The daily chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Ind. Ter. [Okla.]) 1898-1902, 1902-03-03
THE COST OF LIVING.


Z ~ estimate Tie dGtAaa NDSA u ~-c
daily living of their families and
logically adjust il 10 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 II
should be remembered that neees-
saries are not always the same for
different persons What j. neces-
sity for one woman living in eer-,
tain way may be luxury 10 another,
who lives in > much simpler manner.
II Is the duty of everyone 70 adopt
. 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-l
pend. In time of sickness, when ex-'
ira money must be used. there should
be the most rigid economy, wherever
economy can be exercised. 10 meet
the extra expense of the family. or
bankruptcy viii be the result. If the.
income is limited Literary and artist
tic tastes are commendable in man
or woman. but the possession Of such
I taste without means 10 CRAFTY il
is no excuse for exercising il. The
taste. if indulged in, calls for rigid
economy l. other directions, when
the income is limited one
A great many women appear 10
lay out scale of living in consisren-
cy merely with their tastes, and pro-
ceed 10 adopt il, without counting
the cost They seem 10 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 IL is
such household management as this
which is responsible for the various
defalcations and other peculations
that are 30 frequently discerned in
business houses. banks and in pub
lie Office. Ii is the old story Of some
extravagance 10 which - many Of
the disgraceful occurrences must be
laid, Every intelligent woman whose
husband lives on salary knows what
| his income is, ard 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
j. then as responsible as he is il he
yields 10 the temptation which impels
him TO sacrifice honor and take that
which does not belong 10 him. The
woman in such a ease cannot plead:
Il did not know" when the disgrace
of wrongdoing Is brought home 10
the husband. II is her duty as a wife
10 know how much her husband can
afford 10 spend aud TO regulate her
expenditure within that sum.
II Is often easier for a woman TO
retrench in her household expendi-
lures than il is for her husband to
ask her 70 do 30. Pride and many
things tempt him TO keep the house
hold expenditures az generous limit.
and IL il the wife's duty 90 see that
this generosity Is not imposed upon.
There are undoubtedly eases of the
.closeness" Of men who, ike Mr..
Barkis. are ''litfle nearer" IN mat
ters Of household expenditure than
they should be. but we do not believe
these cases are a. common as those
where the man Of the house is Tempt
I'd 10 be more generous than he
should be 10 his home. The good
| old-fashioned time when the ma jority
OF refined women gloried in doing
their own work IN the best ard most
careful way seems TO b. past. We
often hear inquiries like the follow
| ing: What should a family With an
income Of $1,000 a year pay for \
seryant?- In old-fashioned times no
mistress Of a house with an income
Of $1,000 or even S2.cO0 would think
Of keeping a servant. out she could
do her own work. and Il costs to-day
almost a. much as II did 70 keep a
scr-ant 90 years ago. IL j. much easi-
er 70 do the uork Of house to-day
| than il was IL the old-fashioned days.
when our grandhothers did their
work with their own dainty hands,
and the price Of servant With her
board. is proportionately greater
| than IL ever was. a wise woman
looketh well to the ways Of her
household. "Tbe heart Of her hus-
band doth safely trust in her. 80 that
be shall have no need Of spoil"