The Leavenworth weekly times., 1878-10-31
Bcnnets At Ih c eaters,

4
This is the story of woman's bonnet
| the record Of woman's devotion where
| the welfare OF bonnet is concerned, and
| OF her triumph over men and managers.
| 1t is an admitted fact that a fashionable
bonnet, wonderfully and fearfully made as
ii is, and perfect love" of a thing as ii
is always pronounced to be, is nuisance to
| the man or woman who sits behind it al
| any place of amusement. This is unfortu
nate simply for the person sitting behind
the bonnet, and eau be construed in no way
to reflect upon the bonnet itself, or upon
character OF the wearer. In this land OF
enterprise and progress, the man who sits
behind the bonnet is expected to accept the
situation, Green his neck with enthusiasm,
and turn his head this way and that with
the patience that endureth forever.
In the older and moss-grown civilization
Of England theatrical managers are bolder
and average men and women who sit be-
hind bonnets less tolerant. In many OF
the London theatres a rule has been adopt
ed providing that bonnets shall be removed
the rule applying to all who sit outside the
dress-circle. The English ladies are wo-
men of spirit, but, taken by surprise, they
submitted, and removed their head gear.
But there came a time when they saw
their mistake, and looked upon the mana
gerial enactment as an infringement of the
Magma Charta. To realize all this they
required leader, and the leader came in
the person of Lady Churchill. All uncon-
scious of the honors awaiting her, Lady
Churchill, wearing love Of a bonnet, went
with her husband to see "Uncle Toms Cab
in" As she was about to enter the stalls
she was ordered to remove her bonnet. An
English woman is nothing if not loyal and
obedient, and the bonnet went off in a flash
But the lady carried her bonnet in her
hand and went to her seat. This was not
in. accordance with the managerial pro-
gramme, and it aroused the managerial ire.
Lady Churchill was informed that her bon-
net must be left with the attendant made
and provided for the occasion. This
was too much for womanly endurance. La
dy Churchill stood by her bonnet, and de-
clared that where she went it should 60,
and that no manager should put them as
under. Lord Churchill, seeing the chance
for war, stood by his wife, and putting his
foot down manfully declined to go in the
stalls unless the bonnet went too, and de
manded the return OF the fourteen shillings
paid for the tickets. The manager refused
to refund the money, and the war began in
earnest.
Lord Churchill brought suit nominally |
to recover the fourteen shilliDgs, but really |
to test the constitutionaliiy Of the bonnet |
rule. Both parties were ably represented |
by counsel, and when the case was called |
in court there was great excitement. Lord |
lawyer argued that as gentle
men were allowed to carry their hats in
their hands, the ladies must be allowed /
equal privileges as to their bonnets. Then
he launched out boldly against the rule
ladies to remove their bonnets at
all. Gentlemen removed their hats as
matter Of politenese, but if a manager had
The power to say that lady must remove
her bonnet, he had the power to order
her to remove cloak or dress. The posi-
bilities opened up by this line of argument
irightene,. the ladies into unanimous and
Instant rebellion against The rule, and
ouched the Judge in one of the tenderesr
pots of his judicial heart. The case went
against the manager, and the principle vas
established that no manager has the right to
nolest or put in quarantine lady's bon
,et The revolutionary movement has
'een inaugurated, it is expected to end in
he re-establishment of the statu quo, in
which every man who sits behind q bonnet
e expected to take the situation as be finds
I, and do the best he can under existing ,
Once informed of their
lights no one doubts that the English vo-
men will maintain them at any cost. II
'ot, they do not care half as much for
heir bounets as do their American cousins.