Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1886-08-21

rotaries would obey Who would be secure
If his skin from one day to the next What
CHASTITY bald appearance society would as
,ume What is to prevent such hypothe-
sis from being realized We are absolutely
At the mercy OF fashion.
NOR is the fair sex any more unreasonsbly
and cruelty devoted to this whimsical tyrant
than the steruer. Look but at the present
barbsrous and ugly fashion OF tor.
turing horses by the use of the check-rein
over the top of their necks 1t is running |
thousands OF horses in our country, besides |
being an utterly useless and most cruel fash |
ion. IL 1t keeps on much longer the proud |
and beautiful arched neck OF the horse,
which nature gave him for aesthetic as well
as useful purposes, will be thing of the
past, and with it his tree and graceful gait
In place of the traditional horse we will have
a race of csmel-necked animals with a stih
and awkward camel-like gate Yet l see
men everywhere meekly bowiug before this
irrational fashion, sacrificing the beauty,
comfort, and in so far the value of their finest
horses to II. 1t provokes me every time ]
see it
THE only consolation l can find anywhere
and 1t is q far-fetched one, | confess-when
i contem plate the cruelty as well as folly OF
many of the demands of fashion, is the fact
that sometimes her freaks also are blunder-
ingly benefcent 1t has happened more
than once within quite recent years, for in
stance, that some poor tenth-rate writer has
been suddenly elevated, IL not TO real and
lasting fame, yet to some trausitory semblance
of il, and what is of equal material import
ance, to comparative wealth, 10y literary lash
ion in one OF her insane freaks making his
books wildly popular, " all the rage" He
and his publishers al least are benefited,
nyap atNr ffara sta l,x
the murder OF the birds and the torture and
deforming OF horses no one gets the slightest
advantage OF any kind.
SOMETIMES it happens too, that the aggre-
gate good effects OF a fashion so far overbal-
ance any incidental evils that the total result
may be called wholly beneficial. Take for
example the prevalent craze for az war arti-
cles +" in our papers and magazines / can
we'll see that the best literature and pure lit
erary taste has been harmed to some extent
by the prominence and popularity given to
mems writings who may indeed have been
mighty with the sword, but who are decid-
edly weak with the pen. Set their warrior
fame has given them certain pseudo-literary
| fame to which they are in no way entitled,
aud in 30 far has served but to vitiate and de-
grade real literatureaud the nopula- .litare- ~
tasre auos Standards At the same time, how
ever, a rich mass OF material, even though
much OF 1t be raw and crude, has been gath
cred together which will be of incalculable
worth to the future OF historical and other
literature. Then, too, whole new army Of
heroes has been discovered, or created, OF
whom the world would otherwise never
have known anything. The chance OF writ
ing war article has been a godsend to many
adilapidsted fellow, who thus can make him
selfa hero and martyr and be paid for 1t be-
sides while otherwise he would have had to
gnaw his pension In obscurity.
ONE of the latest literary fashions, II may
call it &c, Is the making of lists of " best
books" Since Sir John Lubbock made his
now famous list of one hundred best books
he has had an innumerable host OF imitators
in that most Improbable occupation. The
only thing that can be said in favor OF the
foolish fashion Is that II Is at least compara-
lively harmless Aud even this may not al
ways be true. III anybody is influenced In
his choice OF books by such lists he will find
| in every one some books that will not be the
best for him, and may be actually harmful
| Several lists have seen which Included q
number OF books that must be harmful to
everyone who reads them.
THE latest list OF hundred books " Is one
published by the Independent, the " fore
most religious newspaper in the world" it
calls itself, and processes to be a very high
authority In literary matters. It's list ia one
| clude only books published within the last
three years, though II contains a good many
| that are older. My first impulse on reading
| this list was, like Ruskin did to Lubbock's, !,
to draw my pen blottesquely through the
mass of rubbish" / didn't however ana
my second impression was not quite as bad
| as the first Looking closely saw that It's
sins OF omission at least were fewer than
had first thought Yet several OF them are
altogether ineXcusable.
For example, 30 pure aud artistically ex.
cellent q novel az Miss Blanche Willis
Howard's "Guenn" is omitted, so Is the same
authors "Aulnay Tower" James short
stories, some OF which are exquisite, have no
place In it neither have Maurice Thomp.
son'a looked in vain tor Miss Murfree's
"Prophet OF the Great Smoky Mountains" I"
for any thing by Rose Terry Cooke or Mary
| Hallock Foote, or Sarah Orne Jewett, or
| Mira Ewing, or George Macdonald, or MIRA
Burnett or Aldrich, Warner and q number
| OF others as worthy. But instead of them a
| lot OF second, third to fourth and ii fth rate
1 stories like Mrs. Riddell's "The Senior
| Partner" and Daisies and Buttercups," five
Of D. G. Murray's, four of w. +. Norris,
three Of Miss Tincker's, several by Anstey v,
Hoppus, Baylor, Walworth, Campbell, Lucy,
Dunning and others Of the same rank.
On what principle of selection, ] wonder,
ford's "To Leewsrd," and two others of his,
| and ignore "Guenn" or "Aulnsy Tower" {?
Or why is Dr. s. Weir Mitchell's "In War
| Time" mentioned, or Dr. Hammond's "Dr
| Grsttan," or @. NJ. NewelIs "Kame-
hameha," or Julian Hswthornes "Noble
| Blood" while no notice Is taken Of Mira
Foote'S "Lsd Horse Claim" or "John
Bodewin's Testimony" or OF Prof Hardy's
"Wind of Destiny or Of Sarah Ofne
Jewetts "Msrsh island" or Rose Terry
| Cookies "Deacon's Week.? Why have We
| 30 long and tedious an affair as Tolstoi's
"War and Peace" or Howe's "Story OF a
County Town" and "Mystery OF the Locks,U y
| or 80 intrinsically worthless one ss Con.
| ways Family Affair'-why are we TO read
these, when we might with infinitely more
| pleasure and profit be reading such perfect
little gems a. Mra Ewing's Daddy Oar
wins Dovecot," "Jackanapes" and "The
Story OF Short Life" or that still more
OF Ida" by Francisca (Mra Alexander) or
even some Of Stockton's short stories would
be much bettor than anything OF Howe,
Conway, Hoffman, Hoppus d Co am
sure, too, that II Turgeneff's "Mumu" bad
been put In place Of Daudets "DEvange-
liste," or of one Of Balzscs four novels moth.
ing would have been lost For OF all have
ever read OF the great Russians workA
"Mumu" II unquestionably the strongest,
purest greatest and best, In spite Of its being
the shortest
SPEAKING Of "The Story OF Ida" II you
have never read It take my advice and read
It at onca It 10 quite short little thing.
scarcely Q hundred pages. But would
rather have written those few pages than AL