A NOVELTY IN HUSBANDS.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXV, Issue 9, 7 January 1913, Page 3

A NOVELTY IN HUSBANDS.

OBJECTS TO KISSING. Platonic affection may have its place in the world, but there is such a thing as working an otherwise good philosophy overtime. Here, for example, is the case of John 3. Gallagher, 44 years old, and married—neither of which facts alone need comment. But he is unkissed. He not only confesses it, but apparently glories in proclaiming it to an astonished and probably a hit incredulous woTld. It is true, nevertheless, for his wife backs him up in his statement. She says he has never kissed her, either before or since their marriage. Of course, from personal knowledge, Mrs. Gallagher can speak only for herself, but until some well supported evidence to the contrary is brought forward, Gallagher s statement that he has never kissed a girl nor been kissed by one must lie believed. Gallagher’s record as an unkissed man probably stands alone in this day of “soul mates,” and if he had confined himself solely to maintaining his unkissed state his wife would not have complained; She did object, however, when his display of “affection” took the course of using her after the manner of a punching bag, and so had him haled before the police Judge of the Norristown Court. The charge was of beating his wife. Nothing was said about the fact that he had never kissed her, although most wives would consider that negligence the most culpable offence—probably. The Judge heard the evidence on the charge, and, being an old-fashioned soul unversed in any of the “isms, past or present, suggested that they “kiss and make up.” “1 don’t, believe in osculation,” replied Gallagher, a bit severely, considering the man he was addressing was giving him a chance for his liberty. “What—what’s that?” gasped the astonished Judge. “You don’t believe in what?”

“I don’t believe in kissing,” replied Gallagher, imperturbably. The Judge glanced helplessly in the direction of Mrs. Gallagher, and the others in the Court-room leaned forward expectantly in their seats. “That’s right, your Honour,” said Mrs. Gallagher. “John doesn’t believe in kissing. He has never kissed me in his life, either ibefore or after we were married. And he says 119 has never kissed or been kissed by any other woman.” I h; “He must b ( e queer,” ( said the Judge, emphatically, and as one man the Court-room audience'nodded their’ heads in confirmation. “What’s the matter, Gallagher?” asked the Judge. “Well, your Honour, you see, 1 have my ideas the same as other men, and this business of kissing has always seemed to ; kne to be something like the appendix 1 is to the body; both have outlived their usefulness, and can only make trouble, i\V& arc better off without either. I have thought it all over, and as I am a man of convictions, I have determined that 1 would not encourage a custom that merely plays on our emotions, the reflex of which can only have a deleterious effect upon our higher plane of thought. Besides, scientists have long since proved to us that osculation is far from sanitary. Science, your Honour, has proved beyond refutation by even the most captuous critics that the act of kissing is the only possible way to transmit the bacillus of ” “Hold on, Gallagher,” interrupted the Judge, weakly, “I would like to know by what philosophy you justify your theory of wife-beating. Does that end to the elevation of humanity ?”

“With the ancients ” Gallagher began.

“Stop,” shouted the Judge. “I haven’t time for more philosophy. Will you promise to discontinue this especial theory if I let you off this time?”

“Yes, sir,” answered Gallagher, promptly. “Then, if your wife will agree, I’ll dismiss the charge on that condition.” As the Gallaghers started from the Court-room the Judge added: “And 1 would advise you to revise your theory on kissing. You- will find it not such a hardship after all. Just try one and see.”