Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1889-06-05
The Farmer and Fashion.


The filters of the soil, as class, have
long been noted Tor the possession of
godliness, but whether they possess also
the virtue which stands IN such close
relation to 1t Is open to question. A
man whose business is manuel labor
may smell of the manure pile and yet
be a gentleman, and it he retain the
odor as matter Of habit it is not I'M
likely that it will finally affect his NOR
ais.
The farmer has always professed a
contempt Tor the vanities of town life.
Fashion he has regarded with open
scorn, and his wife, viewing with awe
the superior elegance and beauty Of her
town sisters, has patroniZed the cheap
stores, been forced to stit1e her natural
feminine longings with a sigh. and
make herself content with the dress of
awkward cut and the bonnet of last
years pattern and design. Where ne
cessity, Or fail. economy, has suggested
such course in lie, modesty in dress
and habit is no ordinary virtue; but
where it is the result of a mistaken
mode of thought, or failure to appre-
ciate that the farmer is as entitled as
any to all the goods and benefits of life,
It is high time to re Orm. Surely he
who stands at the very base of indus
Oiial AISb
have, as well as any, a claim TO the re-
tinements and pleasures OF life; and if
any intelligent reason can be given why
the farmer should, beyond his domestic
life, or on 1t, be negligent Of appear
ance, rough inmanner and uncouth in
speech, an indefinite pause should be
made to learn it. Possessing the eN-
quisite means, why should not the
farmer clothe neat foot in a neat boot,
enjoy the sense of self-appreciation
which comes from the patronage of the
best tailor, and see his wife arrayed as
well as her town sisters? What better
right has the banker, the merchant or
the lawyer to ease or manner, grace OF
speech and beauty of appearance, than
the farmer of equal means? What is
there in the life of the farm that makes
a physical difference in favor of the
townsman, when the reverse should be
the case, and why does the farmer,
when called to public office and town
pursuits, change his personal habits TO
conform to his change of scene? Fash
ion, in its broad sense, is the prevailing
method Of the be st people, and in all
christian virtues the farm people are
the chosen people of the earth. lso-
lated in measure by the necessities of
his life, living in the quiet of nature
Will an PIC IlulC lOI ICuoCllUu anu
thought, and opportunity to best de-
velop hlmself, the farmer has been to
the world its leader in all noble
thought and action. lie mention the
lilustrous names that the farmer has
given TO all ages would be to exhaust
these pages before the task was begun
Is it necessary, then, that this mass of
busy toilers, who bear upon their
shoulders the responsibilities and pros
perity of all the world, should live apart
from the best social amenities? Does
farm life destroy the sense Of neatness,
create dislike of good speech and rob
the human form of ease Of carriage and
and grace of motion? If "a neat lifting
suit OF clothes is a perpetual letter of
Introduction" and II there be merit in
dress and appearance. is not the farm
er as entitled as any to the benefit? If
sweet tongue wins sweet heart, and q
gallant bearing speak a gallant man,
why may not the farmer combine all
these virtues and be as marked in an
attractive person as any of his fellows
That many who follow agr. cultural
pursuits have realized that no natural
impeachment stood between themselves
and the best that life affords, we know,
but others should follow the example,
The farmer would be happier with few
er cattle and handsomer hou-e, less
acres and better furniture, and as De-
tween an extra grapary and library
stocked with books, he might safely
choose the latter. He would surely
find that, when these comforts may be
afforded, he would be broadened for