Sably. H ve wished ere are wealth these co one can How by perst = to sav sons, not not in z other me e herself vice by no indisc =with pe of weak s of her ES is the s munities th Oxford in any of our college towns. But one can deny that the aristocracy most wi developed in America is that of wealth. I developed in places that are really too s to afford an aristocracy at all. I myself h known women whose fathers carried din pails and whose husbands have never stopped to regret that their own educa ended with the grammar-school course, simply did not feel that the shabbily or sin dressed woman could be in their class. She be descended from a half a dozen Signers, be at home in every picture-gallery in Eur but she is some one to whom, socially, cannot but condescend. I am told that precisely the same standa prevail in the newer urban civilizations of I land: it would seem to be an inevitable im diate result of the supremacy of riches. T is perhaps no limit to the sophistication vast wealth can eventually give to its own sessors; but this law of fashion is what, sciously or unconsciously, they impose on seething estates beneath them. I have kn owledge, knew their Dest by to the gre plumes, and t spirit which t Versailles. H labor about articles. For d The Ameri is alternately c and scolded fo very well, as being extravag gives one paus mingle comfor can clothe her! both to her ar preposterous a luckily become, be endimanchée nition-vulgar; again, who sta cause they coul unadvisedly, I of the most fa have seen the s by the usher, w ve said that the economic considerations concern of mine; nor are they. Yet it ot be amiss to suggest in this context e women who are responsible for the unpaid toil of the slum-children over "plumes are not the rich women who e for their willow plumes any price that d of them. It is the harpy of the subhe frequenter of bargain-counters and y morning "sales," the woman whose nstructive reading is done among the and patterns of the "women's" magawho is responsible. From what one one is certainly compelled to infer that little children are to be saved, willow should be put at prohibitive prices. ince our women must walk gay," the acy that is rooted in democracy can do without its willow plumes. Fashion itself into a position of such impors that. It is so terrible a thing to be onable that the vast majority of women the vast majority of women are not rich [54] st" dresses: consideratic e they. Ye this cont asible for children of women any price t of the st counters oman who among men's" ma what to infer th ved, will tive pric gay," t mocracy es. Fashi such impo hing to b of wome re not ric plumes, and their Irish-lace collars, in the spirit which took the Dames de la Hall Versailles. Hence many of the condition labor about which we read so many articles. For demand creates supply. The American woman of moderate ind is alternately congratulated on her "smart and scolded for her extravagance. She ca very well, as things stand, be smart wit being extravagant. But the fact that ch gives one pause is this: that a woman ca mingle comfortably with her equals unless can clothe herself each season in a way both to her and to them would have lo preposterous a twelvemonth before. It luckily become, in the strictest sense, vulga be endimanchée; but most people are-by nition-vulgar; and I have known wo again, who stayed at home from church cause they could not so clothe themselves. unadvisedly, I am tempted to say; for in of the most famous churches of Americ have seen the shabbily dressed woman sea by the usher, with reference solely to her [55] 16. port "colonist." She and her daughter the church one Sunday morning, mary dressed in contrasting shades of red. will be no one else in our pew this g," she murmured graciously to the 'put some one in with us, if you likee in white or black." What could not Swift have done with that! One does h to make tragedy out of what is essenomic. Yet it may fairly be said that has its rough side, and that a comedy from the point of view of the comic er himself, would often make melanuff. It would be possible, over this matfashion, to shed the bitter tears of the odd that "dress reform" should always eant something ugly. There would be so Hous a chance for any one who wished rm dress in the interest of beauty! But st amused and disgusted of us will, very forever shrink from the task. "The pilvere clothed with such kind of raiment diverse from the raiment of any that should cert the pity of it! |