He was only 28 years old and had the enthusiasm and impulsiveness, and also, I fancy, some of the illusions of youth. It was just this youthful vigour however that was needed. To Dr. Holmes sweeping changes could hardly have been congenial, but in Mr. Barry the Committee found the energy and ability to tackle the problems which were urgently calling for solution. These problems were at least four.

First there was the fact that the boys attending the School were far too few and only a sixth were older than 15. This the Committee attributed to two causes. The instruction did not satisfy those whose sons were destined for commercial pursuits, and the introduction of the commercial element had impaired the teaching given to boys intended for the universities or professions. The curriculum therefore needed broadening and the standard raising.

This involved a second problem, for the staff would have to be increased and improved.

Thirdly, the buildings were inconvenient, and with the growth of the town their situation had become unsuitable.

Fourthly, for developing the work of the School the income was inadequate. The difficulties then were serious, but the Committee and the Headmaster, working together in admirable harmony, triumphed over all.

TWO MONTHS AFTER his election Mr. Barry got the Committee to assent to three things—

(a) That he need not live in the Master's house. This was utilized for classrooms, and he received £60 per annum in lieu of it, and lived in a house in Spencer Place.

(b) That no boy under 10 should be admitted, nor unless acquainted with the first 4 rules of arithmetic and able to write from dictation, nor (after Christmas) without some knowledge of Scripture history, English history and grammar, and geography.

(c) That boys wishing to learn other subjects than the learned languages should pay a fee.

Apparently however some of the Committee had doubts about the fee, for in August the third resolution was rescinded. In November Mr. Barry suggested considerable alterations in the Fundamental Articles, and in February 1855 the leave of the Charity Commissioners—a body recently constituted to suggest schemes for charitable foundations but (till 1860) without any power to ratify them—was asked to apply to the Court of Chancery to get the Articles modified. The leave was granted and the application made, and on 5 June 1855 Vice-Chancellor Sir W. Page Wood made an order establishing new Articles on the lines desired.

The chief changes made were these.

1. The freedom of the School was extended to boys residing in the borough “with parties who stand towards them strictly in loco parentis.” Free boys were entitled to free instruction in the “Teaching of the Foundation,” i.e. in “the Greek and Latin Languages, and in such Composition and Ancient History and Geography as are necessary for their proper understanding.”

2. The School was to be divided into

(a) An Upper Department, teaching English, Latin, Greek, French, German, arithmetic, mathematics, history, geography.

(b) A Lower Department, teaching English grammar and composition, Latin grammar exercises and translation, French, German, the rudiments of modern geography and modern history, writing, arithmetic (especially the commercial rules), elementary geometry and mechanics.

3. For all subjects beyond the “Teaching of the Foundation” a fee was to be charged, but for free boys this was not to exceed £10 10s. in the Upper or £5 5s. in the Lower Department, and boys already in the School were not to be charged unless they wished to learn French or German. The fees for foreigners were “to be approved of by the Master,” and their number was left to the Committee to fix.

4. New boys were to be admitted on the Monday in the week in which work began after the vacations.

• In 1865 the Headmaster was allowed to admit boys in the middle of a term.

• When the year was divided into 3 terms the opinion of counsel (1871) was that the “half-year” began with the first day of term and that the Lent and summer terms should be regarded as one.

5. The hours were to be fixed by the Headmaster and the Committee. The vacations were to be not less than 4 weeks at Christmas, 1 at Easter, and 5 at Midsummer. Occasional holidays might be given by the Headmaster with the approbation of the Committee.

• As to absence the Calendar of 1875 states—“No boy is allowed to be absent except on account of illness or necessary business, unless leave has been previously obtained from the Headmaster.” In 1885 the phrase “or necessary business” was dropped.

6. The stipend of the Headmaster was to be not less than £500, with either a house or £60 in lieu thereof, but he was now also to receive a quarter of the fees. He was “responsible for the conduct of the entire school; the higher department coming under his direct superintendence, and the lower department placed under an assistant master responsible to him.”

7. The present Usher was to receive £300 per annum with £30 for a house. Future Ushers and such other masters as were needed were to be appointed by the Headmaster and to be removable by either the Headmaster or the Committee at their discretion. Their number was to be fixed by the Committee, and their salaries by the Committee with the approbation of the Headmaster.

• On 12 December 1864 it was resolved that the appointments should be confirmed by the Committee and be “determinable by either party at 3 months' notice.”

8. All the masters were to be “bona fide resident in the Borough of Leeds during the schooldays at convenient distances from the School.”

9. Free admissions, not exceeding 4 in each year, to the full course in the Upper Department might be granted after examination by the Headmaster; in cases of equality boys in the Lower Department were to have a preference. These might be cancelled for idleness or misconduct.

• This is the first mention of what we should call scholarships in the School. It is not stated that the examination should be competitive, nor does it appear that many were granted. In 1856 it was resolved that they should be confined to “Foundation boys.” In I860 they were discontinued for a time. In 1864 there were four “free boys,” in 1866 four, in 1867 three, in 1868 four, in 1869 five. In 1865, 1866, 1868 and 1871 they were specifically awarded to sons of masters.

10. The exhibitions were to be awarded according to the report of the examiner at Midsummer after an examination “in classical and mathematical learning,” and the candidate placed first was to be elected unless the Committee regarded another as preferable through “moral conduct, condition, or circumstances.” Candidates must have “attended the School 4 years successively.” The exhibitions were to be held by “scholars on their quitting the School and going to reside at” Oxford, Cambridge, or Durham. The money was not to be paid without a certificate of good conduct and residence from the college authorities, and was to cease if the exhibitioner was non-resident for a year, except through sickness.

• In 1869 the exhibition was divided with the consent of the parents of the candidates, on condition that if one died the other should have the whole. In 1884 it was decided that the 4 years need not be immediately previous to the examination. In 1890 an exhibition was prolonged on special grounds, and (apparently for the first time) an extra exhibition (of £30) was granted. In 1892 the Committee declared that the boy elected must be leaving the School for the university that year (though in 1895 it was decided that this should not apply to the Poors Estate exhibition); it was also decided that boys, if qualified in classics and mathematics, might be elected for proficiency in modern history or science. In 1894 there is the first recorded instance of the elected exhibitioner resigning the money to the next candidate.

OF THE NEW rules use was at once made. In the autumn of 1855 the School was divided into two Departments. The fees charged to existing boys were £3.3s. in the Upper Department, £2.2s. in the Lower: new boys had to pay double. Foreigners under 14 paid £8.8s., over 14 £10.10s. for classical instruction: for other subjects they had to pay in addition the same fees as the new boys. In 1863 it was ordered that 3 months' notice must be given before a boy was removed, and in 1864 that fees must be paid in advance. For a time there were a few boys who paid nothing, receiving merely the “Teaching of the Foundation,” but they dwindled rapidly: in 1856 there were 25 of them, in 1857 only 9.

THE CALENDAR of 1856—the first issue of this publication that I have seen—shows that the enlarged curriculum was promptly introduced. French was taught throughout the School except in the lowest Form of the Upper Department: in 1858 it was dropped also in the lowest Form of the Lower Department. German was taught in the two top Forms of the Upper Department and in the top Form of the Lower. History, both ancient and modern, and geography were taught in both Departments. There was a prize—won by Edmund Wilson—for an essay on “the theory of the steam-engine.” There were also prizes for drawing, which appears in 1858 as an “extra” with a charge of 10/- per half year—raised in 1861 to 15/-. Science is not mentioned till 1860, when chemistry, botany and geology were optional subjects in the Lower Department. In 1861 the Committee allowed the Headmaster to form scientific classes in the Upper Department; and in 1862 the Calendar mentions that a “Scientific Form” had been started for the study of mechanism, chemistry, geology, botany, and physiology, but only such boys might join it as could pass an examination in English, Latin, writing, arithmetic and elementary mathematics. English literature is mentioned first in 1859.

The changes seem to have been popular; at any rate there was a great rise in numbers. At Midsummer 1855 the total was 98. The following table gives the figures for the next few years, as stated in the Headmaster's February reports.

The Upper Department, it may be noted, was divided in 1856 into 6 Forms, the Lower into 3. The boys were re-classified for mathematics and, till 1861, for French. The monitorial system seems now to have been dropped. The reorganization was not carried out without great changes in the staff. With the masters whom he found at the School Mr. Barry was clearly not satisfied. Except Mr. Wilson none of them were graduates, nor were they the brilliant young scholars of earlier days. Their attainments were moderate, their social position dubious, their methods open to criticism. Moreover, as elderly men, they could not have found it easy to fall in with the views of a young and innovating Headmaster. In January 1855 Mr. Allman had to retire, receiving £60 in lieu of notice. In June Mr. Laurence's services were dispensed with, but 6 months' salary was voted to him. In July 1856 Mr. Wilson resigned his post, receiving £200, a pension of £150, and the thanks of the Committee, both for his past services and for thus facilitating the change contemplated in the Articles, for he was the last Usher whose office was independent of the Headmaster. Mr. Ripley in December 1858 was allowed 6 months' sick-leave (with two-thirds of his salary), but resigned in the following June, with a pension of £75.

THE STAFF THEN was entirely remodelled. In former days there was a great gap, socially and intellectually, between the Master and the Usher on the one hand and the “assistants” on the other, and this was marked by the very different salaries they received. With Mr. Barry however the gap vanished, for the men whom he appointed were drawn from the same class as himself.

In 1863 of 10 masters on the list 7 were graduates and at least 4 were scholars or exhibitioners of their colleges, but though the School got men of a far better stamp it cannot be said that it paid them proportionately. In 1847 it was thought that the Usher ought to receive half the stipend of the Headmaster, and the Third Master—a man of quite inferior calibre—a quarter, and both of them retired with pensions of half their salaries. Now the Headmaster's income was growing greatly, but the men who succeeded Mr. Wilson as Ushers—the title continued till 1875—never received more than £250, and the other masters of the regular staff got as a rule in the Upper Department £150—the same stipend as the Third Master of old—in the Lower £100 to £120. Nor since 1859 does any assistant master seem to have received a pension. With regard to special subjects, from 1855 to 1859 the “French Master” and from 1859 to 1861 the “Modern Language Master” got £150. German was usually taught by a visiting master paid according to the number of hours he was employed, and so too science from 1865 to 1873. The writing master in 1871 got £70, the drill master in 1863 £10.

That the teaching was better might be inferred from the increase in numbers, but such fluctuations are often due to personal, social, or economical causes, and it is by the character and after-life of his pupils that the success or failure of a Headmaster should be gauged. To apply this criterion however in the present case is not easy, for Mr. Barry's tenure of office was so short that it is impossible to say how much credit should be assigned to him. From the Calendars however published in his time we find that Leeds boys obtained at the universities 16 scholarships or exhibitions, 4 first-classes and 2 fellowships. One boy was third in the competition for the Indian Civil Service, and W. G. Nicholson (the present Field Marshal) was first in the examination for Woolwich. C. Crosthwaite also gained admission to Woolwich in 1858 and came out first in the Artillery examination in 1859. Among civilians at least 4 Lord Mayors of Leeds were at the School during these years—F. W. Lawson, C. F. Tetley, T. W. Harding and C. Lupton—and the names of many other prominent citizens appear in the register.

MORE DEFINITE evidence may be found in the reports of the examiners. Mr. Llewelyn Davies (1856) thought the tone of the School admirable. Mr. Andrew (1858) was struck by the pleasant manners of the boys among themselves and their unembarrassed freedom coupled with due respect in their attitude to their masters. Mr. Barry himself is not always so laudatory. In 1855 he thought the boys more truthful and orderly, but that in gentlemanly behaviour they still needed improvement. In 1858 he noted better order and quietness and praised the upper boys for their “energetic work and strong principles of duty.” In 1859 however he regarded them as not serious and manly enough, and in 1860 reported some tendency in the lower boys to mischief and one or two instances of gross misconduct. What pleased him most was the decrease in corporal punishment. He did not believe it was often necessary—“a master who cannot enforce discipline without frequent recourse to the cane is hardly likely to do so properly even with its assistance”—and he ordered that it should only take place after school and be recorded in a book.

As to the work the examiners temper their praise with criticism. In 1857 weakness in verses is excused as in a subject “ornamental rather than useful for the average boy,” but the examiner was not pleased at finding a similar weakness in Latin prose. In 1858 Mr. Andrew had “never seen boys who could at all compare, with those at Leeds in Scriptural and Christian knowledge.” Mr. H. M. Butler in 1859 noted a marked absence of prevalent idleness, but thought the boys showed sense and quickness rather than precise knowledge. In 1861 the education is described as good all round and not confined to a few picked boys, and in 1862 the history and divinity are praised. The mathematical reports were usually satisfactory; but one examiner says that riders were “handled in a very cowardly manner,” and Mr. Barry thought the School better in mechanical accuracy than in abstract reasoning. Of science we hear little, but in 1862 the paperwork in geology was good though the practical work was bad, while in chemistry the reverse was the case. In German the work at first was commended, but the boys did not improve. In French progress seems to have been hampered by slackness in discipline.

THE FOUNDATION of the first of the valuable prizes with which the School is endowed may be regarded as a recognition of present and an incentive to future work. In 1859 the Committee accepted from Dr. Hook, who had long been their chairman, £200 “the interest of which I wish to be paid annually on the 29th of June in the shape of a prize to some one boy for excellence in Composition in Latin, Greek, or English.” In 1861 he suggested that the money should be divided, viz. (a) £5 for a theological prize, “the examination to have reference to the Greek Testament and the Prayer-Book;” (b) £3 for a prize for “an English Essay or an exercise in English Verse.” Two “Hook Prizes” have since then been annually awarded, but in the course of time modifications have been made in the conditions. In 1880, for instance, neither the Greek Testament nor the Prayer-Book formed part of the subjects for the theological prize, and even in 1861 the Calendar states that the other prize would be given “for some piece of English or Latin composition to be fixed by the Headmaster.” For the latter sometimes a piece of composition was set, sometimes subjects requiring wide reading, e.g., in 1874 “The Renaissance,” in 1875 “Richelieu,” in 1876 “The Ottoman Turks.” In 1877 however the prize is described as “ for a classical subject,” and in 1878 it is called the “Hook Classical Prize”—the name by which it is still known. The subjects were still outside the ordinary school work, but in 1886 part of Mommsen's Roman History was combined “with the history for the summer examination,” in 1887 part of Roby's Latin syntax “with the Christmas examination of the VIth Form,” and from 1888 the prize was awarded to the boy who came out top in that examination. In 1905 the Headmaster recommended that it should be the prize for the summer examination. In 1868 it was ordered that no boy should receive either of the Hook prizes more than once; but of late years this prohibition has not been enforced.

AND NOW WE come to that for which perhaps Mr. Barry's headmastership is best remembered—the transference of the School to Woodhouse Moor. A writer in the “Leodiensian” of 1898 describes the schoolroom as:—

“A veritable old barn, dark, dingy, dusty, and decaying . . . The desks were old, battered, and inkstained, carved and disfigured with the initials of many generations of blockheads. The old iron-bound oaken forms, polished bright by the smarting extremities of byegone new boys, were similarly decorated with hieroglyphics. Behind the shattered wainscotting mice scuttled and squeaked, and occasionally a rat enlivened the proceedings by running about beneath the hot-water pipes which warmed the room; rows of pegs were fixed to the wainscotting from which hung a miscellaneous assortment of overcoats and cloaks, from which on wet days arose a steaming smoke under the genial influence of the hot-water pipes beneath. . . The masters' desks were unsightly square wooden tanks surmounted by conical sounding-boards resembling candle extinguishers and as old and worm-eaten as the rest of the scholastic appointments; for use at Divine Service, which was solemnized in the schoolroom on Sundays, a wheezing groaning second or third-hand ramshackle old organ stood in one corner, some of the pipes of which would not ' speak,' and those which could seemed ashamed of their own voices ... A nondescript sort of medieval wooden reading desk graced the opposite corner . . [The bottom* boy in the School had] the responsible duty of opening and shutting all the windows and controlling the ventilation generally [and also of lighting the gas] . . . The playground behind the School was a sort of barren sandy desert of Sahara with a straggling oasis of sooty grass in one corner, and might have contained about half an acre or so. One side was bounded by the high wall of a cloth mill, another by almshouses inhabited by some rather crusty old ladies, whose meditations and windows we frequently broke, whilst it was bound in on another by the walls of a timber yard. It was a dusty place, and in school, under the penetrating influence of the cane, clouds of its dust pervaded the atmosphere of the room all day long.” *This does not quite agree with the General Rules of 1852.

The reorganization of the School had, as we have seen, greatly raised the numbers, and subsequent generations have much reason to be grateful to Mr. Barry for boldly suggesting in 1856 that the School should be removed from its now unsuitable surroundings and rebuilt in “the neighbourhood of Woodhouse Bar.” The Committee approved of the suggestion, a meeting of parents passed a unanimous vote in favour of the proposal, and a sub-committee was appointed to consider sites and the prospect of raising a public subscription, for the funds of the School alone would not be sufficient. At this time its gross income was

School fees brought in about £800, and the annual expenditure was estimated at c.£2,350. In 1857 it was reported that £6,400—the sum was expected finally to reach £7,000—was promised, and that the subscribers recommended the present site by Woodhouse Moor. This—comprising 8a.2r.19p.—could be purchased from the trustees of S. John's Church for £3,016.11s.3d., and buildings to contain 380-400 boys, as designed by Mr. Edward Barry (brother of the Headmaster), were estimated to cost £12,000. The total cost was put down at c.£15,450. Some details may be of interest.

The Committee approved, and proposed to raise the money by

(a) the public subscription.

(b) selling the old site and buildings for £4,200.

(c) using £1,242.17s.1d., recently received from the sale of land on the north side of Roundhay Road.

(d) raising £3,000 by loan or mortgage.

The sanction of the Charity Commissioners was obtained, and on 6 April 1858 the foundation stone of the new buildings was laid by the Bishop of Ripon. In a letter written by Dr. Hook we find,

“Easter Tuesday was a busy day. The Bishop laid the foundation stone of the Grammar School with a beautiful service and an admirable address. We then gave the boys a dinner, to the high table of which subscribers were admitted. I was of course in the chair. Barry spoke admirably, and of me personally with such affection that if I had not been in the chair I should have cried, but I gulped down my maudlin with a glass of wine.”

ON 27 JUNE 1859 the new School was opened. The “Illustrated London News” says,

“The opening ceremony was of an unostentatious character. At eleven o'clock the pupils and friends of the School attended S. Mark's Church, where an eloquent and practical sermon was preached by the Bishop of Ripon from Psalm CXIX. 9. At the close of the service the congregation proceeded to the new School which was formally opened by the delivery of the usual speeches and the distribution of the midsummer prizes. The trustees and about two hundred parents and friends afterwards sat down to a collation in the lower schoolroom.”

For the time the difficulty was tided over by a generous offer of certain unnamed gentlemen to defray any deficit up to £200 per annum for the next 3 years, provided that the exhibitions were not reduced, and as Mr. Barry resigned in 1862 the problem was bequeathed to his successor.

BEFORE HOWEVER bringing this chapter to a close there are still a few things to be mentioned. The writer from whom we have already quoted tells us that the first annual sports were held in 1860; the extinct “Leodiensian” was revived, but only to be dropped again; there was a performance of “The Rivals” with a prologue by the stage manager, and a Rifle Cadet Corps flourished for a time. On all these points we shall have more to say hereafter. There is one subject however which may be conveniently dealt with here.

That Mr. Barry attached great importance to the religious instruction given in the School we can see from the way it is emphasized in the Calendar.

“Religious Instruction (according to the principles of the Church of England) forms a regular and principal part of the teaching of each Form. Those boys are excepted from the teaching of the Church Catechism and Prayer Books whose Parents (being Dissenters) shall express a desire to that effect.”

He wanted however more than this, and soon after his arrival started a Sunday service in the schoolroom. Here there was an organ presented to the School—the donor's name is not recorded—and in 1855 the Committee voted £6.10s. for expenses connected with it. Four years later they voted £10 towards the cost of the services, a notice with regard to which appears in the Calendar of 1859 viz.—“A School Service is held every Sunday morning at Half-past Ten at which the attendance of all boys is especially desired.” The attendance averaged, we are told, 120 boys, and the notice, with the addition (in 1863) of an evening service at 6-30 p.m. and the omission (after 1869) of the clause requesting the presence of the boys, appears regularly in the Calendar till 1882.

WHEN THE NEW School was built Mr. Barry was anxious that a Chapel should form part of it. The Committee however were reluctant to incur further expense. Possibly too they saw that in a day school a Chapel could only be of use to a limited number of boys, while the charge of the services might be a serious tax on the energies of future Headmasters, and in the Articles of 1855 the Master was still forbidden to undertake (unless with special leave) “permanent clerical duties.” Still, though they would not build it themselves, they allowed in 1861 Mr. Barry to collect subscriptions for its erection. They also entered into negotiations with the incumbent of S. George's as to obtaining a license to hold services in the schoolroom or in a Chapel if erected; and he said he would offer no opposition, on condition that

(a) the services should be for the scholars and not for the general public, and that any accommodation beyond what was needed for the boys should be only for visitors to whom from time to time the Headmaster might allow the privilege of attending;

(b) the alms for the poor should be given to S. George's Church for distribution.