HOW TO CHOUSE A WIFE.

Dunstan Times, Issue 1297, 7 January 1887, Page 3

HOW TO CHOUSE A WIFE.

Not absolute'y bound to limit our. se’ves t > one class of su’ jocts in our Review, we are tempted to take what may not improperly be called a rrt-cs-petive view of the attire in which our wives, sisters, and daughters me now promenading the streets. For some unfiitliomah'e reason, they seem quite inmMe to keep thi gs in the golden mean—too much bonnet or too little, too *ight or too citcumam' lent gowns; a> d for what reason have they tmw taken to curry behind an apparatus like the hump of a camel or the sh If of u larder 1 Deeply pondering this new development, itlus occurred to us that it is distinctly a ctse of what evolutionists c ill rever ion. They say that the delight that we take in a picnic is just from its bci' g a t.nnHorary return to the modes in which our fnrefithers ha itually lived ; so with equal reason, and equal turh, we affirm that the present delight r.f women in an abnormal development of i heir retrospect is undoubtedly necanse it is a return to an le-thetic tas e which their mothers entertained hundreds ofyeais ago. Wi I fhevj i t retd this passage from Dar.iin J •• It is well known that with many Hothui tot women the posn ti >r part of the body projects in a wonderful manner; that they are sceatopygous; and Sir Andrew Smith is certain tint this peculiarity is greatly adm ied by men. He once saw a woman who was considered a beauty, ami she was so immensely (level- ped I ehind tit .n when seated on level ground she could not rise and had to push hj »self along until she came to a slope. Sumo <f ' lie women in various neg o tribes are I similarly characterised, and, accorlingj t> Burton, the Soma! men are said to ' choose tlmir wives l>y ranging thorn in | a line and picking her out who pro-! jects fni'ihcst a ter go.” Precisely s->;' and the lu-’d- sof llus civilised age {ot with the bona Me article hat with collies) al-o “ stentopyg ms ” and are running a race with each o her who ‘•will project furthest a (ergo ” Dial inct case ot reversion ; new pioot and i.lustration of evolution. We ea>l attention to this, not as leaders ot fashion, but in the interests of scientific inquiry; holding, fir,her, thatu theologian is nothing unless lie be also a stn l-nt of human nature. What an eb ing and flowing there is in human progress?” How the savage and tho heathen ever and anon make an in- ; roid on our civilisation.—‘Aew Zea-. land Presbyterian ’ j