This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Surnames: "Bloomer", "Camilia", "Capapie" Classification: Biography Message Board URL: http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/ok.2ADE/1485.2 Message Board Post: Geri: Somewhere I picked up on the fact that "L" who was writing so many articles in various newspapers was from Austin, Fremont county, Iowa. There is little doubt in my mind but what this person was our Littleberry Lingenfelter! I wish I had copied all of those articles I had seen/read before I realized who the author really was. (A "woman" wrote this one? NO WAY!) THE FRONTIER GUARDIAN. Vol. III No 17. September 5, 1851. 2 - 4. "THE NEW FASHIONS".--Mr. Editor: Allow me to trespass upon your patience once more, as it is proverbial of one of MY SEX (?), to have the last word in almost everything, at least so it is said. And supposing that all females are endowed with certain inalienable rights such as holding their "Women's Right's Convention," and endeavoring if possible to bring the "usurper" man, into a sphere of equality, and to wear whatever dresses they please, even if it were to adopt a BLOOMER, or what I consider a prettier name CAMILIA, whose business is it? I would really like to know. Some editors take it upon themselves to see what they can say to oppose this beautiful costume, with the advice of a few "oldmaids", who would never change their minds if they knew it would be the means of getting them a _______. With the few preliminaries above, I will enter upon what I have to say. I saw with my own eyes a beautiful CAMILIA in our streets, and supposing that some of your readers would like a description, I will here give it: The "a la Turk," wore a neat hat, trimmed with red, with a splendid wrought veil, white dress, reaching just below the knee, turkish pants, with morocco slips--upon the whole she was attired most graceful. Now, what editor, lady, or gentleman can take any exception to such a beautiful costume? I would almost venture to say scarce none with the exception of some staid person, continually fretting about every thing that is new. The new fashion which recently appeared in our streets, worn by the gentleman (or would be "usurpers") was one not altogether to my fancy. The wearers not feeling at home in the CAPAPIE, they appeared somewhat awkward. Their coats in the first place were two or three inches too long, their pants were entirely of the wrong color, which should have been a light blue, instead of red, and were too tight above the knee, their caps answered every purpose, and their shoes were too high to make a neat appearance; but upon the whole made a very fair show. Suggesting these few improvements, I will close, fearing that I have already trespassed too long upon your good nature, and expect ere long to see the CAMILIA and "a la CAPALIE", to become the prevailing costume, in spite of the opposition of "old Maids, and old Bachelors" combined. .....Yours truly,.......L. Mr. Editor: Finding that my communication did not appear in your last, I desire to make a small addition. When returning from Church last Sabbath, during the shower, I could not help but seeing and experiencing the great inconvenience, of wearing what I cannot call by any better name then "draggle-tails"; they were all besmeared with mud and wet half way to the knee. And from this time I have made up my nind never to appear in the streets, in such a "toggery". In conclusion, Mr. Editor, I am resolved--regardless of the frowns or sneers of any. L.