WOMEN’S FREAK DRESSES.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 70, 22 November 1913, Page 8

WOMEN’S FREAK DRESSES.

THE LORD MAYOR OF SYDNEY NOT PERTURBED. [By Electric Telegraph—Copyright] [United Press Association.! (Received 11.55 a.m.) Sydney, November 22. Tho Lord Mayor, discussing the location of passing a by-law against he' wearing of freak dresses, said he onsidered that the innate common.ense and the collective modesty and good taste of the women would be a Sufficient deterrent to any venturesome and ill-advised wearer of freak attire, ihvo factors—women’s eommonsense uid man’s protective attitude towards lis own where the proprieties were coulerned—should prove an insurmoimtible harrier to the inroads of iniuodesty or the encouragement of grotesque women’s attire. “There is nothing immoral in the slit Akirt, the diaphanous gown, or any ither of the present form of women’s attire. Narrow skirts and trim figures don’t mean immorality, as some insist. )ue of the most vicious epochs of society was when the hoop skirts were worn.” This statement was made last month by Judge Ralph Latshaw, of the Criminal Court of Kansas, when asked ’or his opinion of their cause by per-

..ms furthering the campaign against the extreme styles in women’s dress, i'he campaign is being conducteu through the churches and the social irganisations. “We men of to-clay, continued the Judge, “have unl\ one idea in view: to dress ; n a manner that appeals to men. Well, hast) t it al-

,v avs been so? Why, women and men should be ashamed ol the most wonderful mach.no that has ever been made, ind why women should he called immodest it she allows any part of that machine, except her hands and face to be seen, is a question without an answer. 1 remember when it was considered immodest tor a woman to airamre her eoiltn 'e in a manner that [would show her ears. We have advanced, thank (hid!”