She establishes her position by the fact that she left her baby for the first time when the cherub was ten months old, and there is the Family Bible to prove that he was born May 10, 1888.

Is she likely to be mistaken on such a point when she cried all night in Boston and the bereft infant wailed all night in New York?
What does Charles take her for?
Hasn't he said, himself, dozens of times, that there is no use arguing as to times and seasons with a woman who verifies these by her children's ages?
Mr.Jenkyns has said so--but with a difference.

There is no use arguing with a woman in any circumstances, whatsoever.

That Emma tries to carry her point now by lugging in the poor little kid, who has nothing whatever to do with the case, is but another proof of the inconsequence of the sex.

He has the stub of his check-book to show that he paid the hotel bill in Boston, April 11, 1889.