This last sentence suggests a social practice of the United States which, perhaps, may come under the topic we are at present discussing.  I mean the custom by which girls allow their young men friends to incur expense in their behalf.  I am aware that this custom is on the wane in the older cities, that the most refined girls in all parts of the Union dislike it, that it is “bad form” in many circles.  In the bowling-club to which I had the pleasure to belong the ladies paid their subscriptions “like a man;” when I drove out on sleigh-parties, the girls insisted on paying their share of the expense.  The fact, however, remains that, speaking generally and taking class for class, the American girl allows her admirers to spend their money on her much more freely than the English girl.  A man is considered mean if he does not pay the car-fare of his girl companion; a girl will allow a man who is merely a “friend” to take her to the theatre, fetching her and taking her home in a carriage hired at exorbitant rates.  The Illustrated American (Jan. 19, 1895) writes: 

The advanced ideas prevalent in this country regarding the relations of the opposite sexes make it not only proper, but necessary, that a young man with serious intentions shall take his sweetheart out, give her presents, send her flowers, go driving with her, and in numberless little ways incur expense.  This is all very delightful for her, but to him it means ruin.  And at the end he may find that she was only flirting with him.

In fact, whenever a young man and a young woman are associated in any enterprise, it is quite usual for the young man to pay for both.  On the whole, this custom seems an undesirable one.  It is so much a matter of habit that the American girl usually plays her part in the matter with absolute innocence and unconsciousness; she feels no more obligation than an English girl would for the opening of a door.  The young man also takes it as a matter of course, and does not in the least presume on his services.  But still, I think, it has a slight tendency to rub the bloom off what ought to be the most delicate and ethereal form of social intercourse.  It favours the well-to-do youth by an additional handicap.  It throws another obstacle in the track of poverty and thrift.  It is contrary to the spirit of democratic equality; the woman who accepts such attentions is tacitly allowing that she is not on the same footing as man.  On reflection it must grate a little on the finest feelings.  There seems to me little doubt that it will gradually die out in circles to which it would be strange in Europe.