The daily morning journal and courier., 1904-03-24
sHowGIRL's DAY OVER.
Her Gowns Cost too Much and So
 Does She.


 It is sad. but the glittering show girl is likely to be thing of the past after the present season. She has had a vogue for three seasons that has thrown into the background even some of the stars of musical comedy. Now she has to get out herself.
 The show girl was a sort of subli- mated chorous girl who wore very beautiful long dresses and was beauti- ful enough to stand by herself in the sront row and smile about the theater at those persons who were her acquain- tances or those persons who she wanted the audience to think were her ae- quaintanees.
 Ten or more of these young woman were to be found in very musical farce. They differed from chorous girls chief Fly in the matter of salary. Some of these ornamental beauties received as much as s60 week and refused to leave New York at any price. The expense to the manager was not limited by the showgirl's salary. She | had to have beautiful clothes. These cost sometimes $7O0 and $500. When it came to dressing a score of l these young women, the expense of a production was considerably increased. 1 The disappearance of the showgirl EwiH not be due to her lack of power to I charm so much as, to her costiliness. For half what it cost to dress her up like a society debutante at her first ball she could be effectively rigged up in a fancy costume or several of them.
 Then it would not cost $60 a week to engage girls who could wear these old CT fashioned costumes well.
 The supposition was that it took women with certain amount of style l to wear the kind of dresses that the showgirls wer supposed to display te the greatest advantage. These proud ladies never wore costumes like ordi- mary girls in the chorus. They had 1 their dresses from Worth, Pacquifn l Felix. Armand Doucet and the rest q 1 the famous mantua makers of Paris. I Of course, 1t took a certain air to car ry off those gowns 1t may have beer ] a high toned air only from the theatric- al Soint of view, but it was enough ir 1 demand to make managers pay two and three times as much for it as they gave the ordinary members of the merry, chorous.
 1 Various other causes have led to tho downfall of the showgirl. That she it too much Of an expense, she and hel lclothes, is the principal cause. Ther there is a belief among the wise persons who concern themselves with such i'm l aP <.Ea girls that the time has come for a re turn to tights and other features oi former burlesque and musical farce costuming.
 Girls who are able to wear this sori lof thing an look just as handsome as anybody" said a manager the othel l day, "are to be had for salaries thai rarely exceed $20 week.
 "Theses costumes are cheaper than tht ruinous dresses which had to be bought when the costumes were modern and IT to date The intention to abolish the show girl is a part of the decision ol managers to invest less in productions than they have been doing.
 livery foreign city but London stares in astonishment at the immense sums invested in productions in this country. It has become customary tc Hook for opportunities to spend, moi lmerely to do what is necessary to give a piece a beautiful or appropriate per. formance.
 "The utmost lavishness was the rule in most of the productions, dramatic and musical, during the past three years. In some cases, money was spent to good effect. Beautiful and artistic results were obtained that seemer tt Justify the outlay.
 "But in no case did such appoint. ments help to make success when the play itself was poor. It is necessary with such productions as managers have been making to play to an aver. age of $16,00O a week to pay expenses This is, of course very difficult whel ] there is any but play of the first class The men who were willing to run this lgreat risk during the rencent season. of great prosperity are now much nor, Icautious.
 "The show girl at s60 week in { gown that cost $275 is one of the stag, luxuries that is certainly destained tt ! disappear"