There is only one other enactment which all legislatures should be urged to pass, and that is one which strikes directly at the white slaver, the "procurer," the owner or the "fellow." Keepers of houses of ill-fame have discovered that the hideous task of keeping the unwilling white slave in subjection is much easier if a certain ownership of her is vested in a man. In many cases this man is the one who is directly responsible for placing the girl in the house, but this is not invariably the case. When it is the case he receives not only a lump purchase price down on the delivery of his victim to the house, but he is recognized by the keeper as her owner and master, the one to whom a certain percentage of her income is paid and with whom all settlements on her account are made. What is more important in the eyes of the keeper is that this man is held absolutely responsible for the girl's subjection, and if she attempts to escape he must cajole, threaten or beat her into subjection. In one of the recent raids I chanced to come upon visual demonstration of how this peculiar phase of white slavery operates in actual practice. One of these "fellows" was disciplining a girl whom he "owned"--and doing so by the gentle process of forcing her against the wall with his hands at her throat. Some of these "fellows" "own" two or three, or perhaps more, white slaves, and on the income of their slavery these brutes live in luxury at expensive hotels, maintain expensive automobiles and lead lives of luxury, idleness and dissipation. While some states have statutes directly aimed at this system, it has been found extremely difficult to secure convictions against these most contemptible of all white slavers, for the reason that all of the existing statutes, so far as I am informed, make it necessary, at least by implication, for the prosecution to establish the fact that they derive their entire support from white slaves under their control--in other words, it devolves upon the state to demonstrate that the man on trial has no other visible means of support. As a consequence the defense set up is almost invariably calculated to prove that the man on trial is a solicitor for a tailoring establishment, a laundry or some other legitimate business enterprise. In view of this fact, it seems to me an enactment drawn upon the following lines would be effective: "Any person who shall knowingly accept or receive in whole or in part support or maintenance from the proceeds or earnings of any woman engaged in prostitution shall be deemed guilty of a felony and on conviction thereof shall be confined in the penitentiary not less than one (1) nor more than three (3) years and fined not exceeding one thousand dollars, or both, in the discretion of the court." Not long since I was asked how many persons I supposed Chicago contained who would come under a statute of this kind and who ought to receive sentence under it. My reply was this: