CHIT CHAT.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 914, 6 September 1889, Page 4

CHIT CHAT.

The progress of hygienic dross reform ia likely to have an added impetus through tbe medium of the Paris Exhibition, for in a late English paper I read this significant para, graph : —An original pattern of the * divided skirt ’ is one of the most carious exhibits in the British section on the Champ de Mara. It attracts the attention of the Parisiennes to an amazing extent, and is the subject of much voluble commeut and discussion, not unaccompanied by admiration.’ But can it be possible that this is the first occasion that Frenchwomen have had of inspecting the farfamed, much-landed, and more maligned dual garment invented by Lady Harberton for the comfort . and convenience of her fellow.women? Why ! how many years have past since I had the pleasure and satisfaction of introducing this! reform in remote New Zealand ! It must be quite seven years ago since I first adopted the divided skirt, and I have never failed in my allegiance to the new faith ; moreover, very many sensible women all over the Colony have done likewise. We may, therefore, pat ourselves on the back, and congratulate each other that we are so far in advance of that most civilised country whence emanate the fashions that govern the world, more or less. Now comes the opportunity of the Dress Reform Associations. If they can but induce some leader of society, or still better, a noted actress, to take up the idea and dress it with Parisian skill, the divided skirt will soon become an intrinsic part of feminine attire, as essential as the corset. There is plenty of scope for the ingenuity of a Worth to be exercised in making up the original idea with a ‘ thing of beauty ’ by the addition of graceful draperies. Indeed, the present style of gown is eminently suitable for the adoption of the bifurcated garment. The long redingote, the Empire flowing Bkirt, the revived polonaise, all would conform admirably to the necessities of the under-dress, as also do the Greek draperies now so favoured by elegantes, and I sincerely hope we shall have much more on this subject, so important to women generally. Apropos of the latter style, I must relate the answer of a well-known B,A. when asked why he drew all his female figures in Greek or Roman costumes. ‘Because,’ said he, ‘modern fashions change too rapidly for me to meddle with them. One year it is bangs, and the next year it is bustles. As the father of a family I cannot afford to have my works dependent upon the caprices of women’s taste.’ And he was right. The fashions of modern days are generally considered ludicrous when their time has passed, a fact we are brought face to face with when looking over what Mr Lincoln calls ‘ that chamber of horrors, the family photograph album.’ I have been much amused with the revela- . tions of ‘ masculine dress reform ’ made by a society Journal, which roundly asserts that the man of fashion, tailor-made, is as much addicted to corsets as his sisters ; that he is as particular and fastidious as any woman can be in all the details of dress. Correspondence vvas invited which elicited the inforrpation that there exists in London one fjrm at least which makes ‘masculine corsets.’' A lady well-known in literary circles wrote that a gentleman of her acquaintance, five feet eight inches in height, boasted a waist measuring bpt twenty-two inches. Another qoryespondent mentions a man of nearly six feet, wjth cheat of thirty-nine inches, who ‘laces himself into 20-inch corsets. Still another gives a valuable wrinkle to anyone going in for a wiaist, biit who may be diffident as tp openly ordering men’s stays. It is to get a pair of ordinary ladies' corsets and put them on upside down, vyhich process will, we are told, prqduce the desired graceful effect. Weil, corset-yrearing was quite a ..general thing amopg the dandies of the Regency, so jve cap scarcely wonder that the practice is brought up again by the revolving wheel of fashion, which turns round so much quicker in these days than it did formerly j still we do not like tho idea of masculine humanity in stays. A horrifying discavery has been made by a Greek physician, who declares that ‘ gloves which are sold as kid are often made of human skin. The skin of the breast is soft and pliable, and the tanning is extensively carried on in France and S vilsQ?l&ud, When people buy gloves they do not inquire the material of which they are made, and in all probability the shopkepper is himself in ignorance whether the so-called * kid ' comes from youug goats, rats, puppies, or human

beings. Can the tale vouched for by Dr Mark Nardyz be tme|? Turn we to a more wholesome topic which may be of practical service to my country friends. An American woman accidentally hit upon a new way of making butter. She had put the cream of several days’ milkings from her Jersey cow, into a thick cloth, and as it was too hot to churn, she placed the bag in a cool place on the ground, throwing a shovelful of earth over it so that the cat could not get at it, as she was going from home. Next day on her return she took the bag from the grouad and found, to her surprise, that the cream had turned into a great yellow lump of butter, and that she had but to work and salt it. The .buttermilk had entirely disappeared, but there was about a third more butter than the usual amount from the same quantity of cream when churned. Naturally elated she relocated the experiment again and again with the like result, except, on one occasion, when the rain soaked in tha ground and mildewed the cream. The plan is worth tryiug, for, if as she assents, the butter is more abundant and of better quality, it would be a boon to many a farmer’s wife to be rid of the labour of churning widi tho added advantages. Possibly some friend may feel disposed to test the process and will kindly inform us of the result. ' Eltse.