Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1865-08-11

WOMEN AND THEIR DREss.-The true ex-
PLANTATION ofthe prevailing extravaganza in cos
tune is that women dress for one another. In
other words, they dress for eyes that can APP.
preciate the material and estimate the cost of
every separate article they have on. 1t is
quite true that many men care as much for, and
are as competent TO give an opinion on, the APP
pearance Of their wives, or sisters, or friends,
or any number Of female acquaintance; but
the grounds upon which the two classes of
critics will base their several judgments will al
ways be distinct, and the conclusions them
selves not unfrequently quite opposite. Ask
man and woman TO tell you who is the best
dressed girl al bali, and you will hardly ever
find them agreeing in their answer. Go step
further, and compare the costumes which have
been selected, and you will discover almost to
a certainty that the woman has singled out the
most expensive dress in the room, whereas the
man has simply asked himself which is the
most becoming.
The one has suffered herself TO be so i'm
pressed by the richness Of the material, the ell
aborateness of the embroidery, and the costli-
ness of the trimmings, that IN the end she has
found 1t simply impossible to leave those things
ignorance, has looked only to the general eff.
feet, and has probably given the preference to
a young lady whose gown has no other merits
than those of being scrupulously neat and well
made. We submit, therefore, that il that def
erence to the masculine taste, which is so fire.
quently professed, really existed in any appre-
ciabe measure, it would supply an antidote to
many Of the grievances under which society
now labors.
A week or two back, the correspondence of
on evening contemporary was largely token up
with the sorrows of parents who have TO see
that their daughters look like other people, and
at the same time TO make both ends meet and
we have no doubt that, as soon as the elections
are over the columns Of the Times will be
thrown open TO an endless repetition of similar
complaints. My daughters gowns must sweep
the pavement as they wax, cries one heart
broken mother, or if they do SO far consult
their pockets as to loop them mp, their under
skirts must he hounced an embroidered until
they become as costly as the gown. There is
no necessity in the case, interposes a sterner
moralist; young women should have no wish
to dress beyond their means merely for the
sake of rivaIing their richer friends. 1t is here
that our theory comes in and harmonizes these
opposing views. No man ever felt anything
but irritation at seeing woman's gown doing
the business OF the crossing sweeper, or attach
any value to the amount Of open work display
ed beneath looped-up skirt. If young ladies
would but believe it,-or rather If thew did hut
attach any importance to it when they do be-
lieve it,-a man will he perfectly satisfied with
their appearance, so far as these considerations
are concerned, if their petticoats are spo,essy
clean and their stockings guitless of wrinkle
We do not say that even these characteristics,
when added TO the well-6iting gowns for which
we have already stipulated, are to be attained
without some expenditure of money; for clean
illness, at least in London, is not a cheap vir.
tue, and it is not every dressmaker that knows
how to make dress. But, at any rate, the
proposed standard is good deal easier of at
tainment than the spurious fine-ladyism after
which so many women toll in van and we
cannot but believe that, if girls did but think
more OF pleasing the other sex and less of vie
ing with their own, their parents would see
reason TO bless the change the next time they
came to look over the millners bills.-Satuy-
day Reriep.