The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-05-18
Fancy FashIOns.

lhere Is no knowing in these days of
restless luxury" says an English writer,
what fashion may not revive Powder is
already much used this season in Paris, pro-
badly it will not be long before it blows over
here; and as for paint, it has been looking up
for considerable time. In the abstract,
nothing, it must be confessed, seems more
absurd than to conceal the golden sheen or
silky blackness of women's hair under snow
shower of scented flour. But in practice the
result is far from unpleasant Go into
tour-mill and see robust young miller at
work: you will then at once observe what
value the rose color and healthy carnations OF
his complexion gain from the whiteness of his
hair Certainly his eyes look richer and
darker from the contrast, and the result is an
aesthetic gain. At all events, powder is bet
ter than the gold-dust used to spangle the
hair of French ladies some seasons ago. That
fashion favored too much of the days of the
Roman expresses, when careless slaves were
sometimes thrown into tanks to feed the
lampreys. Gold-dust! Why, the glistening
of tress of golden hair, untempered by any
such sophistries, excels metallic glitter as
much as a sunbeam transcends q streak of
yellow paint.
''There is no knowing what may not be re-
vived. Perhaps. the peascod doublets of
Raleigh's time, the sleeves hung with gilt
bells of Richard the Seconds period, the
tight-ftting cote hardies and broad jewelled
belts of Edward the Thirds barons, or the
cooked hats and three-tier wigs of the Geor-
gian era. The Greeks had other views
about these matters. They never changed
their style of dress. The plain robe and
tunic of Phidias resembled tho robe and
tunic of Demosthenes; the peplum of Helen
hung in similar folds to that of the peplum
| of Aspasia. The Greeks never grew tired
of the simple folds and the statuesque curves
of the simple dress their first sculptors had
immortalized. What would they have said
to the 'Grecian bend, that last distortion
of folly and affectation? The purest ideal
of the way O woman should walk is the
manner in which a milk-gir carries her
pail-erect, buoyant, elastic, the bosom
thrown forward, the head up. Put such a
child of nature, Irish or Welsh, beside a
young lady walking in the absurd way now
fashionable. 1t matters little whether the
modern belle tries to walk so, or whether
high-heeled shoes produce in her that Chi
nese helplessness. One would think she was
trying to play sort of female pantaloon, as
she minces forward with pretty helplessness,
some form of spinal disease being induced by
every step. Farewell to what French cynics
call the grenadier stride of Englishwomen.
Women totter forward now, they do not walk.
The French shuttle and the Spanish glide are
| divine compared with such style OF walking
as the Grecian bend produces. The bend
is ungraceful, unnatural, and unhealthy. But
it is useless to demonstrate or revile. What
did Punch do against crinolines No folly in
dress was ever laughed down. What did
Hogarth do against the absurdities of his day
Nothing. 1t is supposed that womens tickle
ness in dress arises from desire to please
man. If it does, how. is it that folly in
| dress never alters one heur the SO oner for al
mans ridicule or dislike?"
t. "A writer in the Adgance ''says:-'Not &c
long since heard sung in theNchurch the an
them Crock of Ages, in which there is sole
to the words, ''Should nay tears, ETC., which
was sung as follows
''Shoo- hoo-hood rny-hi-to-hears
For-eh-ver-her dow-ho,
Shoo-hoo-hood my-hi-ze-heal
No langor kno-ho,
Thi-his for hor SHIN could
No-hot h-ha-to-hone,
Thou-how muh-hust sa-have,
And thou-how ah-ha-lone,
In my hand no price / bring,
Simply to thy craw-hoss I-hi cling"
NEWELL, LANDSCAPE AND GENERA
N Busne.s rn4tograPhhef. h. No "a ARCH Street: az