Webster's Dictionary, which cannot be accused of any leaning toward
sentimentalism, defines "inhumanity" as "cruelty in action;" and "cruelty"
as "an act of a human being which inflicts unnecessary pain." The word
inhumanity has an ugly sound, and many inhuman people are utterly and
honestly unconscious of their own inhumanities; it is necessary therefore
to entrench one's self behind some such bulwark as the above definitions
afford, before venturing the accusation that fathers and mothers are
habitually guilty of inhuman conduct in inflicting "unnecessary pain" on
their children, by needless denials of their innocent wishes and impulses.

Most men and a great many women would be astonished at being told that
simple humanity requires them to gratify every wish, even the smallest, of
their children, when the pain of having that wish denied is not made
necessary, either for the child's own welfare, physical or mental, or by
circumstances beyond the parent's control. The word "necessary" is a very
authoritative one; conscience, if left free, soon narrows down its
boundaries; inconvenience, hindrance, deprivation, self-denial, one or
all, or even a great deal of all, to ourselves, cannot give us a shadow of
right to say that the pain of the child's disappointment is "necessary."
Selfishness grasps at help from the hackneyed sayings, that it is "best
for children to bear the yoke in their youth;" "the sooner they learn that
they cannot have their own way the better;" "it is a good discipline for
them to practise self-denial," &c. But the yoke that they _must_ bear, in
spite of our lightening it all we can, is heavy enough; the instances in
which it is, for good and sufficient reasons, impossible for them to have
their own way are quite numerous enough to insure their learning the
lesson very early; and as for the discipline of self-denial,--God bless