PUBLIC SCHOOL BOYS AND NATIONAL SERVICE. [To THE EDITOR OP
THE " SPECTATOR."] Sts,---It is gratifying to learn from the letter of the Head- Master of Rugby and the Secretary of the Cavendish Association in your issue of April 14th that one of the Spectator's war-time " fads," if perhaps a minor one, is already being put in practice. 1 hope, however, that the authorities will see their way to adopt- ing a more thoroughgoing and universal scheme for utilizing the labour of the youths in our Public Schools and Grammar Schools.
The scheme outlined in the above-mentioned letter appears to me to constitute a vain attempt to do two things at once—viz., to carry on school lessons and supply agricultural labour. It will surely so disorganize the former that it would be infinitely better to close the schools entirely (as regards lessons) for the summer term, and devote the boys to the requirements of National Service.
I drew attention in my last letter to you on this subject to the educational gain, in view of the forthcoming increased and vital importance of agriculture, that these present boys, who comprise our future landowners and leaders in matters relating to the land, should have some direct practical experience on it. And to those parents who may deplore any disturbance to the school life of their younger sons, whose lack of years has saved them from the battlefield, I would further point out that in no case can their boys just now enjoy or pursue a normal school life: the war has far too distracting and manifold effects, especially in so far as the boys of sixteen to eighteen are concerned. In particular, the withdrawal to military service of the " last year " lads of eighteen to nineteen who normally fill the prefect ranks has, in some cases at least, proved a loss to discipline and tone. In all the present circumstances it would, I suggest, have a bracing and beneficial effect on the boys to give them some direct hand in National Service.
I am sure Sir Hugh Munro would have but an insignificant number of followers among parents in the attitude he takes up on this question. It would seem that his wrath is particularly raised at the idea of his son being set to plough the fields of Farmer Giles. Possibly in the case of the few who hold poor Farmer Giles in such contempt some special arrangements could he made for their sons to plough, say, the Duke of Marlborough's lands, or they might remain at school in dignified isolation under the care of some elderly governess. The vast majority of parents, I feel sure, will think only that their sons have been fortunate to secure, in spite of their tender years, an opportunity of being of some genuine and considerable direct help to their country. They will recognize that the need of more labour is urgent in the extreme, and that it overrides every other consideration. "How can I help England?" is the supreme, and indeed only, question. Boys of similar age in the lower classes are all now busily engaged in work of direct or indirect national usefulness or importance. Are our lads of the upper classes, who themselves yield to none in eager patriotism, to be compelled, in this supreme period of their country's crisis, to continue to luxuriate in Cicero and Sophocles?—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
