School Punishment Forum Bollywood

1. Internal Home Office memorandum by Dr. A.W. Norris, 30 May 1923

OUTBREAK OF INSUBORDINATION at the KENILWORTHTRAINING SCHOOL.

On May 8th I received a telephone message from the newSuperintendent of the school, Miss Langley, to the effect thatmost of the girls were defying the staff, smashing windows anddoors, refusing to obey orders and declining to do any work.

One girl, Florence Loch, had threatened to attack the staffwith a knife and refused to go to bed at 2 in the morning, andwas doing such material damage to the school and inciting theothers to riot to an extent which made the Superintendent call inthe assistance of the police.

A police inspector and sergeant came out and, in a moment ofsurprise, this girl of 18 caught the Inspector by the throat, gothim on the ground and sat on his head. On the sergeant coming tothe rescue she bit him in the arm, the teeth penetrating theflesh to the bone.

I advised Miss Langley to charge the girl under Section II ofthe Prevention of Crime Act with committing a breach of the rulesof the school and with absconding, and this was done thefollowing day. A very foolish magistrate, however, refused tosend the girl to Borstal and sent her back to the school. Troubleat once recurred and the Superintendent communicated by telephoneto the office in my absence and Miss Wall arranged with Mr.Crapper for the immediate transfer of the girl to StaffordReformatory where I understand she has settled down.

It was assumed here that things were quiet at Kenilworth and Iheard nothing more until the afternoon of the 16th when Mrs.Rotherham, a manager, called here and informed me that the schoolfor some days had been in an almost continuous state of riot.Girls had been out half the night, some of them had even spentthe night on motor lorries, two having visited London. The policehad attempted to secure the absconders. Windows and doors hadbeen broken; the staff isolated, and all the girls, with theexception of about eight, were disobeying orders.

Bloons monkey city money hack. I went straight down to the school arriving at 9.30 p.m. andalthough the girls were going to bed there was still adisgraceful noise and I heard a window smash as I entered theschool. I stayed till 11 p.m. when matters had quietened down andthen left the school after having arranged to be called if therewas any trouble. At 7 a.m. I received a telephone message to theeffect that there was further trouble and I went straight to theschool where I found three girls under 16 had barricadedthemselves in one of the dormitories and refused to open the doorand were then smashing windows and the panel of the door. Theyrefused to open at first but ultimately did so.

I found one girl of 15 (Dora Help) had been the ringleader forsome days amongst the juniors and I advised the Superintendent toinflict corporal punishment which she did forthwith.

After breakfast two of the worst offenders amongst the oldergirls (Hannah Turner and Violet Bateman) who were then underarrest were brought before the Leamington Petty Session atMilverton, and after much pressure on my part the Magistratedecided to hold a special court and ultimately sent these twogirls to Borstal. I regretted to send the younger one aged 16 butit was absolutely essential to make an example to stop the riot.

I then proceeded to the school and addressed all the girlsexpressing pleasure at the conduct of the eight seniors andinformed the others that severe and drastic steps would be takento establish discipline in the school, that any senior girlcontinuing any insubordination would be forthwith charged beforethe Magistrates and sent to Borstal and that any of the youngergirls would be corporally punished and I informed them of theextent to which this could be carried out. I further informed themthat the amount of money available for the school was limited andthat it would be necessary to use the money provided for camp,recreation etc. to repair the damage done by them.

I stayed at the school all night and when I left in theafternoon of the 18th order seemed to be restored I telephoned tothe school on Saturday and Sunday and found all going well butvisited again on Tuesday morning.

In the meantime, the youngest girl in the school (EthelMilton), evidently a ringleader amongst the others and who hadbeen absolutely defiant for some days, had behaved very badly,had refused to work and had used very foul language to the staff.The Superintendent there had given her severe corporal punishment-- perhaps rather too severe though justified under the specialcircumstances.

Before leaving the school on the 22nd I had a conference withsome of the Managers and saw the girls at work and am of theopinion that the trouble has practically ceased. The Managersthroughout had been helpful and grateful for my assistance and Ithink on the whole the Superintendent has acted sensibly and hasbeen supported by her staff. I believe that the whole trouble wasa conspiracy on the part of the girls to get rid of the newSuperintendent, having realised that the absolute want ofdiscipline and lazy habits allowed by the late Superintendentwere about to end. I have discussed the matter fully with MissWall who will keep an eye on the school.

2. Letter from Home Office (Miss Wall) to Miss Langley, Superintendent,Kenilworth Training School, 6 June 1923

[..] I think you are to be congratulated on having restoredthe normal routine of the school in spite of great difficulties.

I was sorry at my last visit to find that you had found itnecessary to inflict corporal punishment on the seat in threemore cases, but I hope you will now be able to discontinue theuse of this form of punishment. I know that in times ofdisturbance, when the discipline of the school is in danger, itmay be necessary to take exceptional measures and that Dr. Norrisgave you to understand that in such circumstances he wouldsupport your action; but now that discipline has been restoredand the life of the school is more normal, I feel that you oughtnot to have recourse to this exceptional method of punishment,and I hope to be able to tell Dr. Norris when he returns nextweek that you have been able to abandon it. [..]

3. Home Office internal memorandum, 14 June 1923

KENILWORTH. (Notes by Miss Wall)

On 29.5.23 I visited the school [..]

I did not go round the school as I feared the girls mightagain become unsettled if they thought an inspection was takingplace. Miss Langley discussed some of her difficulties with me[..]

Miss Langley then spoke of Ethel Milton, 13-⁵/₁₂, who had had12 strokes of the tawse on the seat. She said that a few daysafter this Ethel started bouncing a ball in the passage andknocking it against the office door on purpose. She did not feelthat Ethel had sufficiently recovered from corporal punishment onthe seat for her to administer another whipping, so she said shewas to have one tablespoonful of castor oil. This she refused, soshe was given two, which she took.

I asked Miss Langley to discontinue giving castor oil as apunishment [..] I also asked Miss Langley to consider whether,now that the school was in better order, she would be able toadminister corporal punishment on the hands instead of on theseat. She demurred about this and said the girls had been toldthey would get it on the seat, and she did not think they wouldpay attention to any milder form of corporal punishment. She alsosaid that she understood it could be administered on the seat toa girl of any age, under or over 16, and said she felt entitledto give it to a girl of 18 if the case necessitated it. (Marginalnote: The rules permit of this but I advised Managers &Superintendent against this form of punishment for older girls.A.W.N.) [..]

On 1.6.23 I returned to the Home Office [..] Later the same dayI received a letter from Miss Langley saying that she had givenEthel Milton 3 strokes on each hand for disobedience and the girlhad gone out after it and had kicked a hole in the asbestos wallof the staff hut. Miss Langley asked for her to betransferred [..] (The girl went to Exeter on 6.6.23)

On 4.6.23 I went to the Competitions Meeting in Birmingham andmet Mrs. Kirby and Mrs. Rotherham, Managers of Kenilworth.[..] As regards corporal punishment, both Mrs. Kirby andMrs. Rotherham said that they had understood it was onlysanctioned for girls under 16 to have it on the seat.

I slept that evening at a Kenilworth hotel, where Miss Langleyrang me up and asked me to prepare to speak to some of the oldergirls who were being disloyal. [..] She further stated that thegirls had written letters to their parents describing thepunishments at Kenilworth. I told her that these letters shouldnot be posted, but I would talk it over with her the nextmorning.

On 5.6.23 I visited the school and saw Mrs. Miller and Mrs.Rotherham there. The latter left early, but Mrs. Miller stayed onand told me that she thought corporal punishment on the seat hadbeen sanctioned for girls of any age and she thought it wasbetter for an older girl than for her to be sent to Borstal.

Miss Langley showed me the letters the girls had written totheir parents, in which they expressed themselves as being veryunhappy and as having never before had 'their clothes turnedup' and a whipping given them on the seat. All these letterswere burnt and Miss Langley undertook to tell the girls that theymust write to their parents and say that they were going to begood in future, instead of harping on what had happened. I thensaw Gladys Corbett alone, an older girl, who [..] was verybitter at first about the fact that Miss Langley whipped girls[..] She said that [..] the bigger girls [..] felt that thoughthey had behaved well themselves they were not trusted and wouldget the tawse on the seat for the slightest thing. [..]

Miss Langley then told me she had administered corporalpunishment on the seat in three more cases since my last visit.The cases were Annie Maria -----, Doris Levick and Dora -----.(Marginal note: girls under 16 years of age.) The latter had nowhad it for the second time, as she was the girl who had it firstduring the rioting. The girls had it for disobedience in notgoing promptly to sew upstairs, when told to do so, and forrunning out into the garden after supper and not coming in tobed. All three girls had 6 strokes on the seat and were not heldwhile it was administered.

I asked Miss Langley why she had not tried it first on thehand and she said she did not believe that the girls would takeany notice of this form as they now knew they would get it on theseat and would only think her weak if she did anything else.

[..]

On 6.6.23 I returned to the Home Office and reported to Mr.Harris, who drafted a letter for me to send to Miss Langleyasking her to stop corporal punishment on the seat until thematter had been further considered [..]

On 11.6.23 Miss Langley rang me up [..] I asked [..] about myletter and she said that she and the managers had considered it,but feared they must continue to use corporal punishment on theseat when occasion arose, because it was what the girls had beentold they would get [..]

4. Memo from Dr A.W. Norris to the Under Secretary of State, 12 July1923

I submit a recommendation regarding the application of theManagers of Kenilworth Training School in regard to the ModelRule No. 21(3) [..] with the addition of (a) 'In case ofgrave necessity, corporal punishment on the posterior may beinflicted on a girl under the age of 16 if the previous authorityof the Chief Inspector has been obtained. Such corporalpunishment shall be administered strictly under the conditionsprescribed by the Chief Inspector'.

I wish to make it clear in putting forward this recommendationthat I am very strongly opposed to corporal punishment of thisnature; that I feel that the circumstances under which it shouldbe necessary will be very exceptional indeed and may never occur.It must be remembered, however, that many of the younger girls inthese reformatories are of a hooligan type and have had notraining whatever, have no refined tastes and are notparticularly sensitive and cannot therefore be appealed to in thesame way as a girl who has been better trained. I would furtherpoint out that up to 1913 and even later this form of punishmentwas very prevalent in practically every Reformatory and that theDepartmental Committee of 1913 which investigated this verycarefully by means of a small committee presided over by SirGeorge Newman recommended that the power of corporal punishmentshould be retained by the Superintendents but expressed the hopethat it would not be necessary to use it.

Since then the policy of the Department has been todiscountenance its use but I regret to say that in everyreformatory it has from time to time been used and the factconcealed.

In a recent case (Kenilworth Training School) as the result ofa period of some months' slack discipline under an incompetentsuperintendent, the girls made an organized attempt to get rid ofa new superintendent and were openly defiant, smashed windows anddoors and even threatened the Superintendent with personalviolence.

On two occasions the school doctor found it necessary toremain in the School for over three or four hours for theprotection of the Superintendent. Although the older girls knewthat they might be sent to Borstal they thought it was unlikely,whilst the younger girls openly told the Superintendent that theycould not be punished in any way.

Ultimately, at the request of the Managers I had to visit atshort notice and arrived to find a state of open insurrection.Three of the older girls were in the hands of the police and mostof the younger ones were openly defying all authority. Three hadbarricaded themselves in the dormitory and were smashing thepanels of the door and the window. I advised the Superintendentto beat one undeveloped little hooligan of 15 and informed thegirls as a whole that this punishment was authorized and would beenforced in the case of the younger girls and the older oneswould be dealt with by being sent to Borstal.

The effect both on the girl who was punished and the otherswas almost instantaneous and although further corporal punishmentwas given, possibly unwisely, I believe that this and this stepalone checked what had become a very serious matter.

I am definitely of the opinion, in view of the difficult typeof girl which these Schools have to deal with, the fact that theSuperintendent and Staff are human and not perfect, that it isnecessary for the maintenance of discipline that the rule of theSchool should permit punishment of this kind as a last resort andthat the girls should know it.

I quite appreciate that in this matter we may have somedifficulty in satisfying public opinion; that our policy may bemisunderstood; but I believe that our first duty is to supportthe staff of the school in any reasonable methods to keep orderand that the public must realize that these schools are differentfrom all other institutions; that they have to retain and dealwith their difficult girls and that they cannot expel them andpass them on to other people. A.W.N. 12.7.23.

Since dictating the above I have met a new manager of thisschool. He is one of the six men and six women who manage thisand a boys reformatory. Referring to Home Office administrationof these schools he said he felt there was something wrong whenat Kenilworth in May 'a lot of little unruly girls of 13-15years of age were openly defying all authority and smashing doorsand windows and a body of 12 educated men & women, most ofthem married with children of their own, were powerless to orderthese girls a whipping & had to send for the police who,again, could do nothing'. I informed him that under the existingrules the Managers could have ordered a whipping. A.W.N.13.7.23

(Marginal note: They ought to have read their own rules!)

5. Internal Home Office minute, 24 July 1923

In May last there was a serious revolt on the part of thegirls at this Reformatory School. Dr. Norris went there and foundthe girls entirely out of control, and as the situation lookedugly he took steps to have three of them sent to Borstal andordered an obstreperous girl of 15 to be whipped on the posterior(under the skirt but not on the naked body). This action had agood effect and matters have since quietened down.

The Superintendent (Miss Langley) had only recently takencharge and there is no doubt that the girls had got badly out ofhand under the late Superintendent. Corporal punishment on theposterior was not forbidden by the rules in force at the school,though the managers strangely enough did not appear to know thatit was in the power of the Superintendent to inflict it. I thinkDr. Norris was perfectly right to adopt the course he decided totake, and but for his prompt action the state of affairs mighthave become much worse.

The question now arises whether corporal punishment on theposterior is to be allowed in this school in future. In the newModel Rules it was decided after discussions with representativesof the Managers and Superintendents that the only corporalpunishment in girls' schools should be on the hands -- notexceeding three strokes on each hand with a light cane or tawse.Dr. Norris agreed to this rule at the time though he says healways felt doubtful whether it would be possible to maintain itin dealing with certain classes of girls. The Managers areunanimous in asking permission to keep their existing rule whichleaves the Superintendent a discretion as to the infliction oflight and moderate corporal punishment (whether on the hands oron the posterior).

The two lady inspectors (Dr. Whitlock and Miss Wall) hold thatall corporal punishment of girls on the posterior isobjectionable and ought not to be necessary, and I believe thisis the view which would be commonly held, except possibly by someof those who have had the actual management of unruly girls.

There is no doubt that the task of controlling difficult girlssuch as are found in our Reformatory Schools -- especially whenthey become hysterical -- is a very difficult one and baffleseven the wisest of women. It is possible that women ofexceptional type might be able to tackle the problem withoutresorting to corporal punishment at all, but women with suchqualities are rare and are not often found in our schools. Wemust do the best we can with the staff we are able to command andgive them such support as they need.

The Departmental Committee of 1913 gave special attention tothis question and came to the conclusion that the discretion toinflict corporal punishment must be given to the Superintendent,though they are silent as to whether it should be inflicted onthe hands or on the posterior. I presume that they intended toleave the Superintendent a discretion also as to method. It mustalso be remembered that girls over 16 can be sent to Prison or toBorstal and that it is in the case of the younger girls that thedifficulty arises.

How to crack vcds lite 1 2. It would of course be possible to call a further meeting ofrepresentatives of Managers and Superintendents to discuss thequestion again but I am reluctant to reopen it and I think itwould be best to deal with each school on its merits. Many ofthem -- especially the Industrial Schools -- will probably bewilling to accept the new rules as drafted.

If this policy is accepted I think it would be unwise torefuse the application of the Managers, having regard to recenthappenings, and if it is made clear that no corporal punishmenton the posterior may be inflicted without the sanction of theChief Inspector, frequent or improper recourse to this methodwill be prevented. It seems to me better to alter the rule ratherthan when serious trouble occurs to contemplate the possibilityof the staff or the Inspector authorising punishment contrary tothe rule.

I should prefer, however, to keep the framework of the newrule rather than to adopt the present rule with a modification,and I would suggest the following draft. This has the advantageof not mentioning specifically whipping on the posterior, whichmight give rise to adverse comment by those who are not familiarwith the circumstances, and leaves the Chief Inspector theresponsibility of prescribing the conditions under which it maybe administered.

Rule 21

(3) Corporal punishment shall be used only as the last resortwhen all other methods of maintaining discipline have failed andits administration shall be subject to the following conditions:-

(a) Corporal punishment shall be only of a light and moderatecharacter and shall be inflicted on the hands with a light caneor tawse as prescribed by the Secretary of State -- not exceedingthree strokes on each hand.

(b) If in cases of grave breaches of discipline the Managersthink it necessary to adopt any other form of corporal punishmentthe previous sanction of the Chief Inspector must be obtained.

(The remainder of the rule will read as in printed copy.)S.W.H. 24.7.23

6. 31 July 1923. Letter to Lt Col. Reger, Warwick in reply to hissubmitting (on behalf of the Managers) a draft of rules

[..] The terms of the model rule were settled afterconsiderable discussion with representatives of the Managers andSuperintendents of certified schools including girls' schools,and it was decided to limit the infliction of corporal punishmentin girls' schools to three strokes on each hand with a light caneor tawse. The rule proposed by the Managers (which is based onthe existing rule) would allow corporal punishment on the seat tobe given at the discretion of the Superintendent and without anylimitation as to the age of the girl to be punished or as to themethod of punishment. The model rules were intended to mark anadvance in this and other directions and the Secretary of Stateregrets that he could not agree to so serious a modification.

He realizes however that some of the girls who are sentencedto Reformatory Schools are very difficult to manage, and if theManagers feel, in view of what happened at the school in Maylast, that the model rule as drafted does not provide them withsufficient means of dealing with cases of serious and persistentbreaches of discipline, he is prepared to approve the addition ofa paragraph to Model Rule 21(3) so as to allow corporalpunishment to be administered on the seat in case of gravenecessity so long as the previous approval of the Chief Inspectoris obtained. Mr. Bridgeman hopes, however, that the need for thisform of punishment will not arise in the future [..]