Oregon sentinel. (Jacksonville, Or.) 1858-1888, August 23, 1873, Image 1

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

v ' ' ' ' ' ' '
, , y - -- .,-..
.ijji i-ji ;o
NO. 29,
XaS C TvtTNr rx V f 'a ,-r- , ,-, i S&k X gv -.ia f NT 4 , jr r . r- v -
, tarn entf utM : . .
Cor. Third and CjtrcttkJacksonTillt, Oregon.
Terms of Subscription!
'Oil "odtiww yur (in ftdnoce) !
" If not paid till tfat expiration of 6 moi.,
- Hfnot paid tlU tbt end of tbytj"-?":
0a copy B month la ad ranee
u '
3 00
3 50
1 SO
Ratei off AU-rcrl ! I n gi
Ont iqnirr IQilaes or.lci first inurtion $ 3 00
acb subsequent iniertioo... 1 00
M 3 month 7 00
e io oo
One-fourth Column 3 monthi..... 20 00
6 M 30 00
One-bair 3 30 00
C " 45 60
Oo Columns montbfr.(.-r..r.'.viAr.... 60 00
m .. .0 . ..AnlJ,.o..;-A. W)00
Yearly Advertising, mid Transient Adver
tisement of trrrgnlar length, con
trncteil fortpeeliil Kates.
1. SubierlWi whooVnotgire express notice to the
contrary, nre considered at wishing to continne their
2. If any tubicribers order tb discontinuance of their
newspaper!, the publisher may continue to send them,
until all arrearage! are paid.
3, If aubftcrlben iejtjfc't or rfu to taxethetr.ntws
p&pn froiri the omevs to which they are directed the
Uw holJi them responsible until they bare"1 settled the
bills, and ordered them discontinued.
4. If aubscribera remove to other places without in
forming the publish pr, and the ncwepapers are sent td
the firmer direction, they are held responsible.
6, The Courts hare decided that refusing to tnke news
papers frcm the office, or remorlni; and tearing them nn.
called for Is prima facie eTidenpe of Intentional fraud.
C. The postmater who reglrcts to ire legal notice of
the neglect of a peraon to take from the office the news
paper addressed to him, Is liable to the publisher forth
ubacrlptlon price.
iJ.itlcKOUTllle. Urron.
COUNSTXOaAT l'au ako u' fe"l)isT.
Will pncBeein nil Oiudn of Kiok1 in Hie
St ile. and py particular ultcntiuii t btiinp!'
in the United fautes Courts. ict2G lij
c w,KAii.Kr,. ; .
K. n. WATS0X.
-A- ttornoys-at-Iia'ro-,
Jnrksunl ill, Orrgoit
OFHCE- Oppot,lrtlie Court House.
L ' IIX prci'rr in -ill Cnnrt. of this Slate ;
nlilain riteiit. rural! clarpes of public
jlgh niAi m iind pprirullural : nttend,
fvi en 1 tioii. mid itttcnd to all Coun-
(1 l'l I I llllMU1!.
ulli.Juiir 17,1871.
G. H. AIKEN, M. D.,
'iPhysici'arilliaidi Snrgeon,
Jacksonville, Oregon.
OFFICE So the "old Overbeds Uorpital.
XI offer his professional services to the PUH
lie. Office in Union's new building, aaioining
((van's brick or at residence on Third street, op
posite and west of the Methodist Church.
December 28. 1872tf.
Jacksonville - - -
- - Oregon.
Will practice In the several branches of his
profession. OFFICE on corner of block just
uorth of the Court Bouse.
Jacksonville, . v Feb. 17 1872
" dentistry:
JIllatvlM nfUU Work made, inch u
tfsU, iilrer, l'lulna, Alumnlum ul Ilnbbtr. Sprdal
Mttt cJnatoCHUreu'l Tnth. MtruDS Uxlde
( LaochtDE Gs) nuM for lMlnlrs rxtracllnn of
Tec-ill. 3iltTliUAblliitinu1jon the lit of
MvutH alto, Kcrtjtllle od the fourth Mondij In October.
49-Catl anclzfmlncisiiwelmcn 'V"ork.-e
OrriCB-Oonftrof Cattfornta an rtrlh StrVeti. Kc
Uenceopi-oilte the Conrt Howe. im.t30 72j1.
(Formerly of Walla Wallo, W. T.,)
Oourtslnd ifepartmeots ui th'e1 ODited
tjlale, and U.iurts 61 Ibe District.
j,,. Orrtcs-v323iFoi-andBUi3treeuWa!.b?
ington, u. u. "" -
-N ' cjISA- (
,8CflAT' Dkl.TK.V
siclans and SnrReons. New Tork. and Mera
Wof the lk9jal College, itSnrgconsof Canada,
bCR3 to inform the" tchabitants of Jacksiinvlllc
and surroundlup country that be bas settled and
it-rrtmtM TTitiArir rrmirpithmtd3iVbnrille.
OfFiCL Ufi'Orfjtofi 'SOniT ttv& sojth of
IBB rrenco-rtraencan iii'M.i 1 ai
JacksoaTllkJjBlJ 6H,-i8(4." VloaoJt,
Teachers' Institute.
The amended school law of Oregon
requires that a Teachers' Institute be
organitedirxeach Judicial District. It
was ihohjfht best to not1 only organize
but to perform as much work as possi
ble.mia?e, tKere'fofe, uTtEabe aidSf
other teachers, completed tnelollowing
programme lor our Institute, to be
held on August 29th and 30th, 1873, in
1. Prayer.
2. Music vocaL - - '
3. "Instruction in Geography," by
Miss Ettie Braden.
4. Discussion upon "Instruction in
5. Essay by 3Iiss Martha Nail. '
6. "Object Teaching," by Mrs. O.
A. Davis.
7. Recess.
8. Music instrumental.
9. "Instruction in Grammar," by
Prof. Itobb.
10. Discussion upon "Instruction in
11. Discussion of question, lie
solved, That it is the. right and duty
of theikate of Oregon to provide lor
the levying ol a State tax sufficient to
maintain free schools in every county
for nine; months in each year." Affir
mative, C. B. Watson, T. B. Kent;
negative, II. C. Fleming, W. T. Leeke.
12. Music instrumental.
1. Muic vocal.
2.1 Ess.iy by'Mi8'Ida Beach.
3. "Instructidns in Arithmetic," by
J. B. Farley.
4. 'Dibeussionl upon "Instruction jn
Arithmetic." - -
a. "School Discipline," by J. D.
0. Discussion upon "School Disci
pline." '
.H-ccsSt f, ..,
i 9.
!. Short lecture, by Win. Fiddler.
l. OIubtc-Adcal. - "'
10. "Instruction in Elocution and
Reading," by W. J. Stanley.
11. Discut,ion upon "Instruction
in'Elocutto'n and Readin"'."
12. Music instrumental.
13. Essay by Miss Alice Wrisley.
14. ''Music in our Common Schools,"
by Prof. Brooks.
15. Address by Prof. Skidmore. at
8 o'clock r. if.1 "'"'i'-"
1. Prayer. , j ; j,'
2. Music vocal.
3. "IiiKtruclion in Moral,Training,"
by Prof. Skidmore - '
4' Evsay by Miss Ella.Chilvyood.
5. "Instruction in Peu7ians,hip,'Hiy
W.T. Leeke. ', ' '
6. Discussion upon "Instruction in
Penmanship.''. (mill'ij
7. Recess. ' JO OCl-
4 J l
8. "Instruction in Algebra," by II.'
C. Fleming.
9. Discussion upon "Instruction in
Algebra. . , ,
10. "English Literature,' rand its
Place in Popular Eduea'tiori,",y.Mrs. O.
A. Davis. ' ' ' " '
Music instrumental.
1 AF'KKNOoif.
Music vocal. .
"Corporal Punishment;'
r I i ' t
Discussion upon '"Corporal Pun
ishment." - -
4. "Physical Traiuing," by Prof.
V. T.T.cektr. y ,1 "J i
5. Discussion, upon "Physical
Training." ' - ' " I
6. Eisay by Miss Susan Harrison
Music instrumental, ij. .
Recess ' " ' '
Music vocal. ' i
Essay by iliss Howell
if. Discussion of question, 'ijie
solved, That the State shouliprovde a
System of compulsory Education."
Affirmative, J. D. Fountain, J. H.
UlaytotifnegauveF. -W. Ewiug, J.
Nj-HalL ' .' T
.JtaVddres by SyL C. Simpson,
irintetiueiit ot'Public Instruction,
fiiji o'clock P. "M.
Not only teachers, but'all friends ot
education ararespectfuUy solicited to
meet Wth us. l'f"w? J. Stanley; e
" Co. School Snn'u
,! i :??.f,r.iJ, -tiiv 1 ut
n. iiiniu i.imi 1111111 1 "i-. in jiw .v wj .
A jtr,r f Ac-Ki.tiKilil a m lisp tact
Ipoor.iji her poetjlecIarea.sbB' jiijver
reauiea Jier.pecesmieaii!! sue rgo
husband.- -"" ttij 5. . 1
The following is the full text of the
oppinion of Attorney General Williams
in the Vogt case :
Dkpartment of Jdstick.
Washington, July 21, 1873.
Hon, J. 0. B. Davits, Acting Secretary
of Slater
Sir: I have the lioner to acknowl
3gO-thaj-eceipt of -your commnnicatiorw
ut tbe 7tn 'instant, in 'wmcb you suo
mil for -mv official ""opinion the fol-i
lowing1 question :
" Carl Vogt, a Prussian, charged
with the commission of the crimes of
murder, arson, and robbery, committed
in Brussels, in the kingdom of Belgium,
is found a fugitive in the United States;
can the German Government, under
the provisions of the treaty for the ex
tradition of criminals, concluded be
tween the United States and Prussia
and other States June 16, 1852, right
fully demand the surrender by this
Government of the fugitive Vogt, in
order '.hat he may be tried and pun.
ishud in Prussia tor the offence which
he is charged to have committed in
Belgium ?"
Those parts of the preamble and
treaty, applicable to this question are
as follows: ,
Preamble. " Whereas it is found
expedient lor the better administration
ol justice and the belter prevention of
crime "within the territories and juris
diction of th6 parlies, respectively, that
persons so committing certain heinous
erimes, being fugitives from justice-,.
snouiu unuer certain, circumstances, ot;
reciprocally delivered up, and alto to
enulnerale such criines explicitly; and
whereas the laws and constitution of
Prussia and other German States,fepar
lies 10 1H19 convention, iorniii inem-iTi
surrender their own citizen to a forejgtf
jiinsuicunn, me uoveriinient or me
United States, with a view of makHiV
the convention strictly reciprocal, shall,
be held equtlly tree Irom any obliga,
tion to surrender citizens ol the United
States." f JQsi
Article 1. " It is agreed that tie
United -SratwrrmdPrussia, anit?tnf
other States"-! the Germanic CunfedeK
ation included, in, or which mayi hrre
ifter accede to this convention, shall,
upon mutual requisitions by them or
their rainixteis, officers, or authorities.
respectively nude, deliver up to jusl
lice an persons wno,
with the crime ol m
with intent to commit
racy, or arson, or robbr ry. or forin-rv
or the utterance ot torgnrl papers,Mir
the fabrication or circulation of count
erfeit money, whether coin or paper
money, or'the embezzlement ot public
moneys, committed within the'jurisdic
lion of either party, shall eek an
asylum or be found, within t le terri
tories of the other."
You state that the surrender ot Vogt
is chimed by the Germ.rn Government
Vin (he around that he'isa Prussian and
a subject ol the Emperor of Germany ;
that bv the law fit Prussia at the con
J c!uiou . of the extradition treaty be-
tvve'ii the Uniletl Mates, anil .Prussia
and other German States,"l6th Of June,
1852, a Prussian subject who commit
ted certain Crimes (.imong those with
vvTiich 'Vogt is charged is included)
within the territory of another nation,
and beyound thejerritories ot Prussia,
was nevertheless "subject to be tried
and punished in Prussia. , This is also
now the'jaw of the'Germ.in empire.
The.foljowing seemsto be the only
pointjn controversy : Whether or not,
according to the true intent and mean
ing of saidj itreaty, "tiler crimes comrqit
ted by Vogt in the kingdom of Belgium
were committed within the jurisdiction
ot Germany. 'r
To affirm the jurisdiction of Ger-.
many, by virtue ot its own laws, for
tHe puiiishnientot crimes extendsover
the territory of Belgium, is necessarily
to hold that the same jurisdiction ex
tends to Prance, Great -Britain, and
the United States, and indeed to every
nation and country ot the world. Man
itestly, the wor-la "committed within
the jurisdiction" imply that the crimed
named in the treat) may be committed
without thejurisdietion of the partly
thereto". But if the crimes committed
in Belgium vvere committed, wtthin-the
'juffrHicudn'of Germany; 'then itfollows
as lieigmm" i$ as ipdepemleni ot CJer-
many as any other nation that 11 js
iihpoiiable tot crimes to be committed
outside ot the jurisdiction of the. Ger
man' empire. I think, loo, that' the
treaty clearly contemplates that the
fugitive claimed must be a person
escaping from the jurKdtetion of the
party making the claim to the jnridic'
tion of the other part,y, recngiyzingtwo
dit-tinct and independent jimwiiciiom.
But if the claim of Germany is correct
in this case, Vogt is as much within'
ber jurisdiction now 8,s,h.wa'rwlieri
lilt ur.iiJtra v;ii;h ticu iu iimu wcic lifiii;
milted, for the laws under whichish'j
claims have as much force within the
r xie laws, of .uermany whw;providor
tor tne puoisument inere Taonrsas
muntervflr pi"
committed elsewhere by her subjects,
imply" exnecssitate, as a condition for
the exercise ot that power, that such
guilty subjects. mut come, or be con
veyed from a foreign place or juristic
tion where the crimes are committed
to some place where they can be taken
or received and held by German
authorities. Germany has an unqnes
ttoned right to punish her subjects if
she choose? for crimes committed in
Belgium or the United States, but it
would not be proper, theretore, to say
I lJjit-BclgJum-and-xric-Unitcd BtatroareTreseftts Jor many purposes ; lit;-
wilmo'her- iurisdiction. but it would
be proper to say that she has made
provisions to punish her subjects, for
crimes committed withont as well as
within her jurisdiction.
I am quite clear that the words com
mitted within her jurisdiction, as used
in the treaty, do not refer to the per
sonal liabilities of the criminal, but to
locality. The locus delicti the- place
where the crime is committed must
be within the jurisdiction Of the party
demanding the fugitive,
tress fs put upon the supposed differ
encfe in the meaning of the words 'ler
itory'' and 'jurisdiction," and it is
argued that the latter is moro compre
hensive, than the former term. This
is notjiecessarily, but probably so ; but
it noes not follow that Belgium is
williirj the jurisdiction of Germany.
Alf nations have jurisdiction beyond
theuvwphysical boundaries. Vessels
upiTine high seas and ships of war
evAhere are within the jurisdiction
of Je 'nations to which they belong.
Linfted jurisdiction by one nation
upopj.he territory of anqlhei is some
tim4sTcedea by treaty, as appears from
tleireaties between he United States,
Turkey, China, Si im, and other powers.
Cons' racXy'e jurisdiction may possibly
exist in .special (cases arising in barbar
ous countries" or uninhabited places, so
that, effect can be given to tbe word
'jurisdiction " as meaning more-than
1 territory, without holding that Ger-
1 mauy has jurisdiction flver.orimes com
muted in Pans, London, or Washing
ton. Local pi aim a or "definitions can
not ,be allowed to govern this case.
bWliin nations discuss an'd treat ot their
respective jurisdictions,
reti&tathose.duties ,ai
its Swn cTlizens tSuf1 thev
those poitlons ot the earth andplaces
upon us surlace wiere they have re
spectively sovereign, power, or, in
other words, the right of government.
To recognize the claim ot Germany in
this case' would establish a precedent
that might, lead to serious international
complications "" We have no extradi-
Ltfon treaty with Belgium, but we have
with Great Britain"", like that under con
Miieration. Suppose Vogt had com
mitted the crimes with which he is
chrgeo in England instead of Belgium,
and the British authorities cotempora.
neouslyjWith Gtrmany had demanded
his extradition on that account, could
the United States deny that the crimes
were committed " within the jurisdic
tion" o,f Great Britain, and not "withip
1 he jurisdiction" ot Germany? Could
not Great Britain justly complain if
alter the murder ot her citizens and
the" destruction ot her property by the
fugitive,' her claim to him tor the pur
poses of justice should be denied by
the United States, and he should be
turned over tor trial to Germany,
where there are no evidences ot his
guilt, and 'where his friends and syrapa
thizers, il he has any, may be supposed
to be ?r Li w-writers g-nerally define
the jurisdiction ot a court to be the
power'to hear and determine a cause,
and il is argued that as by the laws ol
.Germany her courts have power to
her and determine the case ot Vogt,
therefore his crimes were committed
within her jurisdiction. One conclu
sive answer to this view is that the
word "jurisdiction" in the treaty is not
Hisedvjitji,reference to governmental
power over the subjects ol judicial pro
cedure, but with reterenco to the lerri-
'tory and places- within which that
power miy be exercised.
" Aain, the courts of Germany have
never had the power to hear and deter
mine the case ot Vogt. Jurisdiction
over "a subject is one thing that is con
fined bv law ; jurisdiction over the
person is another; that is a fact which
has never existed iu this case. Whether
the courts of Germany will or will not
hereafter acquire jurisdiction in Vogt's
case depends iipun the tact hereafterto
arise. Germany and the uiiitensiaiesm
tendeflihat the convention in question
should tie" "strictly reciprocal," but if
Germany can rightfully demand the
delivery up by the United Stales of
her citixensxir snbit els for crimes com-
i mined jn Belgium, the convention, is
not reciprocal. Jor tne uniiea oiates
cannot 'demand of Germany jthe de
liverv'Uptof their citizens tor crimes
committed in Belgium. There 4s not
9 sinrfle'cnrne. euuraerated in the treaty
Ibf th,ecomriission or1 which, outside ot
clainfone-ot'their citizens .frqm Ger-
many,'jratt.therejs not only no proba
act up that end,, but jts conatiMiunnal the requisition , is made, implying, as it
nAr te'ao bo is "donbted. Reference . were, a change ot conntry.' M . ,
Uwl&adeYtottie act orCSigfe8S.r 'David Dudley. Fields Esq in his
ot August 18, 1856, which declares that
penury committed before a secretary
ot, legislation or consular officer of the.
United Stales in a foreign country may
be proecuted"in this country as though
committed here, and this, it is said,
shows that the United States, as well
as Germany, claim an extra territorial
jurisdiction. There seems to be no
point in this reference. According to
international law the domicile ot an
ambassador, minister extraordinary, or
consul is a pait or the territory lljirep.
pendent ot this, the question nBls
not whether a sovereign country may
-.not- punish persons coming into Us
bands tor crimes committed in another
sovereignty, but the question here is
whether a crime committed npon ithe
admitted territory and within tbe jex
clnsive government of an independent
n-ition is committed within the jurisdic
tion of another nation. To facilitate
the punishment of crime is desirable,
but the United States cannot with
dignity and safety admit that any
foreign power can acquire jurisdiction
of any kind within their territory by
virtue of ite local enactments. Ob-
jection is made to this construction of
the treaty on the ground that it will
make the United States an asylum
for European criminals. But the ob
jection is not matter of law, nor is it
true as matter ot tact ; and it it was,
the United States, as an act of courtesy,
may deliver up a fugitive from justice,
or tbe subject may be regulated by an
extradition treaty as comprehensive as
the parties thereto see proper to make
11; or, 11 11 snouiu appear necessary,
Congress might possibly interfere byjopinion, of Judge Blatchford upholdine
legislation. To recognize the claim ot
jurisdiction accompanying the requisi
tion in this case may open the door to
confusion and controversy as to claims
ot jurisdiction in other respects made
nnder their local laws by foreign gov
ernments. The plain and practical
rule upon the subject seems to be that
the jurisrlietiomof a nation is commen
surate with and confined to its aclual
or'constructive'territory, changes made
by agreement, and to this effect are tbe
authorities. .Three of tbe judges of the
m(tted'upoivan American rthip on the
higb seas, and a fugitive from justice
in England, made under our extradi
tion treaty 01 ioz wun ureal uniain,
field that the words " within the juris
diction" in said treaty meant 'within
the exclusive jurisdiction of the United
States, and did not apply to cises of
piracy on the high seas, as the person
charged therewith wasjusticeable in
any country in which he was found.
Chief Jbstice Cockburn, in his dissent
ing opinion, thought the term "juris
diction" meant the area, xchether by
land or water, over which the-law of a
country prevails, and saidithat it is
admitted that a ship is a part of the
territory ot the State, or at all .events
that this ship, referring to the one on
which the piracy was committed, was
within the jurisdiction of the United
States-, so as to come within the statute.
Thomas Alls'op, a British subject,
was charged as an accessory before the
fact to the murder ot a rrtneuraan in
Paris in 1858, and escaped to the
United Slates, and as he was punish
able therefor by the laws ot Great
Britain, the, question as to whether he
could be demanded by Great Britain
of the American Government under
the extradition treaty ot 1842 was sub
mitted to Mr. J. D. Harding. Queen's
advocate, the Attorney and Solicitor
General. Sir Fltz'ov Kellev. since
Chief Baron of the Exchequer, and Sir
Hugh Mi Cairns, since Lord Chancellor,
and they recorded their judgement as
follows : " We are of the opinion that
Allsop is not a person charged witb
the crime of mnrder.,commjtted wjthin
the jurisdiction 01 tne rruisn crowu,
within the meaning ol the treaty of
1842, and that this extradition cannot
properly be demanded ot the United
States under that treaty." (Forsyth's
Cases, p. 368.)
This is a decision exactly in point,
and of high authority. Phillimore, in
his work on internalional law, (vol. 1,
p. 432,) says: "There are two circum
stances to be observed which occur in
thee and in all cases of extradition :
"First. That the country demand
ing the criminal must be the country
in which he crime is committed.
"Second. That the act done on ac-
count of which his extradition is de
manded must be, considered as a.crime
to both Suites."
Wharton, in his work on tbe conflict
of laws, (section 957.) says: ''The only
admissible restriction of tbe term 'juris
diction'. is to treat it as convertible
witb 'country,' and to bold that no
requisition iiec-or an onence not
commuted within tne country ot tne
requiring State. And this view is not
without, supp'ort in those expressions
of the treaties "wh'icb speak 'of the per-
iAnd aimaA la nrrifttpa anil An 'APPIC-
iniuo wniMb" - -to" ---' - ---
. ?... . Melnm in thn Hlata nn Dhnm
own lines ot an international code,
speaking of an article propos'ed'011 er-
vrauiuon, says: -;Ane article in its
present form defines" the right ol extra
dition as it is now recognized extend
ing, only to crimes committed within
the jurisdiction of the demanding na
tion. It may be thouaht desirable to
extend the rule to crimes committed'
bvyond its jurisdiction, which it would'
have power to punish if the offender
comes within its jurisdiction."
.&tlnmav- henaral .Lee; In, construing
a 27th article Of thb treatv nf TiQi
with. Great Britain, savsvthaf it mi
confined expressly to p'ersons who are'
charged with-raurder or forgery com-
milieu wiiom tne jurisdiction ot
either nation, and who took refuge in
the other, meaning then territorial
jurisdiction. (Opinions, 83.)
jur ezirauuion treaty ot 1843 with
France provides for the delivery up ot
persons charged with certain crimes
"committed within the jurisdiction of
tne requiring party," and Attorney
General Cushing held that a requisi
tion by the French Government upon
the United States for a fugitive under
this treaty must show thai the crime
was committed by the fugitive whilo
actually in France. (8 Opinions, 218.)'
Courts in this country have held
that under section 2, article 4, of the
Constitution, providing for the reolam.
ation by one State upon another for
iiigiuves irom justice, that the reauisi-
tion must show that the crime was
committed wiihin the territory ot tho
requiring State. (3 McLean-. 13a;
Sanford, 701.)
1 Have carefully read the elaborate
mo juiisuicuuu hi mis case, trans
mitted in VOUr letter hnt. njiih ,i,n:.
'dence and regret I am compelled to
dissent from his views. Thsv ilo nnt.
appear to me to be sound in principlo
orjsustained by authority. Able wri
ters have contended that thero was &
reciprocal obligation npon nations to
surrender fugitives from justice, though
now it seems to be agreed that it is al-
togeiher a matter of comity. But this
is 'to be presumed where there m
treaties upon the subject: SJt"fugi.
.' .. i ?zr-
lv to what is abnvn .'
stated, I make the negative answer to c
your.qnestion, ,
I have the honor to be, very re
spectfully, your obedient servant,
Geege H. Williams,
Attorney General.
l '
Tim is from Arthur Help's newvS1
work : "In tropical climates an over
laden mule falls down upon the sandy
plain never to rise again. Forthwith,
in the dim distance, a .black speck is
seen to arise. It is the vulture, whiob
is coming to a feast. There are the
same phenomena to be observed witb
boys as witb vultures. I met with a
cab accident the other day. Tbe axle
broke, the wheals came in on both
sides of. the cab, and we were at once
la pitiable, wreck. Thereupon twenty
or tnirty opys, appearing to rise, out pt
the ground, surrounded us. It is my
firm belief that misfortune breeds
' m
- Brown, it is alleged, has a very b'alrT
head, and he used to permit the chil
dren to amuse themselves, while he
took his afternoon nap, by playing
lit-tat-to on his scalp with pieces of
charcoal. One day tbe little ones
grew tired ot that game, and started
to play "raumbly peg" witb a jack-
knite, and at the first blow drove the
blade a half inch into Brown's skull.
Nobody ever ascertained who woud
havH won, for the game stopped sud
denly, and Brown took a hand at an
other game in which he chased each
child around him with a Slipper, ilo
sleeps with his bat on now.
Grace Greenwood relates, as an in.
stance of the extravagance of Hew
England humor, thai when a young
farmer's wite made her first boy's pants
precisely as ample before as behind,
the, father exclaimed, "My goodness!
be won't know whether he is going tQ
school or coming home I"
The; Montgomery (Ala.) Advertiser
makes itselt supernuously ridiculous by
remarking that " in lesatban four years
the prolmhiiities are that Ulysses 'S.
Grant will either walk to a scaffold or
mount a throne P'
Said a tipsy husband to his wife.
a You need needn't bl lame me 1
Tvcas woman that first tempted man
to eat forbidden things." Said his wife,
" but he took to drinkiDg: of, hi", own
accord." ,,
Qberal Butler's opponents ,fear
lie will carry certain wards inJJosta
and get the nomination for Governor.
These is a law firm in Boston called
Steele and Gamble. , -
-. j- -
Chemists say no matfer'ls ever lot..
Printers deny it, ,, t,r ,r,y j
- 'Subscribe for Ihe Simsri,' "' v
- V
- "
, -"