Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1902-03-20
The COST OF LIVING.
wouen with Families should Adopt
a Consistent Scale of Ex-
penditure.

daily living of their families and
logically adjust it to their income
In estimating the cost of living the
uecessaries of life, which should be
the first things counted, are not al
ways estimated in their place ~
should be remembered that neces-
saries are not always the same FOR
different persons. What is a neees-
sity for one woman living in GER
tain way may be a luxury 10 another.
who lives in a much simpler manner.
II is the duty of everyone to adopt
a scale of expenditure in consistency
with her income, says the New York
Tribune. The taste and even the
health of individuals cannot regulate
the amount Of money they should eX-
mend. In time of sickness, when eX-
ira money must be used, there should
be the most rigid economy, wherever
economy can be exercised, to meet
the extra expense of the family, or
bankruptcy will be the result, if the
income is limited. Literary and artis-
tic tastes are commendable in man
or woman, but the possession of such
taste without means to CRAFTY II
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 70
lay out scale of living in consisten-
cy merely with their tastes, and pro-
coed to adopt il, without counting
the cost. They seem to imagine that
in some way they viii escape the
logical results Of their acts and live
with an income which is wholly in
adequate 10 their expenses. 1t is
such household management as this
which is responsible for the various
defalcations and other populations
that are so frequently discerned in
business houses, banks and in pub
lie office. IL 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 be-
yond her husbands income, and she
is then as responsible as he is If he
yields 20 the temptation which impels
him to sacrifice honor and take that
which does not belong to him. The
woman in such a case cannot plead:
81 did not know" when the disgrace
Of wrongdoing is brought home 10
the husband. 1t is her duty as a wife
to know how much her husband can
afford 70 spend and to regulate her
expenditure within that sum.
IL is often easier for a woman to
retrench in her household expendi-
lures than it is for her husband TO
ask her TO do so. Pride and many
things tempt him to keep the house
hold expenditures at a generous limit,
and il 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 a little nearer in mat
ters 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 Tempt
I'd TO be more generous than he
should be to his home. The good
old-fashioned time when the majority
of refined women gloried in doing
their own work in the pest and most
careful way seems to be past We
often hear inquiries like the follow
ing: "What should a family with an
income of $1,000 a year pay for a
servant?' In old-fashioned times no
mistress of a house with an income
of $1,000 or even $4,000 would think
of keeping a servant, but she would
do her own work, and ii costs to-day
almost as much as il did to keep a
servant so years ago. 1t is much east
er 10 do the work of a house to-day
than il was in the old-fashioned days
when our grandmothers did their
work with their own dainty hands,
and the price of servant. with her
board, is proportionately greater
than il ever was. ~ wise woman
looketh well to the ways Of her
household" THE heart of her hus-
band doth safely trust in her. so that
he shall have no need Of gnoiI "