The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1892-04-30
NEW YORK WOMEN AND THEIR DRESS.
Stories About Extravaganza in Costumes
Are Generally Fictitious.


Stories About Extravaganza in Costumes
Are Generally Fictitious.
There are many things in which New
York is superior TO any other city on the
American continent, although the state
ment may be questioned and bill of
particulars asked for. But all agree
that Gotham leads in fashions for men
and women. The styles for women's
apparel still come from gay Paris. Fully
year must elapse after a garment be-
comes the rage in Paris for the newest
creations to make their appearance in
New York, and quite as much time Is
required for London to follow Paris, al
though the great cities are only few
hours apart. 1t often happens, too, that
New York women are quicker to follow
the Partisan styles than their English
sisters, SO that it would seem as though
the fashion plates cross the ocean twice
to reach the tight little island.
Once New York women begin to pop
ularize hat or gown or parasol or any
! other article of dress until it becomes
| the lage, it takes quite six months for the
new design to reach San Francisco. 1t
takes double that time for the women of
Boston, Philadelphia or Washington to
fall into line after the New York women,
while three months more are required
for st. Louis and New Orleans women
to make up their minds to be in the gay
procession. The women of some of the
smaller cities follow a year and half
after New York, or two years and half
after the Partisan beauties.
1t is much the same with mems cloth
ing. London is, as it has always been,
the center of fashion for mems garments,
and it takes fully year for new designs
to become popular In New York.
The question of how much money New
York society women spend annually for
dresses and whether they wear costly
gowns more than once induced me to
ask the best known man dressmaker in
this city and London what he had to say
on the subject. He told me some inter
esting facts.
1.-The richest people, as rule" he
said, care more economical in dress than
those in moderate circumstances. The
Princess of Wales is so imbued with the
spirit of economy that she actually has
her gowns made over for her children.
Generally four drawing rooms &C.
cur annually, and the princess always
has u new dress for each occasion. She
pays her own bills and does not wait
for the heir apparent to be dunned.
Often she wears the same dress half a
dozen times, but not at notable royal
functions. Her dresses, all told, cost
GO0 0A0 70nccihlxy G00 0f0
This does not include lace trimmed
dresses.
"Queen Victoria is the most econom-
ical of the royal family, and from year
to year has her gowns cut in the same
style. Lady Dudley is a splendid second
to the queen.
Gin New York the most extensively
dressed women are not the very richest.
When Edith Kingdom was an actress she
caredless for expenses than now. Then
she would order dress and never ask
the price, but now as Mrs. Gould she al
ways asks the price, and often remarks
that because she is Mrs. Gould she does
not wish to pay any more for dress
than the regular price. Ada Rehan is
more liberal and seems to care less for
, expenses than many ladies whose hus-
bands are rated as worth millions. Mrs.
Aston is not extravaganza at all in dress.
Mrs. Coleman Drayton and many others
| could mention are not prodigal in the
matter of dresses The average society
woman of wealth never spends over
$4,000 a year in dresses, for the very
reason that they wear each dress many
times.
"Ball dresses are the cheapest, and
although usually the most frail, they
are often worn four times. The tulle is
changed for each ball, but the skirt re
mains the same. Reception dresses cost
more than ball dresses, and are used
many times by simply changing some
part of the trimming. Even wedding
dresses were occasionally used again fol-
grand occasions. All the big prices re
puted as paid for dresses are largely fic
titious and never deceive knowing ones
The handsomest velvet dress that could
be devised could not cost over $3.50, and
a cloth dress is worth only $3.50 at the
highest price. Old laces or something
: expensive in trimming might make 6
dress cost a great deal more, but on the
whole 800 or 5000 would go a long ways
toward getting the finest kind of ma
terial for. dresses. A woman who spends
$4,000 a year on dresses alone is more
liberal than many royal DANES"
I closed the conversation by asking
him what finally became of the fine
/ dresses of the rich. He said that had
always puzzled him. His guess was
: that they were either sold or given tt
poor relations.-Foster Coates in New
York Mail and Express.
Not Out of Style.