The Ely miner. [volume] (Ely, Minn.) 1895-1986, 1933-08-18
Rights in Home
Must Be Taught
Very Definite Distinction
Between Common and
Personal Property.

Mother and daughter alike feel
certain pride when daughter gets so
''grownup" that she can wear moth
er's shoes, mothers gloves. hats, etc.
1t is the same way with boys and
their fathers, when it comes to size
and height. The paternal pride is APP
parent and the boy Is often touched
with bit of boastfulness. which is
not unwarranted when father is his
ideal of manhood. To be like father
in any way Is something in which to
glory. In the face of all this mutual
admiration there are certain annoy
ances sometimes, which may be very
trivial, but none the less actual.
These should be guarded against so
that they do not mar the laudable
pleasure.
1t is the parents who have the
power to restrict. They can instill
the idea of rights and privileges in
the youthful minds, for it is concern
ing personal belongings that the fric-
ton arises. More often it is between
mothers and daughters than fathers
and sons. although, to some extent
1t applies to them also. and it may
widen its circle to include all men,
bers of the family. Then each per-
sons belongings become common
property, for there is no respect for
individual property.
Since mother is almost the first to
note the invasion, let us see what it
may mean to her. A case in point
comes to mind in which several
members of the family were in
volved, the mother and her daugh-
tiers, who were big enough to wear
her clothes, or at least, accessories.
The mother was invited out to
luncheon which was arranged on the
spur of the moment because a guest
whose visit was very short had ar
rived unexpectedly, and the hostess
wished her to have the opportunity
to meet several mutual friends.
When she went to dress, her best
pair of shoes was no where to be
found. Sally must have taken them,
they would fit her. Grace must have
worn the frock she wanted, since she
went to town for some sort of good
time, and this gown would be well
suited to the occasion. Her best
gloves were gone, and as final an
noyance her most becoming hat. In
each instance mother had to be con-
tent with second choices for herself.
This is no merely fictitious in
stance, 1t occurred in a neighbours
family. The tale was told without
any rancor, but the fact that the
mother had to appear not to best
advantage in her costuming in the
eyes of distinguished person whom
she had not seen for long time, was
real disappointment.
While one could not fail to be
sorry for the woman, one could al
so not be oblivious to the evidence
that the children had not been taught
the distinction between common
property and personal property. The
children felt at perfect liberty to use
mothers individual wardrobe with
out consulting her, and as freely as
If it were their own.
Had they been reprimanded for the
first occurrences. and whenever
there was repetition, they would
have had proper respect for the be-
longings of others. There is dis
tinction which should be drawn be-
tween common property, that is.
those things which are for the use
of all in home. and personal prop
erty. which should be granted the
right to use by the owner.
g. 1888, Bell Syndicate-WNU Service.