most terrible of all. In India at least there can be no excuse for such
customs, for the duty of harmlessness is well known to all."

The whole idea of what is called "punishment" is not only wrong but
foolish. A teacher who tries to frighten his boys into doing what he
wishes does not see that they only obey him while he is there, and that
as soon as they are out of his sight they will pay no attention to his
rules, or even take a pleasure in breaking them because they dislike
him. But if he draws them to do what he wants because they love him and
wish to please him, they will keep his rules even in his absence, and so
make his work much easier. Instead of developing fear and dislike in the
characters of the boys, the wise teacher will gain his ends by calling
forth from them love and devotion; and so will strengthen all that is
good in them, and help them on the road of evolution.

Again, the idea of expulsion, of getting rid of a troublesome boy
instead of trying to improve him, is wrong. Even when, for the sake of
his companions, a boy has to be separated from them, the good of the boy
himself must not be forgotten. In fact, all through, school discipline
should be based on the good of the boys and not on the idea of saving
trouble to the teacher. The loving teacher does not mind the trouble.

Unintentional cruelty often comes from mere thoughtlessness, and the
teacher should be very careful not to be cruel in words or actions from
want of thought. Teachers often cause pain by hasty words uttered at a
time when they have been disturbed by some outside annoyance, or are
trying to attend to some important duty. The teacher may forget the
incident or pass it over as trivial, but in many such cases a sensitive
boy has been wounded, and he broods over the words and ends by imagining
all sorts of foolish exaggerations. In this way many misunderstandings