Thursday, 24th July 1913 Is It Lady-like To Look Like A Lady On Atlanta’s Streets?

Is it proper, also is it legal, for a real ladylike man to further simulate femininity and appear on the streets dressed in women's garb, provided this man be a professional female impersonator?

This is a question which is troubling Miss beg your pardon Mr. Auriema, who is nightly appearing at one of Atlanta's moving picture show houses. Also, it is troubling Chief Beavers.

If it is proper and legal for a woman to cut her hair and don male costume as did Belva Lockwood and Dr. Mary Walker, who, for many years, were conspicuous figures in New York, Washington and other populous centers, why shouldn't I take the place of some of the women who are fast abandoning the frills and furbelows so long cherished by womankind?

This is the way that Mr. Auriema argued.

"Really," he said to himself, "if women keep on deserting the ranks of womanhood it will be only a short time when there will be no women, unless we men take their places!"

Consults With Chief.

However, Mr. Auriema had grave doubts as to Chief Beavers' attitude on this question and before appearing on the streets of Atlanta he consulted with the chief over the telephone.

The chief seemed puzzled over the proposition and advised Auriema that he first submit his costume to police inspection. It is against the law for women to appear on the streets in male costume, he argued, and, therefore, it very likely is against the same law for a man to appear to public in feminine attire.

Captain Lamar Poole was sent to investigate Mr. Auriema and his garb. He had instructions from his chief to ascertain, by all means, whether or not it was immodest or indecent and to render a report on the examination.

Auriema and his costumes, which are said to be the pride and joy of the modistes whose shops turned them out, were scanned by the keen eye of Captain Poole. He saw nothing inde-

"IT LOOKS LIKE A WOMAN- IT WALKS LIKE A WOMAN- BY GUM! I BELIEVE IT IS A WOMAN!"

If Auriema has her (that is his) way.

cent or immodest, and, in fact, complimented the impersonator on his elaborate wardrobe.

He reported to the chief and the chief deferred action. Up to late Wednesday afternoon he had not given Auriema the desired permit to appear on the streets, telling a Constitution reporter that he couldn't permit a man to do a thing that was against the law.

If Auriema Appears on Streets.

The reporter asked him if he would arrest the actor if Auriema appeared on the streets.

"I don't like to say beforehand what I'd do," was the chief's reply. "All I can say is I can't give a man permission to violate a city ordinance."

Some time ago Chief Beavers created considerable amusement with a suggestion to clothe a squad of policemen in female garb and send them to patrol the streets in search of mashers, pickpockets and purse-snatchers.

Meanwhile, My Auriema, clothed in all the glory of feminine art and the beauty of modern fashion, awaits the chief's decision an indecisive lady-like man.

PAGE 4, COLUMN 3

LET THE RECORDER ALONE!

The most effective barrier between Atlanta on the one side and crime and disorder on the other is the office of city recorder, as administered by Nash R. Broyles. This is not to say the other courts are not well administered. But it is Judge Broyles' court that first comes in contact with crime and the criminal. His attitude toward this most fundamental of community problems must necessarily strengthen or weaken the entire judicial processes above his jurisdiction. A weak recorder or a recorder with his powers circumscribed would be a first aid to the thug and the outlaw. Judge Broyles, under present conditions, is not that sort of recorder.

For these and other resources, The Constitution is in hearty sympathy with Senator Huie, of the thirty-fifth senatorial district, when he firmly opposes legislative sanction of that feature of the house bill which in amending Atlanta's charter, would substantially lessen the powers of the recorder. If it comes to a choice between the passage of the bill as it stands and preserving the status quo as regards the recorder, then by all means let the whole measure go. The loss would not be an irreparable one, but the tying of Judge Broyles' hands would be a disaster. About the only element with anything to gain by abridging his authority is the criminal element, and neither Atlanta nor the state need take cognizance of its complaints.

We have yet to see an important instance in which Judge Broyles has abused his authority or acted with undue harshness. On the other hand, without his co-operation it would have ben impossible to approximate the record regarding vice and crime now held by Atlanta. The state would encourage and not discourage the strong and fearless judge who tempers these qualities with the humane instinct. We need more and not less of them. We assume that if the amendment restricting the power of the recorder is restored, the other charter amendments will have smooth legislative sailing. But we repeat that the other changes are of secondary importance to the desirability of leaving undisturbed the influence the recorder now exerts for moral progress and law and order in his community. Senator Huie is to be commended for his statesmanlike and broad interpretation of his duty.