Democratic Sentinel, Volume 16, Number 4, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 12 February 1892 — HOW TO WRITE DATES. [ARTICLE]

HOW TO WRITE DATES.

Many Modes of Putting; Down the Day ol the Month. “The Listener” writes in the Boston Transcript: “January 3, 1891,” is a date which looks picturesque, distinguished and fln-de-siecle on paper. It reminds one that the world is getting particularly old. It will be very interesting to write down “1900” at the top of one’s letters, when the year comes around; it would be still more interesting to write “2000” there. Few of us will ever do it, though il science does its duty and finds a way to prolong a civilized person’s life ts a California Mission Indian’s, some o( us may hope to do it. The writing of that date above reminds the Listener that there is a great diversity of usages nowadays in the writing of a date. Looking over a number of private letters, the Listener has found them dated in all the following ways; 1. December 24, 1890. 2. December 24th, 1890. 3. 24th December, 1890. 4. 24 Dec. 1890.5. Dec. 24, 1890. 6. 24th Dec. 1890. 7. 1890, 24, December. 8. 12 | 24 | 90. 9. XII, 24, 1890.

It would be hard to say which is the most approved of these methods. It is very much according to the taste and fancy of the writer, like the spelling of the honored patronymic Weller. Perhaps the commonest method is No. 5, while the most vulgar is No. 8. It smacks of the retail store and of laziness, too. Personally, the Listener does not like an abbreviation in a date, and consequently does not like No. 5. We ought at least to have the appearance, with our friends and the general public, of having enough time at our disposal to write out the full name of the month at the top of the letter. None but a slave should be under the necessity of abbreviating it. No. 3is old-fashioned and rather English; No. 1 and No. 2 are sensible and approved methods. The letter dated “XII, 24,1890,” was written by and is to be classed as an evidence of eccentricity, rather than of haste and laziness. It has a sort of antique, Romanesque appearance, too, though, to be consist* ntly classical, it should no doubt have been written XII, XXIV, MDCCCXO.