to their happiness than any business triumph; their failure, if they fail, is more disastrous than a whole series of mercantile bankruptcies.
Under ordinary circumstances they can go on by mutual agreement; in extraordinary circumstances they must consent, as business partners do, to delegate t-he decision by the same mutual agreement to that one for whom it is most obviously fitting, or who has most at stake.
In most families this is already done, so far as concerns the broad general method of letting the husband decide on the domicile, and the wife as to the care of children.
Even here the two things intermingle, since in a proposed change of domicile the welfare of the children is one of the most important elements.
It is difficult to think of anything, even the investment of money, in which the habits of modern life do not recognize that the wife as well as the husband has some concern.
The main thing is to remember that marriage is, as Lotze
points out, a mutual surrender, and that the two partners are morally equivalent.
This should be the standard; and not that of Mr. Thomas Sapsea
's story, who recorded upon his wife's tombstone that he had “never met with a spirit more capable of-looking up to him!”