SCHOOLS AND THE FUTURE
SIR,—" A Member of the H.M.C."—he does not give his name and clean• does not understand my argument—says I have made untrue assent° in stating that Public Schools (a) " have regulations against the admission of the sons of local tradesmen," and (2) " only play games against oth Public Schools." I know that regulation (2) existed in practice, if not writing, in. one school in which I taught, and was modelled on th practice of other schools ; but that was thirty years ago, and possibi. the practice is not observed now. (2) That Public Schools confine the school matches (I was not concerned with fixtures .gainst outside teams almost entirely to matches against other Public Schools is, I repeat, well-known fact.
" H.M.C." classes me among " haters of Public Schools "—he is ye much mistaken: I have always admired them for many things, but Mr. Harold Nicolson attributed to them virtues—humility and tolerant which it seems to me their most obvious characteristic—exclusivenes prevents them from possessing. I therefore stressed the points in which they are exclusive, but am quite aware that exclusiveness is, in some cases, necessary, and in some, a merit: I should, however, like to see the Public School less exclusive—less costly. To the former objectiv the gracious acts on the part of Eastbourne College, recorded by Mr. C. J. Blackburn, point the way admirably.—Yours faithfully,
R. WILLIAMS.
Previous page
