The union Democrat., 1870-06-04
Misunderstanding.

How did people first get into the habit of
shaking hands? The answer is not far to
seek. In early and barharous times. when
every savage or semi-savage was his own law
siver, judge, soldier, and policeman, and
had TO watch over his own safety. in default
of all other protection, two friends or SC
quaintances, or two strangers desiring to be
friends or acQuaintances, when they chanced
TO meet, offered each to the other the right
hand-the hand alike of cffence and defence,
the hand that wields the sword, the dagger,
the club, the tomahawk, and other weapons
of war. Each did this to show that the hand
was empty. and that neither war nor treech-
cry was intended. man cannot we'll stab
another while he is engaged in the act of
shaking bands with him. unless he be doub-
le-dyed traitor and villain. and strives to aim
a cowaTdly blow with tae left, while giving
the right and pretending to be on good terms
with his victim. The custom of hand-shak-
ing prevails. more or less, among all civilized
nations, and is the tacit avowal of friendship
and goodwill, jnst as the kiss is of a warmer
passion.
Ladies, as every one must have remarked,
seldom or never shake hands with the cordi-
ality Of gentlemen; unless it be with each
other. The reason is obvious. 1t is Cor them
to receive homage, nut to give it. They eau
not be expected to show to persons of the
other sex warmth of greeting, which might
be misinterpreted unless such persons are
very closely related TO them by family, or
affection; in which cases, hand-shaking is
not needed, and the lips do more agreeable
duty.
Every man shakes hands according to his
nature, whether it be timid or aggressive,
proud or humble, courteous or churlsh, vul-
gar or refined, sincere or hypocritical, enthu-
siastc or indifferent. The incest re6nements
and idosyncrasies of character may not per-
haps be discoverable in this fashion, but the
more salient points of temperament and indi-
vidualty may doubtless be made clear to the
understanding of most people by better
study of what shall call the physiology or
the philosophy of the hand-shaking.
To present the left hand for the purpose of
friendly greeting is piece of discourtesy-
sometimes Intentional on the part of superb
ors in rank to their interiors, and an act that
no true gentleman will commit. There is no
reason why it should be considered more ds-
courteous than it would be to kiss the left
cheek instead Of the right; but, doubtless,
the custom thct makes the right hand imper-
atire in all sincere salutation dates from
gan; and the hand that shook or was shak-
en- in friendship was of necessity weaponless.
The poor left hand that one would think
ought to he of as much value and strength
as the right, just as the left foot or leg is as
strong as the right foot or leg. because they
are both used equally, has fallen into disre-
pute, as well as into comparative disuse, un-
til it has become an accepted phrase to cay
of any proceeding that is uspcious, art
full, sly, or secretly malicious, that it is ''sin-
ister'- tha. is. left-banded.
To shake hands without removing the glove
is an act of discourtesy. which, if uninten-
tional and thoughtless, requires an apology
for the bury or inadvertence which led to it.
This idea would also seem to be an occult
remnant of the old notion that the glove
might conceal a weapon. Hence true conr-
tesv and friendship required that the hand
should be naked, as q proof of good faith.
To refuse nointedly to shake hands with
one who offers you the opportunity in a
friendly manner amounts to a declaration of
hostility. And after aquarrel-or act OF open
hostility-the acceptance of the hand offered
is like the sign and the ratification of peace.
Al fEs Js0r Round