Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-01-21
LAWFOR SP#NDTHRIFTS
THERE WAS a 1 az WHEN Elk
PENDITUREs WERE = LIMITED.
Men Were Not Permitted to Lay Out
More Money Than They Could
AfE0rd.
From Tit-Bits.

that not so long agoaEnTthe history OF the
world the governments'ofth the various coun-
tries were SO considefnte and SO anxious
for the welfare OF their subjects that they
actually made laws regulating to certain
extent. their expenditure, and thus sought
to restrain extravaganza, whether In food,
dress. amusements or even In funerals.
Many of these laws WERE no doubt,
prompt ed by an earnest desire to further
the interests OF the individual, but others
were the outcome those In authority
wishing to prevent their interiors. who
were quite wealthy enough to do So from
closely initiating. or sren surprising. them
in the matter Of dress Or the like;
T OF course. the ladies often received tho
most careful consideration from the law
makers. For instance. on the occasion OF
the second Punic war. about 2I5 B. C..
Rome, which frequently paid great atten-
ton to such matters. decided that NO wo-
man should wear dress Of various coIors
nor ride in carriage In the city or within
a mile Of 1t unless 1t happened to be at pub
lie sacrifice. AS a matter Of course. such
q measure was very unpopular with the
fair sex. and in the space of twenty Yea "a
or Or SO they succeeded N getting 1t repealed.
streets and surrounded the senators houses
and even the senate, and refused to be an
peased so long as such a law was in force
Naturally enough, the ladies have been
and 1t Is on record that when, in 1912
English women were forbidden to wear
farthingales OF an excessive size, inst cad
OF complying and reducing those they wore,
they actually made them bigger! !,
Against Dress Madness.
The first Of these 'sumptuary laws" as
they were called so far as our own coun-
try was concerned, was that of Edward
III, passed in 1868; but this did not affect
any one higher than a-knights In the social
scale. This was directed against dress.
and was passed because large number of
people dressed in a manner far beyond
their means. which resulted, we are told.
the realm" g ~
BY It knights. gentlemen under the estate
OF knights, esquires of certain ouaIifica-
tons merchants. clerks. citizens, bureesses.
servants, handicraftsmen. yeomen, plough
men, and others of less degree. together
with their wives and children, were only
allowed to wear clothes of the kinds and
prices enumerated. and the tailors or cloth.
iers were directed -to@make "a, sufficient
quantity OF such garments. so that there
would pc no excuse for infringing the
statute. Certain individuals were not AL
lowed to wear any silk or jewelry. nor were
they allowed to embroider their clothes witt,
silver, while the penalty DIOR violating the
law was the forfeiture toe the king OF ali
apparel not complying with the regulations
This law apparently wasnot a popular one.
Tor 1t was partly REPEALED lin the following
year. I. tiue o
1t was during the 9eigti Of the next Ed.
ward that the extravaganza of the male
portion of the comm unit yQreached = most
ridiculous height, visits some of the dress
worn was OF trubn absurd description.
and consequently laws were made to put a
STOP 10 such state ofiafaars. In this case
everybody below the rank! Of lord was az
1ected. and the form and value were spect-
ned. While taflors andssfiD emakers guilty of
supplying these, prohibited articles to peo-
pie not qualified to wear fHhem were liable
10 very heavy penalties It was about this
time that the shoes worn had very long
points. sometimes as much as two feet in
length. SO we cannot wonder that the legfs-
them. Ssn-.. r4eo fi.ef -vi-sEraS So.
Dress Materials. 80 20 =
The quantity Of material to be used In
making the various articles Of apparel was
regulated by an enactment passed in the
reign Of Henry VII, as much as sixteen
yards being allowed to duke. six yards to
knight, and considerably less to servants
and others. so the people were not permit
ted to spend their money at will at that
period.
Henry VIII was also strict with regard to
the expenditure of his subjects. and even
directed VINO should be allowed to buy for
eigu-made hats and caps, and what price
they should pay for the same. He also
regulated the apparel Of the royal family
as well as that of his poorer subjects, and
the latter were strictly forbidden to wear
silver button or any kind of ornament
Ihen In 1854. an act directed that who
ever snail wear silk in or upon his hat
bonnet girdle, scabbard hose, shoes or
, spur feathers shall be three months i'm
prisoned, and forfeit f1O. except mayors
aldermen, ETC. while if any servant Of
rended IN this direction and was not dis
missed within fourteen days the EMPLOYER
had to forfeit f1OO. It is safe to assume that
SILK dresses were somewhat scarce during
that reign. These laws regulating the ex-
penditures on dress were all repealed in the
reign or James 1. and apparently such re-
strictions have not been deemed necessary
since. for no further attempts have been
made to deal with the matter