e child suffers through the criminal neglect of
the parents, and the community must interfere for the sake of the future
social efficiency of the individual and of the nation. There is
justification, for here as in the case of the parents of the morally
defective, parental responsibility has either ceased to act or become
too weak a motive force to be effective in securing the welfare of the
child. As the individual parent neglects his duty, so and to the
corresponding degree to which this neglect extends, must the duty be
enforced by the State. But in the enforcing of this or of any duty we
must be quite sure that the neglect is really due to the weakened sense
of responsibility of the parent, that it is a condition of things which
he could remove if he had the moral will to do so, and that the neglect
is not due to causes beyond the power of the parent to remove.

Cases in which there is culpable neglect of the child due not to
poverty, but to the fact that the money which should go to the proper
nutrition of the child is squandered in drink, or on other enervating
pleasures, are therefore cases in which recourse must be had to measures
which enforce upon the parent the obligation to feed and clothe his
children. The really difficult question is as to the best means of
enforcing this obligation. Manifestly to punish by fine or imprisonment
does little in many cases to alleviate the sufferings of the children.
The punishment falls upon them as well as upon the parent, and where the
latter is dead to, or careless of, the public opinion of his fellows, it
fails to initiate that reform of conduct which ought to be the aim of
all punishment. If indeed by imposition of fine, or by imprisonment, the
individual realises his neglect of duty, repents, and as a consequence
reforms, then good and well, but as a rule the neglect of the child is
in such cases a moral disease of long standing and not easily cured, and
so we find often that neither punishment by fine nor imprisonment, even
when repeated several times, is effective in making the parent realise
his responsibility and reform his conduct. All the while the child goes
on suffering. He is no better fed during the period of fine or
imprisonment, and the wrath of the parent is often visited upon his
unoffending head.

The second method of cure proposed is to feed the children at the public
expense and to recover the cost by process of law. But the practical
difficulties in