Walker Lake bulletin. (Hawthorne, Nev.) 1883-1926, 1902-02-14
THE COST OF LIVING.

CDHERE are few women VINO care,
fully estimate the actual cost OF
q the daily living of their famiiies
and logically adjust 1t to their income
In estimating the cost of living the nee
essaries of life, which should be the
first things counted, are not always es-
tlmated in their place. 1t should De
remembered that neeessaries are not al
WAYS the same for different persons.
What is a necessity for one woman
living in certain way may be Il iuN-
ury to another, who lives in a much
simpler manner. 1t is the duty OF eF-
cry one to adopt Il scale of expenditure
in consistency with her income. The
taste and even the health of individuals
cannot regulate the amount OF money
they should eXpend. In time or SICK
ness. when extra money must be
used. there should be the most rigid
economy, wherever economy can be eN-
ercised. to meet the extra expense OIL
the family, or bankruptcy will be the
result, if the income is limited. Lit
erary and artistic tastes are commend
able in man or woman, but the posses
sion of such taste without means to
crafty 1t is no excuse for exercising IL.
The taste, if INDUCED in, calls for rigid
economy In other directions, when the
income is limited one.
A great many women appear to lay
out scale of living in consistency
merely with their tastes, and proceed
to adopt it without counting the cost
| They seem to imagine that in some way
they will escape the logical results of
! their acts and live with an income
which is wholly inadequate to their ex-
penses 1t is such household manage
ment as this which is responsible for
the various defalcations and other pee
ulations that are so frequently dis
! cerned in business houses, banks and
| in public office. 1t is the old story of
some extravaganza to which so many
of the disgraceful occurrences must be
laid. Every intelligent woman whose
husband lives on a salary knows what
his income is, and she also knows, or
should know, at what scale she Is using
money in household matters. She
knows whether she is living beyond her
husbands income, and she is then as
responsible as he is if he yields to the
| temptation which impels him to sacri-
flee honor and take that which does not
belong to him. The woman in such
case cannot plead, Il did not know"
/ 40 nf 1p
brought home to the husband. 1t is
her duty as a wife to know how much
! her husband can afford to spend and to
regulate her expenditure within that
sum.
1t is often easier for a woman to re-
trench in her household expenses than
it is for her husband to ask her to do
so. Pride and many things tempt him
to keep the household expenditures at
a generous limit, and it is the wife's
duty to see that this generosity is not
imposed upon. There are undoubtedly
cases of the "closeness" of men who,
like Mr.. Barkis, are little nearer in
matters of household expenditure than
they should be, but we do not believe
| these cases are as common as those
where the man of the house is tempted
| to be more generous than he should be
| to his home. The good old-fashioned
time when the majority of refined wom-
en- gloried in doing their own work in
the best and most careful way seems to
be past. We often hear inquiries like
the following: "What should a family
with an income of $1,000 a year pay
for servant?" In old-fashioned times
no mistress of house with an income
of 81 600 a year or even $1,000 would
think of keeping a servant, but she
would do her own work, and 1t costs.
/ to-day, almost as much as it did to
keep servant fifty years ago. 1t is
much easier to do the work of house
to-day than it was in the old-fashioned
days, when our grandmothers did their
work with their own dainty hands, and
| the price of Il servant. with her board.
is proportionately greater than it ever
i was. "A wise woman looketh well to the
! ways of her household" The heart of
her husband doth safely trust in her, so
that he shall have no need of spoil''-
Anew York Tribune.