I admit that it is indulged in by a great multitude (not of the best)
but the most aristocratic society people. But does the fact that society
has permitted itself to be carried by storm into a toleration of the
modern dance make the dance any less degrading and sinful. No more so,
it seems to me, than does the fact of the universal use of alcohol make
its effect less harmful or make it any the less a destroyer of homes,
happiness and character.

No, its universality does not prove its morality, and it is certain that
results prove conclusively its immorality, and all who try to make it
out otherwise, are either those who know nothing at all about it and are
unwilling to believe that such an evil could be in their midst without
their knowledge, or those who know and practice the abominations, but
enjoy it far too well to confess what they know. These last will be
loudest in their clamor against this book and its author, and in their
profession of perfect innocence.

They believe themselves to be the sole possessors of the secret which
makes the waltz their pet amusement. They do not mean that their secret
shall be divulged, and they seize every opportunity of praising the
"beauty and variety" of the waltz. Its "health giving exercise," "its
innocent amusement" and its grace-giving qualities. Grace-giving,
forsooth. The grace of the harlot, to my mind, is not the most desirable
possession.

I have known many and many a non-dancing mother to encourage her child
to learn to dance, because she wanted her to become graceful, and in
many a case that daughter has lost grace, health, virtue and all that a
woman holds dear. If you have a choice of a saloon for your son, and a