Take another case.  Not long since we had frequently to hear the reprimands visited on a little girl who was scarcely ever ready in time for the daily walk.  Of eager disposition, and apt to become absorbed in the occupation of the moment, Constance never thought of putting on her things till the rest were ready.  The governess and the other children had almost invariably to wait; and from the mamma there almost invariably came the same scolding.  Utterly as this system failed, it never occurred to the mamma to let Constance experience the natural penalty.  Nor, indeed, would she try it when it was suggested to her.  In the world, unreadiness entails the loss of some advantage that would else have been gained:  the train is gone; or the steam-boat is just leaving its moorings; or the best things in the market are sold; or all the good seats in the concert-room are filled.  And every one, in cases perpetually occurring, may see that it is the prospective deprivations which prevent people from being too late.  Is not the inference obvious?  Should not the prospective deprivations control a child’s conduct also?  If Constance is not ready at the appointed time, the natural result is that of being left behind, and losing her walk.  And after having once or twice remained at home while the rest were enjoying themselves in the fields—­after having felt that this loss of a much-prized gratification was solely due to want of promptitude; amendment would in all probability take place.  At any rate, the measure would be more effective than that perpetual scolding which ends only in producing callousness.

Again, when children, with more than usual carelessness, break or lose the things given to them, the natural penalty—­the penalty which makes grown-up persons more careful—­is the consequent inconvenience.  The lack of the lost or damaged article, and the cost of replacing it, are the experiences by which men and women are disciplined in these matters; and the experiences of children should be as much as possible assimilated to theirs.  We do not refer to that early period at which toys are pulled to pieces in the process of learning their physical properties, and at which the results of carelessness cannot be understood; but to a later period, when the meaning and advantages of property are perceived.  When a boy, old enough to possess a penknife, uses it so roughly as to snap the blade, or leaves it in the grass by some hedge-side where he was cutting a stick, a thoughtless parent, or some indulgent relative, will commonly forthwith buy him another, not seeing that, by doing this, a valuable lesson is prevented.  In such a case, a father may properly explain that penknives cost money, and that to get money requires labour; that he cannot afford to purchase new penknives for one who loses or breaks them; and that until he sees evidence of greater carefulness he must decline to make good the loss.  A parallel discipline will serve to check extravagance.