Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T13:32:06.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Public School Elites in Early-Victorian England: The Boys at Harrow and Merchant Taylors' Schools from 1825 to 1850

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2014

Edward A. Allen
Edward A. Allen*
Affiliation:
Tulane University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Historians agree that the public schools played a central role in the creation of Victorian society and that in particular they were seminal in the construction of that “mid-Victorian compromise” which made the mid-century an era of “balance,” “equipoise,” and accommodation. There is further agreement that the cadre of boys produced by the newly reformed public schools became that mid-Victorian governing and social elite which was at once larger, more broadly based, more professional and, to many, more talented than the one which preceded it. The importance of the public schools in this regard was, as Asa Briggs affirms, twofold. They assimilated the “representatives of old families with the sons of the new middle classes,” thereby creating the “social amalgam” which, in Briggs' view, “cemented old and new ruling groups which had previously remained apart.” Secondly, the singular expression of that amalgamation was an elite type, the “Christian Gentleman”—the result of an “education in character” administered under the influence of Dr. Arnold. Arnold was able to do this because he “reconciled the serious classes” (that is, the commercial middle class) “to the public schools,” sharing as he did “their faith in progress, goodness, and their own vocation.” At first, the schools “attracted primarily the sons of the nobility, gentry and professional classes.” Later, it was the “sons of the leaders of industry” who were, like earlier generations of boys, amalgamated with “the sons of men of different traditions” in a broadened “conception of a gentleman.”

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , Spring 1982 , pp. 87 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

This paper owes a great deal to the inspiration and criticism of the late Peter Cominos. Professors Francis James and Colin MacLachlan, also of Tulane University, gave useful advice and criticisms, as did my good friend Russell M. Young.

1 The number of works which have contributed to this consensus is quite large. See, for example: Clark, G. Kitson, The Making of Victorian England (Cambridge, Mass., 1962), pp. 263–74Google Scholar; Young, G.M., Victorian England: Portrait of an Age (New York, 1964), pp. 87-89, 92, 94–99Google Scholar; Perkin, Harold, The Origins of Modern English Society: 1780-1880 (London, 1969), pp. 297–98Google Scholar; Briggs, Asa, The Making of Modern England: 1784-1867, The Age of Improvement (New York, 1959), pp. 411, 443Google Scholar; Heussler, Robert, Yesterday's Rulers: The Making of the British Colonial Service (Ithaca, N.Y., 1963), pp. 82–106Google Scholar, and Bamford, T.W., Rise of the Public Schools: A Study of Boys' Public Boarding Schools in England and Wales from 1837 to the Present Day (London, 1967), pp. 209–66Google Scholar.

2 Briggs, Asa, “Thomas Hughes and the Public Schools,” in Victorian People: A Reassessment of Persons and Themes, 1851-67 (Chicago, 1955), pp. 143–44Google Scholar.

3 Young, G.N., Victorian England, p. 97Google Scholar and Clark, G. Kitson, The Making of Victorian England, p. 273Google Scholar.

4 For a recent and excellent study of the resilient aristocracy see Gash, Norman, Aristocracy and People: Britain, 1815-1865 (Cambridge, Mass., 1979)Google Scholar. Gash emphasizes “the success of the aristocracy and the gentry in retaining both the substance of their traditional political power and the social deference of other influencial classes.” (p.8)

5 de S. Honey, J.R. , Tom Brown's Universe: The Development of the Victorian Public School (London, 1977), pp. 47–103Google Scholar and Bamford, , Rise of the Public Schools, p. 49Google Scholar (where he cites Henry Hayman's tract of 1858, Can We Adapt the Public Schools to the Middle Class?).

6 Unfortunately, there are no truly excellent, full scale histories of Harrow and Merchant Taylors' schools. Useful, brief accounts giving most of the pertinent information on founding, etc., are to be found in: Our Public Schools (London, 1881), pp. 68–73Google Scholar; The Public Schools Calendar, 1866, edited by a graduate of the University of Oxford (London, 1866), pp. 118–20Google Scholar and 174-75; and Ogilvie, Vivian, The English Public School (New York, 1957), pp. 46–68 on the founding of the Elizabethan grammer schoolsGoogle Scholar.

7 Harrow School, The Harrow Calendar: The School Lists from January 1845 to September 1852, with a History of Harrow School (Harrow-on-the-Hill, 1853), pp. i–vGoogle Scholar, and Adams, R.H.et al., Merchant Taylors' School: Its Origins, History and Present Surroundings (Oxford, 1929), p. 65Google Scholar.

8 Report of Her Majesty's Commissioners Appointed to Inquire into the Revenues and Management of Certain Colleges and Schools and the Studies Pursued and Instruction given therein, in Parliamentary Papers, 1864, 262–64Google Scholar, and Bishop, T.J.H. and Wilkinson, Rupert, Winchester and the Public School Elite: A Statistical Analysis (London, 1967), pp. 124–25Google Scholar, rank Merchant Taylors' 17th in 1864 (on the common standard of the percentage of graduates entering Oxford or Cambridge).

9 Bishop, and Wilkinson, , Winchester, pp. 124-25, 236-37 and 244Google Scholar and “The Public Schools Report—II. Harrow and Rugby,” Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, 96 (July-December 1864), 219Google Scholar.

10 Stauton, Howard, The Great Schools of England: An Account of the Foundation, Endowments, and Discipline of the Chief Seminaries of Learning in England (London, 1865), pp. 242-50, 339–44Google Scholar.

11 Bamford, T.W., “Public Schools and Social Class, 1801-1850,” British Journal of Sociology 12 (1961), 225–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Merchant Taylors' is often excluded from consideration as a “public school” because it was essentially a day school. See, for example, Mack, Edward C., Public Schools and British Opinion, 1780-1860: The Relationship between Contemporary Ideas and the Evolution of an English Institution (New York, 1939), p. 38Google Scholar. And, adds Mack, Merchant Taylors' “was not a public school at all within the social and class meaning of the term” since it ministered to the middle and lower middle classes. A similar distinction is made by Wakeford, John in The Cloistered Elite: A Sociological Analysis of the English Public Boarding School (London, 1969), p. 51Google Scholar.

12 These are: Name, Birth Year, Year Entered, Father's General Occupational Category, Father's Specific Occupation, Son's General Occupational Category, Son's Specific Occupation, University, College, Academic Status at University, A.B., Year A.B. Received, A.M., First, Second and Third Professional Degrees, Year Highest Professional Degree Received, Emigration, Professional Distinction, Rank and Field of Honors Degree (3), Year Left Public School, Academic Honors at Public School, Monitor (?), Distinguished in School Athletics, Distinctions, Father Attended Same Public School, and Year Died.

13 Danglish, M.G. and Stephenson, P.K., eds., The Harrow School Register, 1800-1911 (London, 1911), pp. 112–224Google Scholar; Stogdon, J.H., ed., The Harrow School Register: 1845-1925 (London, 1925), i (1845–1885), pp. 1–46Google Scholar; Welch, R. C., ed., The Harrow School Register, 1801-1893 (London, 1894), pp. 70–172Google Scholar; Harrow School, The Harrow Calendar, pp. xxxv–xl, 1–121Google Scholar; Robinson, Charles J., M. A., ed., A Register of the Scholars admitted into Merchant Taylors' School, From A.D. 1562 to 1874 (Lewes, 1833), 2, pp. 223–310Google Scholar; Mrs.Hart, E. P., ed., Merchant Taylors' Register, 1561-1934 (London, 1936)Google Scholar.

14 A Catalogue of All Graduates in Divinity, Law, Medicine, Arts and Music who have regularly proceeded or been created in The University of Oxford, between October 10, 1659 and December 31, 1850 (Oxford, 1851)Google Scholar; Foster, Joseph, ed., Alumni Oxonienses: The Members of the University of Oxford, 1715-1886: Their Parentages, Birthplace and Year of Birth, with a Record of their Degrees (Oxford, 1891)Google Scholar; Romily, Joseph, ed., Graduati cantabrigienes: sive catelogus exhibens nomina eorum quos ab anno academico admissionum MDCCLX usque ad decium diem octobris MDCCCLVI, gradu quocunque ornavit Academia Cantabrigiensis, e libris subscriptionum desumptus (Cantabrigiae, 1856)Google Scholar; Foster, Joseph, Men-at-the-bar: A Biographical Handlist of the members of the Various Inns of Court, (2d ed; London, 1885)Google Scholar; The Peerage, Baronetage and Knightage of the British Empire for 1880 (Westmister, 1880)Google Scholar; Crockford's Clerical Directory (London, 1862)Google Scholar and Crockford's Scholastic Directory for 1861 (London, 1861)Google Scholar. The publisher of the last two works, John Crockford, was at Harrow from 1828 to 1830.

15 Despite the widespread migrations of boys from one school to another, there is only one instance of overlapping between Merchant Taylors' and Harrow encountered in this study. R. E. Willmott entered Harrow from Merchant Taylors' in 1825 and became editor of The Harrovian in 1828. Danglish, , Harrow School Register, p. 113Google Scholar.

16 Bamford, T. W., Rise of the Public Schools: A Study of Boys' Public Boarding Schools in England and Wales from 1837 to the Present Day (London, 1967), pp. 1–16Google Scholar.

17 As were other schools as well. See, Bamford, T. W., “The Prosperity of Public Schools, 1801-1850,” Durham Research Review 3 (September 1961), 85–96Google Scholar.

18 On the well known connection between the Harrow headmastership and its “very insufficient endowments” see, “Thronton's Harrow,” The Saturday Review (June 13, 1885) p. 796Google Scholar; “Sigma”, “Harrow in the Early Sixties,” Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine 173 (June 1903), 735Google Scholar: and “Harrow School,” Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine 94 (July-December 1863), 462 and 470Google Scholar.

19 Newsome, David, Godliness and Good Learning, pp. 26-27, 62–63 and throughoutGoogle Scholar; Midwinter, Eric, Nineteenth Century Education (London, 1970), pp. 7, 17Google Scholar and Report of the Commission of Inquiry, in Parliamentary Papers, 1864, 1, 13Google Scholar.

20 In fact, White had also founded St. John's and shortly thereafter appropriated forty-three “Fellowships” to Merchant Taylors'. Stauton, , The Great Schools of England, p. 213Google Scholar.

21 The Clarendon Commission noted (Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 1, p. 264Google Scholar) the extent of the connection between Merchant Taylors' and St. John's, but made no mention of that between Trinity and Harrow. See also, Public School Calendar, 1866, p. 185Google Scholar.

22 “Leisured gentleman” is here used to mean: one living on his lands as a gentleman, or upon the proceeds from his lands, or one who is able to live from his investments. In practice, it is often difficult to determine leisured status. As a rule I have assumed it when the registers list occupation directly as “gentleman,” when title is listed as occupation, or when a description such as “living on his estates in Wiltshire” is listed as occupation.

23 Reader, W. J., Professional Men: The Rise of the Professional Classes in Nineteenth Century England (London, 1966), p. 115Google Scholar.

24 Perhaps it is just as well that Harrovians were less inclined toward a parliamentary career than were their fathers. While none who became M.P.s equalled the success of Peel and Palmerston, one was absolutely wrecked by this experience and became a moral example to future Harrovians. J.H. Reed (entering 1843) was M.P. for Abingdon when he contested the seat for Finsbury as an “advanced Liberal.” His expenses on this occasion “led to his imprisonment for debt” and he “died shortly after his release.” Danglish, , Harrow School Register, p. 224Google Scholar.

25 Bishop, and Wilkinson, , Winchester and the Public School Elite, p. 201Google Scholar and Reader, , Professional Men, pp. 150-51, 158, 192Google Scholar.

26 Stogdon, , Harrow School Register, 165Google Scholar. Harrow, (as Newsome, Godliness and Good Learning, pp. 80-81, 205, notes), was one of the first public schools to develop a real cult of athleticism early in the century, centering around its cricket matches. The Clarendon Commission, Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 1, 223Google Scholar, noted that, in 1864, Harrow boys spent between 15 and 20 hours per week on the cricket field, while another observer of that year noted that its football was quite the equal of Eton and Rugby, J. D. C., “Football at Rugby, Eton, and Harrow,” London Society 5 (1864), 254–55Google Scholar.

27 Especially after 1850. Reader, , Professional Men, pp. 92–94Google Scholar; Kelsall, R. K., Higher Civil Servants in Britain (London, 1955), pp. 30–34Google Scholar; and Edwin Chadwick, C. G., “On the Progress of Competitive Examination for Admission into the Public Service,” The Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 22 (March 1859), 51–53Google Scholar.

28 For a description of the system see, “Light and Dark Blue,” Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine 43 (October 1866), 446–60Google Scholar; “Cambridge Classical Tripos, 1866,” Contemporary Review 2 (May-August 1866), 574Google Scholar; “The Last of the Senior Wranglers,” The Saturday Review 53 (February 1, 1883), 135–36Google Scholar; and “Oxford Honours,” Cornhill Magazine 43 (January 1881), 183–90Google Scholar. The last is, however, a totally distortative narrative which attempted to create the impression of close correlation between “honours” and noble birth.

29 That is, 59.9 percent of Taylorians earning A.B.s as opposed to 5.6 percent of Harrovians who earned A.B.s.

30 The fees charged varied, depending on whether an 8th or 16th Wrangler was hired as “crammer.” Taylorian Wranglers tended to rank higher than their Harrovian counterparts.

On fees see, Reader, , Professional Men, p. 109Google Scholar and on the widespread criticism of “cramming,” Courtney, W. L., “Oxford Tutors and Their Professional Critic,” The Fortnightly Review 53 (1890), 294–96Google Scholar.

31 Jenkins, Hester and Jones, D. Cardog, “Social Class of Cambridge University Alumni of the 18th and 19th Centuries,” British Journal of Sociology 1 (1950), 108CrossRefGoogle Scholar, noted that “considerably higher than average proportions of the men placed in Class a at the University gained … distinctions later in life.” And again,“ … men who do really well at the university are likely to do well in afterlife …” An equally interesting perspective results from asking how many of those who did well in afterlife did not do particularly well at the university. As we shall see, this perspective reveals even more the extent to which factors other than academic excellence contributed to distinction in later years—most important, social class.

32 Some individuals earned multiple distinction in later years. These were treated in two ways: as a specific category of distinction and as individual distinctions. Thus, while there were 491 distinguished ex-Harrovians in the study, there were 688 distinctions accrued.

33 Robinson, , Register of Merchant Taylors' School, 2, 296Google Scholar.

34 Guy, W. A., “On the Duration of Life among the English Gentry,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 8 (1845), 69–78Google Scholar and “On the Duration of Life among Families of the Peerage,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 9 (1846), 37–49Google Scholar; and Bailey, A. H. and Day, A., “On the Rate of Mortality among the Families of the Peerage,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 26 (1863), 49–71Google Scholar, tend to support my own conclusions concerning Harrow boys. The last of these credited the higher mortality rate among the upper classes to the fact that “they enter the army and navy in large numbers, travel extensively, and are certainly more exposed to what Assurance Offices consider extra risk, than the middle classes” (p. 60). It must be noted, however, that none of the above investigated the differences in mortality rates between upper and middle classes.