The Parents' Review

A Monthly Magazine of Home-Training and Culture

Parents' National Educational Union.

The Annual Meeting of this Society was held on Friday afternoon, June 8th, at London House, St. James Square, by the kind permission of the Bishop of London. The Chair was taken by Lord Meath. Letters of regret at their inability to attend had been received from Mr. Welldon, Mr. Silkes, Sir Dyce Duckworth, Mrs. Bryant, Mrs. Boyd-Carpenter, Canon Daniell, and Archdeacon Farrar.

The Chairman, in his opening remarks, said that he thanked them very much for asking him to take the chair that day at such an important gathering. He congratulated them most heartily on the very successful work, which had been carried on during the very few years, in which the important organisation had been in existence. They had undertaken a truly national work,--a work exceedingly difficult, which required the most careful thought and consideration, but one, which if carried out in the proper spirit, would do an immense deal towards improving the character of the next generation. He thought it was impossible to exaggerate the importance of any association that was to mould, as he hoped they would, the character of future generations. It meant that they would be able to train up the children of the future so that this Empire should be a nobler Empire, and an Empire more worthy of a Christian people. There were many sides to this question of the Education of Children, and it was impossible to discuss all the many sides of this important question : he should confine himself to one particular side. It appeared to him that it would not be out of place for him to endeavour to put before them the importance of discipline in the home. In former generations it would have been perfectly out of place and useless to press that point. Formerly there was too much seventy, discipline was carried even to cruelty. The danger now was lest people should forget that in well-regulated homes discipline should occupy some place. They would acknowledge, at least all those who believed in a Divine Being, that they were not left without some guidance in this direction of government. The laws of nature were the laws of God. And if they looked at nature they saw that, though benign when her laws were obeyed, she was very severe when they were disobeyed. If they looked at the laws which the Almighty had given to mankind they saw sin did not go unpunished. There were those who denied this, but he thought they were only the shallow thinkers: he believed that all deeper thinkers would feel that sin was punished even in this world. Then if nature and the Divine Being treated men so, and also in the revelation in the Divine Book, they found that discipline was to occupy a prominent position in the government of the world, they ought to see that it occupied a prominent position in the government of the family. Undisciplined men and women became a danger in society. Many parents, desirous to go to the other extreme from the severity of their grandparents, seemed to have forgotten that there must be law in the family as in the State. Some parents gave their children whatever they liked, and fulfilled every desire; yet those children were often the most discontented, unhappy, and in after years had often gone to the bad. He remembered fathers and mothers of this sort who were quite ignorant of the fact that they were acting in a most unkind way to their children--what was the true method? It was in the first place to be perfectly certain that parents in the education of their children should follow the New Testament with regard love, affection, and desire to do all good for them; but they should remember that there was also an Old Testament which taught that there was such a thing as discipline. Parents might destroy their children just as much through over-kindness and want of discipline as through too much severity. If parents insisted on absolute obedience from their earliest years, they would never have any difficulty afterwards. Anarchy in families was just as likely to lead back to the despotism which reigned in the families of our forefathers, as despotism had lead to anarchy. Let them remember that their government was a Christian government, founded on love, mercy, and truth, but let them not forget in their admiration for those qualities that God had placed them in a position of authority, and that they were failing in their duty, if they shrank--whether from idleness, cowardice, or an erroneous interpretation of their duties--from exercising that authority which God had placed in their hands, over their children when in a state of authority. [Cheers.]

Dr. Schofield, M.D., Chairman of the Executive Committee moved the election of the officers: that Lord and Lady Meath be Presidents of the Society. He said that he must be allowed to admire the speech which Lord Meath had just given them. They had had Chairmen for several years, but he did not remember one who had made such a practical appeal to parents, and he hoped that no word would be forgotten by those present. As gratitude was said to be a lively sense of favours to come, he trusted that as they had established a local branch in the neighbourhood of Lord Meath’s residence, perhaps he would again favour them with his views on discipline.

After moving the election of the other Vice-Presidents and members of the Committee, Dr. Schofield continued that he would like to say a few words on the progress of the Society and on the Annual Report. He thought they were to be congratulated on the remarkable progress they had made in the last twelve months. They had got a central office in London, where the affairs of the Society could be transacted, which would be of the greatest possible value: and they had obtained the services of a Secretary of great ability who had done very good work for them. They had established several new branches and had had a large increase of membership. They had new branches in the Southern district at Brighton, Eastbourne and Hastings. Another had been formed in Bayswater with a large number of members, and others at Congleton and Macclesfield. He hoped to begin the campaign soon in the important city of Bedford, most important from the educational point of view, and the Duchess of Bedford had promised her support. With regard to the Society generally, people said that its aims were rather undefined and that they did not understand what its principles were. The leaflet just issued would define them further. But whilst desirous of greater definiteness they did not want a narrower platform. He must refer to other branches of the work. The House of Education at Ambleside was in a most flourishing condition and Miss Mason was anxious to take larger premises for the increased number of the students, and they got flattering accounts of the work done by her governesses. With regard to the Parents Review School, that remarkable undertaking commenced by Miss Mason--it was also progressing and conferred an immense boon on parents in country houses. He had received letters from parents in Fiji who were anxious to join.

With regard to the Parents' Review, which he had said, last year, was so full of pregnant ideas, it had fully maintained the standard. He must repeat now what he had said then, that no one could read any number without being made to sit down and think. It gave ideas and suggestions, and these in a fertile soil were of greater value than if written out a verbose manner. He commended the magazine very strongly and trusted all would become subscribers. [Applause.]

The elections of the officers were then confirmed.

Mrs. Hart-Davis then read an address by Miss Mason, who was unavoidably absent.

Prof. Gladstone, in moving the adoption of the Report, said he wished to express his strong approval of the Union. It had his most hearty sympathy, and he wished it had been founded earlier, and had influenced the present generation as it would doubtless influence future ones. He had listened with great pleasure to the very philosophical paper of Miss Mason, and wished to express his thanks for it. He had always liked the society, because it really took up the views of the educational renaissance to apply them to the whole education of children. Education was one of the things which had undergone an important advance during the last half century in this country, and a revolution was taking place which must influence, and he thought for good, the character of the rising generation. The Society bore in mind that they and their children had come into the world as children of the great Father, to be trained for His love and service here and hereafter. It did show an enlarged spirit and reverent consideration what the child was, what God was, and what were His claims upon all people, and how they could best perform the duties set before them. But what a responsibility it was for the parents when they thought of what their children might be, and then could thank God on what they were!

Parents did not think enough of the potentialities in their children. They might turn to evil, and become a curse to themselves and the world; but they might perform their duties to be a blessing to themselves, their parents, and all around them. Education must be physical and mental, as well as spiritual, and it was very important how this should be conducted. A reverend prelate had said that if a boy wanted to succeed in the world, he ought to be very careful how he chose his parents. Parents ought to be careful, then, to do their duty to their children, asking God to direct them. The example they set was even more important than actual teaching. Children heard a great deal, knew a great deal, carried on romances amongst themselves. They heard their parents’ stories about things they could not see, about God and Christ, and might think them just as much matters of imagination as fairy tales, but if they saw that they were great realities influencing the lives of their parents, then they would believe them. If by example and instruction, parents were able to open the minds of their children to see beauty in this world and in that beyond, they would be giving them new life and strength, which would carry them on when they themselves had passed away. [Applause.]

Dr. R. Horton seconded the report in an able and suggestive speech.

The Rev. H. L. Jackson, of Sydney, in supporting the resolution, said that he should like to give some short account of how he became a Parents’ Unionist, and report what lie wished he could call progress in that part of the world where he had been working. In his country parish, and in his parish at Sydney, they wanted two things ; first, that the whole question of the treatment of the Sunday with regard to children should be carefully revised ; and, second, that something should be done to avert the grave danger to Society, from what Prof. Seeley has called “the abdication of the parent.” Had there been time he would have said hard things of an institution which meets with much admiration, the Sunday School system. With regard to these two points he had taken action by himself by means of lectures and pamphlets, and getting people interested in the subject to carry on the work. After studying the Parents’ Union in England, he went back to Sydney and started a similar Union there, but he was afraid he could only say that to all outward appearance it had proved a failure. It still existed, but was doing very little. The reasons were the extraordinary conservatism of the Colonial mind, which looked askance at new things relating to education, and was very slow to take them up. Those to whom they looked for support--the clergy--were very much over-worked, and very diffident of new work. They were under the voluntary, and were apt to ask whether the new thing would pay. Then there was the utter inefficiency of the Organising Secretary, who was himself, through the demands of a large parish and constant ill health. Those in the Colonies should have the earnest sympathy of this meeting. They were all working to bring about that healthier tone of Society, which would come when people realised that there was nothing about which they ought to be more anxious, than how their sons should become the best men in the world, and when they could say “Blessed are the children who have learnt with their parents, and blessed are the parents who have instructed them. [Applause.]

Mr. Kobara Mochizulki, of Japan, said that he wished to express his gratitude for their indulgence in allowing him to speak on that platform. It seemed to him that children’s education depended much on the tender care of the mothers. He then read several extracts to show how highly Japanese women had been praised by European writers as mothers, wives, and sisters. They were now trying to adopt modern ideas in education in Japan, and the Emperor had sent over a lady to study, and he trusted they would show her every assistance, as the future of the Japanese ladies depended on them, and the Union would be appreciated in his country. [Cheers.] The Report was adopted.

The Rev. J. Ridgeway, in moving a vote of thanks to Lord Meath and the Bishop of London, said that all the time he had been wondering whether his children would have chosen him for a parent. It was a funny, but it was also a very serious thought, and if parents asked themselves that question oftener, they would take a more serious view of their responsibilities. They lived in days when parents tended to shirk their responsibilities, some in order to work, others to play. Until parents faced the question and realised that they were the first Educators of their children and were to draw out their characters, the children would never be quite what they ought to be. He believed that Sunday should be the home day. If they lost that, they would often lose the only day on which the father could see the children. One of the things of which they should take care was lest, in the wider view of how the Sunday should be kept, they should lose sight of it as a home day. In thanking Lord Meath, they were only thanking him for doing one more work of the manv which he was doing for the good of the community. They also thanked the Bishop, and his kindness was a proof that he felt the value of parental Education. [Applause.]

Mr. Margesson seconded and said that with regard to fathers they had a most important part to play. All felt that their relations with their own fathers were closer than theirs had been with their fathers before: the sympathy was closer, and if the Union could increase this it would justify its existence.

The Rev. J. Penrose expressed his gratitude to the Union and for the address of the Chairman. Anything that Lord Meath said always demanded attention, and he hoped that his words would bear fruit. There were more fathers present on this occasion than on the last, which was a hopeful sign. It was a natural consequence since the ladies and mothers were aroused, and once they took a thing into their heads the husbands must follow sooner or later. It was most hopeful that ladies were furthering the aims of the society with such immense enthusiasm; and many of the most instructive articles in the Review were those written by ladies. He hoped that the high spiritual tone and aim of the speeches would be present all through. That would be the strength of the movement, if they looked at it as a most solemn matter that went to the root of their whole being. He thanked God for the Union for teaching parents how to educate themselves in order to educate their children. Hitherto it had been a very haphazard affair; people became parents without giving a thought to the deep science of the matter. He trusted that Lord Meath’s influence would continue to be used on behalf of the aims of the Society.

The vote of thanks was carried.

Lord Meath thanked them most heartily, and wished success to the Union. (Cheers.)

Typed by Blossom, Jan. 2025