صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

fears it does in some degree at Cheltenham) "invidious comparisons on the part of the boys," not always without some foundation in fact; but, on the whole, the system seems well adapted for a very large school.*

The question of punishments presents more difficulties to a conscientious schoolmaster than that of promotion. Flogging-once supposed to be the universal remedy for all schoolboy disorders-is now reserved at nearly every school for grave or repeated offences. At Rugby, it now "rarely occurs so often as eight times in the year;' at Harrow, the cases may amount to as many as sixty-"about twenty in each school term." But at Rugby caning (on the hand) is used in some of the lower forms, though very sparingly. The Sixth Form in both schools are exempt from all corporal punishment; at Rugby the Fifth enjoy the same exemption, "by the courtesy of the school;" and Mr Butler, at Harrow, "rarely decides to flog any boy in the Fifth." But masters and Royal Commissioners both admit the difficulty of selecting a good form of punishment for minor offences. Setting impositions-i.e., lines to write out, -is objected to, either as encouraging that slovenly handwriting which is one of the disgraces of our progressive age, if the master never notices the style of the performance, but will take, as a young witness says some Harrow masters will, "anything that is black and white;" or entailing additional demands upon the mas

ter's time, if he is to examine every imposition brought up to him. Learning lines by heart is open to more objection still on the latter ground. Extra school-as imposed at Harrow-which consists in setting a boy to write out grammar for an hour or two on a half-holiday "in the presence of a master"gives the victims the compensatory satisfaction that the master is being punished too. Solitary confinement-used in the Lower School at Rugby-seems to be the most objectionable of all. It was an idea of Dr Arnold's, apparently quite at variance with his general principle of treatment; and we imagine that nothing but the acknowledged difficulty of finding a substitute for the rod could have led so judicious a master as the present head of Rugby to adopt it. Dr Arnold once went so far as to propose that a special place should be built for the infliction of this punishment; but the trustees of the school, much to the credit of their good sense, declined to sanction it. It is equally to their credit that this is quoted as an exceptional instance of interference on their part with the discretion of their head-master.†

66

Dr Temple is very sound, however, in his views of punishment generally. In opposition to the soft-spoken modern theorists who will hear of nothing but reformatory" processes, he understands that one great object of punishment is-to punish. One or two of the Commissioners, with the most philanthropic intentions, are continually inquiring into the

The arrangement will perhaps be best understood by the tabular view given in the Report:

Sixth Form.
The Twenty.
Fifth.

(Parallels.) Lower Fifth 1st Upper Middle 2d Upper Middle

=

=

(Parallels.) Lower Fifth. 1st Upper Middle. 2d Upper Middle.

3d Upper Middle.

[blocks in formation]

Lower Middle.

amount of "improvement" which it may be possible to combine with the cane, or the birch, or the imposition, as the case may be. And some of the masters, in their answers on the subject, do not venture to dispute the theory, but merely point out the difficulties in the practice. Not so Dr Temple. The question is as to writing out lines of Greek or Latin :

"910. (Lord Clarendon.) It does a boy no good?-It is not intended to do anything but punish him. If you com bine a punishment with that which does him good, you get him to hate that which does him good."

As the delinquent negro said to his Puritan master, who wished to combine religious exhortation with the cow-hide," Massa, if you preachee, preachee; if you floggee, floggee; but no preachee and floggee too.' Dr Temple may or may not have heard of a quondam Lower master of Rugby-a good and zealous man-who, in the discharge of his duties as flogging-master to the Lower School, took the opportunity (on Lord Clarendon's principle of "doing the boy good") of laying in what he considered a few words in season between each cut; it had the effect of prolonging the punishment, and exasperating the sufferer, but the moral results in the way of reformation were, we believe, not distinctly perceptible.

A boy who has taken sufficient advantage of the teaching of either of these schools to have reached the Sixth Form, and to have remained in it for the last two years of his school life, will by that time have gone through a pretty wide range of classical reading. At Harrow he will probably have read, (besides lower books) of the Greek tragedians, the whole of Sophocles, with two or three plays each of Eschylus and Euripides; the same of Aristophanes; a couple of books of Thucydides, with portions of Homer, Herodotus, Demosthenes, and Plato. In Latin, a good deal

of Livy, Cicero, and Virgil, with the whole or nearly so of Horace. To this at Rugby would be added perhaps two or three plays of Plautus, and some books of Lucretius. It will be his own fault if he has not gained a very fair amount of mathematical knowledge at the same time. "The whole of Euclid" seems to be not an unusual point to be reached by a sixthform boy at Harrow, who is yet no aspirant for mathematical honours at the university; and "nearly half those who leave the sixth will have gone through six books," and have gained also " a very fair knowledge of algebra." Something less than this would be the Rugby mark.

In the honours gained at the universities, though Harrow has done fairly well, the balance is largely in favour of Rugby. Indeed, of the latter school the Commissioners have reported that the list of distinctions gained by its scholars "evinces its general teaching in the Literæ Humaniores to be absolutely unsurpassed; its training in exact scholarship to stand within the first rank; and its practice of composition not to disentitle it to a very honourable position amongst public schools." Taking the ten years from 1852 to 1861 inclusive, Rugby has gained at Oxford in classical honours no less than 34* first classes in moderations, and 22 at the final examination, as against 10 and 7 from Harrow; and has three times been successful both for the Ireland and the Hertford university scholarships, which no Harrow man has gained during that period. On the other hand, some of the best Harrow scholars have gone to Cambridge, where they have gained 12 places in the first class of the Classical Tripos, while Rugby has only 6; and have won there a very large proportion of Greek and Latin verse prizes-a test of elegant scholarship in which Rugby seems not nearly so successful. In mathematical honours the two schools

The Report says 35; but Dr Temple's list (App. p. 312) gives only 34.

In

have been nearly on a level. this respect, though both Harrow and Rugby occupy a good place as compared with other public schools, our public-school training is plainly

not so successful as it should be. A fact stated by Professor Price, one of the most eminent mathematicians at Oxford, illustrates this rather remarkably. The great test of high mathematical proficiency acquired at school is the junior of the two university scholarships, which can only be competed for up to the ninth term from matriculation. This scholarship, says Mr Price, "has never been gained by a young man from the great public schools;" but they have gained the senior scholarship repeatedly, which may be supposed rather the result of university training.

The monitorial system exists in its full development both at Harrow and Rugby, and is very much the same in both, although there are of course some minor details which are characteristic of each school. Perhaps the most important difference is that while the Rugby præpostors are above forty -comprising the whole Sixth Form -the Harrow monitors are never more than fifteen. In both cases the privilege is attached strictly to place in the school, the reward entirely of school work, and depending in no way upon age or other qualifications; excepting that at Rugby a boy is not permitted to pass into the Sixth (however qualified by attainments) until he is sixteen, and that as a boy's place in the Sixth, once obtained, never afterwards changes, and he can only rise to the top by his seniors leaving school, it is seldom that a very young boy can obtain the rank of monitor at Harrow. The powers and responsibilities are very much the same in both schools. Mr Butler's statement on this head may stand as well for Rugby as for Harrow :

"Without attempting to define accurately the duties of a monitor, I may say that he would be bound to keep

reasonable order among the boys of his house, especially during the evening;

to assist the master who calls the to investigate and to punish any serious "bill" in school in maintaining quiet; moral offence, as bullying, drinking, gross language or acts, &c.; or any violation of a well-known school rule, as smoking, being in a public - house, throwing stones in the street, &c."

Of the advantages of the system both head-masters speak in the most unhesitating language. Mr Butler says:—

"As to the general question, whether it is desirable that the elder boys in a great school should be formally intrusted with some authority over the younger, I can only state in the most emphatic terms my own conviction, that no great school could long live in a healthy state without it. The limit of the authority may vary, and the recognised means of maintaining it may vary according to the traditions of each school; but I am satisfied that the only true way to train boys is to train them to govern themselves. It is not merely that boys become aware of a thousand instances of misconduct more or less serious which a master can never detect without an amount of surveillance which would be fatal to all generous training; but independently of this, the knowledge on the part of the school at body, of which they hope some day to large that a certain portion of their own become themselves members, is charged to maintain right and to put down wrong, must have a most powerful moral influence in forming manly characters. They see justice done, and evil discountenanced or punished, by those who share their sympathies, whose standard of right and wrong is not so much above their own as to seem fictitious, and who represent in the main the ability and the physical strength of the school."

Dr Temple speaks briefly but decidedly to the same purport; and he remarks that "the Sixth-Form boys, though they are in every way treated as boys, are considered by their schoolfellows as the natural guardians of the good name of the school." It may be just observed, that while Mr Butler may be supposed to speak somewhat enthusiastically in favour of a system under which he himself was trained, Dr Temple's judgment cannot be

otherwise than impartial, as he was not himself a public-school man. But it may be said, this theory of "governing through the upper boys," as one of the Commissioners fairly terms it, is a very fine theory, if you take the masters' view of an upper boy's responsibilities: but what view do they take of it themselves? how far, in practice, are they found equal to these responsibilities, and how far do they maintain the moral discipline which so much depends upon them, and the good name which they are supposed to have so much at heart? Where will you find the monitor or præpostor whom you can trust not only to avoid for himself but to check in others such common schoolboy irregularities as smoking, for instance, or going into a public-house? Mr Carter, Lower master of Eton, where, as we have before shown, the monitorial powers have fallen into abeyance, is remarkably sceptical on this point. Anything like bad language, or conduct which would be generally held disreputable, would be put down at Eton as much as at Harrow or Rugby; not indeed by any direct authority of the upper boys, but by the general feeling of the school. But when Mr Carter, in his examination, is pressed about certain institutions at Eton known as "the Tap" and "the Christopher," to which the boys are proved to resort, to say the least, much too often (for the mere habit of entering a public-house, putting any possible excess out of the question, is most objectionable), it is suggested to him by Mr Commissioner Vaughan that possibly the monitorial authority (supposing it to be acknowledged at Eton) "might have the effect of checking bad habits of such a description." Mr Carter answers that he "thinks not;" and the following rather remarkable conversation ensues :—

Mr Vaughan.-"Could you point out how it would fail?" Mr C.-"I could not point out how it would succeed." Mr V.-"I will show you what I mean,

66

and then you will be able perhaps to point out where the failure would be. Supposing that boys come out of church together, and the monitors are about the streets as the other boys themselves are, the other boys are under the eye of the monitor, and the monitor is an obstacle to the boy going into 'the Tap' without being seen?" Mr C.— "Then I think this upper boy must never do such a thing himself." Mr V. 'I mean, supposing that he would not do such a thing himself, would it not be an advantage in that respect?" Mr C. "In Utopia I think it would." Mr V.-"Such a thing as a boy in the Sixth Form not going into a public-house, then, in the apprehension of an Eton master, is an Utopian impossibility?" Mr C.-"No, I think that is a very hard way of putting it. I think you cannot insure that a monitor would not do such a thing."-Evidence, Eton, 6037-6041.

It does appear to be insured, however, sufficiently for all practical purposes, both at Harrow and at Rugby, where the Eton master's Utopia is found in actual existence. It might be hardly fair to rest this assertion on the sole authority of the masters of either school; an earnest and conscientious master may have a tendency (a very natural and allowable tendency) to see in the moral state of his school rather that which he desires and strives to produce than that which actually exists; and there must always be in a large school some irregularities of which the most watchful master can know nothing. It is not, therefore, altogether because Dr Temple and Mr Butler express their confidence that, as a general rule, a Rugby præpostor or a Harrow monitor would neither allow a lower boy to smoke or go into a public-house, nor do such a thing himself, that we should feel satisfied that the exceptions to this rule were not more common than those gentlemen honestly believe ; but when we have the same assurance from young men whose high standing both at school and college gives weight to their evidence, while they must have had opportunities of knowing the private habits of their schoolfellows

which no master could have, it puts the fact beyond reasonable doubt. Here is an extract from the examination of Mr Ridley, who left Harrow as Captain in 1861 :

1530. Do you consider that the monitorial system is very beneficial?—Yes,

I think that it checks breaches of discipline much more than the power of the masters does; at all events certain kinds of breaches of discipline. 1531. What kind of breaches of discipline? Such breaches as drinking, immorality, and so on. 1532. That is to say, the sort of cases not so likely to be known to the masters as to the monitors ?Yes. 1533. Do you think the monitors would be as much disposed to check or punish those offences as the masters ?— I have known cases in which perhaps the monitor might have failed in his duty, but I can conscientiously say that the general tone is such that a monitor who saw an offence committed would consider himself bound to punish the boy who committed it. 1534. And public opinion would support him in so doing?-Decidedly. 1535. You think the exercise of the monitorial authority is not unpopular?—I think that if any monitor is found to neglect his duty he is despised by those who are subject to his authority. 1536. If he neglect his duty?—Yes.

"1523. Would they stop bullying?

Yes; of course I meant to include that

in the term keeping order. 1524. If they observed any boys going into public-houses, would they report them? -No, but they would be punished.

Here, again, is the evidence of Mr Lee Warner, who was six years at Rugby, and left in 1860 :

"1515. They [the præpostors] would consider themselves called upon to interfere if they saw anything going on that was very wrong, such as going into a public-house?-They would at once interfere, and either send the boy up, or they have the power of licking him if they prefer it; only that, of course, is subject to appeal.

1538. With regard to keeping order in the house: Suppose there was any card-playing going on in the studies, would the Sixth take notice of it?Certainly.

"1546. (Lord Devon.) I ask, of course, merely the general question; but supposing the case which is conceivable,

*

of any offence which would be visited, as regards a boy in the forms below the Sixth, by any punishment to be administered by the Sixth, to be committed by a Sixth-Form boy himself, what would happen?-There would be a Sixth levy called by some fellow in the Sixth, and they would probably decide to ask the head-master either to send him away, or to put him down a certain number of places.

"1577. (Lord Lyttelton.) Do they [the boys generally] go to public-houses to drink?-Very little indeed. 1578. That you think was rather discounten1579. (Mr Thompson.)

anced?-Yes.

Would a monitor stop that ?—Yes.

"1593. (Lord Clarendon.) The Sixth Form would consider themselves bound to interfere in the case of any gross immorality?-Certainly.

"1598. (Lord Devon.) Take another offence which is not a moral offence,take smoking: would the Sixth Form interfere to support any prohibition of the masters with regard to smoking?The Sixth always punished for smoking. 1599. And never smoked themselves? -I suppose some of them did; of course Sixth fellow, he would call a Sixth levy. if they were discovered smoking by a 1600. (Mr Thompson.) They would be obliged to leave the Sixth in that event? -They probably would."

The reader of this evidence will

be quite prepared to hear that Dr Temple, in the course of his examination, says "I expelled a boy in the Sixth Form once for knowing of something very wrong and not from the evidence which has been stopping it." It seems quite clear, quoted, that although instances will occur of bad example or connivance on the part of the upper boys to whom these powers are intrusted, the system on the whole works excellently for the moral discipline of Harrow and Rugby, and is very far indeed from being the Utopian theory which some Eton authorities

are disposed to regard it. Certainly, when we compare Mr Carter's assertion, that "the general good conduct of the school has increased in almost exact proportion to the decrease of authority placed in the hands of the upper boys,"* with his own evidence as quoted

Appendix, p. 121.

« السابقةمتابعة »