A Glimpse of Life
at School in Hullavington
during the mid to late 19th Century

By Ken Greenman

(Ken is researching his family history and, with a name like Greenman, it's hardly surprising he has so many connections with Hullavington.  You can find out a little more about Ken by clicking (here).  Ken wrote this article as part of his family history project and, as  you might expect, it is a tad Greenmancentric,  and the only school miscreants of interest to him were those of his descendants.  I say this just in case anyone should think  the Greenman's we worst behaved children in the village. It is interesting to see that in the 19th century people understood  the concept of zero when they celebrated the new century in 1901)

On reading the school logs for this period it is possible to get an insight into some aspects of life in the school. The log only reports a few brief notes per entry, and concerns such things as late attendance, long periods of absence and behaviour. However, it is occasionally possible to discern other preoccupations of the contributors. One of whom always felt there was nothing like a drop of Jeyes' Fluid down the drains to give the school a fresh feel. Although one also reads of a summer time when conditions were extremely hot and uncomfortable, and even putting dust over the toilets and trying to flush water down the urinals was not effective, whilst there would be a great benefit if some clean water could be obtained for drinking purposes.

Some Typical Greenman Entries:

• 21/12/1865 reproved Benjamin Greenman for his hair being very untidy

• 9/1/1866 Mrs Greenman came to enquire about a handkerchief falsely asserted to have been taken away at
  school

• 16/1 /1866 Detained Benjamin Greenman till 1½ for idleness at arithmetic

• 19/1/1866 Sent Benjamin Greenman and Abraham Hughes out till 2:15 to finish sweeping around the school
  which they began in the dinner hour.

• 22/1/1866 Admitted Kate Greenman

• 2/2/1866 Punished Sarah Greenman by stopping her marks for the work for disobedience and obstinacy.

• 9/2/1866 Discovered that Andrew Greenman who professed to have written his collect from memory scarcely
  knew how to repeat one word.
  
  The school was operated by the School Board, although there was a close link with the church. The incumbent regularly gave religious instruction, and with the permission of the board, was allowed to close the school for a day to allow the clothing sale to take place. Some pupils, such as Elizabeth and Ivy Greenman (16th January 1890), did have a letter from their parents claiming exemption from religious instruction.
  
  The school board was responsible for approving the timetable and providing materials. There are several Occasions when the tog contains complaints that the board has failed to provide certain materials in time and this has impacted the running of the school.
  
  The school was run by a schoolmaster, often assisted by his wife. A school house was provided, (there was a day's holiday once to permit the master to move into the house). An older member of the school (usually female) was often employed to help, this was the monitoress. These would sometimes be sent on specialised courses in such things as PE. (1 presume that the pupil teacher one encounters in Wales was the same.) One of the functions of the monitoress was to ring the school bell. One monitoress was forever late performing this function, and this dereliction of duty was faithfully reported in the tog.
  
  There are often reports of pupils being sent home if they were late in attending school, or their attendance being cancelled if they left early, 'before the expiration of two hours secular instruction'. It is not clear what were the penalties for non-attendance, but those pupils who had a full attendance were sometimes rewarded, in 1896 Ernest Greenman was praised for having attended every day the school was open for one year. Pupils who did not attend for a long period were removed from the register, but could be readmitted on their return. Statistics of attendance for the school are given with reasons for poor periods. These include, potato planting, potato picking, harvesting (although the was a five week harvest holiday around August time), ploughing matches, and outbreaks of winter illnesses.
  
  A persistent complaint was that the local squire, Mr Neald, would illegally employ a large number of the boys as beaters during the shooting season. However, no action was ever taken against him! There are comments that imply many parents only sent their boys to school if the weather was unsuitable for the boys to work on the land.
  Some illnesses kept some children away from the school for long periods, these children would be examined on their return to assess which standard they were at, and where they could be placed. In June 1894 William Greenman having been absent for 14 weeks from Standard IV, in defiance of the Board's repeated orders, was assessed as knowing nothing of Standard IV's work. There are several letters from parents asking for special treatment for their children ‘so they do not become too stressed or overtired', when they have returned. When one child. Sam Broom, had Scarlatina not only were his siblings kept away, but his guardian, Phoebe Wicks, who was the school cleaner was also suspended. A child with poor sight, Florry Wicks, was recommended to only attend classes where there was a high oral content (She was later sent to Guy's Hospital for treatment.)
  Misbehaviour, such as vulgar language, insubordination etc. was reported as was the punishment given to the perpetrator who was often reported as having the punishment repeated by the parent Some pupils, such as Fred Greenman, seem to have been regular offenders. On 24th June 1891 he was severely punished for disobedience and insubordination.
  
  The new century was celebrated in January 01 and several days were taken to celebrate the coronation, although it was reported that the coronation did not in fact take place on those days allocated for the holiday .
  
  The school logs record the regular inspections of the school by the school board. These were usually favourable, but when there had been a change of staff there were often scathing comments about the level of achievement of the pupils
  
  Sources: Hullavington School Logs (WRO F8/500 150/1/2&3) (1865-1888,1888-1903 1903-1966)
  Other useful documents: admissions register 1882-1954 (F8/600n150/1/6/1) and 1949-1966(18/600 150/1/6/2) and the Diocesan Inspection and Misc Papers1880-1980(F8/600 150/1/12/1)
   

See Also Dave Hunt's article on The Railway and Hullavington School