Henry Claypole
Schoolmaster - 1859-65
Present research has revealed no further biographic detail pertaining to Craigflower's second schoolmaster Henry Claypole. However, while Claypole himself eludes documentation, additional material pertinent to the schoolhouse and the period in general has been revealed.1
It appears that Claypole was one of the thousands to arrive in Victoria with the rush of 1858-60.2 He brought with him a letter of introduction from the Duke of Newcastle addressed to James Douglas; the letter was written at the request of Claypole's father "William Claypole, a respectable inhabitant of Newark..."3 By May 16, 1859, Reverend Cridge had appointed Claypole to Craigflower:
I beg to report for the information of the governor that I have this day put in charge of the Craig Flower School [sic] a gentleman whose name is Mr. Henry Claypole & whom after strict examination I believe to be fully competent for the charge in point of educational acquirements, moral character & general intelligence. As moreover he has not been trained as a Teacher, this is understood to be a provisional arrangement & I shall hope to report to his Excellency again on the subject at an early period.4
No further correspondence is evident until 1861 when Claypole wrote to Cridge, stating, "... My renumeration for obvious reasons being insufficient under our present extravagant regime". Cridge's response was sympathetic and he supported Claypole's request for a salary increase when reporting to the colonial secretary.5
While it is not clear whether Claypole received an increase, he continued correspondence expressing concern about the delapidated condition of the schoolhouse.
The School House at the above place having for a considerable period required numerous repairs, I should esteem it a favour if you could grant me any information as to the course to be adopted in causing them to be made. Some time ago I made repeated applications both verbal and epistolary in one of which I gave a list of necessary repairs and a rough estimate of the cost.
Desirous of avoiding the semblance of giving unnecessary trouble, I have waited for a communication to be made to me; anxious to preserve the house from premature decay whilst under my care, I have taken the liberty of making direct application to you.
And am
Your most
H. Claypole
To
W.A.G. Young Esq.6
Subsequently, Pemberton the colonial surveyor was dispatched; his description of Craigflower presents an appalling picture:
I have honour to report with reference to your letter of the 24th March that I have examined Craigflower School House as ordered.
The buildings & premises are in so delapidated a condition as to make it a question whether the present house ought to be repaired or a new house built.
The buildings is unsufficiently supported and the foundation being insecure has sunk considerable. This has caused the plaster to crack in every direction, the ceiling to fall in and the floors to sink.
The backs of the fire places are burnt out, the chimneys smoke, the wind blows through the School room and the rats have made holes in every direction.
In the outer premises common decency has to be neglected, the well has tumbled in and the pump out of order, and fencing down. I made a specification of the least repairs required to make the house and premises habitable and Mr. Lewis an Estimate - $800.00
I remain etc etc7
The colonial secretary was not dismayed by Pemberton's gloomy discription and replied crisply:
Arrangements made for repairs to be undertaken by local schoolmaster under supervision of Surveyor General, f100 devoted to the [Illegible].8
Again the outcome is unknown, but it does not appear that any major repairs were undertaken at that time.
As the general economy declined, so did Claypole's enthusiasm. Moreover, although not trained as a teacher he entertained certain ideas about the principles involved. When the School Act of 1865 established non-sectarian education, Claypole tendered his resignation:
. . . I ask to be relieved of the burden of duty which I am now performing gratuitously . . . The Common School Bill before the House. I consider most injurious in its provisions and tending unnecessarily to lower the character and contract the usefulness of those entrusted with the task of education.9
However, it is difficult to determine whether Claypole's vision of high moral purpose hid his own ineptness. Following his resignation, The Colonist wrote a scathing attack,
Craigflower School — We are sorry to learn that this institution has been of late suffering from the most wretched mismanagement.
The new Superintendent of Education, Mr. Waddington, has, we understand, recently paid the school an official visit, and it is rumored found the system of teaching most inefficient, and the backwardness of the pupils most pitiable, exhibiting the grossest negligence on the part of the managers. A new teacher has just been appointed, but having been only a few weeks in office, he has not as yet had sufficient time to effect the requisite improvements.
It is plainly evident that the state of the public schools of the colony requires the most thoughtful and enlightened consideration of the Board of Education.
It is deplorable to think that the children of this community should so long have suffered through the imcompetence and negligence of teachers, and one of the first and most obvious duties of the Board should be to establish a proper standard of qualification, as to the ability and character of public school teachers.10
There are no further newspaper references to Claypole; nor is he mentioned in colonial correspondence. It does not appear that he remained in Victoria.
Endnotes:
1. See also Appendix I.
2. At that time ships arriving from San Franscisco often carried 1200 passengers; passenger lists were not considered mandatory.
3. I/B/C 57.9 The Duke of Newcastle was one of the directors of the HBC and also ESAC. Newcastle's papers are presently located at the University of Nottingham.
4. Cridge to W.A.G. Young, Col. Sect'y, May 16, 1859, Colonial Correspondence, F395.9.
5. Ibid., May 16, 1861
6. Ibid., March 27, 1862
7. Ibid.. J. Despard Pemberton to W.A.G. Young, Col. Sect'y, April 25.
8. Ibid., undated, reply inscribed at bottom of correspondence.
9. Ibid.. May 3, 1865.
10. Colonist, July 18, 1865, p. 3