“In my article on dress in How to Live I tried to present a healthful, convenient, economical, yet modest and becoming style of dress for Christian women to wear, if they should choose so to do. I tried, perhaps imperfectly, to describe such a dress. ‘The dress should reach somewhat below the top of the boot, but should be short enough to clear the filth of the sidewalk and street, without being raised by the hand.’ Some have contended that by the top of the boot, I meant the top of such boots as men usually wear. But by ‘the top of the boot,’ I designed to be understood the top of a boot, or gaiter shoe, usually worn by women. Had I thought I should be misunderstood, I would have written more definitely. If it were the custom for women to wear high-topped boots like men, I could see sufficient excuse for this misunderstanding. I think the language is very plain as it now reads, and no one needs to be thrown into confusion. Please read again: ‘The dress should reach somewhat below the top of the boot.’ Now look at the qualification: ‘But should be short enough to clear the filth of the sidewalk and street, without being raised by the hand. A still shorter dress than this would be proper, convenient, and healthful for women when doing their housework, and especially for those who are obliged to perform more or less out-of-door labor.’ {1T 462.4}

"I min artikel om klæder i Hvordan man lever prøvede jeg at vise en sund, praktisk, sparsommelig og dog anstændig og klædelig klædestil for kristne kvinder, dersom de ville vælge det. Jeg prøvede, måske ikke fuldt ud, at beskrive sådanne klæder. "Klæderne bør række noget under toppen af støvlen, men bør være korte nok til at være fri for gader og stiers snavs og uden at de skal holdes oppe af hånden." Nogle (463) påstod at jeg tænkte på støvler som mænd normalt går med, når jeg skriver, ved toppen af støvlerne. Men med "toppen af støvlen" havde jeg tænkt skulle forstås som toppen af en støvle, eller gamachesko som kvinder normalt har på. Havde jeg vidst at jeg blev misforstået, ville jeg have skrevet mere udførligt. Hvis det var skik for kvinder at have højskaftede støvler ligesom mænd, kunne jeg se en gyldig undskyldning for denne misforståelse. Jeg tror at sproget er meget tydeligt som det læses nu og ingen behøver at kastes ud i forvirring. Læs venligst igen: "Klæderne bør række noget under toppen af støvlen," læg nu mærke til betingelserne, "men bør være korte nok til at være fri for gader og stiers snavs, uden at de skal holdes oppe af hånden. Et endnu kortere klæde end dette ville være pænt, praktisk og sundt for kvinder når de gør deres huslige arbejde og særligt for dem, som er nød til at gøre mere eller mindre udendørs arbejde."