Etiquette and a Mixed-Race Queen

Portrait of Queen Charlotte, the wife of King George III, from the National Galleries of Scotland – King George III and wife Charlotte, England’s mixed-race Queen, had 15 children, 13 of whom survived to adulthood. During her first years as Queen, the former German Princess, Charlotte had some difficulty in adapting to the life of the British royal court. A strained relationship with her mother-in-law, Princess Augusta, didn’t help matters. Augusta made it difficult for Charlotte to establish social contacts by insisting on rigid royal court etiquette. She also initially appointed many of Charlotte's staff, and several were suspected of reporting on Charlotte's behavior, to her mother in-law. When Charlotte turned to her German companions for solace, she was criticized for “keeping favorites.” Regarding Queen Charlotte’s partial African ancestry, a Buckingham Palace spokesperson, David Buck, was quoted by the Boston Globe as saying, “It is a matter of history, and frankly, we've got far more important things to talk about.” Indeed!

Royal Courtships Which Lacked Real Romance

The romantic wooing of the King of Spain reminds one how rarely the element of romance has been associated with royal marriages. What could have been more brutally inconsiderate than the arrangements for the marriage of Queen Charlotte, wife of King George III? This Princess, just 17, was selected as consort for the King of England. Her life at Mecklenburg, writes Lady Violet Greville, had hitherto been of the simplest. She dressed “en robe de chambre” every day except Sunday, when she put on her best gown and drove out in a coach and six. The Ambassador sent to demand her hand having arrived, she was told nothing of his mission, merely that she was to dine downstairs that night for the first time. “Mind what you say, ‘et ne faites pas l’enfant’,” was the warning of her eldest brother. After dinner, at which she was naturally very shy, she beheld the saloon illuminated, a table and two cushions prepared for a wedding. Some kind of ceremony then took place; she was embraced by her family, and presented by the Ambassador with a beautiful parure of diamonds, including the little Crown of diamonds which so often appears in her portraits. She was pressed for an immediate departure, but pleaded for the respite of a week, in order to take leave of everybody. During this time she ran about visiting the poor and the little garden of medical herbs, fruit and flowers which she cultivated herself for the benefit of the poor. She afterward introduced the same practice at Kew and Richmond.

The poor little bride suffered a terrible crossing to Harwich, the Royal yacht being nearly driven on the coast of Norway. The Duchesses of Ancaster and Hamilton, sent to conduct the Princess to England, were both much indisposed, but Charlotte herself remained quite well and cheered the company by singing Luther's hymns to her harpischord in her cabin with the door open. Arriving in London at about 3 o'clock, having traveled since 12, she was met by the King in the garden of St. James’ Palace. Attempting to kneel, she was caught by the enthusiastic Monarch, who embraced her kindly and nearly carried her upstairs. That very evening the wedding ceremony took place. Horace Walpole writes of the new Queen: “She looks very sensible, cheerful and is remarkably, genteel” (that favorite epithet of the period). “Her tiara of diamonds was very pretty, her stomacher sumptuous, her violet velvet mantle and ermine so heavy that her clothes were dragged almost down to her waist.” The wedding over and supper not being ready, the Queen sat down and obligingly played and sang to her harpsichord. The royal party never separated till between 3 and 4 in the morning, no slight trial for a bride of 17 who had employed the few moments she passed in her room after her arrival in trying on her wedding gown and the rest of her trousseau. When first she caught sight of the Palace she became very nervous, and, being told that she was to be married that evening, she, in fact, fainted in the carriage. The Duchess of Hamilton, one of the beautiful Miss Gunnings, smiling at her fears, Charlotte said: “You may laugh— you have been married twice — but to me it is no joke.” It is pleasant to think that after being so highly tried, Charlotte's married life proved perfectly happy. 

Very different was the arrival of Catherine of Braganza, who, when first seen by Charles II, was laid up with a cough and a little fever in bed. He was not favorably impressed by his new Consort and remarked as much to his attendants. Elizabeth Farnese, who married the King of Spain, son of Louis XIV of France, as his second wife, celebrated her arrival in Spain by quarreling with, and summarily dismissing the lady in waiting sent to receive her, the famous Princess des Ursins, who had ruled the late Queen, and by whom she herself had been chosen successor. Elizabeth's future life was passed in slavish attendance on her husband that she might secure her influence over him and prevent any state affairs being transacted without her knowledge. Twenty minutes only of the day and night was she permitted to be alone. Elizabeth was an ardent sportswoman and followed the King even at the chase; the rest of her existence was passed in a routine of arduous etiquette and monotony. 

George IV's reception of his bride, Caroline of Brunswick, is well known— how the blue-eyed, bouncing, buxom girl was implored by Lord Malmesbury to be very particular about her talk and her toilet; how the Prince pretended to be overcome at their first meeting and called for a dram of brandy, and how the Princess afterward declared that he was drunk on her wedding night. Not much chance of happiness there! Until quite recently very, little liberty was accorded to Princesses. Queen Charlotte, even after her marriage, was for several years in thraldom to the dowager Princess of Wales and denied all diversion and pleasures. She told Miss Burney that even her jewels had ceased to dazzle and interest her. “Believe me,” she said, “it is the pleasure of a week, a fortnight, at most, and then returns no more.” One of her greatest griefs, and one which caused her bitter tears, was the determination of her mother-in-law that Charlotte should wear her jewels when she received the sacrament for the first time after she became Queen. She had promised her own mother never to do this— it was an act of humility which had been strictly inculcated on her; and it proceeded from the game devotional impulse which caused King George to take off his Crown when he knelt at the altar during the Coronation. 

The courtship of Queen Victoria brings us into a pleasanter atmosphere. On Prince Albert’s first visit to England she liked and appreciated him at once, and his tastes agreed with hers. “Every grace had been showered by nature on this charming boy,” says Baron Stockman of him at this time. The Baron judged him critically, calmly and impartially until he finally became his most attached and devoted friend and adviser. Queen Victoria and her cousin met at first unconscious of the object of their acquaintance, and when the desired impression had been produced, the young Prince, like a second Sir Galahad, was sent away to travel and fit himself by study and careful education for his great position. On his return to England the Queen writes: “Albert's beauty is most striking, and he is most amiable and unaffected — in short, fascinating.” 

The young couple were genuinely in love, and the Queen informed Lord Melbourne that the conquest of her heart was complete. So serious, so dignified, so studious and so excellent a young man would infuse an element of poetry and deep feeling into his love making; but by the rules of etiquette the proposal itself had to come from the young Queen, whose maidenly modesty was somewhat embarrassed at the prospect. She summoned him to her boudoir, where he found her alone. After some desultory talk due to her shyness, she suddenly said: “Could you forsake your country for me?” The Prince answered by clasping her in his arms. In such simple fashion did a young Sovereign, woo and win the husband of her choice. – Los Angeles Herald, 1906

Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J Graber, is the Site Editor for the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia 

Etiquette and an African Princess

West African Royalty, Sara Forbes Bonetta, on her wedding day with her Groom, in 1862. Queen Victoria had raised her as a ‘Goddaughter’ in the British middle class. This description is of the wedding; “The wedding party, which arrived from West Hill Lodge, Brighton in ten carriages and pairs of grays, was made up of White ladies with African gentlemen, and African ladies with White gentlemen. There were sixteen bridesmaids.”

Sarah Forbes Bonetta was born a child of Yoruba Royalty. She was a Princess of the Egbado clan in West Africa. The army of the Kingdom of Dahomey brutally attacked her village when Sarah, was only 4 or 5 years old though, slaughtering her siblings and decapitating her parents. The now orphaned Princess was kept as a slave in the court of Dahomey King Ghezo. The King, a notorious slave trader, had plans for Aina (Sarah’s birth name). She was to become a human sacrifice.

During a visit to King Ghezo, Royal Navy Captain Frederick E. Forbes was able to rescue the young Princess. On a mission to convince Ghezo to abandon the slave trade, Forbes bargained for the Sarah’s life. He persuaded the King to give her to Queen Victoria. Later, in his journal, he wrote: “She would be a present from the King of the Blacks to the Queen of the Whites.” Forbes re-named Sarah after his ship, the HMS Bonetta and his own name. The Princess Aina became “Sarah Forbes Bonetta” and they sailed for England. 

Queen Victoria and Sarah Forbes Bonetta, as portrayed on ITV’s series, “Victoria” – “… back in Shakespeare's day, you could have met people from west Africa and even Bengal in the same London streets. Of course, there were fewer, and they drew antipathy as well as fascination from the Tudor inhabitants, who had never seen black people before. But we know they lived, worked and intermarried, so it is fair to say that Britain's first black community starts here. There had been black people in Britain in Roman times, and they are found as musicians in the early Tudor period in England and Scotland. But the real change came in Elizabeth I's reign, when, through the records, we can pick up ordinary, working, black people, especially in London. Shakespeare himself, a man fascinated by 'the other', wrote several black parts - indeed, two of his greatest characters are black - and the fact that he put them into mainstream entertainment reflects the fact that they were a significant element in the population of London. Employed especially as domestic servants, but also as musicians, dancers and entertainers, their numbers ran to many hundreds, maybe even more. And let's be clear - they were not slaves. In English law, it was not possible to be a slave in England (although that principle had to be re-stated in slave trade court cases in the late 18th Century, like the Somersett case of 1772). In Elizabeth's reign, the black people of London were mostly free. Some indeed, both men and women, married native English people.” –BBC History Magazine

The first meeting between Queen Victoria and Sarah was at Windsor Castle in November of 1850. Opposed to racism, and impressed by Sarah’s intelligence and manners, Victoria recognized her Royal blood by calling her a “Princess.” Queen Victoria soon became Sarah’s “Godmother” and invited her regularly to Windsor Castle. Victoria paid for her education and upbringing after finding guardians for the young Princess. Captain Forbes died a year later, around the same time that Sarah developed a chronic cough, attributed to the climate in England. In an attempt to improve her health, Victoria sent Sarah to Sierra Leone in the hope that her health would improve in the warmer temperatures.

Sarah excelled academically, but was unhappy living in Sierra Leone, and attending the church missionary society school there. Queen Victoria arranged for Sarah’s return in 1855, when she was about 12 years old. She lived in Gillingham, with the Schoen family. Remaining a part of Queen Victoria’s life, Sarah was a guest at her daughter Princess Vicky’s wedding.Sarah received a marriage proposal from Captain James Pinson Labulo Davies, when she was 19. He was a wealthy Yoruban businessman, already a widower and more than 10 years her senior. Initially turning down the proposal, Sarah soon agreed to the marriage. Victoria naturally approved the match. Like other young women her age, Sarah had no financial independence if she remained unmarried.

A large wedding in Brighton followed, with guests both white and black. Much happier than Sarah had initially presumed she’d be, the couple moved to Africa. They had three children: Victoria, named after the Queen, Arthur and Stella. The family returned to England in 1867. Smitten with her young namesake, Queen Victoria not only became Godmother to little Victoria, she paid for her education, as well. Sadly, Sarah died of tuberculosis at the age of 37, on Portugal’s island of Madeira.

🍽️Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber of The RSVP Institute of Etiquette, is the Site Editor for the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia 

Etiquette Knows No Color

A "blast from the past," when attendees dressed for all sporting matches, not just for once a year, Kentucky Derby-type sporting events.

Troubling Notions

After a very brief exchange with a woman, when I stated how improper behavior and the lack of proper manners is hurtful to people wanting to advance and improve their lives, I was left troubled. Her response to me was, “You can’t impose middle class values on the ghetto!” She clearly did not understand that proper behavior has nothing to do with race or one's financial status, but more with the respect we show to each other and to ourselves.

It's disconcerting that a great number of people in the African-American community seem to view any type of proper behavior as “selling out” or “acting white.” It's as if carrying oneself respectfully will erase their “identity” from existence. Many also seem to want to disconnect from any type of proper behavior or etiquette with the notion that it has nothing to do with them, when in reality, it has plenty to do with them.

Etiquette's Surprising History

In my research on the practices involved with training etiquette, I uncovered a tidbit of interesting history written by Judith Martin, the author known as “Miss Manners." When it came to teaching manners to the children of wealthy Southern plantation owners, the job was that of the household slaves. According to Miss Manners:

“The plantation owners thought they were being English country gentlemen, but who was teaching etiquette to their children? The house slaves. The house slaves often came from a more elevated background than the masters. They were chosen among the slaves as the people who were more refined. They had been captured and brought over from Africa, whereas, of course, voluntary immigrants came because things weren’t so great at home. 

The house slave, usually the mammy, taught manners to the children. So she taught them the manners she knew. The “y’all come see me” kind of hospitality is an African tradition that they brought over.”

The way I see it, proper manners and respectful behavior are not our shame, they are our birthright! Sadly while these women and men who were teaching their master's children proper manners, it was a valuable education they could not pass on to their children lest they be accused of being “uppity” and it could have cost them dearly. But what about today? Why do many still shy away from it seeing it as something “they do," but not  something “we do," when we have had a family of color, an African-American "First Family," residing for these past several years in the White House?

After slavery, many blacks sought to better their fortunes by taking advantage of the opportunities to become educated and to learn the proper usage of the social graces of their day to fit in. The racism that banned them from being educated in white institutions did not stop them from educating themselves and setting up their own schools and implementing the social graces practiced at that time. These practices continued into the 20th century, when blacks enjoyed their own social dinners, dances and cotillions. 

Maxine Powell, Motown’s, "Artist Development Coach," taught The Temptations, The Supremes and all the other famous Motown acts, the finer points of charm, etiquette and social graces. This training was just as important to their successes, as their ability to sing and, in many social situations of the early 1960s, even more important.

Other Cultures Understand

People of other cultures who are advancing, and prospering on a global level, understand that if they want to interact with people and expand their influence, they have to refine their manners and social behavior.

Dr. Charlotte Hawkins Brown, the founder of Palmer Memorial Institute and author of the 1940’s social graces handbook for African Americans, “The Correct Thing to Do, to Say, to Wear," had this to say 72 years ago during a live radio broadcast:

“After all, the success of the American Negro depends upon his contacts with other races who, through the years, have had greater advantages of learning the proper approach to life and its problems. The little courtesies, the gentle voice, correct grooming, a knowledge of when to sit, when to stand; how to open and close a door; the correct attitude toward persons in authority; good manners in public places, such as railroad stations, moving picture houses, and other places where we are constantly under observation—the acquisition of these graces will go a long way in securing that recognition of ability needed to cope with human society, and will remove some of the commonest objections to our presence in large numbers.”

During the time of Jim Crow segregation, she understood even back then, that proper conduct and behavior was important in working with people of other races and cultures to advance one's fortunes was of the utmost importance. At the same time, she was also very aware that despite those efforts, many African-Americans would still suffer unfair treatment, so to not carry oneself respectfully would only make matters worse.

According to TIME magazine, the #1 course that students take at the Shanghai Institute of Foreign Trade, is the manners course training the students in etiquette. With their newfound prosperity, they understand that their old behaviors are no longer acceptable if they want to stay on the competitive edge. We in the African-American community, need to get with the program if we want a place in the global market and the accompanying respect we are due. If not, we will be left behind, holding on to our right to “keep it real."

Speaking of our right to “keep it real,” how has this false code of honor served us? I for one can say not very well. I believe that the breakdown began in the 1970’s and has continued to this day. We have abandoned many of the practices of social graces and etiquette in the light of “self-discovery.” We made the decision that good manners and celebrating the notion that “black is beautiful," could not co-exist. Good manners and proper conduct were seen as “white” attributes to be shunned and so the baby is thrown out with the bath water so to speak. Dr. Brown also spoke about this:

“It is perfectly natural that we want to forget much that was associated with slavery and its aftermath; at the same time it is very necessary that we pay attention to some of the things gained by our fore parents through intimate association with an aristocracy schooled in the finer things of life. Well may we add to our modern culture and educational efficiency some of the fine manners of those bygone days.”

Dr. Brown understood that despite the fact that proper conduct was associated with white society (though race has nothing to do with behaving properly), she urged African-Americans to not forget the benefits that carrying oneself properly could provide, despite the poor attitude of the people who wielded the most power and influence. 

To a certain degree, I understand the rebellion against these established practices and the attempts to be more independent. But what was gained from outward rebellion? Nothing. It has done nothing but isolate us, and it has robbed many of us, of the things we desire to obtain and achieve. We must take measures to correct this behavior, and quickly, if we want to not just survive, but also thrive.

When in Rome...

There's no crime in wanting to be independent. Utilizing wisdom is the key. The children of foreign rulers and diplomats are sent to finishing and boarding schools to learn Western social graces, but at home they still utilize their cultural protocol. They understand the best gift they can give their children is to empower them to be well prepared for whatever environment they find themselves in. It is not about conforming, but about knowing when it is appropriate to compromise for what one is trying to accomplish.

The world is becoming more globally interconnected, and if we do not get with the times, as aforementioned, we will be left behind. A practical compromise for a greater investment in one's future, if done correctly, is not “selling out." It is not to impress other people as much as it is to value ourselves.

                                                   

This was from a favorite contributor to this site, the late Demita Usher. She wanted it shared and we thought this would be an appropriate time to edit and post it, as it's Black History Month. Demita, who died suddenly in June of 2015, said that she was continually working to dispell the notion that etiquette is just "for white people." Demita wanted others to understand that etiquette knows no color. Her friendship and passion is missed by many!

Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber, is the Site Editor for the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia 

Amy Vanderbilt on Etiquette, Race and Immigrants

“Do not criticize another’s religion, belittle his race or country, or refer unnecessarily to his color in his presence.” Amy Vanderbilt

The Unimportant Differences

As long as I can remember, I have been bored with landscapes. I couldn’t look at a picture, a photograph, or a view with much interest, unless somewhere there were people or something that indicated they were there or soon would be.

I was long secretly ashamed of this limitation in me. I should have, I felt, been able to drink in the beauty of Mount Hood without stealing a connective glance at the outskirts of Portland. I should have been able to love the ocean, even when no ships rode low on the horizon to excite my speculations. But now, after half a lifetime of getting to know myself, I realize that there are too many of us who see the view and not the people humanizing it. My need for people in the picture has given me a fuller understanding of life.

I believe I have something warm and good to give my children in my love of people. When my eldest son was a little boy, we were on a Fifth Avenue bus. He kept turning around to smile at someone I couldn’t see. When we got off, this person did too, and I saw that she was an elderly Negro. “Your little boy likes me,” she said with some surprise. “He don’t seem to notice any difference in me at all, like I was his own grandmother. How’s that?” “Because,” I replied, “he’s never been taught by the grownups around him that there is a difference.”

Children un-coached in prejudice and class consciousness enjoy people for what they are. As they mature, our society soon sets them right, as to their place in it. More often than not, they accept this place without question, and thereby shut themselves off from warm human contact with many of their fellows. They become cocoon-like in their fear that reaching out beyond their own immediate social confines will place them in an untenable position.

It did take a certain courage, maturity, and sophistication to broaden my own circle to include people of other races, nationalities, and religions on the same terms as those born into my own little place in the world. But in doing so, I lost my fear of those different from myself in some way God chose to make them. As friendship became possible, differences seemed very unimportant. I think I’ve learned to accept the differences as an interesting part of my new friends’ personalities, not something to be feared, tactfully ignored, or excused.

I shall never forget my first lonely schoolgirl days abroad before I learned to speak French. I was entirely surrounded by the majestic beauty of the Alps, but I could not speak a word to the people, nor they to me. But within a few months, through the miracle of language, people came into the picture for me. It was the beginning of my understanding that the greatest natural beauty is for me, at least, comprehensible only through living contact with people of all kinds who share the view.

Our Attitude Toward Newcomers to the U.S.

    from Amy Vanderbilt's Complete Book of Etiquette, 1957

Caribbean immigrants in the 1950s

Every generation has its immigrants. Many of us are descendants of the of Italians who came to supply our labor pool or bolster our artisan class in Irish who emigrated here during the potato famine in the nineteenth century, the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, of early Dutch settlers dissatisfied with opportunities at home and who came to trade and colonize in New Amsterdam. We are all, no matter how impressive our family trees, descended from immigrants of one kind or the other, if we are Americans. Even the American Indian is now known to have emigrated here from Asia.

Millions of us are the children or grandchildren or great-grandchildren of those who took refuge here to escape political, social or economic upheavals in their own lands or who fled from religious persecution. The fleeing religious persecution, just as in the twentieth century refugees from Pilgrim fathers, now so revered socially as ancestors, were the first refugees, Hitler Protestants, Catholics, and Jews sought not only the right to worship as they please among us but the very chance to stay alive. The Pilgrims faced the Indians, who, being here first, resented any encroachment on their hunting grounds. Every new settler today has us to face the entrenched Americans, who, like the Indian tribes, forget sometimes that they came (or their grandfathers or great-grandfathers) to this land of opportunity because, for some reason or other, things were not good at home. It is only natural for every man to regard the stranger, the possible economic encroacher, with a wary eye. But we need to remember our own sources and realize that the vigor and progress of the country is stimulated by each such influx of new Americans, who bring with them talents, trades, ambition, and even wealth America can use. 

Let's examine some of our attitudes toward refugees in our century-

One hears the criticism "Why do they all have to live in one neighborhood all the Italians, all the Poles, the Scandinavians, all the French, the Germans, the Jews in tight little settlements?" The answer is that our ancestors, even if they came here at the time of the founding of our country, tended to do the same thing for reasons of solidarity. The melting pot that is America doesn't immediately gobble up the new citizen. Any American who was born abroad must, of necessity, have mixed feelings about his new homeland.

The old living patterns, morals, social habits, and language are all part of him, and it is his children or perhaps his grandchildren who will first have the feeling of being uncomplicatedly "real Americans." Even after generations of assimilation there tends to be this gathering together of Americans with like backgrounds the Irish in Boston, the Germans in St. Louis, Milwaukee, and Chicago, the Italians and Jews and dozens of other ethnic groups in New York, the Scandinavians in the Midwest, the Pennsylvania "Dutch," (really German) in Pennsylvania. Newcomers, quite understandably, gravitate toward these centers, where they can hear their own language, eat their own food, go to their own houses of worship, and receive assistance in their adjustment to a new and strange and often unfriendly land.

It is true that the young do move out and into other circles, through marriage or business opportunities, but it is human and understandable that the older and less adventurous often prefer to make their way in a more familiar atmosphere.

We should all remember that, no matter how American we are now, our ancestors, even if they were English speaking, had their own problems of adjustment here too physical, social, and economic. Even well-bred English who settle here today feel our hostility or experience our ridicule of their manners and customs as any English-born bride of an American can tell you. So it isn't language that is the principal difficulty at all. It is just the perversity of human nature. We all hate to move over, as others had to move over for us. 

Prior to writing her bestselling “Complete Book of Etiquette,” Amy Vanderbilt worked in magazines and advertising. She went on to write a newspaper column and host TV and radio programs about etiquette.

Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber, is the Site Editor for the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia

Emily Post on Etiquette and Race Relations

and the tragedy of the lovers’ lives Emily Post and her family pulled apart in order to save New York’s “Best Society” and its Social Register.

“No matter who he may be, whether rich, or poor, in high life or low, the man who publicly besmirches his wife’s name, besmirches still more his own, and proves that he is not, was not, and never will be, a gentleman.” — Emily Post, (presumably referring only to those husbands who's wives were of the same racial background?) 

Blue Blood Marries “Colored Girl,” Emily Post Frowns - Judge Orders “Nipple” Check     

by William Norwich

Above- Domestic worker, Alice Beatrice Jones “Are the candidate’s friends as well as his family likely to be agreeable to the present members of the Club? If not, he is not admitted.”  Emily Post on Private Clubs

IN 1921, WHILE OUT motoring, society’s Leonard Kip Rhinelander met Alice Beatrice Jones, a domestic worker who lived near Stamford, Connecticut’s Orchard School, an inpatient clinic where young Leonard was seeking the cure for a variety of “nervous conditions” including stammering and extreme shyness.

Leonard Kip Rhinelander, right, in court

While Alice had a curative effect on Leonard, his family hoped it was just an upstairs-down- stairs dalliance. They hoped wrong. In 1924, shortly after Mr. Rhinelander turned 21, the couple married. Unbeknownst to all, Mrs. L. Kip Rhinelander became the first black woman in the New York Social Register—but not for long.

A reporter discovered that she was the daughter of “a colored man,” a former taxi driver who was almost unrecognizably mixed-race. Newspapers ran with headlines like “Blue Blood Weds Colored Girl.” For a few weeks, Leonard defended his wife, but his family won, urging the couple to separate “because of the Ku Klux Klan,” reported the New York Times. His lawyers filed for an annulment, claiming that Alice had hidden her race from Leonard.

Artist's depiction of Alice Beatrice Jones in the judge’s chambers

In the judge’s chambers, Alice, crying and holding on to her mother, was forced to remove various articles of clothing so the all-male and all-white jury could see, by the appearance of her nipples, back, and legs, that Leonard must have known prior to the marriage that she was not entirely of white blood. To the jury’s credit, the annulment was denied, the marriage up- held. Under a subsequent agreement, Alice received a sum of $32,500 plus $3,600 annually for life. (She and Leonard never reunited.)

The annulment was denied.  Even worse?  Mrs. L. Kip Rhinelander became the first black woman in the New York Social Register. But not for long, as Emily Post was on the case!

It was Emily Post, otherwise the champion of kindness and courtesy, who pushed the Social Register to drop Alice. Personalities over principles: Her people in Tuxedo Park were related by marriage to the Rhinelanders, you see. Mrs. Post got more than she bargained for. She sought only Alice’s ouster, but with it came Leonard’s as well.

A product of her time undoubtedly, even Emily Post couldn't quite figure out what she meant by “Best Society.”

 In the 1945 edition of Emily Post's book “Etiquette,” Post quoted a disgruntled reader of her work, bridling at the prospect of imitating New York's “Cafe Society,” a group known to be less mannerly than “pretentious and vulgar.” Just who, the reader demanded to know, are these Best People, whose example Post commends throughout her book? Her answer follows: “There is nowhere to go to see Best Society on parade, because parading is one thing the Best Society does not intentionally do. And yet it is true (and this is one of the things harder to make clear) that in the forefront of the public parade are to be found a certain few who are really best. But they are best in spite of, and not because of, the publicity they attract. When I say that ‘people of taste do this or think that,’ I naturally have in mind definite people whose taste is the most nearly perfect among all those whom I know. Or on occasion, perhaps, I go back in memory to the precepts of those whose excellence has remained an ideal. In other words when I write of people of quality or fashion or taste, I always select the individual people who ideally serve as models... In other words... Best Society, Best People, or People of Quality can all be defined as people of cultivation, courtesy, taste, and kindness -- people, moreover, who are very rarely disassociated from their backgrounds.” – Emily Post
–From “A Short History of Rudeness” by Mark Caldwell

Selections from Emily Post's “Etiquette”

THE FUNDAMENTALS OF GOOD BEHAVIOR 
Far more important than any mere dictum of etiquette is the fundamental code of honor, without strict observance of which no man, no matter how "polished," can be considered a gentleman. The honor of a gentleman demands the inviolability of his word, and the incorruptibility of his principles; he is the descendant of the knight, the crusader; he is the defender of the defenseless, and the champion of justice--or he is not a gentleman. 

DECENCIES OF BEHAVIOR= 
A gentleman does not, and a man who aspires to be one must not, ever borrow money from a woman, nor should he, except in unexpected circumstances, borrow money from a man. Money borrowed without security is a debt of honor which must be paid without fail and promptly as possible. The debts incurred by a deceased parent, brother, sister, or grown child, are assumed by honorable men and women, as debts of honor. 

A gentleman never takes advantage of a woman in a business dealing, nor of the poor or the helpless. One who is not well off does not "sponge," but pays his own way to the utmost of his ability. One who is rich does not make a display of his money or his possessions. Only a vulgarian talks ceaselessly about how much this or that cost him. 
A very well-bred man intensely dislikes the mention of money, and never speaks of it (out of business hours) if he can avoid it. 

A gentleman never discusses his family affairs either in public or with acquaintances, nor does he speak more than casually about his wife. A man is a cad who tells anyone, no matter who, what his wife told him in confidence, or describes what she looks like in her bedroom. To impart details of her beauty is scarcely better than to publish her blemishes; to do either is unspeakable. Nor does a gentleman ever criticise the behavior of a wife whose conduct is scandalous. What he says to her in the privacy of their own apartments is no one's affair but his own, but he must never treat her with disrespect before their children, or a servant, or any one. 

A man of honor never seeks publicly to divorce his wife, no matter what he believes her conduct to have been; but for the protection of his own name, and that of the children, he allows her to get her freedom on other than criminal grounds. No matter who he may be, whether rich, or poor, in high life or low, the man who publicly besmirches his wife's name, besmirches still more his own, and proves that he is not, was not, and never will be, a gentleman. 

No gentleman goes to a lady's house if he is affected by alcohol. A gentleman seeing a young man who is not entirely himself in the presence of ladies, quietly induces the youth to depart. An older man addicted to the use of too much alcohol, need not be discussed, since he ceases to be asked to the houses of ladies. 

A gentleman does not lose control of his temper. In fact, in his own self-control under difficult or dangerous circumstances, lies his chief ascendancy over others who impulsively betray every emotion which animates them. Exhibitions of anger, fear, hatred, embarrassment, ardor or hilarity, are all bad form in public. And bad 
form is merely an action which "jars" the sensibilities of others. 

=THE HALL-MARK OF THE CLIMBER= 

Nothing so blatantly proclaims a woman climber as the repetition of prominent names, the owners of which she must have struggled to know. Otherwise, why so eagerly boast of the achievement? Nobody cares whom she knows--nobody that is, but a climber like herself. To those who were born and who live, no matter how quietly, in the security of a perfectly good ledge above and away from the social ladder's rungs, the evidence 

of one frantically climbing and trying to vaunt her exalted position is merely ludicrous. 

All thoroughbred women, and men, are considerate of others less fortunately placed, especially of those in their employ. One of the tests by which to distinguish between the woman of breeding and the woman merely of wealth, is to notice the way she speaks to dependents. Queen Victoria's duchesses, those great ladies of grand manner, were the very ones who, on entering the house of a close friend, said "How do you do, Hawkins?" to a butler; and to a sister duchess's maid, "Good morning, Jenkins." A Maryland lady, still living on the estate granted to her family three generations before the Revolution, is quite as polite to her friends' servants as to her friends themselves. When you see a woman in silks and sables and diamonds speak to a little errand girl or a footman or a scullery maid as though they were the dirt under her feet, you may be sure of one thing; she hasn't come a very long way from the ground herself.

Emily Post on Country Clubs

Country clubs are as a rule less exclusive and less expensive than the representative city clubs, but those like the Myopia Hunt, the Tuxedo, the Saddle and Cycle, the Burlingame, and countless others in between, are many of them more expensive to belong to than any clubs in London or New York, and are precisely the same in matters of membership and management. They are also quite as difficult to be elected to as any of the exclusive clubs in the cities—more so if anything, because they are open to the family and friends of every member, whereas in a man's club in a city his membership gives the privilege of the club to no one but himself personally. The test question always put by the governors at elections is: "Are the candidate's friends as well as his family likely to be agreeable to the present members of the Club?" If not, he is not admitted.

Nearly all country clubs have, however, one open door—unknown to city ones. People taking houses in the neighborhood are often granted "season privileges"; meaning that on being proposed by a member and upon paying a season subscription, new householders are accepted as transient guests. In some clubs this season subscription may be indefinitely renewed; in others a man must come up for regular election at the end of three months or six or a year.

Apart from what may be called the few representative and exclusive country clubs, there are hundreds—more likely thousands—which have very simple requirements for membership. The mere form of having one or two members vouch for a candidate's integrity and good behavior is sufficient.

Golf clubs, hunting clubs, political or sports clubs have special membership qualifications; all good golf players are as a rule welcomed at all golf clubs; all huntsmen at hunting clubs, and yet the Myopia would not think of admitting the best rider ever known if he was not unquestionably a gentleman. But this is unusual. As a rule, the great player is welcomed in any club specially devoted to the sport in which he excels.

In many clubs a stranger may be given a three (sometimes it is six) months' transient membership, available in some instances to foreigners only; in others to strangers living beyond a certain distance. A name is proposed and seconded by two members and then voted on by the governors, or the house committee.

The best known and most distinguished club of New England has an "Annex" in which there are dining-rooms to which ladies as well as gentlemen who are not members are admitted, and this annex plan has since been followed by others elsewhere.

All men's clubs have private dining-rooms in which members can give stag dinners, but the all men's clubs have private dining-rooms in which members can give stag dinners, but the representative men's clubs exclude ladies absolutely from ever crossing their thresholds. –Excerpt From: Post, Emily. “Etiquette.”

 🍽Etiquette Enthusiast, Maura J. Graber of The RSVP Institute of Etiquette, is the Site Editor for the Etiquipedia© Etiquette Encyclopedia