There ought to be some definite legislation duties consisted in warning travelers of the ap upon this subject, but it does not appear to be proach of trains. One night a farmer's wagon covered, even by the Connecticut blue laws. In was struck, causing a bad accident. The rail Colonial times a Boston man was fined for kiss road company was of course sued for damages ing his wife in public, but that is another matter. and at the trial the old darky was the chief wit In this instance there was no third party. Cato ness for his employers. He answered the ques degraded a senator by the name of Hanilius tions put to him in a clear, direct manner. for kissing his wife in broad daylight and in the Among them was the query as to whether he presence of his daughter, but Plutarch con surely swung his lantern across the road when sidered this punishment excessive, although he saw the train coming, to which he replied : Clement, one of the Fathers of the Church, ex '"Deed I did, sah." horts all married people to refrain from kissing The railroad company won the suit and Mr. in the presence of third parties. In 1837, Mr. Daniel took occasion later to compliment his Thomas Saverland sued a lady who bit a piece witness on his excellent testimony. The old out of his nose for having kissed her by way of fellow was profuse in thanks, but before they a joke. She was a Miss Newton, and not his parted bluntly said : fiancee, but the defendant was acquitted. The "Lordy, Marse John, I sho' was skeered when Court laid down the dictum " when a man kisses dat lawyer gin to ax me 'bout de lantern. I was a woman against her will she is fully entitled to afeared he was goin' to ax me if it was lit or not, bite his nose if she so pleases." This would 'cause de oil in it done give out some time before seem to limit her remedy to retaliation at the de axdent." —Exchange. time the offence is committed. Deep-thinking Germany, however, may shed An interesting and unusual double divorce some light upon the problem. In a treatise pub proceeding was recently made conspicuous in lished about a hundred years ago, a German Wapelle County, Iowa, because the woman who jurist wrote upon the remedies that a woman has was interested in both cases was exceedingly against a man who kisses her against her will. thankful to have a husband as an excuse for ( Von dent Rechte des Frauenzimmcrs gegen cine keeping her out of the penitentiary. On two Mannperson die cs wider seinert Willen kiisset.) pages of the court docket there appeared oppo In this learned treatise the distinction between site each other two divorce proceedings in which lawful and unlawful kisses is made. Reduc a woman appeared,— in the one as plaintiff and ing the whole thing to a system he decides that in the other as defendant. Both were set for a kiss between individuals of the same society the same term of court, and to the inquirer there is not a tort, and in actionable cases of what is, was at first some curiosity as to why the woman according to the Roman law, crimen osculationis, was not prosecuted for bigamy, but an investiga the punishment of the wrongdoer should be pro tion revealed the following story : This woman had married, and her husband, portioned upon a sliding scale, being most severe in the case of nuns or married women, after living with her a time, disappeared, not less severe between betrothed couples, and mild being seen or heard of for years. Believing when the lady is neither married nor betrothed. that he was dead, she married again. Number Possibly this work might serve as a guide to the I one in the course of time put in an appearance, Connecticut bench in the present case. It might and being an unprincipled character, threatened be well, however, to carry the case to the Supreme to make trouble for the woman. In this manner bench, in order that a betrothed suitor might he obtained hush money. Matters ran along knew his exact legal rights, and his fiancee just until number two was made aware of the pro ceedings. Being enraged that his money had what to expect. — Boston Transcript. been going to support a prior husband, and Senator Daniel of Virginia was at one time claiming that he had not known that she was counsel for a small Southern railroad. At a previously married, he filed a petition for a di point on the line where it crossed a prominent vorce. His action was foreseen by the wife, highway they had an old negro watchman, whose and she, wishing to hold him and hoping to cut
