Etiquette "Musts and Mustn'ts"

The young girl just out of school is overwhelmed with mustn'ts and musts   Arbitrary rules of etiquette, such as concern the proper way to shake hands, the number of cards to be left at a reception, the way to turn out your toes and the special greeting that is the current fad, all these rules are liable to change from season to season, vary in different localities and mean very little anyhow. 

Prodigious as are the manuals of etiquette issued in these days, nobody with a kind heart, a desire to please and the merest rudiments of knowledge of the simpler social responsibilities need worry about their “manners.” The self-respect that a good conscience and self-reliance give will keep you from pushing and intruding. As for “rules of conduct,” pooh ! You need hardly bother about any that your own sense does not suggest."

Arbitrary rules of etiquette, such as concern the proper way to shake hands, the number of cards to be left at a reception, the way to turn out your toes and the special greeting that is the current fad, all these rules are liable to change from season to season, vary in different localities and mean very little anyhow. A handshake that is the result of cordial intent can never be rude nor ill done. Bad temper is always ill-bred. Conduct of any kind that puts others to distress is always “bad manners,” disrespect to age or to the dignity that office or high achievement confers is always hopeless rudeness, and your own good heart will tell you that.

The young girl just out of school is overwhelmed with mustn'ts and musts, but most of them are nonsense. If she is modest and self-respecting she will know that the inevitable “young man” must be treated with some reserve. But she need not be afraid to take his arm if she needs his assistance, nor has she committed a social crime if she doesn't take it, so long as neither course is followed to her own distress, or to his unnecessary embarrassment. She will know that this same young fellow should include her mother or guardian in social plans, at least till such time as the mother or guardian have judged him to be trusted with the escort of the girl alone.

Her own instinct will tell her that she should not receive rich presents from a man unless she is engaged to him, because it is never comfortable to be under obligations to any one, whether a “young man” or not, that she is not in a position to repay. All the other mustn't easily range themselves under some equally simple and reasonable rules.

Many of the remaining causes of anxiety to the neophyte come under the head of prompt and exact replies to social notes involving the making of social engagements, of equally careful keeping of social engagements, big and little, of friendly thoughtfulness of the one who is ill, or who is having an anniversary of some kind that demands a call, or a line of remembrance or greeting. Then there are “table manners,” and they are made such a bugbear that one's appetite is all lost. But even at the most formal dinner you need not be afraid. Watch the hostess. She is supposed to set the example for every one.

Don't be frightened, and don't do anything in a hurry. Indeed, those two suggestions will brine, you through almost any formal occasion if you will keep sharp lookout and remember that good temper and a modest desire to please will make up for mere awkwardness and make up handsomely. – C. O. Burton, 1895

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

More Victorian Era Dining Etiquette

“Modern cookery is of such a high degree of excellence, modern table-implements so luxurious and varied, that elegant enjoyment and graceful ease may reasonably ‘be expected of those who gather round a well-appointed table.’”

One of the fundamental rules for graceful carriage is, keep your elbows at your sides, and this rule should dominate the movement of the arms while at table. Its workings are felt rather than seen, but they are nevertheless evident in the graceful methods of those who understand the difference between dining elegantly and merely consuming food.

Modern cookery is of such a high degree of excellence, modern table-implements so luxurious and varied, that elegant enjoyment and graceful ease may reasonably “be expected of those who gather round a well-appointed table.” Even if the general verdict falls a little short of this, the standard is sure to grow toward it. It cannot be otherwise where the desire for improvement exists, and it would be false to assume that there are not many who feel the need and seek the means of improvement. Progress is more quickly noticeable in city than in country life for many reasons, first among them being the necessity for quick and ready adaptation to rapidly moving events.

Although the four-pronged silver fork was in use upon the continent of Europe in the first decade of the present century, it is noticeable that the use of the knife in carrying food to the mouth is by no means obsolete among some of the most advanced of the European nations. One can easily draw a mental picture in which the dogmatists of etiquette a half century ago are seated about a tempting board, all eating with their knives, but using them daintily ; and the retrospect need not go back of the times of those whose manners at table, as well as elsewhere, are defined as models of elegance. 

Since then the steel fork has been banished, the knife subjugated and the spoon subdued. The reason for all this is commonly supposed to be the danger of cutting the lips with the knife, but such danger is very slight, unless one be persistently stupid in handling it. It is much more sensible to assume that mankind was not slow to perceive the more agreeable sensation of putting to the lips the delicate tines of a fork, which were close enough to convey all except liquid edibles with comfort and convenience.
   
Then, too, there are many varieties of food which deteriorate from even the slightest contact with steel, a metal still much in use for knives. There is, however, an inclination to force the use of the fork to the point of affectation, and excess in this direction is quite as deplorable as the indiscriminate use of the knife. The proper use of any table implement at a table where one is a guest is no different from what it would be at the most informal meal, except as it may be influenced by the special preparation of an edible.

In seating one’s self at table a comfortable posture is not incompatible with a dignified attitude. The shoulders should not be thrown back too far, nor should they drop forward. It is the latter pose which produces the inclination of the arms suggestive of the " all elbows" idea which some people give of themselves.

“Of course, the right hand is most frequently used, because it is the best trained for such service; but those who believe it to be an oversight not to train both hands to do our bidding with equal skill are not slaves to the dictum of never raising the fork with the left hand, nor is it supposable that in such a minor matter personal opinion should cause one to relinquish a carefully considered habit or adopt a new one. Etiquette only advises that, if the fork is used in the left hand, it be carried to the mouth with the tines pointing downward.” ~Beautifully stylized oyster forks with one lobster claw fork from a silver catalog

When oysters on the shell are served, at the beginning of a dinner, oyster forks are provided, and in eating such shell-fish the right or left hand may be employed to carry them to the mouth. Of course, the right hand is most frequently used, because it is the best trained for such service; but those who believe it to be an oversight not to train both hands to do our bidding with equal skill are not slaves to the dictum of never raising the fork with the left hand, nor is it supposable that in such a minor matter personal opinion should cause one to relinquish a carefully considered habit or adopt a new one. Etiquette only advises that, if the fork is used in the left hand, it be carried to the mouth with the tines pointing downward. This applies to its use with all kinds of food and to all varieties of forks, but is emphasized here in its application to the oyster fork, because there are many people for whom the smallest blue-points lose their relish if the eyes are forced to rest upon them as they approach the mouth.

Rolls used to be placed in one's napkin, prior to seating the guests, on each guest's plate.

The bread or dinner roll is removed from the napkin on which it is found and placed at the left side, but aside from doing this and placing the napkin the diner does not interfere with the arrangement of the cover until the servant removes the plate. Fingering the glasses, etc., is evidence of a vacuous state of mind.

The servant, if well trained, omits no one in passing such condiments as the various dishes call for, or in replenishing anything of which a first supply may not suffice; consequently, a gentleman's duties in this respect are light, but, trivial as they may be, he should not neglect them.

Even though decanted wines be placed upon the table and the attendant be only a maid, do not offer any kind to a lady until she has finished her soup and do not undertake to assume the duties of the butler, if there be one, in this respect. It is one thing to see that a lady is provided for, and quite another to perform the service in such a way that it interferes with pre-arranged plans.

Soup should be lifted with an outward motion of the spoon and taken from the side of the spoon when possible, and the impossible instances are very rare. A man with a heavy moustache may be excused if he deviates somewhat from this rule, but not until after he has acquired the dexterity necessary to raise his spoon with the end toward him without thrusting his elbow out or making the movement of his arm conspicuous. Such skill can be cultivated, but not so easily as the movement of lifting the spoon sidewise to the mouth. It ought to be unnecessary to add that soup should be taken noiselessly. If the variety served is not agreeable to the palate, let it remain until the servant is ready to remove it.    

An elegant presentation for soup.

It is not good form to refuse soup, even if you do not care for it, it being an easy matter to take up the time of this course with conversation. Indeed, when dinner is served a la Russe, that is, each course placed separately before the diners, it is not judicious to refuse any course unless the list is very long and a menu from which to select is provided. Superabundance in this direction, and the use of the cards as well, are, however, neither fashionable nor refined. No one is obliged to partake of a dish placed before him, and ladies especially are excusable from partaking of richly made dishes and highly seasoned compounds. They may sip their wine and partake of the bread or dinner roll, and if they desire more of this satisfying and healthful food they are entitled to express their desire at the most formal dinner. Their escorts should see that they are provided, and this can best be done by attracting the attention of the waiter in an unostentatious manner. A New Yorker, whose appearance at any dinner, private or public, gives it the cachet of success, and whose delightfully entertaining qualities are recognized both here and abroad, when asked how he preserved his digestion and kept his head clear under pressure of attendance at so many social dinners and formal banquets, replied, "By avoiding made dishes and eating bread while others are partaking of them, and by taking only one variety of wine."

As each course is ended, readiness to have your plate removed may be expressed by placing the knife and fork across it, with the handles to the right, and when the next plate is placed before you, if the knife and fork to be used for the succeeding course be upon it, remove them deftly to the table, placing them at the right side without touching the plate, even though it be the one from which you are to eat.

“Etiquette only advises that, if the fork is used in the left hand, it be carried to the mouth with the tines pointing downward.”

In the use of the knife and fork, daintiness should be cultivated without impairing or interfering with the proper function of either implement. Some varieties of fish do not require the use of the knife, the fork and a piece of bread being sufficient. Others, notably those having many small bones, cannot be properly managed without one, and a small silver knife accompanies their service. Both knife and fork should be held with the handles resting in the palms of the hands when cutting or separating food, but in carrying food to the mouth the handle of the fork should not be kept against the palm, as conveying it in that position gives the effect commonly expressed as “shoveling” the food into the mouth. 

A firm hold upon both knife and fork does not necessitate gripping them as if they were endowed with the ability to fly. It is inelegant to appear busy with both knife and fork all the time. Such foods as require special preparation upon the plate may be prepared neatly and quickly before beginning to eat them, and while it is not desirable to cut one's portion of roast in small bits, as for a child, it may be divided into morsels as wanted without appearing to be incessantly sawing upon it. Whoever is given to "loading up'' a fork or holding upon it a quantity of food pending its deposit in the mouth, had best dine by himself until such gaucheries are overcome.

Eating and drinking at the same time are reprehensible for more than one good reason; but the fact that the practice is contrary to good manners condemns it sufficiently in the minds of the well-bred. Hurry, the bane of our epoch and the foe of self-possession, has implanted the tendency to do everything in the shortest possible time, and the habit of hurrying clings after the necessity has sped. There should be no evidence of haste at a dinner-party, and even the suggestion of it should be guarded against. 

The napkin should be touched to the lips in the interval between partaking of greasy food and drinking; otherwise the rim of the glass will not be inviting to look upon. In eating or drinking, the fork, spoon, glass, or cup is carried to the mouth, but not beyond the lips. Throwing the head far back, thrusting the spoon or fork far into the mouth, turning the bowl of the spoon over in the mouth, draining the glass, emptying it at a single draught, or reversing it so that the stem is inverted, are not merely sins against the social gods — they are coarse and repulsive habits, which should be cured as speedily as possible.

“Crumbing” the table before dessert

It was a pleasing and proper acknowledgment when an invitation to one's table signified the most sacred form of social hospitality, but though an invitation to dine still suggests a desire for some degree of social intimacy, the giving of dinners has grown to be more of a formality since that time.

No more nonsensical statement could be made than that everything eatable should be carried to the lips with a fork. The spoon is the proper medium for conveying many varieties of semi-liquid foods; but methods of preparing certain foods differ according to locality, and to this difference is attributable much of the misunderstanding existing between the use of the fork and spoon. Tomatoes cooked without anything to absorb their liquid contain but little pulp which can be eaten with a spoon, but the delicious manner of thus preparing them, which prevails throughout New England, more than counterbalances the satisfaction that the remnant of solid matter conveyed to the mouth upon a fork would bestow; and those to whom the preparation is agreeable would merely proclaim themselves ridiculously automatic in their ideas by attempting to eat them without the aid of a spoon. On the other hand the same vegetable, prepared so that but little moisture remains, is as easily lifted upon the fork as mashed potato. We have made an every-day selection to illustrate this point, but the rule applies as practically to the daintiest viand that rejoices in a French name, and should be as faithfully adhered to at the table of a king as at the humblest board.

Many people, believing it bad manners to ask for anything not provided by their hosts, inconvenience themselves by refraining from asking for anything which the table equipment does not include. There is, however, no reason why a spoon or any similar implement should not be asked for, if needed; but never on any account should a person signal conspicuously to the waiter nor address him as " waiter." In a restaurant you may ask the usher to send a waiter to you if the service is slow or the attendant negligent, but not even in this public place does a well-bred man call out “waiter,” and he who commits such a blunder beneath a private roof might as well hope for future canonization as for present social success.

Primus, a dinner party pre-supposes enjoyment of the viands; secundus, it does not require that a guest shall express his pleasure by waving his napkin, gesticulating with his knife, fork, or spoon, or talking while his mouth is full of food. Fleeting as is time, there is enough of it for all things, and when conversation is in order, let eating be suspended. Exciting topics may be banished without excluding those which have an exhilarating interest. – By Eliza Lavin, 1889

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

Victorian Etiquette: Basic Principles

“Courtesy is the beautiful part of morality, justice carried to the utmost, rectitude refined, magnanimity in trifles.” – Life Illustrated

I. – Manners and Morals 

Good manners and good morals are founded on the same eternal principles of right, and are only different expressions of the same great truths. Both grow out of the necessities of our existence and relations. We have individual rights based on the fact of our individual being; and we have social duties resulting from our connection, in the bonds of society, with other individuals who have similar rights. Morals and manners alike, while they justify us in asserting and maintaining our own rights, require us scrupulously to respect, in word and act, the rights of others. It is true that the former, in the common comprehension of the term, is satisfied with simple justice in all our relations, while the latter often requires something more than the strictest conscientiousness can demand--a yielding of more than half the road--an exercise of the sentiment of benevolence, as well as of equity; but the highest morality really makes the same requisition, for it includes politeness, and recognizes deeds of kindness as a duty.

II. –Rights 

In this country we need no incitements to the assertion and maintenance of our rights, whether individual or national. We are ready at all times to do battle for them either with the tongue, the pen, or the sword, as the case may require. Even women have discovered that they have rights, and he must be a bold man indeed who dares call them in question. Yes, we all, men, women, and children, have rights, and are forward enough in claiming then. Are we equally ready to respect the rights of others?

III. –Duties 

Out of rights grow duties; the first of which is to live an honest, truthful, self-loyal life, acting and speaking always and everywhere in accordance with the laws of our being, as revealed in our own physical and mental organization. It is by the light of this fact that we must look upon all social requirements, whether in dress, manners, or morals. All that is fundamental and genuine in these will be found to harmonize with universal principles, and consequently with our primary duty in reference to ourselves.

1. The Senses 

 Whenever and wherever we come in contact with our fellow-men, there arises a question of rights, and consequently of duties. We have alluded incidentally to some of them, in speaking of habits and dress. The senses of each individual have their rights, and it is your duty to respect them. The eye has a claim upon you for so much of beauty in form, color, arrangement, position, and movement as you are able to present to it. A French author has written a book, the aim of which is to show that it is the duty of a pretty woman to look pretty. It is the duty of all women, and all men too, to look and behave just as well as they can, and whoever fails in this, fails in good manners and in duty. The ear demands agreeable tones and harmonious combinations of tones--pleasant words and sweet songs. If you indulge in loud talking, in boisterous and untimely laughter, or in profane or vulgar language, or sing out of tune, you violate its rights and offend good manners. The sense of smell requires pleasant odors for its enjoyment. Fragrance is its proper element. To bring the fetid odor of unwashed feet or filthy garments, or the stench of bad tobacco or worse whisky, or the offensive scent of onions or garlics within its sphere, is an act of impoliteness. The sense of taste asks for agreeable flavors, and has a right to the best we can give in the way of palatable foods and drinks. The sense of feeling, though less cultivated and not so sensitive as the others, has its rights too, and is offended by too great coarseness, roughness, and hardness. It has a claim on us for a higher culture.

2. The Faculties 

 And if the senses have their rights, we must admit that the higher faculties and feelings of our nature are at least equally dowered in this respect. You can not trespass upon one of them without a violation of good manners. We can not go into a complete exposition of the "bill of rights" of each. You can analyze them for yourself, and learn the nature of their claims upon you. In the mean time, we will touch upon a point or two here and there.

3. Opinions 

Each person has a right to his or her opinions, and to the expression of them on proper occasions, and there is no duty more binding upon us all than the most complete and respectful toleration. The author of "The Illustrated Manners Book" truly says: "Every denial of, or interference with, the personal freedom or absolute rights of another, is a violation of good manners. He who presumes to censure me for my religious belief, or want of belief; who makes it a matter of criticism or reproach that I am a Theist or Atheist, Trinitarian or Unitarian, Catholic or Protestant, Pagan or Christian, Jew, Mohammedan, or Mormon, is guilty of rudeness and insult. If any of these modes of belief make me intolerant or intrusive, he may resent such intolerance or repel such intrusion; but the basis of all true politeness and social enjoyment is the mutual tolerance of personal rights."

4. The Sacredness of Privacy 

Here is another passage from the author just quoted which is so much to the point that we can not forbear to copy it: "One of the rights most commonly trespassed upon constituting a violent breach of good manners, is the right of privacy, or of the control of one's own person and affairs. There are places in this country where there exists scarcely the slightest recognition of this right. A man or woman bolts into your house without knocking. No room is sacred unless you lock the door, and an exclusion would be an insult. Parents intrude upon children, and children upon parents. The husband thinks he has a right to enter his wife's room, and the wife would feel injured if excluded, by night or day, from her husband's. It is said that they even open each others letters, and claim, as a right, that neither should have any secrets from the other. "It in difficult to conceive of such a state of intense barbarism in a civilized country, such a denial of the simplest and most primitive rights, such an utter absence of delicacy and good manners; and had we not been assured on good authority that such things existed, we should consider any suggestions respecting them needless and impertinent.

"Each person in a dwelling should, if possible, have a room as sacred from intrusion as the house is to the family. No child, grown to years of discretion, should be outraged by intrusion. No relation, however intimate, can justify it. So the trunks, boxes, packets, papers, and letters of every individual, locked or unlocked, sealed or unsealed, are sacred. It is ill manners even to open a book-case, or to read a written paper lying open, without permission expressed or implied. Books in an open case or on a center-table, cards in a card-case, and newspapers, are presumed to be open for examination. Be careful where you go, what you read, and what you handle, particularly in private apartments." This right to privacy extends to one's business, his personal relations, his thoughts, and his feelings. Don't intrude; and always "mind your own business," which means, by implication, that you must let other people's business alone.

5. Conformity 

 You must conform, to such an extent as not to annoy and give offense, to the customs, whether in dress or other matters, of the circle in which you move. This conformity is an implied condition in the social compact. It is a practical recognition of the right of others, and shows merely a proper regard for their opinions and feelings. If you can not sing in tune with the rest, or on the same key, remain silent. You may be right and the others wrong but that does not alter the case. Convince them, if you can, and bring them to your pitch, but never mar even a low accord. So if you can not adapt your dress and manners to the company in which you find yourself, the sooner you take your leave the better. You may and should endeavor, in a proper way, to change such customs and fashions as you may deem wrong, or injurious in their tendency, but, in the mean time, you have no right to violate them. You may choose your company, but, having chosen it, you must conform to its rules til you can change them. You are not compelled to reside in Rome; but if you choose to live there, you must "do as the Romans do." The rules which should govern your conduct, as an isolated individual, were such a thing as isolation possible in the midst of society, are modified by your relations to those around you.

This life of ours is a complex affair, and our greatest errors arise from our one-side views of it. We are sovereign individuals, and are born with certain "inalienable rights;" but we are also members of that larger individual society, and our rights can not conflict with the duties which grow out of that relation. If by means of our non-conformity we cause ourselves to be cut off, like an offending hand, or plucked out, like an offending eye, our usefulness is at once destroyed. It is related of a certain king that on a particular occasion he turned his tea into his saucer, contrary to his custom and to the etiquette of society, because two country ladies, whose hospitalities he was enjoying, did so. That king was a gentleman; and this anecdote serves to illustrate an important principle; namely, that true politeness and genuine good manners often not only permit, but absolutely demand, a violation of some of the arbitrary rules of etiquette. The highest law demands complete HARMONY in all spheres and in all relations.

IV.– Equality

In the qualified sense which no doubt Mr. Jefferson affixed to the term in his own mind, "all men are created free and equal." The "noble Oracle" himself had long before as explicitly asserted the natural equality of man. In 1739, thirty-seven years before the Declaration of Independence was penned, Lord Chesterfield wrote: "We are of the same species, and no distinction whatever is between us, except that which arises from fortune. For example, your footman and Lizette would be your equals were they as rich as you. Being poor, they are obliged to serve you. Therefore you must not add to their misfortune by insulting or ill-treating them. A good heart never reminds people of their misfortune, but endeavors to alleviate, or, if possible, to make them forget it." The writer in Life Illustrated, quoted in a previous chapter, states the case very clearly as follows: "It is in the sacredness of their rights that men are equal. The smallest injustice done to the smallest man on earth is an offense against all men; an offense which all men have a personal and equal interest in avenging. If John Smith picks my pocket, the cause in court is correctly entitled, 'The PEOPLE versus John Smith.' The whole State of New York has taken up my quarrel with John, and arrays itself against John in awful majesty; because the pockets, the interests, the rights of a man are infinitely, and therefore equally, sacred. "The conviction of this truth is the beginning and basis of the science of republican etiquette, which acknowledges no artificial distinctions. Its leading principle is, that courtesy is due to all men from all men; from the servant to the served; from the served to the servant; and from both for precisely the same reason, namely, because both are human beings and fellow-citizens!"

V.–A Remark or Two to be Remembered

We purpose, in succeeding chapters, to set forth briefly but clearly, what the actual requirements of good society are in reference to behavior. You must look at these in the light of the general principles we have already laid down. It is not for us to say how far you ought or can conform to any particular custom, usage, or rule of etiquette. We believe that even the most arbitrary and capricious of them either have or have had a reason and a meaning. In many cases, however, the reason may no longer exist, and the form be meaningless; or while it embodies what is a living truth to others, you may have outgrown it or advanced beyond it.

You have an undoubted right, politely but firmly, to decline to do what seems to you, looking upon the matter from your highest stand-point, to be clearly wrong, and it is no breach of good manners to do so; but at the same time you should avoid, as far as possible, putting yourself in positions which call for the exercise of this right. If you can not conscientiously wear a dress coat, or a stove-pipe hat, or cut your hair, or eat flesh-meat, or drink wine, you will naturally avoid, under ordinary circumstances, the circles in which non-conformity in these matters would be deemed a breach of good manners.

When it is necessary that you should mingle with people whose customs you can not follow in all points without a violation of principle, you will courteously, and with proper respect for what they probably think entirely right, fall back upon the "higher law;" but if it is a mere matter of gloved or ungloved hands, cup or saucer, fork or knife, you will certainly have the courtesy and good sense to conform to usage.

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

Etiquette – Duties, Opinions, Privacy, Equality

It’s one’s duty to to use good manners as those do around you. – “… if you can not adapt your dress and manners to the company in which you find yourself, the sooner you take your leave the better. You may and should endeavor, in a proper way, to change such customs and fashions as you may deem wrong, or injurious in their tendency, but, in the mean time, you have no right to violate them. You may choose your company, but, having chosen it, you must conform to its rules ‘til you can change them. You are not compelled to reside in Rome; but if you choose to live there, you must ‘do as the Romans do.’ The rules which should govern your conduct, as an isolated individual, were such a thing as isolation possible in the midst of society, are modified by your relations to those around you.” 

Etiquette and Our Duties 

Out of rights grow duties; the first of which is to live an honest, truthful, self-loyal life, acting and speaking always and everywhere in accordance with the laws of our being, as revealed in our own physical and mental organization. It is by the light of this fact that we must look upon all social requirements, whether in dress, manners, or morals. All that is fundamental and genuine in these will be found to harmonize with universal principles, and consequently with our primary duty in reference to ourselves. 

1. The Senses

Whenever and wherever we come in contact with our fellow-men, there arises a question of rights, and consequently of duties. We have alluded incidentally to some of them, in speaking of habits and dress. The senses of each individual have their rights, and it is your duty to respect them. The eye has a claim upon you for so much of beauty in form, color, arrangement, position, and movement as you are able to present to it. A French author has written a book, the aim of which is to show that it is the duty of a pretty woman to look pretty. It is the duty of all women, and all men too, to look and behave just as well as they can, and whoever fails in this, fails in good manners and in duty. 

Is it the ‘duty of a pretty girl to be pretty’? A Frenchman thought so at the time. 

The ear demands agreeable tones and harmonious combinations of tones—pleasant words and sweet songs. If you indulge in loud talking, in boisterous and untimely laughter, or in profane or vulgar language, or sing out of tune, you violate its rights and offend good manners. The sense of smell requires pleasant odors for its enjoyment. Fragrance is its proper element. To bring the fetid odor of unwashed feet or filthy garments, or the stench of bad tobacco or worse whisky, or the offensive scent of onions or garlics within its sphere, is an act of impoliteness. The sense of taste asks for agreeable flavors, and has a right to the best we can give in the way of palatable foods and drinks. The sense of feeling, though less cultivated and not so sensitive as the others, has its rights too, and is offended by too great coarseness, roughness, and hardness. It has a claim on us for a higher culture. 

2. The Faculties

And if the senses have their rights, we must admit that the higher faculties and feelings of our nature are at least equally dowered in this respect. You can not trespass upon one of them without a violation of good manners. We can not go into a complete exposition of the "bill of rights" of each. You can analyze them for yourself, and learn the nature of their claims upon you. In the mean time, we will touch upon a point or two here and there.

Norman Rockwell and Freedom of Worship 

3. Opinions

Each person has a right to his or her opinions, and to the expression of them on proper occasions, and there is no duty more binding upon us all than the most complete and respectful toleration. The author of "The Illustrated Manners Book" truly says: "Every denial of, or interference with, the personal freedom or absolute rights of another, is a violation of good manners. He who presumes to censure me for my religious belief, or want of belief; who makes it a matter of criticism or reproach that I am a Theist or Atheist, Trinitarian or Unitarian, Catholic or Protestant, Pagan or Christian, Jew, Mohammedan, or Mormon, is guilty of rudeness and insult. If any of these modes of belief make me intolerant or intrusive, he may resent such intolerance or repel such intrusion; but the basis of all true politeness and social enjoyment is the mutual tolerance of personal rights." 

No snooping or peeping in keyholes

4. The Sacredness of Privacy

Here is another passage from the author just quoted which is so much to the point that we can not forbear to copy it: "One of the rights most commonly trespassed upon constituting a violent breach of good manners, is the right of privacy, or of the control of one's own person and affairs. There are places in this country where there exists scarcely the slightest recognition of this right. A man or woman bolts into your house without knocking. No room is sacred unless you lock the door, and an exclusion would be an insult. Parents intrude upon children, and children upon parents. The husband thinks he has a right to enter his wife's room, and the wife would feel injured if excluded, by night or day, from her husband's. It is said that they even open each other's letters, and claim, as a right, that neither should have any secrets from the other. "It in difficult to conceive of such a state of intense barbarism in a civilized country, such a denial of the simplest and most primitive rights, such an utter absence of delicacy and good manners; and had we not been assured on good authority that such things existed, we should consider any suggestions respecting them needless and impertinent. 

"Each person in a dwelling should, if possible, have a room as sacred from intrusion as the house is to the family. No child, grown to years of discretion, should be outraged by intrusion. No relation, however intimate, can justify it. So the trunks, boxes, packets, papers, and letters of every individual, locked or unlocked, sealed or unsealed, are sacred. It is ill manners even to open a book-case, or to read a written paper lying open, without permission expressed or implied. Books in an open case or on a center-table, cards in a card-case, and newspapers, are presumed to be open for examination. Be careful where you go, what you read, and what you handle, particularly in private apartments." This right to privacy extends to one's business, his personal relations, his thoughts, and his feelings. Don't intrude; and always "mind your own business," which means, by implication, that you must let other people's business alone. 

The longer we pose, the more I can look down and read her letter... 

 

5. Conformity

You must conform, to such an extent as not to annoy and give offense, to the customs, whether in dress or other matters, of the circle in which you move. This conformity is an implied condition in the social compact. It is a practical recognition of the right of others, and shows merely a proper regard for their opinions and feelings. If you can not sing in tune with the rest, or on the same key, remain silent. You may be right and the others wrong but that does not alter the case. Convince them, if you can, and bring them to your pitch, but never mar even a low accord. 

So if you can not adapt your dress and manners to the company in which you find yourself, the sooner you take your leave the better. You may and should endeavor, in a proper way, to change such customs and fashions as you may deem wrong, or injurious in their tendency, but, in the mean time, you have no right to violate them. You may choose your company, but, having chosen it, you must conform to its rules til you can change them. You are not compelled to reside in Rome; but if you choose to live there, you must "do as the Romans do." The rules which should govern your conduct, as an isolated individual, were such a thing as isolation possible in the midst of society, are modified by your relations to those around you. 

This life of ours is a complex affair, and our greatest errors arise from our one-side views of it. We are sovereign individuals, and are born with certain "inalienable rights;" but we are also members of that larger individual society, and our rights can not conflict with the duties which grow out of that relation. If by means of our non-conformity we cause ourselves to be cut off, like an offending hand, or plucked out, like an offending eye, our usefulness is at once destroyed. It is related of a certain king that on a particular occasion he turned his tea into his saucer, contrary to his custom and to the etiquette of society, because two country ladies, whose hospitalities he was enjoying, did so. That king was a gentleman; and this anecdote serves to illustrate an important principle; namely, that true politeness and genuine good manners often not only permit, but absolutely demand, a violation of some of the arbitrary rules of etiquette. The highest law demands complete HARMONY in all spheres and in all relations. 

New Zealand Suffragette Political Cartoon from late 1800s 

EQUALITY ~

In the qualified sense which no doubt Mr. Jefferson affixed to the term in his own mind, "all men are created free and equal." The "noble Oracle" himself had long before as explicitly asserted the natural equality of man. In 1739, thirty-seven years before the Declaration of Independence was penned, Lord Chesterfield wrote: "We are of the same species, and no distinction whatever is between us, except that which arises from fortune. For example, your footman and Lizette would be your equals were they as rich as you. Being poor, they are obliged to serve you. Therefore you must not add to their misfortune by insulting or ill- treating them. A good heart never reminds people of their misfortune, but endeavors to alleviate, or, if possible, to make them forget it." 

The writer in Life Illustrated, quoted in a previous chapter, states the case very clearly as follows: "It is in the sacredness of their rights that men are equal. The smallest injustice done to the smallest man on earth is an offense against all men; an offense which all men have a personal and equal interest in avenging. If John Smith picks my pocket, the cause in court is correctly entitled, 'The PEOPLE versus John Smith.' The whole State of New York has taken up my quarrel with John, and arrays itself against John in awful majesty; because the pockets, the interests, the rights of a man are infinitely, and therefore equally, sacred. 

 

“The conviction of this truth is the beginning and basis of the science of republican etiquette, which acknowledges no artificial distinctions. Its leading principle is, that courtesy is due to all men from all men; from the servant to the served; from the served to the servant; and from both for precisely the same reason, namely, because both are human beings and fellow-citizens!”

From the book "How to Behave, A Pocket Guide to Republican Etiquette and Guide to Correct Personal Habits"

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