Printed 118 years ago today in the Spokane Press. Image cleaned up, see the original.
Found on the Library of Congress site.
Corporal punishment! Gun safety! Body shaming! Protecting migratory birds! These two panels cover a lot.
The page also has some other interesting stories.
- “Fierce Fight in a Saloon”
- Boxing rumors
- A story about the rehab of a racing horse
- An ad that carefully explains to rube readers how to use the ad: “Look at this Illustration and then we doubt If you can find any good excuse for not buying your new Winter Overcoat here especially in view of the fact that we’ll agree to show you lots of garments that will look just as good to you as does this one In the picture.”
- A story about cooks and waiters affiliated with the Industrial Workers of the World going on strike in Nevada. “Proprietors are endeavoring to run the places with Japanese help… The strikers demand a 10 hour day and recognition of the union.”
I love how the coat ad finishes with “we expect you in tomorrow”. Talk about pushy!
500USD for land and a four-bedroom house?! That’s under 20k adjusted for inflation?!
Houses were considered an expendable good (not sure of the exact terminology), not an investment until the past few decades.
That’s wild!
I honestly think he had every right to do that in that situation. Kid aims a gun at you and gets a spanking? Kid got of light…
It was surprising to see Everett say he didn’t have the right to spank him when he beats the shit out of guys all the time with nary a thought.
Kids back then were seen as property of their parents (in case you were wondering where that idea comes from when it pops up now and again today), and thus technically their discipline was also the province of their parents.
Where is the follow up comic of Everett slapping the parents around?
But isn’t beating someone up also a violation of their rights?
Kids didn’t have rights, any more than a dog or horse or chair did. They were seen as property. Both by the law and by custom.
In this case, the rights refer to the adult who “owned” them.
Right, hence him saying ‘I know I haven’t any right to do this’. He was infringing on their rights, with them not present to object.
Yes, and he’s also infringing on their rights when he beats them up, yet has no problem with it.
Yeah that would hold up in a court of law even today. “I murdered him in self-defense, Your Honor.”
I’m guessing it’s a BB gun, but still not good to point at people
Yeah it makes no difference, a gun is a gun.
That’s Gun 101.
It makes a huge difference, but I get your point. A BB gun will cause a little welt if it hits anywhere besides your eyes. An actual firearm has the potential to kill or cripple you, regardless of where it hits.
Not really true in practice. Airsoft and paintball are guns in form and function but they are intended to be aimed at people for fun.
Even with Airsoft/Paintball you would practice gun safety, and not point them at people who are not part of the event, or who are but are not actively ready to participate.
Could still fuck your eyes up.
I think he was pointing the gun at the bird.
there’s a person too close. He should not be aiming at the bird either
Love the subtle clean up, looks terrific.
Thanks! I’m still learning how to use GIMP to do all that.
