A CRITIQUE. OF FAMILY AND
PERSONAL. ACCOUNT KEEPING

Thesis for the Degree of M. A.
MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE

Esther Everett
1945

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

A Critique of Family and
Personal Account Keeping

presented by

Esther Everett

has been accepted towards fulfihnent
of the requirements for

I. A. degree in Home Management &
We Deve10pnent

Major professor

Date December 14. 1945

\L‘ll‘biil l 1 \fi* u it. “I I

I‘lvi'lrli"tllli ii v1

, .V‘I‘Iitl' I...

A CRITIQUE OF FAMILY AND PERSONAL ACCOUNT KEEPING

by

tether Everett

A THESIS
submitted to the Graduate School of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applie
Science in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Home Management and Child Development

1945

[75668

The author wishes to take this Opportunity
to OXpIOSB her most sincere appreciation to
Dr. Irma H. Gross for her patience, help and
encouragement in preparing this thesis.
Dr. William D. Baten'e suggestions on handling
statistical material were most helpful. To the
many peeple who read critically the outline and
parts of the thesis the author wishes to express

her appreciation.

TABLE or coursgrs

chapter Page
I. IntIOduOtion.oeeeeeeeeeoeeeeeoeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoeeeo

mpose Of Study eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeceeeeeeeeeeeee 3
DOfinition Of termfi eeeeeeooeeoeeoeeeeeeeeeeeoeeeoe 3
Materials and. MathOdB Of Study eeeeee‘beeeeoeeeeoeee 4
ROVIOW 0f the literature eeeeeeeeeoeeeceooeeeeeeeec 7

II. Findings .000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOQOOOOOOOOOOO 38

From study of Purnell research project in

home management OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIO9.0.0.0000... 23
Factors influencing account keeping .............. 25
Economic status ................................ 35
Place of residence ............................. 27
Education of husband and wife .................. 29
Length or marriage 00.0000000000000000.0.0.00... 31
Home economics training ........................ 31
lember of family controlling spending .......... 35
Planning use or income .00....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. 37
Amount of planning ........................... 37
Form 0: plane OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.0.0000... 39
Time for which budget is made ................ 40
Duration of planning ......................... 41
Member or group making plan .................. 41
Honeplanning of use of income ................... 45
Use of checking account.......................... 45
From other materials .............................. 48
Study of family and individual records .......... 48
28 Michigan family records.....,..o.,g........ 48

52 personal eXpense accounts of Iowa Four E

1:18 000000000000eeoeeooooooeeeeeOeOOOOOO 50

Analysis of printed account books ............... 54
III. D180u8810n 0f findingfl eeeoeeoooeeeeooooooeoeeeooeooe 57
IV. Summary coo.oeeeeoooeooaoeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoeoeeeoeeee 65

F‘

Bibliography .OOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0|9.0.0.... 69
Appendix

Account books used for study ............................ 73
Detailed Score Card OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.00.000.0.0.0. 74

LIST 9? TABLEQ

Table Page

1. Economic level of families related to extent
0: account keeping .OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 26

2. Place of residence related to extent .
of account keeping ......-......................... 28

3. Education related to extent of account keeping ....... 30

4. Length of time of marriage of homemaker related to
extent Of account keeping .0...OOOOOOOOOO'OOOOOOOOOO 38

5. Length of home economics training related to extent
0: account keepingOOOOOO000.0000...0.00.00.00.00... 34

6. Control of family funds related to extent
of account keeping ................................ 36

7. Completeness of family financial plan related to
extent of account keeping ......................... 38

8. Ferm.cf financial plan related to extent
of account keeping ................................ 4O

9. Length of period for which spending plan is made
related to extent of account keeping .............. 42

10. Number of years of keeping spending plan related to
extent of account keeping ......................... 43

ll. naker of budget related to extent of account keeping . 44

12. Use of checking account related to extent
at aooomt keep1n80000000.0.0000000......000000000. 46

13. Comparison of use made by Michigan families of record
cake by planners and non-planners................. 49

14. Comparison of Michigan families summarizing
expenditures and those who did not ................ 51

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTIOI

Much has been said and written landing the
benefits of keeping a record of money spent for
personal and family living. It is a practice that
education and lending agencies encourage to curb
foolish spending, to encourage saving, to prevent
paying bills a second time, to increase sharing with
others, to become a ”better buyer”, and to help in
payment of debts. Present day tax systems necessitate
some kind of financial record if a family complies
with the law for filing income tax statements. As well
as these reasons for record keeping, the recording is
advocated as a basis for planning of future spending or
budgeting, as such financial planning is called.
Budgeting itself is felt to be a control of unwise
spending.

Study has shown that a sizable group of families
keeps records of spending, but the questions arise:

Are their records used in planning for future spending?
Is the financial record in the best form to be
advantageously used by the planning family? Are the
factors of residence, economic status, education, and
habits of use of family money influences on the extent

of records and the use to which they are put?

2‘

It is the purpose of this introductory chapter
to set forth the aim.cf this study, to clarify the
use of terms, orplain the methods used, enumerate
the materials included and review the literature in
the field of personal and aecount-keeping.

PURPOSE OF 8111])?

The purposes of this study are (l) to investigate
the practices of account keeping of a group of
families and individuals, to investigate what factors
are associated with account keeping and to discover
their relative importance; (2) to examine the
methods and techniques followed by account keepers
and find which most nearly meet their needs; (3) to
develcp a method of evaluation of account keeping
for individuals and families to use by a study of
account books. It is hoped that this study will help
clarify the stand of home economist in the home
management field in advising about records of family
spending.

3

DEFINITION OF TERHB

To assure uniform interpretation of this
study a defination of terms seems advisable.
”Record of spending”,'reoord of eXpenditure',
"account books" are terms used interchangeablely
to cover any written form of a record of
previous spending. It may be an itemized record
or one less precisely kept. Record keepers fall
into two groups. (1) Account keepers are
those who keep account books or files of
expenditures. These books are either commercially
printed or ruled in columns with headings to fit
the family. This group is referred to in the
study as I'formal account keepers”. (S) I'Casual
account keepers” are those who keep receipts,
cancelled checks, or random notes of spending.
The "non-account keeper" has no written record
of spending.

The term.'budget' although often used loosely
to mean record of spending, is used accurately in
this study as a prcposed plan for future
expenditures. To study the extent to which an
account of expenditures must be kept to formulate
a budget, and to determine in how much detail
accounts must be kept for finding how nearly
expenditures are within a budget are purposes
of this study.

4

IATERIALS AND METHODS USED FOR STUDY

Materials from four sources were used in this
research. The first and major part of the research
is taken from the Parnell home management study.
Sections that referred to account keeping and family
financial planning were particularly used. Personal
account books that had been kept by 52 Four S girls
in Iowa were another source of material. The
collection of account books kept by 88 Michigan
families and submitted to the home management
specialists of the Extension service was the third
group. Account books available on the market and
from educational institutions were collected for
study.

As stated above, material collected by
Evelyn Zwemer for the Purnell home management
study of the Michigan State College Experiment
Station was used for the major part of this study.
The introduction and part I of this schedule,
Factors Influencing Home Management Practices,
taken from 1939 to 1941 were used to determine the
factors that might correlate with degrees of account
keeping. The factors that were particularly
investigated'were (1) economic status, (2) residence,

(3) education of the homemaker either general or

5.
home economics, (4) financial planning, (5) checking
accounts, (6) length of marriage, (7) person

controlling spending.

The 382 families for this study had been so selected
that they represented the families in the state of
Michigan in economic status, residence, age, and size.
The original schedule was very detailed.with the plan
of using the collected material in numerous ways, but
that the schedule would be used specifically for an '
account keeping study was not known when the schedule was
formulated. Questions which were asked in the schedule
relative to money management were formulated with the
idea of getting a general picture of home management
procedure in relation to money, not just practices in
record keeping.

The group of 382 families was divided into three
classifications according to the extent of the families'
account keeping. Factors relating to keeping of records
were investigated for each of the three groupsof record
keepers. Practices followed by the families had been
previously added and tabulated so that counting was done
mechanically for this study.

Another source of material was a collection of
individual financial records kept by 53 Four 8 girls
in Iowa. These record books, though not highly selected,
were undoubtedly the better ones kept throughout the state.

6

Certain counties1 were asked to submit three expense
account books each for analysis. In all but one instance
the books were kept in the same printed form, secured‘

‘by the girls for five cents. The books were tabulated
in this study as to completenesa,source of money for
spending, columnar use, monthly and annual summaries,
details of balancing, and use made of record for planning
of future spending.

L The other source of material was the 2? record books
sent to Julia Pond, a home management specialist of the
‘Extension department of nichigan State College. These
‘books were tabulated as to completeness, use made of books
for recording, and for planning future spending. These
records were kept of family expenditures with varying
amounts of the farm expenditures recorded. These records
were kept uniformly in the Farm Family account book.

The final source of material.was the collection
of 24 account books secured from the Extension departments
of state colleges, from federal agencies, from money
lending agencies, and from.retail stores.

lith.a view to visualizing the development of the
philosOphy toward the homemaker keeping financial records

the literature was reviewed from a historical viewpoint.

1Those counties having I'Sbme Efficiency", the name
given the Tour H home management project.

7 ,
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The subject of personal and family account
keeping has not been neglected in the literature. Much
more has been written of family accounts than of
personal accounts, however. By and large, the subject
has been discussed by the home economist, but those
outside the field of professional home economics have
made a contribution to the writings. The approach of
the writers was from one or more of three standpoints:
(1) mere mechanics, (2) the direct values derived frome
the practice, or (3) the philosophy of account keeping.
The literature reviewed chronologieally shows the
changing philosophy of account keeping by shift in
emphasis from the keeping of a detailed spending record
to the use of the record in planning of future spending.

In the W 5 published
in England.in 1899 the authors say “whether the income
be small or large, certain or uncertain the good
housewife will keep an account of her income and ‘

expenditure.!

8
The Dean of the New York University School of
Commerce wrote in leu3 in How to Keep household Accounts,za
“It cannot be too strongly emphasized that the entire
value of the book rests upon a recognition of the absOlute
need of order and method in the financial administration
of the modern household." He put much emphasis upon
the mechanics of the book and the balance sheet.

43 publisned in l905

In a series of pamphlets
attention was given to Ellen H. Ricnards division of
income. Terrill as the author of the home management
section wrote that ”the number of families in wnich accounts
of personal and family eXpenses are kept is aetonishingly
small and in few instances where such records are kept
in sufficient study given to them to lead to advance in
standard of living from year to year.“ She gave the
purpose of accounts to be to "fellow the receipts and
expenses, keep a record of investments and at the end of
the year show the results of business and exact
condition of capital." Her advice was that the keeper
of the account should be a "genius for accounts” or
”one who loves it or who sees in it the possibilities
large enough to create willingness to give necessary
thought and time - - -.' She encouraged businesslike
promptness in entering accounts and enumerated the

fellowing systems of account keeping: envelOpes with

sums for various classes of expenditures, a card and

9
enve10pe system combined, the journal - ledger system,
the itemized and classified accounts.
co 0 cs n ‘ 0 tie 6 Isabel Bevier

wrote in the chapter "Home Economics since 1912“
that in the “period of develOpment” the economic
queStions involved came in for their share of attention
and words “division of income and family budgets“
were added to the vocabulary of home economics.“

An article appeared in Journal 9: home Economigs 4
in isle by Andrews gave very detailed instructions
for keeping a family account book. The purpose of this
artiCls was to secure uniformity in records in order
that they might be studied. An article by Winslow 4‘
in the same issue gave directions for keeping accounts
which suggested classifying expenditures, records for
individual family members, weekly balancing of records,
and the study and comparison of eacn week's eXpehditures.

Kittredge 24

in 1917 gave the percentages by which
incomes of various levels be divided and said "if the
amount set is exceeded by spending then economy is
practiced until the deficit is made up."

Sheaffer 38 emphasized in ngseholg Accounting
and EOOBlegfi the cash book, the summary of expenditures
and gave the percentage of income used for various

items in the budget. Geary 18

suggested large
classifications with subdivisions for expenditures

and stressed savings as the outcome of the detailed

10

recording of expenditures.

The writer of the Farmers' Bulletin
IEIE aousehold Acgountg 47 (1918) stated: '- - -
classification of expenditures - — - the greatest
good that could be derived from records - - -.'

The bulletin stated the farm household
account important as a supplement to farm accounts
and is an aid to economy. The kind of account book
is not important and classification is made to fit
the family.

naclecd 28 found that the use of cards with
headings and classification of spending for the
college students personal accounts to be most
satisfactory to encourage the analysis of spending.

In 1918 Taber's ‘1 statement in Business 91 the
ggggghgldgwas that most household accounts were
impractical because a record for every penny was
attempted; "those without knowledge of bookkeeping
try to 'balance an account' ' and I'there is no
standard of measurement governing family expenditures.“
An account keeper should forget exact accounting and
balancing, but have a ledger account for each important
division of household expenditures, record the date of
payments, articles purchased, adapt the account to the

family and summarize the accounts for the year.

i
11

9 designed a check book that provided stubs

Bosquet
to record expenditures. By paying with checks and the
use of small cards for personal allowances and cash
expenditures the record spending was kept.

Oorruth 13 recommended the card systems as capable
of being enlarged. She recommended, the “human interest“
cards and balancing every few days.

Abel 1 wrote in 1921 that "Out of the account book
of the past year grows the budget of the next." She said
the “very foundation of family thrift is the account book
without it the best plans and resolves will be given.up."

At the same time Bradford writing in.uahual_gf
figmgmgging,46 Encouraged prOper equipment and suitable
place for account keeping. She suggested the loose leaf
book or cards for the accounts, The classified columnar
entry was described as most simple but does not allow
for itemization and answering special questions. She
says ” in order to prove the accuracy of the record the
difference between receipt and expenditure must agree"
and ”balance at least once a week to avoid errors and
omissions.“

Lord 27 wrote in 1922 that it was common sense not
to try to account for every cent in accounting. In the

39 outside the field of home economics,

same year Sprague,
wrote "the word account used in its broadest sense means
not merely a narration or a statement of facts, but

something systematic or orderly - - - it must tend to

12
point to some conclusion.“
By 1923 nacleod 39 concluded that the emphasis on
account keeping should be from its contribution to
planning.

loodhouse 48

emphasized the value of planning

money use. She discusses the family account book as

a source of “information as to where your money has

gone in order that next month and next year you may

spend it to better advantage." She gave definite

questions an account keeper might use in reviewing

her record of expenditures. The excuse of many

homemakers for not keeping accounts is that they are

poor at figures, but, she adds, ”figures are not

important in a budget. It is the matter of deciding

on - - how to spend one's income. It is not the figures

that homemakers dislike; it is living up to a standard,

watching‘bad habits of spending, and being careful.“
Stevens 40 stated in 1937 the motivating of account

keeping with tenth grade girls with these objectives:

Iinteresting facts to be discovered, comparisons to be

made, leaks to be stapped, more instead of less satisfaction

to be gained from.spending, better habits to be formed."

Friend, 16 in her book Eggning and Spending the Family
Inggng,agreed.with the idea saying 'variation of a few

dollars should cause no discouragement.“ She suggests

that the accounting method be simple, such that it may be

13
studied at end of month, spaces and headings fit the
manner of budgeting and account books should have a
summary page. Slips from purchases might be kept on
a spindle, pay by check when possible, have children
help with recording, and make a plan for spending are
her helps to the account keeper.

Lindquist 36

in 1929 wrote, “one out of every

five women prefers a careful record of all expenditures.
The form and divisions which work best vary with the
family, thus indicating that in this matter as in
others bearing upon financial matters there is no one
way which can be prescribed that will prove satisfactory
to all. Each family is a unit with needs, resources
and aptitudes differing from all others and these
differences are the reasons for adapting a plan and
living by one which fits the family - - - one which

is designed to promote satisfactions and harmony rather
than to bring irritation and discord.‘

In 1932 wood, Lindquist and Studley 45

as joint
authors and Raitt in the President Conference on

Home Ownership 33 followed loodhouse in emphasizing

the value of accounts as a basis of budgeting and the
need of careful study of classified expenditures. The
joint authors set 97 percent accuracy as being sufficent

in household accounts. Raitt added, "Budget making and

14

account keeping are tools. They should never be
regarded as ends in themselves. Therefore only such
information as will aid in evaluating use of income
should be included in the household record.'

25 valued account keeping as a.way of

Kyrk
“checking performance over a certain period and providing
a basis by past experience for making a new plan.

Record - - keeping - - provides data that shows the
family's financial history.“ Dislike for the job,
time and effort involved, and intangible character of
results are obstacles to account keeping that Kyrk
described. She suggested using Inatural records“ and
periodic account keeping. It is the time spent in
critical appraisal that gives value to record keeping
itself. She said “The superficial similarity between
household and business accounting has lead to several
undesirable results - - . It is said as a result of
this false ana10gy that the household manager should
be taught bookkeeping and accounting. Actually it is
not the accountant's art and point of view she needs,
but the statistician's. Her problem is the analysis
of the families expenditures.“

A similar viewpoint toward account keeping came
from the field of child develcpment by the Gruenbergs.zo

' - - accounts are of value not in relation to what

has been, the dead past, but in relation to plans for the

15

future; and in relation not to the prejudice of the
parents, but the interest of the child. But unless the
child can be made to feel that he is to get some value
out of the effort or unless he discovers in the
procedure, something to his own interest, accounts
are not worth pressing.“

Reid 35

in directing expenditures. She recommends that the

said accounts are useful only as they aid

family contented with what they are securing from
their money income be advised against formal budgeting.
She feels accounts are not kept because peepls are
“ignorant of their advantages" that they are difficult
and time consuming, and the job is disliked. Accuracy
within 90 to 95 percent is enough to aid in budgeting;
no detail should be recorded that does not serve a
purpose.
Andrews
keeping and added, "Do not unbalance your mind trying

3 suggested several types of account

to balance your personal account to the last penny."

7 put much emphasis on planning the

Bigelow
family spending in advance, but keeping record of
expenditures was minimunized in this statement,

“In much of the literature on budgeting there has been
too much emphasis upon writing down round numbers in

advance, too much emphasis on entering the details of

16
expenditures after they have been made, and not enough
emphasis upon working out in advance a carefully
considered and realistic spending plan.“ — - a family
budget is not a classified system of household accounts.“
Radell, 3‘ Owens, 31 and Donham, 15 each in his own
book stressed planning of spending. While Donham said

31 suggested classified

nothing of account keeping, Owens
columns, and Radell 35 has a sample account book to be
“Beds

33 stressed simplicity in accounting. A

Jordan
simple ruled form of eight columns with space for date
and totals, adjusted to fit situation was her
recommendation.

Harwood 21 suggested the use of a simple adding
machine or entering items in book to nearest five cents.
Stress was put upon the family council plan in settling
financial matters.

In her discussion of accounts kept in home

19 said "Since there can be no

management house Gross
accurate check on a budget without adequate accounts,
there must be a separate loose—leaf page, or column
of a page, or a filing card, for each.division of the
budget. The totals of the different division

must be brought together in a summary, and some kind
a balance must be struck. The balance in the home

management house differs from the balance in a home,

17
that is must be accurate, since it is group money
that is being handled. In a home account on the
contrary, it is permissible to have a reasonable amount
unaccounted for.“

37 from the business training field,

Scott,
recommended a simple account to fit personal needs,
consistency in entering items, keeping a special purse
for sundries but he does not provide for itemized
classification of purchases. Planning is based upon
resources expected.

In writings on family relations the use of money

10 statement was that an

is often mentioned. Bowman's
inexpensive form, not tooexacting, should be used.
He speaks of budgeting as a psyChological problem as
well as financial and mathematical. The budget should
be fitted to the family.

Management in Eamily Living by Nickell

publiShed in 1943 stated that each family decides

30

Whether records be kept and the kind of records will

be determined by the "desire for knowledge and facts?
”When conditions are uncertain or unknown accurate data
are likely to be greatly heeded. Simplicity, adequacy,
convenience and flexibility are the criteria for
choosing an accounting system. Habit and mativation

are the two greatest aids to account keeping."

18
Her notes to account keepers were (1) start simply,
(3) work out a system to suit your personal needs,
(3) stick to your account keeping until a habit is
formed, (4) control the accounts, do not let the
accounts control you.

Three recent articles in lggzna1_gf_figmg

Economics approached the need of accounts as a

12 says, " Families

wartime expedient. Coles
must go about financial planning or budgeting with
a seriousness never before contemplated. They must
‘know how to make plans that will work and how to put
this into effective operation even though this means
keeping expenditure records so dreaded by money.“

Dodge 14 emphasized budgeting for wartime takes and

11 recommended the well kept

bond buying, and Bregger
account book as a basis for budgeting as well as an
aid to wartime austerity“.

In a series of articles written for

W Walter 43
1945, "Detailed records may be more useful, but partial

wrote in

records are useful as far as they go.“ He suggested
that the plans for records be in these degrees of detail
chosen to fit desires of family: 'Hemoranda for income
tax return, budget for large payment, or detailed
budget.’I The author gave suggestions for account keeper

to keep records for use in future planning.

19

In 1944 Bonds 8

wrote of the importance of account
books fitting the needs of families. She stresses
the need of planning before spending and records being
one source of information for planning. Evaluation of
spending will keep the family conscious of their
collective goals. Evaluation should be more frequent
for the beginner than for experienced. Comparison
with other families' use of income is helpful in
evaluating spending.

Three theses have been written at Michigan State
College that have investigated the methods of

handling finances in Michigan homes. In 1935 Fuller 17

wrote in nethods of figndling Eamily in fiomgs of Women
ggllege Students that one-fourth of the families

(44 cases) budgeted their money - - 14 of these 44
budgeted quite fully. Her inquiry did not include

questions about account keeping. The thesis,

written in 1938, Egthgds of gandling Eamily Einance
o s e 0 ts, by Aikinz made

definite inquiry about record keeping. She found that
22 families (about 15 percent) were complete account
keepers, 103 (65 percent) were partial account keepers
and 28 (almost 20 percent) kept none. She found that
the highest percent of record keeping was in the Village

and on the farm rather than in cities. Business and

20
farmers' families kept more records than professional
or industrial workers' families. In the small family
with only one child, and in the group where only one
parent had attended high school there were more records
than when neither or both attended high school.

In the thesis of Eunice A. Pardee, 32

th s o n he co 360 Se ecte
Families in Michigap written in 1936 her study showed
61.4 percent of all families keeping some record of
expenditures, but only a fourth of these kept a
complete record of expenditures. A greater percent'
of city families than farm or town families kept
complete records. Partial records were kept to the
greatest extent by city families but in this group
town families in greatest numbers kept no financial
records (41.1 percent) the percent town families was
very nearly the same. (38.5 percent)

This chron010gical review of literature shows
the trend away from the early view that family records
be precisely kept pages of figures that are balanced
periodically. Instead, there has develOped the goal
of family financial planning with written records
kept only as fully as necessary for future planning.

Balancing of income and outgo of money need not be

closer than ninety or ninety-five percent according

21

to Reid. Use of “natural” records - the "casual"
record classification of this study: cancelled cheeks
and check stubs, receipts - are encouraged by Kyrk.
The present attitude of writers is that records of
completed decisions in spending are not an end in
themselves, but that a balanced plan is the important
goal; that written records of past plans are only a

means of providing basis facts for future planning.

22

CHAPTER II

FINDINGS

This chapter which is based upon the carefully
controlled random sampling of Micnigan families sets
forth some of the possible influences upon, or
factors related to family account keeping. The
factors of economic level, residence, education of
hu9band and wife, home economics training of
homemaker, and the length of time of her marriage
were considered. Because keeping of records and
budgeting are linked to a degree many details of
family financial planning as well as procedures in
handling money were considered. Hember controlling
family purse, use of checking account, length of
time for which budget were planned, the maker of
the plan, as well as the form and completeness of it
were examined. The duration for which the family
had depended upon a budget was studied. The habits
of families declaring they made no financial plans

were viewed with record—keeping in mind.

23

The latter part of this chapter makes use
of two sources of material. The first source is
made up of two groups of records kept by
(a) twenty-eight Michigan family record keepers
and (b) fifty-two Iowa Four H Club girls. Each
group used books with printed headings for
their record keeping. To analyze the book,
the extent to which the records were kept and
some apparent use to which they were put were
studied.

The other source of material was the
twenty-three account books secured from state
extension departments, from the United States

Department of Agriculture and from retail stores.

FROM STUDY OF PURNELL RESEARCH PROJECT IN
HOME MANAGEMENT

The entire group of 382 Michigan families
was divided into three groups - formal account keepers,

casual account keepers, and hon-account keepers.

> 24
The groups numbered as follows:

 

lumber Percent
Formal account keepers 1 109 28.6
Books
Printed headings 16
Devised own headings 91
Card file 2
Casual account keepers 89 23.3
Cancelled checks 6O
'Receipted bills 26
Slips of paper 2
Calendar 1
Ion-account keepers 184 3.8.1}...
Total . 333 10°

The group of formal account keepers was slightly
more than half the non-account keeping group. The
combined formal and casual account keepers exceeded the

non-account keeping group by only four percent.

Of the formal account keepers six times as many
families devised their ownuheadings for their account
‘book as used books with printed headings. A negligible
number (2) used the card file device for their records.

25

Cancelled checks as a casual method of recording
family eXpenditures conshtuted two-thirds of that
group. Almost the entire remainder (26) relied upon
receipts to account for their spending.

' For some of the analysis the casual and formal
record were considered as a group in contrast to the

- non-account keepers.

Factors influencing account keeping

1 of the family was considered

The economic status
as a factor in account keeping. With more money to
spend it was found that families kept more formal
records. (See Table l.) The increase was from 23.5
percent of the low income level families keeping records
to 31.2 percent of the comfort level families keeping
them; families with medium income were similar to
the higher income group.

In comfort income families casual account keeping
occurred with about the same frequency as formal

records (32.0 percent). The decrease of casual records

as income decreased occurred regularly making casual

1"Economic status" in the study was based upon the
homemakers classification of the family's annual
income into the following groups:
Low-farm income under $750; non—farm under $1000,
Medium-farm income 3750 to $1750; non-farm $1000
to $2500,
Comfort-farm income over $1750; non-farm over
$2500.

26

TABLE 1

Economic level of families related to extent

of account keeping

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formal Casual Non Entire
account account account group
keepers keepers keepers
Economic Num- Per- Num- Per- Num- Per- Num- Per-
16761 ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
2
Low income 28 i23.5 17 14.3 74 62.2 119 100.00
Medium income ’ 42 30.4 32 23.2 64 46.4 ‘ 138 100.00
Comfort incomj 39 31.2 40 32.0 46 37.8. 125 100.00
Total [109 28.6 89 23.3 184 48.1 382 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

. -"s'-I.
. n."s.wh.
.30‘
.i

la... II. as,
’.
its! 1!

.II. .0 . st,

27

records even less prevalent among low income families
than.formal record keeping (32.0-23.2-14.3 percent).
The preportion of families without financial records
increased as income fell. The increase was more
pronounced between the low and medium groups than
between the medium and the comfort economic level.
Approximately two-thirds (63.2 percent) of the
comfort level families kept some financial records,
while about an equal percent (62.2 percent) of low
economic level families had none. Medium.economic
level families were about equally divided -
53.6 percent some records, 46.4 percent with no
accounts.
The place of residence, either farm or village}'
‘was studied as a factor in keeping financial records.
(See Table 2). Ihile formal accounts were kept by
farm residents almost as frequently as by village
dwellers (26.7 percent to 30.4 percent) the percentage
and number of casual records doubled from the farm
to village areas (15.? percent to 30.8 percent).
Farm families without financial records exceeded
village non-account keepers by almost one-half.
0r, two-fifth of the farm families were record keepers
'while three-fifths of the village families kept some

kind of financial records.

1Village groups included in the study were groups
of less than 2500 persons.

28

TABLE 2

Place of residence related to extent

of account keeping

 

Formal Casual Ion Entire
account account account group
keepers keepers keepers

 

+’ - Per- Num- Per- lum- Per- Hum- Per-

\ ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent

 

51 26.7 30 15.7 110 57.6 191 100.00

 

 

Farm
V111agi 58 30.4 59 30.8 74 38.8 191 100.00

 

 

 

 

Totall109 28.6 89 23.3 184 48.1 382 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

29

Education of the homemaker as well as that of her
husband was studied as a factor in account keeping.
(See Table 3.) The education of husbands and wives
showed a high positive correlation?’

' Formal account keeping increased with years of
education of both men and women. The percent of
increase was greater between the eighth grade and high
school with the group of women than with the men. The
increase between high school and college was more
pronounced in the group of men.

Ihile the difference in education of the group of
women was not marked (17.9 - 23.8 - 28.6 percent)
among the casual account keepers, there was a marked
increase in the men's group between high school and
colleges ( 18.4 to 38.2 percent )

‘Where the homemaker had an eighth grade education
or'less the pr0portion of homes without accounts was
most marked. As education increased the non-account
group decreased ( 63.4 — 46.2 - 33.9 percent )

As education of husbands increased the families

without accounts decreased, but the decrease showed a

1860 original home management study - W
flags ganagament Practices in nichigaa gages, 2,14.
Special problem correlating education of mates
worked out by author. The correlation coefficient
of .672 can be described as a "substantial or ‘
marked relation“.

30

TABLE 3

Education related to extent of account keeping

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A. Homemaker
Formal Casual Non Entire
aacccunt account account group
keepers keepers keepers
Education lum- Per- Hum-J Per- Bum- Per- Num- Per-
completed her cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
Eighth grade or lead 23 18.7 22 17.9 78 63.4 123 100.00
High School 44 30.0 35 23.8 68 46.2 147 100.00
Beyond.ldgh School 42 37.5 32 28.6 38 33.9 112 100.00
Total 109 28.6 89 23.3 184 48.1 382 100.00
Be Huaband
Eighth grade or les 39 23.2 32 19.0 97 57.8 168 100.00
High school 34 27.2 23 18.4 68 54.4 125 100.00
Beyond high school 36 40.5 34 38.2 19 21.3 89 100.00
Total 09 28.6 89 23.3 184 48.1 388 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

31

different pattern than in the similar group of homemakers.
Non.account keepers were far less frequent when the men
had education beyond high school.

The length of time of the marriage of the homemaker
‘was considered as a possible factor in account keeping.

‘ (See Table 4.) Formal records occurred in about the same
frequency in the first five year period, and succeeding
ten year periods, until after the twenty-fifth year of
marriage. After this, there was a gradual decline in
percent of record keepers from about one-third to one-
seventh of the group. There was no regular pattern of
casual record keeping related to length of marriage. As
the length of time of marriage increased there was a
tendency toward increasing number of families without
financial records.

During the first five years of marriage slightly
more than one-third (36.4 percent) of the families were
without financial records; as years of marriage
increased the families without records reached almost
three-fifths.

In the entire group of 382 families about
two-thirds of the women had some home economics training
in school. Formal account keeping in the home economics
trained group exceeded those without such training
(32.8 - 21. percent).

32

TABLE 4

Length of time of marriage of homemaker related to

extent of account keeping

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formal Casual Ion Entire

account account account group

keepers keepers keepers
Number of years Numther- Nuns» Per- Hum- Per- Hum. Per-
married “her cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
Less than‘SQ-years 13 29.6 15 34.1 18 38.4 44 100.00
5} to 15* years 48 33.8 35 19.5 81 47.7 188 100.00
154 to 25} years :53 30.0 26 23.8. 51 48.4 110 100.00
25* to 35§years 17 33.8 15 80.8 40 55.8 73 100.00
35} years and over 4 14.3 8 38.8 18 57.1 38 100.00

Total 108 38.8 89 33.3 184 48.1 388 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

33

Home economics No home economics
training training
Number Percent Number Percent
Formal account
keepers 80 32.8 29 21.0
Casual account
keepers 57 23.4 32 23.0
None 107 43.8 77 56.0
244 100.0 138 100.0

There was no difference between those with
home economics training and those without in casual
record keEping. I

The length of home economics training was
considered as an influence on financial record.
keeping. (See Table 6.) Records of spending became
more frequent with increased home economics
training. The group having up to one year of
home economics education and keeping formal accounts
was so small it could not be compared to others
with validity. However, the prOportion increased

from nearly one-fifth in this meager group

34

TABLI 5

Length of home economics training and extent

of account keeping

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fbrmal Casual Non Entire
account account account group
keepers keepers keepers
Years of home Num- Per— Num— Per- Num- per-'- Num- Per-
economics ‘ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
education
Over 5 years 29 44.6 11 17.0 25 38.4 65 100.00
1:} to 5 years 29 35.0 16 20.0 37 45.0 82 100.00
1 to 2* years 15 25.0 17 28.5 28 46.5 60 100.00
Up to 1 year 7 18.9 13 35.1 17 46.0 37 100.00
No home economics *
training 29 21.0 32 23.0 77 56.0 138 100.00
Total 109 28.6 39 23.3 184 48.1 382 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

35

to almost forty—five percent when home economics
training was over five years.

Contrary to the findings of the formal record
keepers, casual record keeping decreased with more
home economics training. Women with no training kept
fewer casual records than with less than one year of
training, however.

Over half (56 percent) of the homemakers without
home economics training did not keep financial records.
Of those with less than one year of training, and for
the next two two-year intervals, about 46 percent had
no records. When this specialized training reached
beyond five years the proportion without records fell
to slightly less than 40 percent of the group.

lhether a single family member or the group
controlled the spending, and which member of the group
or combinations of individual controlled the purse
strings were considered as factors in the keeping of
records. Ebw often the statement is made, ”Records
are impossible to keep when someone else spends the
money and does not feel obligated to report the
spending“.

Since only 8 families had democratic control of
funds, a valid comparison was impossible. (See Table 6.)
when there was equalatarian control of funds between
husband and wife there was no significant difference in

percent of formal accounts.

38
TABLE 6

Control of family funds related to extent
of account keeping

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formal Casual Non Entire
account account account group
keepers keepers keepers
Famili I
spend ng Nuns-Per— lum-» Per- lum- Per- Hump Per-
controlled by | ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
lhole family
or husband
wife Jointly
or separately 67 27.9 58 24.2 115 47.9 240 100.00
Husband 22 23.2 22 22.2 34 43.6 73 100.00
Iife 20 31.3 9 14.0 35 54.7 64 100.00
Total 109 28.6 89 23.3 184 48.1 382 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

37

when the husband rather than wife had the sole
control of the family purse there was a higher
proportion of casual records of spending ( 28.2 - 14.0
percent). However, when the wife controlled the purse
slightly more formal accounts were kept ( 31.3 to 28.2
percent).

Families with no financial records were most
frequent of the significantly large groups when the
wife controlled the purse ( 54.7 percent ). When the
control was equalized or when the husband controlled.
the money about 45 percent in each case had no records.

Budgeting, a tentative plan for future spending,
was studied as it related to degrees of account keeping.
is set forth in the introduction accounts are considered
to be a tool with which budgets may be more accurately
made.

The group of eight families making complete plane
was so small that it can not be used as a significantly
slarge group to compare with the others. It is of interest,
however, that so few families plan democratically.

The percent of accounts drapped sharply as less
planning was done. ‘Ihile three-fourths of the complete
planners were formal account keepers (too small a group
to be significant), not quite half ( 43.5 percent ) of
the partial planners kept accounts, and about one-fifth

without plans had accounts. (See Table 7.)

38

TABLE 7

Completeness of family financial plan related

to extent of account keeping

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formal Casual Non- Entire
account account account group
keepers keepers keepers

P1811 made lum- Per- Num- Per- Eum- Per- Rum- Per-”
ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
Complete plan 6 75.0 1 12.5 1 12.5 8 100.00
Partial plan 37 43.5 13 15.3 35 41.2 85 100.00
lo plan 66 22.8 75 28.0 148- 51.2 289 100.00
1...; nos 28.6 39 23.3 134 43.1 332 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

39

In the groups of casual account keepers and non-
account keepers the percent increased as the families
did less planning. Fifteen percent of the partial
planners kept casual accounts and two-fifths none.
One-fourth with no plans kept casual accounts and
over half without plans had no record of spending.
.This group of families with neither plans nor records
made up over thirty-eight percent of the entire group
of families studied.

Considering only the group of planners, their
methods and experience were analyzed in the light of
record keeping. It was found that when plans for
spending were written there was a marked increase
in formal accounts. (See Table 8.) (written plans
63.5 - unwritten plans 32.7 percent).

There was a reversal of this finding in the
casual and non-account keeping groups. With budgets
unwritten 17.3 percent of the group kept casual accounts
and one—half no accounts at all. With written budgets
12.2 percent had casual accounts and one-fourth, none.

Groups of planners in the casual account keeping
group were too small to be significant.

When the period for planning projected a week,

month, or year in the future there was no regular

40

TABLE 3

Form of financial plan and extent of

account keeping

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formal Casual Non Entire
account account account group
keepers keepers keepers
Form of Rum, Per- Num- Per- Num- Per- Num- Per-
plan ber cent ber cent ber cent .ber cent
Written 26 63.5 5 12.2 10 24.3 41 100.00
Unwritten 17 32.7 9 17.3 26 50.0 52 100.00
lone 33 22.3 75 P6.0 143 51.2 239 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

41
increase or decrease in formal accounts. Two-fifths
of the shorter period planners and one-half of the
annual or semi-annual planners kept formal records.
(See Table 9.)

Nearly one-half the families with weekly plans
kept no records, about two-fifths the annual or
semi-annual planner had no records, and less than one-
third (31.5 percent ) of the monthly planners had no
records. '

Again, several groups were found too small to be
significant when the period of time for which planning
had been done.was considered. 0f the largest group,
which had kept records since marriage, over one-half
( 52.9 percent ) kept formal account books. The
percent was even higher ( 5 out of 7 cases ) when
budgets were an innovation in the past year. When
‘budgets had been kept over a ten year period the same
number ( 5 out of 7 ) had no records. See (Table 10)

When the persons or group who made the budget
was considered, the distribution was such that the
numbers in some group were not large enough to be
mathematically significant. When husbands and wives
jointly planned budgets more formal accounts were kept.
(See Table 11.) When the entire family or husbands
and wives budgeted Jointly there is a slight indication

that casual accounts were more common than when either

Length

to extent of account keeping

42

1131.2 9 ‘

of period for which spending plan is made related

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formal Casual Eon Entire
account account account group
keepers keepers keepers
Hump Per- lul- Per- Hum~»Per~ Rum. Per-
“ber cent ber cent bor cent ber cent
Weekly 10 43.5 2 8.7 11 47.8 23 100.00
Monthly 15 42.8 9 25.7 11 31.5 35 100.00
Annual or
semi-annual 18 51.4 3 8.6 14 0.0 35 100.00
Total 43 46.2 14E5.l 36 38.7 93 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

43

TABLE 10

Number of years of keeping a spending plan related to

extent of account keeping

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'Eormal Casual lonn‘ Entire
account account account group
wkeepers keepers keepers
Length of num- Per- Num- Per- Num- Per- Wum- Per-
time plan .ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
Since marriage 27 52.9 7 13.8 E 17 33.3 51 100.00
Past year only 5 71.4 1 14.3 ! 1‘ 14.3 7 100.00
Past 1-3 years 2 16.7 3 25.0 7 58.3 12 100.00
Past 4-10 year; 7 43.8 3 18.8 6 37.4 16 100.00
Over 10 years 2 28.6 - - - 5 71.4 7 100.00
Total 43 46.3 14 15.0 36 38.7 93 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE'II

Makers of the budget related to extent

of account keeping

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formal Casual Non- Entire
account account account group
keepers keepers keepers
Maker of Num-» Per- Nuns Per- HumanPer- Num- Per-
budget ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
‘Whole family 2 40.0 1 20.0 2 40.0 5 100.00
Husband and - ,
wife jaintly 30 47.6 11 17.4 22 35.0 63 100.00
Husband and
wife separately 11 44.0 2 8.0 25 100.00
Total I 43 6.2 )5.1

 

14

 

 

 

45
spouse planned separately. There was a tendency for

the group of non-account keepers to be larger when
either husband or wife budgeted separately.

The group of 289 non-planning families was analyzed
as to decision making in relation to spending. The
group of joint decisions with.husband and wife or
with entire family was overwhelmingly large ( 243 )
compared to a group of nine where either spouse
controlled the money spending. There is indication
that when group decisions were made a higher proportion
of formal or casual accounts were kept than when
decisions were made singly. In either case, families
with no records constituted a larger group than
either extent of record keeping.

The convenience of a checking account was considered
as an influence upon record keeping. In the original
studyla definite relation of a rise in economic level
and the frequency of the use of a checking account was
found. The casual record keepers in two-thirds of the
89 cases reported cancelled checks as their form of
records. It is worthy of note that forty-three families
used a checking account and did not utilize it as a way
of keeping casual records.

0f the 382 families approximately two-fifths
( 41.4 percent ) had checking accounts. Less than
one-third of each group kept formal accounts. (See Table 12.)

1Zwemer, Evelyn. M hi 9.
p. 23.

TABLE 12

46

Use of checking account related to extent

of account keeping

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formal Casual Non Entire
account account account group
keepers keepers keepers
um— Per- Num- Per- Hump Per- Hum- Per-
ber cent ber cent ber cent ber cent
Checking
account used 48 30.4 67 42.4 43 27.2 158 100.00
Checking account
not used 61 27.3 22 9.8 141 62.9 224 100.00
Total 109 28.6 89 23.3 184 48.1 382 100.00

 

 

 

 

 

47

Forty-two percent of those with checking accounts

kept casual records, while less than ten percent of

those without this banking convenience kept such records.
About one-fourth ( 27.2 percent ) of those

families using checking accounts reported having no

records, evidently keeping neither stubs or cancelled

checks. Three-fifths of the non-checking families

had no records.

48

FROH OTHER.MATERIALS

Study of family and individual records

Twenty eight record books kept in 1943 by
homemakers in Michigan extension groups and collected
by Julia Pond, extension specialist in home

1 were tabulated

management, were analyzed. The books
as to completeness and use made of various sections
of book.

0f the twenty eight records submitted twenty five
families had made no written estimate of expected
expenditure. The pr0portion ( 10.7 percent ) of
planners was less than the 24.4 percent of families
investigated and reported earlier in this study. The
three families who planned had budgets for a period
of two to twelve months.

The use made of the book itself by the group of
planners and non planners was compared. (See Table 13.)
The planning group, although too small to be
statistically significant, carried out the record in
more detail than the non-planning group, except
balancing the monthly account and making the yearly

summaIYe

1111 records were kept in U.8.D.A. publication
Bureau of Home Economics. Washington, D.C., 1935,
F ami ccount

49

TABLE 13

Comparison of use made by Michigan families of record

books by planners and non-planners of income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Use of book Use of book
by planners by
( 3 cases ) Ion-planners
' ( 25 cases )
accord gate spending 3 3° _
W 3 31
W 3 13
lonthly summary entered
Wu 1 13
Entered yearly summary 1 ._l§1
Estimated expenses for
2211111221; 1 9
T e e x s t_ 7
Net wgrth statement 3 6

 

50
Of these specific details studied there appears

to be a linkage in the occurrence of recording dates

of spending and using all columns in the book. Monthly
and annual summaries and balancing of the book are two
items that appear to occur with equal frequency among
non—planners and planners.

A comparison was made of the eight books in which
a summary of the cash expenditures for a year was
made with the twenty in which.none was made. (See Table 14.)
Families which summarized financial records made more
use of record books than those which did not. This
was evidenced by a greater pr0portion of budgets,
monthly and yearly summaries entered and summarized
and balanced accounts.

Estimating a years expenses, use of all columns
and recording dates of spending occurred with about an
equal frequency in the summarizing and non-summarizing
group, but monthly summarizing and balancing, entering
some or all items for yearly balancing occurred three
times as frequently in the annual summarizing group.

Fifty-two personal account books kept by Iowa
Four H club girls were analyzed. These books, although
not highly selected, were undoubtedly the better ones
kept by the girls in the state. Each of certain
counties was asked to submit three books for analysis.

The analysis of these books showed that much

TABLE 14

Comparison of Hichigan families summarizing expenditures

and those .h." did not

 

Summarized
annual

expenditures

.1( 8 cases )

No summary
( 20 cases)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘aecgyg dgte of spending 6 16
ng 311 gglumns .§ lfli_____
Estimated expenses for
use: L 9......
Estimated expenditures
t 2 o the _3 0 __

Some of yearly

gumgayy entered 7 9
Monthly summary entered

o e summary figg; 8
W1 1i h
WW1 3 7

 

52

.more.attention was given to recording past spending
than planning for future spending. Eleven of the
fifty two had the assurance of funds available in the
future. Twenty nine earned money for spending.

To judge the completeness of the individual
accounts the monthly and annual summary, the balance
of annual and monthly income and outgo of money,
the saving and planning for the future were given

consideration.

Characteristics of the 52 account books kept by Iowa.4H girls.

Source of money

 

Money given irregularly 23
Allowance given irregularly 16
Allowance given regularly 11
No money given 1
No record 1

Total 52

Earning of Money

Earned money . 29
Earned no money 20
No record of earning 3

 

Total 52

53

Comparison of account keepers with regular source

of money and those whose money was irregular.

Monthly summary
Balanced monthly
Save for purpose
Yearly summary

Balanced annually
Plan for spending

Regular. (11) irregular. (41)
Percent Percent
100 . 90
100 90
63 73'
100 92
81 73
45 28

With a regular source of money, accounts were

more completely kept.)

was more purposeful saving.

With irregular income there

Planning for future

spending was more frequent with a regular income.

Comparison of those earning and those who did not.

Monthly summary
Balanced monthly
Save for purpose
Yearly summary.
Balanced annually
Plan for spending

Earned (29) No earning(23)

Percent Percent
96 95
96 95
84 65
96 95
80 75
64 70

54

The difference in completeness of account
keeping is slight when money is earned by the spender
compared with.when it is not. There was indication
that accounts are more completely kept by the girl
who earned. Planning for the use of money was
not done as extensively by the earners as non-earners.
The girl who earned saved more with a purpose

in mind for spending.

Analysis of printed account books from various sources

Twenty three account books were collected for
scoring. They were secured from state extension
services, United States Department of Agriculture,
and commercial sources.

The scoring of these books on a 75 point scale
varied from 18 to 65 points. More account books
scored low for their lack of emphasis on planned
spending than for any other one deficiency.

Only five of the twenty three books for accounts
were scoredin.the upper third of the range. In each
of the lower thirds the half of the remaining books
fell. More books scored low on this device than in
the upper part of the scale.

While this scoring device was helpful in finding

accounting devices that most nearly filled the

55
Score Card for Evaluating Account Books
( To be used in scoring record books )

Does the book emphasize planned spending?

a. Is there space for spending in a previous
period?

b. Is there a space for anticipated spending
monthly or weekly?

annually?

0. Can the current state of finances easily
be compared to plan?

d. Can the initial plan be altered
conveniently to meet changing needs?

Is the book adaptable to individual families?

a. Is it possible to add additional columns
conveniently?

b. Can expenditures of family members be kept
separately in items desired?

0. Can accounts be started at anytime of year?

d. Can the calculation easily be made by the
unschooled person? '

Is the book simple?

a. Is it necessary to keep little detail to
make use of the record?

b. Is the emphasis placed upon Spending with a
plan rather than "balancing books“?

c. Does the book contain no extraneous material?
13 the make-up of the book suitable?
a. Is there good quality paper?

b. Does the book Open easily and
lie flat?

c. Can the lines and columns be easily
followed on the page?

Total

25

20

15

15

75

58

qualifications set up in this study, families must

find a record book that fits their own needs, abilities,
and desire for detail. Minty—one of the 109 formal
record keepers reported in Chapter II kept records

in books with their own headings, while only 16

kept records in printed account books.

57

CHAPTER III

DISCUSSION 0? FINDINGS

In the sampling of 382 families selected to be
representatives of the Michigan farm and village
pOpulation it was found that about a half of the families
kept financial records. One questions the real use of
casual records as a tool for financial planning -
the avowed use of financial records. The group of
formal account keepers constituted slightly more
than one half the group and the actual use of formal
records for planning cannot be conclusively stated,
but is merely indicated by the two groups of formal
records examined in Chapter II of this study.

Contrary to pOpular belief that with lack of
money those without it know ”where every penny goes“,
the low income groups kept fewer accounts. The
reason may be that the elemental demands of food,
clothing and shelter give no choice for use of funds,
hence essential spending is done with no recording.
With more money and Opportunity for choices both
casual and formal records increased. This leads
one to conclude that with Opportunity to purchase
more, records are more apt to occur. The positive

correlation of rise in economic level with increased

58

education shown in the original study must be
considered in viewing the low incidence of
accounts with lower income. The factor of
education may be as important as amount of choice.

Increased education meant increased records,
both formal and casual. One concludes that
record keeping of financial spending is practiced
more generally by families in better circumstances —
economically and educationally. Yet, undoubtedly
the low income families need even more assistance
from money record books themselves and from informed
advisers for extending income than groups with more
income.

While increased education of both husband and
wife both lead to more record keeping the pronounced
increase of records between high school and college
educated men and a similar increase between eighth
grade and high school education in women leads one
to speculate on the possibility of the institutions
at different levels providing help and incentive
for both sexes in recording financial spending.

The marked increase of casual accounts and the
slightly higher occurrence of formal accounts with
village families in comparison to farm families leads

to several conclusions. The irregularity of farm

59

income probably accounts for the failure of farm
families to keep records. In addition they
undoubtedly find difficulty in recording family
expenditures that are so interrelated with the
farm business expenses. Village families, because
of their proximinity to banking facilities have
checking accounts, hence casual records. Their
income is more regular which would facilitate
record keeping.

Again the factor of education should not be
overlooked - the occurrence of more education in the
village family may be as much of a factor as place
of residence.

After the twenty-fifth year of marriage the
occurrence of accounts decreased. There is no
regular trend with casual records. This may indicate
the formal record keeper learns after a period of
time the pattern of the family's spending, or she
may weary of the necessary regularity of recording.
Casual records continue because the facilities
which are inherent with these records continue to be
used by habit or for their convenience.

Because home economics training itself stresses
wise rise of money and the assumption is made that

records mean better buying, home economics trained

60

homemakers tend to keep more records. Because with
less than one year of home economics training there

is a low frequency of records one concludes that use
of money is a subject not suited to, or, not easily
taught in elementary home economics. Or, it may be
that women not interested enough in the subject of
home economics to continue with it are not interested
in keeping records of family spending. Then, too,

it probably takes longer than one year to indoctrinate
home economics students in the keeping of records.

Because casual records yield less than formal
records in the way of useful information it may be
that such records decrease as home economics education
increases.

Democratic control by the entire family for
spending is not widely practiced. The similarity
when there is equalization of control between spouses
and when either husband or wife controlled the funds
indicated that it is not diversion of decision
making that prevents financial records. When the
husband is the decision-maker the more frequent
occurrence of casual records indicates that men probably
are users of check books while women will keep the

formal accounts that necessitate more detail.

61

Whether plans precede written records or
vice versa, the more complete written plans meant
greater frequency of financial accounts. If there
were plans, those on paper lead to more records.

The values of mental planning is questioned as an
aid to record keeping. '

There was a large group of weekly planners ,
without financial accounts. This probably indicates
that planning was done by the wage earning family
when each weekly pay check "came in” rather than
the planning that resulted from the projected
thinking and decision making in regard to spending.

The large group of monthly planners, the
largest group, would indicate that when periods
for planning are shorter than one year the incentive
was probably greater to see if the "mark was hit".
Too, the monthly basis of planning may indicate that
j the group is the educated, salaried, professional
earners who are frequently paid by the month .

The large number of families who have kept records
"since marriage” indicated that records may be habitual
to a certain extent. There was again indication that
as families age and perhaps become familiar with their

spending patterns, financial records decreased.

62

The small group in which there was separate
planning by husbands and wives had fewer records than
in families with more democratic planning. This would
indicate if statistically valid that the common
interest and purpose of husband and wife rather than
the efficiency of single control would lead to records.
The predominance of formal records among the joint
planners of budgets would further confirm this
observation.

A similar conclusion can be drawn in the families
who made no budgets. In this far larger group of
non-planners it was indicated that with jointly made
immediate financial decisions rather than singly made
ones more formal and casual records were kept.

The use of the checking account by forty-three
families who did not indicate that they kept financial
records would indicate that Opportunities are
neglected by many to use what Hazel Kyrk calls
"natural records“. However, the occurrence of twice
as many cancelled checks as other casual records
indicate they were most usual.

The similarity in prOportion of those with and
without the checking convenience when formal record

keepers indicates it is not an influence on this group.

63

From the two groupsof actual records studied
one concludes that even records kept in detail are
not used to the fullest extent for planning. In the
Michigan family group the notations were entered
into account books many times without being added.
This use of an account book as a diary of Spending
would not make it useful even to learn the family's
spending pattern.

In the group of Iowa Four H girls the lack
of use of the books for planning was indicated. More
care was taken to determine expenditures by adding
columns. While a regular source of funds lead to
more care in keeping the records, there was more
planned savings in the group having irregular income.
This indicated that without the assurance of income
and the resulting insecurity of knowing there would
be money to spend in the future saving was done with
a purpose in mind. More planning was done by those
with a regular source of money because there was
definite income to base planning upon.

In general one cOncludes that families in better
financial circumstance keep records. Opportunities of
education, both general and home economics education
in particular, lead to more records. Planning or
decision making by both husband and wife tends to

increase the occurrence of records. The greater frequency

64

of monthly planning and records would indicate
planning for a relatively short period favorable.
With a regular income records are more

frequent.

65
CHAPTER IV

..~

SUMMARY

This critique of account keeping of families
and individuals attempts to evaluate financial record
keeping as practiced, to determine factors related
to, or influences upon account keeping and to make
a more valuable tool of money management. It used
data (1) chiefly from a study of 382 Micnigan families;
(2) to a less extent it us£3)28 Michigan families who
kept family accounts and (b) 52 Iowa Four H girls
who kept personal accounts. It also included an
evaluation of printed family and personal account
books as t001s of money management.

The chronological review of the literature of
the past fifty years showed that the attitude toward
accounts has changed from the view that money records
must be exact, precisely kept accounts to the belief
'that the records be a basis of planning future
spending and that the extent and accuracy may vary
with family needs and abilities.

It was found that occurrence of formal and
casual accounts increased with educatiOn. The
greatest increase was between eighth grade and high
school for women and between high school and college

for men.

66

Village families kept one fifth more records
than farm families. This probably evidenced the
greater frequency of accounts with a more regular
income.

Of the families on low economic level 23.5
percent kept formal accounts, 14.3 percent kept
casual accounts; 31.2 percent of the comfort income
families kept formal accounts and a similar percent
kept casual ones.

With.more home economics training formal accounts
became more frequent, casual accounts less frequent.
With one year of home economics training 18.9 percent
kept formal accounts and with more than five years
44.6 percent kept them.

Formal accounts were less frequent after
twenty-five years of marriage. Over one half of the
families were without any records after this period
of time.

There was no significant difference in record
keeping with joint or individual control of family
funds. Control by husband meant more casual records,
control by wife more formal records.

With joint budgeting or when immediate decisions
were jointly made by husband and wife records were
more frequent. Nearly twice as many formal accounts

were found with complete budgets and with written

67

rather than mental plans. Over half of those who
had made budgets since marriage kept formal accounts.

The small groups of actual account books
studied indicated that many records that were kept
were neither a preliminary step to financial planning
nor a concluding result of them. Account books were
used merely to record past spending. In family
records, when planning occurred, evidence pointed
to greater use of account books than with no planning.

In the group of personal account keepers more
complete records were kept by girls with a regular
allowance. With regular income there occurred more
planning for future spending, but less saving
for a definite purpose.

Printed books from both commercial and
educational sources stressed the record of past
spending rather than relating spending to planning.
Comparison of the current financial status to a
spending plan appeared to be was difficult and
awkward in most printed boOks. The best book judged
rated 65 points on a scale of 75 for an ideal book.
Fewer books scored within the upper range of the
score than in the lower part. a

In the past too much attention has been given,
as Hazel Kyrk says, to the accountants' vieWpoint

in keeping household and personal accounts - that is,

68

interest in sums of money, rather than to the
statisticians viewpoint - that of what the spending
indicates.

Hone can deny that every tool for money
management must be encouraged, for, as Marian Talbot,
former head of the Department of Household Administration
at the University of Chicago at age eighty-seven years

1 ' - - - I foresee trouble

old wrote recently,
unless women plan for new methods in household
budgeting as business in general is doing.“

The future of record keeping lies in discovering
its potential use in deriving greater satisfaction

from the use of money.

1Personal letter written July 15, 1945.

69

BIBLIOGRAPHY
l. Abel, Mary Hinman. Successful Eamily Life on the

Mbdsrsie_ln22nei. Philadelphia:
J. B. Lippincott 00., 1921, p. 51-3.

2. Aikin, Ann McIntyre. e o s f nd
n s n 0 es of en tu ent
Master's thesis, Michigan State College, 1938, p.58.

3. Andrews, Benjamin Richard. Economics th ouseh
New York: The Macmillian ompany, 1935, p. 519.
4. """ "Family account books". {gurggl_91_§gmg_

Economics, g, (1916), pp. 545-551.

5. Barnett, Edith A. and H. C. O'Neill. Erimgr of

Qomestic Economy, London: Hacmillian and
Company, 1899, p. 113. ~

6. Bevier, Isabel. Home Econo cs
Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott 00., 1924, p. 169.

7. Bigelow, Howard French. gam;;1_£inange‘, Chicago:
J. B. Lippincott 00., 1 36, p. 339. .

8. Bonde Ruth L. Managemgnt in Daily Living, New York:
Macmillan Company. 9 ., p. 185-191.

9. Bosquet, Maurice. “Practical budget accounting“.
l2urnsl.2£.§9me_zsennmisai. 12. (1920). pp. 75-79.

10- Bowman. Henry. W New York:
Whittlesey House; McCraw Hill, 1942, p. 357.

 

 

 

11. Bregger, Myra Potter. "Budgeting our shrinking
dollars“. 0 a o c ,§§
(1943), pp. 275-277.

12. Coles, Jessie Vee. l'Family finances in wartime".

Journal of Home Economics, g3, (1942), pp. 149-154.

13. Corruth, Ella Kaiser. “A card system of household

accounting“. Journal of acne Economics, ‘lg
(1920), p. 37-39.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

70

Dodge, Berniece. "Standards for the wartime budget".

Joggeel 9; Home Economlee, 34 (1942), p. 717-720.

Donham, Agnes. ase ok of ami B etin
Boston: The Boston Cooking School Magazine 00.,
1937, p. 1.70

Friend, Mata Roman. Earning and Spending the
Family Income, New ork: D. Appleton and 00.,
1 O, p. 136-142.

Fuller, Josephine. Methode e: Hegeling {emily
Finanees. Master's T 6918. Michigan State

ollege, 1938, p. 31.

Geary, Blanche. My Remilz Accoent Beet, New York:
The Woman's Press 1917, 32 pp.

Gross, Irma H. Home Management, F.S. Crofts and
00., 1938, p. 133.

Gruenburg, Sidonie Matsner and Benjamin C. Gruenburg.
t

ne New York:
Viking Press, 1933, p. 61.

Harwood, Edward and Helen Fowle. Haw to Make Yoe;
Beeget Belance, American Institu e 0 Economic
Research, 1940, 143 pp.

Haskins, 0. W. 0w e s ho
New York: Harpers and Bros. 1903, 16 pp.
Jordan, David Francis. ers nan as
New York: Prentice Hall Inc. 1936, 6 pp.
Kittredge, Mabel Hyde. Home it
New York: Century 00., 1917, p. 131.
lyrk, Hazel. Econo c P b ems

New York: Harpers and Bros., 1933, p. 409-414.

Lindquist, Ruth. A study of home management in
its relation to child development. The Qaedle,
Joint_issue of Omicron Nu of Phi Upsilon
with Parental Education of the American Home.
Economics Association. Pittsburg, Kansas:
Moore Bros., 1929, p. 36-7.

Lord, Isabel Ely. Getting Iour Moeey's Worth,
New York: Harcourt Brace and 00., 1922, p. 80.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

71

Macleod, Sara. “College students accounts“. gournel
f cono cs 19_ 1917, p. 457-60.

----— “Home economics and banks". Joureal of
Home Economics, l§,(l923), pp. 177-88.

Nickell, Paulina and Jean Muir Dorsey. Manegement
in Eamily Living, New York: John Wiley and
Sons, 1942, p. 180.

Owens, David. Qentrolling 103; Eersonal Fieenees,
New York: Whittlesey House, McGraw-Hill Book 00.,
1937, 331 pp.

Pardee, Eunice Anderson. ‘Methede ef flee%ling;neney
s o

co e 3 ect a i
Master's thesis, Michigan State College.
1936, p. 36. '

President's Conference on Home Building and Home
Ownership. goeseholg MQQQEQEQQE egg Kitchees,
The President's Conference on Home Building and
Ownership. Editors: Cries, John M. and James
Ford, 1932, 288 pp.

Radell, Neva Henrietta. geeountipg $9; the
ledividual end Eemily. New York: Prentice-Hall,

1940, 345 pp.

----- ork 0k 000 n Acco

0
nd vidua d a . New York: Prentice Hall,
1939, 35 pp.

Reid, Margaret Gilpin. Eeonomlcs of Householg
Preguctieg, New York: John Wiley and Sons,
1 34, p. 30.

Scott, Louise Hollister. W
Nomeg. New York: Harpers and Bros., 1940, p.16.

Sheaffer. Willie-m Adam. W
geeeemleel, New York: Macmillan 00., 1917, 161 pp.

Sprague, Charles. Ihe ghilesephy of Accougts,
New York: Roland Press 00., 1922, 183 pp.

Stevens, Janet. ”Clothing accounts for tenth grade
girls“. W 9.9. (1927). p.17.

Taber, Clarence Wilbur. The Business of the Household.
Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1918, p. 41.

42.

43.

47.

48.

72‘.

Terrill, Bertha M. "Household accounts“.
Househelg Management. Part I. American School
of Household Economics 1905, p. 42.

Walter, John T. “Personal financial records”.

Jeurgal of Busigess educetlen, fig.(1945)
March 19-20, April 17-8.

Winslow, Emma. ”Thrift by household accounting”.
gourgel 0; Home Eeenomlcs, e (1915), p. 532-535.

Wood, Mildred Weigley, Ruth Lindquist and Lucy

Studley. Managing the Home, Boston: Houghton,
Mifflin 00., l , p. 85.

Van Rensselaer, Martha, Flora Rose and Helen Canon.
A Manual of Homemakigg, New York: Macmillan 00.,

KFederal Bulletins

United States Department of Agriculture.
Farm fiegsehelg Aeeeegte, by W. 0. Funk.
Farmers Bul. 964, 1918, 11 pp.

rr-r- Elenging Your Eemily Expegeltezes, by
Chase Going‘woodhouse. Misc. Circular 68. 1926.

From State Extension Services:

73

Account Books Used for Study

Name

1.

2.

5.

6.

7.

Home Account Book

Home Account Book

Home Account Book

Family Account Book

Farm and Family
Income and Expense
Book

Record of Family
Business for
Kentucky Homemakers

Farm and Home Record
Book.

Mississippi Farm and
Home Account Book

Farm Home Account
Book

10. Home Account Book

11. New Jersey Home

Account Book

Address

Office of Director
College of Agriculture
Berkely, California

University of Conn.
Gladys Strattan, Home
Management Specialist,
Storrs, Conn.

Iowa State College
Extension Service
Ames, Iowa

University of Illinois
Extension Service,
Urbana, Illinois

Extension Dept.
Miss. State College
State College, Miss.

University of Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky

University of Missouri
Columbia, Missouri

Extension Dept. Miss.
Miss. State College
State College, Miss.

Ohio State University
Agricultural College
Extension Service
Columbus, Ohio

University of Nebraska
Agricultural College
Extension Service
Lincoln, Nebraska

New Jersey State
Agricultural College
New Brunswick, N.J.

Score

49

21

37

64

19

23

18

48

45

74

State Extension Service Account Books (Continued)

Name
12. North Carolina Farm North Carolina State 24
Home Account Book College, Raleigh, N.C.
13. Family Account Book West Virginia University 47
Morgantown, W. Va.
14. This is the Way I Iowa Four H Girls‘ Club 46

Spend My Money Personal Department, Ames, Iowa
Expense Record

15. My Personal Financial State College of Wash. 27
Record Pullman, Washington

Commercial Sources

16. Kwick Glance Mag. Publishing Co. 55
Simplified Method 537 S. Dearborn St.
”Living Expense" Chicago, Illinois

Book and Budget
17. Budget Book Stretching Whitman Publishing Co. 50

the Dollar Racine, Wisconsin

18. The National Home Universal Budget System 24
Budget 45 Murray St. NYC

19. Budgeteer F.W. Woolworth 42

20. Family EXpense Record. Boorum and Pease Co. 75
and Budget Control Brooklyn, N.Y.

21. Money Management‘ Household Finance Corp. 65
The Budget Calendar Chicago, Illinois

U.S. Department of Agriculture

22. Farm Family Account U.S. Dept. of Agriculture 54
Book Bureau of Home Economics
Washington, D.C.
23. Farm Family Record U.S. Dept. of Agriculture 33
Book Farm Security
Administration

Washington, D.C.

Does t
a. I

Is the
a. I

b. I

C. D

Is the
a.
b. D

C. C

 

Scoring of Account Books

State Extension Commercial | USDA
Does the book emphasize planned Spending? Service Sources Sources Sources
./'~ a» IS there Space for Spend-ins of previous 1 8 3 4 5 6‘ 7 s 9 10 11 12 1:5 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
- period? 5 000505 ooeoooooooooooso
‘ b. Is there space for anticipated spending
1 monthly or weekly? 5 5 O O 5 O E; Q o o o 5 o 5 5 o 5 5 o 5 5 5 5 0
annually? 5 5 O 2 5 <3 5 O O O 5 5 O 5 5 O 5 4 O O 5 5 5 5
0. Can the current state of finances
easily be compared to plan? 5 0 O O 4’ C) 2 O O O 3 3 O 3 3 O 5 4 O 5 4 5 3 3
d. Can the plan be altered conveniently
to meet changing needs? 5 3 O O 5 O 4: Q 0 O 3 3 O 4 3 O 4 5 O 3 5 5 3 3
Is the book adaptable to individual families?
a. Is it possible to add additional
columns conveniently? 5 5 l 4 3 (D O 3 O 1 2 2 O 0 3 l 3 O 2 O 4 5 4 0
b. Can expenditures of family members .
be kept? 5 5 O 5 5 (D 3 O O O 3 O O 3 O O O O O O O O 5 O
0. Can accounts be started at any time
of year? 5 5 5 5 5 5 £5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
d. Can the calculation easily be made by
umschooled person? 5 4 4 5 5 4 4: 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 5 3 5 3 3

Is the book simple?
a. Is it necessary to keep little detail
tomakeuseofrecord? 500000000000000002040511
b. Is the emphasis placed upon Spending with”

a plan rather than "balancing books"? 5 O O O ‘4 (D 4 0 0 O 3 4 2 4 2 O 5 4 l 5 O 5 2 2
0. Does book contain no extraneous material? 5 5 O 3 4 C) 3 O O 3 3 4 4 3 5 5 5 5 2 5 4 5 2 1
Is the make-up of the book suitable?

as Is there good quality paper? 5 5 5 5 5 E3 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 5 5 5 5 3 2 2 ‘4 5 3 4
b. Does book Open easily? ' 3 1 1 3 3 l 1: 3 l 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3. 3 3 2
Does it lie flat? 2 l 1 2 2 ‘1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 2 2 2 1 1 2 l 1

0. Can line and columns be easily followed
‘ on page? 5 5 4 3 4 3 3L 3 2 2 5 3 4 4 3 4 5 5 4 O 3 5 4 3
Total 75 49 21 37 54 y948 23 18 22 48 45 24 47 46 27 55 50 24 42 46 65 54 33

 

 

 

Rank 61912219716801?71015891435151191413

 

 

 

131:1 LwL {EELE

A9991

Apr 25 3941

“‘1 8‘.A'8

”ION ED I. IUOJU

\r

r12“

5 K ._.
. i: —l ” .1 1%.; ; :“fé” ff. 9.13 y
x J {F L: L: L, ._ 5‘ , '. :.
him 14 '7'. 57
. _ ‘ -“'. ‘
013-134 "TN?”
2 4 19 .3

JUN 2 1 ’49

nu!
SEE 2 5"”?

3,45a'9fles-E'CK D ‘- “M
O ‘ J: .

\

HYAFT 91"

Lni‘ 14.1.1111 I a 1. “DE

JA .18 56

A‘s-'SN'LD 9 P1410“

”g
m9 1984.? M

n.

'l’
114.41
3.41,?- -
, .

 

 

 

Ma.

 

. - 1
. ~—. ‘-
- .1 - _A. A V .l I.
.
.
'- -
s. _ ‘
o
l
4 1
u
. .
a ‘.
‘ .- -
’ ~a
~
- 'I -
u
- I
.
“
‘-
~
-
i

1 ”1".- 3 -¥

”3-;‘- — —-- - .1.
"I .
bum—v—o~
.
I _ Q ‘
<J "
n
-
‘
' 9
u
. ~
\

-
.
.

 

I
\‘ l
1 ‘ 1 I
I I
. l .
I f
I 'l
U
| l
' I
. l I I
. I
I I
l .
I ‘.
: 1 '
'l . '
I ‘ 1
L
'. I
I s L
\. . .1
. I' I
‘ O
" r f
: I ' ‘ , I. ’
1
I
a . '
.- ' ,‘ I _,
. -:.
.1; I ,. ‘ I
I .
I , ’w ‘_
.' 1 1 ,
II I
21,. 1 - , . I
I
D I ’
:' 1 , , 1
‘ .
1 e. - .
I ‘ 1- .
l l
I
O 'I
I 1 ‘
‘, .
H
' ' . .’
a | . l
' I I
f I
I! ‘ ,
I .
, -

 

 

' 9: “$1.1.r2Jé'ViJ’r" '.'IT’E);.\" I 1

  
    
 

1 A» . I" - '5 u
-. 3“;.( "II-rm}:
‘
Ir , I.‘ 1" 4., 'H
. ‘ P . 1

94' M' ‘ "' ~ -'
' I .1 ' ‘x' .,1 '. ' ‘ k‘ .il'lv“>" '1 I .1 I Q. .
~ .. - 1'. 11 9111. M1. .1

l E ' 1' ' 8 ‘ ' h ‘ 'l -1 "‘ - I
l. * -L I. I or}, - ' l 'QL 1"". '5‘, t, E. " ' ‘1’
'1‘ 1 .. .r‘ ‘ \‘I ‘ (£33134); n. 1':‘-(:.' "I“
I,‘ I «1 ‘1' ‘1‘ ‘1' i ~.-.'£'! 1-1V‘"".-"‘~\{'J
. ' 1 ' 1. - >1. - I , '1.
1, l . '5: , I ‘ {1' . l‘."‘ .PLvl‘hJ ) \._r_ ..

 

.1 CT.
.~ , \ I
.; :-- Hv~ 1.
1 1—‘ __ . 7“ - -.~‘ 1 WI" fl
1 - I . ‘
I . | k... L). VA d— JLlefid L in 1.1- ,.j" it;
.1 2‘: 1 - b 1. ‘ -
. 14 3V .15- 00-311 1.100011r11, .1380 1"
4 ‘.
6
J
\
I
’1
. . a
‘ I
I , “~ I . I
‘ I O
' I . '. I.
5 . .
I. l I ‘
l i
l
.. \ ‘ l.‘ -
- 1 E 4 I I
{‘I > 'I/ -“ .1 I I, I.
1 ,.
1 1 , x
' I . 1
1' ' ' '9’“ '1 'J,
. . 1 - . l .l I
,-' - I “ 5. " . . §
. '1‘} .I J). i r i .‘ V4.7
,‘ JR ‘.OI .’ I. I '. ‘. “A ‘
-; 4. ‘-.. 1 . l - 1 1. --..‘ 9.11
_..~:-.. .19.. / 11..., .11 ..

 

  

 

 

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

3 1293 03056 2676

I