REFORMS IN DOMESTIC LIFE.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 10012, 16 April 1898, Page 8

REFORMS IN DOMESTIC LIFE.

TO THS BDITOR OF THI FRKSS. Sir, —I was very glad to see Lady Stout's able article, and also your leader theVeon, as being' a step in the right direction, and calling attention to the enormous and wasteful expenditure of energy in our present mode of life. I note that you particularly advert to the worry caused by this system. Now this ika, point upon which, as a medical man, I can speak with some experience. The increasing worry and harass of modern life is a universally acknowledged fact, and is one of the most powerful factors in the sum of human misery and ill-health. The time-worn saying to the effect that the worth of life depends on the liver, is familiar to all, and yet how few of us fully realize the effect of worry upon the functions of that important onjan. I take it that happiness here and hereafter is the chief aim in life of all, but I defy any one to feel really happy and comfortable with a congested or sluggish liver. »The symptoms and sensations of this condition are only too familiar to most of us; why should we not, therefore, make a serious attempt to lessen the burdens and facilitate the functions of this organ upon which so much depends? Why wait for the "enterprising or philanthropic person " to try the "experiment"? Out of the 50,000 inhabitants of Christchurch can we not find 100 to club together and prove to the rest how easy it is to be "happy, wealthy and wise " 2

To successfully combat the demon of worry we must first (as Lady Stout implies) alter our environment. Singly and individually this is impossible, but & hundred could do it easily. There is absolutely no reason whatever why we should not begin at once and accomplish a comparatively rapid " conscious evolution," instead of waiting for the tedious process of •• natural evolution," which means that our grandchildren may enjoy what we ought to enjoy ourselvee. The principle of co-operation has been amply proved of solid value in economising time, - money and energy, and it is marvellous that it is not more widely used in our domestic life. Many are the sorrows of the householder ! The gas pipes leak and smell, the roof leaks and destroys the wall paper, the drains get stopped, the kitchen boiler craoks, the cook get£ cross and spoils our iood, the , great servant-girl question is ever before us in one form or another, then there are rents, rates, and taxes, troublesome neighbours, and so on, till the unfortunate man is worried into a " liver attack."

But what of his wife ? No one bub the •Distress of a house can fully realise the demand on time and temper that the ordinary conduct of a household makes. Fully half her time is taken up on trivial details, and as a rule the children occupy the other half. How can a woman be a true mate to her husband when her whole life is frittered away in a monotonous daily round of housework? What chance has she to cultivate her intellect or to keep up the accomplishments which cost so much to acquire in her girlhood ? How often we see a brilliant pianist, sweet singer, or clever artist, so absorbed by domestic cares that those talents which attracted and charmed us before her marriage are now lost by disuse. This is one of the many reasons why marriage is so often a failure. Our wives lose their graces and good looks, and become more or less soured in temper by the incessant worry and cares of our present domestic life. And no wonder. It is the system of isolated homes and the accumulation of care and anxiety on one pair of shoulders that is to blame—not the innocent victims.

Fellow -citizens, would you not like to get more joy and health from your domestic life than you do now ? Do you not wish to be stronger and healthier, mentally and physically? Are you not tired of indigestion, liver attacks, headaches, toothache, rheumatism, &c ? Now, without advocating the co-operative home as a panacea for all the ills to which flesh is heir, I do maintain that it would eliminate an enormous amount of worry from our lives, and thereby increase our health and happiness. It is a trite.obsetwation that mind affects matter,'but few of us realise how intimately our minds and bodies are blended and how profoundly they act and react oo.'each. other. In a well managed co-operative home, Bay, of twenty families, each would have its set of private rooms, where everyone could enjoy the privilege so dear to every Englishman's heart—the privacy of his own fireside —and on the other hand in the public rooms each would find that variety of social enjoyment boat suited to his or her frame of mind.

In such an atmosphere courtesy and unselfishness would grow, for the common weal would be directly to the interest of each individual, and it would add intensely to the interest of life, as each would feel he was a pioneer of a new era in the world's history.

Under the present system of individual and family isolation, each man strives to get what he can for himself and family, and is so occupied in this endeavour as to b'e> unable to follow Christ's command to help others—save in a half-hearted way in hie scanty leisure, but if working in and for a co-operative group, every thought, motive and action would be for others, as well as for himself. This far healthier mental attitude would inevitably produce a corres* ponding physical state. In such a co-operative home the members would be largely independent of outside public opinion, they would have created for themselves a new environment, and freed themselves to some extent from the iron heel of conventionality. In the single item of dress, what would; we not give to be freed from the despotism of a senseless fashion ? Hitherto Christehurch has wisely declined to adopt that hideous inartistic monstrosity, the silk top hat, but we continue to wear olose fitting, corn-producing, and unhealthy boots and shoes, we manacle our necks and wrists with stiif-etarched collars and cuffs, in which we are afraidito take violent exercise for fear of rendering them limp and unsightly. But it is our women who would benefit most in this respect. No one but a medical man can justly estimate the unhygienic state of a modern woman's dresa, and I am almost afraid of mentioning the hotly disoussed question of the corset, for fear of raising a storm, but I would ask any sensible man or woman what would be the result of encasing the arm or leg in a similar stiff contrivance for so short a period as twelve months? I have asked many of my patient* this question, and they all agree that it would have a decidedly hurtful effect on the usefulness of the limb, and yet, in obedience to custom and fashion, they continue to wear them and make their daughters do the same. I aver, aa the result of my professional experience, that not one woman in ten can properly inflate the lower part of her ldngs owing to the disuse and consequent atrophy of the' abdominal and trunk muscles. That this atrophy is real is shown by the feeling of weakness, want of support, and " falling to pieces," which nearly all women complain of on leaving off their corsets.

Into the various ailments and weaknesses caused by this single "garment '*' I will not attempt to enter now, but must express my conviction that so great is its influence on the general health of women, that the day that sees the Goal abolition of this relic of barbarism will see the number of medical men reduced by one-half ! These are a few of the aspects of cooperation upon which I feel competent to epeak, but the first question this wealthseeking, selfish age will require to have answered i«, "Will it pay?" The past history of industrial co-operation a full and sufficient answer in the affirmative, but into the details I must leave some abler pen than mine to enter. Finally, there is the moral aspect—the greatest and most important of all. Will not some of our religious teachers come forward and put this .view of the subject before us ?—Yours, tec., Mediccs.