Arizona weekly journal-miner., 1901-09-04

AS the secretary ana not the gov ernor, is the recipient of that S2,40O bonus of the last legislature the Jour nal Miner remarks concerning his be- ing entitled to it had no reference whatever to the governor, as our pur- gatoIy located contemporary twisted it to read.
 The Nogales custom house seems to be most unfortunate institution for some reason or other. It has been a sort of political storm center for a number of years and every man who has been in charge of it as collector for that period has had troubles of one kind or another and has been the subject of charges of official derelic-
 ton of some sort.
 The tragedy enacted in Tucson on Tuesday morning, whereby B. F. Jossey was killed, was a most de- plorable affair. Happening just at a time when a serious charge was pend ing against him, even with the cir cumstances attending it, indicating that it could easily have been acci- dental, the human family is so con stituted that the suspicion of suicide will never be eliminated from it.
 In replying to the Journal-Miner's criticism of its diabolical and unjust attack on Governor Murphy in con nection with the appointment of an assistant secretary, our contemporary deviates from a personal discussion of
 the editor of this paper long enough
 to say that Governor Murphy should
 have vetoed the bill. He ignores the
 fact that every veto of his was over ridden by the legislature and that a combine existed whereby every one he might have interposed would have met the same fate. Of all the mali cious charges ever preferred against Governor Murphy, even our contem- porary never accused him of being deficient in common sense, and with his experience with the last legisla- ture in the matter of vetoes, had he continued to interpose them in the face of the combine against him, he would have convicted himself of that charge.
 The Journal-Miner has repeatedly called attention to the advantages which the building of the Big Bug and Crowned King railroad will have on the mining industry of those sec tions of country. The Phenix Re publican, speaking of this, has the following to say: "The closing of the contract for the construc ton of the Bradshaw Noun tain railroad into the Big Bug coun- try, marks an advanced step in the development of the rich mineral re- sources of Yavapai county. A large number of valuable mines which are now idle or operated with indifferent energy, will be placed on profitable shipping basis by the new road. Rail road construction in Yavapai has met the same criticism-and the same re- sults-as were observed in the pro- motion and construction of the moun- tain railways in Colorado. Pessimists in Colorado asserted that there were no mines of any account, and that the proposed roads would not learn axle grease" Like predictions were made as to railroad construction in Yavapai county. And yet it is being demon strated rapidly that there is not a richer mining country in the world. and that more inviting and profta- ble field for railroads could not be found. The same state of facts will hold good in numerous other sections of Arizona, and for this reason now, recognized, the territory is on the eve of unprecedented railroad construc- tion."
 The code compilers omitted Labor Day from the list of holidays.
 That Maryland coroner's jury did the proper thing in finding a verdict of homicide against the young man who rocked a boat, while out boat riding in lake, upsetting the craft, resulting in the drowning of young lady. No let up should be made in his prosecution until the foolish 1 young man is placed behind prison bars, where he may have a chance of on the criminal lack of common sense he displayed.
 In a recent divorce case in Los An geles Judge York has laid down the proposition that it is the duty of the wife to be a breadwinner as well as a homekeeper, and that a wife has been both is no reason why she should be granted a divorce. The ruling promulgated has attracted no small of attention and a discussion of the point involved is one of the salient features in recent California The Examiner and other papers have interviewed promi- nent and well known jurists and pub Iished their views upon the mooted topic. With unanimity of expression they all agree that the ruling of Judge York is good law, i. e. that there is nothing in the law which throws upon the husband and father he whole responsibility for providing .or the household, and that conse- Iuently when one has failed to do so he wife cannot set up that failure as . good ground for divorce in a suit or dissolution of the marriage con- ract. The law may be valid but the of it by husband is 7ery reprehensible.