The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-01-14
A CRANKY REFoaMER.

Mrs. Daniel M. Lord belongs to the guild of dress reformers. but unlike some of her sisters. sha wants to reform the man and his clothes. Possibly she thinks her own sex cannot be improved on in this respect. If some of we male persons should presume to differ, and to point out several particulars wherein the modern style of female wearing apparel could be changed for the better, it is likely that we would be regarded as interlopers. and would probably hear something to the effect that fools rush in where angels fear to tread.' If we should applx to Mrs. Lord the Scriptural injunction. Physician. heal thyseIf.' she would probably reply, if she condescended to re- ply, that a mere man knows nothing about it. That may be true, but We could point out some particulars wherein wo- mans apparel could be vastly improved on. but 1t would do no good. for. as old Aaron Hill wrote, nearly two centuries ago:
 First. then, c woman will or won't, de-
 pend ont:
 If she will dot she will, and there's an
 end ont.
 Consequently there's no use pointing out to the dear creatures any inconsistencies or incongruities connected with their own styles of dress. for they'll do as they please about 1t after all is said. In the interests of good Fellowship and courtesy we might even so so far as to admit the right of a female dress reformer to dictate fashions for men to follow, but our ccmplaisance and deferenee to the sex doesn't extend quite so far. We hold that mere man has some rights and that amOng them is. or should be, the right to select his own fashion of clothes, having due regard to the decencies of life, | of course.
 And so 1t happens that we enter our protest against Mrs. Lords dictum. at least in some of its features. wlsen she declares that men should go back to the long and powdered hair. the huge lace neckwear and the knee brooches of a century ago. we beg leave to register a robust kick, even at the risk of being considered discourteous to woman. As for the long hair she can find enough of that among the football players and the foreign pianO-pounders If she yearns for that style, but men who have to work. and who claim right to pay some re- gard to comfort and convenience will con- tinue to have their hair trimmed to suit their own ideas of what they think best l for them. All men are not Sampsons nor cranks Short hair is more comfort able. convenient and healthful for the male members of the human family and if Mrs. Lord doesn't like 1t, she can dc the other tting.
 Nor are we much better pleased witt he- ideas about neck-wear. We some times look at the pictures of the Old bean, of two or three centuries ago and won der how they managed to exist. A table cloth wound about the neck would b, hardly more cumbersome, and to lool at picture Of one of these old beau with yards of lace wound around his necl and his head tilted back as if he was al the time searching For a stray come, might be a pleasant sight for Mrs. Lord eyes. but we respectfully ask to be ex cused. Life Is too real and business to- pressing for an ordinary man to so abou with his neck trusssd up in several yard of hnsry ana bis chin pointed to the starr She must ex3use us.
 Nor arc we any better pleased with he suggestion that men should all wear tn lmee-breeches Of Jefterson's day, or an, other day when such a style was fash ionable. There are some men-and prec ious few of them-whose lower limbs am feet would look well in tights, long stock