers in the Hospitality Industry

The tourism market is highly fragmented, because vendors, intermediar-
ies, and customers are geographically distributed and vary significantly in
terms of economic scale and scope (Go and Appelman 2001). The actors
along the value chain include an oligopoly of large tour operators (TOs),

© The Author(s) 2019 1

G. Zeng et al., Restaurant Chains in China,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0986-1_1
2 G. ZENG ET AL.

hotel chains, and numerous small and medium enterprises (SMEs). During
the past decades, the international tourism sector has been subjected to
the effects of key economic drivers, such as deregulation, globalization,
and the advances of information and communication technology (ICT),
which are key enablers of a flexible response to evolving patterns of tourist
behavior. The strategic position of tourism groups has been influenced by
several major drivers which are inextricably connected: internationaliza-
tion, ICT (Go et al. 2003), mobility, and the rising of middle class (Zeng
and Go 2013), in many countries.
On the demand side, potential tourists have a significant degree of dis-
cretion to either assemble the elements of a tourist product (e.g., trans-
portation, information, entertainment, accommodation, insurance, etc.)
themselves or select an organized tour instead. Many tourists are in search
of attractive, personalized tourism products and services, and expect intel-
ligent and proactive access to relevant high-quality information services,
anytime, anywhere, in a mobile context. At the same time, they hope that
they can get tourism products for an affordable price. On the supply side,
the subsidiaries of tourism groups may use standardization in an effort to
achieve consistency in terms of service quality and image at low cost due
to economies of scale. However, from a demand perspective, customers
are in search for reliable, up-to-date, and accessible services.
For example, the subsidiaries of restaurant groups pursue a standardiza-
tion strategy through the implementation of uniform service quality and a
company image projected in a consistent way but they also see the need
for differentiation to meet individual needs of customers. On the one
hand, the application of a standardization strategy facilitates the imple-
mentation of routines in service production, which, in turn, facilitates the
expansion of restaurant groups, in the sense of opening more restaurants.
On the other hand, authenticity also plays an important role in new prod-
uct development, market introduction, and expansion. However, authen-
ticity and standardization represent contradictory forces and, therefore,
might pose a managerial paradox. In particular, establishing a sense of
uniqueness while simultaneously possessing characteristics that are com-
mon among the individual members of a restaurant group can easily lead
to such a paradox. In this regard, attempts to combine authenticity and
standardization may be likened to mixing water and oil; opposites that fail
to blend. However, the large number of restaurants that provide authen-
tic, standardized, or heterogeneous products for their customers suggests
 INTRODUCTION 3

that different profiles can succeed in market exposure and scale expansion.
Apparently, in terms of the operation performance, neither a standardiza-
tion strategy nor an authenticity strategy serves as a pre-condition for the
success of a restaurant.
In the age of globalization, spaces are subject to a process of continu-
ous reconfiguration and translocality formations. Translocality describes
the ways in which people have loyalties of one place but are residing else-
where, and the promotion of the place through image-building and physi-
cal/social infrastructural enhancements (Smart and Lin 2007). Suppliers
need to deal with the paradox of pursuing ‘perceived geographic authen-
ticity’ (e.g., Waitt 2000) or catering to customers’ needs in the translocal
context. This implies that, first, service providers experience market pres-
sure to pursue differentiation and meet the individual customers’ require-
ments; second, face the challenge to meet critical success factors, including
packaging services appropriately and narrowcasting information where
appropriate.
This study aims to investigate the authenticity–standardization para-
dox. Then, what is decisive for the success of restaurant groups against the
background of translocality? How can restaurant chains deal with the
authenticity–standardization paradox? What authentic products do the
restaurant chains provide for their customers? To answer these questions,
we explore the phenomenon of translocal expansion in the restaurant
chain industry.

1.1.2  Authenticity–Standardization Paradox
Businesses can benefit from being authentic. Forces such as globalization,
pollution, and climate change have caused public anxiety, tourists’ desire
for ‘safe havens’, and the growing demand for authentic goods and ­services
(Barsamian and Hammar 2008). Authenticity is acknowledged as a uni-
versal value and an essential driving force that motivates tourists (Cohen
1988; MacCannell 1973; Naoi 2004; Kolar and Zabkar 2010). The quest
for authentic experiences is considered one of the key tourism trends.
Accordingly, authenticity is crucially important for tourism firms. Many
consumers demand transparency in transactions, so that they are able to
check the genuine source of products. Increasingly, they reject fake offer-
ings (Pine and Gilmore 2000). An entity which projects an aura of an
authentic experience can create customer satisfaction (Govers and Go
4 G. ZENG ET AL.

2004) and benefit businesses. Many businesses want to be perceived by

the public as authentic. But their failure to change their business practice
accordingly results in inauthentic perceptions, instead.
On the other hand, standardization is another strategy a restaurant
group can apply. Standardization may be defined as the ‘activity of estab-
lishing and recording a limited set of solutions to actual or potential
matching problems, directed at benefits for the party or parties involved,
balancing their needs and intending and expecting that these solutions will
be repeatedly or continuously used, during a certain period, by a substan-
tial number of parties for whom they are meant’ (De Vries 1997). There
are specific benefits for the standardization of services. Services are defined
as the result of at least one activity, necessarily performed at the interface
between suppliers and customers, which is generally intangible. From a
user point of view, the first benefit is the building of customer confidence.
This is done by assuring safety, security, quality, durability, and ease of use.
The second benefit is that accurate and appropriate information is sup-
plied and user requirements are taken into account. The third benefit is
that the development of choice and access to a wide range of users is sup-
ported. The fourth benefit is that consumers can purchase goods/services
at affordable prices as a result of the effects of economies of scale and more
price competition, thanks to better transparency. Furthermore, appropri-
ate and fair forms of redress are provided where necessary (ISO/IEC
2006).
For restaurant groups, producing high customer satisfaction by keeping
authenticity increases production cost. At the same time, it would decrease
the cost for restaurant groups to apply standardization, but this may lead
to lower customer satisfaction. So there is an authenticity and standardiza-
tion paradox as indicated in Fig. 1.1.
The concepts of authenticity and standardization seem to contradict.
However, de Vries and Go (2017) suggest that by standardizing a set of
essential common characteristics, a group of restaurants might benefit

Higher satisfaction? Lower satisfaction?

Higher cost? Lower cost?

Authenticity Standardization

Fig. 1.1 Authenticity–standardization paradox

 INTRODUCTION 5

High
C D

Authenticity
Low

A B

Low Standardization High

Fig. 1.2 Analytical framework for studying authenticity and standardization of

restaurant groups (with possible extreme combinations)

from one or more of the above standardization benefits while maintaining

authenticity. The standards should give performance requirements for
those features that are essential for authenticity. In this way, the members
of a restaurant group remain to a large extent different, but share the capa-
bility to meet selected standards, jointly agreed upon. These core elements
can differ in characteristics per restaurant within this group, but should
meet a minimum level of quality. This level should be standardized only
for the essential characteristics of restaurant authenticity. The extent of
integration of authenticity and standardization can be used to form an
analytical framework for investigating restaurant groups (Fig. 1.2). The
dimension of authenticity positions service characteristics of restaurant
groups, and the dimension of standardization includes the shared features,
requirements, and certification criteria, if any, of restaurant groups.
Based on this analytical framework, we can combine authenticity and
standardization into four possible extreme categories: First, there are res-
taurant groups that neither maintain authenticity nor pursue ­standardization
(A). Second, some restaurant groups have standardized their activities and
abstain from using the concept of authenticity (B). Third, some restaurant
groups emphasize the authenticity dimension, instead of focusing on stan-
dardization in their expansion process, but do not focus on standardiza-
tion (C). Fourth, some restaurant groups retain both a high degree of
standardization and authenticity (D). This book is going to investigate
such authenticity–standardization combinations against the background
of translocality.
6 G. ZENG ET AL.

1.2   A Gap in the Literature

Translocality is a common phenomenon around the world. It is not only
related to globalization (movement of people between countries) but in
particular to the movement of people between different regions of the
same country. Standardization in relation to authenticity under the back-
ground of translocality is a promising area of research, as an increasing
number of companies are utilizing standards in a global and translocal
expansion environment and at the same time are adopting translocal
authenticity. So far, the management practice of balancing the authentic-
ity–standardization paradox is evolving primarily on an ad hoc basis.
Scholars like Briley (2009), Craig and Douglas (2006), Nakata (2003),
Yaprak (2008), Nakata (2009), Go and Govers (2011), and Govers and
Go (2009) called for closer consideration of the impact of cultural and
contextual factors and their implications on the conduct of companies and
consumer behavior. Also, within this framework, the analysis of the para-
dox has received only scant attention in the literature, with the exception
of De Mooij (2013), Osland and Bird (2000), and de Vries and Go
(2017). Therefore, this study seeks to uncover and theorize the authentic-
ity–standardization paradox advocating the potential benefits of a ‘translo-
cality’ approach to meet the challenges in managing restaurant chains.
Several potential benefits can be associated with the coordination of
authenticity and standardization. First, such a practice creates an expecta-
tion that restaurant groups involved in translocality will enjoy traditional
benefits related to standardization, such as lower operation costs and
shorter time-to-market (De Vries 1999). Second, globalization of cultures
promises to solve problems associated with authenticity (Wang 1999). In
this respect, the coordination of authenticity and standardization opens an
opportunity to solve the restaurants’ authenticity–standardization para-
dox. There are variables that can be applied to balance the tensions that
exist between authenticity and standardization. These are interventions
designed to improve product quality, reduce the operational cost, and
increase brand recognition against the background of translocality (Smart
and Lin 2007). Achieving the true balance potential of authenticity and
standardization is rather challenging in the context of translocality.
Restaurant groups or translocal restaurants may face the above-mentioned
and additional challenges (caused by geographical, operational, and cul-
tural differences) when adopting the balance practice of authenticity and
standardization. This may apply to both the developed and developing
countries, and to the countries in transition.
 INTRODUCTION 7

Klare (2002) argues that the growing impact of resource scarcity, as a

consequence of the rapid ascendancy of developing countries coupled
with the issue of ‘cultural homogenization’, creates the need for sustain-
able development and more collaboration at customer and producer levels
in the translocal expansion process of restaurant groups. In turn, it chal-
lenges researchers to investigate the opportunities and pitfalls that are part
of the process of implementation of standards in the context of the devel-
oping countries, vis-à-vis developments in industrialized countries in the
knowledge domain of standardization against the background of global-
ization (Go and Christensen 1989; Go et al. 1994) and translocality.
Restaurant groups in different kinds of contexts and in different stages
of their expansion process depend on customer groups and operation
locations, especially in a translocal context. From the 1970s, more and
more studies found that consumers’ characteristics could not explain all
consumer behaviors, and the consumption context is becoming a research
focus of consumer behavior research (Mason et al. 2007). It is, there-
fore, necessary to consider the individual and contextual characteristics
in studying consumer behavior (Engel et al. 1982). In some situations,
the contextual characteristics are more important than the individual
characteristics (Ward and Robertson 1973). There are several kinds of
operation contexts in restaurant chains. Restaurant groups should adjust
their strategies to respond to the demands of the customers in different
kinds of contexts. This study constructs an analytical framework to reveal
how the producers may respond to the evolution of consumption
contexts.
So far, researchers in the hospitality field have studied only limited
aspects of the phenomenon of the authenticity–standardization paradox.
Some have focused on the impact of globalization on the authenticity of
tourism products (Wang 1999; Pine and Gilmore 2000), while others
have focused on the management of standardization in hospitality
­industries (Ritzer 1993; Go and Christensen 1989). Research on the man-
agement of authenticity–standardization paradox that combines these two
streams is just emerging and is still in its early stages. The paper by
Millenaar et al. (2010) was the first one to address the binary by studying
the transformation of a heterogeneous alliance of top restaurants and the
implications for its members (de Vries and Go 2017). At present, there is
a dearth in the literature to suggest how to organize and manage the
authenticity–standardization paradox successfully. This research aims to fill
the present gap.
8 G. ZENG ET AL.

1.3   Research Objective and Central Question

This book is going to investigate the authenticity–standardization paradox
applied in restaurant groups in a translocal context. The research objective
is to explore the relationship between authenticity and standardization in
restaurant groups. To achieve this target, the following questions need to
be answered:

First, what kinds of authenticity–standardization relationships are included

in the operation processes of restaurant groups or translocal
restaurants?
Second, how can restaurant chains get a semblance of balance between
authenticity and standardization to meet the customers’ need for
authentic culture products and to reduce operation costs?
Third, to which extent is it possible and desirable for restaurant groups to
combine authenticity and standardization in a manner which takes into
account the needs and expectations of different kinds of customers
(local residents, immigrants, and tourists) in a translocal context?

This book first tries to answer these questions by combining the authen-
ticity and standardization concepts into a strategic framework. And next,
this book tries to find the best solution for the most challenging combina-
tion of high levels of authenticity and standardization by analyzing case
studies. Furthermore, managerial practices are presented that describe
how restaurants can organize and manage the authenticity–standardiza-
tion paradox in the translocality context.
We focus on the translocality phenomenon for the following two rea-
sons. First, translocality is a common phenomenon around the world.
People move between countries as well as between different regions of the
same country. Both have a similar influence on four consumer categories
of translocal restaurants: local residents, immigrants, tourists from the
original culture, and tourists from other regions. For local residents, a
translocal restaurant is a space to experience the exotic culture. For
migrants (who move from peripheral areas to cities elsewhere) in the
country, the translocal restaurant is a substitute of home. For tourists from
the original (in this book Chinese) culture, the translocal restaurant can be
taken as a space to meet people from their homeland or simply to meet
their physical demand to eat the food their stomach is accustomed to. And
for the tourists from other regions or from abroad, a translocal restaurant
may be viewed as a space to enjoy another kind of cuisine.
 INTRODUCTION 9

Translocality

How do restaurant groups

Producers manage the authenticity- Customers
standardization paradox?

Fig. 1.3 Research focus

To conclude, the focus of this research is on the management and coor-

dination of the authenticity–standardization paradox in restaurant groups
or translocal restaurants, as described in Fig. 1.3. Based on the context of
translocality, a theoretical basis for studying the phenomenon of restaurant
groups and translocal restaurants draws upon both authenticity and stan-
dardization literature, both with a focus on restaurant chains.

1.4   Research Approach and Outline of the Book

1.4.1  Research Method
Because the topic of this research is new and there is lack of existing the-
ory, a case study approach is useful (Eisenhardt 1989, pp. 548–549). We
introduce the specific research methods and processes in Chap. 4. A series
of restaurants have been selected as cases to study the authenticity–stan-
dardization paradox from the perspectives of both customers and
­producers. Four extreme situations may apply: standardization without
authenticity, authenticity without standardization, a combination of
authenticity and standardization, and neither standardization nor authen-
ticity. For each of these extremes we select a case. The combination of
standardization and authenticity is the most challenging option among
the four kinds of strategies. Therefore, we use extra cases to investigate
this combination in more depth.

1.4.2  Outline of the Book

This book consists of eight chapters (see Fig. 1.4). Chapter 2 is a literature
review about the paradox of standardization and authenticity. It results in
10 G. ZENG ET AL.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Structure and Research design
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 1
Motivation for the research
Translocality
Focus of this research

Chapter 2 How do restaurant groups

Literature review on authenticity and Producers manage the authenticity- Customers
standardization
standardization paradox?
Chapter 3
Literature review on translocality

Chapter 4 Methodology

Chapter 5 Case of
restaurant expansion strategy Research framework: authenticity and standardization

Chapter 6 Case Study of combination

4 Cases of Case study 5
Expansion
Chapter 7 Case Study of combination Strategies
Case study 6

Chapter 8 Results
Conclusion and discussion

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fig. 1.4 Book structure and research design

a research framework between standardization and authenticity. Despite

these huge differences, each combination of authenticity and
­standardization may be considered as a possible strategy for expansion.
Chapter 3 adds the phenomenon of translocality. Chapter 4 describes the
research methodology. The next three chapters describe empirical cases.
Chapter 5 shows four extreme cases: standardization without authenticity,
authenticity without standardization, a combination of authenticity and
standardization, and neither standardization nor authenticity. Chapters 6
and 7 show extra cases of the combination of authenticity and standardiza-
tion in the context of translocality. Chapter 8 concludes with a cross-case
analysis, implications limitations, and recommendations for future
research. Figure 1.4 provides an overview.
 INTRODUCTION 11

References
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalization.
Minneapolis, MI: University of Minnesota Press.
Barsamian, A., & Hammar, M. (2008). Connecting the Resources: Authenticity,
Mass Customization and Revenue. Foodservice Institute of America (FIA)
White Paper Based on the Symposium Held at Rush University Medical Center.
Chicago, Illinois, 2008, August 12.
Briley, D.A. (2009). Cultural influence on consumer motivations: a dynamic view,
in Nakata, C (Eds.), Beyond Hofstede: Culture Frameworks for Global Marketing
and Management (pp. 189–200). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity and commoditization in tourism. Annals of
Tourism Research, 15(3), 371–386.
Craig, S.P., & Douglas, S.P. (2006). Beyond national culture: implications of cul-
tural dynamics for consumer research, International Marketing Review, 23(2),
150–162.
De Mooij, M. (2013).Global Marketing and Advertising: Understanding Cultural
Paradoxes, London: Sage.
De Vries, H. (1997). Standardization – What’s in a name? Terminology –
International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Issues in Specialized
Communication, 4(1), 55–83 (rectification in 4, 2).
De Vries, H. J. (1999). Standardization: A business approach to the role of National
Standardization Organizations. London: Springer.
De Vries, Henk J. & Frank M. Go (2017). Developing a Common Standard for
Authentic Restaurants. The Service Industries Journal, 37, 15–16, 1008–1028.
Eisenhardt, M. K. (1989). Building theories from case Study research. Academy of
Management Review, 14(4), 532–550. 14(3/4), 77–96.
Engel, J.F., Kollat, D., & Blackwell, R.D. (1982). Consumer behavior, 4th ed.
Taipei: Hwa-Tai.
Go, F.M, & Appelman, J. (2001). Achieving global competitiveness in SMEs by
building trust in interfirm alliances. In S. Wahab & C. Cooper (Eds.), Tourism
in the Age of Globalisation (pp. 183–197). London: Routledge.
Go, F.M, & Christensen, J. (1989). Going global. The Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 30(3), 73–79.
Go, F. M., & Govers, R., eds. (2011). International Place Branding Yearbook
Managing Reputational Risk. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Go, F., Lee, R., & Russo P. A. (2003). E-heritage in the Globalizing Society:
Enabling Cross-Cultural Engagement. Information Technology and Tourism, 6,
1–14.
Go, F. M., Ray Pine & Ricky Yu (1994). Hong Kong: Sustaining Competitive
Advantage in Asia’s Hotel Industry. The Cornell H.R.A. Quarterly, 35 (5),
50–61.
12 G. ZENG ET AL.

Govers, R., & Go, F. M. (2009). Place Branding: Glocal, Virtual and Physical
Identities, Constructed, Imagined and Experienced, Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Govers, R., & Go, F.M. (2004). Cultural identities constructed, imagined and
experienced: a 3-gap tourism destination image model. Tourism, 52(2),
165–182.
ISO/IEC Guide 76 (2006). Development of standards for services-­recommendations
for addressing consumer issues. Geneva: International Organization for
Standardization / International Electro technical Commission.
Klare, M. T. (2002). Resource Wars: The New Landscape of Global Conflict.
New York: Henry Holt.
Kolar, T., & Zabkar, V. (2010). A consumer-based model of authenticity: An oxy-
moron or the foundation of cultural heritage marketing? Tourism Management,
31, 652–664.
Leitch, A. (2009). Slow food and the politics of ‘virtuous globalization’. In D.Ingl
and D. Gimlin (Eds.), The globalization of food (pp. 45–64). Oxford: Berg
Publishers.
MacCannell, D. (1973). Staged authenticity: Arrangements of social space in tour-
ist settings. American Journal of Sociology, 79 (3):589–603.
Mak, H. N. A., Lumbers, M., & Eves, A. (2012). Globalisation and food con-
sumption in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 39 (1), 171–196.
Mason, R., Deery, M., & O’Mahony, B. (2007). On the trail of food and wine.
Multimedia Manual of Cardiothoracic Surgery, 2015.
Millenaar, M.A., van Ruiven, M.I.C, Go, F.M., & de Vries, H.J. (2010).
Developing a standard for restaurant authenticity – A case of Dutch top-­
restaurants. In J.-C. Graz and K. Jakobs (Eds.), EURAS Proceedings 2010 –
Services standardization (EURAS contributions to standardization research, 2)
(pp. 289–309). Aachen, Germany: Mainz.
Nakata, C. (2003). Culture Theory in international marketing: an ontological and
epistemological examination, in Jain S.C. (ed.), Handbook of Research in
International Marketing (pp, 209–27). Northampton, MA, Edward Elgar
Publishing.
Nakata, C. (Ed) (2009). Beyond Hofstede: Culture Frameworks for Global Marketing
and Management. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Naoi, T. (2004). Visitors’ evaluation of a historical district: the roles of authentic-
ity and manipulation. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 5(1), 45–63.
Osland, J.S. & Bird, A. (2000). Beyond Sophisticated Stereotyping: Cultural
Sense making in Context, Academic Management Perspectives, 14(1), 65–77.
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (2000). Satisfaction, sacrifice, surprise: three small
steps create one giant leap into the experience economy. Strategy and Leadership,
28(1), 18–23.
 INTRODUCTION 13

Ritzer, G. (1993). The McDonaldization of Society: an Investigation into the

Changing Characteristics of Contemporary Social Life. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Pine Forge Press.
Ritzer, G. (1996). The McDonaldization of society. Pine Forge Press, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
Symons, M. (1993). The shared table: Ideas for Australian cuisine. Canberra:
AGPS.
Smart, A. & Lin, G. C. S. (2007). Local capitalisms, local citizenship and translo-
cality: Rescaling from below in the Pearl River Delta region, China. International
Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 31(2), 280–302.
Tomlinson, J. (1991). Cultural imperialism: A critical introduction. Baltimore,
MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Torres, R. (2002). Toward a better understanding of tourism and agriculture link-
ages in the Yucatan: Tourist food consumption and preferences. Tourism
Geographies, 4(3), 282–306.
Waitt, G. (2000). Consuming heritage: perceived historical authenticity. Annals of
Tourism Research, 27(4), 835–862.
Wang, N. (1999). Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience. Annals of
Tourism Research, 26(2), 349–370
Ward, S., & Robertson, T.S. (1973).Consumer behavior research: Promise and
prospects. In W. Scott and R.S. Thomas, Consumer behavior: Theoretical sources.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Yaprak, A. (2008). Culture study in international marketing: a critical review and
suggestions for future research. International Marketing Review, 25 (2),
215–29.
Zeng, G. & Go, F.M. (2013). The evolution of middle class Chinese outbound
travel preferences: an international perspective. Tourism Economics. 19(2),
231–243.
 CHAPTER 2

Authenticity Versus Standardization

2.1   Authenticity

2.1.1  Concept of Authenticity
The tourism literature most commonly describes the concept of authentic-
ity as a form of reality, that is, a sense of genuineness and sincerity (Sharpley
1994; Wang 1999; MacCannell 1973). It implies a corporate culture
anchored in a ‘staying true to oneself’ philosophy at the core of every
aspect of the business context. Importantly, authenticity refers to the ‘real
thing’ and serves as a label that attaches a particular identity to an object,
subject, or person.
Authenticity is acknowledged as a universal value and an essential driv-
ing force that motivates tourists (Cohen 1988; MacCannell 1973; Naoi
2004; Kolar and Zabkar 2010). An entity which projects an aura of an
authentic experience can create customer satisfaction (Govers and Go
2004) and benefit business. Consumer perception of authenticity impacts
brand awareness, brand image, and perceived quality, and influences brand
loyalty and, finally, brand choice intention (Lu et al. 2015).
Although the topic of authenticity has been extensively studied, ques-
tions remain concerning what authenticity means at the conceptual scale,
and particularly what its specific attributes are (Reisinger and Steiner
2006). This finding is rather surprising since Parsa, Self, Njite, and King
(2005) identified lack of authenticity as one of the reasons why restau-
rants, hotels, and other tourism firms are unsuccessful. An ability to

© The Author(s) 2019 15

G. Zeng et al., Restaurant Chains in China,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0986-1_2
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
consequence secured in your bill of rights, concerning which that
proposal is silent. Is that the language of the bill of rights in
England? Is it the language of the American bill of rights, that these
three rights, and these only, are valuable? Is it the language of men
going into a new government? Is it not necessary to speak of those
things before you go into a compact? How do these three things
stand? As one of the parties, we declare we do not mean to give them
up. This is very dictatorial; much more so than the conduct which
proposes alterations as the condition of adoption. In a compact,
there are two parties—one accepting, and another proposing. As a
party, we propose that we shall secure these three things; and before
we have the assent of the other contracting party, we go into the
compact, and leave these things at their mercy. What will be the
consequence? Suppose the other states will call this dictatorial: they
will say, Virginia has gone into the government, and carried with her
certain propositions, which, she says, ought to be concurred in by the
other states. They will declare, that she has no right to dictate to
other states the conditions on which they shall come into the union.
According to the honorable member’s proposal, the ratification will
cease to be obligatory unless they accede to these amendments. We
have ratified it. You have committed a violation, they will say. They
have not violated it. We say we will go out of it. You are then reduced
to a sad dilemma—to give up these three rights, or leave the
government. This is worse than our present confederation, to which
we have hitherto adhered honestly and faithfully. We shall be told we
have violated it, because we have left it for the infringement and
violation of conditions, which they never agreed to be a part of the
ratification. The ratification will be complete. The proposal is made
by one party. We, as the other, accede to it, and propose the security
of these three great rights; for it is only a proposal. In order to secure
them, you are left in that state of fatal hostility, which I shall as much
deplore as the honorable gentleman. I exhort gentlemen to think
seriously before they ratify this constitution, and persuade
themselves that they will succeed in making a feeble effort to get
amendments after adoption. With respect to that part of the proposal
which says that every power not granted remains with the people, it
must be previous to adoption, or it will involve this country in
inevitable destruction. To talk of it is a thing subsequent, not as one
of your inalienable rights, is leaving it to the casual opinion of the
congress who shall take up the consideration of the matter. They will
not reason with you about the effect of this constitution. They will
not take the opinion of this committee concerning its operation. They
will construe it as they please. If you place it subsequently, let me ask
the consequences. Among ten thousand implied powers which they
may assume, they may, if we be engaged in war, liberate every one of
your slaves, if they please. And this must and will be done by men, a
majority of whom have not a common interest with you. They will,
therefore, have no feeling for your interests.
It has been repeatedly said here that the great object of a national
government is national defence. That power which is said to be
intended for security and safety, may be rendered detestable and
oppressive. If you give power to the general government to provide
for the general defence, the means must be commensurate to the
end. All the means in the possession of the people must be given to
the government which is intrusted with the public defence. In this
state there are two hundred and thirty-six thousand blacks, and there
are many in several other states; but there are few or none in the
Northern States; and yet, if the Northern States shall be of opinion
that our numbers are numberless, they may call forth every national
resource. May congress not say, that every black man must fight? Did
we not see a little of this in the last war? We were not so hard pushed
as to make emancipation general: but acts of assembly passed, that
every slave who would go to the army should be free. Another thing
will contribute to bring this event about: slavery is detested; we feel
its fatal effects; we deplore it with all the pity of humanity. Let all
these considerations, at some future period, press with full force on
the minds of congress. Let that urbanity, which I trust will
distinguish America, and the necessity of national defence—let all
these things operate on their minds, and they will search that paper,
and see if they have power of manumission. And have they not, sir?
Have they not power to provide for the general defence and welfare?
May they not think that these call for the abolition of slavery? May
they not pronounce all slaves free, and will they not be warranted by
that power? There is no ambiguous implication, or logical deduction.
The paper speaks to the point. They have the power in clear,
unequivocal terms, and will clearly and certainly exercise it. As much
as I deplore slavery, I see that prudence forbids its abolition. I deny
that the general government ought to set them free, because a
decided majority of the states have not the ties of sympathy and
fellow-feeling for those whose interest would be affected by their
emancipation. The majority of congress is to the north, and the
slaves are to the south. In this situation, I see a great deal of the
property of the people of Virginia in jeopardy, and their peace and
tranquillity gone away. I repeat it again, that it would rejoice my very
soul that every one of my fellow-beings was emancipated. As we
ought with gratitude to admire that decree of Heaven which has
numbered us among the free, we ought to lament and deplore the
necessity of holding our fellow-men in bondage. But is it practicable,
by any human means, to liberate them, without producing the most
dreadful and ruinous consequences? We ought to possess them in
the manner we have inherited them from our ancestors, as their
manumission is incompatible with the felicity of the country. But we
ought to soften, as much as possible, the rigor of their unhappy fate.
I know that in a variety of particular instances, the legislature,
listening to complaints, have admitted their emancipation. Let me
not dwell on this subject. I will only add, that this, as well as every
other property of the people of Virginia, is in jeopardy, and put in the
hands of those who have no similarity of situation with us. This is a
local matter, and I can see no propriety in subjecting it to congress.
[Here Mr. Henry informed the committee, that he had a resolution
prepared, to refer a declaration of rights, with certain amendments
to the most exceptionable parts of the constitution, to the other
states in the confederacy, for their consideration, previous to its
ratification. The clerk then read the resolution, the declaration of
rights, and amendments, which were nearly the same as those
ultimately proposed by the convention, for the consideration of
congress. He then resumed the subject.] I have thus candidly
submitted to you, Mr. Chairman, and this committee, what occurred
to me as proper amendments to the constitution, and the declaration
of rights containing those fundamental, inalienable privileges, which
I conceive to be essential to liberty and happiness. I believe, that, on
a review of these amendments, it will still be found, that the arm of
power will be sufficiently strong for national purposes, when these
restrictions shall be a part of the government. I believe no
gentleman, who opposes me in sentiments, will be able to discover
that any one feature of a strong government is altered; and at the
same time your inalienable rights are secured by them. The
government unaltered may be terrible to America, but can never be
loved, till it be amended. You find all the resources of the continent
may be drawn to a point. In danger, the president may concentre to a
point every effort of the continent. If the government be constructed
to satisfy the people and remove their apprehensions, the wealth and
strength of the continent will go where public utility shall direct. This
government, with these restrictions, will be a strong government
united with the privileges of the people. In my weak judgment, a
government is strong, when it applies to the most important end of
all governments—the rights and privileges of the people. In the
honorable member’s proposal, jury trial, the press, and religion, and
other essential rights, are not to be given up. Other essential rights—
what are they? The world will say, that you intended to give them up.
When you go into an enumeration of your rights, and stop that
enumeration, the inevitable conclusion is, that what is omitted is
intended to be surrendered.
Anxious as I am to be as little troublesome as possible, I cannot
leave this part of the subject without adverting to one remark of the
honorable gentleman. He says, that, rather than bring the union into
danger, he will adopt it with its imperfections. A great deal is said
about disunion, and consequent dangers. I have no claim to a greater
share of fortitude than others; but I can see no kind of danger. I form
my judgment on a single fact alone, that we are at peace with all the
world; nor is there any apparent cause of a rupture with any nation
in the world. Is it among the American states that the cause of
disunion is to be feared? Are not the states using all their efforts for
the promotion of union? New England sacrifices local prejudices for
the purposes of union. We hear the necessity of the union, and
predilection for the union, re-echoed from all parts of the continent;
and all at once disunion is to follow! If gentlemen dread disunion,
the very thing they advocate will inevitably produce it. A previous
ratification will raise insurmountable obstacles to union. New York is
an insurmountable obstacle to it, and North Carolina also. They will
never accede to it till it be amended. A great part of Virginia is
opposed, most decidedly, to it, as it stands. This very spirit which will
govern us in these three states, will find a kindred spirit in the
adopting states. Give me leave to say, that it is very problematical
whether the adopting states can stand on their own legs. I hear only
on one side, but as far as my information goes, there are heart-
burnings and animosities among them. Will these animosities be
cured by subsequent amendments?
Turn away from American, and consider European politics. The
nations there, which can trouble us, are France, England, and Spain.
But at present we know for a certainty, that those nations are
engaged in a very different pursuit from American conquests. We are
told by our intelligent ambassador, that there is no such danger as
has been apprehended. Give me leave then to say, that dangers from
beyond the Atlantic are imaginary. From these premises, then, it may
be concluded, that, from the creation of the world to this time, there
never was a more fair and proper opportunity than we have at this
day to establish such a government as will permanently establish the
most transcendent political felicity. Since the revolution there has
not been so much experience. Since then, the general interests of
America have not been better understood, nor the union more
ardently loved, than at this present moment. I acknowledge the
weakness of the old confederation. Every man says, that something
must be done. Where is the moment more favorable than this?
During the war, when ten thousand dangers surrounded us, America
was magnanimous. What was the language of the little state of
Maryland? “I will have time to consider. I will hold out three years.
Let what may come I will have time to reflect.” Magnanimity
appeared everywhere. What was the upshot?—America triumphed. Is
there any thing to forbid us to offer these amendments to the other
states? If this moment goes away unimproved, we shall never see its
return. We now act under a happy system, which says, that a
majority may alter the government when necessary. But by the paper
proposed, a majority will forever endeavor in vain to alter it. Three-
fourths may. Is not this the most promising time for securing the
necessary alterations? Will you go into that government, where it is a
principle, that a contemptible minority may prevent an alteration?
What will be the language of the majority?—Change the government
—Nay, seven eighths of the people of America may wish the change;
but the minority may come with a Roman Veto, and object to the
alteration. The language of a magnanimous country and of freemen
is, Till you remove the defects, we will not accede. It would be in vain
for me to show, that there is no danger to prevent our obtaining
those amendments, if you are not convinced already. If the other
states will not agree to them, it is not an inducement to union. The
language of this paper is not dictatorial, but merely a proposition for
amendments. The proposition of Virginia met with a favorable
reception before. We proposed that convention which met at
Annapolis. It was not called dictatorial. We proposed that at
Philadelphia. Was Virginia thought dictatorial? But Virginia is now
to lose her pre-eminence. Those rights of equality, to which the
meanest individual in the community is entitled, are to bring us
down infinitely below the Delaware people. Have we not a right to
say, Hear our propositions? Why, sir, your slaves have a right to
make their humble requests. Those who are in the meanest
occupations of human life, have a right to complain. What do we
require? Not pre-eminence, but safety; that our citizens may be able
to sit down in peace and security under their own fig-trees. I am
confident that sentiments like these will meet with unison in every
state; for they will wish to banish discord from the American soil. I
am certain that the warmest friend of the constitution wishes to have
fewer enemies—fewer of those who pester and plague him with
opposition. I could not withhold from my fellow-citizens anything so
reasonable. I fear you will have no union, unless you remove the
cause of opposition. Will you sit down contented with the name of
union without any solid foundation?
 Speech of John Randolph

Against the Tariff Bill, delivered in the House of Representatives of

the United States, April 15, 1824.
I am, Mr. Speaker, practising no deception upon myself, much less
upon the house, when I say, that if I had consulted my own feelings
and inclinations, I should not have troubled the house, exhausted as
it is, and as I am, with any further remarks upon this subject. I come
to the discharge of this task, not merely with reluctance, but with
disgust; jaded, worn down, abraded, I may say, as I am by long
attendance upon this body, and continued stretch of the attention
upon this subject. I come to it, however, at the suggestion, and in
pursuance of the wishes of those, whose wishes are to me, in all
matters touching my public duty, paramount law; I speak with those
reservations, of course, which every moral agent must be supposed to
make to himself.
It was not more to my surprise, than to my disappointment, that
on my return to the house, after a necessary absence of a few days,
on indispensable business, I found it engaged in discussing the
general principle of the bill, when its details were under
consideration. If I had expected such a turn in the debate, I would, at
any private sacrifice, however great, have remained a spectator and
auditor of that discussion. With the exception of the speech, already
published, of my worthy colleague on my right (Mr. P. P. Barbour), I
have been nearly deprived of the benefit of the discussion which has
taken place. Many weeks have been occupied with this bill (I hope
the house will pardon me for saying so) before I took the slightest
part in the deliberations of the details; and I now sincerely regret
that I had not firmness enough to adhere to the resolution which I
had laid down to myself, in the early stage of the debate, not to take
any part in the discussion of the details of the measure. But, as I
trust, what I now have to say upon this subject, although more and
better things have been said by others, may not be the same that they
have said, or may not be said in the same manner. I here borrow the
language of a man who has been heretofore conspicuous in the
councils of the country; of one who was unrivalled for readiness and
dexterity in debate; who was long without an equal on the floor of
this body; who contributed as much to the revolution of 1801, as any
man in this nation, and derived as little benefit from it; as, to use the
words of that celebrated man, what I have to say is not that which
has been said by others, and will not be said in their manner, the
house will, I trust, have patience with me during the time that my
strength will allow me to occupy their attention. And I beg them to
understand, that the notes which I hold in my hand are not the notes
on which I mean to speak, but of what others have spoken, and from
which I will make the smallest selection in my power.

Sir, when are we to have enough of this tariff question? In 1816 it

was supposed to be settled. Only three years thereafter, another
proposition for increasing it was sent from this house to the senate,
baited with a tax of four cents per pound on brown sugar. It was
fortunately rejected in that body. In what manner this bill is baited, it
does not become me to say; but I have too distinct a recollection of
the vote in committee of the whole, on the duty upon molasses, and
afterwards of the vote in the house on the same question; of the votes
of more than one of the states on that question, not to mark it well. I
do not say that the change of the vote on that question was affected
by any man’s voting against his own motion; but I do not hesitate to
say that it was effected by one man’s electioneering against his own
motion. I am very glad, Mr. Speaker, that old Massachusetts Bay,
and the province of Maine and Sagadahock, by whom we stood in the
days of the revolution, now stand by the south, and will not aid in
fixing on us this system of taxation, compared with which the
taxation of Mr. Grenville and Lord North was as nothing. I speak
with knowledge of what I say, when I declare, that this bill is an
attempt to reduce the country, south of Mason and Dixon’s line and
east of the Alleghany mountains, to a state of worse than colonial
bondage; a state to which the domination of Great Britain was, in my
judgment, far preferable; and I trust I shall always have the fearless
integrity to utter any political sentiment which the head sanctions
and the heart ratifies; for the British parliament never would have
dared to lay such duties on our imports, or their exports to us, either
“at home” or here, as is now proposed to be laid upon the imports
from abroad. At that time we had the command of the market of the
vast dominions then subject, and we should have had those which
have since been subjected, to the British empire; we enjoyed a free
trade eminently superior to any thing that we can enjoy, if this bill
shall go into operation. It is a sacrifice of the interests of a part of this
nation to the ideal benefit of the rest. It marks us out as the victims
of a worse than Egyptian bondage. It is a barter of so much of our
rights, of so much of the fruits of our labor, for political power to be
transferred to other hands. It ought to be met, and I trust it will be
met, in the southern country, as was the stamp act, and by all those
measures, which I will not detain the house by recapitulating, which
succeeded the stamp act, and produced the final breach with the
mother country, which it took about ten years to bring about, as I
trust, in my conscience, it will not take as long to bring about similar
results from this measure, should it become a law.
Sir, events now passing elsewhere, which plant a thorn in my
pillow and a dagger in my heart, admonish me of the difficulty of
governing with sobriety any people who are over head and ears in
debt. That state of things begets a temper which sets at nought every
thing like reason and common sense. This country is unquestionably
laboring under great distress; but we cannot legislate it out of that
distress. We may, by your legislation, reduce all the country south
and east of Mason and Dixon’s line, the whites as well as the blacks,
to the condition of Helots: you can do no more. We have had placed
before us, in the course of this discussion, foreign examples and
authorities; and among other things, we have been told, as an
argument in favor of this measure, of the prosperity of Great Britain.
Have gentlemen taken into consideration the peculiar advantages of
Great Britain? Have they taken into consideration that, not excepting
Mexico, and that fine country which lies between the Orinoco and
Caribbean sea, England is decidedly superior, in point of physical
advantages, to every country under the sun? This is unquestionably
true. I will enumerate some of those advantages. First, there is her
climate. In England, such is the temperature of the air, that a man
can there do more days’ work in the year, and more hours’ work in
the day, than in any other climate in the world; of course I include
Scotland and Ireland in this description. It is in such a climate only,
that the human animal can bear without extirpation the corrupted
air, the noisome exhalations, the incessant labor of these accursed
manufactories. Yes, sir, accursed; for I say it is an accursed thing,
which I will neither taste, nor touch, nor handle. If we were to act
here on the English system, we should have the yellow fever at
Philadelphia and New York, not in August merely, but from June to
January, and from January to June. The climate of this country
alone, were there no other natural obstacle to it, says aloud, You shall
not manufacture! Even our tobacco factories, admitted to be the
most wholesome of any sort of factories, are known to be, where
extensive, the very nidus (if I may use the expression) of yellow fever
and other fevers of similar type. In another of the advantages of
Great Britain, so important to her prosperity, we are almost on a par
with her, if we know how properly to use it. Fortunatos nimium sua
si bona norint—for, as regards defence, we are, to all intents and
purposes, almost as much an island as England herself. But one of
her insular advantages we can never acquire. Every part of that
country is accessible from the sea. There, as you recede from the sea,
you do not get further from the sea. I know that a great deal will be
said of our majestic rivers, about the father of floods, and his
tributary streams; but, with the Ohio, frozen up all the winter and
dry all the summer, with a long tortuous, difficult, and dangerous
navigation thence to the ocean, the gentlemen of the west may rest
assured that they will never derive one particle of advantage from
even a total prohibition of foreign manufactures. You may succeed in
reducing us to your own level of misery; but if we were to agree to
become your slaves, you never can derive one farthing of advantage
from this bill. What parts of this country can derive any advantage
from it? Those parts only, where there is a water power in immediate
contact with navigation, such as the vicinities of Boston, Providence,
Baltimore, and Richmond. Petersburg is the last of these as you
travel south. You take a bag of cotton up the river to Pittsburg, or to
Zanesville, to have it manufactured and sent down to New Orleans
for a market, and before your bag of cotton has got to the place of
manufacture, the manufacturer of Providence has received his
returns for the goods made from his bag of cotton purchased at the
same time that you purchased yours. No, sir, gentlemen may as well
insist that because the Chesapeake bay, mare nostrum, our
Mediterranean sea, gives us every advantage of navigation, we shall
exclude from it every thing but steam-boats and those boats called
κατ’ ἐξοχὴν, per emphasin, par excellence, Kentucky boats—a sort
of huge square, clumsy, wooden box. And why not insist upon it?
Hav’n’t you “the power to REGULATE COMMERCE”? Would not that too
be a “REGULATION OF COMMERCE?” It would, indeed, and a pretty
regulation it is; and so is this bill. And, sir, I marvel that the
representation from the great commercial state of New York should
be in favor of this bill. If operative—and if inoperative why talk of it?
—if operative, it must, like the embargo of 1807–1809, transfer no
small portion of the wealth of the London of America, as New York
has been called, to Quebec and Montreal. She will receive the most of
her imports from abroad, down the river. I do not know any bill that
could be better calculated for Vermont than this bill; because,
through Vermont, from Quebec, Montreal, and other positions on
the St. Lawrence, we are, if it passes, unquestionably to receive our
supplies of foreign goods. It will, no doubt, suit the Niagara frontier.
But, sir, I must not suffer myself to be led too far astray from the
topic of the peculiar advantages of England as a manufacturing
country. Her vast beds of coal are inexhaustible; there are daily
discoveries of quantities of it, greater than ages past have yet
consumed; to which beds of coal her manufacturing establishments
have been transferred, as any man may see who will compare the
present population of her towns with what it was formerly. It is to
these beds of coal that Birmingham, Manchester, Wolverhampton,
Sheffield, Leeds, and other manufacturing towns, owe their growth.
If you could destroy her coal in one day, you would cut at once the
sinews of her power. Then, there are her metals, and particularly tin,
of which she has the exclusive monopoly. Tin, I know, is to be found
in Japan, and perhaps elsewhere; but, in practice, England has now
the monopoly of that article. I might go further, and I might say, that
England possesses an advantage, quoad hoc, in her institutions; for
there men are compelled to pay their debts. But here, men are not
only not compelled to pay their debts, but they are protected in the
refusal to pay them, in the scandalous evasion of their legal
obligations; and, after being convicted of embezzling the public
money, and the money of others, of which they were appointed
guardians and trustees, they have the impudence to obtrude their
unblushing fronts into society, and elbow honest men out of their
way. There, though all men are on a footing of equality on the high
way, and in the courts of law, at will and at market, yet the castes in
Hindoostan are not more distinctly separated, one from the other,
than the different classes of society are in England. It is true that it is
practicable for a wealthy merchant or manufacturer, or his
descendants, after having, through two or three generations, washed
out, what is considered the stain of their original occupation, to
emerge, by slow degrees, into the higher ranks of society; but this
rarely happens. Can you find men of vast fortune, in this country,
content to move in the lower circles—content as the ox under the
daily drudgery of the yoke? It is true that, in England, some of these
wealthy people take it into their heads to buy seats in parliament.
But, when they get there, unless they possess great talents, they are
mere nonentities; their existence is only to be found in the red book
which contains a list of the members of parliament. Now, sir, I wish
to know if, in the western country, where any man may get beastly
drunk for three pence sterling—in England, you cannot get a small
wine-glass of spirits under twenty-five cents; one such drink of grog
as I have seen swallowed in this country, would there cost a dollar—
in the western country, where every man can get as much meat and
bread as he can consume, and yet spend the best part of his days, and
nights too, perhaps, on the tavern benches, or loitering at the cross
roads asking the news, can you expect the people of such a country,
with countless millions of wild land and wild animals besides, can be
cooped up in manufacturing establishments, and made to work
sixteen hours a day, under the superintendence of a driver, yes, a
driver, compared with whom a southern overseer is a gentleman and
man of refinement; for, if they do not work, these work people in the
manufactories, they cannot eat; and, among all the punishments that
can be devised (put death even among the number), I defy you to get
as much work out of a man by any of them, as when he knows that he
must work before he can eat.

In the course of this discussion, I have heard, I will not say with
surprise, because nil admirari is my motto—no doctrine that can be
broached on this floor, can ever, hereafter, excite surprise in my
mind—I have heard the names of Say, Ganilh, Adam Smith, and
Ricardo, pronounced not only in terms, but in a tone of sneering
contempt, visionary theorists, destitute of practical wisdom, and the
whole clan of Scotch and Quarterly Reviewers lugged in to boot. This,
sir, is a sweeping clause of proscription. With the names of Say,
Smith, and Ganilh, I profess to be acquainted, for I, too, am versed in
title-pages; but I did not expect to hear, in this house, a name, with
which I am a little further acquainted, treated with so little
ceremony; and by whom? I leave Adam Smith to the simplicity, the
majesty, and strength of his own native genius, which has canonized
his name—a name which will be pronounced with veneration, when
not one in this house will be remembered. But one word as to
Ricardo, the last mentioned of these writers—a new authority,
though the grave has already closed upon him, and set its seal upon
his reputation. I shall speak of him in the language of a man of as
great a genius as this, or perhaps any, age has ever produced; a man
remarkable for the depth of his reflections and the acumen of his
penetration. “I had been led,” says this man, “to look into loads of
books—my understanding had for too many years been intimate with
severe thinkers, with logic, and the great masters of knowledge, not
to be aware of the utter feebleness of the herd of modern economists.
I sometimes read chapters from more recent works, or part of
parliamentary debates. I saw that these [ominous words!] were
generally the very dregs and rinsings of the human intellect.” [I am
very glad, sir, he did not read our debates. What would he have said
of ours?] “At length a friend sent me Mr. Ricardo’s book, and,
recurring to my own prophetic anticipation of the advent of some
legislator on this science, I said, Thou art the man. Wonder and
curiosity had long been dead in me; yet I wondered once more. Had
this profound work been really written in England during the 19th
century? Could it be that an Englishman, and he not in academic
bowers, but oppressed by mercantile and senatorial cares, had
accomplished what all the universities and a century of thought had
failed to advance by one hair’s breadth? All other writers had been
crushed and overlaid by the enormous weight of facts and
documents: Mr. Ricardo had deduced, a priori, from the
understanding itself, laws which first gave a ray of light into the
unwieldy chaos of materials, and had constructed what had been but
a collection of tentative discussions, into a science of regular
proportions, now first standing on an eternal basis.”
 I pronounce no opinion of my own on Ricardo; I recur rather to
the opinion of a man inferior, in point of original and native genius,
and that highly cultivated, too, to none of the moderns, and few of
the ancients. Upon this subject, what shall we say to the following
fact? Butler, who is known to gentlemen of the profession of the law,
as the annotator, with Hargrave, on lord Coke, speaking with Fox as
to political economy—that most extraordinary man, unrivalled for
his powers of debate, excelled by no man that ever lived, or probably
ever will live, as a public debater, and of the deepest political
erudition, fairly confessed that he had never read Adam Smith.
Butler said to Mr. Fox, “that he had never read Adam Smith’s work
on the Wealth of Nations.” “To tell you the truth,” replied Mr. Fox,
“nor I neither. There is something in all these subjects that passes my
comprehension—something so wide that I could never embrace them
myself, or find any one who did.” And yet we see how we, with our
little dividers, undertake to lay off the scale, and with our pack-
thread to take the soundings, and speak with a confidence peculiar to
quacks (in which the regular-bred professor never indulges) on this
abstruse and perplexing subject. Confidence is one thing, knowledge
another; of the want of which, overweening confidence is notoriously
the indication. What of that? Let Ganilh, Say, Ricardo, Smith, all
Greek and Roman fame be against us; we appeal to Dionysius in
support of our doctrines; and to him, not on the throne of Syracuse,
but at Corinth—not in absolute possession of the most wonderful and
enigmatical city, as difficult to comprehend as the abstrusest
problem of political economy which furnished not only the means
but the men for supporting the greatest wars—a kingdom within
itself, under whose ascendant the genius of Athens, in her most high
and palmy state, quailed, and stood rebuked. No; we follow the
pedagogue to the schools—dictating in the classic shades of
Longwood—(lucus a non lucendo)—to his disciples. * * *
But it is said, a measure of this sort is necessary to create
employment for the people. Why, sir, where are the handles of the
plough? Are they unfit for young gentlemen to touch? Or will they
rather choose to enter your military academies, where the sons of the
rich are educated at the expense of the poor, and where so many
political janissaries are every year turned out, always ready for war,
and to support the powers that be—equal to the strelitzes of Moscow
or St. Petersburg. I do not speak now of individuals, of course, but of
the tendency of the system—the hounds follow the huntsman
because he feeds them, and bears the whip. I speak of the system. I
concur most heartily, sir, in the censure which has been passed upon
the greediness of office, which stands a stigma on the present
generation. Men from whom we might expect, and from whom I did
expect, better things, crowd the ante-chamber of the palace, for every
vacant office; nay, even before men are dead, their shoes are wanted
for some barefooted office-seeker. How mistaken was the old
Roman, the old consul, who, whilst he held the plough by one hand,
and death held the other, exclaimed, “Diis immortalibus sero!”
Our fathers, how did they acquire their property? By
straightforward industry, rectitude, and frugality. How did they
become dispossessed of their property? By indulging in speculative
hopes and designs; seeking the shadow whilst they lost the
substance; and now, instead of being, as they were, men of
respectability, men of substance, men capable and willing to live
independently and honestly, and hospitably too—for who so
parsimonious as the prodigal who has nothing to give?—what have
we become? A nation of sharks, preying on one another through the
instrumentality of this paper system, which, if Lycurgus had known
of it, he would unquestionably have adopted, in preference to his
iron money, if his object had been to make the Spartans the most
accomplished knaves as well as to keep them poor.
The manufacturer of the east may carry his woolens or his cottons,
or his coffins, to what market he pleases—I do not buy of him. Self-
defence is the first law of nature. You drive us into it. You create
heats and animosities among this great family, who ought to live like
brothers; and, after you have got this temper of mind roused among
the southern people, do you expect to come among us to trade, and
expect us to buy your wares? Sir, not only shall we not buy them, but
we shall take such measures (I will not enter into the detail of them
now) as shall render it impossible for you to sell them. Whatever may
be said here of the “misguided counsels,” as they have been termed,
“of the theorists of Virginia,” they have, so far as regards this
question, the confidence of united Virginia. We are asked—Does the
south lose any thing by this bill—why do you cry out? I put it, sir, to
any man from any part of the country, from the gulf of Mexico, from
the Balize, to the eastern shore of Maryland—which, I thank Heaven,
is not yet under the government of Baltimore, and will not be, unless
certain theories should come into play in that state, which we have
lately heard of, and a majority of men, told by the head, should
govern—whether the whole country between the points I have
named, is not unanimous in opposition to this bill. Would it not be
unexampled, that we should thus complain, protest, resist, and that
all the while nothing should be the matter? Are our understandings
(however low mine may be rated, much sounder than mine are
engaged in this resistance), to be rated so low, as that we are to be
made to believe that we are children affrighted by a bugbear? We are
asked, however, why do you cry out? it is all for your good. Sir, this
reminds me of the mistresses of George II., who, when they were
insulted by the populace on arriving in London (as all such creatures
deserve to be, by every mob), put their heads out of the window, and
said to them in their broken English, “Goot people, we be come for
your goots;” to which one of the mob rejoined—“Yes, and for our
chattels too, I fancy.” Just so it is with the oppressive exactions
proposed and advocated by the supporters of this bill, on the plea of
the good of those who are its victims. * * *
I had more to say, Mr. Speaker, could I have said it, on this subject.
But I cannot sit down without asking those, who were once my
brethren of the church, the elders of the young family of this good old
republic of the thirteen states, if they can consent to rivet upon us
this system, from which no benefit can possibly result to themselves.
I put it to them as descendants of the renowned colony of Virginia; as
children sprung from her loins; if for the sake of all the benefits, with
which this bill is pretended to be freighted to them, granting such to
be the fact for argument’s sake, they could consent to do such an act
of violence to the unanimous opinion, feelings, prejudices, if you will,
of the whole Southern States, as to pass it? I go farther. I ask of them
what is there in the condition of the nation at this time, that calls for
the immediate adoption of this measure? Are the Gauls at the gate of
the capitol? If they are, the cacklings of the Capitoline geese will
hardly save it. What is there to induce us to plunge into the vortex of
those evils so severely felt in Europe from this very manufacturing
and paper policy? For it is evident that, if we go into this system of
policy, we must adopt the European institutions also. We have very
good materials to work with; we have only to make our elective king
president for life, in the first place, and then to make the succession
hereditary in the family of the first that shall happen to have a
promising son. For a king we can be at no loss—ex quovis ligno—any
block will do for him. The senate may, perhaps, be transmuted into a
house of peers, although we should meet with more difficulty than in
the other case; for Bonaparte himself was not more hardly put to it,
to recruit the ranks of his mushroom nobility, than we should be to
furnish a house of peers. As for us, we are the faithful commons,
ready made to hand; but with all our loyalty, I congratulate the house
—I congratulate the nation—that, although this body is daily
degraded by the sight of members of Congress manufactured into
placemen, we have not yet reached such a point of degradation as to
suffer executive minions to be manufactured into members of
congress. We have shut that door; I wish we could shut the other
also. I wish we could have a perpetual call of the house in this view,
and suffer no one to get out from its closed doors. The time is
peculiarly inauspicious for the change in our policy which is
proposed by this bill. We are on the eve of an election that promises
to be the most distracted that this nation has ever yet undergone. It
may turn out to be a Polish election. At such a time, ought any
measure to be brought forward which is supposed to be capable of
being demonstrated to be extremely injurious to one great portion of
this country, and beneficial in proportion to another? Sufficient for
the day is the evil thereof. There are firebrands enough in the land,
without this apple of discord being cast into this assembly. Suppose
this measure is not what it is represented to be; that the fears of the
south are altogether illusory and visionary; that it will produce all the
good predicted of it—an honorable gentleman from Kentucky said
yesterday—and I was sorry to hear it, for I have great respect for that
gentleman, and for other gentlemen from that state—that the
question was not whether a bare majority should pass the bill, but
whether the majority or the minority should rule. The gentleman is
wrong, and, if he will consider the matter rightly, he will see it. Is
there no difference between the patient and the actor? We are
passive: we do not call them to act or to suffer, but we call upon them
not so to act as that we must necessarily suffer; and I venture to say,
that in any government, properly constituted, this very consideration
would operate conclusively, that if the burden is to be laid on 102, it
ought not to be laid by 105. We are the eel that is being flayed, while
the cook-maid pats us on the head, and cries, with the clown in King
Lear, “Down, wantons, down.” There is but one portion of the
country which can profit by this bill, and from that portion of the
country comes this bare majority in favor of it. I bless God that
Massachusetts and old Virginia are once again rallying under the
same banner, against oppressive and unconstitutional taxation; for,
if all the blood be drawn from out the body, I care not whether it be
by the British parliament or the American congress; by an emperor
or a king abroad, or by a president at home.
Under these views, and with feelings of mortification and shame at
the very weak opposition I have been able to make to this bill, I
entreat gentlemen to consent that it may lie over, at least, until the
next session of congress. We have other business to attend to, and
our families and affairs need our attention at home; and indeed I, sir,
would not give one farthing for any man who prefers being here to
being at home; who is a good public man and a bad private one. With
these views and feelings, I move you, sir, that the bill be indefinitely
postponed.
 Edward Everett.

The example of the Northern to the Southern Republics of America.

The great triumphs of constitutional freedom, to which our
independence has furnished the example, have been witnessed in the
southern portion of our hemisphere. Sunk to the last point of
colonial degradation, they have risen at once into the organization of
three republics. Their struggle has been arduous; and eighteen years
of checkered fortune have not yet brought it to a close. But we must
not infer, from their prolonged agitation, that their independence is
uncertain; that they have prematurely put on the toga virilis of
freedom. They have not begun too soon; they have more to do. Our
war of independence was shorter;—happily we were contending with
a government, that could not, like that of Spain, pursue an
interminable and hopeless contest, in defiance of the people’s will.
Our transition to a mature and well adjusted constitution was more
prompt than that of our sister republics; for the foundations had long
been settled, the preparation long made. And when we consider that
it is our example, which has aroused the spirit of independence from
California to Cape Horn; that the experiment of liberty, if it had
failed with us, most surely would not have been attempted by them;
that even now our counsels and acts will operate as powerful
precedents in this great family of republics, we learn the importance
of the post which Providence has assigned us in the world. A wise
and harmonious administration of the public affairs,—a faithful,
liberal, and patriotic exercise of the private duties of the citizen,—
while they secure our happiness at home, will diffuse a healthful
influence through the channels of national communication, and
serve the cause of liberty beyond the Equator and the Andes. When
we show a united, conciliatory, and imposing front to their rising
states we show them, better than sounding eulogies can do, the true
aspect of an independent republic; we give them a living example
that the fireside policy of a people is like that of the individual man.
As the one, commencing in the prudence, order, and industry of the
private circle, extends itself to all the duties of social life, of the
family, the neighborhood, the country; so the true domestic policy of
the republic, beginning in the wise organization of its own
institutions, pervades its territories with a vigilant, prudent,
temperate administration; and extends the hand of cordial interest to
all the friendly nations, especially to those which are of the
household of liberty.
It is in this way that we are to fulfil our destiny in the world. The
greatest engine of moral power, which human nature knows, is an
organized, prosperous state. All that man, in his individual capacity,
can do—all that he can effect by his fraternities—by his ingenious
discoveries and wonders of art,—or by his influence over others—is
as nothing, compared with the collective, perpetuated influence on
human affairs and human happiness of a well constituted, powerful
commonwealth. It blesses generations with its sweet influence;—
even the barren earth seems to pour out its fruits under a system
where property is secure, while her fairest gardens are blighted by
despotism;—men, thinking, reasoning men, abound beneath its
benignant sway;—nature enters into a beautiful accord, a better,
purer asiento with man, and guides an industrious citizen to every
rood of her smiling wastes;—and we see, at length, that what has
been called a state of nature, has been most falsely, calumniously so
denominated; that the nature of man is neither that of a savage, a
hermit, nor a slave; but that of a member of a well-ordered family,
that of a good neighbor, a free citizen, a well informed, good man,
acting with others like him. This is the lesson which is taught in the
charter of our independence; this is the lesson which our example is
to teach the world.
The epic poet of Rome—the faithful subject of an absolute prince—
in unfolding the duties and destinies of his countrymen, bids them
look down with disdain on the polished and intellectual arts of
Greece, and deem their arts to be
To rule the nations with imperial sway;
To spare the tribes that yield; fight down the proud;
And force the mood of peace upon the world.