Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1866-07-16
Ladies' Dress.

lIuuLCa' OEN81s
The matter of ladies' dress seems to be
exciting much discussion among magis-
trates and officers, and We therefore deem
it right that we should say something in
regard to it in order to settle so vexed a
question. Our readers are well aware
that we have no sympathy with those mis-
guided creatures who advocate, or pre-
| tend TO advocate. what they impudently
and illogica!ly call women's rights. At
the same time every individual, OF what
ever sex they may be, have natural rights,
from the enjoyment of which they cannot
be Justly debarred in a free land. Among
| those rights are that Of being allowed to
dress themselves in such q as they
may prefer, as long as they do not in any
wise violate public decency. If a lady
prefers the style of gen,lemen's dress, and
chooses to indulge her fancy, no one has
a right to interfere with her, as long as
she does not use it for the purpose OF do
ing wrong, and then she is only punish
| able for the wrong done, and not for wear
ing coats and pantaloons. There is no
statute law prescribing the mode of dress
of either male or female, and we chal-
lense even the learned gentleman who ap-
peared before the Police Commissioners
against Mrs. DR.. Walker, to cite a single
instance where it has been ruled at COM
mon law that it was a penal offence for a
lady TO dress in male attire.
The distinct dress of the sexes is pre-
scribed by custom, and fashion, and we
have yet to learn Of a single instance in
which an individual was subjected to pun
ishment for refusing to adhere either to
custom or fashion. The arrest Of Mrs.
Walker by the policemen Of this city was
a most infamous and outrageous violation
Of individual rights, committed without
the shadow of justification. They gave
her such protection as vultures give to
lambs. She called upon them to enforce
the law and protect her rights, and, in
stead of doing so, they add to her wrongs
by arresting and conveying her to the
station house.
Still more outrageous is the case Of Mrs.
DR.. Wolf, who was arrested at San Fran
cisco for the same offense. The magistrate
before whom she was brought admitted
that her style of dress was modest and
becoming, and much more appropriate
and healthy than the dress worn BY ladies
generally, and said that if it could become
the fashion, and be generally adopted, it
would be better for the female sex. II
would be generally expected that u magis-
tra,e who could give expression to such
sentiments would vindicate and uphold
the individual right to dress as she pleas
ed, but il was not SO, as the Judge de-
cided that she must change her dress so
as to conform to the fashion, giving as a
reason ,ha, the style of dress shocked the
public sentiment. In other words, he
decides that the mob must be obeyed
without regard to the higher law of indi.
vidual rights.
We consider such decisions monstrous,
and mus, enter our solemn protest against
them. We say the mob was wrong, and
should be dispersed, and If they attempted
to modest a lady, who chooses to walk the
streets in a peculiar dress. they are the
criminals, and should be arrested, and the
lady should be protected in her rights,
even if i, require the whole power OF the
county to do tn. Y. City Gazette.