Chapter 6 of Manors and Rules This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org Manors and Rules Chapter 6 – The Colloquial Application of Titles The colloquial application of titles differs materially from the application of titles when not used colloquially, and many persons are in doubt as to whether they should or should not make use colloquially of titles in full. Is Majesty the King should be addressed as Sir by all those who come in social contact with him and by all others as Your Majesty?   The Prince of Wales, the Duke of Connort and all Princes of the Blood Royal should be addressed by the Upper Classes as Sir. The Princesses of the Blood Royal should be addressed as Mam by the Upper Classes. The Wives of the Princes of the Blood Royal should also be addressed as Mam by the Upper Classes. All Crown Heads visiting England should be addressed as Sir by those socially known to them and as Your Majesty by all others. The Royal Ladies, their Wives, should be addressed as Mam by those personally known to them and as Your Majesty by all others. A Foreign Prince bearing the title of Serene Highness should be addressed as Prince and not as Sir by the Aristocracy and Gentry and as Your Serene Highness by all other classes. A Foreign Princess also bearing the title of Serene Highness should be styled Princess when addressed colloquially by the Upper Classes but not as Mam and as Your Serene Highness by all other classes. An English Duke should be addressed as Duke by the Aristocracy and Gentry and not ensure grace by members of either of these classes. All other classes should address him colloquially as Your Grace. An English Duchess should be addressed as Duchess by all persons conversing with her belonging to the Upper Classes and as Your Grace by all other classes. A Marquis colloquially should be addressed as Lord A. A Marquis should be addressed as Lady A by the Upper Classes. It would be a mistake to address an English Marquis as Marquis or a Marquis as Marquis colloquially speaking. All other classes should address him either as my Lord or Your Lordship, my Lady or Your Ladyship. An Earl should be addressed as Lord B by the Upper Classes and as my Lord or Your Lordship by all other classes. A Countess should be addressed as Lady B by the Upper Classes and as my Lady or Your Ladyship by all other classes. A Viscount should be addressed as Lord C by the Upper Classes and as my Lord or Your Lordship by all other classes. A viscountess should be addressed as Lady C by the upper classes and as My Lady or Your Ladyship by all other classes. A baron should be addressed as Lord D by the upper classes and as My Lord or Your Lordship by all other classes. A baroness should be addressed as Lady D by the upper classes and as My Lady or your ladyship by all other classes. In strictly official or business intercourse, a Marquess, an Earl, a Viscount, a Baron, and a younger son of a Duke or Marquis should be addressed as my Lord. The eldest son of a Duke should be addressed as Lord A by the upper classes and as my Lord or your Lordship by all other classes.  The younger sons of a Duke should be addressed as Lord John E or Lord Charles E by the upper classes and as my Lord or your Lordship by all other classes. Persons well acquainted with them would address them colloquially by their title and Christian name as Lord John or Lord Charles. The same remark applies to their wives who are often colloquially addressed as Lady Alfred or Lady Edward. The wives of the younger sons of a Duke should be addressed as Lady John E or Lady Charles E by the upper classes and as my Lady or your ladyship by all other classes. The daughters of a Duke should be addressed as Lady Mary A or Lady Elizabeth B by the upper classes and as Lady Mary and Lady Elizabeth by those intimate with them and as my Lady or your ladyship by all other classes. The eldest son of a Marquis should be addressed as Lord A by the upper classes and as my Lord or your Lordship by all other classes. The wife of the eldest son of a Marquis should be addressed as Lady A by the upper classes and as my Lady or your ladyship by all other classes. The younger sons of a Marquis should be addressed as Lord Henry B and Lord Frederick B by the upper classes, and as my lord or your lordship by all other classes. The wives of the younger sons of a Marquis should be addressed as Lady Henry B and Lady Frederick B by the upper classes, and as my lady or your ladyship by all other classes. The daughters of a Marquis should be addressed as Lady Florence B and Lady Sarah B by the upper classes, and as my lady or your ladyship by all other classes. The eldest son of an Earl should be addressed as Lord C by the upper classes, and as my lord or your lordship by all other classes. The wife of the eldest son of an Earl should be addressed as Lady C by the upper classes, and as my lady or your ladyship by all other classes. The daughters of an Earl should be addressed as Lady Blanche and Lady Evelyn by the upper classes, and as my lady or your ladyship by all other classes. The younger sons of Earl and both eldest and younger sons of Viscounts and Barons only bear the courtesy title of honourable. The daughters of Viscounts and Barons also bear the courtesy title of honourable. This title should never be used colloquially. The honourable Cecil Blank, the honourable Mrs Cecil Blank and the honourable Mary Blank should be styled Mr, Mrs and Miss Mary Blank. Aronette should be addressed by their full title and surname as Sir John Blank by the upper classes, and by their titles and Christian names only by all other classes. Baronette's wife should be addressed as Lady B or Lady C according to the surnames of their husbands. Thus Sir John Blank's wife should be addressed as Lady Blank by the upper classes, not as Lady John Blank. To do so would be to give her the rank of the wife of the younger son of a Duke or Marquis, instead of that of a baronette's wife only, and as my lady or your ladyship by all other classes. The wives of Knight should be addressed as Lady B or Lady C according to the surnames of their husbands. Thus Sir John Blank's wife should be addressed as Lady Blank by the upper classes, and as my lady or your ladyship by all other classes. In addressing foreigners of rank colloquially the received rule is to address them by their individual titles and surnames. A prince or princess should be addressed by their full title, thus Prince Munich or Princess Munich by the upper classes. Persons intimate with them usually address them as prince or princess as the case may be. In the case of a prince being a younger son and not the reigning head of the house, his Christian name is generally used after his title when addressing him, thus Prince Louis in lieu of prince only. The same remark applies to the unmarried daughters of princes. They also should be addressed by their Christian name in addition to their title of princess by the aristocracy and gentry, and as your Serene or your Imperial Highness according to their birth and title by all other classes. A French Duke should be addressed by his surname with the addition of Monsieur, thus Monsieur de Rouen by the upper classes, and as Monsieur la Duc by all other classes. A French Duchess should be addressed by her surname with the addition of Madame, thus Madame de Rouen by the upper classes, and as Madame la Duchesse by all other classes. A Marquis should be addressed by his surname with the addition of Monsieur, thus Monsieur de Arfleur by the upper classes, and as Monsieur la Marquis by all other classes. A Marquis should be addressed by her surname with the addition of Madame, thus Madame la Arfleur by the upper classes, and as Madame la Marquis by all other classes. A Count should be addressed by his surname with the addition of Monsieur, thus Monsieur de Montpellier by the upper classes, and as Monsieur le Count by all other classes. A Countess should be addressed by her surname with the addition of Madame, thus Madame de Montpellier by the upper classes, and as Madame la Countesse by all other classes. A Viscont should be addressed by his surname with the addition of Monsieur, thus Monsieur de Toulouse by the upper classes, and as Monsieur la Viscont by all other classes. A Viscontesse should be addressed by her surname with the addition of Madame, thus Madame de Toulouse by the upper classes, and as Madame la Viscontesse by all other classes. A Baron should be addressed by his surname with the addition of Monsieur, thus Monsieur de Vignon by the upper classes, and as Monsieur le Baron by all other classes. A Baron should be addressed by her surname with the addition of Madame, thus Madame de Vignon by the upper classes, and as Madame la Baron by all other classes. A young unmarried lady should be addressed as Madame Moiselle de Vignon by the upper classes, and as Madame Moiselle by all other classes. In German titles, the distinction of von before the surname is seldom used colloquially, the title and surname being used without the prefix of von. Thus Count von Osberg should be addressed as Count Osberg in conversation, and not as Monsieur le Comte. Foreign ladies of rank should be addressed by their title and surname, and not by their title only, and the prefix von should be omitted. But in the case of a French or Italian title, the de or de la before the surname should on no account be omitted. When Englishmen are extremely intimate with foreigners of rank, they would in conversation probably address them by their surnames, but only thorough intimacy and friendship warrants this familiarity. As regards addressing the clergy, an archbishop should be addressed colloquially as archbishop by the upper classes, and as your grace by the clergy and all other classes. A bishop should be addressed colloquially as bishop by the upper classes, and as my lord by the clergy and all other classes. A dean should be styled Dean Blank, or Dean by the upper classes, and as Mr. Dean by the clergy. An archdeacon should be addressed as archdeacon Blank, and a canon as canon Blank. The wives of archbishops, bishops and deans should be respectively addressed as Mrs. A, Mrs. B, or Mrs. C. They take no title from the spiritual rank of their husbands. Officers in the army should be respectively addressed as General A, Colonel B, Major C, or Captain D, and not as General, Colonel, or Major, except by their very intimate friends. The wives of officers should be addressed as Mrs. A, Mrs. B, Mrs. C, or Mrs. D. They should never be addressed as Mrs. General A, Mrs. Colonel B, Mrs. Major C, or Mrs. Captain D. A lady should not address her husband colloquially by his surname only, as Jones, Brown, or by whatever his surname might be, or speak of him without the prefix of Mr. The usual rule is for a wife to speak of her husband as Mr. Brown, or my husband, except to intimate friends when the Christian name only is frequently used, and to address him by his Christian name only. A wife should not address her husband by the initial letter of his surname, as Mr. B or Mr. P. Neither should a husband address his wife by the initial letter of his surname. When intimate friends address each other by the initial letter of their names, it is by way of pleasantry only, and such cases of course do not come within the rules of etiquette. Peeresses frequently address their husbands and speak of them by the name attached to their title, in place of using their Christian or family name. Thus the Earl of Blanxia would be styled Blanxia by his wife, without the prefix of Lord, and his usual signature would be Blanxia, without the addition of any Christian name. Aronette's wife should not address their husbands by their surnames, but by their Christian names, and should speak of them as Sir George or Sir John. The wives of Knights also should not address their husbands by their surnames, but by their Christian names, and should speak of them as Sir George or Sir John. The Lord Mayor should be addressed as Lord Mayor colloquially, and the Lady Mayoress as Lady Mayoress. Unless the Lord Mayor during office is created a baronette, or receives the honour of knighthood, when he should be addressed as Sir John or Sir Henry, and his wife as Lady A. End of Chapter 6, Recording by Jane Bennett. General Society is now very frequently brought into contact with royalty, members of the Royal Family of England, and members of various royal families of Europe. With His Majesty, this association is a frequent occurrence as regards the general public, and persons possessing special interest are constantly brought into communication with him. Strict Court etiquette is greatly in abeyance, and laid aside by His Majesty when paying visits to personal friends, or when receiving visits from the same. The genealogy of the English princes and princesses is everywhere acknowledged, and the restrictions of court etiquette are frequently relaxed by their desire, when visiting at the houses of the nobility and gentry. The etiquette that reigns in foreign courts, Austria, Russia, Greece, etc., is seldom waved, and is adhered to with much punctilio. So much so is this the case with certain foreign princes who visit our shores, that the observances they claim as due to their exalted position are often felt to be a restraint upon the hosts whom they honour with their company, in town or country, at dinner, ball, or country-house party. On the other hand, many royal personages who occasionally visit England are unbending and unceremonious towards society in general. When royal personages visit London for a few weeks, whether located at palace, embassy, or hotel, it is etiquette for any person who is personally acquainted with, or connected in any way with their court or cabinet, or who has been presented at their court, to leave cards on them and write their names in their visiting books. Persons still higher in the social scale give receptions in their honour, and invite them to stay at their princely mansions. When such visits are paid, the principal neighbours are usually invited to meet the royal guests at dinner, ball, or reception, and on the invitation card is written to meet HRH, the crown prince of, Blank, or her serene highness, the grand duchess of, Blank, etc. But a hostess exercises her own discretion respecting the invitations she issues. If a ball is in contemplation, the county at large is invited to the mansion. But if dinner invitations only are issued, then the circle is necessarily restricted to a favoured view. The neighbours who are not invited to a house where a royal guest is staying should avoid calling on the hostess until the departure of the royal visitors, even if calls are due. The principal people of a county who happen to be present at an entertainment, either dinner or dance, are usually presented to the royal guests by the host or hostess, permission to do so having been first solicited. When the person to be presented is a person of rank or distinction, it would only be necessary to say, It would only be necessary to say, May I present Lord A, or General B, to you, sir. But if the person to be presented has no particular claim to the honour beyond being popular in the county, the request should be prefaced with a few words of explanation respecting the person to be presented. When the name or fame of those presented has reached the ears of the royal guests, they usually shake hands on the presentation being made and enter into conversation with them, otherwise they merely bow and make one or two passing remarks. A house party is generally composed of those with whom a royal guest is more or less acquainted. When the party includes anyone who is a stranger to the royal guests, he or she should be presented on the first opportunity. The members of the royal family have each, more or less, their particular set, as have also the foreign princes who periodically visit this country, and therefore house parties are usually made up of those moving in the set of the expected prince. For the proper mode of addressing royal personages, see Chapter 6. As regards royal invitations, all invitations from the sovereign are commands, and must be answered and obeyed as such, and the word command must be made use of in answering such invitations. If any reason exists for not obeying His Majesty's commands, it should be stated. Invitations from members of the royal family are treated by courtesy as commands, but in replying to such invitations the word command should not be used. The answers to such invitations should be addressed to the controller of the household, by whom they are usually issued. Answers to royal invitations should be written in the third person, and reasons given for non-acceptance. A previous engagement cannot be pleaded as an excuse for refusing a royal invitation, only personal indisposition or serious illness or death of near relatives would be adequate reasons for not accepting a royal invitation. When a royal invitation is verbally given, the answer should be verbal also. At all entertainments at which royal guests are present they should be received by the host and hostess in the entrance hall. In the case of Serene Highnesses they should be received by the host and conducted by him to the hostess. This rule equally applies to the reception of Eastern princes. The etiquette to be observed on the departure of royal personages is identical with that observed on their arrival. With regard to inviting members of the royal family to assist at the opening of any public undertaking, the request should be made through the controller of the household of the prince who is to be invited, or through his secretary, and the same rule equally applies to both prince and princess. Indian Princes The exact status of Indian princes has never been actually laid down, but all who are Highnesses are given precedence at the English court and in society after the royal family and foreign princes.  No Indian prince is considered to be of blood royal and they do not stand in the line at levies and courts, but all have the private entree. End of section 7 Read by the Storygirl Chapter 8 of Manners and Rules This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Jennifer Painter Manners and Rules Chapter 8 Points of etiquette when travelling abroad and presentations at foreign courts The acquaintanceship of foreign residents is a considerable service to English people proposing to enter abroad or to remain for any length of time in a continental city as by its means they obtain an entrance into foreign society. An introduction to the English ambassador or minister at a foreign court is of still greater service in this matter. People of recognised position in society have the privilege of leaving cards at the English embassy at any foreign city in which they intend making a temporary stay. So thoroughly is the position of English travellers known to the English ministry at a foreign court that should a person who is not received in English society leave cards at the English embassy they would be at once returned as an intimation that the acquaintance is declined. It is erroneous to suppose that by leaving cards upon foreigners of distinction an acquaintanceship can be commenced for unless introductions have been formally made leaving cards is a useless proceeding. At far away spots little frequented by the general run of travellers and where there are but few if any resident English travellers requiring advice or assistance from the English consul can without an introduction call upon him nationality being the ground upon which to do this and if of equal social standing they would be received with social consideration if otherwise all assistance would be given to them from an official point of view. Many people when travelling abroad make pleasant acquaintances even without the help of introductions the occasion of a meeting being as it were a semi-introduction in itself. Such casual acquaintanceships are however attended with certain risks especially to persons who have been absent from England some little time or who when in England have entered comparatively but little in society and who are thus apt to drift unawares into close friendships with people perhaps well bred and agreeable although tabooed at home for some good and sufficient reason. Contra-tons such as these are painful to kind-hearted people when subsequently compelled to avoid and to relinquish the acquaintance of those with whom they have become pleasantly intimate. An introduction to an English resident in either town or city obviates any unpleasantness of this nature as one so situated is generally kept au courant with all that takes place in society at home. When persons desire to enter into society abroad they endeavour to obtain letters of introduction from friends and acquaintances to residents in the cities they propose visiting. Unless English travellers have been duly presented at the court of St James they cannot obtain presentations at foreign courts through the English embassies. When a lady desires a presentation at a foreign court she should write to the English ambassador and request the honour of a presentation and should state the date of her presentation and the name of the lady by whom she was presented. After her statement has been duly verified the request is granted. In a like manner when a gentleman desires a presentation at a foreign court he should write to the ambassador and request the honour of a presentation and should state the date of the levee at which he was presented and the name of the person by whom the presentation was made. Presentations at foreign courts take place in the evening and the persons to be presented and those who attend assemble previous to the entrance of the royal personages. The rule is for the grand maitress to present each lady in turn to her royal mistress who makes the tour of the apartment for this purpose and addresses some courteous observation to each. There are perhaps two reasons why various surnames are so frequently mispronounced. The one being unfamiliarity with the freak of fashion which governs the pronunciation of certain well-known names the other ignorance or want of education. When sensitive persons hear a name pronounced differently from the way in which they have themselves but just pronounced it and in a tone and manner strongly suggestive of correction it is wounding to their amour approprié. As a rule when persons are endowed as to the correct pronunciation of any particular name it would be best to avoid mentioning it if possible until their doubts are set at rest by someone better informed than themselves. Names that have a fashionable or peculiar pronunciation or are pronounced otherwise than as they are spelled are but few and names which it is possible wrongly to accent are also not very numerous but it is surprising how often these names occur in the course of conversation. The names of distinguished artists that are open to mispronunciation occur far oftener in conversation than do the general run of uncommon surnames. There are many celebrated hunts and hunting quarters of which the names are open to considerable mispronunciation. With regard to placing the accent on the wrong syllable in the pronunciation of names it requires but little thought to avoid making this mistake a popular error being that of placing the accent upon the last syllable of a name whereas in a name of two syllables the accent should invariably be placed upon the first and the second syllable should be as it were slightly abbreviated or slightly altered. In names of three syllables the error usually consists in placing the accent upon the last syllable whereas the accent should be placed upon the second syllable. There are occasional exceptions to this rule and the few names given in this chapter both as regards their pronunciation and accentuation will serve as a useful guide in the pronunciation of uncommon names. Spell A-B-E-R-G-A-V-E-N-N-Y pronounced abirgeni a-v not sounded spelt a-r-b-u-t-h-n-o-t pronounced arbuthnot spelt a-r-u-n-d-e-l pronounced arendl b-e-a-c-o-n-s-f-i-e-l-d beckensfield be-e-a-u-c-h-a-m-p beechem be-e-a-u-c-l-e-r-k or be-e-a-u-c-l-e-r-c bowclair accent on first syllable be-e-l-v-o-i-r beaver be-e-r-k-e-l-y Barclay B-E-T-H-U-N-E Beedon B-I-C-E-S-T-E-R Bister Accent on First Syllable B-L-O-U-N-T Blunt B-L-Y-T-H Bly T-H not Sounded B-O-U-R-K-E Burke B-O-U-R-N-E Burn B-O-W-L-E-S Bowls B-R-E-A-D-A-L-B-A-N-E Bridalboni Accent on Second Syllable B-R-O-U-G-H-A-M Broom B-U-C-H-A-N Bucken Accent on First Syllable B-U-R-D-E-T-T Burnet Accent on Last Syllable B-U-R-N-E-T-T Burnet Accent on Last Syllable B-U-R-Y Berry C-A-L-D-E-R-O-N Caldron Not Caldron C-H-A-R-T-E-R-I-S Charters C-H-O-L-M-E-L-E-Y Chumley C-H-O-L-M-O-N-D-E-L-E-Y Chumley C-I-R-E-N-C-E-S-T-E-R Sysester Accent on First Syllable C-L-A-N-R-I-C-A-R-D-E Clanrycard Accent on Second Syllable C-O-C-K-B-U-R-N Coburn C-K-NOT-Sounded C-O-L-Q-U-H-O-U-N Cohoon Accent on Last Syllable C-O-N-Y-N-H-A-M Cunningham C-O-U-T-T-S Coots C-O-W-P-E-R Cooper D-A-L-Z-I-E-L D-L Accent on First Syllable D-E-R-B-Y Darby D-E-S-V-A-U-X Devaux The X-NOT-Sounded D-E-V-E-R-E-U-X Devereux The X-NOT-Sounded D-I-L-L-W-Y-N Dillon The W-Y takes the sound of U, the Accent on First Syllable. D-U-C-H-E-S-N-E DuCarn D-U-SPACE-P-L-A-T DuPlar E-L-G-I-N Elgin G-HARD as in give E-Y-R-E Air F-I-L-D-E-S FILDS NOT-FILDS F-O-R-T-E-S-C-U-E Fortescue G-E-O-F-F-R-E-Y Jeffrey G-E-O-G-H-E-G-A-N Gagan G-I-F-F-O-R-D Gifford The G-SOFT as in George G-I-L-L-E-T-T Gillett G-HARD as in Gilbert G-I-L-L-O-T-T Gillett G-HARD G-L-A-M-I-S Glarms G-O-R-G-E-S Georges The first G-HARD and second G-SOFT G-O-U-G-H Goff G-O-W-E-R Gore But Gower as regards the street of that name with the general public. H-A-R-C-O-U-R-T Harkett Accent on first syllable H-E-A-T-H-C-O-T-E Hethkett H-E-R-T-F-O-R-D Harford H-O-M-E Hume H-U-G-H-E-S Hughes J-E-R-V-I-S Jarvis J-O-H-N-S-T-O-N-E Johnson Key not sounded K-E-N-N-A-I-R-D Canard Accent on last syllable K-E-N-N-A-R-D Canard Accent on last syllable K-E-R Car K-N-O-L-L-Y-S Knowles L-A-Y-A-R-D Laird L-E-C-O-N-F-I-E-L-D Leckenfield L-E-F-E-V-R-E The Favour L-E-I-G-H Lee L-Y-V-E-D-O-N Liveden M-A-C-N-A-M-A-R-A McNamara Accent on third syllable M-A-I-N-W-A-R-I-N-G Manning M-A-J-O-R-I-B-A-N-K-S Marshbanks M-C-I-N-T-O-S-H McIntosh M-C-L-E-O-D McLeod M-E-N-Z-I-E-S Minjees Accent on first syllable M-E-U-X Muse The X sounded as S M-I-L-L-A-I-S Millet Accent on first syllable M-I-L-N-E-S Mills M-O-L-Y-N-E-U-X Mala Nukes The X sounded with slight accent on last syllable M-O-N-C-K Monk M-O-N-C-K-T-O-N Monkton Accent on first syllable M-O-N-S-O-N Munzen M-O-N-T-G-O-M-E-R-I-E Or M-O-N-T-G-O-M-E-R-Y Montgomery Accent on second syllable M-O-W-B-R-A-Y Mobri N-I-G-E-L Nigel O-U-L-E-S-S Ulis P-A-R-N-E-L-L Parnell Accent on last syllable P-E-P-Y-S Pappas Accent on first syllable P-I-E-R-R-E-P-O-N-T Pierpont P-O-N-S-O-N-B-Y Ponsonby P-O-N-T-E-F-R-A-C-T Pomfret P-U-G-H Pew P-Y-T-C-H-L-E-Y Pitchley Not pitchley R-U-T-H-V-E-N Riven S-A-N-D-Y-S Sands S-T-Period Space C-L-A-I-R Sinclair S-T-Period Space M-A-U-R Seymour Or S-T-Period Space J-O-H-N Singin As regards Christian and surname, but as Saint John when applied to church or locality. S-E-Y-M-O-U-R Seymour Accent on first syllable S-T-R-A-C-H-A-N Strawn T-A-D-E-M-A Tatamar Accent on first syllable T-O-L-L-E-M-A-C-H-E Tolmas T-R-A-F-A-L-G-A-R Trafalgar Accent on last syllable As regards the peer of that name, not otherwise. T-R-E-D-E-G-A-R Tradiagar Accent on second syllable T-R-E-M-A-Y-N-E Tremaine Accent on last syllable T-Y-R-W-H-I-T-T Tarot V-A-U-G-H-A-N Vorn V-A-U-X Vox The X sounded V-I-L-L-B-O-I-S Veilbore V-I-L-L-I-E-R-S Villars W-A-L-D-E-G-R-A-V-E Wallgrave The D-E not sounded W-E-M-Y-S-S Weems W-I-L-L-O-U-G-H-B-Y Space D-A-Postrophe Capital E-R-E-S-B-Y Willoughby-Dursby End of Section 9 Read by The Story Girl Chapter 10 of Menace and Druze This is a LibriVox recording All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org Menace and Druze Chapter 10 Presentations at courts and attending courts Courts are now held in lure of drawing rooms by the Majesties the King and Queen at Buckingham Palace and at which presentations to the Majesties are made. These courts are held in the evenings at 10 o'clock but the hour at which the company should commence to arrive is intimated by the Lord Jambalane in the notice issued of the courts to be held. Two courts are usually, but not invariably, held before Easter and two more after Easter. Ladies who have been presented at drawing rooms and courts held during the last two reigns do not require to be again presented to the Majesties the King and Queen. Thus, ladies who have already been presented at the drawing rooms and who are desirous of being invited to one or another of these courts and who are also desirous of making presentations should send in the names and the names of those to be presented by them to the Lord Jambalane since James Pellis, SW, on the 1st of January in each year but not before that date. Ladies are also privileged to mention at the same time when it will be most convenient to them to pay their respects to the Majesties. If it should not be convenient for a lady to attend or be presented at a particular court to which she is invited, it will be open to her to make her excuses to the Lord Jambalane in writing when her name can, if desired, and if possible be transferred to another list. A lady who makes a presentation to the Majesties must be personally acquainted with and responsible for the lady she presents. She must herself attend the court and cannot present more than one lady in addition to a daughter or daughter-in-law. The numbers receive that each court being necessarily limited, ladies can only receive occasional invitations. Therefore those who cannot be included in the year's lists of invitations will receive an intimation to this effect from the Lord Jambalane in answer to their applications to attend. The persons entitled to be presented at the Majesties courts are the wives and daughters of the members of the aristocracy, the wives and daughters of those holding high official appointments in the government, the wives and daughters of members of parliament, the county gentry and town gentry, the wives and daughters of the members of the legal, military, naval, clerical, medical and other professions, the wives and daughters of merchants, bankers and members of the stock exchange and persons engaged in commerce on a large scale. Although the word gentry is thus elastic and although persons coming within the category might be fairly entitled to the privilege of attending courts yet it is well understood that birth, wealth, associations and position give raison d'être for such privilege. As for instance the wife and daughters of an officer in the navy or a line regiment whose means as lender and whose position is obscured would not be justified for these reasons in attending a court. Although the officer himself might attend a levy if desirous of doing so and this remark equally applies to the wives and daughters of clergymen barristers and others similarly situated. Presentations to the Majesties are made officially by the various foreign ambassadors by the wives of the members of the cabinet and the wives of other official personages in various departments of the state either civil, military, naval or clerical. Presentations at each of the Majesties courts are now limited by royal command. Presentations to the Majesties should be made either by a relative or a friend of the lady presented who has herself been previously presented. A lady has the privilege of presenting one lady only at the court in addition to her daughter or daughter-in-law. This restriction does not apply to ladies who from official position or other circumstances are specially privileged to make presentations to the Majesties. When a presentation is not made officially or by a near relative it is considered a favour of the person making the presentation towards the person presented. The responsibility of a presentation rests upon the person who makes it both as to the social and moral fitness of the person presented therefore to solicit the favour of a presentation from a friend is to incur a considerable obligation and it is a favour ladies have no hesitation in refusing and as good reasons exist for granting it. When presentations are made through official channels their responsibility rests upon the office rather than upon the person making the presentation. Hence presentations so made have little personal significance to the person making them. A lady having been presented on her marriage has the privilege of attending by invitation any subsequent court and ladies who have no official position will only be allowed to attend a court by summons every third year. On the accession of her husband to any title she would again have to be presented and should she marry a second time another presentation would be necessary to entitle her to attend one of the Majesties courts. It is the privilege of the married lady to make presentations but should any person be presented whose antecedents or present position renders her socially unqualified to be presented the Lord Chamberlain on becoming aware of the fact would at once cancel the presentation and officially announce it in the Gazette and the person making such presentation would be expected to tender an apology for so doing. An unmarried lady does not possess the privilege of making a presentation however high her rank may be. She is not permitted to attend any subsequent courts after first presentation until three years have elapsed safe under exceptional circumstances. Four courts are held during each year at Buckingham Palace two before and two after Easter Two intimation is given previous to each court being held by the Lord Chamberlain through the medium of the official Gazette from whence it is copied into the newspapers. The wives of members of the cabinet and of the ambassadors or ministers at the court of St. James usually attend at each court and have the privilege of doing so by reason of the official presentations made by them at each court. It is compulsory for a lady making a presentation to be herself present at the court at which the presentation is to be made though it is not necessary for her to accompany the person whom she presents but simply to attend the same court. When a lady intends making a presentation she should on or after the first of January to the Lord Chamberlain and inform him of a wish to attend a court and forward the name of the lady to be presented by her. Ladies are not expected to attend court more than once in every three years unless under exceptional circumstances. A lady attending a court may present one lady in addition to her daughter or daughter-in-law. A lady presented for the first time can only present her daughter or daughter-in-law at the court at which she is presented. No applications can be received from ladies who wish to be presented. Their names must be forwarded by the ladies who wish to make the presentations. Some answers are issued about three weeks before the date of each court. Ladies may be accompanied to court by their husbands if the letter have been presented but gentlemen do not pass before the king and queen. Ladies are requested to forward the names of the husbands at the same time as their own in order that they may be submitted together as once the summons has been issued the amending of the summons card in order to include a ladies husband can only be permitted under the most exceptional circumstances. Those who have the privilege of the entree enter at the gate of the palace situated outside Buckingham gate. Those who possess this privilege are the diplomatic circle, the cabinet ministers and the wives and the members of the household. The rooms, two in number next to the residence chamber are appropriated to them. All who have the privilege of the entree are received by their mayesties before the general circle and according to their individual presidency and they also have the privilege of making the first presentations. When a lady arrives at the palace she should leave her in the cloak room with one of the maids in attendance. After crossing the great hall she then makes her way up the grand staircase to the corridor where she shows her invitation card to the page in waiting and then passes on to one of the saloons. When a lady arrives early she gains admission to the saloon next to those reserved for the entree. When she arrives late she has to take her place in a further room of the suit according to the number of persons present. The saloons are placed at the door of each room close the guild barriers when they consider the saloons are full. Chairs and benches are placed in the corridor and in these saloons for the accommodation of ladies thus waiting the turn to enter the throne room or presence chamber. As the ladies quit each room for the presence chamber others take their places and the barriers are again closed and continued until everyone has been received. A lady has to pass through the two entrées saloons before reaching the picture gallery. At the door of the picture gallery a lady's train which she has hefferto carried on her arm is let down by two officials in attendance and spread out by them with their wands. In the presence chamber at the door of which she should give the card of invitation she has brought with her to the official station to receive it. A lady on being presented curses to the queen and curses to the queen. The king bows in return as does also the queen. A lady presented does not kiss the queen's hand as she formally did. However high the rank may be, neither does the queen shake hands with any present. A lady on being presented does not now curtsy to any member of the royal family when she passed their mayesties and leaves the presence chamber stepping backwards, facing the royal party until making her exit from the apartment when an official places her train on her arm at the treasured of the doorway. When a lady wishes to attend a court after having been duly presented it is necessary to inform the Lord Chamberlain of her wish to attend. Summoners are issued about three weeks before the date of each court. Having received a summons to attend a court she should take the summons card with her which she should show to the page invading in the corridor and eventually hand it to the official stationed at the door of the present chamber by whom it is passed on to the Lord Chamberlain who announces the name to their mayesties. A lady attending a court curses to the king, she also curtsies to the queen but does not curtsy to any other member of the royal family present. In the general circle there is no precedency as to the order in which ladies attend a court until the present chamber. The earliest arrivals are the first to appear before their mayesties without reference to rank or position and the same rule applies to ladies who are presented or to ladies who make presentations. A married lady presented at the court can, at the same court, present her daughter or daughter-in-law but in this case the one presented by her should enter the present chamber after her and not before her. Although according to present regulations the unmarried daughters of members of the nobility and gentry who have already been presented are only expected to attend a court once in every three years it will not prevent their being invited to court functions to the state boards, concerts and garden parties. Ladies who have been presented at the court have the privilege of writing the names in their mayesties visiting book at Buckingham Palace once during the season. The hours of calling for this purpose are generally from three to five o'clock in the afternoon. It is imperative for ladies to wear full court dress when attending or being presented at the court. With low bodies, short sleeves and trained to dress not less than three yards in length from the shoulders. When the train is cut round or square is a matter of inclination or fashion the width at the end should be 54 inches. It is also imperative that a presentation dress should be wide if the person presented be an unmarried lady and it is also the fashion for married ladies to wear wide on the presentation unless the age renders their doing so unsuitable. The wide dresses worn by either debitants or married ladies may be trimmed with either colored or white flowers according to individual taste. High court dress the queen has been pleased to permit that the high court dress of silk, satin or velvet may be worn at their mayesties court and on other state occasions by ladies to whom from illness and firmity or advancing age the present low court dress is inappropriate with bodices in front cut square or heart shaped which may be filled in with wide only either transparent or lined at the back high or cut down three quarters height sleeves to elbow either thick or transparent trains, gloves and feathers as usual it is necessary for ladies who wish to appear in high court dress to obtain royal permission through the Lord Chamberlain this regulation does not apply to ladies who have already received permission to wear high dress wide gloves only should be worn except in case of mourning when black or grey gloves are admissible as a lady on presentation does not now kiss the queen's hand as formally she did she is not required to remove the right hand glove before entering the present chamber this order therefore is no longer in force and the lady wearing elbow gloves and bracelets will find it a great convenience not to be obliged to take off her glove it is compulsory for both married and unmarried ladies to wear plumes the married ladies court plume consists of three white feathers and unmarried ladies of two white feathers the three white feathers should be mounted as a prines of wales plume and worn towards the left hand side of the head colored feathers may not be worn in deep mourning white feathers must be worn black feathers are inadmissible white wheels or lace leopards must be worn with the feathers the wales should not be longer than 45 inches bouquets are not included in the dress regulations issued by the Lord Chamberlain although they are invariably carried by both married and unmarried ladies it is thus optional to carry a bouquet or not and some elderly ladies carry much smaller bouquets than do younger ladies a fan and the lace pocket hand can chief are also carried by a lady on presentation or on attending a court but these two items are also all together optional end of chapter 10 for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org recording by Jennifer Painter Mammers and Rules Chapter 11 presentations at Leves and attending Leves Leves are held by the King in person those who have been presented at Leves held by his late Majesty King Edward are required to be again presented to his Majesty King George four or more Leves are usually held every year by the King at St James's Palace gentlemen are officially presented by the heads of any department or profession to which they individually belong whether civil or military, naval or clerical it is more usual for a gentleman to be presented by the head of his department or by the colonel of his regiment than by his nearest relative presentations are also made by relatives and friends of those presented but these are greatly in the minority of all Leves gentlemen must be again presented at every step in their career whether civil military, naval or clerical on civil appointments on gaining steps of naval, military legal or clerical rank and on accession to title whether inherited or conferred those entitled to be presented at his Majesty's Leves are the members of the aristocracy and gentry the members of the diplomatic corps, the cabinet and all leading government officials, members of parliament leading members of the legal profession, the naval and military professions, the leading members of the clerical profession the leading members of the medical and artistic professions the leading bankers, merchants and members of the stock exchange and persons engaged in commerce on a large scale an exception to the rule as regards retail trade is made in favour of any person receiving knighthood or when holding the office of mayor or being made a justice of the peace or on receiving a commission in the territorial forces the dates on which Leves are to be held are duly announced in the gazette and in the daily newspapers at all future Leves cards of admission will be required as the numbers at each of these ceremonies must be limited the Lord Chamberlain has issued the following revised list of rules which are to be observed to tendances and presentations in future all officers whether on the active or retired lists of the Royal Navy and the Royal Marines of whatever rank should communicate with and obtain their cards from the private secretary to the first Lord of the Admiralty all civil officers of the Admiralty should follow the same rule all officers whether on the active or retired lists of the army regulars or territorial of whatever rank except those on the Indian and colonial establishments should communicate with and obtain their cards from the adjutant general at the war office stating clearly at which level they desire to be present and whether they wish to attend or to be presented if the latter stating by whom and on what occasion Deputy Lieutenant of Counties should also communicate and obtain their cards from the war office. Officers of the household cavalry and foot guards on the active list should make application to the Lord Chamberlain at St. James Palace for cards of admission and presentation all retired officers of the household cavalry and brigade of guards should apply to the war office all officers of the Indian civil service and of the Indian Army of whatever rank whether on the active or retired lists should communicate with and obtain their cards from the private secretary to the secretary of state at the India office Whitehall. All officers of the colonial service and colonial forces of whatever rank whether on the active or retired lists should communicate with and obtain their cards from the colonial office Whitehall. Similarly all gentlemen connected with the foreign office, the home office, officials connected with the houses of parliament or any government department should communicate with and obtain their cards for attendance or presentation at levees from the department under which they serve. Judges, law officers, Kings Council and all legal officials holding appointments under the crown are requested to make their applications through the secretary to the Lord Chancellor. Peers, Bishops, Lord Lieutenant of Counties, Members of Parliament, clergy of all denominations and all gentlemen other than the above mentioned should communicate with the Lord Chamberlain at St. James Palace where they will each be furnished with a card of presentation for use at the levee. The names both for attendance and presentation must be received at the various offices above indicated, not later than eight days prior to the date of each levee. But in the case of officers who make application to the war office 14 days before the date of each levee. When a gentleman makes a presentation it is compulsory for him to attend the same levee as the person whom he presents. And the card of presentation is sent to him to be forwarded to the person to be presented. A gentleman on being presented should bow to the king and his majesty will bow to him in return. A gentleman attending a levee should also bow to his majesty. Gentlemen who have been presented at a levee have the privilege of writing their names in his majesty's visiting book at Buckingham Palace once during the season. The hours of calling for this purpose are generally from three to five o'clock in the afternoon. The dress to be worn at courts, state functions and levees. Full dress uniform is invariably worn by all gentlemen entitled to wear it. All officers of Scottish Kilted Corps wear the Kilt irrespective of their being mounted officers or not. Gentlemen who do not wear uniform may wear either velvet court dress, new style, velvet court dress, old style, cloth court dress. The new style velvet court dress is a black silk velvet. The body of the coat lined with white silk and the skirt with black silk. Steel buttons a waistcoat of white satin or black silk velvet.  The velvet court dress old style is very similar to the foregoing with the addition of a black silk wig bag at the back of the neck and lace frills and ruffles. The cloth court dress consists of a coat of dark mulberry, claret or green cloth with black silk linings, gold embroidery on collar, cuffs and pocket flaps, guilt buttons with imperial crown, waistcoat of white corded silk or white matchella.  Leve dress is identical with the foregoing except the trousers with a row of narrow gold lace down the side seams are worn and not britches. Military patent leather boots.   Deans and archdeacons at evening state functions wear the same dress as bishops except that the coat and short cassock are black.   White gloves are worn at all court functions the academical habit should not be worn at court except when addresses are presented from the universities when the court is in mourning gentlemen attending a levee are expected to wear a band of black crepe on the left arm above the elbow end of chapter chapter 12 of manners and rules this is a LibriVox recording all LibriVox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org recording by Jennifer Painter manners and rules chapter 12 Balls and State Balls Balls are given in town and country by society at large and these invitation balls include hunt balls, military and naval balls, Yeomanry and territorial balls, bachelor's balls etc. Public balls are those balls for which tickets of admission can be purchased although for many of these balls it is necessary to obtain vouchers from the committees or patronesses when held in town or at watering places.  In town ball giving is in a way a science and an amusement upon which large sums of money are frequently expended a crowded ball is not always pronounced a good ball by the guests often the contrary but then again what is termed a thin ball is open to the accusation of not going off well and falling rather flat of not being kept up with spirit and of being considered a stupid ball and so on. To hit upon a happy medium with regard to the number of guests is an achievement in ball giving which is only arrived at by a careful study of the map of the county and a judicious selection of night. This selection is of paramount importance to the success of a ball as when a smarter ball is given at a smarter house on the particular evening chosen by the giver of a less brilliant ball the grander ball extinguishes the lesser ball through the most fashionable people nearly looking in at the one and remaining the rest of the evening at the other. This putting out as it were of the lesser light occurs very frequently during the London season to ball givers moving in the same sets who have been expected to add luster to the lesser balls appear but for a few minutes and usually arrive rather early uncomplementarily early at perhaps a little before 11 and remain hardly half an hour in the rooms making their way to another ball of the same calibre and remaining there perhaps another 20 minutes before arriving at the goal is the ball of the evening. Both ladies and gentlemen follow this practice thus at a little after 12 an average ball giver finds her rooms deserted by all but those who have nowhere else to go although the fitting of the guests thus early is a disappointment to the hostess and although it does not prevent the fleeting ball givers from making suitable returns by placing the family on their ball lists it yet greatly marrs the enjoyment of the ball and prevents it being looked back upon with anything approaching to pleasure or satisfaction the departure of the most eligible partners being not the least of the vexations of the night. These contra-tons are sometimes unavoidable but when practicable it is always best to postpone a ball rather than to allow it to clash with a ball of greater pretensions. An impromptu dance is often a great success while an impromptu ball is almost a certain to prove a great failure. The difference between a dance and a ball consists in the number of the invitations issued in the strength of the band and the extent of the supper arrangements. At a dance the number of the guests varies from 80 to 200 at a ball they vary from 200 to 500. At a dance a piano band is frequently engaged while at a ball a full band is requisite.  At a small dance they are often dispensed with. Ladies new to society as it were or whose circle of acquaintance is of a limited character and who do not number in that circle many ball givers and who yet desire to form a ball acquaintance frequently replace their ball in the hands of some intimate friend of higher standing than themselves giving her carte blanche to form a ball list. When this plan is followed invitations are still sent out by the ball giver in every case the name and compliments of the lady who forms the list are sent with the card. This plan although of a advantage to the hostess is often productive of much unpleasantness to her fashionable friends who are naturally very much affronted at being excluded from the ball list which they usually are as a lady who undertakes to form a ball list for a friend is not a little arbitrary as to the conditions under which she assumes its management she naturally wishes the ball to be confined to her own set to the exclusion of what she terms all outsiders ladies are always more or less reluctant to yield up their ball to the exclusion of their old friends however anxious they may be to make new ones but when a ball is thus given it is thoroughly understood that conditions however stringent must be complied with a hostess should receive her guests at the head of the staircase at a ball given in town and at the door of the ballroom at a country house ball she should shake hands with each guest in the order of their arrival the ladies of a party should advance towards the hostess followed by the gentleman of their party a lady and gentleman should not ascend the staircase arm in arm or make their entrance into the ballroom arm in arm the gentleman invariably enter the ballroom after the ladies of their party and never before them or arm in arm with them a ball is usually opened either by the hostess herself or by one of her daughters opening a fancy dress ball simply signifies dancing in the first quadrille opening a dance means dancing the first pulse when a member of the royal family or a foreign prince is expected dancing should not commence until the arrival of the royal guest and when the royal guest is a lady the host should open the ball with her having his wife or daughter as of E when the royal guest is a prince the hostess or her daughter should open the ball with him when a prince wishes to dance with any lady present with whom he is unacquainted his equity informs her of the prince's intention and conducts her to the prince saying as he does so Mrs A your royal highness or Miss B your royal highness the prince bows offers her his arm the lady should curtsy and take it she should not address him until addressed by him it's not being considered etiquette to do so the same course is followed by a princess strangers to the princess should not ask her to dance but the host has the privilege of doing so when more than one royal personage is present the one of the highest rank leads the way with either hostess or host see chapter 5 royal guests should be received by the host and hostess at the entrance of the mansion and by them conducted to the ball at ball suppers the same precedence is strictly in force the royal guests leading the way with host or hostess see page 49 the same etiquette should be observed on the departure of royal guests as on their arrival general introductions should not be made to royal guests and introductions should be made by request only gentlemen present at a ball are expected to ask the daughters of the house for one dance at least a hostess should use her own discretion as to any introduction she thinks copper to make when a ball is given in the country the hostess should endeavor to find partners for those young ladies who are strangers to the general company but when a ball is given in town she is not expected to do so as in town the guests are supposed to be acquainted with each other more or less and to be independent of the kind offices of a hostess the dances mainly in vogue at the moment are balsas the boston two steps and the cotillon in which handsome presents are given our drills are danced at state balls and at those balls at which the king and queen are present also at fancy dress balls Lancers are danced occasionally at hunt balls the precedence he observed in sending guests into supper is far more punctiliously followed in the country than in town the host should take in the lady of highest rank present and the hostess should endeavor to send in the principal guests according to their individual rank but in town she generally leaves the guests to follow the host and lady of highest rank according to their inclinations a guest should not enter the supper room before the host has done so when a gentleman takes a lady into supper he should reconduct her to the ballroom as a matter of course the fact of friends joining her in the supper room would not relieve him from this obligation and the same etiquette applies equally to a lady she should return to the ballroom only with the gentleman who has taken her down to supper unless she is engaged for the ensuing dance when her partner might come in quest of her she should then return to the ballroom with him it is not usual for guests to take leave of a hostess at a London ball this remark applies to acquaintances of the hostess and not to intimate friends at a country ball the guests are on a more friendly footing than is generally the case in town and therefore make a point of taking leave of the hostess if possible it is optional whether a host conducts a lady to her carriage or not in the country more is expected of him than in town in this respect as at a London ball such a civility would involve a vast amount of exertion which few hosts would be willing to undergo ladies accompanied by an acquaintance generally make their way to their carriages the custom of covering in small balconies and the windows of the drawing rooms where a ball takes place rendering the atmosphere of the room almost insupportable from the total exclusion of air is fast disappearing the space gained by this means for the accommodation of the guests is totally disproportionate to the discomfort thereby entailed upon them ball givers have at length realised the mistake of crowding 200 to 300 people together into rooms not properly ventilated and it is now the rule when covering in balconies to introduce window frames into the bunting covering and to drape them with lace curtains etc the windows of the ballroom being entirely removed large blocks of ice are frequently placed in convenient spots for the purpose of cooling the atmosphere and colour dice produces a pretty effect. Patent ventilators are also much in use and the substitution of electric lighting on account of it emitting little heat has become general ball goers appreciate these alterations as only those who have experienced the close stifling atmosphere of an overcrowded ballroom can do and as half the London ballrooms are generally average sized drawing rooms the absurdity of excluding air from the ballroom with yards of thick canvas cannot be too severely criticised. Ball givers too frequently issue far more invitations than the size of their rooms authorises under the mistaken idea that to have a great crowd in their rooms is to give a good ball but experienced ball givers limit the number of their invitations to 300 instead of expanding it to over 300 the country ball season ostensibly commences in November reaches its zenith in January and terminates early in February. The stewards of these balls are as a rule the representatives of the various classes by whom they are attended the members of the aristocracy residing in the county heading the list of stewards and the members of the professional classes usually closing it. The top of the ballroom is as a rule appropriated by the aristocratic element head stewards and lady patronesses the enjoyment derived from country balls depends upon a variety of circumstances which do not influence in a light degree the ball going world of London.   As a rule the leading ladies of a county lend their names as patronesses and supporters of a charity ball although it by no means follows that they will personally attend it but a long list of influential patronesses materially increases the sale of tickets which is the result to be achieved. A large attendance is not the primary object of a county ball as the sum raised by the sale of tickets is only required to defray the expenses of the ball although these are sometimes considerable especially when the decorations are elaborate and the arrangements on a grand scale in which case there is not seldom a deficiency rather than a surface which deficiency is defrayed by the stewards themselves. To ensure a good ball considerable unanimity on the part of a county ladies is demanded and they usually meet and consult together previous to fixing the date of the ball to take into consideration the fixtures of neighboring county balls and so avoid the possibility of the said balls clashing with their own county ball and also with a view of perhaps attracting the house parties of their more distant neighbors to swell the numbers at their own ball. House parties invited for a ball vary from 10 to 25 as the accommodation of a house admits. It is not the province of the stewards of a ball to find partners for either ladies or gentlemen and therefore if a lady does not form one of a large party but merely attends a county ball with a relative or friend and has not a large acquaintance amongst those present she has very little chance of obtaining partners. Young ladies do not now return to their chaperones after each dance or after they have been to the tea room. A gentleman should offer his arm to his partner at the conclusion of a dance to conduct her to the tea room. In round dances it is customary to take frequent pauses and not to race round the ball room until the music ceases.   County balls usually commence between 9 and 10 o'clock. Sometimes a ball is not opened until the most influential of the stewards and their parties have arrived. But often other than not the two first dances are over before the arrival of the county magnets. It depends upon the length of the drive at what time people arrive at a ball. As a rule they do not arrive later than 10.30pm The usual mode of conveying a house party to a ball is by private omnibus in addition to carriages and motor cars. But when these are hired for the occasion the expense should be defrayed by the guests themselves. It is usual to leave a country ball not later than half past two. The most fashionable people invariably do so about that hour. As a matter of course persons attending public balls take their ball tickets with them. When attending a military ball or a hunt ball it is usually the rule to take the invitation card and hand it to the sergeant or official in attendance. It is sometimes stated on the invitation card that this is to be done although it is often taken for granted that persons will do so of their own accord. At balls given by private individuals the invited guests should not bring their invitation cards with them unless in the case of a vile musk when they are sometimes requested to do so. In giving a ball three weeks notice is considered necessary but with regard to a dance a short 10 days notice would suffice. The invitation card is the usual at home card the word dancing being printed in the corner of the card. The word ball should never be used on an invitation card however grand the entertainment and the same form of invitation is employed either in the case of a small dance or of a large ball. Though in the event of a small dance only being given the words small or early should be written or printed on the invitation card. Invitations to a ball should be issued in the name of the hostess only. When the hostess is a widower with a grown-up daughter the invitations should be issued in their joint names. When the hostess are a widower or a bachelor they should be issued in his name. Invitations issued by officers, members of hunt committees, bachelors etc to their balls either request the pleasure or the honour of Mrs Company but this formula should not be used by ladies when issuing invitations. The at home card should simply bear the word dancing at the bottom of the card the hour and date filled in in the lofted space the name of the guest written at the top of the card. In the case of a written invitation it would be correct to use the words ball or dance when alluding to the entertainment about to be given in a friendly note. A lady or gentleman might ask for an invitation for his or her friend to a ball given by an acquaintance although the acquaintance ship were of a slight character but a lady or gentleman should not ask for an invitation to a ball if unacquainted with the giver of it. The fact of mutual friends having received invitations to a ball gives no claim upon the hospitality of a stranger therefore such requests are inadmissible. The proper course for a person to pursue in the event of desiring an invitation to a ball given by someone with whom he or she is unacquainted is to request some mutual friend to obtain one and this course is always followed. Card should be left by the guests present at the ball within the current week if possible see chapter 3. Pretuities should never be given by the guests to the servants of the house where a ball is given. State Balls. Two state balls are annually given at Buckingham Palace during the London season by command of His Majesty. Invitations are issued by the Lord Chamberlain but His Majesty previously revises the list. When ladies and gentlemen attend a state ball at Buckingham Palace they make their way to the ballroom unannounced and there is no official reception accorded to them either by royalty or by the Lord Chamberlain. Dancing does not commence until the arrival of the royal party when the guests rise and remain standing while the royal quadrille with which the ball opens is being danced. The King and Queen act as host and hostess on these occasions but confine their attentions to those with whom they are personally acquainted. Ladies attending a state ball at Buckingham Palace should wear the usual full evening dress but they should not wear court trains or plumes or lappets. Gentlemen attending state balls should wear uniform or full court dress, dress coat, breeches and silk stockings, shoes and buckles. Trousers can only be worn as part of a uniform and not with a court dress as generally worn at a levee. A gentleman intending to dance should remove his sword otherwise he should not do so. When the court is in mourning ladies attending a state ball should wear mourning according to the official notice which Julie appears in the Gazette. Gentlemen should wear crepe on the left arm which is supplied in the cloakroom of the palace to those who have forgotten to provide themselves with it as it is imperative when the court is in mourning that a band of crepes should be worn at either state ball or state concert. The ball given by the princes and princesses of the Blood Royal are not state balls therefore court dress is not worn by the gentleman present. They act as host and hostess at the balls given by them and receive their guests shaking hands with them as they are enhanced. Ladies and gentlemen do not take their cards of invitation with them to Buckingham Palace. End of chapter 12


Who do you think defines the model of development in a country? For me, development is one of those tricky terms because it will depend on whose perspective you are taking into account. And it took me a while to understand the nuance of this term. Everything started while I was deciding what to study. I always like nature and love all types of plants. So I think that influenced my decision of studying forestry. As an undergrad student in Peru, we have to take field classes. And in my wildlife class in a community near to Iquitos, I had to conduct interviews with the local people to understand hunting practices in the area. I noticed then that although we had trouble so much around Peru in our different courses, we didn't know the people and the context they are embedded in. And I recognized that we didn't know and so that took me a while. And all this idea of the context and indigenous peoples having a different concept, what development means, it took me to understand that I was assuming that just good technology, access to the global market and efficiency managing resources, it will be enough to achieve development. But development for whom? The Amazon is mostly seen as a source of natural resources, but at the same time is seen as home and life itself by hundreds of different indigenous peoples. Well, some people call these differences of development, or endogenous development because they are trying to differentiate themselves from the market globalized notions of development. So there are two competing expectations of what development means, indigenous peoples and not indigenous peoples. And this is creating conflicts in Peru. So for instance, political, environmental, ecological and social conflicts. Actually, in the Peruvian Ombudsman, it is registered a monthly average of 228 social conflicts and most of them are related to the destruction of natural resources. So grassroots organizations, journalists and respected academics identified that such conflicts are mostly and primarily driven by transnational corporations, models, businesses. So extraction or exploitation, production, consumption and marketing of these products that are way beyond our planet ecological boundaries. Also it has been documented that transnational corporations have the tendency to exploit nature under the name of development and progress while externalizing liabilities to the communities and the environment. Furthermore, transnational corporations take part in the writing of public national policies regarding the management of the commons and share resources. Well, there is an increase of rural and indigenous movements voicing the different perspectives of development. I mentioned these two types of development, right? Endogenous and ethno-development. So in the Amazon, indigenous peoples are articulating that the projects of development that are executed in their territories should take and support, should support their visions and desires for their future. And the way that they are doing this is through the creation of organizations, that indigenous organizations that will provide a means for them to support their visions and what actually decide for their future. In Peru, there is an asymmetric struggle to address main powers, main transnational powers, so they respect the self-determined ethno-development of indigenous peoples. There has been some achievements, sadly at high cost of human lives. In 2009, there was a sadly success in what is called the power massacre and it was a clash between military forces and the people. Well, the people was able to create enough pressure to the government to eliminate certain degrees that were threatening their desires for the future, well, their collective and individual visions after a free trade agreement signed with the US. Well, I was mentioning at the beginning that I wasn't getting to know actually the context of people and the people itself. So I decided to do something about that. But through a master's and a PhD now, we are forming alliances with Asheninka and Ginayami peoples for the Peruvian Amazon to collaboratively research about what they envision for their futures. There are some evidence that suggests the necessity of established meaningful and endogenous indicators of development, so are based in the context and culture. As well, it is important to recognize the recognition of plurinational state in Peru and a practice of it. So these endogenous processes are vital in order to influence public policies in Peru and as a way to address current and future conflicts between humans and humans in nature. Underlying all of these are two important values. First, respectful consistency and reciprocity. Thank you very much for listening.


to be here. This is my 10th Gerucho. I've been at all of them. So I'm especially honored to be speaking at this Gerucho X edition. Also really honored to be keynoting. That was a bit of a surprise. And until I found out that that actually meant that I was the first one up in the morning. So there were trade-offs with that. But I made it. So we're going to talk a little bit about code quality lessons learned. As Luke mentioned, I started a company called Code Climate about five years ago. How many of you have heard of Code Climate? All right. Anyone who doesn't have their hands up, come see me afterwards. But the reason I mention this is because Code Climate helps teams by providing automated code review using static analysis to help teams and projects achieve higher quality and better outcomes. So we have a little bit of experience working with this code quality and the questions that it poses. There are over 80,000 repositories that get analyzed by Code Climate with our static analysis every day from over 75,000 developers who have taken advantage of our tools across 1,500 organizations. So that is where a lot of this experience that we're going to be talking about today is drawn from. So we thought it would be interesting to look at six questions related to code quality that might have sort of non-obvious answers or interesting answers that we're going to sort of walk through today. The first question is, what is code quality? This comes up almost right away when we start talking with an organization about what they're trying to achieve. The code part is very obvious. We all know what code is. But what does quality mean? Maybe that is not as easy to answer. So one way to try to answer the question of what is code quality might be looking at the opposite of code quality. So everybody is familiar probably with legacy code. This is often described as the opposite of code quality. So the definition of legacy code, it's a noun. It means code written by somebody else or code written by me more than two weeks ago. That is legacy code. So anything that's not legacy would be quality. Of course, like we said, we realize that code quality has many meanings. When we talk with developers about the quality of their code, they use adjectives like simple. They want to be able to get the work done in as efficient way as possible. Well tested either with unit tests or integration tests or both. Bug free. Does the code do exactly what it was intended to do without defects? Is it clear? Can somebody read it and understand it and can the team maintain it over time? Some teams will talk about refactored code. Was it not just written once, committed, and sort of did the developer move on? Did they actually go back and try to iterate the design of the code to match best practices and the team's conventions? Documented. Some teams will want code to be documented either inside the code or with supplemental documentation. Extensible. Can the code be evolved to meet new requirements that show up in the future? In some cases, just fast performance. If you're building a trading system, it would be hard to talk about your code being high quality if it takes 300 milliseconds to process a trade when you need to be able to do them in under a millisecond. The takeaway here is to make sure that your team is on the same page about your goals. If you want to improve code quality and different individuals on your team have a different understanding about what code quality is or how to achieve it, then you are at risk of spending a lot of time, energy, and potentially frustration moving in different directions, either opposite directions or even just not exactly the same direction. And one quote that I feel like really sums this up is thinking about the design of code. Somebody once said, any code less decomposed than mine is a mess. And any code more decomposed than mine is over engineered. And you probably all felt this before, right? That code that is, you know, less decomposed is a mess. But everyone's also, at the same time, criticized code that they felt was over engineered and thrown around the word yagney. So start with that conversation with your team is the takeaway. The second question that I wanted to look at is what is the best way to measure the complexity of the code? Suppose we've identified that maintainability and complexity are the goals. How could we actually measure that with our code base and with the changes that we're making to determine that we're moving in the right direction? Now, the oldest and most famous measurement of code complexity is WTFs per minute, as you can see. On the left side, there is a code review going on. And the code being reviewed is of high quality because the reviewers are only swearing a little bit. And then on the right side, you can see that that code review is going much less well. So the code is obviously of lower quality based on the profanity. Now, in truth, there are many metrics that can be used to evaluate the complexity of a given unit of code. Some of you may be familiar with cyclomatic complexity, which sometimes is also known as McCabe's complexity or McCabe's number. And it refers to the number of individual paths through a given block of code. Some of you may have also heard of the ABC metric, which is slightly less well known, but it's a measure of code complexity or size based on the assignments, branches, and conditionals within a method or a class. And we'll have to take a look at that in just a moment. And thirdly, the sort of classic oldest measure of code complexity. Everyone knows lines of code. It's very easy to understand the lines of code. We'll talk about that in a second as well. So this is the definition of the ABC metric that you're seeing here. And you can see that to compute the ABC metric for a given unit of code, you take the assignments in that code, squared, plus the branches squared, plus the conditional squared, sum that all up, and take the square root, and it'll produce a single number. Now, what can seem nice about this is it doesn't just take into account code paths and conditional logic like the cyclomatic complexity. It also incorporates elements like assignments, which do tend to add to the cognitive load of processing a given block of code. So it can be perceived as more precise for estimating the code complexity. However, if you tell a developer that the method that they just wrote has an ABC score or an ABC metric of 47.3, that might be difficult for that developer to interpret. It's unclear if 47.3 is a low score or a high score. It's also unclear, importantly, what the developer would do to reduce that score. Now, they might infer that by moving some code out of the method in question that one of those variables would be reduced, and therefore the overall score would be reduced, which is true, but it's somewhat indirect. So with code climate, we have support for cyclomatic complexity and ABC metrics in many cases, and what we've found through talking to a number of teams is that the most important thing when choosing a metric to track is to choose a metric that resonates with your team.  However, if those are not concepts that your team is familiar with, then it may be preferable to choose something simple. So at this point, when a team comes to us and says that they want to start tracking a metric related to complexity or code size or maintainability, our recommendation often is just to use lines of code, which sounds almost naive and silly, right? The reason that people laugh at lines of code as a metric is that in the past, there were managers who would evaluate the productivity of their developers in terms of the number of lines of code written per day or per week or per month, and that's how you sorted the good developers from the bad developers. The good developers wrote lots and lots of code. Everybody knows that. But if you look at the lines of code metric on a class or a method, it actually turns out that it correlates incredibly well above a certain size with how easy it is to understand that unit of code. If you have a class or a file like userRB, I'm sure none of you have this, but if you knew somebody who had a userRB file that was 1,300 lines long that nobody ever wanted to change anything in, but somehow every week somebody's adding just one more thing to it, just for the feature that needs to shift this week in that userRB file, you would be able to see that that code is probably difficult to maintain. So the nice thing is if you use lines of code as a metric, it's very clear what you need to do to improve on it. The code needs to go somewhere else. There's only one solution. So that can make it easier to understand what to do when the metric is showing you something that you don't expect or that doesn't seem preferable. Also, you have the advantage of being able to choose the lines of code metric and just get back to work, because we have seen teams burn immeasurable amounts of time with internal debates about the relative value and precision of metrics like cyclomatic complexity and ABC metrics and all of this stuff, and there are very quickly diminishing returns. The third question that we wanted to look at is why are older projects harder to maintain? Everybody loves working on green field projects. Just the name, it sounds delightful. You picture a blue sky and a sun shining down on this empty field. The problem with green field projects is that very quickly, or green fields, is they very quickly tend to attract cows, and you are all the cows. Because cows enter a green field, and it tends to be that over time they turn it into a brown field. So why does that happen? One of the reasons is that sloppy code is self-reinforcing. If you introduce sloppy code into a code base, you don't just have to live with that sloppy code for a potentially long amount of time, often years. It's also the case that that sloppy code may perpetuate other instances of sloppy code in the code base. Let's look at what that cycle might be like. Oftentimes it starts with pressure. So there might be some need, some business critical priority like a key customer deal, or perhaps an event. Maybe you need some large amount of functionality finished by the time Geruco rolls around, and I'm sure none of the code climate developers can relate to this at all. There might be pressure to get the code done. The pressure leads to the sloppy code. The developers cut corners and in some cases will knowingly act differently with respect to the way that they craft that code and do not apply the same level of rigor, but the intentions are good here. They're trying to meet the business need. Unfortunately, sloppy code can make it harder to work in the code base. It can mean that you're no longer able to deliver as quickly as you were before, which leads to the project in a word being late. And of course, when you tell somebody on the business side that the project is going to be late, that loops right back around to pressure. And you can see how this cycle perpetuates. So that's one reason why code quality on projects that are older might not be as good as newer ones. Another is that code quality is a moving target. So to look at this diagram, you can see that the code is represented by the horizontal line on the bottom. At the time that the code was written, it aligned perfectly with the domain as it was understood by the business. In this case, the code is not changing. The code just continues to exist over the horizontal axes. But what you can see is that the domain of the business actually diverges from the code because the business is not standing still. It's learning new things. It's entering new markets. It's subject to new requirements. And the delta between the domain and the code at any given time can be described as technical debt. And the more technical debt you have over time, the more that that can slow your project down. There are a few ways to deal with this. Everyone probably has familiarity or experience with efforts like a rewrite or a big redesign to try to align or replace components with components that are more connected to the domain as it's now understood. And that is one approach. We often recommend taking a more iterative design approach where on a more regular basis, the team is aligning the code with the domain. And you can see in the difference between these two diagrams that the area between the two lines, which is the technical debt, in the iterative design approach is much lower. You're not waiting until the big refactoring to converge those two things. So this is an example of a principle that sometimes gets referred to as the Boy Scout rule, which is to always leave your code better than you found it. In this case, it would be always leaving your code closer to the understanding of the domain than it was when you found it. Okay. The fourth question that we wanted to look at is what is the optimal size for a pull request? Many of you have probably seen pull requests as simple, of course, as a single line or single word change all the way up to those very large pull requests that incorporate thousands and thousands of lines. And as we know, because lines of code correspond with more work being done, those are the really good ones. The joke is that if you present a developer with ten lines of code to review, they'll probably have 13 comments about little things that you can do differently. But if you present a developer with a 4,000 line pull request, the comment will be, looks good to me. So why is that? A company called Smart Bear Software did an interesting study of about 2,500 code reviews at Cisco, and some of the information that they collected was the size of the change that was being reviewed, and also the density of the defects that were identified. In this case, this was human reviewers who perceived that there was a problem with the code and would note it. And so they looked at the way that the defect density of the code related to the size of the change. What they found was that fewer issues are found in larger pull requests if you look at it in terms of issues per line of code. The problem is that it doesn't take a whole lot of intuition to realize that when we're making large changes, it's not likely that those changes have a lower defect rate than small changes. It's pretty obvious that you would expect that the defect rate of a larger change would be at least as high as a smaller change, if not higher, because there's many more things that can go wrong in a larger change. So this wasn't because larger pull requests have higher quality. What they found was that 400 lines of code was an interesting sweet spot where the human reviewers were still able to identify defects at the same ideal rate. And then above 400 lines of code, the rate of the human reviewers ability to find defects would decline substantially. So what you could consider on your team is any time you see a pull request that's over 400 lines of code, you might post a comment and just ask, is there a way that this could be broken down into a series of smaller changes? And perhaps that's a feature that Code Climate will support at some point. There's an interesting quote that I think is kind of related to this from Brandon Keepers who works at GitHub, which is that we are more receptive to feedback from pedantic robots than pedantic people. And robots are more reliable. So everything we talked about in terms of defect identification relates to human reviews. So if you are using a static analysis tool or a linter, of course, it doesn't get fatigued by the size of your change. It's going to do the same thing on every file. So it can be a way to supplement and hedge against the human's ability to identify defects in larger changes, to supplement that with automated tools that aren't going to be subject to that fatigue. Okay. The fifth question that we wanted to look at is when is sloppy code not a problem? When might it be okay or perhaps even desirable to have code which is lower quality than you might otherwise intend to write? And there are three different cases that we've seen where that may be the case. The first is proving a hypothesis. When you're getting started with a new project or a new business, it might not be clear whether there is actual business value that can be created from the code that you're writing at that point in time. You might have an existential threat to the survival of your business to answer the question of how are we going to deliver value? What is the product that we're going to provide? And in those cases, it can be preferable and in some cases necessary to write code that doesn't necessarily represent your idealized version of quality. My friend Patrick McKenzie has an interesting quote about this that he tweeted. There are two types of bootstrap startups in the world, those with integration tests and those with revenues, which is not entirely accurate, but it's a little tongue in cheek and you can kind of see his point. I can certainly say that the initial versions and iterations of the code climate code bases were not necessarily of the highest quality and the developers at Code Climate can probably attest to that. Another example would be if you can build the first one to throw it away. There are certain situations where you might have a problem you need to solve as a developer and you may realize going in that it's very hard to know the exact approach that you're going to end up needing to take to solve the problem. It's not just a form for collecting content or something like that that you've done 100 times in the past. You don't actually know how you're going to solve it. In those situations, it can be useful to build a version of that code to enhance your understanding with a plan to throw it away at the end. Sometimes this gets referred to as a spike. The key with a spike is to actually throw it away. Spikes have a tendency to be created with the understanding that will be thrown away and then end up in production. So you have to be careful there. The third example would be what's known as an omega mess. Omega mess was a term coined by Sandy Metz which is defined as code that has only inbound dependencies and does not change. And these things, of course, are very related. If the code has a lot of outbound dependencies, then it would necessarily need to change if any of the code that it depends on changes. But sometimes you have a unit of code which only has outside callers into that unit. And it may not need to change at all. In those cases, you might have a higher tolerance for lower quality code than you would in the rest of the areas of the system. So an example would be perhaps you have a module which interacts with a legacy external system, like calls into a main frame or something like that. You may know that that code, the server that it makes calls to, is not changing, has not changed in many, many years. And so the fact that if you open that module, the code is difficult to understand, may not be a big deal as long as everybody on the project is able to take advantage of that module because it has a clean interface that it exposes. So the omega mess may be the third type of situation where sloppy code or lower quality code may be more acceptable or desirable. Okay? The sixth and last question that we wanted to look at is one of my favorites. And that's what is the biggest enemy to clean code or high quality code? Why aren't all projects high quality? Is it apathy? Is it that developers don't actually care about the quality of the code in their projects? I would pose that it's clearly not apathy. Everybody in this room, I feel like, likely has a desire to produce high quality results as a developer that's something that we feel internally regardless of whether we're asked to do that specifically by somebody who's asking us to implement a project. We also know that if the code is low quality, we're the ones who are going to be stuck maintaining it and dealing with it afterwards. So it's not apathy. Is it ability? Is it that developers want higher quality code, but they just don't know what to do in order to achieve that result? Well, I would argue that it's not ability because what we've seen is even in cases where projects are staffed by very experienced engineers, they tend to fall victim to these same cycles and pressures where the code quality over time does decrease. So it's not the experience of the team. Is it changing requirements? Is it those dastardly business people who are always pulling the rug out from under us?  That might be a little bit of it, but I think there's a more interesting reason for why code quality can be so hard to maintain. So why don't we walk through an example of a developer making a change and how they might think about that change and what it tells us? So starting at the beginning, developers don't want to introduce bugs, but they know that it's easy to introduce a bug when changing code. By the way, this is a diagram by a gentleman, David Peterson, that he did on his blog a while back, and I think that this is just a really great example, so that's why I wanted to walk through it. So the developer doesn't want to introduce bugs, it's easy to introduce a bug by changing code, so the developer will take care to minimize changes to existing code. Now, the way they do that is where things start to go awry. They know that working on a copy of the code means that you don't have to change the original, so the developer may introduce duplication. Also, the developer understands that putting a conditional around new code will reduce the chances of breaking the existing code, so they can introduce a conditional to make sure that they're only going to modify the behavior in their particular case. Together, what you see is that conditional logic increases the complexity of the code and duplication increases the complexity of the code, resulting in code that is difficult to understand, and so the developer doesn't understand the ramifications of a change they're about to make, which brings us right back to the beginning, that it's easy to introduce bugs. Now, what's interesting about this is that at every step of the flow chart, the developer made a reasonable decision to try to reduce the likelihood that they're going to introduce bugs, and in a way, have higher quality code, but if you follow this logically through, you are introducing more and more duplication, more and more conditional logic, and creating more and more complex code that is actually working against your initial desire. So, the reason that the biggest enemy to code quality in our experience is actually fear. It's this visceral fear, it's the fear of not being able to make the change that you want without introducing another problem, and that leads to poor decision-making. So, if you want to improve the quality on your project, the biggest thing that I can recommend is reduce the fear of making changes, and there are many ways to reduce fear, and we're not going to have time to go in depth into them today, but some of them, they will all probably be familiar. You can reduce fear with automated testing, unit tests, integration tests, you can reduce fear with operational metrics, if you know that your code is functioning well in production and performance and not returning exceptions to end users, that can give you confidence. Code review, which we've already talked a lot about. Static analysis, of course, near and dear to our hearts is a way to reduce fear of certain types of changes, and many teams leverage pair programming, having two sets of eyes on every change to advance the code and be confident that they're not going to break anything. So if I can leave you with one idea, it's that hope is not a plan. If you have issues with quality on your project that you want to resolve, if you keep doing the same things, they're unlikely to change. So you need to take a step back and sit down with your team and figure out what code quality means to you and your team, define it, agree on it, and then start taking actions to reduce the fear associated with making changes, and that's how you're going to be able to achieve the results that you set out to do. So thank you very much. I really appreciate it.


Kia ora, my name is Bisma and welcome to this week's You're Away Weekly episode. Today we're coming to you from the Raymaiya building. With exam season fast approaching, it is important to make use of the university's wellbeing services. Uni Wellbeing is an online program designed to help students better manage worry and stress. If you're interested, please email UniWellbeing at Auckland.ac.nz. Bring your best business ideas to this one-day innovation and entrepreneurship workshop. This workshop aims to provide students a basic understanding of what it takes to build a business venture. Come along June 27th at 9.30am to the Unleashed space. Calling all business administration and business management majors, if you're interested in gaining your masters, come along to the online information session. In preparation for exams, AUSA is hosting study wananga. Snacks and drinks will be provided to come along to the foyer of Sir Ong Glen Building. Dig the Gig is a band competition open to all university students. If you're interested, register now on the Dig the Gig website. The Recreation Centre's annual Switwith Pride event is back. This is hosted by Radical Movement and All Funds Raise will go towards supporting the LGBTQIA Plus community and the MVP FAF Plus community. Donate to the PJ Project. This is a fundraiser organised by the Kindness Collector Foundation that aims to provide warm PJs to children across New Zealand. That's all from us this week. For more information and to contribute to UOA Weekly, check out the What's On page on the University of Auckland website. Have a great week and best of luck for exams.