The Arkansaw traveler., 1884-12-13
MANNERS IN ENGLAND.
[New York Nation.

The question is constantly discussed in England, and perceive from recent article in your paper that it is discussed in America also, whether there has been decline of late years in the tone of En- glish society-whether our manners are less polished, our conversation less de- corous, our moral standard less strict, than in the earlier years of the present reign. It is question very difficult to answer, not only because it embraces so wide 6eld, but because those whose personal recollections, extending over forty or fifty years of adult life, best qualify them to answer it, are likely to have contracted the usual fault of the old, and to see too keeIly the faults of to-day while they remember the charms of youthful days. Such persons have several explanations to give, but before hearing them one must ask whether the alleged decadence does in fact exist.
 To take the lightest part of the change l first, is it true that the manners of men toward one another are less suave and courteous than formerly2 Suavity has never been strong point with the En- glish, who seem to continental eyes both stiff and brusque. But the only reason given for holding us less courteous than formerly is that rude language and scenes of violence have grown more frequent in parliament. This must be admitted. Nor is it only, as many Englishmen will tell you, the Irish members who trans gross good manners. Several English members, some of them people of high social position, are pretty nearly as bad. Ike house of commons, however, con- tains only six hundred and fifty persons, and its sins can easily be accounted for by specia causes. Two or three men set the example, and thAlast speakers lem iency allowed the evil to grow. The very fact that the country notes and condemns it, and that the present speaker is gen. orally praised for his greater stringency, shows that the house of commons is in this respect below the average level of good private society. Scenes in town councils or other assemblies are occa- sionally reported in the newspapers, but on the whole the business of these bodies goes on with wonderfully little personal friction, especially as they are chiefly composed of persons who are not, in the conventional English sense of the word, "gentlemen in station. Considering that dueling completely died out thirty or forty years ago, while it still holds its ground on the continent, it is remarkable that none of the evils its defenders pre- dicted have followed. Insulting language, personal assaults, violent quarrels of all kinds, are less common now than they were when oueling fourished, and, con- sidcring the infirmity of human nature, may be pronounced very rare. We re- tain, besides our brusquerie, the great fault of indicating by manner our sense of caste differences. Interiors are apt to be servlle, superiors naughty. But this is not an increasing fault the sentiment of equality grows, although slowly, and will remove 1t ia time.
 Everybody knows what a character we bore on the continent for the use of pro- fane language. l could mention places in France where the ordinary name for an Englishman is still "un godam." But swearing has now disappeared, not only from ordinary polite society but from the army and navy. Not all com manders have reached the level of the captain of the Pinafore, and on board ship, where things have to be done quickly and mishap may be serious, it may be necessary to relieve ones feelings forcibly. But on shore a naval officer, who, in the novels of sixty years ago could hardly open his mouth without ap oath, is decorous as ether people. The improvement among the laboring classes is less marked, but if one excepts certain 1 classes, such as dock-laborers and draw men, cana(-boatmen and such like, there is less bad language than in France. 1 This IS the more remarkable because it doesn't seem due to any growth of re- l lgious feeling. Sixty years ago it was the professedly religious people only who objected to swearing, and persons who joined them from the ranks of what used to be called "the world" had hard work to rid themselves of habit which scan- dalized the congregation. Now the practice has ceased to be a sin and be- come merely-if habitual, for no one thinks much of an occasional word-a mark of ill-breeding.
 To come to more serious matter, there can be no doubt that inioxication is far less common among the middle and upper classes than 1t was in our grand- fathers or fathers times. One sees this in many ways. Thirty yesrs ago people sat over their wine after dinner for an hour at least, and drank five or six glasses of port. Now only twenty minutes, and drink two or three glasses at most. It is true that more is drunk at dinner, but it is less trying to the head then. The number of those who drink nothing is large, and increases daily partly because many physicians prescribe abstinence, partly from philanthropic motives and a desire to set good ex- ample to the poor. On the stage, in the comic papers, and in after-dinner speeches, it is still convenient joke to assume that people get drunk in good so- ciety; but in reality the phenomenon is rare. A few weeks ago heard a man Of fifty, who had moved great deal in the best circles of London and of uni- versity city, declare that he had never but twice in his life seen a gentleman the worse for liquor; and several pers ons among the party present declared their