QEGS was physically brutal: ex-pupil

Blackburn Citizen: QEGS in Blackburn QEGS in Blackburn

QUEEN Elizabeth’s Grammar School is a very different place today to what was described by John Mead’s victims in court.

At the time corporal punishment was legal in schools and pupils across East Lancashire were regularly punished by teachers.

One of the men, speaking after the verdicts, told the Lancashire Telegraph discipline at the time was extremely strict and corporal punishment was frequent.

And failure to fit into one of the school’s cliques would mean a lonely time for many pupils.

He said: “The mechanics of the school were such that there was no way I could mention this abuse to any of my contemporaries.

“It was brutal. It was a regime.

“The teachers were old school. They used to deal out quite severe punishments, physical punishments.

“If you got into trouble, you had to go and see the discipline master. He had a little office and you would go in there and on the wall were straps and slippers and rulers. He would say ‘take your pick, which one do you want?’ “It was physically brutal.

“QEGS was cliquey. You either fitted in or you did not.”

At the time, the Blackburn school was an all boys private school, which had a junior and senior section.

It is believed to have been founded in 1509 next to Blackburn Parish Church. Former notable pupils include the inventor Brian Mercer and fashion designer Wayne Hemingway.

In 1976 girls were allowed to join the sixth form for the first time.

It is set to become a free school from September, with pupils no longer charged £10,000 per annum to attend.

A free school a is non-profit-making, independent, state-funded school which is subject to the same Ofsted inspections as all local authority schools.

Comments (15)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:19pm Wed 18 Jun 14

woolywords says...

Whilst I don't wish to denigrate the opinion of this victims view of Blackburn's QEGs, I shall leave that to those whom were there, in and around the same time as him but I have a differing view of another QEGs, that I attended.
Our school was single sex, ruled with rigid discipline, by both Masters and various forms of Monitors and Prefects.
Corporal punishment also existed, either within the class or for more serious offences, by the Headmaster or his Deputy. Only once, did I ever see one pupil, called onto the stage, at morning assembly and given '6 of the best', for a crime that I cannot recall now.
We had the '3 strike' rule, where you were allowed, if that is the right term, to commit an offence against the rules, before you received the final sanction of being caned. Somehow, during my time there, I only managed to get up to a '2 strike' warning each year that I was there. (Your record was expunged after each year of attendance.)
My final school report entry from the Deputy Head states, '...has the makings of a championship skater, with all the thin ice that has managed to evade during his time here.'
Being late, failing to complete homework on time, fighting, truancy.. It was though I'd read the whole rules, committed them to memory then decided to break all of them, in turn, but never enough to get caned for it.
I did just sufficient to gain B's, either plus or minus, to keep the parents happy but never to stick out, like some of those 'right swots'. I evaded sports, quite artfully, I thought and never managing to play any instrument, to a greater degree. Once reported, for playing a violin, like a banjo.
When he was there, my older brother was the school bully, so the Prefects left me alone, pretty much. Only, some second years, thought that I deserved a thumping, just for being his sibling, which is why I only got caught fighting in school, the once. Had another warning, for fighting outside school time though and that was on a Saturday, after the school broke up for holidays!
You were expected to wear school uniform, in it's entirety every school day and even when attending church on Sundays. You had kits for each of the sports that you participated in, and woe betide you, if you failed to have the right kit, on the right day. Was once, made to run around the rugby pitch, for not having my kit, in my vest and underpants, in January! Never did that again, as I much preferred the warmth of a scrum, to the loneliness of the long distance runner...
I did some learning and some pranks, that caused a stink.
Have yet to see anything, that beats my self-igniting, stink bombs, made with a mixture of potassium permanganate and glycerine, inside a ping-pong ball, that are highly illegal now. Or my grenades, made with weedkiller and sugar, inside a 2oz Nescafe coffee tin, that you shake and throw.. these entertained the Bomb Squad in Northern Ireland, when the IRA were using milk churns, as real bombs. (You can't throw a milk churn, you eejits!)
My form Master went nuts when he learned that I had no intention of taking any GCE's but thought the better of me, when I stated that I was joining the Army. He did, however, embarrass me, a lot of years later, when I was in the company of some friends, by stating that he was still awaiting my Geography homework, from the last week of school, as it was some dozen or so years, late! I admitted my wilful crime and settled on buying a pint or two, as a 'measure of punishment' and giving a vocal outline on my travels around the World.
To this day, I don't believe that corporal punishment did any good, as the same people were caned on a regular basis and am sure that, if it were possible, would have benefited from a more appropriate punishment.
My time in the Army taught me that, discipline and education, go hand in hand when dealing with any offence and not brutality, even though there was a cadre of sadistic NCO's around, whom were later exposed as being nothing more than plain, old-fashioned bullies. We were well shot of them, when that came out, at Harrogate..
All in all, my school days were happy ones, that have in no small part contributed to my lifelong zest for reading, learning and inquisitive nature.
And for that, I thank them all, as they contributed to making me, the erudite idiot that I am.
Whilst I don't wish to denigrate the opinion of this victims view of Blackburn's QEGs, I shall leave that to those whom were there, in and around the same time as him but I have a differing view of another QEGs, that I attended. Our school was single sex, ruled with rigid discipline, by both Masters and various forms of Monitors and Prefects. Corporal punishment also existed, either within the class or for more serious offences, by the Headmaster or his Deputy. Only once, did I ever see one pupil, called onto the stage, at morning assembly and given '6 of the best', for a crime that I cannot recall now. We had the '3 strike' rule, where you were allowed, if that is the right term, to commit an offence against the rules, before you received the final sanction of being caned. Somehow, during my time there, I only managed to get up to a '2 strike' warning each year that I was there. (Your record was expunged after each year of attendance.) My final school report entry from the Deputy Head states, '...has the makings of a championship skater, with all the thin ice that has managed to evade during his time here.' Being late, failing to complete homework on time, fighting, truancy.. It was though I'd read the whole rules, committed them to memory then decided to break all of them, in turn, but never enough to get caned for it. I did just sufficient to gain B's, either plus or minus, to keep the parents happy but never to stick out, like some of those 'right swots'. I evaded sports, quite artfully, I thought and never managing to play any instrument, to a greater degree. Once reported, for playing a violin, like a banjo. When he was there, my older brother was the school bully, so the Prefects left me alone, pretty much. Only, some second years, thought that I deserved a thumping, just for being his sibling, which is why I only got caught fighting in school, the once. Had another warning, for fighting outside school time though and that was on a Saturday, after the school broke up for holidays! You were expected to wear school uniform, in it's entirety every school day and even when attending church on Sundays. You had kits for each of the sports that you participated in, and woe betide you, if you failed to have the right kit, on the right day. Was once, made to run around the rugby pitch, for not having my kit, in my vest and underpants, in January! Never did that again, as I much preferred the warmth of a scrum, to the loneliness of the long distance runner... I did some learning and some pranks, that caused a stink. Have yet to see anything, that beats my self-igniting, stink bombs, made with a mixture of potassium permanganate and glycerine, inside a ping-pong ball, that are highly illegal now. Or my grenades, made with weedkiller and sugar, inside a 2oz Nescafe coffee tin, that you shake and throw.. these entertained the Bomb Squad in Northern Ireland, when the IRA were using milk churns, as real bombs. (You can't throw a milk churn, you eejits!) My form Master went nuts when he learned that I had no intention of taking any GCE's but thought the better of me, when I stated that I was joining the Army. He did, however, embarrass me, a lot of years later, when I was in the company of some friends, by stating that he was still awaiting my Geography homework, from the last week of school, as it was some dozen or so years, late! I admitted my wilful crime and settled on buying a pint or two, as a 'measure of punishment' and giving a vocal outline on my travels around the World. To this day, I don't believe that corporal punishment did any good, as the same people were caned on a regular basis and am sure that, if it were possible, would have benefited from a more appropriate punishment. My time in the Army taught me that, discipline and education, go hand in hand when dealing with any offence and not brutality, even though there was a cadre of sadistic NCO's around, whom were later exposed as being nothing more than plain, old-fashioned bullies. We were well shot of them, when that came out, at Harrogate.. All in all, my school days were happy ones, that have in no small part contributed to my lifelong zest for reading, learning and inquisitive nature. And for that, I thank them all, as they contributed to making me, the erudite idiot that I am. woolywords
  • Score: 18

10:30pm Wed 18 Jun 14

HelmshoreBoy says...

What a refreshing read that was Woolly.
What a refreshing read that was Woolly. HelmshoreBoy
  • Score: 8

11:37pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Graham Hartley says...

wooly, we need not stray far in chemistry or along other paths in life before we encounter something which is illegal. It's reported that the last Labour government made some 3,500 new laws, perhaps even one which insists that I must write 3 500 (notice the clever space) rather than 3,500 which confuses the French. Like you, I have extensive teenage experience of low explosives; all of it now illegal if I describe or even offer to describe the details. I thrill to what it is that I know (don't you?) which is proscribed by the Terrorism Act 2000 (should that be 2 000?) Part VI Miscellaneous.

I indulge here in a brief, censored account of how we blew a chunk out or the stonework of the canal bridge numbered *** at Rishton, sometime in 1968. We had sunk a length of scaffolding into the canalside, some 100 yards from the bridge and inclined towards it, to serve as the barrel of the gun. The end buried in earth we had closed by dint of much hammering with NORI bricks. We had prepared the charge, a Halibut Liver Oil Capsule screwtop tin filled with the correct mixture of ****** ******** and *****, the base of the tin drilled with a narrow hole through which passed a length of Jetex fuse. We lit the fuse, dropped the charge down the scaffolding tube, without delay dropping in a ball-bearing (selected for fit), and awaited the result. We had aimed the barrel so that we expected the projected ball-bearing to strike water somewhere on the other side of the bridge arch. Instead, the satisfyingly loud report of the gun was followed by the deep, shattering clash of tempered metal upon the quarried bridge stone. The boy we called Erk, our camp-follower, had at that moment briefly raised his head above the parapet afforded by the bridge and rapidly lowered it (his head) as the ball-bearing vowed its intent to be a pilgrim just a few feet away.
wooly, we need not stray far in chemistry or along other paths in life before we encounter something which is illegal. It's reported that the last Labour government made some 3,500 new laws, perhaps even one which insists that I must write 3 500 (notice the clever space) rather than 3,500 which confuses the French. Like you, I have extensive teenage experience of low explosives; all of it now illegal if I describe or even offer to describe the details. I thrill to what it is that I know (don't you?) which is proscribed by the Terrorism Act 2000 (should that be 2 000?) Part VI Miscellaneous. I indulge here in a brief, censored account of how we blew a chunk out or the stonework of the canal bridge numbered *** at Rishton, sometime in 1968. We had sunk a length of scaffolding into the canalside, some 100 yards from the bridge and inclined towards it, to serve as the barrel of the gun. The end buried in earth we had closed by dint of much hammering with NORI bricks. We had prepared the charge, a Halibut Liver Oil Capsule screwtop tin filled with the correct mixture of ****** ******** and *****, the base of the tin drilled with a narrow hole through which passed a length of Jetex fuse. We lit the fuse, dropped the charge down the scaffolding tube, without delay dropping in a ball-bearing (selected for fit), and awaited the result. We had aimed the barrel so that we expected the projected ball-bearing to strike water somewhere on the other side of the bridge arch. Instead, the satisfyingly loud report of the gun was followed by the deep, shattering clash of tempered metal upon the quarried bridge stone. The boy we called Erk, our camp-follower, had at that moment briefly raised his head above the parapet afforded by the bridge and rapidly lowered it (his head) as the ball-bearing vowed its intent to be a pilgrim just a few feet away. Graham Hartley
  • Score: 2

6:46am Thu 19 Jun 14

Excluded again says...

I think the description of QEGS as 'physically brutal' in the 1970s is over the top. As a pupil in the time, I never found it so.

But the culture was not one in which making a complaint about a teacher would seem even remotely possible. Never in my time there can I recall it ever being said that if a teacher did something inappropriate, you could and should complain or who you could or should complain to.

I can well understand why the victims in this case felt there was no-one in school they could turn to.
I think the description of QEGS as 'physically brutal' in the 1970s is over the top. As a pupil in the time, I never found it so. But the culture was not one in which making a complaint about a teacher would seem even remotely possible. Never in my time there can I recall it ever being said that if a teacher did something inappropriate, you could and should complain or who you could or should complain to. I can well understand why the victims in this case felt there was no-one in school they could turn to. Excluded again
  • Score: 12

8:42am Thu 19 Jun 14

greenscreener says...

Excluded again wrote:
I think the description of QEGS as 'physically brutal' in the 1970s is over the top. As a pupil in the time, I never found it so.

But the culture was not one in which making a complaint about a teacher would seem even remotely possible. Never in my time there can I recall it ever being said that if a teacher did something inappropriate, you could and should complain or who you could or should complain to.

I can well understand why the victims in this case felt there was no-one in school they could turn to.
I agree. I have every sympathy for anyone who was abused, in whatever fashion, it is inexcusable, but that is a portrayal of the whole school that doesn't really fit with my recollection. Physical brutality, by staff or pupils, did happen but was exceptionally rare. Cliquey certainly, but what school isn't ? In my experience the atmosphere in the first and second years was intimidating but beyond that it was more encouraging and positive. The schools results, both academic and sporting, at that time were exceptional. There was more than one teacher that you would want to steer clear of but there were also some absolute legends.
[quote][p][bold]Excluded again[/bold] wrote: I think the description of QEGS as 'physically brutal' in the 1970s is over the top. As a pupil in the time, I never found it so. But the culture was not one in which making a complaint about a teacher would seem even remotely possible. Never in my time there can I recall it ever being said that if a teacher did something inappropriate, you could and should complain or who you could or should complain to. I can well understand why the victims in this case felt there was no-one in school they could turn to.[/p][/quote]I agree. I have every sympathy for anyone who was abused, in whatever fashion, it is inexcusable, but that is a portrayal of the whole school that doesn't really fit with my recollection. Physical brutality, by staff or pupils, did happen but was exceptionally rare. Cliquey certainly, but what school isn't ? In my experience the atmosphere in the first and second years was intimidating but beyond that it was more encouraging and positive. The schools results, both academic and sporting, at that time were exceptional. There was more than one teacher that you would want to steer clear of but there were also some absolute legends. greenscreener
  • Score: 10

9:15am Thu 19 Jun 14

garyintandem says...

I was at QEGS between 1968-75 and cannot recall one incident of corporal punishment or threat of such action.
I was at QEGS between 1968-75 and cannot recall one incident of corporal punishment or threat of such action. garyintandem
  • Score: -2

11:25am Thu 19 Jun 14

rudis_dad says...

greenscreener wrote:
Excluded again wrote:
I think the description of QEGS as 'physically brutal' in the 1970s is over the top. As a pupil in the time, I never found it so.

But the culture was not one in which making a complaint about a teacher would seem even remotely possible. Never in my time there can I recall it ever being said that if a teacher did something inappropriate, you could and should complain or who you could or should complain to.

I can well understand why the victims in this case felt there was no-one in school they could turn to.
I agree. I have every sympathy for anyone who was abused, in whatever fashion, it is inexcusable, but that is a portrayal of the whole school that doesn't really fit with my recollection. Physical brutality, by staff or pupils, did happen but was exceptionally rare. Cliquey certainly, but what school isn't ? In my experience the atmosphere in the first and second years was intimidating but beyond that it was more encouraging and positive. The schools results, both academic and sporting, at that time were exceptional. There was more than one teacher that you would want to steer clear of but there were also some absolute legends.
Couldn't agree more with either of you - I was there in the early eighties, and whilst corporal punishment had by-and-large been done away with by then, the threat of rapid and severe sanction was never far away for anyone. If I'm honest, I hated every minute of my time at QEGS, but not because I was frightened or intimidated, but coming from a working-class family from Burnley I felt that I never quite fitted in. I didn't perform particularly well academically or in sporting endeavour (although a lot better than anyone in my family has ever done) but looking back on it, my time at the school instilled a great belief in, and respect for, discipline, honour and the rule of law. I doubt that I would have experienced that had I gone to the local comp.
[quote][p][bold]greenscreener[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Excluded again[/bold] wrote: I think the description of QEGS as 'physically brutal' in the 1970s is over the top. As a pupil in the time, I never found it so. But the culture was not one in which making a complaint about a teacher would seem even remotely possible. Never in my time there can I recall it ever being said that if a teacher did something inappropriate, you could and should complain or who you could or should complain to. I can well understand why the victims in this case felt there was no-one in school they could turn to.[/p][/quote]I agree. I have every sympathy for anyone who was abused, in whatever fashion, it is inexcusable, but that is a portrayal of the whole school that doesn't really fit with my recollection. Physical brutality, by staff or pupils, did happen but was exceptionally rare. Cliquey certainly, but what school isn't ? In my experience the atmosphere in the first and second years was intimidating but beyond that it was more encouraging and positive. The schools results, both academic and sporting, at that time were exceptional. There was more than one teacher that you would want to steer clear of but there were also some absolute legends.[/p][/quote]Couldn't agree more with either of you - I was there in the early eighties, and whilst corporal punishment had by-and-large been done away with by then, the threat of rapid and severe sanction was never far away for anyone. If I'm honest, I hated every minute of my time at QEGS, but not because I was frightened or intimidated, but coming from a working-class family from Burnley I felt that I never quite fitted in. I didn't perform particularly well academically or in sporting endeavour (although a lot better than anyone in my family has ever done) but looking back on it, my time at the school instilled a great belief in, and respect for, discipline, honour and the rule of law. I doubt that I would have experienced that had I gone to the local comp. rudis_dad
  • Score: 9

1:00pm Thu 19 Jun 14

Roy Drage says...

I was at QEGS in the 80s. My first year form tutor was Mead and the austere Ormerod House my prison. In the long term, my schooling has stood me in good stead. However, it is fair to say, I hated every minute there. Petty rules (including the requirement to call female teachers 'Sir'!), humourless teachers and an intolerance of 'average' made it pretty unpleasant for anyone who was not a genius or sporting hero. I must admit to a sense of schadenfreude in reading the misfortunes of the school in recent years. Bad memories last long in the mind.
I was at QEGS in the 80s. My first year form tutor was Mead and the austere Ormerod House my prison. In the long term, my schooling has stood me in good stead. However, it is fair to say, I hated every minute there. Petty rules (including the requirement to call female teachers 'Sir'!), humourless teachers and an intolerance of 'average' made it pretty unpleasant for anyone who was not a genius or sporting hero. I must admit to a sense of schadenfreude in reading the misfortunes of the school in recent years. Bad memories last long in the mind. Roy Drage
  • Score: 10

2:44pm Thu 19 Jun 14

cathedral citi says...

Hi Wooly

what a fantastic and a nostalgic read your article is. Beautifully put, and getting to the core of our idiosyncratic ways as children and young adults.
You have hit the nail on the head with wonderfully put wordings.

One thing's for sure, you definitely paid attention in your English classes!
Hi Wooly what a fantastic and a nostalgic read your article is. Beautifully put, and getting to the core of our idiosyncratic ways as children and young adults. You have hit the nail on the head with wonderfully put wordings. One thing's for sure, you definitely paid attention in your English classes! cathedral citi
  • Score: 3

3:13pm Thu 19 Jun 14

ahussain123 says...

as an ex qegs pupil, rudis_dad sums up my feelings perfectly.
for a working class kid, it was difficult to adjust. a culture shock coming from a local authority primary. even though the school did have a lot of good points, unfortunately i dont have many memories to treasure.
as an ex qegs pupil, rudis_dad sums up my feelings perfectly. for a working class kid, it was difficult to adjust. a culture shock coming from a local authority primary. even though the school did have a lot of good points, unfortunately i dont have many memories to treasure. ahussain123
  • Score: 6

4:19pm Thu 19 Jun 14

george11 says...

I was there in the late 40's. Every morning the head - the 'Boss' - thrashed some unlucky lad. We were terrified of him. He always asked if we could give him any reason why he should not cane us.The very first day he took us for prayers in Big School he picked someone out. "Boy - go to my study!" By mid-morning everyone in the school knew he had been caned. Eventually my turn came when I should have been kept in after school, and went home to turn on the stove for the family's dinner. I couldn't think at the time because I was so terrified. There were 6 of us. Some came out in tears. "Bend over and put your hands on that chair". It was humiliating. I don't know about brutal. That was the way they did things. But the previous head was a real gentleman. If you offended him he would say" Smith (or whatever), you have disappointed me". That was enough to put us on the right track!
I was there in the late 40's. Every morning the head - the 'Boss' - thrashed some unlucky lad. We were terrified of him. He always asked if we could give him any reason why he should not cane us.The very first day he took us for prayers in Big School he picked someone out. "Boy - go to my study!" By mid-morning everyone in the school knew he had been caned. Eventually my turn came when I should have been kept in after school, and went home to turn on the stove for the family's dinner. I couldn't think at the time because I was so terrified. There were 6 of us. Some came out in tears. "Bend over and put your hands on that chair". It was humiliating. I don't know about brutal. That was the way they did things. But the previous head was a real gentleman. If you offended him he would say" Smith (or whatever), you have disappointed me". That was enough to put us on the right track! george11
  • Score: 4

6:56pm Thu 19 Jun 14

Graham Hartley says...

There was in those days no lack of brutality at Acrington's grammar school, but we must not conclude that it was a grammar school phenomenon. Norden at Rishton employed a teacher who would sit on pupils. She is described as having the necessarily large dimensions in the rear quarters, the better to stifle the victim's protests. Later the officer with responsibility for child protection in one of the semi-militarised youth organisations, she made great progress from such a disqualifying position.

Excluded gives a fine description above of the safeguards against abuse. There were none at QEGS, and none at AGS.
There was in those days no lack of brutality at Acrington's grammar school, but we must not conclude that it was a grammar school phenomenon. Norden at Rishton employed a teacher who would sit on pupils. She is described as having the necessarily large dimensions in the rear quarters, the better to stifle the victim's protests. Later the officer with responsibility for child protection in one of the semi-militarised youth organisations, she made great progress from such a disqualifying position. Excluded gives a fine description above of the safeguards against abuse. There were none at QEGS, and none at AGS. Graham Hartley
  • Score: 4

8:02pm Sat 21 Jun 14

swampbeastie says...

As a pupil at QEGS through much of the seventies, I would agree that there were several incredibly vicious and psychopathic school bullies...........So
me of the pupils were pretty bad too..........

Seriously, there were some excellent teachers who I will always have the highest regard for, but there were others who , in my opinion, should never have been allowed to work with children.

There were uncontrolled cliques of profoundly unpleasant older boys who acted with impunity and there was no system of redress. Some survived by becoming their lackeys, others by becoming the court jesters while several burned out, scarred forever by the experience.

Perhaps, some of the school's darkest secrets are slowly beginning to seep out, even after all this time..........I sincerely hope so.
As a pupil at QEGS through much of the seventies, I would agree that there were several incredibly vicious and psychopathic school bullies...........So me of the pupils were pretty bad too.......... Seriously, there were some excellent teachers who I will always have the highest regard for, but there were others who , in my opinion, should never have been allowed to work with children. There were uncontrolled cliques of profoundly unpleasant older boys who acted with impunity and there was no system of redress. Some survived by becoming their lackeys, others by becoming the court jesters while several burned out, scarred forever by the experience. Perhaps, some of the school's darkest secrets are slowly beginning to seep out, even after all this time..........I sincerely hope so. swampbeastie
  • Score: 0

12:27am Thu 26 Jun 14

kessuki says...

Great read thankyou for your insightful and detailed post Wooly. Im young, but I always thought QEGS had a squeaky clean past and a great reputation - it comes as a surprise to me to read it had a tough regime and physical punishments in place.
Great read thankyou for your insightful and detailed post Wooly. Im young, but I always thought QEGS had a squeaky clean past and a great reputation - it comes as a surprise to me to read it had a tough regime and physical punishments in place. kessuki
  • Score: 0

11:42am Sun 6 Jul 14

DavidSaul says...

I was also one of the boys who went on the outward bound trips with John Mead and yes, we all swam naked in a rock pool in the wilds of the Trough of Bowland. We all knew he was a bit dodgy but found it more of a laugh than a threat.

Despite the unsavory peccadillos of a single teacher, I'm not sure I'm reading about the same school that I attended between 1969 and 1976. I was thoroughly happy in those years. True, I was hit with a gym shoe from time to time and the PE teacher was violent thug, but I am truly perplexed by the "discipline master" with his straps and slippers displayed on the wall. Where on earth did that notion come from? God knows, I was no angel - but I never saw any of that.
I was also one of the boys who went on the outward bound trips with John Mead and yes, we all swam naked in a rock pool in the wilds of the Trough of Bowland. We all knew he was a bit dodgy but found it more of a laugh than a threat. Despite the unsavory peccadillos of a single teacher, I'm not sure I'm reading about the same school that I attended between 1969 and 1976. I was thoroughly happy in those years. True, I was hit with a gym shoe from time to time and the PE teacher was violent thug, but I am truly perplexed by the "discipline master" with his straps and slippers displayed on the wall. Where on earth did that notion come from? God knows, I was no angel - but I never saw any of that. DavidSaul
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree