Ms. Zelizer's major concern is with how expenditure -- the use of money -- is controlled. On this she delves deeply into history; she is particularly concerned with the period between the 1870's and the 1930's, which, for reasons not entirely clear, she says "provides a strategic time frame." In that period, she tells in sometimes unforgiving detail, money acquired a sharply differentiated character according to user and use. What a man did with it was often more relaxed as to employment and enjoyment, compared with the allowance made available to his wife. (No superior masculine wisdom was assumed: "As one exemplary housewife explained, 'A man does not understand the regulation of the household and its expenses.' ")

Often the family, sometimes using labeled jugs, cans or boxes, divided the weekly pay among various needs and enjoyments. Thus differentiated, some of the cans would be empty, some replete. Ms. Zelizer dwells on the peculiar urgency with which many poor families put aside money for funeral expenses. Nothing so detracted from life as the prospect of a pauper's funeral and grave. She also explores how charitable and welfare organizations supervised and controlled the use of the money they provided. This was not a power to be delegated along with the cash. Those who were inadequate in getting money were long assumed to be incompetent in spending it. The New Deal, Harry Hopkins as relief administrator, and Social Security were great liberalizing forces. Besides providing money to the needful, they ceded authority over its use, a notably liberal step.