Our British brethren are great sticklers for ancient usage so far as spelling is concerned. Booksellers, publishing books for sale on both sides of the water, find it necessary to use the English orthography, if they wish to capture British trade. Yet the same people who insist that “honour” must be spelled with a “u,” think it strange that we should prefer such Shakespearian words as “apothecary” and “lawyer,” to “chemist” and “barrister,” o illogical is human nature! It should be noted that “baggage” is also to be found in Shakespeare. Hence we Americans have good authority for its use, even though the English always say “luggage.”

Among the Briticisms which Mr. White mentions are the following:

“As well” used, in the sense of “all the same.” “Her aged lover made her presents, but just as well she hated him.”

“Awful” for “very.” I had always supposed that our countrymen were responsible for this misuse of the words “awful” and “awfully,” but Mr. White says that we are not.

He “commenced” poetry, or he “commenced” school, for he “began to write” poetry, or “began” to study. This form of expression is certainly very slipshod.

“Directly” used in the sense of “when,” “as soon as.” “Directly Mr. Parnell rose to his feet, the cries of the opposition began.”

“Stop” for “stay.” As Mr. White says, to stop is to arrest motion, to stay is to remain where motion is arrested. Hence it is better to say, “I stayed at a hotel,” than to adopt the English phrase, “I stopped at a hotel.”

“Ill” for “sick” is another Briticism. The English confine the use of the latter to seasickness and its equivalents. Yet the Book of Common Prayer of the Episcopal Church speaks of the “visitation of the sick,” and the Bible uses the word in the same general sense.

English people employ the word “nasty” much more commonly than Americans, who find it unpleasant.

With regard to the use of “bid” and “bidden” for invite and invited, it can at least be said that this is a return to the old use of the words. Bidden has a rather quaint and pretty sound, and is less offensive to our ears than some of the other words used by Anglophiles.

– A-B-C of Correct Speech and the Art of Conversation (1916)

Everywhere in these days one hears the same story. The American woman in her home, whether in city or country, is becoming as dependent upon the telephone as her husband in his store or office. She orders the family dinner by telephone, upbraids her dressmaker by telephone and electioneers by telephone for the presidency of her club. If she happens to live in one of the houses equipped with the latest pattern of telephone apparatus she gives her orders to the cook in the kitchen without leaving her chair in the sitting-room, for the telephone has taken the place of the speaking-tube in the up-to-date city residence. No habit grows by what it feeds on more rapidly than the telephone habit.

Things have come to such a pass that an elaborate code of telephone etiquette has come into being. A first rule has been formulated to the effect that messages shall be sent only to social equals. It is a breach of good telephone form for Mrs. A to ask her servant to call up Mrs. B; and Mrs. B, if snubbed in that way, would be quite satisfied in cutting Mrs. A’s acquaintance. Of course, it is possible for Mrs. A to send her message by means of a servant, but in order not to give offence it is necessary that Mrs. A’s servant repeat Mrs. A’s message to Mrs. B’s servant and that Mrs. B’s servant take the message to Mrs. B.

When, however, Mrs. A calls for Mrs. B it is to be expected that a servant may respond. In that case it is perfectly proper for Mrs. A to give the servant a message for Mrs. B, but care must be observed if, for instance, an invitation to drive or to dinner is being extended, that it be expressed in language as carefully chosen as any that a gentlewoman would use in a written note. In general, Mrs. B, if she is at all punctilious, will prefer to go to the telephone and to accept or decline the invitation personally. If she permits the servant to make the reply it is incumbent upon her to have the message worded with a formality equal to that used by Mrs. A.

“The Telephone in Home Life” – New Era Illustrated Magazine (1904)

As regards the recognition of friends or acquaintances, it is the privilege of a lady to take the initiative, by being the first to bow. A gentleman should not raise his hat to a lady until she has accorded him this mark of recognition, although the act of bowing is a simultaneous action on the part of both lady and gentleman, as a lady would hardly bestow a bow upon a gentleman not prepared to return it.
The bow between intimate acquaintances takes the character, when given by a lady, of a familiar nod in place of a stiff bow.

When a gentleman returns the bow of a lady he should do so by distinctly taking his hat off and as quickly replacing it, not merely raising it slightly, as formerly, and if he is an intimate acquaintance or friend, he should act in a similar manner.
In France and on the Continent generally, the rule of bowing is reversed, and the gentleman is the first to bow to the lady, instead of the lady to the gentleman.
Between ladies but slightly acquainted, the one of highest rank should be the first to bow to the other; between ladies of equal rank it is immaterial which of the two bows first.

A lady should not bow to persons only known to her by sight, although she may frequently have seen them in the company of her friends.

A lady should bow to a gentleman, either a friend or acquaintance, even when he is walking with either a lady or gentleman, with whom she is unacquainted.

Gentlemen do not raise their hats in recognition of each other, but simply nod, when not walking with ladies, save when a vast difference exists in rank or age.

When a gentleman meets another—a friend of his— walking with a lady or ladies, with whom he himself is unacquainted, he should raise his hat and look straight before him, not at the lady or ladies.

A lady should not bow to another who, being a stranger to her, has addressed a few remarks to her at an afternoon party, as the fact of meeting at the house of a mutual friend does not constitute an acquaintanceship, and does not authorise a future bowing acquaintance.

Ladies, as a rule, are not too ready to bow to those whom they have merely conversed with in a casual way. In the first place, they are not quite certain of being remembered, and nothing is more disconcerting and disagreeable than to bow to a person who does not return it through forgetfulness of the one who has given it, or through shortsightedness, or through actual intention. Short-sighted people are always offending in the matter of not bowing, and almost every third person, comparatively speaking, complains of being more or less short-sighted; thus it behooves ladies to discover for themselves the strength and length of sight possessed by their new acquaintances, or the chances are that their bow may never be returned, or they may continue to labour under the impression that they have received a cut direct; thus many pleasant acquaintances are lost through this misapprehension, and many erroneous impressions created.

A bowing acquaintance is a difficult and tiresome one to maintain for any length of time, when opportunities do not arise for increasing it The irksomeness of keeping it up is principally experienced by persons meeting day after day in the Park or on public promenades, riding, driving, or walking, more especially when it is tacitly understood that the acquaintance should not develop into a further acquaintance.

It would be considered discourteous to discontinue a bowing acquaintance which has once been commenced.

To know a gentleman by sight through having frequently seen him at balls and parties, does not give a lady the right to bow to him, even though she may have stood beside him for some twenty minutes or so on a crowded staircase, and may have received some slight civility from him.

A lady who has received a little service from a stranger would gladly acknowledge it at any subsequent meeting by a pleasant bow, but as bowing to a gentleman argues an acquaintance with him, and as in such cases as these an acquaintance does not exist, etiquette provides no compromise in the matter. Therefore, if a young lady takes her own line, and rather than appear ungracious bows to a gentleman who has not been introduced to her either directly or indirectly, it is a breach of etiquette on her part; and as to do an unconventional thing is not desirable, the innumerable little services which ladies receive in general society are not further acknowledged beyond the thanks expressed at the moment of their being received.

Bows vary materially: there is the friendly bow, the distant bow, the ceremonious bow, the deferential bow, the familiar bow, the reluctant bow, and so on, according to the feelings that actuate individuals in their intercourse with each other.
When a bowing acquaintance only exists between ladies and gentlemen, and they meet perhaps two or three times during the day, and are not sufficiently intimate to speak, they do not usually bow more than once, when thus meeting in park or promenade.

– Manners and Rules of Good Society: or, Solecisms to be Avoided (1913)

Why is this called a Bread-and-Butter letter? I turn to The Word Detective, who breaks down the possible origins of the phrase:

“Bread,” being the staff of life and all, is, of course, a very old word, though it’s interesting to note that in Old English the word simply meant “piece of food, morsel,” not necessarily the stuff cranked out by Pepperidge Farm. “Butter” is even older, and comes from the Greek “boutyron,” meaning literally “cow cheese.” By the way, that “staff of life” business comes from the Bible, where “to break the staff of bread” means to cut off the food supply that supports a people (as a walking staff supports an individual).

“Bread and butter” has been used, since at least the early 18th century, to mean “everyday kinds of food” (“It was strictly a bread and butter dinner, not a snail in sight”), but more often in a figurative sense to mean “means of living, basic financial support,” often of a distinctly unglamorous sort (“Sure, I dabble in tech stocks, but repossessing cars is my bread and butter”).

The logic of “bread and butter letter,” a term first appearing in print in the US in the early 20th century, seems to fall somewhere between those two uses. The writer is thanking his or her hosts for their hospitality (and food), but the letter is also a basic social formality, not likely to contain any exciting content. A “bread and butter” note may not be eagerly awaited, but it’s the sort of thing expected and probably noticed most in its absence.

This letter could never be too flattering or effusive, as the following examples attest:

Dear Candace,
Six o’clock last night found me home with the pleasantest memories of happy days passed with you in your lovely country place. It was so sweet of you to have that delicious basket luncheon prepared for me, which combined with magazines and papers so thoughtfully given me by Mr. Endicott helped to shorten an otherwise rather tiresome journey.
I am sending you a new book just out by the author we both enjoy so much and hope it pleases you as much as the others.
My love to you and yours.
Affectionately yours, Date Adelaide Colton

Dear Edith,
We arrived home still breathless from the exhilaration of those wonderful days spent with you. You were a dear to give us such a jolly time, and John and I are looking forward to the time when you can come and spend a while with us. Although we have no glorious lake for skating, we may, perhaps, be able to find a few other pastimes to interest you in our big city, although I know that anything short of Tinker’s Pond will prove a poor substitute.
Thank you, dear girl, for having us with you. John joins me in sending best regards to all the family.
Affectionately yours,
Mary K. Grainer.

My dear Miss Blank,
Tinker’s Corners is a landmark in my small geography of “special selections.” I am sure that the others whom you entertained so royally last week must feel as I do. The warmth of your hospitality will leave a glow in our memory for some time to come. With kindest greeting to your dear mother and brother, I am,
Cordially yours,
Helen D. Westvale.

In American idiom this type of letter was sometimes known as “the roofer,” no doubt in reference to the ego-elevating phrases!

This is now known (more mundanely, in my opinion) as the “Thank You Note”–and even that has grown quite rare. So now that you know what a Bread-and-Butter letter or Collins is, try you hand at writing a few to others. I’m sure many would be surprised and pleased to receive such a flattering note.

Sources
The Social Letter by Elizabeth Myers
Social Letters Made Easy by Gabrielle Rosiere

Letters

An elegant hand and proper salutation were key in both social sets, but Mrs. Sherwood lamented the death of letter writing due to telegrams, cheap postage, and postcards. The hustle and bustle of American life was present in the pre-printed address and initials dashed across the corner of the notepaper, and sometimes, the day of the week for shorter notes. Lady Colin Campbell cautioned against this practice, citing nosy servants and mail carriers. The trend for colored notepaper hung on in America, though the most fashionable color was écru, a creamy white. The most drastic difference between the two nation’s was the subject of sealing wax.

According to Mrs. Sherwood, sealing wax fell out of favor during the earliest voyages to California, where “the intense heat of the Isthmus of Panama melted the wax and letters were irretrievably glued together, to the lost of the address and the confusion of the postmaster. So the glued envelope–common, cheap, and necessary–became the almost prevailing fashion for all notes as well as letters. The use of wax is prohibited in correspondence with Cuba and the Philippines.” It is also interesting that Mrs. Sherwood emphasizes correct spelling, as George Cornwallis-West recalled the horrendous spelling of many of his peers in his memoirs, Edwardian Hey-Days (one particular correspondent asked to be remembered to his “yph”).

Dress

Both Mrs. Sherwood and Lady Colin Campbell praised the Frenchwoman as chicest, and wrung their hands over the innate gaudiness and gaucheness of American and English women. Dress for certain occasions were similar–plain, serviceable, and inconspicuous costumes for walking in the streets, delicate colors for lawn parties, fêtes, bazaars, etc; useful and sturdy clothing for picnics and excursions; and elegantly showy costumes for carriage rides. However, American ladies merely wore high-necked gowns at tea, whereas English women donned tea-gowns, and the more daring (such as Lady Randolph Churchill) wore kimonos. Mourning was once again a divergent point. As most of us know, English mourning customs were elaborate and rigid, though they grew less so in the 1900s. The Americans followed English fashions with the exceptions of heavy crepe and veiling, black gloves, thickly bordered notepaper, and “the hired mutes, the nodding plumes, the costly coffin, and the gifts of gloves and bands and rings, etc.”

Visiting

The concept of paying calls and leaving cards was quite difficult in America; “our cities have grown too large for it, and in our villages the population changes too quickly.” The original practice was to call once or twice a year on all one’s friends, with the hope of finding at least two or three at home. As society in cities such as New York grew, this became impossible, and the first solution was the establish a reception day which held good all winter. This was quickly abandoned and was narrowed down to four Tuesdays, perhaps in one month; that resolved itself into one or two five-o’clock teas. To circumvent the changes that would prohibit a woman from making calls or having reception days, one card a year was left at the door, or one sent in an enveloped, continued the acquaintance with new and old friends. Now contrast this rather lackadaisical approach with the strict etiquette of paying calls in England!

Balls

Dancing and balls were a major pastime in English society. According to Lady Colin Campbell, there were public balls–county balls, hunt balls, hospital balls, bachelors’ balls (or any ball to which a ticket was required)–, fancy dress balls (costume), and private balls, where the list of dances stretched from waltzes, lancers, galops, polkas, quadrilles, reels, country dances, and cotillions. Guests were ushered into cloakrooms when they arrived, where a maid was prepared to take cloaks, coats, hats, and wraps, and mend or repair any last-minute accidents to the toilet. They were then conducted to the tea-room, where tea, coffee, cakes, and biscuits were dispensed by a servant. After partaking of a cup or two, the guests are then shown into the drawing room, where the lady of the house received her guests.

Dancing began immediately, and it was considered the duty of family members to keep the guests happy (introducing strangers to one another, finding dance partners etc; the son of the house was supposed to dance with each lady). Refreshment rooms were also advised, where guests could drink claret, champagne, lemonade, sherry, and so on. In America, balls in the home fell out of fashion by the 1890s, and it was quite smart to host private balls in Sherry’s or Delmonico’s. When a ball was held in the home, guests merely greeted their hostess and circulated throughout the room before the dancing commenced. In both societies, a very good supper was provided. The “Cinderella Dance” rapidly came into favor with both American and English society. This dance was less elaborate and inexpensive, beginning at 8 pm and ending at midnight, and only claret, coffee, tea, and biscuits were provided.

Tea

In England, there were two types of tea: “great teas” and “little teas”, with the “high” or “meat” teas coming under the former, and afternoon tea falling under the latter. High tea was largely a country institution, as the custom of late dinners during the London season interfered with the informality of country life. A “high tea” consisted of preserves, cakes of various times, hot muffins, crumpets, toast, and tea-cakes. A tray with the tea and its accoutrement were placed on one end of the table, and a tray with the coffee was placed on the other end. The sideboard held cold salmon, pigeon and veal and ham pies, boiled and roast fowls, tongues, ham, veal cake, and roast beef and lamb were there for the gentlemen of the party. In America, high tea took the place of dinner on Sunday evenings in cities, and were considered dinner in rural cities and the countryside. They were formerly fashionable in Philadelphia, where guests ate hot rolls and butter, escalloped oysters, fried chicken, cold ham, waffles, hot cakes, and preserves, and the hostess offered guests their choice of tea, coffee, or chocolate. Mrs. Sherwood doubted the popularity of high tea in America’s major cities, since “the custom of eight-o’clock dinners prevails.”

Afternoon tea was modified in England, since dinners were so late. It took place about five-o’clock, and the invitation was by card. The hostess poured the tea for her guests, and no plates were brought into the room except those large enough for cake or rolled bread and butter. Since the afternoon tea was an intimate affair, servants were usually dispensed with. The American hostess stood by her drawing room door to greet each guest, and in the adjoining room, usually the dining room, a large table was spread with a white cloth, and one end held the tea service, and the other, service for chocolate. Flowers adorned the table, and dishes containing bread and butter cut thin, and perhaps cake and strawberries were placed for consumption. Servants attended the tea to carry away soiled cups and saucers, and to keep the table looking fresh. In the summer, a bowl of cracked ice was included, for Americans loved iced tea!

How the debutante should enter the Throne Room and present her card to the Lord Chamberlain, represented at the rehearsal by the figure on the right. Her train is shown as it would appear after being spread at the entrance by the pages.

Rehearsing the first curtsey to the King. In the class the seated figures represent their Majesties. The debutante should hold her bouquet in her right hand just beyond the right knee as she sinks gracefully down in her obeisance.

In the first place, a Court curtsey is much lower than an ordinary curtsey, and quite different to the curtsey in a minuet or gavotte, where the front foot is extended.

A Court curtsey is always made on the right foot. The learner should practise standing with her feet slightly apart, then move the left foot sideways and a little forward. Next draw it gradually round with a circular movement till it is behind the right foot, but not touching it, and resting on the toe only.

Then bend both knees, sinking gradually towards the ground, and bending the head slightly forward. The greater part of the weight is on the right foot when bending down, and is transferred to the left foot on rising.

This is done slowly when the learner has bent down as far as possible. The body draws back a little towards the left foot, which bears all the weight, so that the right foot is perfectly free to start a second curtsey or to walk on.

This curtsey should be practised carefully and slowly till it can be made without jerks either when sinking or rising. And the learner must be careful not to stoop forward from the waist when doing it, but only to incline her head gracefully as her knees bend.

After her second curtsey, which is made to the Queen, the debutante should rise into the position illustrated, and move train sweeping behind her, and the regulation bouquet held in her right hand!

When the debutante reaches the exit door of the Throne Room, she should turn and extend her left arm for a page (the figure on the right) to place her train over it.

Do you think you could master the court curtsey?

Of this period, two books remain extant:

The Colored Girl Beautiful (1916) by E. Azalia Hackley

Hackley, a classical singer who studied voice in Europe, “championed the use of African-American spirituals among her own people as a tool for social change.” According to the manual, The Colored Girl Beautiful was compiled from talks given to girls in colored boarding schools across the United States.

Since dinner giving was the most important of all social observances, gentlemen and their wives held them much more frequently than balls or other social venues; a dinner was more intimate and invitations were sent to those one was intimate with or with those the host and hostess hoped to further their acquaintance. In the greater scheme of social precedence, dinner giving was a test not only of the hostess’s position, but also the direct road to obtaining a recognized place in society. When issuing invitations to a large dinner party, it was customary to give three weeks’ notice, though, by the 1910s, the notice was extended to four to six weeks in advance. This permitted sufficient time for the guests to bow out in case of an emergency–though the acceptance of the invitation was socially binding. Invitations could be purchased at stationary shops, and were blank save lines where the hostess or her social secretary would fill in the names of the guests, the date, and the time of the dinner, and these were sent in the name of both the host and hostess as following:

The dinner hour was approximately eight to nine, and guests were expected to appear at least fifteen minutes prior to the time listed on the invitation. By the 1900s, the long, slow, and heavy meals of the mid-nineteenth century had disappeared: now hostesses preferred their dinner parties swift and filling (though this was taken to the extreme by Mrs. Stuyvesant Fish, who would hurry her guests through eight or nine courses in forty minutes), most likely to make time for evening entertainments.

On arrival, ladies and gentlemen would take off their cloaks in the cloakroom or leave them in the hall with the servant before entering the drawing-room, where the host and hostess awaited them. The vogue for pre-dinner cocktails was strictly an American custom until after the war, and once the host and hostess greeted each guest, the ladies sat and the men stood, chatting lightly until the last guest had arrived. If any parties were unacquainted, the hostess would introduce the guests of the highest rank to one another. At very large dinner parties, however, the butler was stationed on the staircase and announced the guests as they arrived, and no introductions were required.

According to Arnold Palmer’s Moveable Feasts: Changes in English Eating Habits, the custom of pairing off to go in for dinner did not begin until early in the reign of William IV, and this was refined throughout the nineteenth century until it morphed into its usual form: The host should take the lady of the highest rank present in to the dinner, and the gentleman of the highest rank took in the hostess. This rule was absolute, barring the highest ranking male and female were related to the host or hostess, in which case his or her rank would be in abeyance, out of courtesy to the other guests. Another don’t was for a husband and wife, or father and daughter, or mother and son, to be sent in to dinner together. As often as possible, the hostess was advised to invite an equal number of men and women, though it was usual to invite two or more gentlemen than there were ladies, in order than married ladies should not be obligated to go in to dinner with each others’ husbands only. Should the numbers be skewed–such as more women than men, or more men than women–in the case of the former, the ladies of highest rank would be taken into dinner by the gentlemen present, and the remaining ladies followed by themselves; in the case of the latter, the hostess would go in to dinner by herself, following the last couple. Prior to entering the dining room, the hostess would inform each gentleman whom he would take in to dinner.

Until the guests have taken their seats, the host remained standing, and motioned to each couple where he wished them to sit. When the host did not indicate where the guests were to sit, precedence took over, and each lady and gentleman sat near the host or hostess according to their rank. In seating, the host and the lady he took in to dinner sat at the bottom of the table, she sitting at his right hand. The hostess sat at the top of the table, and the gentleman who brought her in to dinner sat at her left. According to precedence, the lady second in rank sat at the host’s left hand, and the other female guests sat at the right of the gentleman who took her in to dinner. It was at large dinner parties where place-cards with the names of the guests were placed on the table, and in some instances, the name of each guest was printed on a menu and placed in front of each cover. The menus themselves were placed along the table, each viewed by one or two persons. These menus could be simple or elaborate, depending on the hostess’s tastes, and the dishes available in each course were written in French.

There were a variety of methods for decorating the table, though they were a matter largely of taste rather than etiquette. The basic table setting was of a mixture of high and low center pieces, low specimen glasses placed the length of the table and trails of creepers and flowers laid on the tablecloth. The fruit for dessert was usually arranged down the center of the table, amidst the flowers and plate. Some dinner tables were decorated with a variety of French conceits, while some were sparse, save the flowers and the plate. Lighting was an important feature, and though electric lights were in vogue when possible, it was not uncommon to dine by old-fashioned lamps and wax candles. Accompanying the decorations and lighting was the “cover,” which is the place laid at the table for each person, and consisted of a tablespoon for soup, fish knife and fork, two knives, two large forks, and glasses for the wines to be served.

Dinner-table etiquette was strict–an uneducated or uncouth person who appeared innocuous enough, would reveal their inexperience in a finer milieu should they display such shocking customs as eating off a knife, or tucking a napkin into the collar of their shirt. When a lady took her seat at the dinner table, she removed her gloves at once, though should they be long gloves, they were usually made to allow the glove to be unbuttoned around the thumb and peeled back from the wrists. Both the lady and gentleman would unfold their serviettes and place them in their laps. Soups were of course, eaten with a tablespoon, though one spooned away from themselves and never ever slurped. Fish was eaten with the fish knife and fork, and all made dishes (quenelles, rissoles, patties, etc) were eaten with a fork only, and not with a knife and fork. Poultry, game, etc were eaten with a knife and fork, as was asparagus and salads. Peas, the test of true breeding, were eaten with a fork. In eating game or poultry, the bone of either wing or leg was not touched with the fingers; the meat was cut from the bone with the knife. Jellies, blancmanges, ice puddings, and practically any substantial sweet, were eaten with a fork. Cheese was eaten daintily, with small morsels placed with the knife on small morsels of bread, and the two conveyed to the mouth with the thumb and finger. When eating grapes, cherries, or other pitted fruits, they were brought to the mouth, whereupon the pits and skins were spit discreetly into the hand to be placed on the side of the plate.

Dessert was served to the guests in the order in which dinner was served, and when the guests had helped themselves to the wine and the servants had vacated the dining room, the host would hand the decanters to his guests, commencing with the gentleman nearest him, as ladies were not supposed to require a second glass of wine during dessert. If she required a second glass, the gentleman seated beside her would fill the glass–she would definitely not help herself to the wine. Ten minutes or so after the wine had been passed once around the table, the hostess gave a signal for the ladies to leave the dining room by bowing to the lady of the highest rank present. The gentlemen rose when the ladies did, and the women quit the dining room in the order of their rank, the hostess following last. The gentlemen were left to their port and claret, while the ladies retired to the drawing room for coffee. While the ladies drank their coffee, a servant took the coffee to the gentlemen, and after a few more rounds of wine and the cigarettes and cigars were smoked, they joined the ladies. This custom, however, shortened by 1910 or so, and at times, the practice of ladies and gentlemen separating after dinner was abandoned by smarter hostesses.

Dinner ended in town about half an hour after the men joined the women in the drawing room. In the country, it was common to begin games or play cards into the wee hours of the night. There was no etiquette for leave-taking, and after the host and hostess saw each guest into his or her or their carriages, their duties were done for the night.

Further Reading:
Manners and Rules of Good Society by A Member of the Aristocracy
Manners and Social Usages by Mrs. John Sherwood
Etiquette of Good Society by Lady Colin Campbell
The Correct Thing in Good Society by Florence Howe Hall

Once a young girl turned eighteen, her childhood was essentially over. The moment she put up her hair and lengthened her skirts, she was a woman. A coddled, protected woman, but a woman nonetheless. The putting up of the hair was the most important aspect of signifying one’s status as a jeune fille à marier, or a young woman ready for marriage: no man bothered to address himself with other than the merest passing courtesy to a girl whose hair hung down her back. As soon as her hair was pinned up, everything changed, and for the remainder of the young lady’s life, only inside her bedroom or during a fancy dress ball would her hair hang down over her shoulders.

The young lady of America’s entrance into society was marked by the order of dresses from Paris, a ball at Delmonico’s or at home, and the most extensive leaving of cards on all desirable acquaintances. In introducing a daughter, parents seldom or never put her name on the card, merely sending invitations written thus:

Mrs. Walsingham
at home,
Thursday evening, February 9th,
at ten o’clock

At her first ball, the young lady stood beside her mother, was presented, or launched, and took her place in society with the way clear before her. The young lady was then introduced to and danced the German with the gentleman to whom her mother had selected to lead the dance–and that was it. In the 1890s, the Four Hundred incorporated the chaperone from Europe. This adoption, however, invoked controversy. America at the time prided itself upon the ability of a woman to move about unmolested. The presence of a chaperone was a smack in the face to the American gentleman: were they not be trusted? An etiquette book of the period stated it bluntly: “if men did not drink, there would be less need for chaperones.” But the fierce independence of  Americans won out in the end, and the chaperone died a quick, painless death by the turn of the century.

For the young English girl, their entrance into society was marked by a few ways: the court presentation, a supper party, or a country ball. In some unorthodox families, such as the Tennants, young ladies could have taken part in social events as young as 15 or 16. The young men whom they might meet were always carefully inspected and discussed beforehand by their mothers, aunts, grandmothers and indeed the whole circle of older ladies. Meetings were seldom, if ever, mere chance: daughters who might be expected to become a good political hostess due to their father’s status were deliberately placed in the way of eligible political bachelors; young daughters of great landed estates who would expect to live in the country were steered towards gentlemen with great landed estates. The acceptable choice was limited, but quite clear.

Gentlemen were placed into types: if the young lady met a “detrimental,” or extremely ineligible man, her female relations would gently remind her of her duty. There was less to fear from the “indefatigable,” a young man just come out or an old beau who danced indiscriminately with any and all women, and the “indispensable,” the anxious fetcher and carrier of wraps, gloves, lemonade, fans and ices, but a young lady was introduced to as many approved and eligible men as quickly as possible.

The French, however, were a bit more cerebral when it came to the debutante. To be considered an eligible young woman, one must have a dot, or dowry. Those who were not to be provided for were doomed to be spinsters or poor relations, and as a result, most convents were packed not with devout novitiates, but poor young women. Not to say there were no “love matches” amongst the French, but rarely amongst the nobility, for whom marriage was too serious a matter to be dominated by romantic notions. After emerging from a convent school, the young French lady was introduced at a bal blanc, at which all ladies were gowned in pure white and only maidens and bachelors were expected to be present. There, the gentlemen were permitted to request to dance with a lady without having been first introduced to her, and it was considered very bad form for a young woman and young man to “sit out” a dance together or to retire to the veranda or lawn.

Prior to this ball, the young lady was invited nowhere and met no gentleman, as amusements and flirtations were the sole province of a married woman. Young men were hampered by this restriction as well, for they were honor-bound never to court a girl without having previously asked her parents’ permission. As the slightest attention to a girl assumed immediately a serious character, the young man must either ask this permission before knowing his bride or risk being shot down by her brother should he afterward decline marrying within a few weeks’ notice.

Even stricter were the lives of debutantes in Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary. The daughters of Russia’s nobility were entered into one the of the numerous educational establishments founded for the their training as early as age three, and there they remained until seventeen. At The Catherine Institution, one of the principal rules was that from the time a pupil entered until her sortie, she would not quit the bounds of the establishment on any plea whatsoever, ill-health alone excepted.

Relatives were permitted to visit the girls whenever they chose, and on Sundays, the pupils received any lady of their acquaintance and male relations to whom the law prohibited them from marrying–this latter rule was constantly evaded however, with many dashing suitors proclaiming themselves to be “first cousin” to a pupil and gaining admittance to visit with them. Easter was the season for the sortie of finished pupils, and previous to the reception of a debutante at the home of her parents and friends, an apartment was prepared for her within the institute to be filled with elegant furnishings and lavish gifts from friends and, if from a distinguished family, the Russian royals.

Austro-German court circles were tightly regulated, and none but the highest nobility could make headway (with the exception of wealthy Americans introduced by their ambassadors, and aristocrats of other nations). The imperial German court was usually held in either Berlin or in Potsdam where the imperial family resided during its regular stay in town, which typically lasted from shortly after New Year’s until the middle of April or May. During these months the large court festivities took place of about ten large and many smaller fetes, consisting of several big court balls, at which attendance reached two to three thousand. They all open with the first “Defilir Cour,” or ceremonious reception, at which all persons entitled to presentation at court made their first obeisance to majesty.

Those entitled to admittance included those who by reason of birth or official station, were members of the royal family, members of all other German dynasties present in Berlin, members of the aristocracy, all officers of the army and navy, all members of the Prussian and imperial cabinets, all persons who have been decorated, court and higher government officials, members of the Prussian Diet, of the Bundesrath and the Reichstag. All considered eligible were called “courfahig.” The debutantes of the season were presented at the initial receptions by their mothers in gowns with deep decolletage and train of a certain length according to their rank.

In Vienna, the “Frauenheim,” which was given at the Sofiensaale, was the ball at which young girls made their debut, dressed entirely in white similar to a bal blanc in France. It was usually patronized by an Archduke or Archduchess. However, these unmarried princesses, countesses, duchesses and archduchesses had a special place in society. At every ball there was a room set aside for them called the “Comtessin Zimmer,” into which no married woman was allowed to penetrate. There the girls “gossiped with their partners between the dances, keeping a jealous and watchful eye on any erring sister who ventured to overstep the bounds of the most innocent flirtation.”

A young woman’s entrance into society marked a time of transition. There was no concept of “adolescence” at the time: a female was either a child or a woman, and her treatment and behavior was precisely dictated and delineated for the sole purpose of creating a perfect “wife.” This was a time where perhaps they were to meet gentlemen on equal footing for the first time, and indeed, a few girls–the aforementioned Tennant family, of whom Margot was the ultimate exception–thrived within this mold, and others languished. But it was an interesting time for these young women: once they put up their hair, they were expected to be “adults” and were immediately accorded the respect of an adult despite possibly having been horsing around in the nursery with younger siblings just the week before her debut!

Further Reading:

1900s Lady by Kate Caffrey
Princess Daisy of Pless by Herself by Princess Daisy of Pless
Etiquette of American Society by Mrs. M.E.W. Sherwood
France of To-day by Matilda Betham-Edwards
Russia of Yesterday and Tomorrow by Baroness Souiny
1913: A Beginning and an End by Virginia Cowles

The social world of the Capital was divided into three classes:

1. The Official Class, embracing all three branches of the Government, Presidential appointees to administrative departments, and includes officers of the Army, Navy and Marine Corps on duty permanently or temporary at the Capital, and civil officers of the Government whose places of employment are in the different states of the Union or officers of the Diplomatic or Consular services of the US and visiting the city.

2. The Quasi-Official Class, which embraces the Foreign Diplomatic and Consular Corps, Officers of Foreign Governments, and Officers of State or Municipal Governments in the US, in the city.

3. The Unofficial Class, which includes residents from other localities, sojourners or visitors to the city who are entitled by social status at home to recognition in good society, and permanent residents of independent means or engaged in professional or mercantile affairs.

The social and domestic routine of Washington is regulated and controlled entirely by official duties. The day was divided into two parts, socially speaking; all that portion before the dinner hour which is after the close of official hours, being regarded as morning [3-5 PM, no later than 6 PM], and that portion of time thereafter as evening [8-9 PM]. Hence, in afternoon receptions, it was generally customary to say good morning, although it was really afternoon (applied only in conversation. In notes and invitations, the usual divisions of time were used). Informal calls between friends and acquaintances, or those doing business, were generally held between 10 AM and 12 PM.

The strictest piece of etiquette it was fatal to fail was that of paying calls. The routine was rather different from that of society in other cities, and could put a newcomer into quite a tangle! For example, everyone in official life was required to call upon the President and his wife, but they never returned them unless the caller was a Sovereign, Ruler, or fellow President. A stranger of distinction visiting the Capital was required to make their first call upon a resident official of equal rank, while a newly appointed official, of whatever rank, made the first call of office to the branch of the service or department to which the official belonged. For the stranger arriving in Washington, a simple call–that is, leaving cards for people one wished to know, or tell you were in the city–was sufficient. Amusingly, unlike any other city in America–perhaps even the world–men called on one another more than women were required to!

The Official, or Fashionable Season at the Capital began with the general receptions at the Executive Mansion and by the Cabinet Ministers on New Year’s Day, and it terminated with the beginning of Lent. During Lent, as a rule, there were no important public dinners, though quiet dinners and less conspicuous social gatherings were indulged in by some. The Congressional Season, when entertainments and amusements peaked, began regularly on the first Monday in December, and usually ended with the session, or earlier, when the session protracted into the summer. From June to September, owing to the heat of summer, prominent members of the Government and residents generally left the city on their vacations.

The formal social demands led to the creation of Receptions. As a rule, these began and ended with the Season, and comprised of two classes, and certain days were set apart for the “At Homes” of the female relations of Washington’s officials. The first class was the Afternoon Receptions, or Drawing Rooms. These required no invitations and were held between three and five P.M., to which all persons of reputable character and becoming dress were admitted. Excluding the President’s Levee, Evening Receptions required an invitation, unless otherwise announced in the newspapers. As a rule, these were given by the Vice-President, Senators, the Speaker, Representatives and Members of the Cabinet who entertained, and sometimes were hosted by distinguished private citizens. An evening reception lasted three hours, from eight to eleven P.M., and the gentleman of the house was always present, and received with his wife (or designated hostess) and any other whom she invited to assist her.

Due to the transient nature of Washington D.C., it was a natural battleground for social climbers to receive the social recognition denied them by their hometowns. Rather akin to popping over to Europe to mingle with the aristocracy, nouveaux riche could meet the titled and well-born without leaving the States–and a few international matches were made in Washington D.C., the most well-known being that of Belle Wilson (of the “Marrying Wilsons”) and Sir Michael Herbert (“Mungo”), while famous residents who moved to the Capital after being snubbed in their cities included Mary Leiter of Chicago, who married George Curzon and became Vicereine of India, and Evalyn Walsh McLean (left) of Colorado, the last private owner of the unlucky Hope Diamond.