In his lectures published in 1902, George Still described 43 children in his clinical practice who had serious problems with sustained attention and self-regulation. George Still certainly did not use the current terminology for this disorder, but many historians of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have inferred that the children he described in his series of three published lectures to the Royal College of Physicians would likely have qualified for the current disorder of ADHD combined type, among other disorders. Still believed these children displayed a major "defect in moral control" that was relatively chronic in most cases. To Still, the moral control of behavior meant "the control of action in conformity with the idea of the good of all." Still concluded that a defect in moral control could arise as a function of three distinct impairments: (a) a defect of "cognitive relation to the environment," (b) a defect of "moral consciousness," and (c) a defect in "inhibitory volition." In this article, the author provides his views on Still's contentions. He contends that Still cannot be faulted for not recommending interventions for children with attention problems. Special educational services were unheard of in Still's time. The author wants to applaud Still's efforts for his careful observations and thoughtfully reasoned conclusions about his clinical cases that would prove to be a historical beginning not only to the field of ADHD but also to the study of child psychopathology more generally.