Your analogies leave a lot to be desired but I'll play along.
You say it was the husband who ran up the bills. Nonsense. The South exercised a disproportionate level of influence in Congress - not only because the three/fifths rule gave them more Congressmen than they might otherwise be entitled to but also through congressional power. Alexander Stephens detailed this in his speech before the Georgia secession convention: "In like manner we have been equally watchful to guard our interests in the Legislative branch of government. In choosing the presiding Presidents (pro tern.) of the Senate, we have had twenty-four to their eleven. Speakers of the House, we have had twenty-three, and they twelve. While the majority of the Representatives, from their greater population, have always been from the North, yet we have so generally secured the Speaker, because he, to a great extent, shapes and controls the legislation of the country." So at worst the decisions to spend were made mutually. At best the South had more influence on the decision.
He tells the wife that the stuff she owned going into the wedding is now his...
I have no idea what you mean by this, but the forts and mints and court houses and customs houses and armories and ships and all the other property that the South seized without compensation were owned by the federal government. Therefore once could say it was owned by all the states and not just the states where they were located. Using your analogy they were community property in every sense of the word.
...fires some shots at her on her way out the door...
Look at the timeline. The South, I mean the wife fired not once, not twice, but on three or more occasions trying to initiate a fight.
...kills her and tells the cops she shot first.
More like she committed suicide and blames it on the husband.