Wednesday, 11 February 2015

The Elmley Schoolhouse

Some time ago I posted a blog about the early days of the old Elmley schoolhouse - see my posting dated 26th December 2013. Unfortunately since then the shell of the building has continued to become more fragile and can't be far away from total collapse. I have the somewhat romantic photograph below in my collection but have no record of where it came from and so I hope that whoever did produce it will forgive me for using it.
Since then I have found more documentation about how the school came about, written a number of years ago by a Les Howard, the detail is very interesting and I quote some of it here.

In 1884 the whole of Elmley was owned by the Oxford University and so on the 1st of January that year the vicar responsible for Elmley church, the Rev. Scott Robertson, wrote to the University Curators pointing out that the Education Authorities were likely to force the building of a school at Elmley. This came about because the church vestry was being used to teach up to 45 children there- in and the Government Inspector had certified the vestry as suitable for only 35. The Rector pointed out that in reality some 60 children ought to be at school at the time and that a school to accommodate some 70-80 children should be built during that year. This was particularly relevant as eight new cottages were being built by the Cement Company nearby that coming Spring which would imply the addition of another twenty four children.
At a Vestry meeting on the 28th March 1884 Scott Robertson was directed to write again to the University Curators pointing out that there were currently 61 children above five years of age on Elmley. To date admission to infants between three and five had been refused but must be taken into consideration in planning for a new school and thus allowance for 90 children would be necessary. It was also pointed out that when one proprietor owned a whole parish it was necessary for them to erect a school. Having consulted a local architect and seen his proposed plan they advised that building costs would amount to £495 and to get a certified teacher to reside on the spot it was considered advisable to erect a teacher's cottage adjacent to the schoolroom at an additional cost of £220-£250. Further fixtures and fixings brought the estimated costs to a total of £800. The University was asked to provide a site for the new school just to the east of the churchyard on the space that was currently being used as the current school playground. Finally, the Vestry submitted that four courses were open to the University; to erect a school and give it to the parish; to erect a school and rent it to the parish at a small rental; ratepayers might build by School Board rate, but cost would be heavy and rates burdensome, or the University to give a larger contribution and the Rector to raise the balance of the £800 by subscription.

Scott Robertson sent the Curators a further letter on the 16th April 1884 quoting the population of Elmley on that very day as;-
Adults over 13 years - 148; children over 3 and under 13 years - 95; infants under 3 years - 34, making a total of 277 persons. There were now 62 children in the Vestry schoolroom (fit for 35 he once again emphasised) and all over 5 years of age despite many parents demanding that under fives should also be there. He also made it clear that it was only his influence with the school inspectors that was stopping the education authorities from taking further action, something presumably, that could not be held back for much longer. The Curators responded quite quickly to this letter from the Rev. and their letter appeared to saddle Scott Robertson with an "obligation," one that saw him setting out to raise £300 (implying that the Curators had offered £500 towards the building costs). 

The next few months saw further letters exchanged between Scott Robertson and the University Curators where firstly Scott Robertson suggested that the Curators might consider a Deed conveying the site for the school to the Diocesan Education Board. The Curators responded with various questions on funding, including income made from charging the children pence for their education. On the 13th May 1884 Scott Robertson sent a letter to the Curators stating that due to the London clay that the school was to be built on it would be necessary to have a strong foundation of concrete and facilities for storing every drop of rainwater. He went on to explain that the house currently being occupied by the teacher (one of the cottages in the Kingshill farmyard), had no backdoor, no pump or well (all the water being fetched from the Kingshill farmhouse) and no closet, there being just one at the end of the row of five cottages, common to all five. 
That month the Curators also opened talks with Levett & Co. of the nearby cement works to sound them out about possible funding for the new school, only to be told that such consideration would only be given if the University were prepared to extend the factory's lease for a further 40 years. However by June 1884 Scott Robertson announced rather bitterly that the Curators had taken the matter out of his hands and that he was obliged to withdraw applications made to Societies and individuals for funding as the University prefers to build the school themselves and retain the buildings on site in it's own hands. He also announced that he had been transferred to Throwley Vicarage but would continue to reside in Sittingbourne for several weeks in order that he could assist in every way possible at getting a start made on building the school before bad weather made the carriage of materials across the clay soil tracks very difficult. 

On the 14th November 1884 the new vicar, Rev. G. H. Mason, paid a visit to Elmley church and reported that the school attendance was so large that half the children were were being taught in the open porch of the church. Shortly after, a visit to Elmley by the University's Agents, saw them render a report to the Curators entitled "Recommendations as to New School". In that report they confirmed that the Education Department would insist on the erection of a proper school building on the site next to the church, which was halfway between the children from the cement works cottages and those from the farm looker's cottages. They also considered that it was not suitable to provide residence on that site for a single women schoolmistress. Besides being very lonely, it was only half a mile from the cement works where "men of a very rough and often intemperate character are occasionally employed". The site of the school building would be a quarter of a mile from several cottages at Kingshill farm homestead and it was suggested that one be re-furbished for the schoolmistress and that rubbish from the cement works be used to provide dry, clean path alongside the "plantation" (the name for the line of trees that ran, and still do), from the farmyard down to the church. Looking at the original 1884 ground plans for the school and the architect's plans that later became the actual blueprints for the new school, it is clear that the schoolhouse was eventually built to a smaller size after omitting the rooms that would have been for the schoolmistress's personal use. It became a simple and plain schoolhouse about 28-30 feet by 16-18 feet wide, with a classroom, sitting room for the mistress, together with sanitary offices and all at an estimated cost of £500. If the idea for a smaller building was adopted, the University's agents pointed out, it would keep it as the private property of the University. Clearly it was because not long after, five tenders ranging from £576 to £720, were received for building the school and the laying of two sections of path. 
The two sections of path were named as from the the churchyard gate to the Old Engine House (presumably at the cement works) and from the Old Engine House to Rutland Garden gate. With the Rutlands living in a cottage in Kingshill farm at the time, I suspect this meant that the path also went in the other direction, from the churchyard to Kingshill farm and in that way keeping all attendees at the school from getting wet and muddy feet. Surprisingly, the part of the tender that covered the cost of building the school, also included seats and desks and paved foot-ways to offices and approaches.

So finally, it seems that agreement had been made and by the July of 1885 building of the school was well underway. There were also plans in place to make better living accommodation for the schoolmistress and in October of that year, a local architect estimated the costs of the necessary repairs and alterations to the north portion of Kingshill farmhouse in order to convert it into her residence at £53.10.0. Other sundries required for the new path from the farmhouse to the church and schoolhouse, i.e. wicket gates, posts, etc., were estimated as £3.5.0. (Later, in 1891, it was noted that the rent paid to a Mr. Wilks for the part of the farmhouse allocated to the schoolmistress was £5 per annum).

On the 10th December 1885 the Rev. Mason wrote to the University thanking them for the new school, reporting a large increase in the number of children at the day school and that three Sunday school teachers had been enlisted. More interestingly, Wednesday evening reading classes were also being held for parents. Two of the Elmley ratepayers, Mr. Rutland and Mr. Wilks, wanted to form a school committee, to which the Rector had no objection but he did oppose their suggestion that the current schoolmistress be got rid of. He considered that she was very well conducted and considered that due to the number of infants now attending the school it would be best to assist the schoolmistress by employing one of Mr. Rutland's daughters (clever), as a monitor at one shilling a week. However, due to a rise in the number of infants it was thought that the pay should be made two shillings a week.   

Throughout the next year or so various balance sheets were discussed, showing the income and outgoings of the school and the fact that a healthy balance seemed to be being maintained. In September 1887 Mr. Atkinson, the Superintendent of the Sunday School, made an appeal to the University for a good library of books for the school, something not supported by the Rector. Within a month and after consultation with the schoolmistress and the people of the parish, the Curators arranged for Clarendon Press of Oxford to supply all the books requested at a trade price of £10.

Early in 1899, the schoolmistress Mrs Harris, decided to leave Elmley where she had been teacher for seven years and the Rector suggested a male replacement as, "some of the boys are big and need a firm hand", but he was ignored. Instead another mistress was appointed but then in March of 1902 she also resigned and so Mrs Harris was re-appointed but by then the cement works had closed and there were only 10 children on the books. The school hadn't been around that long and now it's future looked even shorter and over the next few years various views were expressed on it's ownership and viability.

In 1902 the Rector commented on the relatively healthy state of the school finances and observed that a new Education Bill that was going through Parliament would relieve the Church from maintaining the staff, or alternatively, the school will have become secularised so as to render it not worth retaining by the Church, With the 1902 Education Act now in force, in January 1903 the Rector sought the views of the Curators as to what course they proposed to take. He reported that there were around 37 persons on Elmley of which only 8 were of school age. Four belonged to the Williams family, one to the Fenners and three were boys from the Minster Union, boarded in Elmley. The schoolmistress Mrs. Harris, remained, on an annual salary of £60, plus the benefit of the house provided by the University. He went on to remark that he no longer had the right to carry on the school in what was the university premises (presumably as a result of conditions in the new Act), and he sought the Curators views as to what he saw as three courses open for the future:-
a) Form a Management Committee of four churchmen, provide a Trust Deed and hand over the school to the Education Dept.
b) close the school
c) the University to keep the school and relinquish Government aid.
In the Spring of 1903 the KCC Board of Education suggested that the University might find it convenient to make an Agreement for letting the school premises but finally decided that it should be continued as there was no other accommodation on the Isle. 

The opinions on what should happen to the school and it's now regular tiny attendance of schoolchildren rumbled on, but while they did it allowed the school to survive for a good number of years more. One last note on that was the fact that in late 1906 a Mr. Hallums painted both the school and it's fencing for the sum of £8.10s, using 100lbs of paint at £2.10s+ labour of £6.    



  1. Lovely photo of the ruins and a very interesting recounting of its history.

  2. Well thanks Wilma, I really appreciate your comments,

  3. This has been very reading, I will love move Sheppey history story...