Two Purses in One Family.
By Chas. B. Reynolds
“THEREFORE all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them, for this is the law and the prophets.” There are men, who, admitting the binding force of the golden rule in their dealings with the world, utterly ignore its application to their own wives. Old bachelors and confirmed spinsters, frequently favor us with “Advice to Wives.” “Duties of Wives,” etc., but few men seem to consider that they need any instruction as to their duties as husbands. A man having sought a woman and drawn her from the loving shelter of her home and family, to cheer and bless his life, has something to do besides providing a dwelling place, and supplying the cellar and buttery, meagerly or bountifully, as his own alimentiveness may prompt. There are mutual duties, mutual obligations; the man should come home, not only to be cheered, sympathized with, and made happy, but to cheer, sympathize, and make his wife happy. The same course of conduct he used to win, he should exercise to keep. What is needed is mutual love, mutual forbearance, mutual confidence; and these will grow up into a better and purer love than the first. There is something very delightsome in love’s young dream; but dreams, however delightsome, do not last; the sweet and holy joys of married life, will. Men generally seem to think they will lessen their dignity if they consult their wives as intelligent partners, and so treat them either as babies or as slaves. A man will unhesitatingly trust his life, honor, home, children, to his wife, yet refuse to trust her with a little money. In this respect the majority of wives are treated as little children. “Oh! but women don’t know the value of money!” “Women are so extravagant!” If so, why so? Who’s to blame? Woman by nature is quite as careful and economical as man. A good wife who is acquainted with her husband’s business and the condition of his purse, will spend money with more judgment, use more true economy, and have more to show for it, than her husband. How often has this been proved in cases of sickness or long absence from home on the part of the husband. But if kept in ignorance of her husband’s resources, she attributes the grumbling with which money is so grudgingly doled out to her, to lack of confidence in her, rather than lack of means; and so may sometimes make mistakes. I have heard women say the most painful thing they had to do was to ask their husbands for money; and I have seen men dole it out as if they were drawing teeth, even when they had abundance, and knew it was needed for absolute necessities. It is a great mistake for a man to keep secret from his wife the state of his affairs, and have her ignorant of how to transact business. What will she do if left to widowhood? In case of sudden death of the husband, how much of loss, ruin, sorrow, and trouble, has resulted from this absurd course. Some men seem to utterly forget or ignore the fact that the wife has helped to gain the property, and by every principle of right should have a voice in its disposal. Some, though I hope few, are even mean enough to keep entire control of their wives’ own property, instead of letting them use and enjoy what is their own in their own way. This idea that a woman and all she has belongs to her husband, and that she must never expend a dollar without his lordship’s permission, is a relic of the barbarous customs of the old world. But a man and his wife should have but one purse between them says the husband, and he so closely guards and retains sole control of that one purse, that an occasional exterior view is all he allows his wife. Not only do men act in this matter ungenerously, but very unjustly. Here is Bro. and sister A—. They commenced married life with little or nothing. Together, by hard work, industry and frugality, they have now a handsome property. Systematic Benevolence is to be arranged. Bro. A puts down fifty dollars, about two-thirds what it should be. Sister A, nothing. Why? Says Bro. A, “I give for her and self too.” But sister A has as much love for and desire to aid the cause as her husband. She would like the delight of giving, herself, but she has nothing to give. She has often felt the urgent need of a few dollars; had to deny the really deserving objects of charity, because even for her necessities she dreads to ask for anything from their one purse, on account of the miserable spirit of parsimonious surliness with which it will be refused, or at best grudgingly doled out. She determines to obviate this; obtain a little funds for herself that she can control; raises poultry; it adds to her cares and burdens; but anything is better than to have to apply to our one purse; meets success. Bro. A takes the poultry to market for her. How glad and happy she feels to think she can now have, herself, the blessed privilege of giving, until Bro. A returns, and she finds he has confiscated the entire amount, and in answer to her expostulations, he growls out, “What can you want with the money? Wish women had the earning of the money, they’d learn the value of it! I want you to understand once for all, I don’t believe in two purses in one family!” Many a man who would scorn to defraud or in any way wrong his neighbor is profoundly indifferent about cruelly wronging the woman he has chosen for his dearest earthly friend and companion for life. Now I do not believe in “Woman’s Rights” technically; but I do believe in woman’s rights to be considered with as much care and thought after marriage as before. I do not think men should be so mean as to obtain goods under false pretenses. Wonder if sister A would have said, Yes; if A had honestly asked her to become his drudge, the patient bearer of all his whims and caprices, share all his troubles and sorrows, be his hired girl for life, with only one purse between them, which means that he should save a hired girl’s wages and she should never have the privilege to control or spend a dollar as she desired, no matter how many she might earn? Let every wife be helped so she may help herself in this matter. Let a certain amount be invested and the interest payable to her, or a stipulated sum allowed her regularly, or let her have the proceeds from the sale of the butter, or what poultry she can raise, or the small fruits, or a part of the orchard, or dried fruit; or in some way let her have a fund that by care and prudence she can increase, and let her have the whole, sole, and undisputed, right to use such means, just as she pleases. I greatly mistake if it does not result in the figures on S. B., of some of the wives shaming some husbands to making very considerable advance. It is right, it is just, that the wife should have sole control of some little portion of her earnings. Why ignore the golden rule to wives and apply it to all others? Let us hear no more of “but one purse in the family” while you hold fast both ends. Put yourselves in the places of your wives and see how you would like it. Do to your wives as you would they should do to you, if your positions were reversed. Let wives have the benefit of the golden rule, share in the responsibility of our stewardship, and in the delight of lending to the Lord.
CHAS. B. REYNOLDS.