. Mrs. August Belmont (Caroline Slidell Perry) lived in a fine
house on Fifth Avenue and frequently gave large receptions. His sister,
Sarah Perry, subsequently Mrs. R. S. Rodgers, was an early friend of
mine. The elegant Major Alexander S. Macomb, who was his father's
namesake and aide, on entering Mrs. Belmont's drawing-room was
unfortunate enough to brush against a handsome vase and completely
shatter it. It was generally conceded that his hostess was conscious of
the disaster, but "was mistress of herself though China fall" and
appeared entirely unconscious of the mishap. Some months later at the
house of Lady Cunard (Mary McEvers), a similar accident happened. The
unfortunate guest, however, in this case was immediately approached by
his hostess, who with much elegant grace begged him not to be disturbed
as the damage was trifling. Immediately society began an animated
discussion, when even the judicial powers of Solomon might have found it
embarrassing to decide which of the two women should be accorded the
greater degree of _savoir faire_.

In 1844, accompanied by my father, I attended the wedding of Estelle
Livingston, daughter of John Swift Livingston, to John Watts de Peyster.
At the time of this marriage, Mr. de Peyster was considered the finest
_parti_ in the city; while, apart from his great wealth, he was so
unusually talented that it was generally believed a brilliant future
awaited him. It was a home wedding, and the drawing-room was well filled
with the large family connection and other invited guests. At this time
Mr. Livingston was a widower, but his sister Maria, Mrs. John C. Stevens
of Hoboken, did the honors of the occasion for her brother. The young
bride presented a charming appearance in all her finery, and at the
bountiful collation following the ceremony champagne flowed freely.
This, however, was no unusual thing, as that beverage was generally seen
at every entertainment in those good old days. Mrs. John C. Stevens
lived at one time in Barclay Street, and I have heard numerous stories
concerning her eccentricities. In 1849 she gave a fancy-dress ball but,
as she had failed to revise her visiting list in many years, persons who
had long been dead were among her invited guests. She was especially
peculiar in her mode of dress, which was not always adapted to her
social position. It is therefore not at all surprising that unfortunate
mistakes were occasionally made in regard to her identity. Ano