They know how to avail themselves of their altered position, and soon learn to charge city prices for country products; but nothing can make people feel rich who see themselves surrounded by men whose yearly income is many times their own whole capital.  I think it would be better if our rich men scattered themselves more than they do,—­buying large country estates, building houses and stables which will make it easy to entertain their friends, and depending for society on chosen guests rather than on the mob of millionaires who come together for social rivalry.  But I do not fret myself about it.  Society will stratify itself according to the laws of social gravitation.  It will take a generation or two more, perhaps, to arrange the strata by precipitation and settlement, but we can always depend on one principle to govern the arrangement of the layers.  People interested in the same things will naturally come together.  The youthful heirs of fortunes who keep splendid yachts have little to talk about with the oarsman who pulls about on the lake or the river.  What does young Dives, who drives his four-in-hand and keeps a stable full of horses, care about Lazarus, who feels rich in the possession of a horse-railroad ticket?  You know how we live at our house, plainly, but with a certain degree of cultivated propriety.  We make no pretensions to what is called “style.”  We are still in that social stratum where the article called “a napkin-ring” is recognized as admissible at the dinner-table.  That fact sufficiently defines our modest pretensions.  The napkin-ring is the boundary mark between certain classes.  But one evening Mrs. Butts and I went out to a party given by the lady of a worthy family, where the napkin itself was a newly introduced luxury.  The conversation of the hostess and her guests turned upon details of the kitchen and the laundry; upon the best mode of raising bread, whether with “emptins” (emptyings, yeast) or baking powder; about “bluing” and starching and crimping, and similar matters.  Poor Mrs. Butts!  She knew nothing more about such things than her hostess did about Shakespeare and the musical glasses.  What was the use of trying to enforce social intercourse under such conditions?  Incompatibility of temper has been considered ground for a divorce; incompatibility of interests is a sufficient warrant for social separation.  The multimillionaires have so much that is common among themselves, and so little that they share with us of moderate means, that they will naturally form a specialized class, and in virtue of their palaces, their picture-galleries, their equipages, their yachts, their large hospitality, constitute a kind of exclusive aristocracy.  Religion, which ought to be the great leveller, cannot reduce these elements to the same grade.  You may read in the parable, “Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment?” The modern version would be, “How came you at Mrs. Billion’s ball not having a dress on your back which came from Paris?”