The San Antonio Light (San Antonio, Tex.), Vol. 41, No. 89, Ed. 1 Monday, April 18, 1921 Page: 8 of 14
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: San Antonio Light and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
8
fHE SAN ANTONIO LIGHT.
<r»»«w m mti
r». Use am-me Ueet ut >k< h. ui»s
OM-'l.
■ SOW.. L~»« •< *—*<•'•*
»«^e If wroi>4 ow KMMa .1 U» Fuwornoe st S*
Iw *« •* '*»«'•“ *•”» •• '•”
t^WCraS. ewe .rtleote «• •«“«'. em«S n w in
atMMrßexs a. Con» •" N’uev* l^r»a». Tun. Bor
fM&. »• «• ><•*'• •- IM
Offm. Son lU-HI ft.vie •.root.
Mom s».»u<» C .oa ft
' st BM Bimo* ILA TICS
I Mo. • »* I ft-
aits owiwi «•“» “* •“<•» “ O-’
Cats Os/rto' •“*» „• •• .
BaU <i» Tosno. t«i> o* 4 SunSaj *• *’• •
Mail 111 Tosno. onat ... ■•
■». ..»■«• Tosaa mel^iM Boston .n A.H »«•
Mali aa—*• TOI so la.aa.r onto I ■■ — • ~
“7“T^l^taoi -
wi»> onass^ •• ~a “ a "* • adr -~“
Coo.n Sol. .00 M ttrorßW. pioono ooutT mo ««>«»
L>®Cb»t* 1741
<otoaio Meet to •» •« MWr
t«nd» tb» United •*•!«
"SncAao urnvß—Fam un»t“o ■“«
BuBTI’N ornc*—Paul BMB. Ibb.. Ultle BISS.
OBTKUIT vrriCß—Paul Bloc*. Ine.. Kroago Bldg
MSMBSM QI 188 AoaOlLAlßll PBKsa.
— .——.-.-a Proso is osciuaiooit oaUUMI in too
-■ ... .Mbiioatios or all sows UlspaicßM credited u
. „ aM llloi* credited U .-SIS l-aiar *n« *m» U»«
wnai !“*■»•’ bw.ib. SU ngnu at .opubiloa-
uos at opoao. d.opoteooo Bo.oln er. sioo ’— r -* a -
PARLIAMENT TAKES A HAND
The difference between the moral if
not the material effect of democratic
government and that of bureaucratic gov-
ernment seems to have been exemplified
in the turn which the labor situation in
England took when the House of Com-
mons asserted itself in an effort to settle
the coal miners’ strike. Whatexer the
outcome may be. or may already have
been one can hardly miss the significance
of this reported sudden development.
Previously Premier Loyd-George had
been using his office in an attempt to
bring the operators and the miners to a
common basis of understanding. Even
from this distance it had seemed that the
situation was one demanding a more com-
prehensive consideration than any one
man could be expected to give it. The
welfare of the entire country was at
stake and so far flung was the issue and
so manv factors did it involve that it
seemed to be a subject for legislative
review rather than for executive negotia-
tion. _ .
Not only was the welfare of all England
menaced but it is not exaggerating to
say that the interests of other nations
were involved. Certain it is that the
entire British empire had cause for con-
^The situation was radically altered
according to cable accounts immediately
after the House of Commons took matters
into its own hands. \\ hether this turn
may affect Premier Lloyd-George’s pres-
tige and influence appreciably is a ques-
tion for guessing. It would appear how-
ever that the controversy assumed a dif-
ferent tone on both sides as a result of
the active interest manifested in it by
the members of the lower branch of ।
Parliament. For it is reported that “the .
mine owners and the striking workers J
brought forward almost simultaneously. ;
new proposals looking to an adjustment
of the situation.” The atmosphere
seemed to clear swiftly. Presumably
both sides believed that a more nearly '
fair if not more disinterested hearing
would be given by many arbitrators than 1
had been given by one.
That was a natural presumption. Upon 1
a like basis was predicted the measure
under whose authority our own Railway 1
Labor Board has just undertaken to re-
move the adverse conditions from which :
transportation in the United States has ■
been suffering. And as the decision of
the Railway Labor Board grants some
of the contentions of each side to the
controversy that has retarded material
development in this country’ so might a
similar compromise ordered by Parlia-
ment have a wholesome effect upon the
industry and commerce of England. No '
mandate by a premier could carry the
moral weight of one by the lawmakers
of the land who more or less directly 1
represent public opinion.
oo
LABOR BOARD’S DECISION
Abrogation of the national working
agreement by the Railway Labor Board ;
is one of the most gratifying domestic ।
developments of the year thus far. \\ hile
neither railroad nor union officials had .
much to say about the anouncement when
it was made each side apparently waiting 1
to compare the decison with its own ।
interests the public cannot but be un- i
qualified!)’ gratified. Or if there is to be <
any qualifying of the public’s gratifica-
tion it may be due to the fact that the
transportation act which created th'- ■
labor board provided no penalties Er it' ■
violation.
Perhaps the best indication that the
board's decision is a fair solution of the i
controversy over the national agreement '
is that it was not hailed as an outright
victory for either side. A union official
did say that it was a victory for the em- i
ploycs in that it provided for first <odc .
of principles ever laid down “by a federal
body for the guidance of lalior.” Xnd
a railway official expressed the opinion
that it would be a victory’ for his side •
if it should bring about individual con- •
ferences between the railroads and their <
rasperti’e employes instead of a single <
conference participated in by repre-enta-
A>ve> of all roads and all emotoves
While die employes may have cause i
MONDAY
for gratification in that part of the de-
cesion which sets forth certain principles
for their protection the most conspicuous
change provided for is that the railroads
shall deal with their respective employes
in the matter of defining working condi-
tions. It was the single-agreement plan
that the railroads most urgently objected
to and the reasons for their objection on
this score were shared by a large part
of the public. There was no hope for
reduction in freight rates as long as the
railroads were burdened with unnecessary
expenses. Under the court rulings that
public-service corporations are entitled to
a fair return on their investment the rail-
roads had a perfect legal claim upon high-
er rates. The difficulty of course was
that the point of diminishing returns had
already been reached if not passed. In
other words raising of the freight rates
would most likely have resulted in a re-
duction of gross revenue. Thus the rail-
roads were between two fires a legal
and an economic one. On the legal side
they might have raised their rates. But
on the economic side there was a natural
inhibition against that. Hence the right
to a fair return on their investment was
more theoretical than practical.
With the national agreement abrogated
the railroads can proceed to arrange work-
ing conditions with their respective em-
ployes. This does not necessarily mean
that any’ individual worker will be paid
for his work at a lower rate. But it
does mean that innumerable absurd re-
quirements imposed upon the railroads
resulting in the payment for work never
done and in the employment of more men
than necessary will be thrown out.
Then the railroads can operate again
upon a business basis. They can balance
their expenses at least for labor against
their income. As long as the national
agreement was in effect the railroad prop-
erties were not in the hands of their
private owners in a strict sense. The
owners were not permitted to manage
their properties in accordance with their
own judgment.
If the decision “sticks” there shoud be
a resultant appreciable improvement in
business conditions generally’. And the
only conceivable reason why it might not
“stick” is that the transportation act pro-
vides no sure' way of enforcing the de-
cisions of the labor board.
DO YOU BELIEVE IN GHOSTS?
As a result of the filing of a damage
suit in Illinois recently wherein the ques-
tion of ghosts and ouija boards "figured
prominently the attorneys found it neces-
sary to ask every member of the panel
called for jury duty this question: “Do
you believe in ghosts?” Much to the
surprise of the court it required a con-
siderable time to select a jury because
a number of the jurors were disqualified
when they expressed under oath a firm
belief that ghosts do exist and that they
are seen frequently by some people and
can communicate with humans from the
spirit world.
This of course raised the question of
belief in spiritualism but the examina-
tion for jurors did not proceed that far.
It merely concerned itself with a belief
in what might be termed the “old fash-
ioned ghosts” or apparitions once popu-
larly supposed to be robed in flowing
white garments and to frequent lonely
roads cemeteries and haunted houses.
The case it appears arose over an
alleged utterance on the part of the de-
fendant to the general effect that her
home had been robbd by a neighbor. Her
sole proof for her statement it appears
was that she had consulted her ouija
board and it had informed her that her
neighbor was the guilty culprit. The
neighbor promptly resenting this charge
against her reputation filed suit for slan-
der and the case was brought into court.
One member of the panel was disquali-
fied when he expressed firm belief in the
ouija board and declared that he owned
one himself. Another juror said he had
never seen a ghost personally but he be-
lieved in ghosts and that he had a relative
who saw ghyts regularly.
Throughout all the ages mysticism has
always been present to a greater or lesser
extent. But of recent years the old fash-
ioned ghost theory has more or less died
out. Yet in many people there still exists
an unconscious fear of spirits. No matter
how skeptical the average man may be
nor how stout his nerves yet let him
see a bed sheet whipping in the wind on
some dark night in a lone spot and he
will halt instanter and his breathing will
nuicken perceptibly until he discovers that
the object giving him such a start was
nothing more than a piece of con.mon
cloth.
Granting for the sake of argument
that ghost- max have ru-ted at 'otm
time • r nth-r. win should thci t ike upon
themselves the long flowing rob.* and
lapping white gariMLis usual!) attribut-
ed to them? Why for in-tance shouldn't
a gho-t array itself in a dte-- -mt or in
overall' or a kimona in-t a- mu< h a- >n
a lad -heet?
I he reason probably finds it- e plana-
tion in the fa<' tl at the ancient winding
sheet of white cloth in which the Iwxlies
of the dead were wrapped became asso-
ciated with gho-t- and tradition- have
alway- retained the fiction. But now-
adays we do not bury our dead in wind-
ing sheets. We clothe them as they were
THE SAN ANTONIO LIGHT.
clothed in life and place them away with
their hands folded upon the breast. Why
then if they become ghosts or if ghosts
have any association with the dead do
they not also follow modern customs
as to their garb?
Yet in the examination of these men
for jurors in this case those who pro-
fessed belief in ghosts for the most part
professed belief in the old-fashioned
ghosts the kind with flowing white robes
that appear only on dark stormy nights
in out of the way spots where even a ghost
would be lonesome. Can it be that our
styles in ghosts will never change? That
those who believe in them will always
cling to the kind of a ghost popularly
associated with ghost stories for genera-
tions?
GREAT AMERICAN ATROCITY
Some of us are always committing
crimes of one kind or another. If it is
not one thing it is something else. Be-
fore the war we were told that we should
have to mend our ways of spelling a
large proportion of the words in our lan-
guage. Hardly had we finished contem-
plating the horrors of armed conflict be-
fore the panoplied pronunciation-perfec-
tors resumed their warfare against the
wrongs that words are suffering.
The scene of awful atrocities has been
shifted from Europe to America. We are
murdering the Queen's English again—or
still. More work for the League of Na-
tions.
It is something terrible the way we
Americans butcher the English language.
That at least is what a lecturer at Har-
vard University evidently thinks as one
may judge by information to the effect
that she (a woman on a crusade!) has
organized the “Association for the Im-
provement of American Speech.”
However from the standpoint of people
who have an ingrowing dislike of things
Noo Yawkish her campaign ..at be
wholly without meritorious features ivr
she seems to have launched her first at-
tack upon the colloquialisms which she
ascribes to New York. One of the most
awful atrocities committee by New
Yorkers she thinks is to say “lemme.”
Apparently she would not be satisfied
with “let me.” Nothing less dignified
than “permit me” would be permissible.
So the lectures proceed—and it goes
without saying that the lecturer has more
than a lifetime job ahead of her if she is
even to repeat let alone abolish all the
peculiarities of speech that give variety
and spice to Americanized English.
If she wants to be shocked she ought
to come to lexas. As a lover of epigrams
once said there is more land in Texas
•than anywhere else in the world. Some-
times it seems that we have more styles
of speech here than acres of land—-and all
variations of the “English language.” It
is difficult to understand some English-
man direct from certain parts of London.
A South German and a North German
can hardly converse with each other al-
though both speak “German.” In China
there is a different “language” for almost
every province and not even all of the
Pekinese use the same lexicon.
It could hardly be expected that Amer-
icans would pronounce all words alike
or have the same expressions. And in
reality there is no standard except that
of usage. Even usage changes from time
to time and place to place. The “Eng-
lish” of Chaucer's time is not the “Eng-
lish” of Chesterton's day. “Bowery”
language and that of the' Texas plains
could never reach common ground. But
if the words and pronunciations of cither
place should become commonly used
throughout the country the lexicographers
would have to be guided accordingly.
Ihe standard is always changing. It
is not what purists think it ought to be
but what usage makes it. Even the pur-
ists themselves alter their positions. As
compared with polite English of a cen-
tury or so ago their own is positively
atrocious.
— oo
Extensive drilling opetations are going
forward in Spain in an effort to find a
petroleum field. How do )on say “wild-
catting” in Spanish?
oo
An earthquake shriek has been felt in
\rizona. However having no tourist traf-l
fice Arizona folk- do not feel an earth-
quake shock quite SO keenl) a- those of
Southern California.
THE PI ZZI ED CEXSI S TMiER
’’Got any t|„ Marshal aai<!
To a lady from ov»r thy Itbinr;
And the lady sh-.k her flaxen h-ad.
And ci»illy an-wro-d "Nrint”
’’Got any <irh?" the Marshal -aid
To tho lady from over the ftliine;
And azain the ladv sli-olc L<r head.
And * it dfy ansnend ”N’-in
"Eut soup ate dead?” the Ma> hal said
I o the Udi frk u „r. । the Kline;
And again the lady sl.r-.k her h.-ad.
And rmlly an-nered A.m!’
H hand - f ...ur ?" ti r Mar-hal sa.d
T’> the ladv from over the Rhine
And acam -hr -h-.k her flaxen tend.
And rnilly an-armd ’.Via!”
Ihe d ~1 you haie ’ the Mar-hal aa<d
To tin lady tom IM r the Rhine
And irxiti -he shte.k l.'-r flaxen head.
And eivtlly anioreind ’ .Vein f
W what do you mean by ehakins
lour head.
And always answering Xiue?”
Uh kann nieht Encllwh eivilly said
The lady from oier the Rhine.
— Jolin Godfrey Suva.
Without Mercy
iCopylKßl. uiu. Bl a. p Pulß.m • SoBb)
(Continued From Saturday.)
CHAPTER XXL
The Woman Teat if *e*.
t “On November the firat the day on
r wblcb the tragedy took place yuu were
>tayiu< at Derebam Hall?* a^ked
t Gmne.
; “Yea.* Margaret. Her voice was
watcciv audible and trembled blight-
ly. Sir (.erald Giaemt** tone was
. courteous and even sympathetic.
"I nali/.i’. Mita Gartb that thi>
muH be painful to you" be baid almost
apologetically; “it la necaaaarjr how-
ever. that 1 ahuuld a*k you one or two
brief question* a* to the time and
place. Mr. Orme culled upoa you at
r bcreham on the first. Can you tell
the jury at what time he left the
l hOU!M’’*“
“Yea* said Margaret mechanically.
’ “It was ten minutes past acres.*
“I am sure. I noticed the time ini-
mediately he had goae by the clock in
the hall.*
“Thank you" said the crown coun-
sel. “It it all I have to ask.*
| He sat down but Haggard rose at
once.
“When Mr. Orm< left you at ten
minutes pu.-t seven.” he said slowly
“was he in good spirits. Mica Garth?
I mean did he seem happy or the re-
verse?*
A warm flu>h crept over Marga
ret’s pale cheeks. She paused.
“Yes” she said quietly “1 think he
seemed happy.*
There was a curiously strained look
on Haggard’s usually impassive fea-
tures.
“I have a reason for asking“ h«
said “and for calling attention to this
point. “What happened during the
visit of Mr. Orme’s?*
“Must 1 answer that question?” said
Margaret in a low voice.
“If you please.”
“Mr. Orme asked me to be bis wife*
said Margaret. “Aad I consented —
very gladly. ’’
Dead silence reigned in the court.
Three hundred pairs uf ejes were ou
Margaret.
“We have heard even from the c«»un-
sei for the prosecution* said Haggard
“that Orme once ^aved your life under
rircumstanres of great danger to him-
self. It was then more than mere
giati:udr htat you have felt toward
him?”
Margaret answered quietly and fear-
lessly.
“If you mean did I love Mr. Orme’
"•he said “my answer fa that I did —and
that 1 do.”
Haggard bowed and sat down. Mar
garrt retired her bead bowed and
escaped to bide a* best she might the
hot tear* that would not bp krnt hark.
There were wet eyes among the spec-
tators also.
Margaret Garth was the last of the
witnesses for the crown. Haggard
called the fir^t for the defense. This
waa odc I^ntbball an overlooker in
a cotton mill and connected neither
with the bribery nor the election.
“Where were y«»u at G o’clock on No-
vember 1 Mr. I^nthall?” asked Hag-
gard.
The witness replied that he was in
the har of the “Green Man.” opposite
Oldham Gardens. That Simon Linke
was there nl««». That Link* wa* *pen<l
ing money freely and offered him a
drink and a cigar Hr refused. Linke
was the worse fnr drink though n«»t
noisy. He aecowd in a quarrelsome
mood anti abused the witness for re-
fusing. Linke left tbe bar with Outh-
wait* who wa« also preM-nt.
"Did you se«- Linke again?*
"Yes 1 sav him siftin’ on a bench 1
under a tree in the Garden fen min- <
Ute* later with another man.”
“Did you know the other mao by
sight?”
“Ayr It was Massingham. They i
was lalkin’.”
“Did either of them see you" •
This caused a buzz of sensation in
court. Graeme cross-examined but
failed to shake the witness' certainty
that if was Mnsoinghnm. The judge or-
dered Simon Linke to he recalled.
He wna aworn. cautioned aternly by
the judge and the questimi put to him
arain. Linke was pale fag. d and ob- i
stinate. I|e held to it tlisf he had not i
seen Massingham in the Garden* and
had never bat under the tree. If any '
And Then He Joined a Private Club
By JOHN GOODWIN
«>ne else said he had it waa not
true.
The judge who put tbe questions
received the denial* uf Linke with a
.11 1 tnea and tightened (iga. Linke
j left tbe box.
“1 shall call no more witnesses fur
। tbe defense m> loid” said Haggard
with a grim smile.
The crown counsel io»e his papers
‘ before him and addressed the jury.
( The discrepancy in Linke'* evidence
he said was no more than tbe word of
k one man against another.
“I ask you. gentlemen” be said "to
disregard the unsup|»orted attacks made
( upon &r MHmotb Craven the dead
I man's friend.
“I ask you tu clear your minds of
। side issues of love stories of sentiment
and of theories. Massingham a man
of clean and honest life universally
respected — Massingham who did his
plain duty in showing up a fraudulent
• nspiracy is dead—cruelly murdered.
He had no enemy but Urme. We hear
of him calling at prme's hotel—alone.
A few minute* later as the prosecution
has shown Massingham is found dying
with^ the piisunrr beside him.
“You have seen that the prisoner for
all his record of courage and service as
a man of violent and uncontrolled tern
per. Before this issue ever arose we
find that be iiublicly insulted this man
who had never harmed him. and refused
to offor an np dogy though urged to
it by his own friends.
“The defense has attempted to shou
that no proof has been given of the pris-
oner being present in tbe hotel when
Masaingham arrived there. Where then
was he? You have heard the evidence
of Miss Gaith that Orme left Derebam
Hall at ten minutes past seven. Be-
tween that time and the moment uf his
discovery by Marlowe no one set eyes
on him. The distance from Dereham
Hall to the Bell hotel is under two 1
miles. Even the slowest walker could
not take 50 minutes to cover that dis- i
tance. Massingham arrived at the hotel
at ten minutes to eight. It is stated i
that Orme lust hi« way in the f<»g aid ।
was delayed. Yon have his word fnr it.” .
-aid Graeme grimly "and nothing ।
mo* e.
“Gentlemen there is no need for me
to say more. The proofs of guilt against
tbe prisoner are surely overwhelming. 1 i
eave tbe laoM la year hand* with can-
fideoce that you will retara the verdict
that justice
The crown counsel irsumed bis seat
audd dead aileace anti Veraoa Hag- ।
zard after a brief pause rose to make
liia last effort for the life ami liberty uf
the man in tbe dock.
“Gentlemen of the jury” he said in
a steady clear voice “we have heard f
many reasons somewhat luridly express-
ed why Mr. John Orme. V. must ।
have murdered and did actually murder
M am.” |
Haggard leaned one band on the r
table and looked at the jury with a
dry smile. <
"Let us examine a little of the evi- ।
deuce which ha* been wet before you to
show why O. me should murder Mass-
ingham.
"We are told that diagrace and ex-
posure threatened John Orme the
nroofv of which were in the hands ••f
Massingham. Where are those proofs?
Trobably burnt' says the prosecution. (
We think Orme bu:nt them.’ Mark
that gentlemen.”
“Tbe proofs are missing. What evl- 1
deuce have we then. Umt they ever ex-
iated? ‘Very Irimi e? tuyii the profe* I
• ution ‘Massingham wrote a letter *o
Sir Melmoth < raven. That letter was
bandcfl sealed to the manager of the
White Rose hotel and passed cn tn •
Craven. It contained Massingham’s ac-
cusation against Orme.’
“And *». gentlemen w* fin*i Sir
Melmoth ( ravel brought into the wit- *
nesa box. and he telh u«. on oath what i
that letter contained. It contained he I
«ays. a statement by Massingham that *
Orme wa« j»enw»nally guilty of bribery.
But where is that letter? Would you »
not like tn see it gentlemen? So I
should I.”
Haggard panned.
“Massingham’s proof* aze burnt —
Massingham'* letter has been de-tro)w| •
by Cravet What have we left to «
prove a motive nn Orme's part? Why J
that gentlemen is even simpler." said 'I
Haggard blandly "we have the *worn I
‘•tatement of Mr. Simon Link*. Admir-I''
able!* The ring of gentle irony in
Haggard's lune was |»erfectiou. “We
actually have Linke's word for it.
“Mr. Linke was the last man. but one.
tn sec MuaataghMl Bl < whit dlu
Mamiingbam aaya to him? 'Hr tall me.'
-ays Linke ‘that he had proofs that
Orme was personally guilty of bri-
bery.' *
Haggard placed both bis hand* on his
h | '•
“I do not think” he said “that I
ever heard thinner evidence offered to
a jury. It conalsta of three iteuw. Itdm
•Be— a couple of bank notes that have
vßßiahad iato the nahaowß. Iltai two
-a letter that ha* ben torn up but is
quoted to you by Orme’s political rival
at prveent enjoying the seat in parlia-
■aat that ormc waa. Itou tkra—tbt
bare ward of an impecunious and self-
eaafetaed briber of vatera. who fen
tirated you all to a bare-faced exhibi-
tloa of I"' 'ir\ in that box. A very
curious trinity gentlemen” said Hag-
gard grimly “on which you are asked
damn a man to the gallows.
'T now invite you to follow me for
a brief space in the footsteps of Maa-
ilngham. and I think we afeU! find it
ealfghtenfag* I will mj in eeoMnaat l
ment that I believe what all Wi^ting-
t«»n agrees that a more honest man
I.'t aa an What he did.
“First we find Massingham acting
busily for Craven in the election and
showing great industry. Orme wins;
Massingham that very same day gets
on the track of bribery. Orme is
thrown down Craven acquires the prize
—the M-at in parliament. It is a tri-
umph for Massingham’s party. He may
well rest <>n his laurels. And for many
days he doe* so.
“Where do we find Massingham next?
“Where indeed? Sitting on a bench
in the public garden* and in the com-
IMS M Linke. I.inl.r. by the way. for
reasons of his own denies that this
interview ever took place. He believed
that no man suspected it. Yet we have
the testimony of a disinterested witness
that this denial is a lie.
“Linke the briber of voters Linke
the impecunious but enterprising liar
has been imbibing freely in the Green
Man and is the worse for liquor" said
Haggard slowly. “What more probable
that that Linke who dared not to tell
us the truth here in court allowed it to
leak out when he sat there with Mas-
singham his head muddled with drink.
•'What is Maasingham'N next and im-
mediate move? He leaves Linke. He
goes straight to every one of the bribed
votrs and offer* a double price for the
bank notes which they received—from
Linke.
“Having posswesed him*elf of these
as w* have learned Massingham goes
to Linke’s hou»e. L nke—half drunk
—has gone to bed. No matter. Mas-
singham has him roused and brought
down.
Haggnid stopped suddenly and looked
keenly at hr jury.
••What is this strange thing—thia
new ami burning pr<s»f that Ma**ing-
ham has discovered?” he said impirs-
•iyely. “What i« it that caused bun
to bring Linke from his bed? Is it
fresh proof against Orme? Is Massing-
ham merely floggiig a dead horse? Or.”
•«aid Haggard grimly “is it proof that
Linke is more than a brilier —that he is
a conanlrator and a felon I Then bis
work was directed to Orme’s undoing—
Orme. wh<» had refused to ^ive or lend
him three hundred pounds!’
IV/jere to Go.
Majestic: “Varieties ni 1921." ami
other acts of Big-Time vamirville.
Grand: “G«iod Nignt IxuiAm** and
other act* of I‘antages vainkville.
Princess: “Pej»-O-Mint H<vue ami
other act* of Ijocw’s vaudeville.
Empire: Pictures. Claries Ch •
in “The Kid."
Rialto; I’icturee. Ot^s Skinner in
•'Kismet.’*
R. :*ieturws. William S. Halt
in “O’Malley of t2>c M» unted."
Four Firemen Overcome.
.Seattle Wash. April IB.—Fire Chief
G<*orgr Mantur and three other fire-
men were over»f»me by smoke while
fighting a fir* in the forward hold of
the Nippon Yumh Ka is ha freighter.
Tatsumo Maru here late Sat unlay '
night. The tire was confined to the
foiward section of the ship.
C hild I* Burned.
Lufliin. Tex.. Anri I IK.—The 5 vrHr-
«dd s< n of Charlie Diftiu was burn«<l l<i
death Sunday when the tent in whic'i 1
the family lived wa* destroye<| by fire !
The mother and father were away from |
home when tbe fire started. Another |
child wa« seriously burned.
APRIL 18 1921.
A Laugh or Two
A merchant was recently persuaded
to purchase an excellent parrot This
one had traveled far and could jab-
bird coming for dinner. Wring ita neck
and have it fried hot for Mr. Kicharda
when be gets home.” Unfortunately the
parrot arrived first and Mary followed
instructions. At dinner he was duly
sen^l. -What’s this?” exclaimed Mr.
Richards.
Mary told him.
“But for goodness sake. Mary" he
said “this is awful. That bird could
speak seven languages."
"Then phwy the divil didn't he aay
something?" asked Mary.
Mr. Bully was cross-examining a
down-trodden witness.
“Now sir" he thundered "you have
stated under xath
that tbis man bad <
the appearance of <fW
a gentleman!
Please tell the jury Jg
bow a gentleman
looks—in your esti-
mat ion!”
"Well—er—a gen- — f
tieman looks like I
er — a — er ” ■ I
stammered the poor confused witneas.
With unmerciful sarcasm the coun-
sel plunged to the attack again.
“1 don't want any of your 'era* and
remember you are on oath! Can you
sec anylssly in the court who looks
like a gentleman?”
The witness’ eyes for the first time
showed anger and he blared out:
"Stand out of tbe way and then per-
haps I can. You're not transparent!”
Haus was speaking about the high
price of cabbage in his town.
"K ebb ages is
a awful high dis
year” be said "Me
und mine vife puts
up seven eight
nine barrels of
sauerkraut efery
year but we can't
dis year. lie keb-
bages coat too
much."
"But you did put up some sauer-
kraut. didn't you Hans?" questioned
a friend.
“Oh yes two or tree barrels just to
haff in de house in case of sickness.”
The scene was an old country farm
yard and the farmer's wife stood at
the door. Down the pretty country
lane a tramp be-
draggled and dirty -
made his way. __
At the farm yard 'x
gate he stopped qj Rj)' i
and besought the 2/ /> —VS * jli
farmer's wife to e>A
give him sum*- [
tiling to eat to ap- ' PSk !
pease his hunger.
(-ome right into I————*
th* yanl.” Hzid obe. cordially.
Th* tramp eyed the bulldog that win
roving round the vard. The bull d<>g eyad
him.
"Cwr right in !" repeated tbe farm-
er’* wife.
*T dunno about that." answered tbe
tramp. “How ’bnut the dog? Will be
Mfer
“I don't know." aaid the fanner’a
wife. “I only g«»t him today aud
that’s what I want to find out."
“I see a visitor to New York wav
arre-t»*i the other day because he had
in hi* pocket" said <!bureb.
"Aad it wasn’t
bis own money?"
a»*ke<| Gotham.
W *’
J proved in <-ourt
bat ** own
pul money.” replied
‘''"^v on earth
did they arreet
* him. then?”
Tl" »ns trying to gel out of town
ber in several for-
eign lingoes. H«
ordered it sent
home. The same
day hia wife bad
ordered a fre a h
spring chicken for
dinner. On leav-
ing tbe bouse she
"aid to the cook:
'Mary there'a a
—By Ripley
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Diehl, Charles S. & Beach, Harrison L. The San Antonio Light (San Antonio, Tex.), Vol. 41, No. 89, Ed. 1 Monday, April 18, 1921, newspaper, April 18, 1921; San Antonio, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1617189/m1/8/?q=%22%22~1: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; .