The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1870-12-02
Mistellantous.
HAND SHAKING.

set many people thinking whether it is
not possible to invent some mode of
salutation more convenient than that
of shaking hands. When the thermom.
eter is at ninety in the shade, and when
the only hope of escaping a sunstroke
seems to be to drink so much tea and
to wear so little clothes as shall best
promote perspiration, then the tyrany
of the social law which compels us to
grasp the hand of a casual and very hot
acquaintance, and to give it the estab
lished vibration, is fully felt, and be-
comes almost insupportablc. But the
inconvenience of the practice of shak.
ing hands is not confined to the season
of hot weather only. There is probably
no mode of sautation commonly prac-
ticed by any civilized nation which is
so cncompassed with difficulties and
embarrassments The difficulty of ma
king correct bow is no doubt consid-
cradle There is the difficulty of know.
ing how to bow; how to draw the ar.
tistic line between the uncercmonious
nod and the obsequious obeisance. And
for people who aim at doing things
in good form--the difficulty of appor-
tioning their due angles of reverence to
the different sexes, and to the different
social positions, ages, and degrees of in
timacy of persons in each sex. And
there is also the difficulty of knowing
when to bow. But all the difficulties
that cluster round the bow, are nothing
com pared to those that encompass the
shaking of hands. The difficulties of
knowing how to bow are after all only
the difficulties which beset the attempt
to do anything well; and difficulties of
the same kind, not inferior in degree,
will be found to beset the practice of
shaking hands. AS for the difficulties
of knowing when to bow, it is obvious
that they must be at least doubled in
the case of hand shaking, for this SIM
pie reason, that that mode of salutation
requires the consent and cooperation of
two persons to execute it,
If a person should be inclined to
doubt whether hand-shaking is a diff
cult operation, let him consider the
different modes in which The custom is
observed among his various friends and
acquaintance. There are negative
modes and there are positive modes of
shaking hands There are, first of all,
the people who seem to fear that if they
once give you their hands they may
never get them back again, and who
man9uver that you may not possess
yourself of more than the tips of your
fingers. This mode of hand. shaking
may be called tipping, and those who
use it tippers. Closely allied to them is
another sort of NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. (,
those namely, who do not clasp your
hand but finger it with two digits. This
mode of shaking hands is sometimes
adopted by men of political and litera-
ry notoriety. But it is very apt 10 give
offense; and the most serious conse-
quenccs have been known to ensue
from its having been pracyiced by a
young author upon critic whom he
had mistaken for rival writer. These
people, who, failing to give the whole
hand, nevertheless do not touch your
hand with the tips of their fiuger5 only
but finger it with the whole or more
fingers, may be called .fngererS. Then
there are those who give the whole
hand, but give it in limp, tlabby man.
ner, as a Newfoundland dog gives its
paw. These people seem to think they
haye discharged the whole duty of
hand, shaking when they have put their
neighbOrS in possession of their hands.
Were it the custom to make our adieu
to dear departed by shaking hands
with his corpse, the sensation would NO
doubt be very like what we experience
when we salute these tlabby shakers ;
who, as they use their hands much in
the same way as the Mock Turtle uses
his flaps, may be called FapperS. These
negative modes of shaking hands are
disag recable enough. But the positive
modes are still more unpleasant. Among
these the least distressing is probably
the thrusting mode. There are some
who, when you offer them your hand
take it; but take it only to put it from
them, as if it were something common
or unclean. They seize it with quick
decision, as brave children seize a snap
dragon or an earwig. Then, by rapid
thrust forward in tierce, they return it
to your side; and having got it there,
they drop or shoot it into space. These
MrUSterS are numerous class and,
oddly enough, their mode does not
seem to give so much ottensa as that of
the tippers and tingerers. More physi-
cally painful, though ethically less in
furious, is the mode of those who
squeeze. This mode is chiefly prac-
ticed by Methodists, by fervid preach
ers of evangelical persuasions, and by
other persons of power and piety. Tor
ments are sometimes suffered by small
bonded or rheumatic men, and by frag-
lie women, who have fallen into the
hands of one of these tervid giants, and
who happen to have rings on their fin
gers when the cruel clutch is effected.
But worse even than this class of Squee-
GERS is that of the clingerS; the people
who, having once got hold Of your
hand, refuse to let ii go, but used it as
they would buttpn'hole, or as the An
cient Mariner used his glittering eye,
to compel you to hear all they have to
say; giving it at intervals little pres
sures, motions, or vibrations as run
ming accompaniment to their twaddle.
OF all the kinds of shakers above de.
scribed these clingers are most undoubt.
edly the most pestilential; and when,
as is occasionally the case, they combine
squeezing with clinglng, they are sim
ply unendurable, aud ought to be treat
ed as creatures that outrage society.
There are very few people who do not
partake, in greater or less degree, Of