place occupied by him has its limits.

If it is a case of a danger, which it is desirable that the
child should really dread, we must allow the thing itself to
have an alarming influence. When a mother strikes a child
because he touches the light, the result is that he does this
again when the mother is away. But let him burn himself with
the light, then he is certain to leave it alone. In riper years
when a boy misuses a knife, a toy, or something similar, the
loss of the object for the time being must be the punishment.
Most boys would prefer corporal punishment to the loss of their
favourite possession. But only the loss of it will be a real
education through experience of one of the inevitable rules of
life, an experience which cannot be too strongly impressed.

We hear parents who have begun with Spencer and then have taken
to corporal punishment declare that when children are too small
to repair the clothing which they have torn there must be some
other kind of punishment. But at that age they should not be
punished at all for such things. They should have such simple
and strong clothes that they can play freely in them. Later on,
when they can be really careful, the natural punishment would
be to have the child remain at home if he is careless, has
spotted his clothes, or torn them. He must be shown that he
must help to put his clothes in good condition again, or that
he will be compelled to buy what he has destroyed carelessly
with money earned by himself. If the child is not careful, he
must stay at home, when ordinarily allowed to go out, or eat
alone if he is too late for meals. It may be said that there
are simple means by which all the important habits of social