Evening Republican, Volume 15, Number 37, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 13 February 1911 — TO REPLACE HOBBLE [ARTICLE]

TO REPLACE HOBBLE

More Trouble Ahead for the Corpulent Woman. New and Daring Creation on Its Way From Paris Described as "Skirt , With Sort of Pantaloon Attachment." . ' ~C’7j '7-';■■■ *Tv New York. —According to a cable dispatch from Paris the hobble skirt is about to be supplanted by a new and daring creation In the* way of a skirt which is described by dressmakers as “a skirt with a sort of pantaloon attachment." The' new skirt, it is said, is the invention of Paul Poiret, a gownmaker of Paris. A New York house has already imported from Paris a consignment of these Bklrts, which are being displayed to dressmakers here, and the house is prepared to measure and fit any woman with the new creation who thinks she would like to wear It. Some of the city’s dressmakers were asked to describe the new. fashion. Their ideas of the skirt differed, and none of them could give the same description of it, but they all objected to the use of the words “pantaloon,” "breeches” or “trousers” in describing It, though none of them was able to suggest a more delicate word fer the skirt’s masculine attachment. A woman representative of an Importing house, said: “Yes, we have heard about the new skirt. It is to be launched as a novelty,-and maybe it will become very popular. But please don’t call the little- part of it the ‘pants,’ or rather the trousers, as you men say, because it is nothing of the sort. It is Just two little foot holes. Pijrst, you stick a foot one, and then you stick the other foot through the other hole, and there you are. It is not at all difficult, i assure you, and the wOmen will not find it 'SO.” When asked whether the two holes resemble the legs of trousers, she replied: “I suppose so, but you must understand tbe legs are very short” Asked whether the pantaloons of the skirt extended as far below the knee as the ankle, she blushingly replied: “I cannot answer your question.” ... Another dressmaker described the new skirt as being very tight The pantaloon attachment, she said, would not be visible If the skirt should become the rage in Paris, she said, the New York women would have to adopt it whether they liked It or not otherwise they would lose their reputation for keeping up with the fashions. When asked if she regarded the new skirt as the forerunner of trousers for women, she replied: “It Is wrong to epeak of that part of the skirt as trousers. I don’t know exactly what you would call It but you don’t describe the Turkish women as wearing trousers. * "1 don’t think that our American women would ever take to the trousers worn by men. It would not only unsex them —look at Dr. Mary Walker—but there Is no beauty In trousers for women. Let a woman pat on trousers and her beauty, is lost forever; besides, the men would never tolerate such a thing. ""The Idea of this new skirt is not to popularize trousers for women, but to add a little touch of orientalism to their dress. However, the skirt which will be Introduced here Is s much modified form of the skirt In its Parisian make-up." Nearly all of the dressmakers agreed that If the skirt should be adopted by women, as the dressmakers understand it, they wouli have to readjust their manner of dressing themselves; Instead of following the usual custom of putting on a skirt by first throwing It over the bead, they wouhl have to don tbe new one Just as trousers are put on, by entering tbe skirt feet first For a slender

or athletic woman this would not be a difficult thing to learn; but the dressmakers were inclined to believe-that-Btout women or women with nonelastic joints might experience some little difficulty in getting into the 'skirt and in learning late In life a new way to dress themselves. The .skirt, as described in the cable dispatch, was an exact reproduction of the dress worn by Turkish women, minus the veil.