The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-08-13


lost. But her measurements are still said to
accord more exactly with classic STANDARDS
than those Of any other sovereign do. She Is
Ave feet four and three fourths inches hign,
weighs 1870 pounds, and has bust measure
OF thirty eight inches, waist measure OF
twenty two inches, and her hips measure
forty inches. Queen Amelia OF Portugal is
of about the same size as the Czarina OF
Russia, although she is older, and mas a
somewhat fuller figure. She has the distinc-
ton OF being the only woman on a European
throne who has abandoned the use OF stays
Before that, she boosted a waist line OF only
twcnty-threc inches, and no statistlclan mas
discovered the increase since that chanSe.
The Czarina measures only 22 lnches
around the waist. while the bust measure OF
80 inches accords with her height OF D feet
2 inches and her weight OF 12O pounds Inc
Queen of Belgium weighs only 143 pounds,
but has a waist measure OF "a inches Queen
Sophia Of Sweden is CT nearly the same mea-
surement but is said to be able to diminish
her waist measure several inches. The
Queen of Spain is nearly the thnnest in Eu-
rope and that seems comprehensive enough
under the circumstances. She weights l41
pounds. but is 5ik feet tall None OF these
crowned women possess figures that would
conform to the most eXactinS standards OF
the artists or the dressmakers. Queen Will
hclmna Is said to come more nearly to the
artists ideal while the CZarina OF Russia
would be more likely to do justice to dress
makers work.
The passing OF the wrapper is change in
the dress Of woman that has more than a
modish significance. II has bearing as we'll
on many other aspects Of American femninl-
ty. The wrapper was the sweeping symbol Of
home relaxation and comfort not many years
ago. Its pleasures were not always to be
enjoyed only In the midst Of the family cir
Gle. Sufficiently ornate, II could appear be-
fore strangers. and that period was long in
OBJ ,,ft h.t No,
ed beyond its domestic limits, and carried its
suggestion Of freedom from stays and con-
ventional garb into wider spheres. 1t appear
ed on the piazzas Of summer hotels in the
eighties and was the accepted breakfast tot
let for the head of the most formal family
and the other women of the house The
vogue Of the wrapper in those days was not
connected with any lack of worldly know
ledge or unwllingness to learn the best mode
and abide by ii. The garment needed no
apology In towns outside OF New York its
usefulness was more extended. Shopping in
n wrapper was no violation OF Western and
Southern proprieties then If the weather hap
pened to be warm enough for the convenience
oil the wearers. Materials in those past ages
were not rs important they came to be.
Richness was not necessary to excuse the
wrapper. Its folds no more violated the cor
rect ideas OF things because they hung in
calico and lawn than IL their substance were
damask. Cherished for its comfort and ac-
BILE that the wrapper should have disappear
ed so completely. Rut 1t has gone When II
comes into vogue again. its revival will be
discussed, as the chignon and crinollne were
talked about when II was thought they
might be worn.
The Mother Hubbard Is small disaster
In woman's dress still remembered II spread
over the country and could not be dislodg-
cd 1t became an object OF public scorn and
rldlCule, yet II remained on view longer
than anybody wanted 1t to. 1t was the butt
or every humorist. When it finally dlsap-
peared. the wrapper had received its first
serious blow as a popular garment ANY
thing with looseness that resembled the de-
parted Mother Hubbard was not to he
| thought OF. The ill-repute which attended
the hnal departure of the Mother Hubbard
| put temporary end to any dress that re-
produced its flowing looseness. Thus was the
vogue of the wrapper first damaged 1t ne
| yer recovered. Other influences came in to
| complete the work OF its final extinction
The younger generation became athletic
lhere was no sympathy between lawn ten
| mis- and wrapper. The older generation
grew as tailor made as 1t could, and every
| influence was against the revival of the
| wrapper. Corsets lost their importance tc
| the younger women, and or the relief from
tight stays rested much OF the wrapper's
popularity Physicians say that women lace
| less now than they did some years ago, ant
| prove that by showing how much larger
| their waists have grown. But neither its
graceful draperios nor its becoming folds
held for the wrapper it's place in woman's
| regard. 1t was the opportunities il gave fol
RELIEF from tight stays. When these were
not needed. the wrapper lost its last hole
| on favor. Golf and the bicycle have kept III
| the work begun by tennis. The wrapper los
| It's last hold OF fashion when women were
comfortable enough in their corsets to keeI
| them on,