The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-04-01
QUESTIONABLE scHooLs.~
In England the Idea is Growing That
 Their Training is not Valuable.

Their Training is not Valuable. London Mail.
 The system of instruction pursued in the great public schools has been con- demned as impractical, whether success in the army or in commerce be consid- cred. The evidence given before the Ak ers-Douglas army education committee and the reports of leading captains of industry" leave no doubt that their meth ods must be altered forthwith if their pupils are to hold their own against the competition of other European nationali- ties or of the United States. or even of Japan.
 Their campions contend that, admitting the instruction to be bad, they are not the less valuable institutions for the forma- ton of character" and that the more fashiona ble schools, such as Eton, Har- row and Winchester, excel in this respect. But If their character and spirit aye so excellent, 1t Is strange that so few of the makers of our Empire were at any fash ionable public school. The majority of these men did very well without their aid. Not one of the eminent naval officers of the past entered their portals. These all joined the service when young direct from private teachers. Not one of the grea. captains of industry mentioned in the Dictionary of National Biography as founders of our modern wealth, went to a rich public school.
 With regard to our Indian and colonial empire. poor Scotch and Irish academies contributed three to one of the men who have famous records as compared with fashionable public schools. Our most eminent lawyers, fnanciers, journalists, engineers and artists were never at these schools or at similar institutions.
 Take five eminent men now living:
 Lord Roberts was eight months at Eton, when he was 14 years old. and then went to Sandhurst, where he got a prize in German. He next went for eighteen months to a "crammers" at Wimbledon. (Brackenbury's) then to Addiscombe. thence to India at the age of 19.
 Lord Wolseley was never at the Eng fish public school. He went to private schools in Dublin. where he played at surveying and carpentry and studied hard at military history. He entered the army at the age of 19.
 Lord Miner was born and received his first schooling in the domain of the Kaiser" so 1t can hardly be denied that he was to a certain extent made in Ger many" He came to England in his early boyhood, however, and entered as stu dent at Kings College, London. which afterward proudly claimed him as a fel- low. In February, 1s73 he matriculated at Balliol College. Oxford. Although he cannot be credited with victories in the cricket field or on the river, he figured conspicuously in the debates of the OK ford Union.
 Lord Kitchener when young left Ireland to go abroad. the place selected being Grand Clos, Villeneuve, where he re- mained for a period under the Rev. J. Bennett. The boy. after some further travel, came to London. The 'crammer' chosen for him was the Rev. George Frost of No 2S Kensington Square. From his hands he passed to the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich.
 MT. Chamberlain was never game player. He was educated at University College School.
 Except a certain class of politicians, who were promoted because they were rich and connected with territorial or mo- ble families, none of our greatest men owed their greatness to fashionable schools.
 Wellington was at Eton for short pe- riod, but was educated from l5 to IS in Belgium and France and then entered the army, thoroughly well taught for his years. Give, Wolfe and Sir Eyre Coote, the most eminent predecessors in the eighteenth century, managed to do with out either the character or the spirit of the public schools. Not one of the cele- hrated Peninsula officers was ever at a public school.
 No great warrior ever spent six months all told of his youthful life at so-called games or at loafing. The notion that it was desirable to spend their working time at games when books were at hand never entered into the heads of eminent in structors or clever pupils from the days of Cyrus till 1860.
 This idea prevails in modern Ensla1d among certain circles, and there only. It | began to be popular about thirty years ago, along with the cult of gam2s, the predominance of certain rich sets anu the fashionable craze to send children to schools for social rather than educational reasons. So certain schools or colleges, without the slightest pretence to educa- tional efficiency. are crowded with pupils. and the results are most disastrous to the careers of their students and most inju- rious to the nation, which suffers from