The Colfax chronicle. [volume] (Colfax, Grant Parish, La.) 1877-1981, 1911-03-04
More Trouble Ahead for the Cor
puIent Woman.
New and Daring Creation on Its Way
From Paris Described as skirt
With Sort Of PantaIoon At
tachment."

New Notwithstanding to caoie
dispatch from Paris the hobble skirt
is about to be supplanted by new
and daring creation in the way OF a
skirt which is described by dress
makers as "a skirt with a sort OF
pantaloon attachment" The new
skirt, 1t is said, is the invention OF
Paul Poiret, a gownmaker OF Paris. A
New York house has already imported
from Paris consignment OF these
skirts, which are being displayed to
dressmakers here, and the house Is
prepared to measure and mt any WON
an with the new creation VINO thinks
she would like to wear 1t.
Some Of the city's dressmakers were
asked to describe the new fashion.
Their ideas of the skirt differed, and
none of them could give the same de-
scription of it, but they all objected to
the use Of the words "pantaloon,
'breeches" or trousers" In describing
1t, though none of them was able to
suggest a more delicate word for the
skirts masculine attachment.
A woman representative of an I'M
porting house, said: Yes, we have
heard about the new skirt. 1t is to be
launched as a novelty. and maybe II
will become very popular. But please
don't call the little part of 1t the
.panos,' or rather the trousers, as you
men say, because 1t is nothing OF the
sort. 1t is just two little foot holes.
First, you stick a foot through one,
and then you stick the other foot
through the other hole, and there you
are. It is not at all difficult, / assure
you, and the women will not md 1t
Co."
When asked whether the two holes
resemble the legs of trousers, she re-
Piled: IT suppose so, but you must
understand the legs are very short.
Asked whether the paptaloons OF
the skirt extended as far below the
knee as the ankle. she biushingiy re-
piled: Il cannot answer your ques-
ton"
Another dressmaker described the
new skirt as being very tight. The
| pantaloon attachment, she said, would
| not be visible. II the skirt should be-
come the rage in Paris, she said, the
New York women would have to
adopt It whether they liked 1t or not,
,therwise they would lose their repu-
tation for keeping up with the fash
IONS. When asked IL she regarded
| the new skirt as the forerunner of
| trousers for women, she replied: 1T
| is wrong to speak Of that part OF the
| skirt as trousers. I don't know ex
actly what you would call 1t. but you
don't describe the Turkish women as
wearing trousers.
81 don't think that our American
women would ever take to the trous
fers worn by men. 1t would not only
unsex them-look at DR.. Mary Walk
er-but there is no beauty in trousers
for women. Let a woman put or
trousers and her beauty Is lost for
ever: besides, the men would never
tolerate such thing.
THE idea of this new skirt Is moi
to popularize trousers for women. but
to add a little touch of orientalism t.
their dress. However, the Skin
which will be introduced here Is
much modified form of the skirt in it.
Partisan makeup"
Nearly all of the dressmaker'
agreed that II the skirt should b
adopted by women. as the dressma
kers understand 1t. they would have t.
readjust their manner of dressing
themselves: instead OF following thu
usual custom of putting on Skin
by nrst throwing 1t over the head
they would have to don the new ont
just as trousers are put on. by enter
ing the skirt feet first. For q slende