dren are trained by servants far more largely than they were when social life was less complex; and servants are to be ordered about, not obeyed. So, too, the mother in the modern city is often keyed up to such a pitch of excitement on account of social . tension that she has neither the leisure, the energy, nor the inclination to work out moral situations with her children, and to follow them through until she establishes a feeling and a habit of adjustment to the customs and institutions of the community. She is usually nervous and in a hurry, and she, like the children with the dog, settles problems on the basis of immediate and not future need. Let any fairminded person observe how frequently children in an American city home are bribed to adapt themselves for the moment to a necessary rule of conduct, and he will be impressed with the way social strain is pressing in upon the child and "spoiling" him. It is remarkable to what an extent this bribing business is carried on in some homes. But there comes a time when bribing will not do, and then the vicious character of this method of training stands revealed. It will help out of a present difficulty, but it corrupts the whole moral character of the child, and unfits him for life in modern society.

The most serious change taking place in our social life, as it affects the training of children, is the rapid

The elimination of masculinity in the training of children

elimination of men from the whole business. A really impressive fact was brought out while a group of gentlemen were discussing this matter in Chicago recently. Every member of the group but one confessed that the only times he saw his children during the week were Saturday afternoons and Sunday mornings, and often engagements would prevent his seeing much of them at these times even. In the country, as in the city, pupils often pass entirely through the schools to-day without coming under the influence of a man at any point in their progress. Giving full credit to the happy results flowing from feminine influence in child-training, it still can be said without qualification that nine out of ten boys will be more or less "spoiled" if they do not come under masculine control during a considerable part of their life in the school and outside. A woman can not effectively teach a boy certain lessons he ought to learn thoroughly in order that he may adjust himself to modern conditions. She may talk to him about his conduct, but she can not dynamize her talk so that it will take deep hold on impulse, and check it or divert it as circumstances may require.

In the countries across the sea where practically all the teaching is done by men, there seems to an

American observer often to be undue roughness in the schools. In some of these places one misses the sympathy with the young child, and the patience in helping him through his difficulties, which is usually found in typical American schools. The invasion of our schools by women has to a large extent eliminated the rough-and-ready methods which are in force now in some countries of the Old World, and which were in fashion in our country fifty years ago. It is a commonplace remark that man is cruder and more biceptual, as it were, in his attitude toward the young than is woman. The former relies more largely on compulsion to attain his ends; the latter on persuasion. In the school-room, a woman can as a rule adapt herself to the spontaneous expressions of children more readily than the man can. It is fundamental in the masculine nature to coerce non-conformists into compliance with rules and regulations which have been instituted for their government; but feminine nature can easily tolerate a larger degree of independence, especially in the young.

While the development of tenderness in our schools is greatly to be commended, is there yet danger that Hypertrophy of it may go too far? Is it imperative our sensibilities that there should be a certain amount of sternness, even roughness, in the man

agement of pupils, boys especially? The typical boy respects muscle more than he does kindness, gentleness, or any of the feminine virtues. An unprejudiced observer of our educational régime can not fail to see boys in our schools who are going to the bad mainly because they do not come under the hand of a strong man anywhere in their school course. Nothing but masculine vigor, not too much repressed, will properly impress such boys, and turn them from their evil ways. And not only do boys require such influence for their sound development, but there seems to be need for it also in the girl's life, though the popular view is that while the boy should have the softening effect of woman's influence, the girl will come out all right even if she is taught from start to finish by one of her own sex.

In modern times people have become very responsive to the expressions of childhood. Many of us can not endure rigorous methods of dealing with children, because the circumstances of our lives have made us supersensitive to this sort of thing. Our forebears, who had rougher work than ourselves to do, were more dynamic in their attitude toward the young. Their sensibilities were not particularly keen in response to the apparent distress of a child. who did not adapt himself to necessary rules of conduct in the home, the school, and the church. It

is possible their sensibilities were not delicate enough; but it is more likely that our sensibilities are becoming too active, so that we supinely give way to children when they need for their own welfare efficient resistance, restraint, and control. This is certainly true in respect to a large proportion of the boys in our schools, and any pseudo-philosophy which over-emphasizes delicacy in dealing with them will prove a detriment not only to the boys themselves but to society at large. At any rate, there is slight danger that one positive-minded masculine individual in a school will nullify to a harmful degree feminine tenderness therein.

The over-refinement of our sensibilities in dealing with the young is seen in the tendency to prohibit Corporal corporal punishment. Any and every punishment form of physical correction for wrongdoing is prohibited by law in some of the cities of our country. France has recently enacted a law to the effect that no pupil in any of the public schools can be subjected to corporal punishment, while in Germany corporal punishment is quite in fashion. A comparison of the schools of these two countries shows greater spontaneity among the children in the former than in the latter, but at the same time the French pupils have less respect for the rules and regulations of the school than is the case with the