us; only in after yeai's are we able to philosophize upon them. Just so, too, is it with successive generations. Men of the past quite misunderstood the institutions they Hved under; they pertinaciously adhered to the most vicious principles, and were bitter in their opposition to right ones, at the dictates of their attachments and antipathies. So difficult is it for man to emancipate himself from the invisible fetters which habit and education cast over his intellect; and so palpable is the con- sequent incompetency of a people to judge rightly of itself and its deeds or opinions, that the fact has been embodied in the current aphorism— "No age can write its own history:" an aphorism sufficiently expressive of the universaUty of prejudice. If we act wisely, we shall assume that the "reasonings of modem society are subject to the like disturbing influences. We shall conclude that, even now, as in times gone by, opinion IS but the counterpart of condition— merely expresses the de- THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN. 177 gree of civilisation to which we have attained. We shall sus- pect that many of those convictions which seem the results of dispassionate thinking, have heen nurtured in us by circum- stances. We shall confess that as, heretofore, fanatical opposi- tion to this doctrine, and bigoted adhesion to that, have been no tests of the truth or falsity of the said doctrines; so neither is the strength of attachment, or dishke which a nation now exhibits towards certain principles, any proof of their correct- ness or their fallacy. Nay more — we shall not only admit that public opinion may be wrong, but that it must be so. With- out a general eq^uUibrium between institutions and ideas society cannot subsist; and hence, if error pervades our institutions, it must similarly pervade our ideas. Just as much as a people falls short of perfection in its state, will it lack of truth in its beliefs.
Thus much by way of bespeaking a calm hearing. As lately said, the proposition about to be maintained conflicts with the habits, associations, and most cherished convictions of the great majority. That the law of equal freedom appUes to children as much as to adults; that consequently the rights of children are co-extensive with those of adults; that, as violating those rights, the use of coercion is wrong; and that the relationship now commonly existing between parents and children is there- fore a vicious one — these are assertions which perhaps few will listen to with equanimity. Nevertheless, if there be any weight in the foregoing considerations, we shall do well to disregard all protests of feeling, and place imphcit faith in the conclu- sions of abstract equity.
We say that a man's character may be told by the company he keeps. We might similarly say that the truth of a belief may be judged by the morality with which it is associated. Given a theory universally current amongst the most degraded sections of our race— a theory received only with considerable abatements by civilized nations— a theory in which men's con- N 178 THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN.
fidence diminishes as fast as society advances — and we may safely pronounce that theory to be a false one. On such, along ■with other evidence, the subordination of sex was lately con- demned. Those commonly-observed facts, that the enslave- ment of woman is invariably associated with a low type of social Hfe, and that conversely, her elevation towards an equality with man uniformly accompanies progress, were cited in part proof that the subjection of female to male is essentially wrong. If now, instead of women we read children, similar facts may be cited, and a similar deduction may be drawn. If it be true that the dominion of man over woman has been oppressive in proportion to the badness of the age or the people, it is also true that parental authority has been stringent and unlimited in a like proportion. If it be a fact that the emancipation of women has kept pace with the emancipation of society, it is likewise a fact that the once despotic rule of the old over the young has been ameliorated at the same rate. And if in our own day, we find the fast-spreading recognition of popular rights accompanied by a silently-growing perception of the rights of women, we also find it accompanied by a tendency towards systems of non-coercive education — that is, towards a practical admission of the rights of children.
Whoever wants illustrations of this alleged harmony between the political, connubial, and filial relationships, may discover them anywhere and everywhere. Scanning that aboriginal state of existence during which the aggressive conduct of man to man renders society scarcely possible, he wlU see not only that wives are slaves and exist by sufierance, but that children hold their Hves by the same tenure, and are sacrificed to the gods when fathers so will. He may observe how during classic times, the thraldom of five-sixths of the population was accompanied both by a theory that the child is the pro- perty and slave of its male parent, and by a legal fiction which regarded wives, as children similarly owned. That poUtical degradation of the present East-Indian races for whom absolute monarchy seems still the only possible form of rule.
THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN. 179 he will find accompanied alike by suttees and by infanticide. The same connection of facts mil be seen by him in China, ■where under a government, purely autocratic, there exists a public opinion which deems it an unpardonable offence for a wife to accuse her husband to the magistrate, and which ranks filial disobedience as a crime next in atrocity to murder. Nor is our own history barren of illustrations. On reviewing those times when constitutional liberty was but a name, when men were denied fireedom of speech and belief, when the people's representatives were openly bribed and justice was bought — the times, too, with which the laws enacting the servitude of women were in complete harmony — the observer cannot fail to be struck with the harshness «of parental behaviour, and the attitude of humble subjection which sons and daughters had to assume. Between the close of the last century, when om' domestic condition was marked by the use of Sir and Madam in addressing parents, and by the doctrine that a child ought unhesitatingly to marn' whomsoever a father appointed; and when our pohtical condition was marked by aristocratic supre- macy, by the occurrence of church- and-king riots, and by the persecution of reformers — between that day and ours, the dechne in the rigour of paternal authority and in the severity of political oppression, has been simultaneous. And, as akeady remarked, the like companionship of facts is seen in the present rapid growth of democratic feeling, and the equally rapid spread of a milder system of juvenile training.
Thus, the biography of the race affords ample illustration of the alleged law. That uniformity of moral tone, which it was asserted must necessarily pervade a nation's arrangements — social, marital, and parental, we see exemplified alike imder all phases of civilisation. Indeed this position hardly needed proof, being, as it is, a direct coroUary fi-om self-evident truths. As surely as a man's character shines through all his, deeds, so surely does the character of a people shine through all its laws and customs. Having a common root in human nature, co- temporary institutions cannot fail to be equally affected by the 180 THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN.
imperfection of that nature. They must all he right or wrong together. The evil which taints one must taint all. The change which reforms one must at the same time reform all. The progress which perfects one must eventually perfect all.
Consequently, whoever admits that injustice is still visible m the dealings of class with class— whoever admits that it similarly exhibits itself in the behaviour of one sex to the other, cannot but admit that it necessarily exists in the conduct of the old to the young. And he must further admit that being most im- plicitly received amongst the most barbarous nations, and waning as its influence does with the advance of civilisation, the doctrine of fiUal subjection is entirely condemned by its associations.
If coercive education be right, it must be productive of good, and if wrong, of evil. By an analysis of its results, therefore, we shall obtain so much evidence for or against the doctrine that the liberties of children are co-extensive with those of adults.
That coercive education is impoUtic, may be strongly sus- pected from the fact lately adverted to — the evident disposition towards the abandonment of it which modem systems of train- ing evince. Considering what universal attention the culture of the young has lately received — the books written about it, the lectures dehvered on it, the experiments made to elucidate it — there is reason for concluding that as the use of brute force for educational purposes has greatly declined, something radically wrong must be involved in it. Eut without dwelUng upon this, which, like all inferences drawn from expediency, is liable to have its premises called in question, let us judge of coercive education not by the effects it is believed to produce, but by those it must produce.
Education has for its object the formation of character. To curb restive propensities, to awaken dormant sentiments, to THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN. 181 strengthen the perceptions, and cultivate the tastes, to en- courage this feeling and repress that, so as finally to develop the child into a man of well proportioned and harmonious nature — this is alike the aim of parent and teacher. Those, therefore, who advocate the use of authority, and if need he — force in the management of children, must do so because they think these the best means of compassing the desired object — formation of character. Paternity has to devise some kind of rule for the nursery. Impelled partly by creed, partly by cus- tom, partly by inclination, paternity decides in favour of a pure despotism, proclaims its word the supreme law, anathematizes disobedience, and exhibits the rod as the final arbiter in all disputes. And of course this system of discipline is defended as the one best calculated to cui'b restive propensities, awaken dormant sentiments, &c., &c., as aforesaid. Suppose, now, we inquire how the plan works. An imamiable Uttle urchin is pursuing his own gratification regardless of the comfort of others — is perhaps annoyingly vociferous in his play; or is amusing himself by teasing a companion; or is trying to monopolize the toys intended for others in common with him- self. Well; some kind of interposition is manifestly called for.
Paternity with knit brows, and in a severe tone, commands desistance — visits anything hke reluctant submission with a sharp " Do as I bid you " — if need be, hints at a whipping or the black hole — in short carries coercion, or the threat of coercion, far enough to produce obedience. After sundry exhibitions of perverse feeling, the child gives in; showing, however, by its sullenness the animosity it entertains. Meanwhile paternity pokes the fire and complacently resumes the newspaper under the impression that all is as it should be: most unfortunate mistake!
If the thing wanted had been the mere repression of noise, or the mechanical transfer of a plaything, perhaps no better course could have been pursued. Had it been of no conse- quence under what impulse the child acted, so long as it ful- filled a given mandate, nothing would remain to be said. But 182 THE EIGHTS OF CHILDREN.
something else was needed. Character was the thing to be changed rather than conduct. It was not the deeds, but the feehng from which the deeds sprung that required dealing with. Here were palpable manifestations of selfishness — an indif- ference to the wishes of others, a marked desire to tyrannise, an endeavour to engross benefits intended for all — in short, here were exhibitions on a small scale of that unsympathetic nature to which our social evils are mainly attributable. What, then, was the thing wanted? Evidently an alteration in the child's disposition. What was the problem to be solved? Clearly to generate a state of mind which had it previously existed would have prevented the offending actions. What was the final end to be achieved? Unquestionably the form- ation of a character which should spontaneously produce greater generosity of conduct. Or, speaking definitely, it was necessary to strengthen that sympathy to the weakness of which this ill behaviour was traceable.
But sympathy can be strengthened only by exercise. No faculty whatever will grow, save by the performance of its special function — a muscle by contraction; the intellect by perceiving and thinking; a moral sentiment by feeling. Sym- pathy, therefore, can be increased only by exciting sympathetic emotions. A selfish child is to be rendered less selfish, only by arousing in it a feUow-feeling with the desires of others. If this is not done, nothing is done.
Observe, then, how the case stands. A grasping hard-natured boy is to be humanized — is to have whatever germ of better spirit may be in him developed; and to this end it is proposed to use frowns, threats, and the stick! To stimulate that faculty which originates our regard for the happiness of others, we are told to inflict pain, or the fear of pain! The problem is — to generate in a child's mind a sympathetic feeling; and the answer is — beat it, or send it supperless to bed!
Thus we have hut to reduce the subjection -theory to a definite form to render its absurdity self-evident. Contrasting the means to be employed with the work to be done, we are at THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN. 183 once struck with their utter unfitness. Instead of creating a new internal state which shall exhibit itself in better deeds, coercion can manifestly do nothing but forcibly mould externals into a coarse semblance of such a state. In the family, as in society, it can simply restrain; it cannot educate. Just as the recollection of Bridewell, and the dread of a poUceman, whUst they serve to check the thiefs depredations, effect no change in his morals, so, although a father's threats may produce in a child a certain outside conformity with rectitude, they cannot generate any real attachment to it. As some one has well said, the utmost that severity can do is to make hypocrites; it can never make converts.
Let those who have no faith in any instrumentahties for the rule of human beings, save the stern will and the strong hand, visit the Hanwell Asylum for the insane. Let all self-styled practical men, who, in the pride of their semi-savage theories, shower sarcasms upon the movements for peace, for the abolition of capital punishments and the like, go and witness to their confusion how a thousand lunatics can be managed without the use of force. Let these sneerers at " sentimentalisms " re- flect on the horrors of madhouses as they used to be; where was weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth, where chains clanked dismally, and where the silence of the night was rent by shrieks that made the belated passer-by hurry on shudder- ingly; let them contrast with these hoiTors, the calmness, the contentment, the tractabihty, the improved health of mind and body, and the not unfrequent recoveries, that have followed the abandonment of the strait-jacket regime": and then let them blush for their creed.
And shall the poor maniac, with diseased feelings and a warped intellect, persecuted as he constantly is by the sugges- " See Dr. ConoUy on Lunatic Asylums.
184 THE KIGHTS OF CHILDREN.
tions of a morbid imagination, shall a being with a mind so hopelessly chaotic that even the most earnest pleader for human rights would make his case an exception, shall he be amenable to a non-coercive treatment, and shall a child not be amenable to it? WOl any one maintain that madmen can be managed by suasion, but not children? that moral-force methods are best for those deprived of reason, but physical-force methods for those possessing it? Hardly. The boldest defender of domestic despotism will not assert so much. If by judicious conduct the confidence even of the insane may be obtained — ^if even to the beclouded intelUgence of a limatic, kind attentions and a sympathetic manner will carry the conviction that he is surrounded by friends and not by demons — and if, under that conviction, even he, though a slave to every disordered impulse, becomes comparatively docile, how much more under the same influence will a child become so. Do but gain a boy's trust; convince him by your behaviour that you have his happiness at heart; let him discover that you are the wiser of the two; let him experience the benefits of following your advice, and the evils that arise from disregarding it; and fear not yon will readily enough guide him. Not by authority is your sway to be obtained; neither by reasoning; but by inducement. Show in all your conduct that you are thoroughly your child's friend, and there is nothing that you may not lead him to. The faintest sign of your approval or dissent will be his law. You have won from him the key of all his feelings; and, instead of the vindictive passions that severe treatment would have aroused, you may by a word call forth tears, or blushes, or the thrill of sympathy — may excite any emotion you please — may, in short, efiect something worth calling education.
If we wish a boy to become a good mechanic, we ensure his expertness by an early apprenticeship. The young musician that is to be, passes several hours a day at his instrument.
THE EIGHTS OF CHILBEEN. 185 Initiatory courses of outline drawing and shading are gone through by the intended artist. For the future accountant, a thorough drilling in arithmetic is prescribed. The reflective powers are sought to be developed by the study of mathematics. Thus, all training is founded on the principle that culture must precede proficiency. In such proverbs as — " Habit is second nature," and "Practice makes perfect," men have expressed those net products of universal observation on which every educational system is ostensibly based. The maxims of a village schoolmistress and the speculations of a Pestalozzi are alike pervaded by the thory that the child should be ac- customed to those exertions of body and mind which will in future life be required of it. Education means this or nothing.
What now is the most important attribute of man as a moral being? What faculty above all othere should we be soUcitous to cultivate? May we not answer — the faculty of self-control? This it is which forms a chief distinction between the human being and the brute. It is in virtue of this that man is defined as a creature " looking before and after." It is in their larger endowment of this that the civiUzed races are superior to the savage. In supremacy of this consists one of the perfections of the ideal man. Not to be impulsive — not to be spurred hither and thither by each desire that in turn comes uppermost; but to be self-restrained, self-balanced, governed by the joint decision of the feeHngs in council assembled, before whom every action shall have been fuUy debated and calmly determined — this it is which education — moral education at least — strives to produce.
But the power of seK-govemment, like all other powers, can be developed only by exercise. Whoso is to rule over his passions in maturity, must be practised in ruling over his passions during youth. Observe, then, the absurdity of the coercive system. Instead of habituating a boy to be a law to himself as he is required in after-life to be, it administers the law for him. Instead of preparing him against the day when he shall leave the paternal roof, by inducing him to fix the 186 THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN.
boundaries of his actions and voluntarily confine himself witMn them, it marks out these boundaries for him, and says — " cross them at your peril." Here "we have a being who, in a few years, is to become his own master, and, by way of fitting him for such a condition, he is allowed to be his own master as httle as possible. Whilst in every other particular it is thought desirable that what the man wiU have to do, the child should be well drilled in doing, in this most important of all particulars — the controlling of himself — it is thought that the less practice he has the better. Is o wonder that those who have been brought up under the severest discipline should so frequently turn out the wildest of the wild. Such a result is just what might have been looked for.
Indeed, not only does the physical-force system fail to fit the youth for his future position; it absolutely tends to ««fit liim. Were slavery to be his lot — if his after-life had to be passed under the rule of a Russian autocrat, or of an American cotton planter, no better method of training could be devised than one which accustomed him to that attitude of complete subordina- tion he would subsequently have to assume. But just to the degree in which such treatment would fit him for servitude, must it unfit him for being a free man amongst free men.
But why is education needed at all? Why does not the child grow spontaneously into a nonnal human being? Why should it be requisite to curb this propensity, to stimulate the other sentiment, and thus by artificial aids to mould the mind into something dififerent from what it would of itself become? Is not there here an anomaly in nature? Throughout the rest of creation we find the seed and the embryo attaining to perfect maturity without external aid. Drop an acorn into the ground, and it will in due time become a healthy oak without either pruning or training. The insect passes through its several transformations unhelped, and airives at its final form possessed THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN. 187 of every needful capacity and instinct. No coercion is needed to make the young bird or quadruped adopt the hahits proper to its future life. Its character Kke its body, spontaneously assumes complete fitness for the part it has to play in the ■world. How happens it, then, that the human mind alone tends to develop itself wrongly? Must there not be some excep- tional cause for this? Manifestly: and if so a true theory of education must recognise this cause.
It is an indisputable fact that the moral constitution ■which fitted man for his original predatory state, differs itom the one needed to fit him for this social state to which multiplication of the race has led. In a foregoing part of our inquiry (Chap. II.), it was shown that the law of adaptation is efiecting a transition irom the one constitution to the other. Living then, as we do, in the midst of this transition, we must expect to find sundry phenomena which are expHcable only upon the hypothesis that humanity is at present partially adapted to both these states, and not completely to either — has only in a degree lost the dispositions needed for savage life, and has but imperfectly acquired those needed for social life. The anomaly just specified is one of these. The tendency of each new generation to develop itself wrongly, indicates the degree of modification that has yet to take place. Those respects in which a child requires restraint, are just the respects in which he is taking after the aboriginal man. The selfish squabbles of the nursery, the persecution of the play-ground, the lyings and petty thefts, the rough treatment of inferior creatures, the propensity to destroy — all these imply that tendency to pursue gratification at the expense of other beings, which qualified man for the ■wilderness, and which disqualifies him for civOized hfe.
We have seen, however, that this incongruity between man's attributes and his conditions is in course of being remedied. We have seen that the instincts of the savage must die of inanition — that the sentiments called forth by the social state must grow by exercise, and that if the laws of life remain constant, this modification will continue imtil our desires are 188 THE EIGHTS OF CHILDEEN.
brought into perfect conformity with our circumstances. When now that ultimate state in which morality shall have become organic is arrived at, this anomaly in the development of the child's character will have disappeared. The young human being will no longer be an exception in nature — will not as now tend to grow into unfitness for the requirements of after-life; but wiU spontaneously unfold itself into that ideal manhood, whose every impulse coincides with the dictates of the moral law.
Education therefore, in so far as it seeks to form character, serves only a temporary purpose, and, lite other institutions re- sulting from the non- adaptation of man to the social state, must in the end die out. Hence we see how doubly incongruous with the moral law, is the system of training by coercion. Not only does it necessitate direct violations of that law, but the very work which it so futilely attempts to perform, will not need performing when that law has attained to its final supremacy. Force in the domestic circle, like magisterial force, is merely the comple- ment of immorality: immorality we have found to be resolvable into non-adaptation: non-adaptation must in time cease: and thus the postulate with which this old theory of education starts will eventually become false. Rods and ferules, equally with the staffs and handcufis of the constable; the gaoler's keys; the swords, bayonets and cannon, with which nations restrain each other, are the ofispring of iniquity— can exist only whilst supported by it, and necessarily share in the bad- ness of their parentage. Bom therefore as it is of man's im- perfections—governing as it does by means of diose imper- fections—and abdicating as it must when Equity begins to