Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1914-12-26
UNIFORM GOWNS,
MASCULINE IDEA,
VETOED BY WOMEN
MIR. Georges Suggestion
Negatived by Fashion
Leaders and Those Of
Modest Means.

Suppose you had an appointment 10
meet your best lady love at Broad Street
Station and when you arrived there, In
stead OF finding her a vision Of lovelness
in blue charmeuse. a thing apart from
the rest of the feminine world, you dis
covered several hundred OF her all ar
rayed in exactly the same type OF cos
tume-ln the sedste gray OF a little
Quaker lady with modest ksrchlef folded
across her breast. in the sombre robes Of
Sister OF Charity, or in any other uni
form-would you like it7 And would you
recognize the lady as the apple Of your
eye, or is II possible that you might
accost dozen or more Of the other fell
lows lady loves In your endeayor to find
the right ons7
II the suggestion of one w. L. George,
mere man and not fashion arbiter, at
that is carried out such confusion Is
likely to result at any moment. with
temerity that is not given to the ma
jorlty Of his sex Mr.. George In start
ling article In q current magazine ad-
vises that women, one and ALL from the
highest to the lowest, adopt a uniform
costume.
Always by their drafts upon It's
wealth." writes he. women lead hu-
manity nearer to poverty, envy, discon-
tent, frivolity. starvation, prostitution-to
general social degradation. Nothing can
mitigate these evils until the modern
woman is induced TO view clothing as
does the modern man, until, namely, she
decides to wear a uniform"
THEY LAUGH AT GEORGE.
A society woman, fashionable couturIer
and little shopgirl were shown the
above-quoted article, and one and all, for
varying reasons, laughed Mr.. George and
his foolish-man theories to scorn.
Mrs. j. Francis Sullivan, one OF the
most beautiful and most smartly gowned
women in Philadelphia, though inclined
to favor the uniform idea, refused to
agree with Mr.. Georges conclusions that
the rich woman, because OF the example
OF extravaganza that she sets. is re-
sponsible for the luxurious desires OF the
poor. which cause so much misery and
heartache.
"Unlforms7 What lovely idea, i've
always wanted to wear a uniforml" she
exclaimed, and from the merry twinkle
in her blue eye one couldn't be quite
sure whether she was serious or only
luItllIlbs Hinh VI lNt llIlo we
save and the wonderful amount Of charity
work we could do II we didn't have to
spend so much time over our tollettes.
And while he was about 1t why didn't
the gentleman suggest that we shave our
heads alsoI
las for the well-dressed woman being
responsible for the unhappiness and per-
haps the downfall OF many girls Of the
working class" she continued, 81 do not
thtfAlr that = n atnIaORnf hANanae
the well-dressed woman is never the one
who Is conspicuously costumed, and the
desire for finery, being born In the heart
OF every woman, there is no need for an
example to be set to put 1t there"
NEVER! SAYS sIGNoR RIENzI.
When signor Luigi Rienzi. proprietor oi
an exclusive Walnut street shop, was
asked what he thought about the matter
he elevated his eyebrows superciliously
up into the topmost regions or his scalI
and the ends OF his waxed mustache tool
on a deprecating droop.
Uniforms for the American woman,
said he. "never! Fer your American wo
man, each and every one, is a law unit
herself. an individuality. The idea viii
never take root here. though" he added
| frankly, "the author knows something o.
/ what he Is talking when he mentions thl
| hold which dress has on the woman o
/ the day.
! "The Philadelphia woman. however, 4
the most conservative woman in tn
/ world when II comes to fashion. You
average well-dressed woman here doe
not spend over $1,000 annually on her cos
tunes, whereas her New York or foreign
sister in exactly the same social class will
get away with $4,000 or $4,000 year.
"There are women of fashion in thi
city, Of course. who do spend more thar
$4,000 on their attire, and this is exclu
| sivs of Jewels, OF course One OF M
customers alone did $4,000 worth OF bust
ness in my shop last year, and / am II
a position to know that she did not bu!
everything here. But / am inclined I
| look upon this as an exception. BY pro
ceeding very cautiously" he concede
largely. "a woman may even be we
dressed on 5000 or 5000 a year. but sh
must study her type carefully and bu
with extreme discretion"
COST OF SMART DRESSING.
And then because he was interested 1
the subject signor Luigi RienH hgure
out exactly what the well-dressed won
ans wardrobe would have TO contain /
order to justify the adjective smart"
beginning with the morning." sal
he. "she would have 10 have at Ieas
three or four boudOir gowns, ranging {
price from $50 10 500 apiece The cap.
slippers. garters and other accessories I
match will come 10 500 at least Tn
smart woman, moreover has at least Nv
morning suits for walking and shoppin
wear. These may be obtained for frol
SIS up-that ls. In Philadelphia. In Ne
York or Paris one would have to pa
from al25 to $500. Five walking hats, ii
expensive ones OF course. would cost fro
SZ0 TO IS. Walking bOots-R woman e0u
scarcely do with less than three pairs
cost from 50 TO S12.
THE modern woman" he continue
has discarded the luncheon oostum
she wears either her morning or her al
| eFnoon attire The latter consists az