people determines the quality of the control exercised.  In both cases it may be inferred that amelioration of the average character leads to an amelioration of system; and further, that were it possible to ameliorate the system without the average character being first ameliorated, evil rather than good would follow.  Such degree of harshness as children now experience from their parents and teachers, may be regarded as but a preparation for that greater harshness which they will meet on entering the world.  And it may be urged that were it possible for parents and teachers to treat them with perfect equity and entire sympathy, it would but intensify the sufferings which the selfishness of men must, in after life, inflict on them.[1]

“But does not this prove too much?” some one will ask.  “If no system of moral training can forthwith make children what they should be; if, even were there a system that would do this, existing parents are too imperfect to carry it out; and if even could such a system be successfully carried out, its results would be disastrously incongruous with the present state of society; does it not follow that to reform the system now in use is neither practicable nor desirable?” No.  It merely follows that reform in domestic government must go on, pari passu, with other reforms.  It merely follows that methods of discipline neither can be nor should be ameliorated, except by instalments.  It merely follows that the dictates of abstract rectitude will, in practice, inevitably be subordinated by the present state of human nature—­by the imperfections alike of children, of parents, and of society; and can only be better fulfilled as the general character becomes better.

“At any rate, then,” may rejoin our critic, “it is clearly useless to set up any ideal standard of family discipline.  There can be no advantage in elaborating and recommending methods that are in advance of the time.”  Again we contend for the contrary.  Just as in the case of political government, though pure rectitude may be at present impracticable, it is requisite to know where the right lies, in order that the changes we make may be towards the right instead of away from it; so, in the case of domestic government, an ideal must be upheld, that there may be gradual approximations to it.  We need fear no evil consequences from the maintenance of such an ideal.  On the average the constitutional conservatism of mankind is strong enough to prevent too rapid a change.  Things are so organised that until men have grown up to the level of a higher belief, they cannot receive it:  nominally, they may hold it, but not virtually.  And even when the truth gets recognised, the obstacles to conformity with it are so persistent as to outlive the patience of philanthropists and even of philosophers.  We may be sure, therefore, that the difficulties in the way of a normal government of children, will always put an adequate check upon the efforts to realise it.