San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1896-04-26


Indicative OF ill-msnners, nothing
more reprehensible, unless it is
that of the fiddle. hea ded mascu-
line who stands at muddy cross
ings to inspect the ankles OF the
ladies who must cross, and in pass
ing expose an ankle or a lace to
the impudent gazer.
This form Of impoliteness is
dwelt upon because it is so general,
so unwomanly, so unnecessary, so
barren Of any satisfaction or COM
fort or good to the one who is
so'guilty of the breach. Not only
so, it is so openly done that it ex-
poses the one who is guilty of it to
the apprehension of those who wit
ness it. No matter how thickly
they are tarred with the same
stick, the locker on at the locker
backward will not fail to condemn
the act. Men always note that
kind of a woman, and the lady
upon the street who has a regard
for the opinion of the best men
will be very sure to avoid look
ing backward, for this reason,
that travelled men put down this
act of rudeness to lack of breeding,
and no woman cares to be consid-
cred inbred by her gentlemen
friends.
But If this kind of looking back
wardsis reprehensible, what will be
said of that other and worse habit
that some women, and these not
vicious, have of looking back to see
II they are being observed by the
knots Of men whom they pass on
the streets. The looking backwards
to inspect passing dress is a
breach Of good manners; the other
is a breach Of good morals. 1t at
once exposes the unsophisticated
woman who does it to the suspi-
cion Of desiring to attract the at
tention of strange men. No repu-
tation could be worse. None could
be gained that will quicker expose
to all manner of remarks, inviting
the address Of the impudent and
the vicious and leading to the in
tensest modification il the woman
be not utterly impure in her
thoughts. Too often the woman
who thus looks backward is lost.
Lots wife was not the only one
who got left in a family sense by
looking back.
But the women are not alone in
this thing. The male-biped who
passes along the street, looking
back into the faces of the women
whom he passes, is the nuisance of
the thoroughfare. There is no
modesty 80 retiring as to escape
his impudent stare, no natural dig
nifty so sweet that it avails to de-
fend its possessor from his self
satisfied smirk, no purity that is
respected by his sensual leer. This
man is Of that character that only
the "rod for the FOOLS back" will
avail to teach him, not good man.
ners, for that is beyond him, but
decent regard for propriety on the
streets. This man is a libel on the
word man, an ulcer on the street,
a walking pestilence, a pup of per-
dition. He is the terror of maid
enhood, the nightmare of a wise
maternity and should be Stunned
Of all decency as is leper.
There is that other street nuis-
ance, the man who looks backwards
with cane under his arm. This
man is not wicked, he is only a
fool. He was evidently brought
up on the prairie, where there is
not human in sight between his
own simplicity and shutdown. He
gravitates by some occult force in
to town, and measures his stupidi-
ty with a cane under his arm on
the street. He has not the least
conception why he carries a cane,
or what 1t is for, or anything else,
save that he sucks it when he is
not jabbing some one in the eye
with it, and jabs some one in the
eye with it when he is not sucking
it. Be always, with some ingenuity
inspired OF the devil, manages to
take his whirl and look backward
just at the time that some victim
is in his front and about to turn