OCR Interpretation

The Seattle Republican. (Seattle, Wash.) 1???-1915, March 08, 1907, Image 4

Image and text provided by Washington State Library; Olympia, WA

Persistent link: http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84025811/1907-03-08/ed-1/seq-4/

What is OCR?

Thumbnail for

The indications at this writing point
strongly to the fact that the next munici
pal campaign in Seattle will be fought
with Sunday closing as the chief issue. In
other words Mayor Moore wili be supported
by the church element for the stand he
has taken on this question for renomina-
tion and election, and if the Republicans
fail to nominate a candidate equally pro
nounced on the subject of Sunday closing
as is Mayor Moore there is grave danger of
the Republicans losing the battle and Billy
Moore again winning by a political scratch-
# m #
The charge that Mayor Moore has en
tered into a collusion with a saloon keeper
to relieve another saloon keeper of $50 a
month on a two year's lease, reads just
like a lie. The Pie-maker is not one of
those who do not believe Billy Moore is
averse to a handsome retainer from a cli"
ent, but he does not believe that he would
give the cut in a $50 graft a moment's con
sideration, as that would not buy him ci
gars for a day. To fight a political oppo
nent on the policy he is pursuing is the
bounding duty of one partisan toward an
other, but to trump up cheap charges for
the sake of discrediting an official in the
community is too low, mean and contempt
ible to be considered by men.
The Ross investigation is still being
heard in the distance with nothing of a
tangible nature coming to the surface in
the investigation. As has been previously
stated in these columns the whole affair is
one faction of politicians in the Republican
party trying to trump up a charge on an
other faction for the express purpose of
defeating one of the members of the other
faction from being renominated and elect
ed. However this is just a way they have
of doing politics out West and no amount
of moralizing will bring about any change
in the situation.
* # #
The vote on the direct primary law de
veloped opposition to it in places unlooked
for. No one thought for a moment that
Ruth would be against the measure nor did
they think under the circumstances that
George U. Piper would be against the
measure notwithstanding the fact ''a ma
jority of the voters in his district oppose
such a law." He pledged himself in con
vention assembled to support the measure
and he made his campaign on that plank in
the platform and party pledges should be
held just as sacred as personal pledges.
Everyone, who knows George Piper,
knows that when he gives his word to a
fellow man that he will live up to it if it
took an arm off and he should hold his po
litical pledges just as sacred.
• # #
The general public felt greatly relieved
to learn from the daily press of the city
that John Riplinger, erstwhile Seattle poli
tician and political idol, who listened to the
whisperings of over zealous friends to take
too long a leap in the dark and was plung
d into a fathomless abyss below, the
shock of which so completely wrecked him
that he was forced to leave for parts un
known to seek his health, who, according
to the vague news that the public could
pick up from time to time about him, was
trembling between life and death, has suf
ficiently regained his health to be up and
about, though he is still on crutches, the
results of a partial stroke of paralysis.
John Riplinger is one of the ' 'whitest"
men that ever entered the political arena
and he deserved a better fate than that
handed out to him a year ago in Seattle
when he was defeated for mayor by a
Democrat. It was a mistake for him to
accept the nomination under the circum
stances, but he was too good a man to be
so mercilessly slaughtered. The politician,
however, tells us that these are all the for
tunes of war, and those who go to war
whether'with a just or unjust cause must
expect to meet such reverses.
# # #
The legislature adjourns next Friday
and until it shall have adjourned the polit
ical situation so far as state politics is con-
cerned is quite at sea. No combinations
can be made until it is known whether or
not the direct primary bill will become a
law. If it becomes a law it will be up to
the people to say who will be nominated
for the various state and county offices,
but if it does not become a law then the
factions will begin at once a battle royal
for the control of the next state conven
tion. At this writing the anti-Ankeney
forces are on the Tun, but with the direct
primary put on the shelf and under the in
fluence of barrels of "dough" they would
soon be in the saddle again and they would
assume control of the Republican politics
of the state for the next decade.
Representative Beebe of King county
has fathered a bill through the legislature
of this state and the same has been signed
by the governor making it a felony for
either fathers or mothers to desert their
children when under the age of 16 leaving
them in a necessitous condition. The
measure is a much needed piece of legisla
tion and the people should see to it that its
provisions are rigidly enforced. So often
it happens that scoundrels who are forced
to marry a woman they have betrayed leave
them in a few days thereafter and for the
most part in a most pitiable condition from
a financial standpoint. While the instances
are not so numerous of mothers deserting
their own children yet that sometimes hap
pens and in each case the one so deserting
such necessitous persons whether wife or
children should if found be tried and sent
to the penitentiary or otherwise punished.
That the general public may become better
acquainted with the measure, which will
be a law after the requisite three months
shall have passed, it is quoted in full:
"Any person who shall, without lawful
excuse, desert or willfully neglect or refuse
to provide for the support and maintenance
of his wife in destitute or necessitous circum
stances, or any person who shall, without
lawful excuse, desert or wilfully neglect or
refuse to provide for the support and main
# * *
tenance of his or her minor children under
the age of 16 years who are in destitute or
necessitous circumstances, shall, on convic
tion thereof, be punished by a fine of not
more than $500, or by imprisonment in the
penitentiary at hard labor for not more than
three years, or in the county jail for not more
than twelve months, or by both such fine and
imprisonment; and should a fine be imposed
it may be directed by the court to be paid in
whole or in part to the wife or to the guard
ian or custodian of the minor child or chil
dren : provided, that before the trial, with
the consent of the defendant, or after con
viction, instead of imposing the punishment
hereinbefore provided, or in addition there
to, the court in its dicretion, having regard
to the circumstances and to the financial abil
ity or earning capacity of the defendant,
shall have the power to make an order, which
shall be subject to change by it from time
to time as circumstance may require, direct
ing the defendant to pay a certain sum week
ly for the space of one year to the wife or to
the guardian or custodian of the minor child
or children, or to an organization or individ
ual approved by the court as trustee, and to
release the defendant from custody or pro
bation during such time as the court may
direct upon his or her entering into a recog
nizance, with or without sureties, in such
sum as the court may direct. The condition
of the recognizance shall be such that if the
defendant shall make his or her personal ap
pearance in court whenever ordered to do
so within the year, and shall further comply
with the terms of the order and of any sub
sequent modification thereof, then the recog
nizance shall be void, otherwise of full force
and effect.
"If the court be satisfied by information
or complaint and due proof, under oath, that
at any time during the year the defendant
has violated the terms of such order, it may
forthwith proceed with the trial of the de
fendant under the* original indictment or in
formation, or sentence him under the orig
inal conviction, or enforce the original sen
tence, as the case may be. In case of for
feiture of a recognizance, and enforcement
thereof by execution, the sum recovered may,
in the discretion of the court, be paid in
whole or in part to the wife ot to the guard
ian or custodian of the minor child or chil
"No other evidence shall be required to
prove marriage of such husband and wife,
or that such person is the lawful father or
mother of such child or children, than is or
shall be required to prove such facts in a
civil action. In all prosecutions under this
act any existing provisions of law prohibit
ing the disclosure of confidential communica
tions between husband and wife shall not ap
ply, and both husband and wife shall be com
petent witnesses to testify to any and all rele
vant matters, including the fact of such mar
riage and the parentage of such child or chil
dren. Proof of the desertion of such wife,
child or children in destitute or necessitous
circumstances or of neglect to furnish such
wife, child or children necessary and proper
food, clothing, or shelter is prinia facie evi
dence that such desertion or neglect is will

xml | txt