Nobody looks for wisdom, naturally, in the world of fashion, and I suppose that is why a very little wisdom in the dress of to-day has to be answerable for a greats deal of foolishness later on. A little while ago, in a moment of extreme boredom, the woman of fashion cut off her train. The other sort of woman, who, because she was a sportswoman or merely because she liked to be comfortable, had never worn a train, suddenly woke up to find herself fashionable. Her short skirt, for the first time, received the stamp of authority and Paris. All sorts of people, from doctors onwards, praised the new skirt, under the impression, apparently, that it had been prompted by the noblest of reasons. The woman of fashion was told that she had listened at last to the voice of hygiene, that in the interests of the public health she had ceased to sweep the germs of disease into the house. She accepted the compliment, and wore her new skirt just as many weeks as it pleased her, and no longer. Where is that short skirt now? It has gone back, not to Paris, where it came from, but to where it perennially flourishes – in circles where the woman who puts comfort first and fashion afterwards may always be found. Her brief existence as a fashionable lady is over. We have not revived the skirt with a train, however. That would be wanting in originality, as it is only a couple of years since it went out of favour. It would have much to recommend it, for the trailing skirt at its worst and its longest was an easy one to hold up, and, in spite of the outcry raised against it on medical grounds, swept far less dust into the house than the short skirt that was not short enough to escape raising dust at all – to do that it would have to be considerably shorter than any skirt ever worn in London or Paris – and yet was not long enough to require to be held up. We are paying for our moment of wisdom with far more foolishness than any revival of a skirt with a train would entail. Besides, fashions do not hark back in that way; they follow a curious kind of evolution, and the skirt of the moment is an evolution of the short skirt of yesterday. It is circular in shape – that is, it is the same length all the way round, and that length is the most absurd one that could possibly be devised. It is just long enough to lie on the ground in billowy folds all round its unfortunate wearer – folds that trip her up if she is not careful and occupy both her hands if she is. It is extremely full, so it is useless to attempt to hold it up with one band. The only way to lift it off the ground is to gather up the folds elaborately in both hands before attempting to take a step, and in these days of no pockets what is one to do without a third hand and a bag? It may be urged that the circular skirt is meant for the woman who does not walk, but where is that woman nowadays? She must get out of her motor sometimes, to say nothing of walking upstairs. Besides, there are plenty of women who want to look well dressed, even fashionably dressed, who have to go about on foot, and they are compelled to choose between the skirt “trotteur,” which is no longer suitable for the drawing-room, and the full circular skirt, which makes them look ridiculous in the eves of any sensible person who sees them trying to manage it in the street. To be a strap-hanger in the new circular skirt is not an enviable position.