Ladies' Column.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 313, 20 April 1878, Page 3

Ladies' Column.

Mercedes, Queen Consort of Spain, is a fair, siveet-looking youDg lady, with a round girlish face, extremely winning and attractive. She is intelligent, gentle, and amiable. Worth, by the way, has been making her a court dress in crimson velvet, embroidered with lions and castles in gold and silver, the blended crests of Castille and Arragon. The Melbourne papers chronicle the death of a somewhat singular character, known in Melbourne as the “ boy-girl.” Her name was Miss Kate Johnson, and she was known as the “boy-girl” from the fact that she paraded Collins-street in a costume more nearly approaching male than female attire. This eccentric conduct was said to have been the result of a wager of £IOOO with a wealthy squatter that she would not appear daily in this dress “ on the block ” for a certain period, and judging by the time she was seen there attired as a boy, she had nerve enough to dare public opinion and win her wager. Her parents, who purchased the ex-vice-regal residence at Toorak, are very wealthy, and her sister is married to a Melbourne musical celebrity. The death of this clever though eccentric young person will occasion regret amongst a large circle of fashionables in the Victorian metropolis, to whom her virtues as well as her singularities were well known. For the sake of showing, the Sunday Times says, that though this is not the age of miracles, wonderful things do sometimes happen, the amazing fact must be recorded that in one short week two ladies have brought actions for breach of promise of marriage against so many gentlemen, and have actually failed to win the day! What revolution is coming over society? Well might Miss Becker buckle on her armor, when Mr. Herschell announced his determination to bring in a Bill having for its object the total abolition.of actions for breach of promise, for that lady evidently sees but too much reason to fear that unless she nips this movement in the bud, it will prove to be the beginning of the end. Twelve good men and . true at Liverpool have given a verdict for the defendant in an action brought by a Miss Barrow against a Mr. Lund. The lady’s story was good until the gentleman gave his version of the affecting circumstances. He admitted, indeed, that he had asked Miss Barrow to marry him, and that she had graciously consented to clo so, but he added an item that would seem to have escaped the plaintiff’s memory. At the time of the proposal Mr. Lund lived at Bradford, in Yorkshire, but finding it necessary in the interests of his business to remove to Derby, he acquainted his ladylove with the fact, and asked her if she would like to live at Derby, whereupon she solemnly declared that nothing on earth would induce her to live at Derby—that, in shoit, she “ would not go there for any man,” We

are not informed whether Miss Barrow’s cruelty greatly afflicted Mr. Lund. He made no complaint, but he not unnaturally considered himself rejected, and soon after married another lady, who did not object to live at Derby. The jury took the trouble to master these details, and then found themselves constrained to tell Miss Barrow that they were unable to take her view of the matter, and that painful as it was to refuse a lady anything, they could not see their way to giving her the damages she sought. Who can deny that hers is a hard case. But it is not a bit harder than that of a Scotch young woman who the other day demanded £2OO damages from a man for blighting her tender holies. Now this damsel might have won her case, but for the trifling accident tint, long before she made the acquaintance of the defendant, she had married another man, who had not been obliging enough to leave her a widow, and who, “ not to put too fine a point on it,” is at this moment alive and well, thus proving how dead he is to all right feeling and sense of duty. Truly, his wife has a good right to complain of the jury for refusing to award her substantial damages, on the paltry ground that she is neither widow nor spinster, but already a wife. If hers be not a hard lot we should like to know where one is to be found.

ART EDUCATION OE WOMEN. Women need much consolation in this world. Sometimes they are in love ; indeed, this is so common a complaint with them that they should have a sublimated Pond’s Extract, a metaphorical camphor, or spiritual arnica, to apply to the hidden wound. The needle is a good little lightning-rod—a conductor for concealed disturbance. Many a heartache has been embroidered away. Sometimes women are poor. This is sadder still. They must so conduct hidden sorrow through the needle into the satin that it may come back to them, bringing bread. They must weave that enchanted carpet of Aladin, which shall take them from place to place. They must earn their living by their accomplishments—a hard thing to do. And here we come to trouble. Most women can do various pretty things well, but not well enough to sell. The thorough art education of women is a thing which had not been thought of twenty-five years ago. Thus it came about that no being on earth is so helpless as the reduced lady ; and it is to the assistance of reduced ladies that the South Kensington Museum Association has devoted itself, teaching women to embroider so perfectly that even the Roman Catholic Church, that great purchaser of embroideries, will buy the work, and she is a very particular purchaser. The ecclesiastical embroidery is a special art by itself. Chasuble, cope, and alb, robe and carpet, and altar-cloth and drapery, must be so deftly done that the microscope itself can detect no flaw. There is no finer, richer illuminating in an old missal than some of this embroidery. The face of Christ is painted by some devout needlewoman in silk, almost as Leonardo da Vinci painted it in oils. Tapestry is the work of potli Arachne and Penelope. It is woven first, and then embroidered, or else in the weaving a shorter thread is thrown across, and the pattern comes out in the fresh colors of a different weft. Many ladies now emulate Matilda in the Bayeux tapestry, and use, as she did, coarse brown linen for the groundwork, and design, as she did, their own patterns. Turkish toweling is a favorite background for these tapestries. A great tendency towards cheap things, and the sudden discovery that the cheapest fabric and the most perpendicular sunflower, or the straighter cat-tail, is more artistic in combination than the wreath of splendid lilies thrown across satin— all this is the surprising discovery of modern art decoration, ISome of us take the liberty of doubting the wholesale assumption of the modernEastlake, pre-Raphae-lite, and South Kensington schools. Some of us still love luxurious Erench brocatelles and Japanese silks, heavy with gold and silver ; but we are in an inglorious minority. A coffee bag embroidered with cat-tails is “ higher art.” — Appleton’s Journal.

BREACH OF PROMISE IN INDIA. The first Parsee breach of promise of marriage case was brought before the High Court, Bombay, lately, and occupied the Court over seventeen days. The case was that of Goolbai v. Manockjee Limjee Manockjee, in which the plaintiff s'ued her first cousin, the defendant, to recover E 5.20,000 as damages for breach of a promise to marry her. Being the first case of its kind amongst Parsees, a large number of members of that community crowded the Court, and seemed to take a warm interest in the proceedings. The plaintiff and defendant are first cousins, of the respective ages of 21 and 24 years, and were in their infancy betrothed in marriage to one another by their parents, who are sister and brother, children of the late Manockjee Limjee, who some years ago occupied the position of broker to several leading European mercantile houses in Bombay. Since the betrothal the plaintiff spent considerable time at the house of the defendant’s parents, with whom he lived. During the visit of the Prince of Wales to Bombay plaintiff lived at her father-in-law’s house, and she was then, it is alleged, seduced by the defendant. Propositions were made by the defendant in two letters, which eventually resulted in the seduction of the plaintiff, in whose possession the letters remained. When she became aware of the consequences she mentioned the fact to the defendant, who told her not to be alarmed. A consultation between their parents took place subsequently, and the girl was sent off to Damauu in charge of a nurse, apparently with the intention to procure abortion. That step was, however, considered to be full of danger to the girl’s life, and being brought back to Bombay, she gave birth to a female child at her mother’s house in September, IS7£>. Subsequently to the birth of the child, the defendant denied his paternity, and proceedings were thereupon taken against him in the Police Court for an allowance for the maintenance of the child.

Common friends of the parties interfered with a view to put an end to the scandal which threatened to overtake the two families, and, after certain negotiations, Rs. 1500 were paid, it was alleged, on behalf of the defendant, for a compromiseof theproceedings, and further anote of hand was passed for Rs. 300. The police proceedings were dropped, and the parties lived separately at their respective parents’ houses. The child died subsequently, and thereafter the present suit was instituted. The defence was that the betrothal contract made during the infancy of the defendant was invalid, and could not be held to be binding upon him ; and that since he arrived at a marriageable age he had declined to confirm the contract to marry the plaintiff. The defendant further submitted that, even if the betrothal gave the plaintiff a right to insist upon the marriage, she had forfeited such right by reason of having given birth to a child by some person, as he alleged, unknown to him ; and he finally denied having ever been on affectionate terms with plaintiff or having addressed any letters to her. It was also alleged on his behalf that the plaintiff abandoned the police proceedings, and acknowledged herself obliged to the defendant for permitting her to withdraw from them without payment of his costs ; that she agreed not to adopt similar proceedings against him ; and that he never paid a price to induce her to abandon those proceedings.— Mr. Justice BayLy, who heard the case, has taken time to consider his decision.

THE COST OF LIVING. (From the S. F. Bulletin.) It was Thoreau, we believe, who reduced the cost of living to 13 cents a day, including lodgings. But then he built a cabin on the margin of Waldeu pond, planted a garden, ate berries, and drank spring water. Most men who perform manual labor would like a more bracing diet. Nothing was ever yet gained by starving a stomach, although a spare diet is vastly better for most people than overfeeding. A late London paper contains the dietetic experiment of Dr. T. L. Nichols, editor of the Herald of Health. His bill of fare is given, showing that he lived comfortably for an average of less than 4d. a day, or about 7 cents. During his experiment of a month he, of course, ate no meat, but then he maintained his regular weight and improved in health. He notes the quantity and price of each article consumed. The following will serve to illustrate his fare: —“ Breakfast—Oatmeal and fruit. Dinner—Wheat porridge and fruit. Cost for the day, 2Jd. Another day the bill of fare is set down thus :—Breakfast—Polenta, milk, and stewed apples. Dinner—Potatoes fried in oil, bread and apples. Cost for the day, 3Jd. The menu was varied each day. But bread, fruit, milk, eggs and vegetables were the limit of his dietary ranges. A stout man, standing sft. 11 in. in liis stockings, and weighing 12st., ccmes out of his experience of a month a still stouter man. If this list had been served out to a tramp he would have resented such fare. Not long since a tramp called for a meal at the door of a citizen’s house. It was given him. When finished, the tramp lighted his pipe, and proceeded to lecture the housekeeper for not offering him coffee. The standard of living among poor people in this country is very high. Coffee and tea are not regarded as luxuries, but as necessities, and tobacco comes under the same head. There is no science and no art of living among the poor, save in a few instances. The moment such a diet as that which Dr. Nichols thought excellent for a well man should be imposed, there would be signs of distress.