Social Customs/Chapter 6

​

In writing an invitation, it is an excellent plan to "make the punishment fit the crime," or, in plain English, to write your invitation in such terms that the recipient shall understand just what it means, just what sort and size of occasion he is invited to attend.

This does not go against the fact that there are certain prescribed modes and forms in which it is customary, and therefore best, to write invitations. But some people, wishing to make a party as informal as possible, invite their guests with less formality than the size of the occasion warrants; hence there is often a great diversity of dress, some of the guests learning beforehand how large the party will really be, and others supposing it will be limited to a very few persons. Hence heart-burnings and mortification often ensue, since most ladies, particularly very young ladies, prefer to be dressed neither with more nor with less elaborateness than others who are present with them.

Another cause for the undervaluation which people used to put on their entertainments more than they do now, was the old-fashioned idea of humility as being a necessary adjunct of politeness. All this has been much modified in the manners of to-day, whose frankness I have spoken of elsewhere as being one of their pronounced features. Still, even now it requires some knowledge of the uses of society to know just what a form of invitation means; and a society habitué himself often cannot tell just what the size or form of an entertainment will be.

​Be explicit, therefore, within the bounds of politeness, in your invitations; let them all be uniform,—not some verbal and others written,—and write them, or have them engraved, in plenty of time. Some hostesses do not send out their invitations until the eleventh hour, and are then disappointed because people do not come.

The length of time beforehand that an invitation should be sent, depends on the formality and size of the occasion. For a ball, two weeks is the usual time, and it is the same with any very ceremonious occasion,—a large dinner-party or a formal luncheon.

People judge a little, and properly, of the size and formality of an entertainment from this "lapsed time" between the receipt of the invitation and the occasion itself, but it is not an infallible guide. If you invite your guests a long time in advance of the event, they naturally infer that it is one for which you yourself will make elaborate preparations, or one that they will specially wish to attend, and that therefore they are notified of it in good season.

Engraved cards and note-paper are very much used at the present day, both as being more elegant (in the true sense of the word) and more convenient than writing so many invitations. Per contra, for dinners it is quite fashionable to write notes in the first person, even where one has only a slight acquaintance with the person invited. This is the vogue of the present moment, and does not apply to very large and ceremonious dinner-parties.

In writing invitations, be very careful to write names and dates distinctly. I have known some unhappy instances where the guest arrived "the day after the fair" because he mistook "Tuesday" for "Monday" in the note of invitation.

It need hardly be said that these notes should be written very carefully in all respects, notably that of spacing correctly, where the invitation is a formal one, written in the ​third person. Thus, "Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Jenks" must not be separated, even in a note of invitation; the whole phrase must be written on the same line.

Another point to be observed in writing is, not to mix up your second and third persons. Thus, it would not be allowable to write

It is permitted to employ this form in engraved invitations, although it is not correct, grammatically speaking. No doubt the use of it is considered allowable in engraved invitations for large parties or balls, because it is so convenient, and saves the trouble of filling in the names.

is a correct form for an invitation to a large party or ball; the R. S. V. P. is often omitted. The name of the hostess only ​should be used for all occasions save weddings and dinners. For these, the invitations should always run in the name of both host and hostess.

No matter how large or grand a ball you contemplate giving, you must not mention the word "ball" in your invitations; neither must you invite people to "a party," using that word. Some of the English books on manners give express permission to use the phrase "evening party" in invitations, but it is not done in these United States. We all know, to be sure, that "Hans Breitman gave a party," but the lamentable consequences which followed it prevent us from doing likewise. No doubt the reason we do not use these objectionable words is from an old notion that it is well to assume the forms at least of modesty and humility, even if we do not possess the virtues themselves.

For public balls it is allowable and usual to call a spade a spade, and to use the word "ball," because the affair being a public one, no arrogance is displayed by any individual in using the proper term. Instead of "Dancing," "Cotillon" may be engraved in the left-hand corner when there is to be a german; or the hour may be added, "Cotillon at ten."

This form is preferred very often to the one given on the preceding page, and saves the trouble of writing in the names. It is always easy to learn from first-class stationers what are ​the customary forms to be used for invitations for various occasions, and to have the cards or note-paper engraved either in whole or in part. It is quite a convenience for ladies who entertain frequently, to have these forms engraved, with spaces left for the date and the names of guests.

Invitation cards should be perfectly plain, and engraved in plain script. The same is true of the engraved note-paper which is now used largely instead of cards. This paper is always white, and rather heavy. It may have a coat-of-arms, or monogram, or both, embossed in white, but colored designs have gone out of fashion for this purpose. Perfectly plain envelopes also are now used for invitations. If they are sent by post, two envelopes should always be sent.

In England, it is entirely proper to send invitations through the post-office, and the custom is such a sensible and excellent one that it is growing in favor in this country. When we remember how often messenger boys "post letters in a snowbank," in case of any difficulty about finding the address, we ought to be more willing to trust to the paternal Government, with its efficient public servants especially trained to solve riddles in the way of addresses.

The English, who ape French customs less than we do, use the phrase "The favor of an answer is requested," instead of R. S. V. P. (Répondez S'il Vous Plaît).

Never use ruled paper either for writing or answering invitations, or indeed for any letters save business communications. Probably the reasons in accordance with which ruled paper is considered to be in such bad style are: First, because it seems commercial, and our society, like the English, still has a horror of anything that smacks of trade. When it is considered how largely our aristocracy, so far as we have any, is founded upon trade, and composed of people whose fortunes were all made in business, this little prejudice appears somewhat unreasonable. But beware of trifling with ​prejudices! It is more dangerous than meddling with principles, as all men of the world know. The second reason for which ruled paper is tabooed as a part of the furniture of the writing-desk, is because its use implies that the writer does not know how to write straight without lines, and every lady and gentleman ought to be able to do that. Then, ruled paper looks cheap, and "is used by everybody."

An English gentleman, a scion of the nobility, quite horrified the inhabitants of Boston some years ago, by answering his invitations on this same ruled paper, enclosed in a yellow envelope, which he found at the Somerset Club, if I remember rightly. Of course society was in a state of collapse over this British eccentricity; but perhaps the truth of the matter was that the Hon. Mr. —— supposed the use of the stationery in question was permissible in this country, since he found it at one of our most fashionable clubs.^[1]

For dinner-parties, the invitations should be in the name of both husband and wife.

​An invitation to dinner must be answered without loss of time and without prevarication. If you have any reason to suppose that you will not be able to attend the dinner-party, there is no alternative but to refuse, since it may spoil the whole occasion if the hostess does not know exactly who is coming, and if she does not know it in good season.

Hence it is not unusual for the messenger who brings an invitation to a dinner, to wait and see if there is any answer.

is a proper form of refusal. Or if you accept, "accept with pleasure the polite invitation," etc. Always mention the hour, when accepting a dinner invitation, so as to be sure that ​there is no mistake about it. One should be careful also to express one's self in courteous terms in answering a note of invitation. If the note is a refusal, it is better, if possible, to state the reason which has compelled one to refuse; as,

Or, "must deprive her of the pleasure of accepting," etc. If you are to be out of town, "absence from the city" will be the excuse proper to send. Of course the form "regrets extremely her inability to accept" is often used; but the other form seems more courteous, especially in answering a first invitation, or any one where the entertainer will be apt to suppose that there is an intention to slight her if no reason for the refusal is given.

All invitations should be answered promptly, except those to afternoon teas and receptions and "At Homes," which are usually not answered at all. It is manifestly illogical to answer a card which says merely "Mrs. Breeze At Home Friday, January thirtieth," because the invitation is not worded in such a way that it can be answered. Sometimes R. S. V. P. is appended to an "At Home" card; but this is an incorrect ​form of invitation, though used occasionally to save time and trouble.

I find it stated in one book on manners,—and a very good book in many respects,—that one should never write "polite" invitation, but always "kind" or "very kind." The writer adds that it—the latter form—"is English, you know," and states also that "polite" is no longer used in this way in good society in America.

It is to be feared in this case that the wish was father to the thought; for however charming it might be in the eyes of many people to have our social manners and customs become mere duplicates of English forms, we certainly have not yet reached that delightful apotheosis of Anglomania, perfect similarity. "Kind" is certainly often used in answering notes of invitation, but "polite" is still a proper and quite usual form of expression in New York and Boston.

The same authority points out the incorrectness of such forms of expression as "will have the pleasure of accepting," "will prevent his acceptance," "will accept," etc. You accept or are prevented from accepting in the present tense,—that is, when you write the note,—therefore it is incorrect to use "will," which is in the future tense. Neither is it polite to "decline" an invitation; the refusal must be worded in a more courteous form. One should never abbreviate, in writing either acceptances or regrets. They should always correspond in style with the invitation, which should be referred to in order that the answer may be exact.

Where a lady sends her visiting card with "At Home" and the day and hour written upon it, no answer is necessary. In sending your card in acknowledgment of such an invitation, do not write "regrets" or anything else on it, as it would be very impolite to do so.

If an invitation is issued in the name of "Mr. and Mrs. Folsom," then one must accept or refuse Mr. and Mrs. ​Folsom's kind invitation; or if Mrs. F. alone invites the guests, then they send their answers to Mrs. F.

It is necessary to be explicit on this point, since some people imagine that if they are not personally acquainted with the hostess, they ought to send their answers to her invitation not to her, but to whatever member of the family they happen to know personally.

This is both illogical and absurd. Indeed, it would be extremely rude to send to the daughter, for instance, an answer to an invitation received from the mother. It would imply that you thought the hostess had committed a breach of etiquette in the form of her invitation. If a lady does you the honor of asking you to her house, the least you can do is to respond courteously, whether she is a stranger to you or not.

A student at Harvard College, a few years ago, was somewhat surprised at receiving an invitation for a dancing party at the house of a lady in Cambridge whom he did not know. As he was a great favorite in society, and a good dancer, he concluded that he had been invited in the character of an eligible partner, and went to the ball.

The hostess and her family treated him with such marked politeness and courtesy that he began to fear something was wrong. Subsequent inquiry revealed the fact that the invitation had been intended for a classmate who bore the same name and surname; and the hostess was so much afraid that her guest would discover the mistake, and would be mortified to think he had come where he had not been invited, that she showed him, by special attentions, that she was pleased to receive him as her guest. Verb. sat. sap.

Married people can never be invited separately, unless on some occasion where ladies only or gentlemen only are asked to be present. But if any gentlemen are invited, all—that is, all husbands—must be. Even where it is well ​known that a lady or a gentleman never goes into society, you must still pay the stay-at-home member the compliment of asking him or her. In the case of very informal occasions, or where another person is suddenly wanted to fill a vacant seat at a dinner-table, this rule is sometimes waived among intimate friends; otherwise it is strictly adhered to, being one of the active laws, as opposed to the dead letters of social observances.

If a person finds that he cannot go to an entertainment after he has accepted the invitation, he should write before the occasion and send his "regrets." This is in accordance with European custom, it is stated, but it is not usually done here, except in the case of dinners, "sit-down" lunches, or other occasions where the host needs to know the exact number of people who will be present, such as tea-parties, "sit-down" suppers, etc. If only a few guests are invited, even to an informal occasion, any one who finds that he cannot go, after he has written that he will do so, should certainly write and let his host know of his change of plan, because the absence of one makes a great difference when only a small number are invited.

Once in a while a very polite person will write to a hostess who is about to give a party, and say that he is at the last moment prevented from coming. But for balls or large parties it is not customary to do so in America, unless one is to be the guest of honor, or unless there is some other special reason for writing.

Should one send invitations to people who are in mourning? It is considered to be more polite to do so, except in case of a recent bereavement. While a family is plunged in deep sorrow and affliction, it is certainly more delicate and considerate not to do anything which would jar upon their feelings, and invitations coming at such a time would almost certainly have that effect. But to people in the later periods ​of mourning it is quite in order to send general invitations; that is, invitations to large parties, weddings, etc. Of course they do not go; but one should pay them the compliment of asking them.

People who are in mourning do not plead a previous engagement when declining an invitation, but regret simply, without giving any reason. They then send by mail their visiting cards with black borders, thus showing clearly why they cannot accept the invitation, the cards also serving instead of a personal visit. These cards should be mailed on the day when the ball or wedding takes place, and should be enclosed in two envelopes. The same number should be sent as if one were calling in person; the lady would send one card, and her husband would send two,—one for the host and one for the hostess.

"Avail" and "preclude" are words not thought to be in good form for the answers to invitations. "An invite" for "an invitation" is slang of the worst description.

In sending invitations to a family of several members, the most approved method is to send one to the husband and wife, a separate one to the daughters, be they few or many, directed to the Misses Brown, and a third to the brothers, addressed to Messrs. Brown. If there is only one son and one daughter, an invitation may be sent to "Miss Brown and brother;" but "Misses Brown and brothers" is not advisable, although on these minor and less important points people often follow their own convenience.

"Dr. Brown and family," however, is a form of invitation not favored by those who are careful in such matters. Quite as bad, or worse, is the other extreme,—that of sending a separate card of invitation to each member of a large family. This looks ostentatious, and society dislikes rather particularly ostentation of the sort.