The Birmingham age-herald., 1915-05-02
ECONOMIzERs
By IRENE WESTON

We are all striving to be as economical
 as possible nowadays-some in one way
 and others in another. A good many, I
 have no doubt. arc managing it more
 successfully a great deal than others.
 Many are the little expedients resorted to to attain the desirable end of ''mak- ing ends meet" A good many must dis tinguish themselves in the manner in
 which they perform that desirable feat. Isn't it wonderful what lot of things we find other people might do without quite easily? When it comes to ourselves, however, il is quite another matter. I re- member the story of a couple who sud- denly found it necessary to ''draw in to the extent of s1000 year. They thought the problem over day by day, but it's so- lution appeared nearer when the bright idea came to one of them-I don't know which--that the husband should draw up a list'of economics his wife might effect, by which she might save S5o0 a year, while the wife did ditto for her husband. There was the required sav- ing at once.
 l You see. nv dear. it Is so much easier for another to see ones extravagance | than it is for one to recognize it oneself." | t'Certainig.'
 | The drawing up of the list of economies
 the other matrimonial partner might l make occupied the two evenings of a
 week At the end the husband had list 1 of suggestions by adopting which hls l wife could save no less than 1850. while l the wife had a list of extravagances com 1 mitted by her husband-things he could do without quite easily and really be | the better without''-which would save no | less than SIPS a year.
 l They did not speak to one another aft erward for a whole week.
 'I can't make out" said friend to me the other day, "how it is people who want to save don't eat porridge for break l fast Nothing like it, and so cheap!' l But you don't eat porridge yourself, do you?" I asked, remembering the nut
 ton chop I had seen him consume only an hour or two ago.
 | Well, you sec' he replied, ''porrldsc doesn't agree with ms I'm one of those l unfortunate persons with a peculiar di- gestion.'
 | When it comes to practicing econAmies on ourselves, it is wonderful how many of us haven't the digestions to stand them. When it comes to reducing our 1 little luxuries we discover we are pe- cnliarly dclicately constituted individuals | who really couldn't do without them. If VIC could only bring ourselves to prac- 1 ticing half of the economies we prescribe so ruthlessy to other people, what lot of difference it would make in our bills! But I have known many people who have not found the slightest difficulty in SlNinS up luxuT1eS to WHICH they were used when the pinch came" A little abstinence from them showed that really they had no reason to waste money on them. They were just as happy without them.
 A writer on social economy sometime since told us how we got luxurious habit. and how it enslaved us. In the first place, he said, we taste the luxury and enjoy it as a new sensation. It is de- l lightful. In the second stage we still go | in indulgng in it, but the delight is grad ually growing less and less. In the third stage 1t is giving up remarkably little pleasure. but 1t has become a habit. We can hardly tolerate the idea of giving
 1t up. It is "the usual thing" with us,
 and we really don't know how we should get on without it."
 l Retrerching expenses satisfactory de- pends, of course, very considerably upon cleverness, but much more upon the spirit | in which 1t Is performed-whether one re-
 gards 1t as duty to be faced as cheer | fully as possible. or a hateful necessity which providence really has no right to | impose on one. The last folk will never | do it comfortably.