But it may be objected that, though this view in the abstract looks
plausible and rational, not one in a thousand can practically adopt
it. How few keep any account, at all, of their current expenses! How
impossible it is to determine, exactly, what are necessaries and what
are superfluities! And in regard to women, how few have the control
of an income, so as not to be bound by the wishes of a parent or a
husband!
In reference to these difficulties, the first remark is, that we are
never under obligations to do what is entirely out of our power; so
that those persons who can not regulate their expenses or their
charities are under no sort of obligation to attempt it. The second
remark is that, when a rule of duty is discovered, if we can not fully
attain to it, we are bound to _aim_ at it, and to fulfill it just
so far as we can. We have no right to throw it aside because we shall
find some difficult cases when we come to apply it. The third remark
is, that no person can tell how much can be done, till a faithful trial
has been made. If a woman has never kept any accounts, nor attempted
to regulate her expenditures by the right rule, nor used her influence
with those that control her plans, to secure this object, she has no
right to say how much she can or can not do, till after a fair trial
has been made.
Pages:
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350