Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1919-02-16
NO OISCOURTESY SHOWN
TO JOHN KENDRICK BANGS
Correspondent believes Women Justi-
field In Leaving Room in Token
OF Their DisapprOvnl.

To The Editor of The Times Dispatch:
Sir.-Thcre have recently been sew
eral articles in our Richmond papers
having reference TO the lecture or ad-
dress delivered by Mr.. John kcndr ick
Bangs before the Woman'S club, last
Monday afternoon. lie 10 described as
a novelist lecturer and humorist. and
in some Of these articles the names
have been mentioned Of three ladies
who showed by leaving the hall their
diSapproVal of the offensive criticism
OF the President by MIR. Bangs.
Ia short editorial in The Times
Dispatch OF Thursday YOU refer to the
lie criticism 10y tho newspapers of the
Pres den; for attending the Paris peace
conference in person. and suGScs; that
perhaps II was not in good taste" for
Mr.. Bangs TO express his personal
opinion III criticism of the President.
OF thS | think there can be no doubt.
am sure that YOU did not intend
so severe Il criticism of the ladies who
chose To show their disappoval by
leaving the room, when YOU say, lit
may bc questioned If the women who
violating the tcnetS of NirSinia's hos
pitality by their ovcrstraininE n: the
dcbatablc point OF patriotism and in
yoWr further suggestion that they
''ycrged on. if they were not guilty
Of. rudcncss to "A distinguished man
who Was their guest"
am only Il mere man. and. there
fore. was not present on the occasion
referred 70, nor have ! the personal
right 10 protect against your criticism
OF the ladies III question. ] am. how
ever. crcdtbly assured by ladies who
were present. that the disapproval OF
MIR. Bangs conduct was universal in
the audience. and that many ladies
present regret now that they. TOO. did
not also give evidence of their diSap-
prevail and Indignation by leaving the
room | respectfully suggest TO you
that none OF these ladies rendered
themselves liable to the charge of rude
that the distinguished author was pres
cni III tho capacity OF Il paid lecturer
to tell of his own personal experiences
and observations in and about the scat
Of tho recent war, and that his criti-
CiSnS OF the President were draEG cd
in without necessity or even conse :
Qucntidl CoUuCC ton with his address
and were made particularly objection
able by tho fact that he never men
toned the PRESIDENTS name or Office,
but spoke of certain person" If Il
:cnt!c man in my house yours a., a
guest had been guilty of such breach
OF good taste. neither OF us would have
/ eft tho room. and am sure both Of
IL would have stood with Commcndabic
patience tho conduct of our guest. how
ever heartily we diSapprovcd Of It. 1t
seems To me the situation is very diff
fHr"nt when ladies. of u club. in which
the discussion of politics is strictly
prohibited give quiet. diEniticd cvi-
Ounce Of TINS diSapproval of tho con-
duet or language Of u man, who. how =
ever distinguished. had been retained
and compensated for delivering leo
turc VIII h IN no sense justified his UNI
welcome Interpolation OF criticisms
which were certainly political il not
diSloyal.
am sure It is not discourtcous for
me 10 say in this connection that tho
conclu.ion cs yonr editorial. reminding
these Richmond ladies of the conduct
Of certain ill-advised women who
burned he President in cniGy III Wash
iugtou shortly after the episode under
confederation. and of whom | am glad
to say only one was n NirGjnian. and
your suggestion OF Inconsistency in
. tliat oonncciion, seems not only iilosi-
, cal bu: unkind.
You have III YOUR editorials so often
! and SO strongly commended tho Pres
+ idcntS wisdom in attending the peace
| conference IN France, and the wonder.
. tul results which he has thus helped
. I" secure, that [ ain sure YOU canno;
/ question tho good Judgment tn. ladies
! showed III their dis pproval ~ the un-
warranted criticisms Of him, aud on
/ further consideration ! h"licvc YOU
! VIII agree with me that th!s method
! Of showing that disapprovul did 10
| constitute in fac; rudcncSs or dis
y courtesy 10 guest. q.
I.ichmond, Va. February II. 1919.