Strangely enough, they are all deprecia-
tory. I have sought for a word to describe
the consideration of man by man which
would be colorless, that neither praised
nor blamed, but simply fixed attention on
the fact. No such word do I find. A blot
of disparagement is on them all. I choose
Manners as on the whole the least objec-
tionable.

Pass them briefly in review. When I
say a man is kind in Manners, do I not
suggest that there may be a contrast be-
tween his outward bearing and his inner
heart? Or shall we call the relation one of
Propriety, as Adam Smith does in his mas-
terly discussion of this moral situation?
Propriety always stirs aversion, because it
implies that we have had little share in
establishing the standard employed. It
has been set up outside us and still we are
subjected to it. How exasperated a child
is when told to behave properly! Why
should he care for Propriety? Or shall we
say Civility? It is a scrimping, meagre
word, announcing that only so much con-
sideration is shown as decency requires.
When we hear a man say, " John was civil
to me," our thought continues: "Was that

-14-