Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 10.pdf/269

 242

and closely nestled to a heart that beat alone for the defendant, showed his base black in gratitude by abandoning her without cause whatever, except the insatiable thirst for novelty, which is the predominant character of the defendant's nature." If the deserted one was in the habit of holding forth in this style, the wonder is that the union endured as long as it did. But complaints of cruel and inhuman treat ment are not the exclusive privilege of the weaker sex. Husbands have made their share of them. One man claimed a divorce on the ground that his wife was in the habit of pulling him out of bed by his whiskers; another because his wife did not sew on his buttons. A third wanted freedom because his spouse gave him a violent blow over the head with her bustle; and yet another be cause his wife's brothers used to come to his house and threaten to thrash him, and make him do everything she wanted him to do. It is only a few months ago that William Schineckebier of Chicago applied to the courts for freedom from a wife who had set up for his observance these new Command ments. These are the new commandments ten, . Which wives now make to married men : 1 . Remember that I am thy wife. That thou must cherish all thy life. 2. Thou shalt not stay out late at night When lodges, friends, or clubs invite.

3. Thou shalt not smoke indoor or out Nor chew tobacco " round about." 4. Thou shall with praise receive my pies Nor pastry made by me despise, 5. My mother thou shalt strive to please, And let her live with us in ease. 6. Remember 'tis thy duty clear To dress me well throughout the year. 7. Thou shalt in manner mild and meek Give me thy wages every week. 8. Thou shalt not be a drinking man, Hut live on prohibition plan. 9. Thou shalt not flirt, but must allow Thy wife such freedom, anyhow. 10. Thou shalt get up when baby cries, And try the child to tranquilize. These my commandments from day to day Implicitly thou shalt obey. The plaintiff obtained his divorce, but it is only fair to Chicago to say that it was granted on some more reasonable ground. After noting such instances as the fore going, it is pleasant to be able to record a case where matrimonial difficulties were solved by the exercise of a simple little bit of philosophy. Jennie June tells the story as follows: — "I once asked a poor woman if she would not be better off to leave her drunken worthless husband. 'Well, I don't know,' she replied, ' women must be takin' care of something — don't ye think so? — an' I might as well take care of him; nobody else would.' "