Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1882-03-15
A Social Paradox.

1t is one of the oldest degrees of fashion that
punctuality in attending social party is to be
held high crime and misdemeanor. If Smith
| is told to meet his lawyer OF his broker at 9
o'clock p m. he makes it point to be pune
tual, and If by accident he should be half an
hour late, he feels that he has been guilty of a
breach of prOpriety. When, however. he is in
vited to . party at o'clock p. m. he never
dreams Of presenting himself befores9 O'clock,
and would as soon enter the drawing-room in
his shirt-sleeves as be guilty of entering the
house at 8 o'clock. AS for ladies, there is no
lady who would not feel as if she should sink
through the floor were sh e to arrive early at a
party. Punctuality in this matter is rather
worse than want ofpunctuality in keeping bust
ness appointments and the punctual party-goer
could never hold position in polite society.
The origin of this curious social law is not to
be found, as many shallow philosophers have
Imagined, in desire to mark as plainly as pos
sble the distinction between business and
pleasure. If person goes to a party late be-
cause he would go to his business early, there
Is no reason why he should not show still
greater contempt for business habits by going
to party two or three days after the day
named in the note Of Invitations course
which would obviously render parties impOs-
sbe. The real reason why everybody goes to a
party an hour or two later than the specified
hour Is to avoid being the irst-cOmer. There is
not party-goer living who would, in any con-
ceivable circumstances present himself at a
party unless at least three other guests had al
| ready preceded him in the drawing-roOm.
From this custom springs the curious paradox
| that no guest is ever the irst-cOmer at party.
AS each guest enters the house and proceeds up
stairs, he or she steals a glance into the draw
ing-rOOm. and invariably finds that it containSa
number of earlier guests. Beyond any question,
these early guests had been in their turn pre-
coded by still earlier guests: and it is the Opin-
ion of Prof. Hardness, of the Naval Observatory.
who has discussed the question at some length
in his last official report. that there must in the
nature of things be first guest. Nevertheless,
no party-gOer has ever yet seen first-cOmer,
much less appeared in that undesirable char
acter. 1t certainly does seem as if the fact of
the arrival Ofsuccessive guests postulates the ar
rival OF a first guest. series must have begin
| ming, and though there is no record of any guest
who, on arriving at a party has found less than
three guests already i'm the drawing-r ROOM we
cannot exempt those three guests from the
operation of mathematical law and believe that
they always are self existent and have always
been seated on the drawing room sofa or chairs
as the case may be- There must be time i'm
connection with every party when the first-comer
arrives. He must be one of the three early
guests, and may either arrive alone or simultan-
eOuSy with histw companions. Prof Hardness
ably compares this hitherto unidentified first
conner with the planet Neptune, and holds that
his existence may be proved in way some
what analogous to that in which the existence
of Neptune was demonstrated by the fact that
the motions of Uranus were irregular. Let us,
then. assume that every party has it's irst-cOm-
Ell, or. possibly its first three guests. We thus
avoid the unScientific conception of series of
guests without beginning.
Who is this unknown frst-cOmer? This is
question which touches the inner mysteries of
New York society. From time to time strange
stories are told concerning "Our best society"
Not merely by those wonderful correspondents
of country papers, in comparison with whom
AnaniaS was dull and conscientious, but by per-
sons of some degree of intelligence and of Occa-
sional veracity. There was the story of Browns
young men," 1t was said that the lamented
sexton and undertaken of parties supplied
young men in quantities to suit customers
to ladies about to give parties. There was at
the time dearth of young men in society, and
neither dancing nor conversation could be
efficiently carried on owing to the insufficiency
OF dancing and talking men. Accordingly.
Brown laid in stock of desirable young men
who could either dance or talk, and hired them
out to party-givers. Dancing young men cost
twenty-five dollars per dozen and talking young
men thirty dollars. and it is asserted that i'm
every case Browns young men gave complete
satisfaction and were generally thought to be
very cheap at the price.
Whether this story be true or false it gives us
a hint which may explain the mystery of the
first-cOmer at parties. 1t is highly probable
that some energetic man, noticing the fear
which party-gOers have of being among the
earliest guests has undertaken to furnish party
givers with one or more f1rSt-cOmers. We may
suppose that as rule the party-giver orders
three assorted first-cOmers-one man and two
women. These are sent to the house as early
as O'clock and take up their position In the
drawing-rOOm, where. at the first alarm at the
front door. they engage in animated converse
ton with the hostess and with one another. If
we assume that not more than fifty parties are
given on one and the same night, it is evident
that force of one hundred and fifty frst-com-
ers would meet all ordinary demands. The
business being necessarily conducted in secrecy
and the livelihood of the professional hrst-cOm-
ers being dependent upon the preservation OF
this secrecy. we can understand why it ia that
the public has hitherto been kept in ignorance
of the system by which first-comers are sup
piled. At any rate, this explanation solves the
mystery of first-cOmers, and should certainly be
adopted in preference to the unscientifc hypO-
thesis that a series Of guests can exist without
a beginning.