Page:Jesuit Education.djvu/649

Rh noisy, and the teacher, especially one who has the reputation of inflicting severe punishments, angrily charges him with the offence, the boy will deny the deed in sheer excitement. And one lie leads to many more; the boy assures and protests, in order not to expose his first prevarication. Therefore the master, as a rule, should not insist on arguing the case, but await a better chance, when the boy is calm. A teacher who is patient, judicious in inquiries, just and reasonable in punishments, will seldom be told a lie. If noise is going on in class, such a teacher may safely ask: Who made that noise? And in nearly all cases, as the experience of many teachers has proved, the offender will candidly acknowledge it. Sometimes this confession, with an earnest but calm word of admonition, will dispense with any further punishment. Of course, if the pardon invariably follows the confession, there will be no good effects whatever.

There are boys who, from a long practice, have acquired a most pernicious habit of lying. Such cases are hard to deal with, and it is difficult to lay down general rules. A few suggestions, however, may not be out of place. Very rarely, and only on extreme occasions, should there be shown any doubt of a pupil's word on a matter of fact. All should know that implicit confidence is placed in their assertions, and that it is considered as a matter of course that they speak the truth on facts within their knowledge. If ever a lie is found out and proved, the punishment should be severe. Dr. Arnold says, in such a case the punishment should be the loss of the teacher's confidence. But even then the teacher should try to save the offender from discouragement by holding out to