be expected to contribute anything toward her own support or whether all
her time is needed for her children. This amount should be cut down only
when there is actually not enough left for the man to live on; and his
wife and children should not be pinched for necessities in order that he
may have luxuries or indulge in vices. The habit some judges have of
accepting the man's own statement on oath as to what his earnings are is
responsible for many unjust orders. A man who does not want to
contribute to his family's support is almost sure to understate his
earnings, oath or no oath; and the confirmation of his employer (or when
the employer is suspected of being in league with him, the inspection of
the employer's books by the probation officer) is often needed. Probably
the most difficult form of evasion to combat is that of the man who
deliberately takes a lower salary than he is capable of earning, so as
to have less to give his wife. Surprising as it may seem, this is a
common practice; but skilful probation work can nevertheless find a
remedy.

In cases of suspended sentence, payments ought always to be made through
the court and not handed by the man to his wife. It is better to have
the amount received and transmitted by some bureau attached to the
court, and so managed that the man can send the money in without
"knocking off work" to bring it and that the woman can receive it by
mail. The probation officer should not be bothered with the actual
handling of the money, but he should be promptly notified of any
delinquency in the payments.

Whether the man under court order is on probation or not, the cessation
of payments should automatically reopen the case. At present, in most
courts, the order goes by default until the wife comes in to make
another charge. This, through discouragement or fear of a beating from