The Union and eastern journal. [volume] (Biddeford [Me.]) 1854-1858, 1856-01-04
Extravaganza in Dress.

A fashionable dry goods dealer advertises
u lace scarf worth fifteen hundred dollars
Another has bridal dress, for which he
asks twelve hundred. Bonnets at two hun
dred dollars are not unfrequently Sold
Cashmeres from three hundred dollars up
wards are seen by dozens in walk along
Broaway. A hundred dollars is quite COM
mon price for silk gown. In word, ex-
trayagance in dress has reached a height
which would have frightened our prudent
gandmothers and appalled, their husbands.
A fashionable lady spends annually on her
milliner, mantua-maker and lace dealer, a
sum that would have supported an entire
household, even in her own rank in life, in
the days of Mrs. Washington. A thousand
dollars year is considered, we are told,
quite narrow income for such purposes
among those pretending to be in society"
in some Of our cities. Add to this the ex-
penditure for opera tickets, for II summer
trip to the Springs, and for score of little
inevitables Ct eeteraS, and the reader gets
some idea of the comparatively wanton waste
of money, carried on year after year, by
thousands, if not by tens Of thousands of
American women.
And for what end? Do these human bnt-
terhies improve their intellect, enlarge their
culture or elevate their characters by this
spendthrift system? On the contrary, they
deterionte all. Do they bestow additional
happiness on their husbands and father?-
The very reverse, for to sustain these extrav-
agances, the father or husband, as the case
may be, tolls late and early, consumes his
health, and often is driven TO wild spccula-
tons that end in utter ruin. Do they win
the approval Of the other sex? Never was
the esteem of any worthy man secured by a
costly, reckless style Of dress. All that this
perilous extravaganza effects is to crafty
miserable personal vanity. The fostering of
one Of the most petty of human vices is the
only result of their spendthriit habits. Miss
Potiphar plumes herself on having outshonc
her rival in laces at some grand soiree or in
having worn more jewels, and that is the
single barren harvest which she reaps by the
expenditure Of thousands. Can the pampcr-
ing Of such vanity benefit her or Others p
Alas the women who lives for such tri-
umphs Us these whose whole souls are given
to diamonds and dress, are little fitted to be
the wives or mothers, to lie companions for
men or educators of children. When the
Roman matrons sunk to similar condition
Rome began from that hour to decline.
Fortunately for our country however, such
painted trihers form but small minority OF
the women of America. Unfortunately
however, their influence ON society is greater
than their numbers, for to their extraya-
gance and vanity is united u presumption
which asserts for themselves socially SUI
periority, 50 undeserved, is conceded to them,
partly because Of their apparent wealth.
They are thus enabled practically to give a
tone to society at large. In city circles les
Ostentatious, in country villages, and even
in western farm houses, their extravaganza
and vanity is copied, till in half the families
in the land females spend upon their dress
moro than they can afford. With too ma
ny happily We need not say with all-adOrn.
ing the person takes the place of mental cul.
turc. To be showily dressed is often con,
sidered Of more moment than to be graceful
amiable and intelligent. Where will all
this end? If this continues for another
generation, where will We be.-PhiiadelPhiC
| LedOer