The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1893-08-09
Answer Your Letters.

Few people know what a delight and an
education correspondence may become.
The reason is that few people know how to
"answer letters" The chief cause of this
condition of things is carelessness. \ per-
son receives Il letter and is either too busy
to reread it when answering or too lazy to
take tie trouble. If these slipshod letter
writers could see the effect of their careless
answers they would rarely drop letter i'll
the box a careless answer to friendly
letter is not only rude, but unkind-some
times positively cruel.
An invalid, after reading aloud to me a
letter she had received from common
friend, laid it wearily aside. / asked if
she had not enjoyed it. ''Oh, yes" she
said but it was such an effort to write to
her, and she does not even mention my let
ter
1t hurts to ire so much and receive so
little
y more pointed instance comes to my
mind. An acquaintance who had been re-
Gently married lost her husband. The
thought of her pain so filed my thoughts
at the time THAI felt must mention it in
letter | was obliged to write. In the
middle of the answer which came to me
was this: Isn't it shame about Mr..
S.? | feel so sorry for his wife" And
that was all The very choice of words
irritated and wounded me. The young
man had died in the opening of his man
hood, leaving his wife almost crazed with
the loss, and my correspondent merely
thought it 'shamel'
At another time was in trouble of my
own. had to write to a friend, and forced
myself to speak of it, thinking she would
misunderstood silence. l mentioned the
| subject quietly, admitting that l felt ii
deeply, and made the rest of my letter as
| cheerful as usual. received an answer in
! few days. but on the subject which was
uppermost in my thoughts there was not a
word!
OF course letters are often written mere
| ly to entertain OF express friendship, and a
| specific answer is not required. 1t is al
most always desirable to show the appre-
| citation and the pleasure felt at receiving
| the letter The answer should in every
case respond to the spirit of the letter
which called it forth A grave unrespon-
siye reply to a chatty, amusing letter is hui
initiating in its effect. Light hearted peo-
pie are often the most sensitive to reproof,
implied or otherwise. In like manner, a
| light, frivolous response to a serious or de
spending letter is out of place and shows a
lack of consideration for others. Again, a
person writing to one older and wiser fol
information or advice should not be made
to feel by the long delay and unwilling
tone of the answer that another has been
put to great Inconvenience.
We would not think of giggling at per.
son who came to tell us his troubles nor
would we deliver a discourse on vanity to
the girl who calls for advice concerning her
evening gowns Who would tell a student
to "wait a few weeks" if he dropped in on
his way to school with an unsolved geomet-
rical problem? Yet many people deceive
themselves with the idea that lack of SYM
pathy or heartiness is not visible in then
letters, as it would be in their manner, if
face to face with their correspondents. A
man who would have friends must show
himself friendly in his letters as in every
thing else
1t is very true that answering letters Is
often WEAKNESS and veXation, and that
even light correspondence is to some peo-
Pile burden. This very fact should make
every letter writer more careful. Core
spondence is privilege and involves re-
sponsibility. Fields Washington.