A HISTORY OF DURHAM 



to be instructed in the catechism, and farther 

 made fit to go to the Grammar School and like- 

 wise to be taught their plain song and to be 

 entered in their prick song.' The relation of 

 this school to the more important institution was 

 the subject of some controversy in the days of 

 Cosin (1670-72) and Crewe*- (1674-1721). It 

 was supplemented in the 1 8th century by the Blue 

 Coat School, which was first founded in 1718 by 

 civic enterprise.*' The Corporation had admin- 

 istered, had often maladministered, the various 

 charitable funds, of which some mention has 

 been made above. In the opening years of the 

 century and under the will of the non-juring 

 Vicar of St. Oswald's, John Cock, some kind of 

 elementary instruction was given in the parish. 

 The scheme took effect in 1717. Possibly the 

 Corporation were provoked to jealousy by this 

 suburban scheme. At all events they lent two 

 rooms in the New Place near St. Nicholas' 

 Church rent free, and here rudimentary educa- 

 tion was furnished under their direction to a 

 foundation of six boys, though it may perhaps be 

 presumed that paying pupils were also admitted 

 to swell the meagre roll of scholars. The estab- 

 lishment grew in course of time and excited much 

 interest in city and county. The minute-book 

 begins in 1705 and bears testimony to this 

 interest, in the steady growth of the list of sub- 

 scribers, and the augmentation of the foundation. 

 Six girls were added in 1 736 and in 1 75 3 a bequest 

 from Mrs. Ann Carr made provisionfor seven more 

 boys. By the end of the century thirty boys and 

 thirty girls were being educated, and soon out- 

 grew the original premises. 



Private schools existed in Durham in addition 

 to the public institutions named. The Grammar 

 School had a formidable rival for some time in 

 the establishment of a Mr. Rosse at the end of 

 the 17th century.** In 1732 a Quaker called 

 Glenn provided instruction for ' a great many 

 scholars both of his own persuasion and others.' 

 He was reputed to teach Latin and to ' pretend 

 to Greek.'** The first mention of a ladies' 

 boarding school noted so far is in 1757, when a 

 diarist's niece ' came to the boarding-school at 

 Durham.'** This establishment would per- 

 haps be in the North or South Bailey, where 

 living memory can trace a long succession of 

 girls' schools.*' There was also a famous ladies' 

 school by ' The Chains ' in Gilesgate. 



62 See V.C.H. Dur. i, 382. 



** The best account is in Surtees, op. cit. iv, 26. 

 C. M. Carlton's Hist, of Dur. Char, gives a mass of 

 useful information. 



" F.C.H. Dur. i, 382. 



•^ Surtees, op. cit. iv, 165. 



•* North Country Diaries (Surt. Soc), 207. 



•' Visitation returns at Auckland Castle prove 

 three or four dames' schools to have existed in Cross- 

 gate only. 



Attention has already been drawn to the ex- 

 clusiveness and rigid protection of the City trade- 

 gUds. One instance has been given of an inva- 

 sion of these privileges.** It is by no means the 

 only case that might be cited. In 1699, for 

 instance, when much building was in progress, 

 the masons' company, with its wide inclusion 

 of * Free-masons, Rough masons. Wallers, 

 Slaters, Paviours, Plasterers and Bricklayers,' in 

 fact the whole building trade, strove to oust all 

 competition of country masons in the college. The 

 carpenters and joiners subscribed to the expenses 

 of the suit. It was urged that ' foreigners ' had 

 in many cases worked in the coUege, castle, and 

 elsewhere without interruption and a plea was 

 put in that the places in question were not 

 legally within the city as incorporated, so that 

 the ' foreigners ' were not liable. Various other 

 suits*' may be cited of similar general import, aU 

 going to prove that the strictest protection was 

 exercised, whilst on the other hand there was a 

 constant tendency to override trade privileges. 

 Accordingly in 1728 a meeting of the Corpora- 

 tion was held, at which the principle of rigid 

 adhesion to the exclusion of outsiders was con- 

 firmed. All infringement of the rule was hence- 

 forth to be punished by heavy fines. Further, 

 because of some irregularity in admitting free- 

 men which had grown up it was ruled that all 

 admissions were henceforth to be under careful 

 surveillance. There were to be no amateur free- 

 men : all were to be approved by mayor and 

 aldermen, whilst apprentices were to serve their 

 time and to be actually taught the trade or 

 mystery. 



The policy thus pursued had a result which 

 was perhaps not contemplated by the members 

 of the Corporation, who were naturally con- 

 cerned only or mainly about trade interests. 

 Ever since the Restoration it had been the 

 fashion to admit to gild freedom many of the 

 leading men in city and county, though quite 

 unconnected with the special craft.'" In this 

 way Percy, Lambton, Tempest, and other im- 

 portant names, appear on the lists of admission. 

 The decree of 1728 seems to have restricted the 

 honour to those who were able to take up their 

 freedom by patrimony, save in exceptional cases 

 as when the bishop was admitted. Now, since 

 the admission of the City to representation in 

 Parliament, the gild had been the electors, but 

 the new rule tended to restrict the increase of 

 the electorate. In days of growing political ex- 

 citement the privilege of a vote had an increasing 



88 Above, p. 42. 



•' Other suits of similar scope are on behalf of the 

 Mercers' Company in 1 71 8 (Dur. Rec. cl. 7, no. 75) ; 

 Goldsmiths 1720 (ibid. no. 77) ; Saddlers 1728 (ibid, 

 no. 79). Cloth workers, rather later, but undated 

 (ibid. no. 95). 



'" See the names in Surtees, op. cit. iv, 20-5. 



44 



