New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1917-02-08
mot EVEN PARTNERS?"
Yes, Indeed, Say Margaret and Winthrop
Lane in Expounding Their Success
. Editor OF The Tribune.

To the Editor OF Inc Tribune.
Sir: Since you have been so interested as
to call attention editorially 10 the humble
scheme of domestic economy that is followed
BY two whom you are pleased to call
"modernist couple of our town. and since
the contemplation of so uncharted an ad-
venture upon the high seas Of matrimony
must have shocked the shore-loving souls Oh
many of your admirable readers, may not
the couple concerned venture to point out
what seems 70 them the vital weakness OF
YOUR own mental navigation about this sub
ject?
You are troubled by these words OF Mrs
Lane TO an interviewer:
1--WE meaning her husband and herself }
do not pool our financial interests mean
ing salaries We divide the oiIi9
evenly and then each OF us has the remihue'
~ bis or her own money for personal ex-
renditures. Each Of US remains a free per-
son. If | make a mistake, VIII pay ioi
tina. mistake myself And my husband mas
the same happy feeling"
w, wander. apparently, why We do not
"pool our financial interests" when DUST
ness partnership is formed, you say one
of the chief benefits sought ana ooosi"ea
is inst this pooling of profits and losses,
successes and mistakes" II the law hrm OF
Smith. Jones & Davis, you ASH can ~"
a partnership with quite complete freedom
Of individuality year in and year OUT upon
tho basis of pooling profits and losses why
cannot a simple combination IiAe "a'
and Winthrop Lane|'
Our answer is that we do prec'sely 'he
same pooling that is done by smith, Jones
& Davis and that your question, therefore,
3; .,,,erauous We pool our profits and losses
lin everything that concerns our partnership
not in things that do not concern y" we
share evenly all expenses that nave 10 u"
primarily with the fact that we are marrleu
and live together-rent. grocer's bills, tuei'
maid service. household effects, etc Neither
Of us. moreover contracts such an eNpe"ui
ture without first consulting the otne'' -
ono of rs is seized with "A orillahI iuea "a
wall decorations or an uncontrollaD'e ue''ie
o. buv the Encyclopedia Britannica ne ac's
NV ar,er gaining the others consent uh-
,o.. of course he is willing to foot the Dill
,ionc And even then he shows some coheer"
for the artistic preferences of the o'nei'
or course. expenditures that concern ohiy
tho individual are paid for by the indiV'oual,
Does smith make Davis pay for MS cigars :
noos Davis. lust because he cannot pass "
eo,yor shop without buying violets Tor inc
v,idow Brown, make Smith a party 10 MS
,morous purchasings? Not at all lie taxes
the money out Of his own pocked. lie "ouia
resent any suggestion from his partner tha'
that nortlv individual Che would be sure 10
he portly in Davis's eyes, be allowed TO go
baIvssp in so extremely personal matter
So acts "the combination OF Margaret ana
Winthrop Lane" Communal expenditures
we share; personal ones, having nothing 10
do with the fact that we live together' such
&C clothes. car fares, tennis balls and copies
ofThe Tribune, we pay individually. The money
Tho, each has left from his earnings AFTER
;oint EXPENSES are met is comparable 70 'he
Individual profits of Smith, Jones ct al. Ana
M mariners. not even business ones, pool
tbeir individual spending money.
II is no criticism of this arrangement 70
saw that in particular instances 1t is dlfhcui'
I,o determine whether an expenditure Is JONI
or personal. A bit Of reasoning Is sufhcieh'
20 scttlo the matter And the fact that we
have continued our arrangement amlcaDly
for five years is some indication that IL Is
not overwhelmingly difficult to carry OUT.
MARGARET AND WINTHROP LANE
New York, Feb 8, 1917.