In Minnesota the women’s clubs made a state issue of a case in which a married man, deserting his family, took a girl from Wisconsin to Minnesota, and was sentenced by Judge McPherson to three months in the county jail and a fine of $1,000. The women’s clubs petitioned the judge of the United States Court of Appeals, who makes the assignments of the district judges, to assign Judge McPherson to another district, “lest another case of white slavery be placed upon the calendar subject to Judge McPherson’s judgment.” This petition was refused, on the ground that the degree of punishment is expressly intrusted to the trial judge. It was stated also that the United States district attorney who prosecuted the case was satisfied with the sentence. The man had pleaded guilty to taking a girl under eighteen across state borders for cohabitation. Judge McPherson defended his sentence on the ground that there was no evidence to show that the girl was coerced. The club women countered vigorously with a statement to the effect that coercion was not the point; that by the man’s own story, plus all human experience, the girl was surely entered on a life of prostitution; what they wanted was such punishment as would be the talk of every barroom and a specter to any man who contemplated doing it in the future.[14] The federal judges and attorneys generally take into account the circumstances in the case and only in clear cases where white slavery is accomplished by force have the full penalties been imposed. The transportation of regular prostitutes was not punished, in one instance the judge saying that thus “our own daughters” are better protected. Women with a social conscience take the position that all women are their daughters and that no daughter is safe until the traffic is suppressed. Moreover they seek to protect their sons wherever they are and they call upon the national government to help them do it. That women voters will not tolerate a wide-open indorsement of vice was proved in the case of the policy pursued by Mayor Gill of Seattle in 1910–1911. It is true that conditions were so flagrantly vile that the instincts of women were in open revolt, yet Mayor Gill, in his alliance with the interests that were profiting by the public traffic, seemed firmly entrenched. Through the power of the recall, the women of Seattle led a movement against Mayor Gill and his vice policy which was successful; the mayor was removed from office; and a reform policy was instituted. At the last election, however, contrary to the expectation and to the amazement of women in other parts of the country, Mayor Gill was reinstated as mayor. Criticism was rife and men joined with women in attributing the result to the fickleness of women and their superficiality. They were even accused of worse things.