d 1912
reveals the existence of an entirely novel adjunct to male attire. Silk
bows have been worn about the neck for nearly, if not quite, a century,
but never in the body of the attire. It is true the gentleman as early
as 1910 adorns his nether garments with a plain silk band, but in the
elderly party of 1911 he has assumed gay ribbons for his shoes as well
as at his knees and throat. In this plate we greet the presence of an
unmistakable umbrella as a good omen. But it is only a short-lived
rapture, for the spruce young party in the next sketch is balancing
lightly between thumb and forefinger what we take to be nothing more or
less than a shepherd's crook. This is hardly an edifying prospect. Yet
if we do not altogether mistake the two wing-shaped objects projecting
from his person, it is not the only feature of gentlemen's fashions
twenty years hence which will occasion a shock. Nor must we overlook the
frivolity of the lady of the same period who is doing her utmost to look
pleasant under the most trying conditions. Yet it must be confessed that
in spite of its intricate novelty and perplexity, the costume must still
be called plain. One might be forgiven for surmising that the
kerchief-shaped article covering a portion of the lady's bust is formed
of riveted steel, for surely nothing else could support the intolerable
load she is so blandly carrying off.

Female costume seems to have always been regulated by the same waves and
rules which governed male costume, but in a different degree. In the
Ebullient period it is chiefly distinguished by head-dress and the total
abolition of stays. Crinoline, in spite of certain opposition, enjoyed a
slight revival in the present day, and in 1897 the divided skirt
threatened to spread universally. But it passed off, and nothing of a
radical order was attempted in this direction until the revolution which
brought in trousers for women in 1942.

Meantime, in the next plate of a lady's costume, which is dated 1922, we
have presented a very rational and beautiful style of dress. The skirt,
it is true, is short enough to alarm prim contemporary dames, and it is
scarcely less assuring to find in the whole of the remaining plates only
three periods when it seems to have got longer. But doubtless the very
ample cloak, which is so long that it even trails upon the ground,
extenuated and in some degree justified its shortness.

[Illustration: 1922]

[Illustration: 1920]

[Illust