almost too trivial a detail to discourse upon, but it is as true that
details make dress as it is that "trifles make life"--and neither life
nor dress is a trifle.

[Illustration: NO. 46]

The offence in No. 45 is more the result of untidiness than of a lack of
artistic discrimination. Nos. 46-1/2 and 47, on the contrary, outrage
the laws of art, and display ignorance of the value and beauty of lines.

No. 46-1/2 might serve to conceal a deformity of the shoulders. That
really seems its only excuse for being. The full, ugly, straight pleat
that falls to just below the waist-line lends neither grace nor style to
the figure. It is too short to give the distinction and dignity that
handsome wraps with long lines almost invariably do, although they seem
to add age to the form. There is a hint of youth in this ungraceful
jacket to be sure, but it is not especially attractive in its suggestion
of youthfulness.

[Illustration: NO. 46-1/2]

[Illustration: NO. 47]

No. 47, with a line at the neck-band, crossed bands in the centre of the
shoulders, and lines across the back, is obviously inartistic. The back
of a Venus, even, would be detracted from by such criss-crossed effects.
Happy the woman who has so shapely a back she can afford to allow her
waist to fit smoothly and plainly, unbroken by any conspicuous lines. If
bands must be used to remedy the deficiencies of ungenerous Nature, let
them be at the neck and waist; and if the back is unconscionably long, a