The Birmingham age-herald., 1916-08-27

are obliged to obey from the first but the long run is trying to the sufferers from the unchecked naughtiness of the youngsters who are permitted to have their way without regard to the judg- ment of those older and wiser than themselves.
 So much for my own opinion on the subject of the advisability of spanking. I hold also that 1t should be hedged about with certain rules. No parent should ever spank a child in wrath. That should be the first precept laid down.
 But I would never raise my hand against child, no matter how bad he was. unless I was angry" protested one parent to whom I made this assertion
 Such parent has no business ever to attempt the correction of child or even of an animal. I am not sure that he ought to have children at all Punish ment should be inflicted with anger at the sin. not at the sinner; it fails of It's effect if administered in passion. grant that 1t is more difficult for the parent to give pain to his child when unmoved by wrath, but it is the benefit of the child we are considering now, not the state of mind of the father or mother
 Another condition I should make in connection with spanking Is that 1t should never be administered except by the parent or some one--in rare cases who stands in the place of the parent. do not go as far as my correspondent does when she recommends or at least countenances punishment of this sort at school. It is hard enough for the parent to judge wisely as to the necessity Of such correction, and I would never dele gate 1t to any one else except in extreme and remarkable cases of insubordination when the natural guardians of the chill dren had given up any attempt to re- form their offspring.
 I have had the opportunity of noticing many cases of children brought up in families where the switch or the slipper held recognized place. In such homes there could be no doubt in my mind of the sincere and deep affection subsisting between parents and children. The spankings which were necessary were usually received much as dose of bad tasting medicine would be taken. It was not liked, but the need of giving it was TeCORnlZ6u dIQ lllc uOo0 Wco dCSOPbCh philosophically. Anything like the feel ing that the parent took advantage of being the stronger to get his own will with some one younger and weaker than himself has never come my way, when as I have said before. the punishment was deserved and was bestowed in the s,i:st of desire to correct wrongdoing not to get even or to display revenge.
 But it is such mean thing to whip a child Just because you have the right to dooit and some authority over him." woman said to me when we were dis cussing the question of spanking.
 The person who takes this view of punishment has never fathomed its meaning. The question of superior strength has nothing to do with 1t-it Is because of larger experience and greater wisdom that the senior wishes to correct evil tendencies in the child and to teach the lesson we must all learn sooner or later, that causes pro- duce effects. This is something a child does not grasp. His present enjoyment, the indulgence of his immediate desire, whether this be to secure a forbidden pleasure or to yield to his temper at being thwarted, or to refuse obedience to a just command, are the only consid-