The American Gentleman's Guide to Politeness and Fashion Part 20

_To Mrs. Modish,[9]

No. 14 Belgrave Place, Charleston, S. C._

ASTOR HOUSE, NEW YORK, _Jan. 27th, 1863_.

DEAR MADAM:

Permit me to present to you my friend, Mr. James Stuart--a gentleman whose polished manners and irreproachable character embolden me to request for him the honor of an acquaintance with even so fastidious and accomplished an arbiter of fashion as yourself.

Mr. Stuart will be able to give you all the information you may desire respecting our mutual friends and acquaintances in society here.

Do me the honor to make my very respectful compliments to the Misses Modish, and to believe me, dear madam,

Most respectfully, Your friend and servant, ROBERT B. HAWKS.

MRS. MODISH.

[9] It is etiquette to address communications to a lady according to the style she adopts for _her card_. Thus, the elder of two married ladies, bearing the same name and of the same family, may properly designate herself simply as Mrs. ----, without any Christian name (her position in society and the addition upon her card, of her _locale_ being supposed sufficient to identify her). The wives of her youngest brother, or those of her sons, are then "Mrs. N. C. ----,"

"Mrs. Charles ----," and so on. The eldest of a family of sisters is, "Miss ----," the younger are "Miss Nellie ----," "Miss Julia ----,"

etc. In writing to, or conversing with them, you thus individualize them. But when you are upon ceremonious terms with them, _in the absence of the elder,_ you address one of the younger sisters, with whom you are conversing, as "Miss ----," only, omitting the individualizing Christian name. Of course, when writing under such circ.u.mstances, a note of ceremony designed for the young ladies of a family, collectively, should be addressed to "_The Misses_ ----;" and if for one of them, alone, to "Miss ----," or, "Miss Mary G. ----,"

as the case may be.

Letters presenting _foreigners_, should designate the country and particular locality to which they belong, as well as the purpose of their tour, as--"The Chevalier Bonne, of Berne, Switzerland whose object in visiting our young Republic is not only the wish to compare our social and political inst.i.tutions with those of his own country, but the collection of _specimens_ and _information_ respecting the _Natural History_ of the United States. Such a.s.sistance as you may be able to render my learned friend, in facilitating his particular researches, will confer a favor upon me, my dear sir, which I shall ever gratefully remember," etc., etc.

The subject of letters of introduction naturally suggests that of _personal introductions_, in relation to which the grossest mistakes and the greatest carelessness are prevalent, even among well-bred people.

In making persons acquainted with each other, the form of words may vary almost with every different occasion, but there are certain rules that should never be overlooked, since they refer to considerations of abstract propriety.

Younger persons and inferiors in social rank, should, almost invariably, be _presented to_ their seniors and superiors. Thus, one should not say--"Mr. Smith, let me introduce Mr. Washington Irving to you," but "Mr. Irving, will you allow me to introduce Mr. John Smith to you?" Or, "Permit me to present Mr. Smith to you, sir," presupposing that Mr.

Smith does not need to be informed to whom he is about to be introduced.

It is difficult to express upon paper the difference of signification conveyed by the mode of _intonating_ a sentence. "General Scott, Mr.

Jones," may be so p.r.o.nounced as to present the latter gentlemen to our distinguished countryman, in a simple, but admissible manner, or it may ill.u.s.trate the impropriety of naming a man of mark to a person who makes no pretensions to social equality with him.

Usually, men should be introduced to women, upon the principle that precedence is always yielded to the latter; but, even in this case, an exception may properly be made in the instance of an introduction between a _very young_, or, otherwise, wholly unindividualized woman, and a man of high position, or of venerable age. A half-playful variation from the ordinary phraseology of this ceremony, may sometimes be adopted, under such circ.u.mstances, with good taste, as--"This young lady desires the pleasure of knowing you, sir--Miss Williams," or, "Mr.

Prescott, this is my niece, Miss Ada Byron Robinson."

When there is a "distinction without a difference" between two persons, or when hospitality interdicts your a.s.suming to decide a nice point in this regard, it may be waived by merely _naming_ the parties in such a way as to give precedence to neither--thus: "Gentlemen, allow me--Mr.

W----, Mr. V----," or, "Gentlemen, allow me the pleasure of making you known to each other," and then simply p.r.o.nounce the names of the two persons.

By the way, let me call your attention to the importance of an _audible_ and _distinct_ enunciation of _names_, when a.s.suming to make an introduction. A _quiet, self-possessed manner_, and _intelligibility_ should be regarded as essential at such times.

When introducing persons who are necessarily wholly unacquainted with each other's antecedents of station or circ.u.mstance, it is eminently proper to add a brief explanation, as--"Mr. Preudhomne, let me introduce my brother-in-law, General Peters,--Mr. Preudhomne, of Paris," or; "Mrs.

Blandon, with your permission, I will present to you Senor Abenno, a Spanish gentleman. Senor A. speaks French perfectly, but is unacquainted with our language;" or, "Mr. Smithson, this is my friend Mr. Brown, of Philadelphia--like ourselves, _a merchant_;" or, "My dear, this is Captain Blevin, of the good ship Neversink,--Mrs. Nephews, sir."

Never say "My wife," or "My daughter," or "My sister," "My father-in-law," or the like, without giving each their proper ceremonious t.i.tle. How should a stranger know whether your "daughter"

is--

"Sole daughter of your house and heart,"

or Miss "Lucy," or "Belinda," the third or fourth in the order of time, and, consequently, of precedence, or what may chance to be the name of your father-in-law, or half-sister, etc., etc.

Well-bred people address each other by name, when conversing, and hence the awkwardness occasioned by this vulgar habit, which is only equalled by that of speaking of your wife as "My wife,"[10] or worse still, "_my lady!_" Is it not enough, when your friends know that you are married, and are perfectly familiar with your own name, to speak of "Mrs. ----,"

and to introduce them to the mistress of your house by that designation?

It is a solecism in good manners to suppose it unsuitable to designate the members of your own family by their proper t.i.tles under all circ.u.mstances that would render it suitable and convenient to do so in the instance of other persons. Never fall into the _American_ peculiarity on this point, I entreat you. Say--"My father, Dr. V----,"

or "My sister, Miss V----," "Mrs. Col. V----, my sister-in-law," or, "My sister, Mrs. John Jenkins," with as scrupulous a regard for rank and precedence, as though dealing with strangers. Indeed, you virtually _ignore all personal considerations_, while acting in a social relation merely.

[10] This reminds me of another habit that is becoming prevalent in this _new_ land of ours--that of men's entering themselves upon the Registers of Hotels, Ocean Steamers, etc., as "M. A. Timeson and _lady_!" or, "Mr. G. Simpson and _wife_." What can possibly be the objection to the good old established form of "Mr. and Mrs. M. A.

Timeson," or "George and Mrs. Simpson," or "Mr. G. Simpson. Mrs. and the Misses Simpson?"

The rules of etiquette very properly interdict _indiscriminate introductions_ in general society. No one has a right to thrust the acquaintance of persons upon each other without their permission, or, at least, without some a.s.surance that it will be agreeable to them to know each other. Strangers meeting at the house of a mutual friend, in a morning visit, or the like, converse with each other, or join in the general conversation without an introduction, which it is not usual among fashionable people to give under such circ.u.mstances. If you wish to present a gentleman of your acquaintance to a lady, you first ask her permission, either in person or by note, to take him to her house, if she be married, or to do so at a party, etc., where you may chance to meet her. In the instance of a very young lady, propriety demands your obtaining the consent of one of her parents before adding to her list of male acquaintances, unless you are upon such terms of intimacy with her family and herself, as to render this superfluous; and so with all your friends. It is better, however, even where unceremoniousness is admissible, to err upon the safer side.

Among men, greater license may be taken; but, _as a rule_, I repeat, persons are _not_ introduced in the street, in pump-rooms, in the public parlors of hotels, or watering-places, meeting incidentally at receptions or at morning visits, etc.; and not even when they are your guests at large dinners, or soirees, without their previous a.s.sent or request.

Of course, such rules, like all the laws of convention, are established and followed for convenience, and should not be regarded, like those of the Medes and Persians, as unchangeable. Good sense and good feeling will vary them with the changes of circ.u.mstance. No amiable person, for instance, will hesitate to set them aside for the observance of the more imperative law of kindness, when a.s.sociated with those who are ignorant of their existence (as many really excellent persons are), and would be pained by their strict observance. Neither should the most punctilious sticklers for form think it necessary to make a parade of the mere letter of such rules, at any time. It is the spirit we want, for the promotion of social convenience and propriety.

Perhaps it may be as well in this connection as in any other, to say a word about the matter of _visiting cards_.

Fashion sanctions a variety of forms for this necessary appendage. In Europe, it is very common to affix the professional or political t.i.tle to the name, as "---- ----, Professor in the University of Heidelburg,"

or, "---- ----, Conseiller d'Etat,"; and an Englishman in public life often has on his card the cabalistic characters--"In H.M.S."--(in Her Majesty's Service). Among the best-bred Americans, I think the prevalent usage is to adopt the _simple signature_, as "Henry Wise," or to prefix the t.i.tle of Mr., as "Mr. Seward." Sometimes,--particularly for cards to be used away from home--the place of residence is also engraved in one corner below the name.[11]

[11] Persons belonging to the Army and Navy use their full t.i.tles, with the addition of "U.S.A.," or "U.S.N."

Europeans occasionally adopt the practice of having the corners of the reverse side of their cards engraven across with such convenient words as "_Pour dire Adieu_" (to say good bye). "_Congratulation_" (to offer congratulations). "_Pour affaire_" (on an errand, or on business).

"_Arrive_" (tantamount to "_in town_"). The appropriate corner is turned over, as occasion requires, and the sentence is thus brought into notice on the _same side with the name_.

_Business cards_ should never be used in social life, nor should flourishes, ornamental devices, or generally unintelligible characters be employed. A smooth, _white_ card, of moderate size, with a plain, legible inscription of the name, is in unexceptionable taste and _ton_, suitable for all occasions, and sufficient for all purposes, with the addition, when circ.u.mstances require it, of a pencilled word or sentence. But to return to our main subject.

_Letters of Recommendation_ partake of the general character of those of introduction. It is sufficient to add, in regard to them, that they should be _conscientiously_ expressed. All that can be truthfully said for the advantage of the bearer, should be included; but, as I have before remarked, no one is obliged to compromise his own integrity to advance the interests of others in this manner, more than in any other.

_Letters of Condolence_ require great care and delicacy of composition.

They should relate chiefly, as a rule, to the subject by which they are elicited, and express _sympathy_ rather than aim at _administering consolation_. No general directions can be made to embrace the peculiarities of circ.u.mstance in this regard. Suffice it to say that the inspiration of genuine feeling will dictate rather expressions of kindly interest for the sufferer you address, of respect and regard for a departed friend, or an appreciation of the magnitude of the misfortune you deplore, rather than coldly polished sentences and prolonged reference to one's self.

_Letters of Congratulation_ should embody cheerfulness and cordiality of sentiment, and be at an equal remove from an exaggeration of style, suggesting the idea of insincerity or of covert ridicule, and from chilling politeness, or indications of indifference. To "rejoice with those who rejoice" is indeed a pleasing and easy task for those who are blessed with a genial nature, and enrich themselves by partaking in the good fortune of others. Letters expressing this pleasure admit of a little more egotism than is sanctioned by decorum in some other cases.

One may be allowed to allude to one's own feelings when so pleasurably a.s.sociated with those of one's correspondent.

_Brevity_ is quite admissible in letters both of condolence and felicitation--referring, as they properly do, chiefly to _one topic_; it is in better taste not to introduce extraneous matter into them, especially when they are of a merely ceremonious nature.

_Letters to Superiors in Station or Age_ demand a respectful and laconic style. No familiarity of address, no colloquialisms, pleasantries, or digressions, are admissible in them. They should be commenced with a ceremoniously-respectful address carefully and concisely expressed, and concluded with an elaborate formula, of established phraseology. The name of the person to whom they are written should be placed near the lower, left hand edge of the sheet, together with his ceremonious t.i.tle, etc. No abbreviations of words--and none of t.i.tles, unsanctioned by established usage, should be introduced into such letters, and they should bear at the commencement, below the date, and on the left hand side of the paper, the name of the person addressed, thus:

WASHINGTON CITY, _Feb. 2d, 1863_.

HONORABLE EDWARD EVERETT:--

SIR,

I am, sir, Very respectfully, Your humble servant, J. F. CARPENTER.