The Sun.
London, England, 1851-11-05 00:00:00

----
-- ---.
•
/--_ .. . ,
, ~;...
~.,
~,,,,,,
*TP ,1 . , \ • p
‘-e,7. s
Mrs. .
3 '1"::
I
(4,...
..,... ~,
~P.)
...,
',/ -n' ,
*.-1 -' '. \
..r
r.
:,,...
ie ....„ e _.--
:, 'S' 'Or, t ,•'.- tr ", ../ - f-.Yr
'‘l.* '';'./, '..;:'.1! ''. •: ‘"-? 441* .3k" ;N *Pt!' : •-t '- ' .I'r'''
-o'
• . -,t,e ''' .---- ...'",:,,, ;., ‘ ..-74 rot st:Aii,s,.; 4,
4 ,t—,-,\:.--,,.._ • l-3 „,-• .•:: r. .
..,, -.• + .A,,,ffi 4.... ,4,4 . -0" --•
' - ....
'''
,(4._,_.-43,..=.7 (444.. ,:- ,„;_..., t,, ok ,; y. f. TS coS ''' • • •";• 1=.2- . i-' ti' 144 : • •,,..
-AcA40.,....,,-.*:*
Pi. _
. • ... ~ Itri
;...,...: At
ir.
\ . :1-4 :4.,
okera
'''''lf
It '''
1;511.111;4".":... )1 - ji4m,/ :49'AISia4 6 ?ii'':732lo/T
. _
• ,•
, .

[PRICE SD.

T. C. FOS S LECTU 0
ENGLI COSTUME.
C. Foster is no Bloomer. On Monday, in
e delivered at the Hanover-square Rooms,
pretty sharply of the " go-a-head" leaders
of the movement, and went no farther than to advo-
cate a modification in female costume, which may be
termed " Bloomerettism," the skirt of the dress being
curtailed of its fair proportion but by six, instead of
sixteen inches. Still the objectionable " pants" were
visible, completely spoiling the symmetry of her figure.
which was displayed to exceeding advantagein a graceful
satin gown in the earlier portion of the lecture. Indeed
the adoption towards its close of " the modification of
Bloomerism" took off full fifty per cent. of the per-
sonal attractions of the fair lecturer, whose appearance
and manners are very prepossessing, and who, in the
lady-like dress in which she made her entrance may
be pronounced singularly pretty and fascinating.
Her lecture was devoted to the history of the mute-
Lions which female costume has undergone during the
last half century, and while exposing past monstrosi-
ties which in their turn have been sanctioned by,
fashion, she hinted at reforms still desirable, and re-
commended the new Transatlentic costume in a modi-
fied foam. The audience was rather small, but com-
prised a fair proportion—about one-third—of ladies,
who, if any one, may be supposed to be interested
in the subject of discussion. Amongst such an
auditory, "fit, though few," there was, is might
be anticipated, none of that boisterous and
indecorous mirth by which the Bloomer ad-
vocates in other places have been saluted.
Of her address, which she delivered with very agree-
able voice, enhanced by good elocution, we subjoin a
well- condensed report from the Morning Chronicle :-
-" She introduced her subject by avowing her in-
tention to abstain from any remarks on the rights of
woman, feeling satisfied that any attempt to mix up
the subject of costume with one so widely different
would be distasteful to the majority of her audience.
This practice, she conceived, had defeated the objects
of those who resorted to it by preventing the intro-
duction of the desired change in aristocratic circles,
where, to be successful, it must first make its ap-
pearance. After a few remarks on the despotic
nature of fashion, and the slavish obedience yielded
to it in this country, the lady referred to the
absurd costumes in vogue in the time of Elizabeth,
particularising the gigantic ruff, sometimes so large
as to compel the unfortunate wearer to eat with a
spoon two feet long ! Descending to the time of
Charles 11., she showed the ladies' dresses were then
distinguished by much ease and elegance, and re-
ferred for proof to the pictures of Vandyke. She
traced the mutations which female attire had under-
gone—through the hoop, the high head-dress, or com-
mode (when a lady's hair was piled up to a height of two
feet, being kept in that position by stuffing and grease,
and only " opened" once in eight or nine weeks), and
the absurdly large bonnets, like an inverted coal-scuttle,
which, though prevailing till a comparatively recent
period, were now happily numbered amongst the
modes d'autrefois. The illustrations of these enor-
mities, which were exhibited in turn, were very
amusing, and fairly melted the original gravity of the
audience. The lady then came to what proved the
more interesting portion of her lecture. Having ex-
pressed her belief that the new " Bloomer" costume
was admirably adapted for the purpose for which it
was intended, she said it would be acceptible to the
audience that she should exhibit it in person, and with
this view she retired. In the course of a few minutes
she returned, wearing an elegant ruby velvet dress
and mantle; the dress descends to within about four
inches of the ground, and leaves visible a very
small portion of the nether garment, as we may call
it, for want of a better term. Indeed, owing to the
imperfect light on the platform, and the position in
which the lady stood, it was impossible for the ma-
jority of the audience to see how the leg•dress was
arranged. The applause having subsided, the lady
resumed her address by pointing out the inconve-
niences which would be remedied by the adoption of
this costume, without any sacrifice of modesty or
elegance. Every one knew the misery which
ladies now k, xperierned from walking in the dirt
or dust. Some said the proposed costume Wag
unfeminine, and that it was an imprudent
usurpation by woman of a certain nameless gar-
ment supposed to pertain exclusively to the male sex.
—(Cheers.) This was not the first time woman had
been charged with this offence ; the same complaint
had been made as early as the fifteenth century, again
in the time of Elizabeth, and in 1662 Mr. Pepys said,
' The women wear doublets, coats, and great shirts,
just for all the world like mine ; so that, only for a
long petticoat draggling under their shirts, nobody
could take them for women in any way whatever.'—
(Laughter.) But the Bloomer costume was neither
new nor extraordinary—it was worn in every board-
ing-school iu the kingdom ; it bad only been to
America, and undergone a few changes, and
now appeared under a new name. Whatever
merits or demerits it might possess, it was certain the
ladies of this country would not have any form of dress
forced upon them, unless perfectly satisfied that it was
superior to their own. The modification of the dress
which she wore was a street dress for winter—warm,
comfortable, and convenient—made for the sake of

testing its applicability for ordinary walking pur-
poses. A much greater amount of elegance might be
obtained by lighter colours. Some objected that it
was not sufficiently short, being longer than those
represented in the engravings. But, she imagined,
few ladies would like to attire themselves in that way,
so as to resemble those indescribable beings between
a ballet dancer and a daughter of the regiment:—
(Laughter.) If by cutting six inches from their dreses
they could attain all the objects desired, why should
they cut off sixteen ? She did not believe the other
sex would entertain any real antipathy to the change,
provided expenditure were kept within due limits.
But, while the advocates of the costume continued to
act in the imprudent and unwomanly manner they
were doing they would retard rather than advance
their cause. The costume must stand or fall by its
own merits. The prevailing mode was a long way
from perfection ; and whether the Bloomer costume
was a step in the right direction or a retrogression it
was for the audience to decide. Mrs. Foster then
thanked her hearers for their attention, and excused
any little nervousness she might have exhibited on the
ground of her being rather disappointed in the number
present. She then withdrew amidst applause."