There were all sorts of curious cases which came up in Boston as in other cities, which show alien artlessness or slacker subterfuges much as they appear elsewhere, as well as a certain occasional informality in regard to the observance of the ordinary civil laws. For instance, one does not recall the name of Edward Burkhart as one of the occupants of the Mayflower on its arrival; neither does Mr. Burkhart seem to have been fully possessed of Puritan principles, for it was alleged that he had been dishonorably discharged from the U. S. Navy, was dishonorably living with a woman who was not his wife, and had dishonorably failed to register for the draft. As Mr. Burkhart was hiding out somewhere, an A. P. L. operative was put on his trail. He went to the house where Burkhart was living and told the woman in the case that she was doing wrong in covering up the whereabouts of Burkhart. He added that he believed the man was in the house or would come back to the house, in spite of all she had said. That was at three o’clock in the afternoon, and the operative concluded to sit in the house and wait to see what would happen, all exits being guarded by other operatives. Nothing did happen until 9:15 that night, although the house was searched. At last, up in the attic, a small blind space was found where the electric light wires went up to the roof. A flash light here illuminated the dark interior—and disclosed Mr. Burkhart resting rather uncomfortably on the cross beams, where he had been since early that afternoon—something of a Spartan, if not much of a Puritan. It was found that he was twenty-five years of age and not thirty-seven. It was also found that he had the classification card belonging to another man, whereupon he was accused of failure to file his questionnaire. On December 30, he was brought before the Grand Jury, found guilty and sentenced to East Cambridge jail. Another gentleman, Mr. Ralph E——, when he filled out his questionnaire, swore that he was a married man and had a wife and child dependent upon him. It was discovered that the woman was not his wife. The man consulted the partner of the A. P. L. inspector—the two being members of the same law firm—in professional capacity. Here, therefore, was a question of ethics involving the privilege of a confession made to an attorney and also the oath taken to the A. P. L. The two law partners called in Mr. E—— and gave him good advice about the crime of perjury. As the man did what he could to square up matters, it was decided to let that part of his case drop. He was not sent to prison. Mr. Herbert C—— had an ambition to go across as a member of the American Red Cross and had good recommendations. A. P. L., however, discovered that he was an alleged dope fiend. He did not go with the Red Cross.