, 1875-09-25

MATRIMONIAL ECONOMY.
To the Editsr ef The Ch.eage TRIBUNE:
JAsEsv1LLE. Wis, Sept. 10.-1n common with
tue most Of your readers, havo been much in-
terestcd in the discussion Of this subject; and
particularly In your editorial OF Sept. 1, aud tho
fotters Of correspondents published In the Same
issue. Ono important point. Which do not sod
alluded to has. id my estimation, quite al mitch
to do with tho question why women are not
more fascinated with the subject OF domestic
economy than any other.
1t Ia familiar principle Of political economy
that tho laborer should bo secured in tho ftco
enjoyment and disposal Of tho fruits Of lls la-
bor, II you would have an industrious, frugal.
and prosperous community. III" say the cl.
ainentary writer's, "whst mnn produces By h,s
industry might be taken from lin by othcrs,
there would bo no inducomeut for him to labor
for anything beyond bare Subsistence.
II tho right OF property should
ccaao 10 bo protected. men would
cease to labor, and industrious and orderly citi-
zens would soon become iutolent and vicious.
In despo!ia government tbs people are usually
poor and intlolout, bocansa the sovereign ruler
has tho power to dispose Of theIr property.
1hore IL little encouragement 10 ba industrious,
since what ~ gaaned by labor ia liablo to be
taken from its owner at tho pleasure uf tho
monarcA."
might quote much moro to tho Sane purport,
Nov. MF. Editor, thore 10 Ktcat daal Of hu-
nlau uatnEn In Eomctl, g,shera and sentimental
istB to 1ho contrary notwithstanding. Married
Women, an clhas, usver hayo boen Protected in
their hight to the fruits Of their labor. and sro
not HOW 10 protected. although their condition
IN tMis respoct ID doubtless much better than
eyes De!ors. AZ common law: .!' woman'a
yestad III bur husband At marriage, aud
har earnings and other acaNistions
after luAs1sage becsme hls absolutely,
and she bud 10 control whatever over them. Il
Il at Ali strange that whom she saw tho fruit OF
Aor industry aud economy appropriated and
s1uandct0d, ~ she not nnfraquentIy did, by q
aluslpatet, ahiftltss, or 1eckluss husband, she
ceaaod to labor md oconomlzs2 Conl4 any 9th.
or result DO Ant!cipatea' It SeemH to no thai
1t i'll bosotneH meh to complain Of tbs lndolence
aud oxtrayagauco OF women when they have
themselves placaa them iu . position Which
according to their own well.xuown anj
eotsIed praclrlos OF politlca! economy, could no,
fslt 10 develop those qualities. From tiu,s in.
memorial men hayo held tho pusse-yt1lnRs, xiv,
complained bitterly that eho was moi more eco
uonalcs!! Would thsy b. any nlore 30 In hsl
Il IL true that Tue common law regulation,
modified. 70 that nov. in many States, nle hold,
property coming 70 her by descent. dsEiao. u
sltt, in heF owu sghs bus in very few Btasos i.
D married WOMAN ectisled 70 her own ca1u
nus. and thtnk IN none ID she &c
entitled who're her labor IL pe1forsuec
IL thu service Ut her husband. Whether
this arrangement, By which thu husband resp,
thu beuehls and coutrolS the fruits Of tho W,se's
Industry and ECONOMY, IL just OF unjust Ntsa O
unwlse, it il Amply sufficient 10 account for ii
tho inproyiieucs and o1tsaysganco ailegee
aKainst women. Would inna bs any moro ln
dnsil;ous Or economics! uudsr similar clrcum
stances?
suppose "iio 1ao"a o1 'nas aM sue could ssv. M
would not furnish hsr husband the ciya1s ht
suloAes IND gives away III weeks Mhas iu
ducemett hes she 70 labor and eeon6nlka7 Il
Tho monoy she thus sayet. uiight ba devoted tt
dsy W Tor i the 1.u; aaacsston % Of tho M chllsn
Of aeYossQ " pu4su.ApYia FIy33sss