SIR,—There is a potential snag in Mr. Lyon's plan for
the public schools so serious that it might, I should fear, prove fatal. Most of the State-supported boys would come from homes where a part at least of the public school code of ethics and manners would be rejected as artificial and its practice resented, even though the ground principles which really underlie it are common property. The point is this. What would happen to the relations between the " trans- planted " boy and his parents, or, still more, between him and brothers or sisters at secondary schools, where codes of behaviour are different?
To avoid tragic friction in home life, would not the boy have to (i) " leaven the lump," or (2) slough part of his acquired code when at home, or (3) discover some other modus vivendi? As regards (t), one questions if the " lump " would in most cases consent to be " leavened "; as regards (2), he could not temporarily drop his code without feeling a traitor, with all the psychological consequences. The tact and mutual tolerance demanded by (3) would have to be exceptional. Unless these fears are exaggerated, or the cure easier than seems to be likely, Mr. Lyon's plan might create social problems outweighing its advantages, besides containing the seeds of ultimate failure. At all events, its implications in the sphere of family relations deserve, I suggest, most careful consideration.—Yours faithfully,
Ludwell House, Charm', Kent. G. E. HUBBARD.