The Cincinnati daily star. [volume] ([Cincinnati, Ohio]) 1875-1880, 1880-06-25

think" he said, "that could not afford
to buy you gloves" Now, here were the
facts Of this case. Both had little
money, the wife's share being, think,
about equal to her husbands. He had
been University Don, and was then a
"Coach." taking pupils. Some six or
eight young men were living in his
house, and of course his wife had her
cares of housekeeping so much enlarged
as to make them an engrossing and con-
stant occupation.
She had besides large family of small
children. If she did not work as hard
for her living as he did. then the words
have no meaning; but so little did this
good man suppose her exertions to be
worth, 80 little share had she, according
to his ideas, in the actual business OF
life. that he spoke Of his want of gloves
as a reflection upon him, as he might
have spoken of the neglected appearance
of child. He had no wish to be lib
eral-he was fond of his wife and proud
of her, and very willing to keep her in
gloves and anything else she wanted, but
he had no feeling Of right in the matter;
no sense that her position ought to be
anything else than that of absolute de-
pendency. Had it been necessary to
bring in stranger to do the wife's work
that stranger would have been highly
paid and very independent person In
deed.
But the work of the wife represented
nothing to her husband, and gave her,
save by his grace and bounty, no right
to anything, not even to her gloves ana
bonnets, her share of the living which
size SO largely helped to earn. In this
respect, however, the most liberal and
the most generous men are often as much
at fault as the coarsast. They will not
allow the Importance Of the second part
in the universal duet. They will give
literally, and praise freely, but thew will
not acknowledge ''My wife has as much
to do as l have. Without her work
mine would not have half its value; we
are partners in the toll Of living, and she
has earned the recompense Of that toll as
well as L" No one will say this, nor
will the world acknowledge it.
What the world does say when a
woman outside Of the bonds vf marriage
claims to be allowed to work for her
bread as she best can is, that she ought
to go back to her proper sphere, and at
her own individual work. all credit is
taken from her, her exertions are denied,
her labor is undervalued. The only
chance for her to get her work acknowl-
edged is to do it very badly, when there
will be an outcry. But when it is we'll
done it is ignored, it is taken as mat
ter Of course, it is never thought upon at
all. Let this be contrasted with the re-
verse Casa case by no means unfrrquent,
though left out of account in all popular
calculations When it happens that the
women is the richest of the two partners
in life, when the living comes from her
side, or when abe earns it, she is considered
bound to assert no Consciousness of the
fact. 1t is a horror and shame to all spec
tators when she makes any stand upon
her m0neyed superiority.
That she should let it be seen that she
is the supporter Of the household, or re-
mind her husband that he is in any way
indebted to her, is piece of bad taste
and bad feeling for which no blame is
too severe. And the woman herself is
the first to feel it SO. But that which
seems the depth of meanness and ungen.
erosity in woman is the natural and
everyday attitude of the man. II is a
point Of honor on her part to ignore to
the length of falsehood her husbands in
inferiority to herself in this respect;
whereas the fact of her dependence upon
him is kept continually before her eyes
and insisted upon, both seriously and
jocularly, at every point Of her career.