THE DIPLOMACY OF CHILDREN.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 5731, 28 October 1905, Page 13

THE DIPLOMACY OF CHILDREN.

(By Paola Lombroso,) Who lias not at times boon surprised —nay, almost stupefied—by instances oi childish rose and cunning? Improvised intrigue, diplomatic perversion of tho. truth, deceit —sometimes ingenuous, at other times of the most refined description—all these arts, suggested by malice, acute observation or prompt wit, are resorted to by the child to attain its ends. Nothing in connection with children deserves more careful attention. Wc aro thus enabled to obtain a clear perception of tho least noble and the most inavowablp desires, which in spite of all our solicitude and all our vigilance obtain a foothold in there small atoms of humanity. By making a careful study of such matters wc can also discern how tho child may best acquire that moral sense which assuredly will prove tho most important element in making him iu the future an honest man. Not all instances of childish deceit aro equally reprehensible. There are many width scarcely deserve the name of deceit at all, which, without proving false to our duty , as educators, wo may treat with the greatest indulgence. Such instances savour less of downright malice and a fixed intention to deceive than of a quick-witted ingenuity, able to turn to profitable account both circumstances and individuals. There is not ono among us unacquainted with those pretty little tricks, capable of disarming tho most austere brow. Let mo cito an instance) My own litllo hoy of four years old was excessively fond of grapes, and whenever he found himself among tho peasants, they wore very proud of stuffing him with as many as ho could eat. Tho little roguo knew very well that we would not look at the matter so indulgently, and thus ho was careful always to warn tho peasants, “If you are thinking of giving me some grapes, let them he only white ones.” His reasoning evidently was that wo should thus know nothing about it. since tho black grapes would have left revealing traces on his clothes. My baby is a perfect prodigy of diplomacy and when ho wishes to obtain anything which excites his greed ho lays his plans with incredible astuteness. Recently he passed tho day with some friends. After brcakfpst they had given him some sweets; for lunch ho had an apple and some bread. “What a pity it is,” ho said, as ho took tho apple, “that I did not keep some of this morning’s sweets. I would now have had them for lunch!” In this way ho discreetly expressed liiii desire to have more. Such tricks and expedients are really not very blameworthy, since they conceal no grave leaning to duplicity or malice. On tho other hand the conduct of some children who indulge in these small deceptions is" greatly aggravated by premeditation, furnishing proof of a serious defect in their moral sense. Such cases one ought .not to look over or leave' unpunished. . It is our duty, wo who are grown-up and are acquainted with the rules and laws of the moral sense, to inculcate'them into children, oven if tho process entails unpleasant consequences. Hero is a significant example. Ono of my friends took out with her for the day "a three-year-old niece, who carried with her a doll, a recent present. During tho day the doll fell to the ground, with the result that the head was broken. The little girl became very anxious and uneasy. “How they will scold me when I get home!” she said. “No,” was the aunt’s reply; “I promise jou that it will bo all right. It is an accident only, and I will say that you were net at all to blame.” The child was immediately quieted, and in due jourse tho two returned homo. When tho aunt, however, in order to take off her hat, entered the room where the little girl was already with her mother, she was greeted by her niece as follows: “Don’t be afraid to come in. * Nobody will scold you. I have already explained that you didn’t break my doll on purpose, and that it was only an accident.”

With the greatest effrontery tho child bad thus thrown on her aunt tho entire responsibility for an accident brought about by her own carelessness. Hero there was much evidence of impudence, bad faith, and premeditation. The aunt had said no word, nor had. tho little girl allowed it to bo in the least suspected that sho premeditated giving such an aspect to the affair. “No one saw us,” was probably her reflection, “so no one can cast a doubt on my explanation, and my aunt will not dare to deny it.” Sho knew that her aunt was very indulgent towards her, and she had evidently counted upon her complicity in keeping silence. This deception was not due to fear of punishment; it was an offence, a calumny on a person to whom tho little girl was very much attached, and proves that in that little soul there was already an obscure instinct towards evil for evil’s sake, an instinct which, in after years, might transform the adult woman into a dangerous, hysterical person, of the Hedda Gabler type depicted by Ibsen.

Prom this youthful'Hedda Qahler I will pass on to a youthful Therese Humbert, in tho person of a very intelligent little girl of eleven, belonging to a middle-class family. Her parents sent her to a gymnastic class, frequented by a number of children whoso parents were very rich. She was, one must suppose, annoyed at finding herself among children able to make comparisons not to her advantage. One of her companions boasted of tho fine villa her parents had, another of a carriage, another of the lengthy -journeys she made, and so on. In order not to appear inferior bo her more fortunate companions tho child invented a fantastic and perfectly credible story, after tho manner of the French adventuress referred to. Two of her cousins, perfectly acquainted with the circumstances of her family, who would have immediately perceived she was not speaking tho truth had she invented something inherently impossible, were among the pupils, and she was, therefore, at great pains to give her invention every appearance of plausibility. Tho girl’s father had business relations with a very exalted personage. She, therefore, related one day that tills particular personage had visited her parents’ house, and had been invited by her mother to dine with them on the following evening. Next day she mendaciously recounted all the preparations in progress for the feast, and on the following day described the different guests, enumerated the toasts, and had the satisfaction of perceiving that her friends looked at her with a certain amount of envy. After this successful commencement, she continued the deception, telling her companions that the exalted personage

came to visit her parents at every moment of tho clay, generally remaining to lunch or dinner, as tho case might bo. So prodigal of details was sho that even her cousins never doubted for an instant that tho facts were as related, and they in turn told their parents. The result was that very- - considerable coldness resulted between tho various families, who were hurt because not only had they never been invited to these feasts, but because tho matter was so carefully concealed from them altogether. At last came tho day when (iie whole thing was revealed. Tho mother and father of the mendacious little girl were stupefied on learning the whole tissue of her inventions, for, as a matter of fact, tho exalted personage had never in his life crossed their threshold. Tho child was severely punished. And, to take away from her all desire to repeat her offence, she was forced to make full confession before her companions and her parents, and was then removed from tho school which her innate vanity made her so proud to attend. Tho foregoing is one of tho most typical instances of deceit with which I am acquainted. Tho moans employed to weave all those falsehoods and inventions into a connected story and tho entire absence of scruples in this little girl of eleven yeans old constituted so giave an offence that no ordinary punishment would have sufficed. •

A child capable of thinking and feeling in this way would require to bo carefully watched and kept away from all contact with persons capable of encouraging her instinctive vanity, an instinct very easily excited. She ought to have been made to understand that there was, no shame in being less well off than her companions, and that it was far more disgraceful to he detected tolling a falsehood than to be poor. I have personal knowledge of two or three other cases of deception committed by children, but they are loss grave than tho one I have just related. One day a friend sent her little girl, seven years old. to ask mo if_wo had any engagement for that evening, as sho wished to pay us a visit. Tho child came to mo as told, but was very careful to ask me nothing. Sho then returned home and told her mother that we wore terribly annoyed, but that for this particular evening we had hooked places at the theatre. Tho motive fortius invention was, if not plausible, at least comprehensible: tho girl did not wish her mother to go out on this evening without coming to say good-night to her when she was in bed! Tho next instance is that of a boy, also of seven, a grand-nephew of Verdi, the composer. Tho trick of which .he was guilty gavo rise to a very curious episode. At Bussato, Verdi’s native place, the composer’s works are played at a theatre where all the boxes belong to private individuals. The schoolmistress of tho little boy in question asked one day during tire class whether any of her pupils could obtain for her the loan of tho key of a box for one evening. Anxious to prove to the mistress and his comrades as well how important lie was, our young hero said ho could procure a key. When he asked his mother, however, for the loan of her key, she replied that sho required it herself. At a loss how to arrange tho matter after having given his promise with such effrontery, and loth to come before his comrades again with empty hands, the hoy resorted to the following expedient: Ho picked out one of the largest koys from a bunch, ho found in tho house, tho key of a cellar, doubtless —answering to the idea he had formed in his own mind of what tho key of a box ought to be—and with tho greatest coolness took it to the school, saying that his mother had sent him with it. Tho schoolmistress naturally perceived tho deception in a moment, and brought the matter to the notice of tho boy’s mother. The child, it turned out, had never seen the key of a theatre box, and was not awaro that each key was numbered, so that his falsehood would necessarily be at once detected. Hd reasoned that the key he presented might easily bo passed off for the true one, and that when, at the last moment, it was found not to open the door, his mistress would conclude that the pupil’s mother had simply mad© a mistake. Here, also, evidently we have an instance of deceit of ivhich the gravity is somow-hat diminished by tbo circumstances of tho case. The child not only wished to show off before his comrades, but also to prove how obliging he was; on the other hand, tho request for the key which ho actually made to his mother had in a great measure furnished the occasion and decided him to carry to a conclusion his little boastful trick, which is not among those at which parents ought to be alarmed for their ultimate effect upon a child’s morality. A more complicated case, both for the child and for the educator, was that which happened to another of my friends whose little boy was brought up in accordance with the most austere moral principles. His father had received a false coin. Tho boy, though aware that his father considered tho coin useless, did not know that it would bo wrong to pass it off on somebody else. Ono day when ho was in tho country with his parents ho suddenly rushed into tho room exclaiming in most triumphant tones: “I have done something so clever; I have given tho false coin away for this stick.”

He knew vaguely that tho false coin could not he exchanged for a good one, but ho was unable to conceive how what ho had done was reprehensible, and had ingenuously boasted about his trick before everybody. He reasoned that since somebody had succeeded in making his father accept tho false coin in place of a good one. ho, the son, was quite justified in behaving in a similar manner, provided ho could find somebody so inattentive as to accept tho coin; in a word, ho did not understand that ho was cheating tho shopkeeper, and he could nob see how the action he had committed was in any way one to bo ashamed of.

In the interests of my own son, I have often asked myself what importance should be attached to such tendencies towards dishonesty on the part of a child, and what are the most efficacious means of correcting them. As a matter of fact. I do not think that too excessive significance should he given to such acts, nor that they should he looked upon as infallible indications of the character of nuite young children. Similar acts to those I have related are committed by almost every child, even by those who become the most honest, upright, .and loyal of men. In such acts we ought, I think, to see hut a phase of the development of the moral sense, rather than 'seeds of the inexorable future. Individual development, before it reaches the degree which in the present state of civilisation we look upon as normal, passes inferior forms such as falsehood, dissimulation, selfishness, and injustice. Afterwards, as the result of continuous contact with adult honourable persons the intelligence and the possibility

of fudging and comparing develop, the moral sens© becomes organised and strengthened, and these little children of seven or eight grow into accomplished, scrupulous, and thoroughly honest men and women. I do not moan to say that children should bo allowed to form habits of such a nature without being corrected. But in the case of little children, when wo surprise them in falsehood unawares, wo might act in such a way as to inspire them with the idea that it is not possible for them to say an untruth or to do anything wrong without our knowing it. Moreover, when we scold or reprimand them, we should always put ourselves on their level. The little boy of a. friend of ours had committed one of those dishonest acts which children so often do. by taking from tlie table a silver coin whiclrthe servant had left there. Hie child’s father found it' out, and sought to inspire his eon with alarm by telling him that he believed the money had been stolen by the servant, and that she would bo punished tor it. The father's idea was that the child would ho much aifoctcd by hearing , that his act had exposed an innocent person to the danger of arrest. Some minutes after the reprimand the door-bell was_ heard to ring, whereupon, in the hearing cf his father, the littlo_boy said to his sister: “Come along, quickly. This'is tho policeman, I expect, who has come to arrest tho servant. It will be very funny to see it.” ... , , Tho severe lesson had not produced the slightest effect upon the conscience of this five-year-old hoy!

In many instances self-pride is tho string that may bo matlo to vibrate with good effect. Most children have an enormous amount of amour propre, principally made up of vanity. They desire to appear better than they are, and are very sensitive to the opinions of those in whose eyes they wish to stand well, especially their masters and their comrades.

The lady principal of a girl’s school told me that she had a very good method of correcting punili which was productive of the best results. It was to isolate the little -wrong-doer, and keep her for three or four days fromthe society of her companions, who were prohibited from speaking to, playing, or walking with tho culprit, as if they dreaded that such contact might he 'harmful; this temporary ostracism profoundly humiliated tho girls upon whom 'the punishment was inflicted. Such " a system, I think. could not easily bo applied in private families, since there is sure to be somebody especially tender hearted, ready to break tho order, and thus render such a disciplinary measure ineffective. When children are much attached to anybody —to their own. father or mother, for instance —a good way to correct them is to make them understand how painfully anything they do wrong affects those whom they love. I believe that tho most difficult of all such acts to correct are those inspired by vanity and hypocrisy: ordinary falsehood anddishonesty in a child are much easier to detect and correct, since they fall directly under our control, and are what I should call normal aspects of wrong-doing. But more difficult than anything to teach tho child, and what we should strain every effort to teach him, is that an act may he bad in itself, quite irrespective of any assurance of immunity from punishment or of what strangers may think of it. If we succeed in making a child comprehend that ho ought not to pass a false coin, and that ho ought not to utter a falsehood, not because by so doing he hurts his father, hut because such actions are wrong from the strictly honest point of view, we may ho very proud at having achieved such a result, because we may bo assured that the precious plant of moral rectitude has thus victoriously taken root in a little soul.