Miscellaneous—Criticism of Different Forms and
Fashions—Elasticity—Sensitiveness—Rubbers and Water-proof
Leather—Cure for Sweating—Qualities of a good Covering.
It has been said that fashion should never be allowed to change the
shape of the sole, or interfere with the form of the lasts used in
the construction of the foot’s coverings. This restriction, however,
does not apply to the materials of which they are made, nor the form
into which the _uppers_ may be cut. The latter may be of a great
variety of forms, and the material of almost any kind or quality,
and of all colours and descriptions of ornamentation. Yet there are
many particulars that are matters of style now, which will give way
to something different in another year, or in two or three years.
Each of the different kinds of boots has certain peculiar advantages
which, in addition to its being fashionable, contribute to make it
popular. The side-spring boot, that has been a favourite so long,
seldom slips at the heel, and this is a decidedly good point; it
also, by fitting closely at the ankles, gives a feeling of snugness
and security which is comfortable, while it admits of perfect
freedom in all movements of the ankle in walking. There is less
trouble in putting it on and off than with most other descriptions of
boots and shoes which is a recommendation to many people who value
time or dislike extra labour.
The _Balmoral boot_ for ladies has its recommendation in its
_superiority of fit_. This has made, and keeps it, a favourite,
causing it to be more generally worn than any other. The mariner of
lacing enables the wearer to draw it smooth and snug over the instep
and around the heel and ankle—an advantage possessed by no other,
except, partially, by the side-laced boot; which is likely to come
again into favour.
The _Polish boot_ takes the place of the Balmoral when a greater
height upon the leg is required. There is no other difference in its
form, and the quality of fit is the same. Its worst disadvantage is
the amount of time required in lacing and unlacing it, although, when
made of thick leather, it may have a slight cramping effect upon the
muscles of the ankle.
The _Button boot_, often called the Hungarian, when cut high like
the Polish, is at this time the most fashionable. It is quite as
handsome, but has not usually the neatness of fit which the Balmoral
possesses.
One style, not generally introduced, but of which a pair has been
made occasionally, is superior to the Polish or Hungarian in that
there is only half as much trouble in lacing. It may be made very
high—thirteen inches, if desired—being laced or buttoned about as
far up as the Balmoral, when the upper part of one quarter is folded
over past the opening, and fastened with two or three handsome clasps
attached to elastic straps, which give and retract sufficiently
to accommodate the action of the leg, while at the same time the
leg is snugly fitted. This is a good heavy winter boot for ladies,
where an extreme height or length of leg is in demand. The _Highland
buckle_ is similar to it, the part that laps over being fastened
with one inelastic strap. We have also noticed a high boot made
with gores like the side-spring—one at the ankle and two above on
each side—which would seem to be a very convenient thing to put on,
but one that needs the best gores to make it serviceable. It is not
probable that either of these varieties will be extensively popular.
The first is of the three the most deserving.
The quality needed by all laced, buckled, or buttoned boots is
_elasticity_ at the leg, ankle, or instep, such as is possessed at
one point—the ankle—by the side-spring. A great advantage would be
gained if this elasticity could be extended down even to the ball
or joint. One purpose of it is _to give free play to the muscles of
the leg and ankle, and also allow the foot to lengthen and spread
without hindrance as its arches expand under the weight of the body
in walking or standings and another is to keep the upper closely
drawn over all parts of the foot, ankle, and leg, when the arches
are contracted and the muscles inactive, as in a state of rest; both
objects—ease to the foot and beauty of fit—being secured by the same
means_. Buckle and button boots for gentlemen, with this quality
supplied at the ankle by a narrow goring on one side of it, while
the buckles or buttons are on the other side, have lately been made.
The gored Oxford shoe supplies the elasticity at the instep. Perhaps
some other style can be invented that will do as much for the ball
and transverse arch as these kinds have done for the parts above.
Any boot or shoe with this peculiarity is superior to the same thing
without it. It must not, of course, be supposed that such a shoe will
fit a thick or a slim foot equally well, for the elastic may be too
tight for ease in one case, and too loose for a good fit in the other.
In connection with this matter, strong elastic cords for laces are
suggested as worthy of a trial in Balmoral and Polish boots. If
successful, they accomplish the same result as elastic goring, and,
besides, may be drawn tightly or loosely to meet the defect of the
boot, or suit the convenience or taste of the wearer.
Cloth and leather materials are joined together in ladies’ work in
all sorts of proportions. In regard to this practice it may be said
that those kinds of shoes in which the higher part is made of cloth
or lasting, and the lower and forward parts of leather, are to be
preferred for one reason: the softer part at the ankle allows of
more freedom and ease to the muscles, while the leather below serves
all the purposes it would if extending throughout, and thus the
advantages of both are combined. There is no difficulty in making
this union, whatever the _cut_ of the boot may be—whether gored,
laced, or buttoned.
Tender feet may find what suits their wants in the softer kinds of
kid and morocco, when cloth is not preferred. There is no reason why
a woman’s boot, though a heavy one, should be hard and stiff; as a
good quality of oiled morocco, pebbled calf, or calf-kid leather, to
be obtained almost anywhere, will commonly be found pliable enough,
even for moderately sensitive corns. Still more softness may be given
by double linings of flannel.
There is no leather worn by ladies that is water-proof, and that
quality ought not to be expected. Their heaviest boots are made with
a double sole and double upper, which give additional warmth, and
protect against ordinary dampness. But the only thing they have as a
sure protection against wet is rubber. Rubber sandals or shoes for
the sidewalk or a rainy day, and high rubber boots for snow, are a
complete security.
Men are, in this respect, better provided for. There are several
kinds of leather worn by them which, if saturated with grease or
special preparations, will be water-proof, though exposed for a
considerable time. They have the benefit of rubber besides.
The Napoleon tongued boot, for a heavy one, is supposed to have a
superiority of fit about the ankle, and is more tasteful in a general
way.
The double-footed boot is considered, with some reason, to be
_warmer_ than a single one of the same thickness. For men’s feet
that are very sensitive to cold, perhaps the best thing is a doubled
boot, having the inside part, or foot-lining, made of fur-calf—calf
skin dressed with the hair on—or some other kind of fur. Arctic
overshoes are very excellent for riding in cold weather, provided
they are not too small. Cork soles, covered with wool or flannel,
for either sex, are another help toward keeping the feet warm, with
which, in addition to flannel linings and other provisions, the most
cold-footed ought to be tolerably comfortable. It must not, however,
be expected to keep the feet warm in any kind of a covering that is
_tight_.
But as this kind of sensitiveness is, in healthy persons, very much
a matter of habit, it is perhaps quite as well for such to accustom
themselves to wearing an ordinary doubled boot through the winter,
unless much exposed, and put on a light boot, shoe, or gaiter for the
summer. Appropriateness and adaptation to weather or circumstances
are always to be considered. A heavy leather boot with double sole
is as much out of place and time in a warm day, as a light cloth
gaiter in a snow-storm. While the latter would expose the foot
unnecessarily, the first, besides being uncomfortable, keeps the foot
in an unnaturally sensitive condition. It is not intended to make
any suggestions to _invalids_. We only state the well-known rule
that exposure to cold makes the feet, or any other part of the body,
more hardy, when there is an ordinary state of health, or sufficient
blood in the system to be easily drawn to the surface by this
demand. Where there is too little vitality for this, the experience
of the person or the counsel of the physician is the best guide.
So also in regard to dampness or wetting the feet. While making no
law for sickly or feeble constitutions, it seems to us very evident
that the more often the feet are exposed to damp or wet, the greater
the ability acquired by the system to resist it;[12] and that when
the feet happen to get wet only occasionally, the consequences of
the exposure are proportionately more serious. It is probable that
if care were taken to keep the feet _comfortably warm_ when wet,
either by exercise, as in walking, or in some other manner, there
would be very little danger from the wet alone, unless in cases
of invalid feebleness, or where they were dampened so seldom that
the intelligence of the physical system was unprepared for such an
occurrence.
One of the well-established facts of physiology is that anything worn
upon the feet which, like rubber or patent leather, prevents the
passing off of the insensible perspiration, is detrimental to the
health. Those who regard the organic laws as having any sacredness,
will not use patent leather boots covering the whole foot, for
constant wear, but limit them to particular occasions. Rubbers ought
to be removed, and something else substituted in their place, as
soon as the feet come out of the wet which occasions their being put
on. The same is true of all boots that are water-proof. They should
be worn only when times of exposure make them necessary. This is
sufficiently well known with regard to rubbers; but few know that
leather boots are objectionable, for the same reason, in proportion
as they are watertight. There are comparatively few of them which
are perfectly so; yet there are many, which, worn as they are, day
after day, in dry weather as well as wet, must, by retaining a large
part of the foot’s perspiration, have an unhealthful effect. It is a
good practice to bathe the feet after removing a pair of water-proof
boots which have been worn during the day. With many men this is a
necessity, and it would be such with many more if they knew all the
requirements of the laws of hygiene, to say nothing of any other
reason. To give the boots themselves a washing-out occasionally might
be advantageous. The feet must be allowed to perspire naturally, or
the skin in some other part is liable to be overtasked; and it is
stated by medical authorities that skin diseases have been produced
by neglect of the feet in this particular.
The following cure for abnormal sweating of the feet is taken from
one of our first-class periodicals;[13] and from the nature of the
remedy it would seem that it ought to have the effect indicated.
“Pulverized tannin sprinkled inside the boots or shoes in three
days prevents tender feet from perspiring and blistering. Tanning
thus applied, rapidly strengthens and hardens the skin, softened by
the simultaneous action of moisture and heat; perspiration being
thus reduced to the proper degree, without its healthy action being
in the slightest interfered with, the exhalations as a matter of
course cease to be offensive. The cessation of disagreeable odours
is explained by the fact that the products of the ammoniacal
decomposition of the skin are immediately combined with the tannin
and so carried off.”
Rubber-soled shoes for ladies, with leather or other material for
the uppers, have been manufactured to a slight extent; and, as far
as we know, are a success. The objection on account of health does
not apply to them seriously, because the rubber is at the bottom.
Possibly, however, an uncomfortable effect may be produced upon the
sole of the foot.
Water-proof serge or lasting, also, is among the late inventions.
It is claimed to be sufficiently porous to allow the escape of
perspiration, yet water-proof under all ordinary exposure. The two
qualities are incompatible and if really water-proof it is only fit,
like rubber, to be worn occasionally.
Cloth materials of different kinds have been much worn. They permit a
partial saving of leather, and are equally handsome. They are light,
soft, may be made sufficiently warm, and are far more favourable
to health. They answer nearly every requirement for a good shoe,
except the defence against dampness; and their wearing ought to be
encouraged. The defect named must be supplied by rubbers.
Nearly all the coarser and cheaper kinds of men’s shoe goods have
the bad quality of general stiffness. Their wearing makes, in a very
decided and proper sense, _stiff feet_. They are all the worse for
having pegged soles. Whether the soles are curved or straight makes
not much difference, for the stiffness prevents the use of either the
upper or lower set of the foot’s muscles. As these goods can not be
generally manufactured at the present time without being made stiff
by pegs, in addition to the firmness of the leather, there is but
little chance for improvement. Those obliged to wear them are advised
to do so only so far as they are compelled, and to keep the upper
parts in as pliable a condition as possible by frequent applications
of oil. It is to be hoped that something softer will some time take
their place.
The value of all these various styles, and of any other that may
come up hereafter, may be tested by the presence or absence of
the following general qualities: sufficient porosity of the upper
to admit the passage of the insensible perspiration; softness and
pliability sufficient to allow of ease and comfort to the foot in
all its movements; flexibility and elasticity that will yield to
accommodate the action of the muscles at the ankle and top of the
foot, yet draw the upper tight enough to fit smoothly; general good
shape and proportion; flexibility of sole; strength for protection
and service. The more of these there can be combined into any species
of foot-clothing the better will the foot be protected and preserved,
and at the least expense of money and trouble in proportion to the
benefit gained.
THE END.
BILLING, PRINTER, GUILDFORD, SURREY.
FOOTNOTES:
[12] It may become an important problem to the physiologist and
physician to determine whether the same law does not hold good
in respect to _whatever_ is naturally injurious to the human
constitution _in any way_, so long as its resisting power _is not
overbalanced_. If all kinds of unhealthy conditions, surroundings,
and exposures can be made to produce the good effects of healthful
stimulation when made use of to the proper extent, however little
that may be, while only past that limit they become destructive,
then a change will come over a great many notions and practices.
Some facts are reconciled by such a theory which are otherwise quite
contradictory.
[13] _Appleton’s Journal_—department devoted to Science.
Transcriber’s Notes
pg 21 Changed: which is excedingly tender and painful
to: which is exceedingly tender and painful
pg 27 Changed: it invaribly has and must have
to: it invariably has and must have
pg 129 Changed: The “Hydropathic Enclyclopædia” recommends
to: The “Hydropathic Encyclopædia” recommends