Chapter III: “the Sisters of the Boys.”

“No man will give his son a stone if he asks for bread; but
thousands of men have given their daughters diamonds when they
asked for books, and coiled serpents of vanity and dissipation
round their necks when they asked for wholesome food and
beneficent employment.”—F. P. COBBE.

The great event of the year 1871—from the educational point of view—was the meeting of the Society of Arts, at which Mrs. William Grey read her able paper on Secondary Education for Girls, in which was contained the germ of the Women’s National Education Union, and the Girls’ Public Day Schools Company. The chair was taken by the Rev. William Rogers, whose great school for boys in Cowper Street was just completed, and the audience included most of the distinguished leaders in educational movements.

Mrs. Grey took up the question of higher education for women in all its bearings, and, recognizing the needs which had to be met, proposed the formation of “an Educational League,” to embrace all who were actively interested in the question, and having for its object—

“to carry what might be characterized as the Educational Charter
of Women—first, the equal right of women to the education
considered best for human beings; second, the equal right of
women to a share in the existing educational endowments of the
country, and to be considered, not less than boys, in the
creation of any new endowments; third, the registration of
teachers, with such other measures as may raise teaching as a
profession no less honourable and honoured for women than it is
for men.”

The discussion following this paper will always retain historic value, because, as both sides had free scope, it represents the exact estimate of women which prevailed at that period. For the women of the twentieth century—in the serene enjoyment of the results of the work of the nineteenth century—it will have an interest of which wonder will form no small part. The women of 1871, as they listened, had long since ceased to wonder, but they had other feelings which, happily for the readers of 1971, will also have acquired the historic value which attaches to all relics of a far-away past.

It was when presiding at this meeting that Mr. Rogers made the speech, of which every one heard so much during the next two years, a speech that showed how he also had yet to learn from experience the difference between efforts for boys’ and efforts for girls’ schools.

In proposing the vote of thanks for Mrs. Grey’s paper, Mr. Rogers remarked that he could not agree with one statement—that there was no demand on the part of parents for a higher education; on the contrary, there was a widespread dissatisfaction with the present state of things. Being anxious to establish a girls’ school in connection with the Boys’ Middle-class School in London, he sent round a paper to the parents of the boys—numbering about eleven hundred—asking their opinion, and he received answers, and promises that the girls should be sent, from about five hundred. He also disputed the statement that “where pounds were subscribed for the boys there was difficulty in getting shillings for the girls,” as he believed that funds would be forthcoming so soon as the real difficulty—of suitable sites and good teachers—had been met.

In passing, it may here be noted that during the year following this meeting Mr. Rogers succeeded in securing the required site and teachers, and thereupon made his appeal for the girls—the “sisters of the boys.” For the boys, _in one single meeting_, he had obtained promises of £60,000, to which another £10,000 was added. It was the work of months to collect for the girls the sum of £5000, much less than one-tenth of what had been given for the boys. What eventually became of this £5000 will be told in due course.

On the strength of Mr. Rogers’ speech at Mrs. Grey’s meeting, I wrote a letter to the _Daily News_, stating that the Camden School was in full possession of the essential points of teachers and pupils, and now needed only £5000 for a suitable building.

To this appeal there was no response in money; but, on July 6, 1871, I had a note from Miss Buss which showed that interest had been excited—

“DEAR MISS RIDLEY,

“Miss Mary Gurney has been here to-day, and she talks of
writing a paper for the Leeds meeting of the Social Science. I
told her about you, and asked her to write to you, and I also
said that a sketch of this, the only public school for girls,
would probably lead to more useful, because more positive,
results than another paper on the general question of girls’
education.

“Miss Gurney is the daughter of the shorthand writer to the
House of Commons, and is deeply interested in all educational
questions.

“She has made our acquaintance _only_ from your newspaper
paragraph.

“I felt what the little children call naughty on Monday—wearied,
dejected, worried, and over-anxious!! But body prevails, as you
know, over mind, and I felt very sorry for what I said to you.

“I send you a _Daily News_ of to-day. The leader will help on
our appeal. Only the editor, all the way through, speaks of
‘boys’ instead of ‘children,’ which would include boys and
girls.

“We meet to-morrow?

“Always yours,

“FRANCES M. BUSS.”

Early in July a letter of mine in _Public Opinion_ had been followed by a discussion on endowments for girls’ schools, which I finally summed up as follows:—

“Now, however, we may hope. In this implied support of the Lord
Mayor we see far more than help to the Camden School. We see in
it a hope of some large and united public effort, through which
the Camden School will be only the first of a series encircling
London, and everywhere meeting the same want. A great step has
been taken in the City, in Mr. Rogers’ proposed new schools
there. Two other City schools are also proposed. It must be
remembered, however, that the resident City population is
steadily diminishing. To benefit girls truly the schools should
come to them in the suburbs.”

Referring to this hope, Miss Gurney writes—

“I am extremely obliged to you for your kindness in thinking of
my paper, and sending me such a helpful letter about it. I will
get the _Illustrated News_. I will also venture to write to Miss
Cobbe, and I will look at your letter in _Public Opinion_. I
think I have advocated just the same view in my paper. The
difficulty seems to be to constitute the central authority. Any
Middle-class scheme ought to be very superior to our Elementary
Education, which has grave defects. And then, where are our
suitable teachers to be found? From my experience of the world
there are few people like Miss Buss. It will never do to have
the teachers of Elementary schools. But of course all these
difficulties must be met with spirit.

“I have been so much interested in your arguments in favour of
public schools, of many of which I had not thought, but I agree
with all. I should have liked to copy it into my paper, and have
acknowledged your kind help, but had not room; so I have stolen
some of your ideas, which I hope you will pardon, and have woven
them in with a curious German report from Frankfurt. Your
thoughts in favour of a ‘mixture of classes’ and ‘true
independence’ have long been favourite hobbies of mine; but your
idea of an _esprit de corps_ was quite new to me, and I think it
most valuable.”

In the _Echo_ of October 10, 1871, there is a report of the Social Science Meeting at Leeds, saying—

“The time of the Education Department to-day was wasted for a
long time by two factious men. They spoiled the discussion of
the papers by Mrs. Grey and Miss Gurney on the special
requirements for the improvement of the education of girls, by
two childish speeches, the one in disparagement, the other in
eulogy of woman. Mr. Baines (the president) had the greatest
difficulty in shutting them up.”

In the same day’s issue of the _Echo_ there is a somewhat sarcastic letter from Miss Cobbe, commenting on Mr. Rogers’ happy visions of help for girls’ education, and demanding the practical realization so long deferred, and especially advocating the claims of the Camden School to a fraction of the help so liberally bestowed on the brothers of these girls.

The outcome of Mrs. Grey’s papers—read before the Society of Arts and the Social Science Congress at Leeds—was a large and enthusiastic meeting in London, in November, 1871, when the Women’s National Education Union was formally inaugurated, with Mrs. Grey as president for the first year. In the year following H.R.H. the Princess Louise (Marchioness of Lorne) became president, with a goodly array of well-known names as vice-presidents, and an acting committee of Educationalists, professional and amateur. Of this committee, Mr. Joseph Payne, Chairman of the College of Preceptors, became the chairman till his death in 1875.

The _Woman’s Education Journal_, edited by Miss Shirreff and Mr. G. C. T. Bartley, served as the special organ of the Union, lasting for over ten years, and containing a summary of the most important events of a decade rich in interest for all women.

Miss Buss’ Journal-letters refer to the rise of the Women’s Education Union, and also to a suggestion made by a friend that Mrs. Grey, having the public ear, should make an appeal through the _Times_ for the Camden School—

“Nov. 1, 1871.

“DEAR MISS RIDLEY,

“Miss Gurney called on Monday. She is willing to join Mrs.
Grey’s association—the National Union for Improving Women’s
Education, or some such name. May I give in your name as a
member, and _perhaps_ worker? I think we ought now to print an
account of what we have done—what say you? Your pamphlet, ‘Pearl
and Sea-foam,’ is almost out—I have only two copies. From what
Miss Gurney said, I think she would write a pamphlet, but I told
her I would consult you. Please tell me your opinion.

“When you can, I want you to enter into our inner life, and then
some fine day write an account of it—perhaps after my time, who
can say? At all events, a detailed account of Cheltenham College
for Ladies was read, at a Social Science Congress one year, and
perhaps you might do a similar thing for us at a future time.

“There is a talk of getting representatives of different
educational bodies on Mrs. Grey’s National Union Committee. If
so, I hope you will represent us. But that appointment must be
made by the Board.

“This must be the tenth letter, so you will forgive its jerky
style. Our concerts went off well and were well attended.

“Your very loving

“ARNIE.

“You do not know my ‘pet name’—that given me by my dear wee
nephew?”

Miss Buss was elected on the Council of the Education Union as representative of the school-mistresses Association. She was also of great use in sending information, through me, to a sub-committee of which I was for a time a member.

In readiness for the need of which Miss Buss speaks I had been collecting material for an enlargement of “Pearl and Sea-foam,” but as Miss Gurney was willing to make the schools the text of her pamphlet (issued later as No. 3 of the Women’s Education Union Series), her offer was gladly accepted. In this pamphlet Miss Buss’ schools are recognized as the model on which those of the Girls’ Public Day Schools’ Company were afterwards formed.

In December, 1871, Miss Gurney writes—

“I am extremely obliged for all the trouble you have taken with
my paper. It has been a very difficult task, especially after
writing on the same subject before. I hope you will read my
Leeds paper in the _Englishwoman’s Review_ last month.

“I most fully feel the truth of all you say about Miss Buss. I
think her personal influence most wonderful; and, although I
cannot say that she has awakened any _new_ enthusiasm in me,
because an educational enthusiasm has been always a part of
myself, yet I think I am able to see and appreciate her _rare_
worth and talent.

“And yet, in this paper, we must not say anything which will
appear like flattery to those who do not know her.”

Miss Buss’ own words gave her appreciation of the help rendered to her own work by this pamphlet—

“Myra Lodge, March 25, 1872.

“MY DEAR MISS GURNEY,

“The pamphlet shall go out to-day to Mrs. Gilbert. It
seems to me that we cannot circulate your paper too widely. Will
you order another one thousand copies, or, if you think more
will be wanted, let us have two thousand.

“Should not a copy be sent to the members of the Council of the
Society of Arts, and of the Social Science? Copies will be
wanted for the annual meetings of both these societies.

“On all hands I hear how glad people are to have so clear a
statement of our plans.

“The Merchant Taylors have given us fifty guineas and the Dyers
five. _As yet_, no other Companies have responded to our
appeal....

“Dr. Hodgson says he has read your paper with great interest,
and that he trusts this strong appeal may help us. He asks
whence you quoted him?

“By his advice, I have sent some copies away. During the Easter
recess—from the 17th to the 29th of April—I hope to go to
Edinburgh, in order to see the five schools of the Merchant
Companies: 4400 pupils under one management—two schools for
boys, and two for girls (one of the latter with 1200 pupils, and
the other with 500), and one mixed school.

“Do you see the _Examiner_? It is very liberal in the women’s
questions. A pamphlet, containing a reprint of many—well,
_several_—of its articles has just been issued.

“I think you will not mind my saying that _every one_ likes
_your_ pamphlet—so far as my knowledge goes. When are we to pay
for the first edition?

“With all kind regards,

“Believe me, yours most truly,

“FRANCES M. BUSS.

“To Miss Gurney.”

But this comes some months later. In the mean time, Mrs. Grey had to buy the experience that afterwards led to the formation of the new company. The Journal-letter of November 18, 1871, alludes to the inaugural meeting of the Women’s Education Union—

“Nov. 18, 1871.

“Mrs. Grey’s meeting was well attended yesterday, but oddly
enough not one word was said of our schools. This does not
matter much, however.

“Mr. Forster’s suggestion is admirable, and ought to be carried
into execution at once. I think Mrs. Grey would make the appeal;
at all events, I will ask her this evening. For the Camden
School only, however, for women, we want about £5000.

“It will not do to include the other at present. Miss Gurney has
begun her paper, but I am not very clear about it. I was so
worried by visitors on Wednesday, when she came, that she and I
got only half an hour together, as she had to rush off to Mrs.
Grey’s committee.

“If only an agency could be started, with which I was not
ostensibly connected, what a comfort it would be! But just now
the applications for governesses are overwhelming, and they
entail correspondence which is not compatible with the inner
school-work, which _I_ ought to do. But at present I see no
outlet. I never have leisure to prepare any lessons at all, and
it is only this week I have even been able to give an account of
my holiday trip to Sweden—among the pupils. Denmark is waiting
still; it is necessary to digest one’s materials, to draw up
heads, etc., and these require leisure.

“Do you remember the peasant girl, now a first-rate teacher in
Stockholm? Also the Danish peasant girl, who is mistress of the
orphanage at Holstermunde?...”

“Dec. 8, 1871.

“I fear my last note was pitched in a low key. Mrs. Grey’s
letter enclosed will show you there is no occasion for
jubilation, but I am better, having nearly struggled through my
heavy cold.

“We had a very long sitting on Monday, but got through some
business, one part of which was that the Treasurers were
empowered to take another house for the Camden School rather
than refuse pupils! I gave my furniture, valued at £140, in the
Camden School, to the trust. My scholarship is to be invested in
Consols, to my disgust, as that will only produce 3 per cent.

“Mr. Harries and Miss Ewart are to audit the accounts on the
22nd, and I wonder where the accounts would be if Mr. Danson did
not give so much help to us. Do you know, Mr. Danson is
perfectly delightful. He is so business-like, so kind and
patient, that I can’t see what I should do without him on the
one side, and a certain Annie R. on the other. And I mean this.

“We are all quite sick with anxiety about the Prince of Wales,
who is said to be dying. I cannot help being sad about the poor
little Princess—_our_ Princess. My dear love to you. My little
housemaid is waiting for this to post it, and it is past ten, so
good night.”

“Board Room, 202, Camden Road, Dec. 12, 1871.

“_Trust for carrying on the North London Collegiate School for
Girls._

“Look at this!

“DEAR ANNIE,

“Are we not getting business-like! Mr. Forster’s
suggestion of a lecture from Professor J. R. Seeley is a good
one, but I doubt whether we should get as much as £100 from the
lecture; and as Professor Seeley is already largely pledged to
the Hitchin College, I also doubt whether he would lecture for
our movement only. But we can try. I know both Professor and
Mrs. Seeley. They have visited me at Myra, and I have visited
them. Mrs. Seeley is a niece of Mrs. De Morgan.

“Your loving

“ARNIE.”

This last suggestion came to nothing, but Mrs. Grey wrote to the _Times_, setting forth in the strongest way possible the claim of girls in general to the help so freely given to boys, as well as the special claim of the Camden School, not only as recognition of Miss Buss’ services, but from the fact that the school was in full work, and therefore proved conclusively not only the need for such a school, but also that this need could be met. She told how Miss Buss, “with a self-sacrifice as rare as it is noble, had voluntarily handed over the fruits of twenty years’ labours” for the benefit of girls, and then, for these same girls, asks that Miss Buss’ generosity may be supplemented, for the two schools, by a quarter of the amount given to the one school for boys in Cowper Street, since, otherwise, it is to be feared that—

“these schools and their able and devoted principal, Miss Buss,
must break down under the strain put upon them, and a great work
which has already done so much for the better training of girls,
and promises to do more, will have to be abandoned.”

Among my correspondence of this date, I find a note respecting this appeal which might account in some measure for the small response it received—

“The _Times_ won’t do things gracefully. I enclose you Mrs.
Grey’s admirable appeal on behalf of the Camden Schools, which I
cut out of the _outer sheet_ of the issue of yesterday. The
redeeming feature is that the letter is what printers call
‘displayed.’ Unfortunately, however, people who buy the paper at
the bookstalls frequently leave the advertisement part behind!”

Within a month after this first letter Mrs. Grey wrote again to the _Times_, stating in detail the response given to Mr. Rogers’ appeals for boys, and giving as her own experience, concerning the appeal for girls of the same class, the following most noteworthy result:—

“The answer to my appeal for the Camden Town Schools for Girls,
founded by the energy, ability, and generosity of Miss Buss, has
been £47 2_s._ 6_d._, of which £20 would have been given whether
my letter had been written or not; so that the net result of my
appeal to this great Metropolis on behalf of the sisters of the
boys for whom such a magnificent endowment has been received has
been, in fact, just £27 2_s._ 6_d._”

This second letter brought in about £100 more, raising the result of Mrs. Grey’s appeal to £147 2_s._ 6_d._ The total amount collected by all, _after three years of hard work_, came to not more than £700.

And yet Miss Jewsbury’s hopeful words, written about this time, were quite true. Public interest was roused, though not as yet to the point of generous giving. Miss Jewsbury writes—

“Give my love to Miss Buss, and wish her a happy New Year. The
idea of a thorough education for women has now, I think, taken
hold of the public mind, and will be followed by the desire to
obtain it. Miss Buss’s schools will bring forth abundant fruit.
She has borne the burden and _cold_ of the day, but her work
will take root. There was a notice of Mrs. Grey’s letter in the
_Manchester Examiner and Times_, and a leading article too. I
had seen a nice letter of Mrs. S. C. Hall’s yesterday. Yes, Mrs.
Grey _is_ charming, and _good_ to the core.”

The subject was in all the papers. Miss Cobbe did good service in the _Echo_, and Miss Chessar in the _Queen_. Our hopes had naturally risen high when Mrs. Grey took the question up so warmly. The disappointment was proportionately great.

And, bad as this might seem, there was yet more to follow. During the six months since the reading of Mrs. Grey’s paper before the Society of Arts, Mr. Rogers had collected £5000 for a girls’ school in the City. But some City endowments—the “Datchelor Charity” and others—had been found available for girls’ education. Consequently, at the seventh annual meeting of “the Corporation formed for Promoting Middle-class Education in the City of London _and the Suburbs_,” it was proposed that the £5000—_collected for girls expressly_—should be used for the new hall of the Cowper Street School for Boys (already endowed with £60,000), this particular sum being just what would make up the £11,000 needed for a new hall.

Several voices, notably that of Alderman Besley, were raised against this act, and mention was made that this sum was all that was asked by the Camden School, _in the suburbs_, and very close to the City. But the motion was carried.

It was to no purpose that leading journals, as well as “educational enthusiasts,” were “aghast at the announcement that a sum of money contributed for the special purpose of endowing a middle-class school for girls is to be devoted to the purpose of beautifying and enlarging the present middle-class school for boys.” The thing was done.

That the school on which so much had already been expended should, in addition, take the sum, which, comparatively small as it was, would have sufficiently endowed the one existing school for girls of the same class, was a blow calculated to wound to the utmost the women who were devoting themselves heart and soul to the effort to help these girls. Mrs. Grey, in a letter to the _Times_, expresses this natural feeling with a strength that was not in excess of the provocation received, as she says, “It was with painful astonishment, not unmingled with bitter feelings,” that she had read the report of the meeting. Her letter ends with a still stronger appeal to the editor—

“Will you, sir, not raise, in the name of the nation, a protest
which cannot be so easily set aside? Will you not at least make
it clear to the public that this is not a woman’s question, but
a man’s question, a national question, and that to leave
uneducated one-half of the people—and that the half which moulds
the associations, habits, and life of the other half—is a course
so suicidal that of the nation which deliberately follows it we
are tempted to exclaim in bitterness of soul, ‘Quem deus vult
perdere prius dementat’?”

Miss Buss naturally shared in this bitter feeling, to which she thus refers—

“You have received my outburst of indignation about the City
corporation? Fancy coolly alienating the money collected for a
girls’ school, and then handing it to the boys’ school, on which
ONLY £60,000 have been spent! Then the land in Southwark,
purchased as the site of another school, is to be sold, and the
proceeds handed over to the same school. Of course, it would be
infinitely more useful to build a school at Southwark than to
spend the money on the City school.

“A protest might well be sent from us against the recent act in
the City—on public and general grounds. Of course we could not
have any claim to that £5000. But it is no matter. Do not
trouble about it. But I do feel so impatient and weary
sometimes! Still, I try to be faithful. Unto the end, let us
hope!

“Really, I am very despairing, spite of success so far.”

But “impatience” and “despair” were never more than passing moods with this strong, brave spirit, whose faith went deep down below all check or discouragement. Here are two notes which end the year 1871 and lead in 1872—

“Myra Lodge, Christmas Morning.

“MY DEAR ‘ANNIE,’

“A very, very happy Christmas to you and to all you love!
“Will you read Mrs. Grey’s note?

“Will you come here for me, or will it be less fatiguing to you,
for me to meet you at the Swiss Cottage Railway Station? Please
send word by bearer, and the hour. If the latter plan be agreed
on, we had better meet at 10.30 or 10.45.

“After our interview with Mrs. Grey, will you return to lunch
with me, and let us have a quiet afternoon together? A _quiet_
afternoon for me will be delightful. No consciousness of work
neglected, and no responsibility, will make it really enjoyable
to me.

“If you will return here, I will ask Agnes to come also.

“Yours always affectionately,

“ARNIE.”

“Ryde, New Year’s Day, 1872.

“MY DEAR ANNIE,

“A very happy New Year to you and yours! Will you accept
the enclosed motto,[6] in loving remembrance of Arnie and New
Year’s Day? It is a motto one needs to keep in constant
remembrance. It is the hardest of all life’s lessons, that of
resigning one’s self to an All-guiding and Almighty Hand
above....

“I am already much better for leaving behind all
responsibilities. It is very cold. On Friday, or Saturday, I
expect to go to Sea Moor House, Bournemouth, Hants (Mrs.
Hodgson’s), for a few days. My love to you and to Agnes.

“Yours always affectionately,

“ARNIE.”

Footnote 6:

This motto is, “O God, for Christ’s sake, do with me, in me, to me, by
me, for me, as Thou wilt, this year!”

------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE LOWER SCHOOL.
]

------------------------------------------------------------------------