Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1912-03-13


ISOLATION, and Messrs. John D. Nor
moyle and George Harlow. which
only succeeded in getting out of
committee at a late day, but this bill
was bitterly fought by delegates from
districts where there are associations
that do not desire nor welcome
public investigation (unlike the en-
cellent association above mentioned.)
(4) A bill TO prohibit second
hand glass bottles. picked up from
refuse places. being used to encase
i food or medicines, introduced in be
half of public health and my local
friends and constituents, the glass
blowers, and which was defeated by
the Richmond delegation.
90 A bill to provide salary in
lieu OF fees for sealer Of weights and
measures, which seems TO be the mod
ern idea.
co. A bill to protect stone cut
ters claims.
O. A bill to increase justice S
jurisdiction in civil matters, so as to
save the higher courts much trivial
work, and TO provide the public. an
ever ready means of trial. but this
was strenuously opposed by the
young lawyers in particular. they say
ing that justices knew little or no
law, but it seems to me that old JUS
tees with wide experience and conf
mon sense, desiring to do what is
substantially just and right upon the
facts of the case, would be better for
the public welfare and business than
the school learned knowledge of
young lawyer before he has digested
his knowledge.
(S) A bill to change the wage
exemption from $4,000 to $500, in
the case of necessaries Of life, rent
claims and labor bills, but to leave it
at $4,000 in all other cases. This
bill introduced in behalf Of honest
laboring men. the business men, and
for the protection of the wives and
children OF laborers who were not
good hearted and manly enough to
voluntarily use their income to sup
port their families. ! only introduC-
ed this bill after talking the matter
over with labor leaders Of my city,
including Messrs. John T. Harrison
and Charles A. Howard, who, without
fiattering them, are high toned gen
tlcmcn DESTROYS of the best interests
of their community and labor in
general. and ! think labor is very for
tunatc in having their services. lhlS
bill, if passed. would have preferred
clothing, food. rent and labor Dills
to all others, and given a wife pow
or TO get support for herself and chill
drcn whether the husband said so or
not. In my experience as lawyer
and man, | have found that as a rule.
man who beats his bills will also
neglect his family and use his money
for whiskcy. dcbauchery or gambling,
and under our great social conditions
it certainly seems to me that after a
man. marrirs woman and imposes
upon her a family, which nature
makes her look after, he certainly
owes her. and those for whom he IS
responsible, the duty to furnish them
food, clothing and a house land also
to pay another laborer for work done
for himl, and if he docs not rolun-
tarily do so then the wife should
have the right to demand and re-
uuire part Of his money, to-wlt,
under this bill what is above 5000
for the support of herself and fam
lily. the $500 certainly being enough
for him TO spend solely for pleasure;
and as TO every other claim than those
enumerated, the exemption still re-
manning $1,000. 1t seems to ME that
labor ought TO work out plan 10
make u spcndthrift man support his
I family. and request its enactment IN
TO law, because it would be to its
credit, and the class of men who beat
arc no credit 10 labor and as we'll do
not pay their union dues.
l. | got this bill through the House
by large majority against the ef-
forts of certain political leaders, who
we're in part, in my judgment, play
ing for political notoriety and capl-
tai. but such being two-edged
sword. | doubt if their effort to de-
feat the measure appealed to hon
est labor and business men.
In the Senate the bill came up on
Saturday when few members were
present. and although it received
,,to or ~ TN & in itc ia vOr Ontpr the