Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 11.pdf/463

 430

hereafter." And it was further ordained: "That no manner ofperson shall have any Ap parel of Velvet, Satin or other stuffs of Silke, except Noblemen, Lords of Parliament, Prel ates, His Majestie's Counsellors. Lords of Session, Barrons of quality having of free, yearly rent, fourscore Chalders Victual, or 6,000 marks of Silver," and certain officials. Even those who were permitted to wear the said apparelling of silk could " no wayes have embroydering, or any lace, or passements upon their cloathes : except only a plain Welting Lace of Silk upon the Seames, or borders of their cloathes : with Belts and Hatbands embroydered with silke, and such like, that the said apparel of silke be no wayes cut out upon other stuffes of silke, except upon a single Taffatie. The wives of the said priviledged persons, their eldest sonncs, and eldest daughters unmarried, and the children of all noblemen be licentiate to weare their apparel in manner aforesaid only, under the paine of a thousand pounds, toties quoties." It was also enacted that no person of what soever degree should have Pearling or ribbening upon their Russes, Sackes, Napkins and Sockes; except the persons before privi leged. And the Pearling and Ribbening to be so worne by them (if any), to be those made within the Kingdom of Scotland, un der the payne of £ 00, toties quoties. " Item, that none weare upon their Heads or Buskings any Feathers." " And notwithstanding it is permitted that any person may weare Chaines, or other Goldsmiths worke, having no stones, nor pearles, within the same; and that no person weare any pearles nor pre cious stones (except the persons before privileged), under the paine of 1,000 marks, to be payed by the contraveeners, tot1es quoties. And it is statuted, that no person or persons (except, etc.) weare Launes or Cambricke. And that no person whatsoever weare upon their bodies Tiffinies, Cobwebbclaunes or Slytes, under the pain of £100, toties quoties."

Then the subject of servants' dresses was considered, and it is statuted : "That no ser vant, men or women, weare cloathing, except those that are made of Cloath, Fusteans, Can vas, or stuffes made in the country. And that they shall have no silk upon their cloathes, except silke buttons and Button holes, and silk Garters, without perling or Roses, under the paine of one hundredth markes, toties quoties." But it was declared to be lawful for them to wear their maisters or mistresses old cloathes. No clothes could "be gilded with Gold." A fine of £100 was for any one not of the privileged classes who presumed to weare a castor hat. Neither man nor woman could change the fashion of clothes then in use, "under the paine of forefaultice of the cloathes, and ^1 00 to be paid by the wearers, and as much by the makers of the said cloathes, toties quoties." Husbandmen and laborers of the ground could wear no cloth ing but gray, white, blue, and selfe black cloth, made in Scotland; and their wives and little ones had to wear the like under the paine of £40. Some may ask what was the use in women dressing at all, if they had always to be clad in the same fashion? Variety is the spice of life to the fair sex. Rollicking, pleasure-loving King Charles passed, in 1672, even a stronger and more sweeping act than did his grandfather, to pre vent injury to his Kingdom of Scotland from the sumptuousness and prodigality of his subjects in their apparel. He went so far that the manufacturers rose in their might (as they do in these days) and in the follow ing session permission was given to every Jack and Jill to wear satin, velvet, and silk I clothes, white lace, and point made of thread, and plain satin ribbons. j Both church and state interfered with ' wedding-feasts. James and his parliament, in 1 581, tried to stop the eating of candy at bridals and promulgated a law in which, after speaking of " the great excesse and