The Shasta courier., 1872-07-27
FAMILY GOVERNMENT.

We do not say anything very original
when we say that the chief object in the
government of children should be to teach
a child TO govern himself
We know that most people think differ
emily, or rather they believe differently.
One can not diguify their mental process
with the name of thinking. Most people
believe, or at least feel, that the business
they have in hand in the government of
children is to conform the child's will to
their own What is falsely cal ed fan ily
governne ent is in most families selfish
struggle between the willfulness OF the
parent and the wiltulness of the child. a
struggle between the strong and the weak
in which the weak goes down
'But have not right to be obeyed T."
asks some indignant parent who has read
thus far. We answer that your very q es
ton betrays the sel6shness ofyour demand
You are thinking of your light, and not OF
the child's good Hall your failure lies just
there And if you insist on a categorical
'nswer to your question in regard to your
right, we answer with more indignation.
than you asked it, that you have no right
to exact obedience unless you exact tn,
obedience for the childs' good instead of
for your pleasure. Mark, we do not say
that the child, except in fragrant cases,
has right to refuse obedience. The
child has no right to judge of your motives
or of your wisdom. But you have no
general right to exercise your authority
for the mere sake of being obeyed For,
let US repeat, the chief object of family
government should be to teach child to
do without your authority.
Mr.. Beecher has said in his quaint W.,
that there is just as much family govern
mcnt now rs there was formerly, but that
more of it is in the hands of the children.
y hich is matter not to be regretted
The shoot must one day be severed from
tt e parent stem; the sooner it gets roots
enough to live by itself, the better. If
you nave child capable of governing
himself at fifteen rejoice. Throw the reins
upon his neck and let him 90 his gait
But il you wall child in. aud circumvent
him always by the restraints of your own
will, how shall he ever learn to stand alone !?
We have seen a plne-trec that grew tall
and slender in dense forest. bolstered on
every hard by its fellows, so that it did
not need to acquire hardness of fiber.
And then, when road was cut through
the forest, we have seen that self same
slender supple, upright tree left standing
without support upon enc side. And at
the first wind it bent itself down across the
road, making itself into a bow from sheer
lack of strength to stard up 4 nd we have
seen young men checked and governed lik e
infants, never allowed to stand upon their
own responsibility-we have often seen
these weaklyuprieht young men, wien left
without the support of authority, fall from
lack OF moral stamina. They had never
learned to stand alone
A child can not learn to walk if he is
always supported. He can not swim if he
is never trusted in the water He will
not learn to govern himself if he is never
allowed to try. When you want to teach
child to direct horse, you give him the
reins. When you want to teach him to
direct himself-you keep the reins in your
own hands and say that it is your right to
be obeyed And for this bit Of sel6,hness
you choose to weaken your child's charac-
ter. For though this process may not
spoil every child, it will permanently in
jure character in every case.
Government in the family should be ad
ministered like brandy in the family-it is
to be reserved for cases Of necessity