St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-08-23

queenly. hOme-loving matron. the wifi
Of an affectiOnate husband, the mOthe
of grown sons and daughters, wears
her dress-but my pen shrinks from
writing what this high-bred lady does.
This case, which represents scores of
others, is of Importance, because the
offender herself is so unconscious of her
offense, and so far in other respects
above it. There is no life of concealed
dishonor, no intrigue. no sboddy BIRTH
right, no fast-and-loose views of duty.
The woman Is otherwise immaculate.
How explain this ethical enigma? Are
our ladies' morally insane, or mentally?
Do they know what they are dong?
And if not, why not? How shall we char
acterize the toO-low corsage with some
nothing for a sleeve? The lower bodice
with no sleeve at all? Nudity covered
by transparency? And what is known
as the V-back? They are below excuse,
as they are beyond explanation. What
moral mania blunts the sensibilities
that ought to nix the standards of a ma
ton? What dementia deters the lever
Womanly" from ''leading us on" at
least so far that the simplest instinct of
feminine mOdesty-that which covers
nakedness-may keep stroke with the
moral development of the age? Let it
be said that gay women always have
dressed improperly What of it? Is
that any reason why they always
should?
o. women! queens of life! bestir
your hearts. Rouse your dulled percep-
lions of the monstrous things you do
and suffer to be done. Call the fact by
its right name. Blush for it. and abhor
it. for it is abhorrent. SO long as you
take your fashions from the demi-
vuh hot nr, fbor,
these? The Irish cook in your kitchen
is your superior, madam, when sha goes
to her ball room on st. Patrick's day
clothed to the throat. as by the customs
of her people she is required to Der
And the rules of the Roman Catholic
church forbid her to waltz.
Let us have done with playing about
the fire, and call low thing low, and
out with it. Face the truth. An i'm
modest dress does not cover a modest
woman. If your costume is coarse and
vulgar, you can blame no voice or pen
which calls you coarse and vulgar too.
Ii the dress is disgraceful, the wearer
is disgraced. The woman who dresses
indecently = never mind who, never
mind where, never mind WHY'S in
decent. The woman who dresses with
out shame is shameless.
By their robes We shall know them.
And, pray, why not? AS you character
iZe the danSeuSe, as you stigmatize the
poor creature who flaunts herself in the
eye of vice, why shall not yourselves be
judged by their judgment? Have wo-
men of fortune any special immunity
from heaven or earth which releases
them from the common, human, moral
conditions of their sex2 To be rich and
fashionable-does this give one the
privilege of being immodest and re-
spected?
Organize for the Battle.
We are club-burdened age, and of
forming many societies there is no end;
but let one association more be Sug-
gested, and heaven hasten, as it will
surely prosper it'll Let dozen of the
most influential women in the city of
New York be banded together-that
would be enough; as many in Washing
ton, Philadelphia and Boston. Let
these women, having agreed to regu-
late their own costume with re-
gard to the essentials of decorum.
bind themselves never to receive
second time into their parlors woman
who is immOdestly dressed. Let them
tions coming from indecently dressed
hostesses. Let them reduce their def
nitions of modesty to a few articles
this is not intended, heaven forbid!
for mantua-maker's pun, and the
thing is done. 1t is perfectly easy. Any
of US can think, at hap-haZard, dozen
society ladies any one Of whom would
gladly do this if the other eleven
would. Suggest for such an asso-
citation simply this name-The Ladies.
Suppose that there were added to
the efforts of these ladies. in full har-
mony with them, the sympathy of a
dozen clean-hearted, high-minded, So
cially powerful men? We are glad to
believe that it would be quite possible
to find them. Let these gentlemen
firmly take the stand, 1--WE accept no
invitations from hostesses who invite |
us to meet immodestly dressed guests"
What would happen, think you? So |
ciety would be revolutioniZeG in three |
months. From half-nude set of Bac- |
chantes we should become decently |
draped human beings, and probably |
stay so.
''All knowledge," says the Talmud,
''is but step to modesty and the fear |
of heaven" The public taste for ques-
tionable tales. the readiness OF literary |
most hopeful of us can see or say these |
two facts continue to be correlated |
in our times, even as in
coarser and cruder age. A pub
Usher of experience gave it as his |
testimony that rs per cent of the manu-
scripts submitted to him since the APP
pearance of - IA popular and indell- |
cate novel; have been morally so tainted |
or so coarse that he could not even con-
slider them. Evidently" he says, |
''our young writers have the impress
sion that, to SELL an author must be |
improper"
The Crime of TOlstOi.
A few weeks ago, [ read through. for |
the first time in my life, one of those |
volumes which on does not care, after |
reading, to leave upon the center table. |
The name and fame of the author, his |
well-knOwn high moral standards, and |
the intense religious character which he
is understood to cultivate-these be-
guiled me, and did read. Here is the man
who has been treated by literary critics
as second Christ, and who, despite
OgnlZe, has certain moral motives of
very high and noble order. Here is he
who has been boldly called the greatest
novelist of this or any other age or
of any tongue. May we not trust
Tolstoi to the extent OF one very
small story published with what we
cannot deny to be the highest moral
aim? One would have thought so. But
if his last volume be fair specimen of
what We are to expect of the genius, of
the morality, of the modesty, of
the true art of our times, may
heaven save us, and the author, too!
Silence upon him. Let him put
his hand to his mouth, and his mouth in
the dust, and stay there. Tolstoi's chief
mistake in the abominable little. true,
coarse, well-meant. and ill-executed
book is one of art. He has overlooked
the circumstance that the novel
is not medical treatise. He
has converted the pen of the story
writer into the probe of the ply
sleian. Tolstoi's psychology is nothing
but physiology. His objectionable
fault is one of literary taste. He lacks
more than refinement; he lacks simple
human deceDcy; and that is the begin
ming and end of the matter.
If civilization implies high degree