Year: 1872

WE do not say anything very original
when we say that the chief object in the
government of children should be to teach
child to govern himself


We know that most people think differ
emily, or rather they believe differently.
One cannot dignity their mental processes
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 called family
government is in most families a selfish
struggle between the willfulness of the
parent and the willfulness of the child, a
struggle between the strong and the weak,
in which the weak goes down.


But have / not right to be obeyed ?"
asks some indignant parent who has read
thus far. We answer that your very
question betrays the selfishness of your
demand. You are thinking of your right,
and not of the child's good. Half your
failure lies just there. And if you insist
on categorical answer 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 un-
less you exact the obedience for the child's
good instead of for your pleasure. Mark,
we do not say the child, except in fragrant
cases, has a 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 OBJ
ject of family government should be to
teach a child to do without your author
ity.


Mr.. Beecher has said in his quaint way
that there is Just as much family govern
ment now as there was formerly, but that
more of it is in the hands of the children.
Which is matter not to be regretted.
The shoot must one day be severed from
the parent stem; the sooner it gets roots
enough to live by itself, the better. If
you have child capable of governing
himself at fifteen, rejoice. Throw the
reins upon his neck and let him 60 his
gait. government is only learned by
exercise. But if you wall a child in, and
circumvent him always by the restraints of
your own will, how shall he ever learn to
stand alone? We have seen a pine tree
that grew tall and slender in dense for
est, bolstered on every hand by its fellows,
so that it did not need to acquire hard
ness 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 one
Slue. Anu DIT Iuc uJSL Wluu III DcHL ltScll
down across the road, making itself into
bow from sheer lack of strength
to stand up. And we have seen
young men checked and governed like
infants, never allowed to stand upon their
own responsibiiity-we have often seen
these weakly-upright young men, when
left without the support of authority,
fall from lack of moral stamina. They
had never learned to stand alone.


A child cannot learn to walk if he is
always supported. He cannot 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
a 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 obeyedl And for this bit of
selfshness you choose to weaken your
child's character. For though this pro-
cess may not spoil every child, it will
permanently injure character in every
case.


Government in the family should be
administered like brandy in the family
it is to be reserved for cases of necessity.
Hearth and Home.