The next list has Mrs. Burnett's "Little Saint Elizabeth," a morbid tale, and with it a reproduction of "Prince Fairyfoot," a story which the author read when she was a child in a book that she never could find again. In order to understand the pertness and flippancy of her style in this story, one has only to compare it with the original, reprinted within a few months in Frances Browne's "Wonderful chair," or "Granny's wonderful chair," as it is called in one edition. A few lines in the simple, direct English of the old fairy tales, are expanded by Mrs. Burnett into eight or 10 pages, with attempts at wit and allusions to unhappy married life, which should be kept out of books for children.
The same article in the Nation which gives high praise to "Josey and the chipmunk" thinks "The wonderful chair" prosy, but I have tested it on children who do not enjoy stories unless they are simply told, and have found that it holds their attention.
Books on differences of religious belief, books written in a style or on subjects beyond the years of boys and girls, scientific books that are inaccurate or out of date, books that make children despise their elders, or have an overweening sense of their own importance, and books that are cheap, slangy, flippant, or written in bad English, dialect or baby-talk, should have no place in a school list, and books on poor paper and in poor type and binding should also be kept out. There are books that tell stories of wholesome, well-bred children; fairy tales in the simple, old-fashioned style; out-of-door books that are not dull or aggressively instructive; and selections from the best poetry to choose from. There is room yet for the right kind of histories that are interesting without being babyish, and accurate without being dull.
Lists are often made in entire ignorance of the limitations of the children who are to use the books recommended in them. A well-intentioned paper suggests for children of eight or over Ebers' "Uarda" and Thiers' "French Revolution" as attractive historical works. In science it mentions Hooker's books, which are quite out of date, and in biography Lockhart's Scott and Forster's Dickens, which not one boy or girl in a hundred would read through, great as is their charm. Bryce's "American commonwealth" is also named. This list has either been made up from books that the compiler has heard of as classics, or else she is not in the habit of associating on familiar terms with boys and girls, even of high school age. This paper recommends Sophie May for very young children, and also the "Story of liberty," which a mother in the New York Times says is in the library of her daughter of eight. This is a mother who would not allow a child to read Scott's novels till 14 or 15, and thinks Dickens too sad for even that age!
The hundred books recommended in the St. Nicholas for March, 1900, made up from many competing lists, are nearly all good. A few, like Mrs. Richards' "Captain January," Mrs. Wiggin's "The Birds' Christmas Carol," and Munroe's "Through swamp and glade" have no permanent value. If one of Munroe's books is to be included it should be "The flamingo feather," or "Derrick Sterling," both of which are well worth reading many times and are great favorites with children. The defect in the list is the same just spoken of, that too many of the books are for boys and girls from 10 to 14 years old of bookish families, and that little attention is paid to younger or less carefully trained children.
One list puts into the first primary grade, or fourth year of school, for children nine or 10 years old, Abbott's "Cyrus," "Darius," "Xerxes," and other heroes, and Fiske's "War of independence," all of which are entirely beyond the grasp of 499 children out of 500 under 12 or 14. Lists should be shorter, and not too closely divided. A division, "Easy books," should include whatever children need until they can read without difficulty, and should contain books like Longman's adapted stories from the "Blue fairy book" and the earlier volumes of the "Ship" English history, Baldwin's "Fifty famous stories retold" and Eggleston's "Great Americans for little Americans."
In one case where books are not classified by grade, Horace Bushnell's "Woman suffrage," Hinsdale's "President Garfield and education," and Wright's "Industrial evolution of the United States" are in the same class with Emilie Poulsson's "Through the farmyard gate," with no discrimination as to the age for which any one of the four is intended. Three are beyond the understanding of boys and girls below high school age, and if in school libraries should be for teachers only, and the fourth is a book of kindergarten stories.
A book which is often commended by teachers and librarians is Coffin's "Story of liberty," which I said nearly 20 years ago "is so fierce in its Protestantism and so bloody in its details that it causes pain to many a sensitive child." The pictures are too horrible for a child to see, and the book, like any other which wars against any form of religious belief, should not be allowed in a public school.
Some lists admit the "Elsie" books, tearfully sentimental and priggish, where the heroine is held up as a saint and martyr for refusing to obey an entirely reasonable request of her father, and where money, fine clothes, and love-making at an early age hold too prominent a place.
In one list, one of Mayne Reid's books is annotated, "To read carefully any volume of this author is to acquire a considerable knowledge of the trees, the flowers, the animals, the insects, and the human creatures existing in the region where the story takes place." In Mayne Reid's "Desert home" maple sugar trees are tapped in the autumn and yield nearly a hundred pounds of sugar. Emerson's "Trees and shrubs of Massachusetts" states that although sap will flow in summer and early autumn, it has but little saccharine matter. Mayne Reid's stories as stories are delightful for children to read, but should never be used as aids to geography lessons.