(TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR.") SIR,—I do not know
where your correspondent Mr. Arthur Strachey gets his facts, but to those who know the present state of our public schools, his assertion with reference to the moni- torial system as practised at Rugby, Winchester, and Harrow, that "the grossest tyranny is still exercised in this country," is not less astounding than (to use the illustrations which he himself suggests) it would be to say that the slave-trade still flourishes as in the days of Wilberforce, or that our prisoners still rot in jail, as in the days of Howard.
I have known Rugby pretty intimately for over thirty years, and I can confidently assert (1) that bullying, never prevalent, is now entirely extinct ; (2) that this result can be traced to the working of the monitorial system, as organised by Arnold and carried out by his successors ; (3) that in the rare instances where bullying has for a time appeared, it has always been in " houses '1 where the monitorial system happened to be temporarily weak, as, for example, where several elder boys chanced to leave together, and a young and inexperienced boy succeeded to the post of head of the house. In such cases, the evil has sometimes been cured by transplanting an old Sixth-form boy from another house ; (4) that if the monitorial system could be submitted to a plebiscite, the only boys who would vote for its abolition would be the big, idle fellows, unable to distinguish themselves either in school or in games, who in private schools are the ruth- less tyrants of small boys, but whom the monitorial system holds in check.
I have spoken of the school I know best, but I know enough both of Harrow, Winchester, and Marlborough to feel sure that if the monitorial system were seriously threatened, "the future of " these great schools would 4 4 be contemplated with the gravest concern by their admirers."—I am, Sir, &c.,
R. E. BARTLETT.
Previous page
