Choosing. Cost. Lawyer. Choosing. History. Costs. Education. Needs.

Most people have heard of the gentleman (?) who was perfect in his
knowledge of the laws of etiquette, and who, seeing a man
drowning, took off his coat and was about to plunge into the water
to rescue him, when he suddenly remembered that he had never been
introduced to the struggling victim, and resuming his coat,
tranquilly proceeded upon his way.

Not less absurd are a thousand instances where a regard for formal
mannerism takes the place of the easy grace that is the mark of
true politeness, which being well acquired and habitual, is never
obtrusive or offensively prominent. Too rigid an observance of the
laws of etiquette makes them an absurdity and a nuisance.

But, because the laws of etiquette may be made a restraint under
injudicious management, it does not follow that they should be
disregarded or in any way set aside. The abuse of them is no
argument against them, any more than gluttony is any reason for
starvation. It is not the food that is in fault, but the excess of
the person partaking of it. The fault must be laid wholly and
solely at the door of those who misunderstand the use and
intention of really sound and excellent precepts. The extravagance
of an overdisplay of etiquette is really only another form of
innate vulgarity, although there are instances which may be drawn
from the side of over refinement, from the history of people and
societies, who become extravagant in their devotion to what they
deem good breeding, simply because, like the stars that looked
down upon Molly Bawn, “they’d nothing else to do.”

Choosing. Cost. Lawyer. Choosing. History. Costs. Education. Needs.