Poor -- New York (State) -- New York; Social settlements
The people who do not know the lives of the working people can have no idea
of the extent to which the working men trust their wives. The majority of
working-men's wives are financially in a far more independent position than
the wives even of capitalists, where the wives are without an independent
income. Not only is the money given to the wives, but their use of the
money is unquestioned. There is a constant revelation of the unselfishness
of these men. Children will be overdressed, while the father will not even
be comfortable; but there is no complaint, for the pride of the father is
gratified. He, with the mother, has one standard--clothes. There are men
who say frankly that they would waste the money if it were in their care;
that their wives secure far better results than they could; that the
practice of having only carfare, at the most lunch money, reduces greatly
the much abused social habit of "treating." The married man who can
"treat," it is generally conceded, is not fair to his family; he keeps his
wages at their expense.
Sometimes the observer marvels at the infinite patience of many men. Their
wives drift. Neither money nor time is used for their families. A week's
loss of work, and there is debt; a day's sickness, and to its suffering is
added the knowledge that there is no money in reserve to meet this
emergency, even though the wages insure it. While knowing well the cause,
one resents the unjust conditions that control many marriages among the
young people of the wage-earning class. The young women rarely have the
knowledge that will enable them to do their share in establishing the home.
The young man contracting a marriage without the prospect of supporting a
home is condemned and his bride pitied; but there is little criticism if
she spends years--years that mean discomfort and waste--in learning to do
her part, if she ever learns.
[Illustration: AFTER SCHOOL AT THE COLLEGE SETTLEMENT.]
The mental attitude of the wage-earners toward their income is confusing
and yet interesting. In reply to any question of wages, the maximum sum is
always given. The question of idle time does not enter into computations of
the year's possible income and necessary outlays. This holds good before as
well as after marriage. Work may last for only forty weeks of the year, but
the other twelve, even among intelligent wage-earners, sometimes are not
counted in their relation to income. This perhaps explains much that is
counted as thriftlessness. It is, in fact, a failure to apply arithmetic to
daily life.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account