Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1875-09-30
a MISTAKE.

station; splendor, luxury, servants,
equipage, if these be expected from
the income; simple comforts, and the
means to work with, if these be al
that are expected think that when
they have provided so much as this
and do not in any fragrant manner
outrage the decencier Of life, that
there then duties end and many Of
them would be as surprised as shock
ed if You assured them that their
duties had only begun.
In fact, when a man has provided
his wife with a home, and a proper
contingent of comforts in it, he has
done no more than the law requires Of
him, than Scripture requires when
it declares that he who does not pro-
vide for his family is worse than an
infdel But there is a great body oil
unwritten law, so to denominate it,
which demand much more than this,
which demands that when man has
taken a wife under his care he shall
take her happiness besides, her health,
and in some measure her moral wei
fare also
Doubtless, without having given
much thought to the subject, many
husbands would assert that all this
they do, and have not left the other
undouc If woman is not happy,
they would say, when you give her
all the clothes and finery she wants,
unlimited credit, unlimited pin money,
diamonds, a box at the opera, if you
are in the line of milionaires; and if
you are not in that line, if you find
that she is not happy when you put
her in a house as good rs her neigh
bors', and, maybe, with some things
the neighbors have not; when you
are what the neighbors call good
provider; when She never has ask
you twice for dolar--if she is not
happy with all this, they would say,
why, then, she would not be happy
under any circumstances whatever,
and it is OF small use to try and make
her SO. AS for her health, after pro
viding fit clothes and food, what has
her husband to do with her health.
except to be sorry it is no better, and
to stop on his way to business and
send up the doctor? And as for h +
moral welfare, are Husbands much III
the habit Of requiring their wives 10
commit larceny and murder, and take
false oaths?
Softly, softly, good man! then we
would say. To her clothes, to her
food, to her doctor, to her moral lib
erty, your wife has Alright: it is not
in the least to your credit when you
provide them; it is only to your own
discredit when you do not. Even if
she did not earn clothes, food, and
care by her personal labor in your
house, the law gives them to her and
makes them hers. All the credit, in
reality, that you can possibly claim
in this relation proceeds from what
you evidently consider to be works of
supererogation, which imply a kind
consideration, an anxious forethought,
a desire to please, general effort to
secure her happiness, as in the old
season Of courtship, when in the
darkest day the sun seemed to be
shining in blue skies, and the world
so blessed a place that there was
hardly need Of heaven,
This wile-any wife, on the broad
average-had, most probably, her
clothes, her shelter, and small need
of doctor when her husband wooed
her to his home They were the
things taken for granted in her life,
like the general air, and She gave
them little thought. She went to her
husbands care for something more
than all thls--tor the sake of an es-
pecial regard, to be given her above
all others, for an ideal oneness in
sympathy and love-in short, for hap
niness. These things were in the bar
gain, and not a mere contract for
bread and butter.
Alb, the husband may say, there
you are on grounds OF sentiment,
while marriage brings us face to face
with sterner realities than the mere
Illusions of fancied happiness. But
we beg his pardon: marriage itself,
with all the obligations of its civil
and religious contract, is matter
founded on sentiment if it were not
we should be little more than in the
condition of the beasts OF the field,
everting to state worse than savagery
and there is no shadow Of sentiment
too delicate to be neglected by either
party to it, with impunity.
Looking at the affair more in detail,
let US pause aud ask how much, may
we believe, does it conduce to the
happiness of woman, when her hus-
band has been away all day at his
usual occupation, for him to be away
all the evening too at his usual plea
sure? Or suppose it is only the
strictest regard for business that takes
him off, is life to be resolved into
nothing but a struggle to accumulate,
without the enjoyment OF a moment
rs VIC 30 along? There is hardly a
woman living who would not be con-
tent, and glad too, to be by that
much poorer, if her husband would
spend his evenings at home, and let
her harvest the JOY of that compaion-
ship every day It is true that after
hard days work a husband needs
some relaxation but it is also true
that it is his duty to find that relaxa,
ton, for the most part, in the society
of his family. Does his wife, who
also has been occupied all day, need
no relaxation And would size think
of providing it for herself and not for
him? And should not the thing be
mutual: II his home is SO constltut-
ed that be does not find enjoyment
awaiting him there, doubtless, being
the stronger mind, the healthier body,
the more energetic will, the one with
faculties most stimulated by contact
and friction with the world, it is his
place to furnish it there, and the wife