National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-06-23
DLssEYTER DEFENDED.
E woMEN's CHRISTIAN ASSoOIA-
a- TON AGAIN.

THE wOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIA-
--r- a-- TON AGAIN
70 tie Editor of tie National Rspu6tfcdn:
Sin: The reply Of Inconsistency" on Saturday
last to Dissenter has led to further inquiry intS
the of the refusal Of ESQ presented By Mrs
Sherman to the Womsn's Christian Association.
submit the facts, as given me, with such COM
msnts % seem 10 be pertinent: T- si
L Mrs. General Sherman, with other ladies'
undertook 70 raise money for charitable purpos0
by eertaip .drameno entertainments" and Wes
sdecessinf In occurring considerable sun, of which
$50 was sent to the association The GIT was re-
fused without consulting the association. and the
money returned. The reason given iot tais sStloo
fused to taks and sell tickets for the enterprise
and did not approve Of dramatic entertainments.
were returned without authority, that the asso-
citation had nothing to do with either act snd has
never in any way expressed its Judgment about
clearly should not do While some Of the mem.
beers may, for sught know, disapprove OF al
such sntertainmsnts II Is not By any means known
their intelligence II 10 to be hoped they do not.
2 Not having refused tbs tickets or condemned
such entertainments, the association was not re.
Quired by consistency to reject the money. And
yet 10 was returned with expressions which, how
ever courteous In FORM plainly the action
OF Mrs Sherman and her associates. Probably
Mrs Sherman's standing In this city, not only for
good Intentions" which consistency" conde-
scendingly allows her, but for intslligsnt Chris-
least, as high as that Of any lady in the Wonsn's
Christian Association. 49,, -.-r..r Z
8. am assured that the entertainments were o
an unexcepsionable character. and were attended
more or lsss by Intelligent Christian people. I
am no, aware that any Of them were "b2iiet par.
formances:" yet consistency" ntters very poor
70 Rsf hs9 the EYst Ssy s. becsssaf to o6SisEs
the education Of his or her danghters" Il no
mere follows, because one approves dramatic en-
tertainments that he must approve the "baliet,H "
than that be must seek for himself and sons bad,
Dramatic entertainments, like most others, are
partly guod and partly bad. To condemn them all
In Q lump Is childish and irrational. That the
willing to believe on ''Consistsncy's" authority.
But then, the money was refused, not because lt
was raised by the ballet, bat simply because the
entertainments were drAmatic. H.Oonsistency,'
before an lntsllIgsni community he or abe ID, In
my Judgment, profoundly self-deceived. rE.-5
4.-FInally, We are told that the ection, refusing
the money, "mes the approval Of every member Of
tons" There are two or three hundred membsfs
Of the association and twenty-five or thirty dtrec-
tors. In meeting Of the association, not Of the
been returned, whsn nfsesn members we're pres
ent, nine, on special motion made, voted 70 ap-i
prove the action. As TO the yots OF the nine,
approval ofthose whom the love Of money has not
blinded, and whose moral sense 10 not bluntsd."
Verify '1Conslstency" ought to be aware that this
is notlsnguags which gentleman OF lady truly
such personalities, though they have been the
convenisnt rssort Of narrow Vows and religious
can't 10 all ages Of the world This writer fully
concurs IN the eIhortation by 'Oonnstsney" TO
thu association to prosecute It's work "unostenta-
tiouSly, quietly anu steadily" and especially
urges that be particularly unostentsious Of tho
superior pIety and Christian principle" Of its
members. .-- A CiTIEkN