Eagle River review. [volume] (Eagle River, Wis.) 1890-1927, 1903-02-14

away has adventures with thrills in
them. He saves the life of his employ
er's daughter, and later marries her and
accepts partnership in her fathers
business. Then, one day he goes back
to the old home and reaches it just as
the Sheriff Is moving the pitiful effects
of a white-haired mother into the
street. The son produces a large roll
Of bills, pays the mortgage, installs his
mother In a beautiful home, and then
the curtain falls. Sounds well. It
would make almost any boy want to
run away. But it isn't true twice in a
million times. Surprising we had a
book about Guy Oliver, of Mason, w.
Va, who ran away from a good home
nearly a year ago. Perhaps he is away
off somewhere building fortune. Per-
hapsl There Is no perhaps about the
woman at home. Her heart has been
wrung till life has lost its pleasure. She
has wept till tears no longer contain
consolation. She has journeyed hun
IeuS VA U1AcS, dAN oA""JS va
her lips has been the question:
"Have you seen my boy" Be-
cause she believed that the newspa-
pers could find him she has written
letter to the lad and forwarded 1t to a
Cincinnati paper. 1t Is a wonderful
document. Between the lines in all its
pages 1t pleads for a word. 1t Is ten
derness itself. It says: Il forgive. Oh,
my beloved boy, won't you come home
to your mothers arms?" 1t tells Of a
fathers forgiveness, Of welcome,
warm, tender and strong, that awaits
the selfish lad who didn't stop to think
and ran away. That Is the other side
Of the story, you see. No fortune that
a youth could make; no honor that he
could achieve would pay for a wom-
ans tears. If every boy who has run
away, and there are hundreds, could
mentally picture a sobbing woman
listening for the footsteps Of lost boy,
wouldn't there be some glad home
| comings, some fervent "I'm sorrys,"
and joyous reconciliations.
The decision Of the United States Su-
preme Court invalidating a divorce
granted In South Dakota to residents
Of Massachusetts will once more en-
phasize in the public mind the need
Of national divorce law establishing
uniform conditions and requirements
as a basis for DEGREES Of separation.
nol 70 In
dence Of six months in that State be-
fore divorce can be granted. When
an applicant for divorce, residing in
another State, takes up his residence
in South Dakota and remains only six
months it Is plainly obvious that the
residence Is only temporary, fact
confirmed when the relations Of citi-
zenship are resumed Immediately after
the decree Is granted. The legality Of
the decree in such cases is seldom
challenged unless the courts are called
upon to administer the estate Of one
or both Of the parties affected. The
Massachusetts case just passed upon
by the Supreme Court involved the
question as to which Of two widows
Of a citizen Of that State was entitled
to administer upon his estate. The
court, following the line Of It's former
decisions respecting the South Dakota
divorce law, decided in favor of the
first wife from whom the husband had
secured a divorce after remaining six
months in South Dakota, holding that
the temporary change Of residence did
not amount to domicile nor change Of
citizenship. The South Dakota court
was therefore without Jurisdiction and
it's decree was void. In a question Of
this kind vitality affecting the basis
Of orderly and organized society the
people are not disposed to patiently
tolerate any clubbing over legal tech
nicalitIes A Massachusetts Divorce
may have become legally a 'citizen Of
South Dakota" under the law Of that
State defining citizenship by residing
there six months, but the law Of South
Dakota cannot destroy his citizenship
in Massachusetts, especially when he
has returned to that State to reside.
Under the demoralizing and disinte-
grating complications growing out of
such State enactments, the sentiment
In favor of a national divorce law is
rapidly gathering irresistible force.
A Much-Traveled Cat.
The dogs who travel on railways be-
H. -