Rocky Mountain husbandman. [volume] (Diamond City, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1878-10-10
WOMAW'S DRESS.

nightly Reuiew.
WOMAN'S DRESS.
In Herbert Spencer's theory; that pro-
gress is from the simple to the complex, is
correct, the attire of the American women
of to-day shows an amount of progress
which ought to-and doubtless would-as-
tonish Aspasia nightly. Man, however,
reached his climax some time ago, in the
matter of costume. Since Pepys confided
to his diary the questions about buckles and
ribbons which vexed his soul, and Gold
smith was lodging the tailor who made
him his beloved "plum-colored-velvet,"
man, has refrigerated into sober, simple cos
tune. 1t is, perhaps, regret for his w van
ished glories that induces him to regard
women as unduly devoted to tixings and
urbelows. 1t is probable that Sir John
Lubbock wrote the sentence in which he
stigmatises love of ornament as one of the
chief characteristics Of savagery which sub
dued enjoyment, and that he showed it to
Lady Lubbock-if such a person exists
with satisfaction and self-complacency. The
weaker sex certainly has not lacked advis-
ers of either sex to show it the errors of it's
way and it's wardrobe. The recent women's
Congress in Chicago discussed dress reform
with destructive vigor. The foes of the cor
set maligned it by the hour, and displayed
their suspenders as profs of their emancipa-
ton from prejudice and as foreshadowings
of their coming to mans whole estate.
More than one physician, indeed, has advis-
ed a compromise garb, halfway between
the styles now worn by the two sexes, and
Lucca has shown in her pages attire rs Mig
non, that such a costume may be as dainty
AS the heart could wish. Such a sweeping
change, however, must find footing in the
far future, if anywhere. Reform moves as
slowly in dress as in politics. Some Eng
fish artists of high repute tried, some time
since, to substitute certain tasteful designs
of their own for the seasons fashion plates,
but the scheme did not succeed. The fam
Gus art-firm with which William Morris is
connected is said to contemplate ornament
ing the persons, as well as the houses of it's
patrons, but has not yet carried the design
into effect. One or two feminine artists in
London have lately done something in this
way. NJ. Charles Blanc, the brother of the
ex-revolutionist, has just published a book
on the art of dress. The work shows the
French passion for generalization, as when
M. Blanc observes that bonnets are worn
large "when religion is IN fashion," but 1t
is full of shrewd sayings. The author dis
cusses the color and form of the raiment of
each sex, and plays barber, shoemaker,
dressmaker, miliner and tailor by turns.
He objects to the expanse of white linen re-
vealed by a mans dress suit, but fails to sug-
gest a substitute. That substitute is GER
tainly not to be found in a vest cut close to
the throat. A double breasted vest is the
only semi-graceful form of that ungraceful
garment, and that this is too heavy to har-
monte with full dress, which, by an old
contradiction of terms, must be lighter than
half dress. A man bisected by buttons
from his waist to his neck is not q pleasing
object. M. Blanc puts his general theory
into a nutshell, thus: "Adornment should
serve only to make the women thus adorn-
ed, admired. Men often say, WE have seen
some beautiful dresses All. well, if the
dainty dresses had been still more dainty,
they would say, we have seen some beauti-
full women."'
THE LANDS OF DEAD HEROES.