The Madison daily leader. [volume] (Madison, S.D.) 1890-current, 1915-03-20
WOMEN'S DRESSES
LONDON NEWSPAPERS PRINT
COLUMNS AGAINST THE
PRESENT STYLES OF
WOMEN.

during the past two weeks have been
waging a campaign against the exag-
gerated and so called indecent styles
in women's dress. They are devoting
columns every day TO letters from
the clergy, the stage and men and
women well known in the social
world.
The campaign received its impetus
from the pulpit Of the Rev. Richard
Free. vicar OF St. Clements Fulham.
and his remarks have brought forth
a food of letters. some of the writer's
defending his attitude, while others
denounce him as a prude.
One of the correspondents, a WON
an. who signs herself Not "A Prude,"
has this to say:
II entirely agree with the Rev.
Richard Free and your other CORE
s~pondents who call attention to the
immodest dress of women in the
present day. | am a woman, and GER
tainly not a prude. | have a daugh-
ter and like to see her becomingly
dressed, but | should blush with
shame TO see her attired as the ma
iority of girls (and elderly and mid
die aged women, too are at the pres
ent time. We see them in skirts so
short that they cannot kneel In
church or stoop TO tie a shoe lace
without exhibiting their limbs.
I'VE see dresses in the day and in
the evening cut so low that n longs
TO throw a shawl round the wearer.
Surely. III we go a step further, we
..nl1 .~...~n an thu hah ftc nf
the ancient Britons, dispense with
clothes and merely paint our skins.
Those in favor of immodest fash
ions would do we'll to study st. Paui's
advice: That women adorn them
selves with modest apparel with
shamefacedness and sobriety.' | do
not know about sobriety, but there Is
very little shamefacedness to be seen
anywhere"
"A Woman" writes:
The most ardent supporter of the
present day fashions cannot truthful
ly saw that they are modest. The quo
tation, a lie that is half a lie.' etc,
might well be applied to the up to
date woman's dress in its semicon-
cealment of the female form.
ut lis needless to say that there is
no indelicacy or suggestiveness in the
perfectly nude figure. Who can deny
hat there is both in the scantily
clothed forms seen daily in the
streets? Not much imagination Is
necessary to enable one to observe
the effect of such scanty attire on the
faces of youths just entering man.
hood.
"St. Paul had a great deal to say
on the subject of woman's dress, and
he was a minister. When u hrst
parents knew that they were naked
they we're ashamed. In these days
we know IL and-are not
Women Defend Styles.
AS may be expected, the women oil
the stage defend the present-day
STYLES. and the views of two actresses
are given herewith:
"It is shear nonsense" said Miss
Elialine Terriss, who is playing the
lead in Broadway Jones" al the Ly'
ceum. "to decry the method of pres
ent day dressing. The dresses were
never more charming. IL we would
go back to the early Victorian style
IL would be perfectly absurd. III PEG
ple are to use the imagination or ths
parochlal school they will see the
form divine as well under a crinoiin'
as through a divided skirt. Do no
let us become absolutely hypocritical
We are bad enough already. Clergy
men. like cobblers, should stick Il
their spiritual lasts and leave things
alone about which many OF then
know little or nothing"
II am afraid that II will be an i'm
possible task to please everybody IL
regard TO women's fashions in dress,
said Connie Ediss, who Is appearing
In mot Likely" at the Alhampra
After all, I do not see anything yer!
terrible in a portion OF a young won
ans knee being revealed, especial.
If It is neatly stockinged; for WI
must all accept the fact that natur,
endowed woman as well as me VIII
lower limbs. Some people seem u
be as sensitive to changes of fashions
AS others are to change of weather
III I were half so sensitive about tn
method of draping the human forn
divine I should certainly remain Sc
NpIelA at nODlts Dut tAS ~
get used to one style of dress or an
other; and 1t might be well to estab
lish training colleges for prudisl
} people, so that their ayes could grad
ually become trained to endure with
out discomfort the occasional sigh
of a shapely foot or leg peeping be
tween the edges of a divided skirt.
But of all the comments on tn
Rev. Richard Frees scathing denun
|, citation of the indelicacy of moderl
women's dress. none. either for o
, against, has tried to find a reason 10
. the eccentricities of fashion. A pro
: lessor. however, advances the pie
: that woman should be pitied and no
blamed for her foibles of vanity, TO
they are the outcome of heredity an
the predatory instincts of primeva
man. Heretofore. mankind ma
t been greatly puzzled by these eccen
trio foibles and peculiarities OF tn
4 fair sex" saw Prof. Schlessinger, tn