12 OCTOBER 1889, Page 10

COURTESY versus SINCERITY.

THERE will be more sympathy in England with the American Bishop who has denounced the usual phrases of courtesy as insincere, than the Daily News appears to believe. According to our contemporary, Bishop Huntington thinks it wrong to "express regret" when declining an un- welcome invitation, to ask for the " pleasure " of distasteful company, or even to "present compliments" to persons whom the writer at heart regards with uncomplimentary sentiments. The Bishop would, of course, consider the answer, "Not at home," when the hostess is in the house, as a device of the Devil ; and think of the excuse, "He is not very well," if spoken of one in health, as a tempting of Providence. The Daily News smiles at his simplicity; but the illusion—for it is an illusion —which has conquered the worthy Bishop has intermittently perplexed the best classes of English society for centuries, and even now exercises an embarrassing influence on many minds. The Puritans detested most of the formulas of courtesy as either untrue or impious, and the Quakers repudiated them for all time as inconsistent with "plainness," though they adopted a courtesy of their own one item of which, marked by a singular forgetfulness of their own ethics, was to call every one "friend." That is, of all terms of civility perhaps the one least generally true. The earlier Evangelicals were greatly exercised about the rightfulness of "unfaithful courtesies," and but that so many of their leaders were rich and well-bred men, might have made a more decided stand against them ; while to this hour pious women of all kinds avoid the phrase, "Not at home," as savouring of untruth, and women who would be pious if they could, object to it "because servants think it untrue." Thousands, we believe, would endorse Bishop Huntington's opinion, even though they did not act on it, and for his reason, that courtesy must not be preserved at the expense of truth. Yet every one of them will assert every day of their lives that the sun has risen or set, though the statement, on their hypothesis that truth and literalness are the same thing, is a direct false- hood, which to the very ignorant and to children may be an injurious one. They cannot understand that any form of words is true if it conveys a true idea to the hearer—words mattering nothing in themselves—and that a courteous method of saying, "No admittance," is exactly as true, when on.ce generally adopted as the proper phrase, as a discourteous one. The words, "With compliments," are simply a recogni- tion of the receiver's right to respect, and except in extreme cases, are not even technically false ; while the expres- skin of an artificial regret is a courtesy simply, meaning, "I have no intention to be either abrupt or impertinent in giving this answer," which is true. If any one took a courteous expression for more than it meant, it might be necessary to exercise caution, and, as the Daily News says, to beg pardon only of those possessed of the power of pardoning ; but nobody does so take it, and the use of con- venient euphemisms has no effect except to facilitate slightly the intercourse of mankind. Their use is certainly not more untruthful than that of half the intensive adverbs now in everybody's month, and a great deal more sincere than the phrases with which a business man or a tradesman precedes his signature to a reeeipted bill.

Bishop Huntington will, as we have said, receive sympathy from a great many good English people, and this the more for a reason almost peculiar to men of the Teutonic race. That worship of truth for which Bishop Huntington pleads exists in England ; but there exists something else besides, a latent belief that courtesy is in its essential nature insincere and contemptible. The common people avow this belief quite plainly, and defend their roughness of speech upon this ground ; and a numerous section of the cultivated hold the opinion also, though they rarely announce it to the world. They only profess to admire " rough diamonds," men who are " downright " and women who are "plain-spoken," or always "say what they mean." They say of a man, "He is too polite," and if his politeness is finished, distrust it as evidence that he has something to conceal. They would as soon think of teaching courtesy in the pulpit as of teaching etiquette, and think the old world silly when it recognised politeness among the virtues to be acquired. They do not, it is true, like want of courtesy towards themselves, any more than they like asceticism in their own daily lives ; but they admire it when displayed towards others, or at least think of it as a guarantee of character. So well is this

understood, that many professional men, and even tradesmen, affect discourtesy in order to inspire confidence in their advice or their wares, and find after a time that they have attracted a profitable clientele. "You will get no politeness," customers say, "but you will get what you want," their only proof of that being, however, the want of politeness itself. The cause of this feeling, which is a curious exception to the liking of man- kind for a smooth path, is, we are convinced, a secret con- tempt for courtesy as a branch of histrionics, or even a form of dissimulation. Nobody,' men say or think, would be as civil as all that unless he had something to gain.' The cynical criticism has, of course, occasionally truth in it. A great number of men are acting when they are courteous, and put on and put off courtesy at will, not always for the sake of advan- tage, but still by a conscious effort. We all know people who are courteous, that is, who display perfect consideration, only towards superiors—this is the standing habit of all men- servants, and of almost allAsiatics, who, though often naturally dignified, are only intermittently courteous—and there is a class which never displays it except towards inferiors, the motive in the latter case being partly kindness, partly a desire for the pleasant effect which they know they can produce. It may be right to despise such courtesy so far as it is histrionic— though we do not see why, when it makes life easier, we should despise it any more than any other civilised practice—but courtesy remains none the less one of the higher qualities. It is the most useful of the manyvarieties of unselfishness. Except the few who are courteous because there is in themselves an inner well-spring of graciousness, or who are so happy that they are in love with all mankind—you will meet perhaps two specimens of each in a lifetime—no one can be courteous without incessant small self-suppressions which discipline the character, and which we should all admire in any other depart- ment of effort. Courtesy, the true considerateness which will infringe no right of another, and diminish no pleasure, which recognises all individuality and pays homage to all just claims, is self-suppression in action, as well as concrete sym- pathy. It reduces the burden of life more even than pity, because it can be displayed towards all, and all are slightly raised as well as soothed when it is displayed. Of all the facul- ties which can be acquired, it is the one which is nearest to a Christian grace; and where it is lacking, the Christian graces lose half their external influence. The English contempt for it is a defect, not a merit, in the English character, and is one of the many reasons why that character is misunderstood, and why one of the kindliest of races—a race which, for example, quotes the hatred of Irishmen as a reason for fresh benefac- tions to the Irish—is regarded abroad as both selfish and ill-conditioned. That does not matter very much, it is true; but it does matter that the charge is very often true, and true because its objects have never passed under a discipline of courtesy. Courtesy is not imperative here, and in neglecting it, the Englishman, and especially the uncultivated Englishman, gives full play to the instinctive selfishness which grows as it is indulged, and to that individualism careless of all besides, which, when extended to manners and shown in small things, is but another name for brutality. Courtesy is an armour; courtesy is a solvent of temper ; and courtesy is an expression of that perpetual self-control which, even more than his knowledge, differentiates the civilised man from the savage. If Bishop Huntington acted on his own precepts— which, of course, he never does—and said to every guest pre- cisely what arose in his mind to say, he would be a more " natural " man, it is true ; but the Fijian or the Samoyed would be as natural as he.