The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-05-12
BANNERS IN AMERICA AND DENqLAND.

this title, There is much in it valuable as well
as true; but we cannot help thinking that the
writer lays more stress than is at all necessary
ON the Importance of toning down all our OBJ
seryations, as to avoid exciting any asperty
of feeling on either side Great nations, after
all arc not to be regarded in the light of pune
tilious, irritable members of society. If a good
many Englishmen sin in the way of stupid ma
tionalism or less excusable insolence-if a good
many Americans, the other side, exhibit
LONELINESS which makes them intole-
rant, not only of the slightest sar-
casm, but of manly crticism--the wsest course
for impartial critics on both sides of the water,
is, in our view, to disregard these unpleasant
pecuiarlties altogether. If we have occasion to
pass Judgment on each other at ALL we had
better do so with single eye to truth and with
= out timorous attention to every possibility of
touching sore place.
Manners" may ''maSe the man." but most
assufedly they do not make the nation 1t may
be grievously doubted whether either Lesser
England or Greater England would occupy the
position which is at present conceded to them in
the world if States were to rank, not according
to 'area, population, and revenue" but accord
ing to social qualities. But however this may
be, one thing is certain and too commonly for
gotten in controversies of this kind, which is
that the manners Of people-Or, to speak more
1ntelllg1Dly the manners OF class Ol u people;
say the upper class, of which we are most COM
monty thinking in these discussions-are not
lightly formed nor soon thrown aside. They
constitute an edifice which may seem slight and
easily shaken, but which is in truth the product
of many generations of men of similar minds
and similar social circumstances The polished
society of England and of France have been for
centuries nearly allied to mere superficial OBJ
servers the variances between them may appear
slight enough; but any one who has lived in
both knows how deep is, in truth, the difference
in habitual line of thought and demeanor and
mode of expression, between cultivated
Frenchman and Englishman, and still more be-
tween the ladies of the respective countries
Their social codes different as their politi-
cal institutions or their Jurisprudence.
Now cultivated America has not yet had time
to frame complete social code; but 1t is in pro-
cess of doing so, and, when complete, the result
will wear a somewhat different shape from that
which prevails in either of the older countries.
Whether better or worse is really question for
children to wrangle about, not for men to can
vass. In mere 'minor morals" there is no right
or wrong We have seen an unconscious Eng
lshman frowned at, in n refined American circle,
because he had used, in the innocence of his
heart some phrase to which American prudery
attached disagreeable meaning. And we have
seen another English visitor to the States dis
concerted, for his part ut some harmless saying
of his host or hostess which, Tor some ineXpli-
cable reason, could not have been used in SINH
lar society in England And in each case the
feeling of repugnance aroused was probably
ivelier than that which areally selfish or discour
teous expression might have ELECTED. Some of
our readers may remember how, at King Johns 8
feast in "Ivanhoe," when the Normans were
passing their comments on Saxon behavior
Cedric, who dried his hands with towel, n
stead of suffering the moisture to eXhale by
waving them gracefully in the air, incurred
more ridicule than his companion Athelstan
when he swallowed to his own single share the
whole of II large pastry composed of the most
exquisite foreign delicacies
Nevertheless there is u lesson to be found,
tl,.aY
tience to search for it. Some marked differences
between good English and good American de-
meanor may be accounted for, so to speak, his
torically.
Among the most observable peculiarities in
the conversation of highly educated society in
this country is the tendency which everywhere
prevails towards concise and compendlouS
modes of expression. We do not merely speak
of circles in which 'smartness" is at premium.
There are plenty of these: circles in which talk
habtually slides off into what is politely called
the epigrammatc, and Vulgarly the snlp-snap
stye-circles in which chatter resembling that
OF Swft's polite conversation (barring the gross
ness) or the banter of some of our old comedies
bears tiresome sway. If any one is disposed to
criticize closely the best conversation which
falls under his notice, he will detect in it a
strong tendency to conciseness though not to
smartness. Those who take part in it seldom
express their whole meaning. They use con-
Ventional abbreviation. They shorten a story
by cutting off the head or the tail, or both.
They rarely indulge in preface or epilogue.
They seem constantly under the fear of giving
themselves too much trouble, or that of boring
their hearers.
This peculiar curtness of dialogue we believe
to be produced by the social friction of many
refined generations. Nevertheless, some think
it increasingly chara acteristic of our own day.
We have heard good judges OF manners and GUS
toms say that the table-talkers of London forty
years ago, Rogers, Luttrell, Conversation
Sharpe, would be condemned now as prosers,
and that for this reason they have no successors
And we believe this last phase OF ofover-refnement
to prevail in France quite as much as among
ourselves. Frenchmen 1--WE speak of course OF
the polished class) are the best takers in the
world Theyare also the most epigrammatic, and
1--WE suspect) the least inclined OF all people To
tolerate lengthiness in others.
Now. If the reader of these remarks is in the
habit of conversing with well-educated persons
of less advanced classes in England, to certain
extent with provincials generally, but most
especially with thoughtful and instructed mer
of the working order he will infallbly have OBJ
served the great difference Of style between
them and their so-called betters in this particu
lar They never seem anxious to cut short wha
they have to say. When they reason they give
Won premises and conclusions at full length
fhev never reduce a syllogism to an enthymen
0f we may be pardoned piece OF Oxford pc
dantry) If they tell story they complete 1t
with all its circumstances, and cannot understant
fine -impatience of a hearer who tries TO init
mate that he anticipates the point OF II.
they Joke they do it deliberately. IL J0ked with
they analyze the jest to show that they apprecl
ate it. Their slowness is apt to lrrltate persons
really not acuter than themselves, but used U
rapid shorthand modes of expression But they
are ant to make themselves all the better under
stood for it, The clever person who 9uesses
meaning from half sentence runs the rlsh