LADIES' COLUMN.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 8100, 27 August 1904, Page 3

LADIES' COLUMN.

WHO SHOULD HOLD THE PURSE ? Motors aad Fathers, "Wlym a&& Susbands, What Do Tou Say ? (Pearson - * Weekly.) There is nothing of greater importance to married folk than the proper management of the pures. Whether the income is largo or small, a family's success in life very greatly depends upon the ability of the person who has charge of it. He or she has to decide periodically what amount should be expended and what should be saved. Though there is apparently no reason for it, it seems to be generally accented that the husband should be the custodian of the family finance*. Mean or spendthrift, careful or reckless, he alone must spend or save it. But is it fair to his wife, sharer of his joys_and sorrows? In hundreds of cases it is not. Yet where it is known to his acquaintances, the man who parts, with the bulk of his earnings, leaving only bis bare expenses for himself, is regarded by them as a " molly-coddle," a man without spirit, without independence. They ignore altogether the fact that it is perhaps the wisest thing for that man to do, that by so doing he is leading a happier and more prosperous life. For where the interests of several are concerned, a great many men are absolutely, unfit to have charge of money. They are not dishonest men. With their em-, plovers' money they will exercise the greatest care and exactness, but with their own, absence of these quantities is their chief characteristic. To arrive at the solution of this problem it would be easier perhaps to show who should not carry the purse. First of all, there is the man who habitually drinks " not wisely but too well." He, for one, should never have more in his pocket than his customary expenses, and in his sober moments will readily admit it. The wife who can compel her husband to see it- in that light and to act upon it, will be doing him the greatest kindness in the world. Wasting no more words on him than he deserves, there is next the married man whose ono desire in life is to "cut a dash." -„,.-, With the idea of impressing his friends that he is much better off with respect to this world's goods than he really is, re-, gardless of the fact that wife and children may be in actual want of his money, he flings it about recklessly— but for a few hours only. When " stony " h© retires into penitence arid obscurity until next pay-day. Very often he is a good fellow at heart, but cannot resist a periodical "splash." To deprive him of his purse is his only cure. After him comes the good-natured manapparently. Though he cannot afford it, he practisefl generosity— not purposely, but thoughtlessly— and his family at home suffer in consequence. Th-sn there is the reverse of this type — the mean married man. The long-suffering wifo of tliis person is compelled to squeeze every penny— even for her ordinary, everyday expenditure— from her husband's pockelc. Their married life in one long jangle about money. This husband knows in his heart that the sum he allows his wife is quite insufficient for ber household needs, but with the idea of teaching ber economy he stints her on every possible occasion, and co, for the sake of adding a pound or two to his yearly banking account, he and his family live in continual discord and discomfort. Besides these' broad typos, there ie a host of lesser importance. There is the married man with a hobby — it may be clothes, old books, photography, gardening, or some sport- or pastime. v There is the,, gourmand, who spends as much on his midday meal as he allows his wife for her, whole day's expenses ; and there is the religions philanthropist, who invariably puts down on the subficriptionlists submitted to him sums out of all proportion -to his earnings. If their incomes are large enough for them to give free rein to their hobbies without prejudicing the interests of those nearest to them, well and good; but theevil is when husbands spend more than they can afford. To each and all of these types there is | a corresponding one on the feminise side. There are women who make good wives and loving mothers, who yet, so far as tbe purse is concerned, cannot resist an occasional plunge in some direction or other. And though' they compare very favourably with men in tbis respect, if they oannot check their pet extravagances they are not fit persons to have entire control of the family -exchequer. That person, therefore — whether wife or husband — who is most con6cientious_ careful, far-sighted, unselfish and just, is the one who should carry the purse. He is a wise man who, knowing that his wife can make a sovereign go farther than he can himself, entrusts his money to her keeping; and she is a wise woruan who r«sts content with the family wealth in her husband's pocket, knowing thereby that it is for the greater comfort and happiness of all concerned.