Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1881-11-03
Divided SkirtA.

! lhSI9l liAab IL 10 lLC Ut sAh'' "ub' W N'~
SEX to wear trousers. These profession
al dress reformers have, however, made
very few converts to their cause. Their
/ arguments have not satisfied other wo-
men, for the latter have preferred to be
attractive in skirts rather than ridiculous
| in trousers. There has always been =
suspicion that the true reason why dress
/ reformers ramOr for trousers is their
! knowledge OF the fact that they cannot
make themselves attractive in skirts no
matter how pretty their skirts may be.
/ When, however, they put on trousers
they are sure to be looked at by men;
and holding with MIR. Tennyson that
- is better To have looked aud laughed
Than never TO have looked a. all"
| thew prefer that men should look and
I laugh ut them rather than that they
should pass through the street without
drawing a single masculine glance.
Meanwhile, women generally have by
degrees adopted mems clothing SO far as
the region above the belt is concerned.
They wear derby" hats undistinguish-
able from the derby hats OF the other
sex They wear masculine collars
around their neckS, masculine waist
coats where waistcoats belong, and
masculine coats and listers, slightly
modified as to skirts, 80 as to conform
to the exigencies OF the feminine hips.
In this gradual adoption OF garments
once the exclusive property OF meH there
has been no pretense OF dress reform.
The presumably fair creatures who wear
mems hats and coats do so avowedly as
matter OF taste aud not OF duty. While
the true dress reformer maintains that
the physical welfare of the human race
and the success of free government and
the Christian religion are involved IN
the trousers which she insists upon
wearing. her more frivolous sister has
no other reason for incasing herself
from the waist upward in masculine
clothes than that at is the fashion"
TO the thoughtful student OF tenden-
cies and development it has long been
obvious that the female belt could not
permanently arrest the tendency to-
ward complete adoption OF all mascu-
line garments. Sooner or later the skirt
must give way TO the trousers, Just as
the o!d-fashioned waist" hooked up
behind has given way to the walstcoat
and Newmarket coat. What the dress
reiormers could not accomplish as
great moral reform is sure to be accom-
plished in accordance with the dictates
OF fashion. The belt, which for several
wears has proved barrier to the down
ward development OF masculine dress
among women, has, at last, given way,
and we are told that women wearing
what is called the divided skirt" are
now frequently met on the most fashion
able London promenades.
The new divided skirt" is simply the
old trousers writ large. 1t is evident to
the pAilosophic eye that the typical
skirt is simply pair OF trousers with
one large leg instead OF two small ones,
and that pair OF trousers is simply two
small skirts. This great truth IS forced
upon our attention by the divided
skirt" which is skirt OF extra width
stitched together in the middle so as to
divide it into two smaller skirts, each
of which affords accommodation for
single leg When the wearer is perfect
Is still the divided skirt" cannot be
distinguished, except by an expert,
from an ordinary skirt, but when she
undertakes to walk the TACT that she is
comes evident.
Nothing is clearer than that the dl-
vided skirt cannot last. IL ls merely
resting place on the road to trousers.
There is not single argument to he
urged in its defense. The dress reform
ers claim that trousers are lighter than
skirts, but the divided skirt, being OF
extra width, must be heavier than the
ordinary skirt Ii the ordinary skirt Is
announcement in case the wearer wishes
TO climb fences or to ride horses, after
the manner oi the Maid OF Orleans, the
divided skirt would be still more lnCon-
venient in like circumstances. In tact
IL il omen 10 ali the objections which can
he brought against undivided skirts,
aud has absolutely nothing to recon-
mend it.
/ OF course, il has not been adopted
without a reason, and that reason Is
seli.evdent. The open and unexpected
wearing OF trousers by women OF hlther-
/ 70 unim peached sanity would be an IN
tolersble shock 10 the public nerves.
/ Dress. makers who have determines that
/ trousers shall be added to the list OF
, masculine clothes already worn by wo-
/ men nave, therefore, ucNiSeu ltAS N'''N
ed skirt as an entering wedge, soon to
/ be followed by real trousers. The Ice
/ of prejudice against trousers is to be
/ broken by the divided skirt, and as soon
as men have become accustomed to
seeing women clad in divided skirts
the scissors will be laid to the central
seam, and the double skirt will be III
stantiv transferred into a, loose and Oaggy
pair OF trousers.
This is no false alarm. SO long as
trousers were advocated only by dress
reformers, and then upon high moral
grounds, there was 40 danger that sane
women would prefer moral grounds to
beauty aud would yield to dress-reiorm-
Jug arguments. Now that there is an
evident purpose on the part OF dress
makers to make trousers fashionable we
can have no reasonable hope that this
neiarious purpose will fail. Within
two or three years, at furthest, We shall
see fashionable ladies' wearing real
trousers, unless we make bold stand
against the divided skirt and crush, so to
speak, the undeveloped trousers in the
bud