Rapides gazette. (Alexandria, La.) 1869-187?, 1873-11-15
English Good Breeding and American
Good Manners.


There is a wide, fundamental distinction
between English good breeding and Amer
ican good manners, which is half indicated
in the difference between the words them
selves. English breeding consists in q
training which results In an acquired facul-
ty of instinctively doing or avoiding par
ticular things. A well-bred Englishman
is taught from his cradle up how to sit,
walk, speak, eat, drink, enter room,
leave IL; he is also taught, notwithstand-
ing his behavior in this country, how TO
dress. He is taught, also, 10 whom to be
respectful, whom TO treat as an equal, how
to bear himself toward interiors. The re-
suit of this training Is that one detects In a
well bred Englishman the result OF sort
of military discipline, a stiff regularity
which suggests the notion of dress-parades
and the manual in early life. There Is in
deed something in the relation between
English fathers and children which sug-
gests the drill-sergeant and raw recruits.
In American families, however. in which
there is any training at all, the process Is
quite different. The attempt is made-and
certainly no one will deny that in some
cases it is made with success-to give the
child not a series OF rigid rules for his
guidance in life, but foundation in char
acter of urbanity and amiabiliiy which
will enable him as he goes through life to
make rules for himself He Is taught as
much rs possible that, though rules Of
good manners are always in existence for
the convenience Of mankind, the founda-
ton Of good manners does not
consist I'm rigid adhesion TO one
rule, but in an amiable cndeayor TO
make social intercourse agreeable; that
he is the best-mannered man who is most
suaye, most urbanc, most hospitablc,
most benevolent. most honorable, most
brave, most upright. The American who
is really well brought up Is taught from
the earliest moment that the first rule Of
good manners is 10 sacrifice his own indi-
viduality TO the general social good, and
that all rules Of detail are subordinate to
that. He is taught that he must not be 81
lent in the midst of people who are talk
ing; that he must not, on the other hand,
monopoliZe the conversation. He is
taught that he must keep his feelings to
himself, and not try to force bis opinions
down others throats he must not be dog
matte, obstinate, or selfish. He must not
even be too original He must always
consult the interest Of the whole. and al
low the 'individual'' to .'wither."
Wedo not mean TO say that there are many
families in America where this code OF
manners is taught. But there are enough
there was once more than there are now
to make such scheme of social behavior
an American ideal. There are people who
continually have it in their mind when
they describe that mythical character, the
American gentleman. To put the matter
in other words, the English ideal of man
ners is a practical ideal, and consists of
submission TO certain rules and conven-
tons which have been adopted in England
for the convenience of Englishmen. The
American ideal of manners is vague
ideal. which might In Utopia be carried
into practice, which regards all rules as
means to ends, and which aims ut snbsti-
tuting for the hard, systematic code of
other days, Il code of bIotherly love, Chris
tianity, or what Mr.. Arnold calls 'sweet-
! ness and light" Possibly some persons
may see in this difference between the
English ideal and the American ideal Of
! manners, the fundamental difference be
: tween the two peoples which make it SC
difficult for them TO understand each other
--GaIary.