The Eureka sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1902-current, 1922-12-30

gram, but some experiments have
been made by progressive couples an
search oil a fair standard. One OF
the most complete plans for adjust
ing family finances is worked out Nv
Isabel kendig Gill, who is organizing
the professional councils.
Mrs. GIN believes that there "a only
one satisfactory basis for family a.
nance and that is to establish an
equal partnership. and to share equal
~ whatever money husband and wife
earn. She says she has tried this sys-
tenn when h was earning more
money than her husband, when abe
was earning less, and when she earn
ed nothing at all, and that she and
her husband find 1t the fairest plan.
Her idea Is that each should contri-
butte to the successful upkeep of the
home according to his or her honest
ability. and that each should draw
upon the family resources according
to the need. She advocates Joint DOS
sessions and a joint bank account.
MARRIAGE NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
She admits that IL a man who has
an earning capacity of $4,000 a
year marries q girl who before mar
rage earned only $1,000, he may find
1t hard to see why he should share
equally with her. But after all the
fact OF his choosing such q girl would
indicate that he thought her q suit
able wife for him and once chosen
she has a right to an equal partner
ship In the firm.
Little tolerance is expressed for
the husband who decides autocrati-
cally whether OF not his wife shall
spend money for q new hat. The al
lowance idea In all of its phrases is
strongly opposed. Following out this
idea 1t Is illogical for a divorced wife
to expect her former husband to pay
her an alimony allowance.
IF there are children. the divorced
husband should be made to provide
for them or should do his share to-
ward their support. until they are of
an age to take care of themselves"
says Mrs. Gill. But as far as the
couple are concerned, l believe that
the property and savings accumu-
lated during the partnership should
NO C4u0AAy aANAaOA anu O0kn AOkt IOC
Of the other financially"
In this division OF possessions,
property which a man or woman may
have owned before marriage is not
included. How such property Is to
be disposed OF might well be decided
by q couple before marriage, she
suggests; that is, whether the hus-
band and wife will retain the prop
erty then In their possession sepa-
rately In their own names. But ~
erything accumulated during the
years OF marriage she would have
held jointly. and, II the firm Is dis
solved, divided equally.
This is certainly an up-to-date ar
rangement In that 1t provides specifi-
cally for a possible termination of
the partnership. This has no doubt
become necessary in any practical
theory of family finance, since the
increase In divorce has had an OBJ
vious influence on the modern
couples attitude toward household
economics.
With marriage no longer regarded
as necessarily a lifelong matter, both
husband and wife may have a feeling,
perhaps only dimly realized, of inse-
curity. The feeling manifests itself
in q tendency toward keeping posses
sions distinctly separate. This is one
factor back Of the reluctance OF some
husbands to let their wives know
their financial status. Consciously or
unconsciously they are afraid that
they might some day be called upon
to pay a high rate of alimony. based
on their resources. The same feel
ing Is back Of the wife's resentment
when the husband keeps the bank ac-
count while she has no savings to
show for her work as housekeeper.
The only drawback to Mrs. ellis
system, II 1t is a drawback. is that 1t
presupposes honesty and trust be-