DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am engaged to a young lady and would like to purchase an appropriate wedding gift. I am currently looking at strings of pearls, which, if given as a wedding gift, I would hope she could wear on the day of the nuptials.

Is it appropriate for the groom to give the bride a set of black Tahitian pearls with matching earrings? Would it be improper or a fashion error for her to wear the black pearls for the ceremony, or should I shop for white? She, of course, will be wearing a white dress.

GENTLE READER: Even if this question were not in the context of your forthcoming wedding, Miss Manners would have known that you were not yet married. You apparently have never dealt with the paradox of a wife's loving to be surprised with an extravagant present but resenting being told what to wear.

Black Tahitian pearls are a magnificent present, and they go with everything, except possibly a wedding dress. That is not a dictate from Miss Manners, who has not seen the dress or been able to guess how strictly your bride wants to adhere to the tradition of wearing white. It is merely a warning that your bride may think so, and -- however much she may appreciate the pearls -- not appreciate having her look changed at the last minute.

It would be safer to spoil the surprise, although not the pretense of the surprise, by asking the opinion of the bride's mother or her maid of honor or anyone else you can count upon to break your confidence, tell her, and come back with the right answer. Another approach would be to give her the pearls on your wedding trip.

Or you could give up and give her white pearls, which are the classic accompaniment to wedding attire. But although Miss Manners doesn't know how the lady feels, she hates to give up on the black ones.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I have finally graduated college at the age of 28. My family strongly feels that I should send out graduation announcements to the extended family and friends not only because they are proud of me, but for the monetary gifts that might result.

I, however, am rather embarrassed that it took me so long to graduate and do not want to trumpet the fact to my friends and relatives. I also am uncomfortable with sending out the "plea for money" that graduation announcements seem to entail at my age.

Is it wrong for me to strip my parents of their pride in my graduation by not sending out announcements or is this something that I can quietly sweep under the rug as I would like to do? BTW, my education was paid for entirely by myself so I do not "owe" my parents anything in terms of showing appreciation to them for my education.

GENTLE READER: You would not be stripping your parents of their pride. Nothing is stopping them from writing letters to everyone they know telling them of your graduation. For that matter, nothing is stopping them from sending around fundraising pleas, if that is what they wish to do.

However, Miss Manners congratulates you, first on your graduation and second on your refusal to use it to shake down others. A graduation announcement is innocent enough in itself, but in this case tarnished by the hopes that would be pinned on it.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: In a situation where a husband has had an affair, and this has become known to the wife, and the husband and wife have decided together to discontinue the affair and continue with the marriage -- who else may know of the affair, if anyone?

May the wife confide in her closest friends, or is this asking for trouble of the endless "Why do you stay with him?" kind?

It seems very grim to weather such a storm without anyone to confide in --but it also seems risky. And the couple's parents? It seems very hard for the wife to have to continue hearing from her mother-in-law what a prize she has, under these circumstances, but neither does it seem right to reveal such private marital details.

If no one may know except the people directly involved, what do you think is the best way for the wife to explain to her friends why she seems "so weird lately"?

GENTLE READER: "Stress." That's what everyone else cites as an excuse for strange -- even rude -- behavior, so it doesn't fan much curiosity. "I'll be all right; I don't feel like talking about it right now" is usually enough to quell the probing.

But this is far from solving the problem. There is an urgent need for a sympathetic ear, but Miss Manners has to confirm your realization that this rarely, if ever, comes without a price. Even the closest partisans will weigh in with advice and will show their distaste to the husband long after the couple may have put the episode behind them. Furthermore, they may unburden themselves to confidantes of their own, and the story will soon be all over town.

Ethical professional counselors will not do that, but one can hardly expect them to refrain from giving advice, which is what people go to them to get. Also, they tend to assume that the fault must not be all on one side, putting the faithful partner in the unpleasant position of sharing some blame.

So, yes -- it is harsh not to be able to talk about this but risky to do so.

One confidence you ought to make is to the person who already knows -- your husband. Miss Manners suggests that you confide what it is that you may be driven to reply unless he persuades his mother to stop telling you how lucky you are.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: It drives me nuts when on the phone the person I'm speaking with will say, "Well, I'll let you go."

Does that mean I have permission to hang up? Shouldn't hanging up the phone be a mutual thing and not something requiring permission from one to the other? Or am I the one who is irritating by this bothering me?

GENTLE READER: Probably not, but Miss Manners would like to convince you that it is a useful new-ish convention. It implies that the other person's time is more valuable than one's own. And it beats the sign-off of "I think I hear my mother calling me."

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: We have a person who was in Congress from 1981 to 1993 and has been out of office since then, who has decided to run for Congress this year in hopes of returning.

1. As voters, if we get the opportunity to speak with him, is the proper way to address him "Congressman Lastname" or "Mr. Lastname"?

2. In his campaign ads, is it proper for the ad narrator to say, for example, that "Congressman Firstname Lastname is a good man," or should he by the rules of etiquette be required say, "FirstName LastName is a good man"?

3. Is it proper for various pages on his campaign's Web site to refer to him as "Congressman FirstName LastName"?

I believe that the rules of etiquette when applied to former presidents ?allow a person to address him (someday her?) as "President Lastname," and may allow an ad narrator to refer to him as "President Firstname Lastname," but I have the impression that the rules for a former congressperson, or anyone who hasn't been president, may be different. I also wonder if the passage of 13 years since the person in question ?has been in office alters the answer in any way.

GENTLE READER: You're not running against him, are you? Because then Miss Manners would be extra careful about reminding you to address him respectfully, even as you attempt to make it clear that he is wrong on every possible issue.

But, as you have noticed, that is not easy. The official protocol is clear but is rarely observed. This may be because nobody except Miss Manners remembers it, or because people feel it is not respectful enough, or because they feel it is too respectful.

For starters, "Congressman" is not a title; if it were, it would have to include senators, who are also members of the U.S. Congress. The correct title is "Representative of" with the state. But although these officials should be addressed in writing as "The Honorable," a title that stays with them through life regardless of their behavior, the direct address should be simply Mr. or Ms. with the surname.

But, as you know, it isn't. The terms "Congressman" and "Congresswoman" sprang up to save our officials from the political sin of modesty. And since former senators are forever styled senator, the other members of Congress may as well be. Only holders of unique titles, such as President of the United States, are supposed to surrender them on leaving office. Former presidents Truman and Eisenhower gracefully assumed the last multiple titles they had held, Senator and General respectively. But now we have a number of people styled "President." Aside from the violation of American protocol, Miss Manners would have thought that the people in question would feel confident enough that everyone already knew who they were, and they would not have to trumpet it.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: What is the proper response to a party guest who asks the host "Hey, where's so-and-so (a friend of the guest who was not invited)?"

GENTLE READER: "He's not here. Would you like me to freshen your drink?"

: