53 



capable of being fathered or rather mothered upon some responsible and respectable person ; but 

 perhaps this is a matter better not enquired into, for fear the originator should be Satan him- 

 self at any rate if he is not the originator he has more to do with it than is generally sup- 

 posed. True it is people need not follow the fashion unless they chose ; but do fashions not lead 

 the weaker part of humanity into irresistible temptation which too often ends in everlasting 

 ruin? If some women wish to make themselves out to be equal, if not superior, to men, 

 surely if they are, or intend to be generally, the first step to take to shew their equality would 

 be for them to dress themselves like rational beings, and to give up a great deal of their 

 frivolitv. No religious woman could be guilty of any such supposition, were she to consult the 

 Scriptures; matters are going the wrong way in this respect, and perhaps they may create 

 greater wickedness than the promoters of such will like to have to answer for. 



It seems questionable whether the love of dressing beyond girls' stations in life, and which 

 has been ingrafted in their minds by observing it in their mistresses and their families, or those they 

 have been brought in contact with, has not led to more crime and misery to them than any 

 other cause whatever, not excepting drink itself. Now this seems an alarming statement; but 

 I fear a true one. Amongst a certain class of people dress alone seems to point out the social 

 position. I remember, many years ago, a boy punishing another worse dressed boy than himself 

 for insolence, when his retort was that, " When he had his Sunday clothes on, he was as much a 

 gentleman as himself." Now the Sunday clothes would hardly alter the character of the boy ; 

 but certainly, at the present time, the Sunday clothes of the girl might enable her to be called 

 a lady but the name would hardly carry the distinctive one of " gentlewoman." Now I would 



N 



