making $70 a month, and visitor forced him to add that he got in
addition his board and lodging on the ship, so that he was under no
expense except when on shore leave. Visitor repeated that as a
husband he was required to pay for woman's care, that that was the
right thing to do; that one way he would be a husband deserting his
wife, liable to arrest for non-support and desertion, and the other
way a husband with a sick wife for whom he was willing to provide
the medical attention and care that every sick person has a right to
have. He said if it was a question of a few dollars a week, he
supposed he would be willing to do it, and visitor felt he really
was willing to do the right thing if he only could be assured that
woman would not interfere with Arthur. Said he would never let woman
see the child, but finally admitted, if she were not drunk and was
in the hospital and it would do any good, he supposed she could."

With persistent or recalcitrant deserters as a group, court action has
very often to be invoked. Procedure in this direction differs so much in
different communities that only general observations can be offered
here. If the man has left his home but not the town and is still within
the jurisdiction of the local court, the magistrate will usually issue a
summons (which in many cities the wife is expected to serve) calling on
the man to appear at court on the date set for the hearing. If he fails
to appear a warrant for his arrest is issued. If he has left the city
but not the state, local courts may issue warrants, which can be mailed
to the city to which the man has gone and served by the police there; or
an officer may be sent from the home town with a warrant to arrest the
man and bring him back.

Prior to his arraignment, the best court practice calls for an
investigation by the probation officer, so that the judge may have