Head caned son too hard, says mum
A mother ran to the local newspaper
to complain after her 11-year-old son was given two strokes of the cane by his
headmaster. The marks were still visible two days later, she said. The boy had
been repeatedly playing with the bell on a corporation bus. The headmaster
said, ‘You cannot judge the severity of a caning by the marks it leaves, as
some children bruise easier than others.’
As published in Reading Evening
Post, 8 December 1979.
Picture credit: Damian Simons.
Traditional School Discipline
Traditionalschooldiscipline@gmail.com
The Mum seems a bit daft if she is "not opposed to caning" but also thinks that a caning that still leaves marks two days later, is "inhumane". A proper big school caning, like the ones that turn up in court cases and in scandals and in some reminiscences, would leave bruises that lasted for *weeks*.
ReplyDeleteAlthough. There might also be some confusion about the timescales. 8th December 1979 was a Saturday. So when June Wilkinson wrote that the boy "still bears bruise marks today" and the caning was "last Tuesday". This suggests that the caning was actually on Tuesday 27th November. Perhaps June met the boy and his mother (and even inspected the marks?) or perhaps she just took a phone call from the mother. For publication on Saturday 8th, that would've presumably taken place ("today") on Friday 7th. Therefore ten days altogether.
The headmaster seems rather weaselly. He starts out saying that he had to give a caning because the behaviour was potentially so dangerous. But then admits his main priority was his school's reputation. Modern headmasters are like that too!
Interesting to see a proper caning happening at a comprehensive school. Ten years later this kind of incident would sometimes lead to a court case for assault. But on several occasions dismissed by the magistrate as justifiable punishment.