DRESS AND THE AGE.

Press, Volume IV, Issue 448, 6 April 1864, Page 3

DRESS AND THE AGE.

[From Once a 11 'eek.~\ The tendency of modern dresß is to give greater youthfnlness to the appearance. This is especially the ease in regard to men's drets. The introduction of the turned down collar, end its adoption by persons at nil ages, took oil' ten rears from the aspect of Englishmen generally. With the roideur of dress wert also the stillness of advanced age. The peace after Waterloo dealt the first blow to senility, by permitting civilians to discard at will the hitherto almost compulsory white neckcloth. The bold innovator who appeared al Ahnack's in trousers, and justified his renunciation of breeches on the ground that Ms legs were crooked, submitting that fact to tho Ladiee' Committee for verification, kicked down the remains of the old dress fabric. Tlie external symbols formerly considered appropriate to the advancing stages of life having been abolished, it is diillcult now to judge correctly of a person's age. In our own recollection the man of seventy looked his years ; at this day he might pasa as sixty, or even fifty-iive, for anything we can determine. The gradations of time on the stage were etill more marked. A father of the last-mentioned ago used to be represented ns an old gentleman—wore a wig, or long white^hair — And his breeches, and all tliat, Were so queer. Increased case in manners has kept oven etop3 with that of dress, and hae doubtless been affected by it. When nightcaps and trowser-straps were thrown to the winds, men fcund, with additional bodily freedom, a corresponding mental emancipation. Unquestionably, there is a danger of the reaction being too great: an imminent danger of plunging from rigidity into a rude negligence. Our countrymen are no longer accused by continentals of the stiffness of their attire, but of its nondescript vulgarity. Tho Freuch are very fond of caricaturing their British neighbors in t lie article of dress, but the mass of Frenchmen are bad dressers themselves. An elaborate quiz, seen m the shop windows in Paris and elsewhere, called " 1/Anglais a Mabille," presents an extraordinary combination of colour and form, uiid it would not be recognised iis an Englishman except by the title at foot. Much of the bad taste now seen in men's dress here —a sloppy doi scription of clothes —is borrowed from our i'renck contemporaries. In ladiee' dress, the greateet coup in modern times has been the restoration of the close-fitting sieerc. It was a return to the true principles of taste. Willi j many variations, and an occasional attempt of drees-

makers to discard it, the natural sleeve keeps its place, arul has dono so now for rears. Tho stomacher was a funeiful reproduction of tho Elizabethan age. So far it was looked upon wi'.h favor for o considerable period; but it was a mistake. It was a protracting of t!m waist far below i(s real position ; and at one time fanaticism brought the point down almost to the knees. Tho introduction of the hat instead of the bonnet was 'a great modern gain. Even the muchabused "pork-pie" brought out our countrywomen* beauty in no small degree. The cardinal canon in costume is, that dress should conform to the human figure. It is not intended by this that persons of both sexes are to go about in clastic tight coverings, or that no liberty or variation within limits is permissible. But wherever dress grcatlv deviates from the form—goes upon lines not in harmony with those of the person—there is error, there is bad taste. Drees is to run ite epicycle over tho curves and contour of the body. The hooped petticoat or steel skirt, foolishly called crinoline, conceals the form, and, when excessive, reduces a lady to a pyramid. It is not likely, however, that this controverted instrument will be talked down, because it has its aspect of health and convenience. The application and power of color are known to all intelligent dressers. Redundancy of figure is to be killed or kept down by black and dark tints, ■whilst, to deficiency in fulness, white and light-hued materials gives the greatest breadth and outline, j Many years ago, waist-bands were much worn by ladies. They were frequently made of two colours, longitudinally divided: and thoso for whom the were intended were quite aware that, by wearing the dark portion of the ribbon downwards, it increased tho conic diminution of the waist, which the light portion above gave force to the spring of the bust. In the selection of colours " that go together," in the frequent sobriety of tone in their dress, and in their careful interposition of a wide space of neutral between opposed colours worn at the same time, coneists tho famed superiority of tho Parisian lady over the Englishwoman. It is said commonly, also, that tho former invariably "knows how to put on a ehawl," implying that our ladies have not that knowledge. Our belief is, that English ladies possess, by ■whatever means obtained, a considerable taste and •kill in dress ; but it may be years before a cry to the contrary will subside. Tt does not matter how well anybody does anything, if there is unfortunately a cry against him raised by designing people, and continued by uninquiring ones. Frenchwomen can, and do often, dress vulgarly, with an ostentatious disregard to rule, and with violent and novel colouring. If you should see the bonnet pathetically described by Haynes Bailey,—that bright blue bonnet, when its ♦renovator was about to " trim it with yellow, and line it with green,"—it would probably be on the head of a Frenchwoman. The effects of colour on complexion are learnt from experience ; and the subject cannot be treated successfully in a short paper like the present. Portrait artists know how many are the colours that mingle in one face, and slightly varying proportions and small omissions produce differences in the skin, so that colours which suit one person are not becoming to another, although the complexions of the two are supposed to bo the same. A candid friend, or the more candid looking-glass, must be the ultimata appeal. Now that wo have touched the J delicate subject of the mirror, let us notice the fact of how much tho position of a glass, in reference to the light, has to do in making a person satisfied or discontented with his, or her appearance. The most flattering position for the glass is when placed between two windows, the equal cross-light reducing inequalities and roughnesses to a minimum. The most unbecoming reflexion is from a glass in front of a window, the only one in a room. It is remarkable, and perhaps unexplained, that any irregularity of the features, anything out of drawing in the face, ie increased when seen in a glass. There is a great difference in tho colour of the glass itself; some glasses are very pure and white; some have a greenish tinge, necessarily producing disheartening reflexions. Returning to form, we must own that the bonnet adopted for the last two or three years —the spoonbonnet in nil its varieties and sub-species—is most reprehensible. If an ollipse is needed, the longer axis is required across the brow. By generating two ellipses from the chin, the oval face and the oval bonnet—the latter including tho former, and having the same perpendicular axis—the effect is most disagreeable. Contrast with these tho Norma wreath, tho Jfary-Quoen-of-Scots head-dress, or even the bonnet in fashion four years ago. Pile Pelion on Ossa; put insido the spoon, above the forehead, a large bouquet of flowers, and make feathers nod over tho extreme summit, as we saw in Paris last June; or bring the hair above the head, on cushions surmounted by a crown of stars, as we have Been in a London theatre in July this year—yet taste and simplicity will triumph over what is artificial and unsymmetrical. One observation about milliners and modistes, and our few remarks on modern dress are finished. "Why is it that when the tide of taste turns in our favour —when, after many efforts, we at last apprehend simplicity, nnd rejoice that a female costume rather enhances than detracts from its wearer's natural beauty—why is it, we nek, that the flood so soon tnrns, and that next season the charming head gear and tho becoming sleevo have been displaced, and that something different, not so pretty, not so correct, is the only thing to wear ? What was round has become elongated ; what was small is enlarged ; lines which ran transversely are now longitudinal. Tho word different contains ihe secret. The law-giver is the artiste in robes and bonnets. Tlroro must be activity, there must be business; there must be such variations this season that a last season's dress or hat shall be instantly detected and known, and its wearer held up to well merited ignominy. It does not matter to Madame Lucile or Mdlle. Henrietta, whether ladies wear what ia intrinsically better or more becoming to them, but they shall wear something that is different; and their steps must wear the staircase of Madame Lucile and Mddle. Henrietta. Hopeless, therefore, is the struggle after jrsthetioa in dress when the trade depend on on violent changes. Happily the people at large— the masses, if you will—are not equally constrained. They too rapidly seize on what is new, and often retain what is really pretty. Some of the best of modern changes in dress are already adopted as • national costume. What for instance, can be more becoming than the prevailing drees of our female eervants; the well-fitting dress, cotton, or dark material; the snowy apron ; the round cap of lace, below which appears the knot of glossy, well kept hair; the close, short sleeve; the white stocking ? Observe the female domestics of good houses, and it will bo thought they have hit a happy mean in dress, and have succeeded in combining in a remakable manner the elegant and the modest. DEBATES IN THE FRENCH CHAMBERS. Nothing seems to have excited greater interest in Paris, not even tho plot to assassinate the Emperor, than the animated debates which have taken place in the Legislative Chambers. The following account of a debate which occurred on January 14 is from the correspondent of the Marning Herald. Tho interest at the debates in the Corps Legislatif yesterdny was confined to two speeches—one by iTules Favre and tho other by M. Rouland, President of the Council of State. M. Jules Favre argued at very great length that the interference of the Government in the elections, and the pressure that was put upon the various functionaries, rendered the election which, if it were meant to express the wishes of the country, should be perfectly free—little better than a mockery. He then said :— " When the Government becomes the champion of its candidates it puts in action all the means at ite disposal; functionaries are stimulated, threatened, and used as blind instruments in the hands of Government. I shall therefore ask the Government what part it means to assign to functionaries at elections ? Are they still citizens free to have an opinion of their own ? It is important to propose this question. Then whilst in the camp of the Government candidates uo

complaint is ever made of the pressure of authority, in other camps that pressure is stigmatised as intolerable. You may remember the complaints of M. Chabanon, formerly a member of the majority, against the Prefect of the Gard, who had ceased to patronise him [noise]. I beg leave to repeat the question that I put just now. What is the part of functionaries at elections? Canthey keep their places? J Are they not threatened with dismissal if they vote .•igßi'nst the Government candidates ? [Marks of denial.) There are 37,000 public functionaries condemned to elect the candidates of Government, and therefore to municipal death! [exclamations]. A mayor of La Charente has been torn from his seat whilst presiding over an electoral assembly. He has been suspended for two months because he did not support the Government candidate, and the suspension is still illegally maintained. All functionaries are placed in a conflict between their conscience and their inteiest. There have been dismissals in every quarter; but I wish to say a few words about the displacement of a certain professor. He was in a situation which appeared to place him out of the reach of political tempests ; he was professor of botany [laughter]. He was dismissed for not having favoured the Government candidate —dismissed from a post gained by public competition. Is such an example salutary? Would it have occurred if the Government were not condemned to ensure the success of its own candidate ? [hear, hear.] "M. Kouland, Minister presiding over the Council of State. —Will M. J. Favre mention the professor, and at what time he was dismissed ? " M. J. Favre. —It was in 1857 [exclamations]. " M. Rouland. —That is important to state. When anecdotes are related persons should have the good faith to mention dates [approbation]. " M. Jules Favre then went on to point out that it was a favourite argument with the Government to state that under previous regimes the authorities had interfered with the elections. He denied that they had ever done so to anything like the extent to which the abuse now prevailed ; but at any rtte as the present Government boasted of its superiority over all those who had come before it, it should avoid falling into the same mistakes. But the charges brought against former regimes were not in accordance with fact. Neither under the Restoration nor under the Government of July had such a thing existed as " candidate of the King's Government ; " it was only since 1852 that they had become familiar with the novel creation of " candidate of the Emperor's Government" [cries of" No, no," uproar, and a few voices exclaimed "and under the Republic"]. M. Jules Favre pursuing, reminded the house that at the periods he spoke of there were different parties in the state, who each brought forward their candidates. Ho would not think of denying that the Government preferred one candidate to another, but that was widely different from putting forward a candidate who was openly recognized by the Government as its nominee. There were parties in those daya—[Some voices—" There are still in existence"] — well, they might still exist, he would not deny that, but he must confess his astonishment at the course of the Government, which at one time proclaimed there was nothing of the kind, and at others held them up as a kind of bugbear which ought to frighten society out of its senses [no no]. Yes, there were parties, and where parties existed, there also was liberty to be found [partial applause]. Did they know where no parties existed ? There were none in Turkey, there were none under despotic governments, in countries where a tyrannical power weighed like an incubus over a degraged population, where but one opinion existed, where all alike were devoted and silent, where the Government was everything and the nation naught [here M. Thiers and several other members exclaimed "ires lien"']. M.Jules Favre then proceeded to show the advantages of party government, and proceeded to claim the abolition of the " Government candidateships" as impairing the dignity of the Corps Legislatif. Withgreatskillhe appointedoutthat many of his present colleagues had in 1848 joined him in acclamations of "Vive Iα Mepublique" and noticed, en passant, and as a reason for not attaching undue importance to their declarations, that a great many of the Ministers and Councillors of State, who were previously staunch protectionists, had been suddenly converted to free-trade principles the moment the Emperor had pronounced the doom of protection. He then, resuming his argument against the system of official candidates, raised a perfect storm of opposition by stating that the late elections for Paris had been a triumph for the Opposition and the yiews they advocated, and that but for administrative interference the example of Paris would have been followed by the rest of the country. The Paris electors had condemned the policy of the majority in the preceding Legislature [great uproar.] The real meaning of their votes was that they demanded the immediate restoration of liberty. Here a regular scene took place, in the course of which the President complained of the aggressive and defiant tone of M. Jules Favre, the majority shouting, interrupting, and behaving altogether as a set of unruly schoolboys. Finally M. Jules Favre resumed his speech, after explaining that if the house had done him the honor to listen to him they would have seen that the inference he drew from the Paris elections was borne out by facts, but that he did not mean to imply anything resembling a threat. He felt that all his colleagues desired equally with himself the grandeur and prosperity of the country, but they differed on one very important point. He and his friends believed in the possibility of immediately granting liberty, and the majority were for its adjournment. Hβ expressed his deep-rooted conviction when he said that the best means of securing the greatness and prosperity of the country was, for the Government to abstain from interference and leave the electioas really free [applause on several benches.] After a few words from M. Segris, who maintained that provincial members were quite as independent as those of Paris, M. Rouland rose and protested against the speech of M. Jules Favre, which he described as neither honest, loyal, or considerate in refering to the elections after the debate on the verification of the returns was over. There must have been something very offensive in the minister's manner, for no sooner were the words out of his mouth than a perfect tempest arose : — " M. J. Favre.—These are insults! " M. Rouland.—l repeat that it was neither considerate nor honest to reproduce such accusations. " M. J. Favre.—l ask to speak on a personal question. " M. Dariraen. — To insult a person is not to answer him. " M. Rouland.—lt is not my habit to insult any one. " M. J. Favre. —If you mean to insult, we are no longer your adversaries. " M." Thiers. —What language are we speaking if the word ' honest, , employed as you have done, is not an insult ? We should surely respect each other! [noise.] "M. Ronland.—Tn order to bo able to tell the Chamber that it, emanates from a vitiated source M. J. Favre cites facte without dates —facte that have already been discussed during the verification. Such being the language, I think it my duty to protest [applause.] When M. J. Favre, yielding to the bitterness of hie feelings, comes and tells ue that it wae Paris that sent him and his party to the Cliatuber, and that Paris is France — " M. J. Favrc.—You distort my words. " M. Picard.—Paris is not Franco ; it is only the brain of France. " M. Thoinnet do la Turmeliere. — A very mad brain! •' M. Latour dv Moulin.—We cannot submit to be told that Paris is the brain of France. M. le President, call M. Picard to order! [agitation]" M. Picard was not called to order, and M. Rouland resumed his remarks, of which the following were the salient points : — " I wee astonished to hear M. J. Favre complaining with co much bitterness of the conduct of the j Government, and denouncing administrative pressure j with co mucli warmth. If he had reflected he would have remembered that the things of which he com- ! plains are characteristic of ull Governments. Did not j

the Republic lay down the principle of its right to interfere in the struggle more harshly than ourselves? I will not envenom the debate, but will confine myself to saying that what is wanting to these reformers, who are so prompt to invoke all liberties, is experience. When the Emperor assumed the reins oi Government who was it that had agitated the country ? And when he had, in his wisdom, to decidi upon the form to be given to his Government, his good sense showed him that excessive liberty must be discarded, and the alliance of order with liberty, as M. Thiers says, established. He therefore framed a constitution capable of improvement, founded on universal suffrage, and supported by a force sufficient to uphold it. Now, having done that, having spontaneously granted that liberty which enables you to examine all the affairs of the country, could he expect that he would be asked to grant what M. Favre calls •immediate liberty in all things ? It would be dangerous to do all at once, and hastily, instead of proceeding slowly and regularly ; it would be causing agitation, and imperilling the whole Government. Gentlemen, I protest, by these few words, against things which attack the honour of the Chamber. I have answered frankly, and, I hope, explained matters rightly. [Loud applause.] M. Jules Favre then complained of the language of M. Rouland as personally offensive. M. Rouland protested that he meant nothing personal, and Duke de Moray cut the matter short by telling M. Favre that he understood he might have more to say on the subject, and that he might speak next day if he pleased—and the debate was adjourned. The following extracts from a letter by the Paris correspondent of the Times, which apparently refer to the same debate, describes some curious results arising from the system of Parliamentary reporting adopted in the Chambers : — When M. Thiers made his speech on the Supplemental Credits the Emperor was said to be greatly pleased at the moderation of his tone and language. His second speech and address, however, has given anything but satisfaction, and the auger of people at Court is very great, not only at the effect of that speech on the public, but also at what they term the general inefficiency of the Ministers—with hardly an exception in favour of M. Rouher —in combating the Opposition. It is certain that many members of the majority complain bitterly that their numerical superiority does not counterbalance the vigour of their asßailants, and that the Opposition have all the talent with them. When M. Rouher stood up to reply to M. Thiers the other day, it was remarked, with surprise, that some words he let fall about himself were received with derisive laughter, which did not subside when, with no small show of irritation, he cried that he also had a stock of irony at hia command. The laughter did not proceed exclusively from the opposite benches. In the meantime the attention of the public seems to mc to be more attracted by the debates than any other topic, foreign or domestic, and as for the plot, it has already I ceased to be talked of even in the salons. When the President of the Legislative Corps was reproving M. Glais-Bizoin, who, in the debate on Tuesday, presumed to complain of the bondage in which the newspaper press was held, he said that it was in order to prevent journals from ■' mutilating and disfiguring" the proceedings, as they have been in the habit of doing under former Governments, that there were furnished to them by authority either summaries of their proceedings or full reports, which they had to copy from the Moniteur. Whatever be the value of these reasons, the President meant to set forth these summaries and reports, drawn up on official authority, as the strictly faithful reproduction of what passes in the Chambers, which the press must accept or go without, for it must not give any report of its own. It would appear, however, that those faultless reports and summaries', emanating from his department, and under his control are far from deserving the character given of the accuracy and skill of his subordinates by the President. Few days pass that members of the House do not utter complaints of omissions or interpolations, and on one occasion it was said that they had " skimmed the cream" of a member's speech. The complaints, I believe, mostly come from the Opposition ; they are sometimes contested, sometimes admitted, and a few lines of rectification now and then appear at the tail of a report on the following day. On Wednesday, however, that is 24 hours after the President spoke of the press as " mutilating and disfiguring" the speeches of members, a Deputy, not of the Opposition, but one of the more devoted both to the Government and the President himself—who once held the post of Director of the Press, and who has never voted but with the majority—stood up and applied the very same words to the official summary which the President used against the press -when it gave its own reports. M. Latour-du-Moulin said : — " By reason of the delicacy of the subject which I treated during yesterday's sitting I took the liberty to imitate the example of several Parliamentary celebrities by reading my discourse. It is perfectly given in the Moniteur, but in the summary there are deplorable errors ; my discourse is maimed and mutilated; it is not recognisable. I must beg of the President to be so good as to take care aa much as possible to avoid the repetition of such things ; for the summary has a thousand times more publicity than the complete report in the Moniteur. If our speeches were given in the third person—if the reporters for instance, said, ' Mr. Such-an-One said so-and-so' —I could understand such a summary; but that expressions which we never used should be put in our mouths is what we will pot accept." M. Latour-du-Moulin -was followed by If. Taillefer, and M. Taillefer complained that the official summary of the speech he had said the day before also misrepresented what he said. M. Thonivet de la Turmer'.iere " protested" against the words which the report attributed to him. He i said he had never uttered them, and the interruptions which he permitted himself, and which the Moniteur indicated correctly, were the best guarantee of his accuracy. M. Glais-Bizoin, the allusion to whose Latin quotations by the President excited the hilarity of the Chamber, likewise complained of " having been mutilated both in his Latin as in Ins French." He further complained that all cries of " Very good," " acclamations," " lively acclamations," &c, are put in the official reports to the credit of the Government speakers ; whereas, " noise," " murmurs," " exclamations," &c, were carried to the account of the Opposition speakers. He cited the case of M. Thiers. The whole CJiamber, he said, could bear witness to the applause in which it terminated ; whereas the j report stated that it was " noise," indicating die- j approbation. The same occurred to M. Jules Favre, ' and while M. Picard's speech drew forth the applause of the Opposition, the report gave only 50 lines, and interpolated " noise," " repeated noise," " increasing noise," &c. M. Morin (de la Drome) said that he also had been misrepresented in the Moniteur. The President pleaded in excuse the fallibility of human nature, and the difficulty of any one attaining perfection. It was to enable members to point out these errors that the privilege of demanding rectifications was accorded to them. Various suggestions were made by other members as to the best mode of remedyine these defects. It was proposed that the papers should insert, not short summaries, but all that appears in the Moniteur. This was objected to on account of the additional expense, which the papers in their present condition could not bear. M. Glais-Bizoin said that the only way to prevent these mutilations was to give liberty to the press. It is pretty certain that this strange suggestion will not be acted upou. After Borne further observations the debate on the Address was resumed. There was a most eloquent speech from M. Jules Favre, one passage of which drew down great applause. Alluding to what has been so often said about political parties, he said : — " I am astonished when I hear the Government at one moment stating that there are no parties, and at another that there are, and holding them up as a phantom for the stupefaction and tenor of society. What do you mean by ' parties ?" Parties are groups

of different opinions as erpresed in salons, books, the press, aud politics. Parties hare different statesmen who seek to make their doctrines prevail, and who pursue, under different banners, the same objectthat object being the progress and the greatness of our eourtry. In whatever country parties exist. 1 iind liberty also existing. (Approbation from many benches.) ' Do you know where no parties are found.- . There are none" in Turkey ; there are none under despotic Governments, there are none in those countries where tyranny weighs heavily on degraded souls; when there is but one opinion, one sort of devotedness, one single word—where the ment is everything, and the nation nothing ?" These words were received with " tres bien, ires bien, , hv many members, among whom M. Thiers was foremost. The debate continued, but with a good deal of interruption, murmurs, and noise, and was adjourned to the following day. In the account of another debate which took place on January 22 we find the following strong protesl against the centralisation which pervades the whole system of Government in France = — The amendment on which M. Eugene Pelletan spoke in the Legislative Corps, on Wednesday, set forth that the nomination of their presidents and secretaries should be restored to the Councils-General of Dei partments, and as in Paris and Lyons Municipal i Councils are not permitted, but only what are called municipal commissions, the electors of these two great cities, one of which is the capital of France, have condemned the system by which their municipal interests are now administered. The amendment also urged that the mayors, who are the representatives of local interests, should be chosen by their municipal councils respectively, and the municipal councillors by the electors. In the. course of his speech M. Pelletan, who owes his election to the opposition against him of 40 or 50 mayors in the suburban districts of Paris, showed how the central authority has its hand in everything. Formerly the municipal bodies, designated the | mayors and elected them indirectly. The Government now names them. Formerly the proprietors of newspapers appointed their own editor ; the Government now names them. Formerly the mutual relief societies chose their presidents; it is the Government that now names them. Formerly the Society of St. Vincent de Paul elected its president; that duty is now performed by the State. Formerly the Masonic body elected its own Grand Master ; the State now appoints him. Formerly the Jardin dcs Plantes was self-governing ; that right has been taken away, and the Government now manages it. Formerly the School of Medicine appointed its own head; the School of Medicine appoints him no longer ; it is the State that does it. Formerly the Institute had in its hands the direction of the studies of art, and it named the students who merited the great prize of Home—that is, the students sent to Rome for a certain number of years to perfect themselves in painting, sculpture, and architecture at the public cost. The Institute no longer does so, but the Government. Formerly it was by public competition that the Professors of the different colleges were chosen. This is no longer the case, for the State has stopped it, and names the Professors. " I declare to you," concluded M. Pelletan, " That if means be not taken to arrest this alldevouring power of the State, it will end in a sort .f social pantheism, in which the State will be everything, and the individual nothing." This system of centralization, which leaves nothing great or small untouched, and which M. Thiers has eulogized, does not seem distasteful even to those who talk a good deal about liberty, for on a division there were only 61 for the amendment, and 182 against it. The choice of M. Jules Favre, who had a double election, having fallen on Lyons, and M. Havin, who was in the same position, electing to sit for St. Lo, leave two places vacant in Paris—namely, the first and fifth districts. The Government would willingly contest both, but the late defeats in the Vosges and Alsace are not much calculated to encourage them. At all events, no official nominee is yet spoken of. M. Gamier Pages is resolved to start for the fifth district, and it appears has a large majority of the Faubourg St. Antoine in his favour. In the first district his friends hope that M. Camot will present himself, though nothing is yet decided in the matter, his repugance to taking the oath of allegiance being all but invincible.