On March 28 1909 Cannon Barnett said he had pleasure in opening the first Institute building “because the Institute is the first expression of the common life of the Garden Suburb” and he hoped “it might be the open door to a fuller and wider life”

Two years earlier, Henrietta Barnett had cut the first sod and started the building of her dream, a well-planned suburb that would provide homes for people of all classes, wide roads, gardens for all, hedges and trees, in contrast to the appalling conditions witnessed by the Barnetts in the East End of London.

The Institute buildings were completed gradually over another 21 years with each stage being marked with great excitement. There were several visits from King George V and Queen Mary who graced openings and laid foundation stones.

During the Great War, Belgian refugees were taught English. Towards the end of the war, The Institute School of Music was headed by Proms founder Sir Henry Wood. One of his teaching staff - ‘Fee to each teacher 15/- an hour’ - was nineteen year old Adrian Boult. Later, as Sir Adrian, he was to become one of the most famous English conductors.

Many of the classes from those early days are still to be found in our prospectus but the titles of some speak of a bygone era - such as ‘Nature’s garment and how to study it. Five shillings per class of one hour’

The first principal was Harold Lacey MA who, in the words of Henrietta Barnett “having earned the affectionate respect of people of all sorts and conditions was made principal in 1927.”

His successor was John Enderby who writes: ‘In 1952 the Chairman of The Institute Council, Mr Gurney Braithwaite MP, was seeking a replacement for Harold Lacey as Institute Principal and Secretary and Clerk to the Governors of the preparatory and high schools (today Henrietta Barnett School) . Mr Braithwaite offered me the post of Assistant Principal under Mr Lacey. At 26, I eagerly accepted the challenge of the appointment at a salary of £650 per annum I was appointed Principal in September 1953.

Both the Suburb and The Institute had been badly affected by the War. The Suburb Club House had been bombed and many houses destroyed. Institute evening classes had all ceased and by 1953 The Institute had only 650 students on roll. It was deeply in debt. The administrative staff numbered only two full-time workers and two part-time clerical assistants. This small team of dedicated staff was ably backed up by a team of voluntary helpers, including my long-suffering wife. As a contribution to The Institute as a charity, I agreed an initial salary as Principal of £750 per annum which would be supplemented in relation to the number of students attracted. Happily, by the time I retired, The Institute was showing a substantial revenue surplus; my salary had become a living wage; the status of Henrietta Barnett School as a three-form entry voluntary-aided grammar school had been preserved , the Art department had been upgraded and the English as a Foreign Language department had become the money spinner so badly needed.. With over 3,500 students on roll, The Institute’s intake was capped at this figure as it was felt that it could not function efficiently in crowded premises, shared with the school, without creating insuperable accommodation problems.

So, after 32 years, I retired to Dorset fulfilled that I was leaving with The Institute free of debt and assured of a substantial revenue surplus.’

John Enderby was succeeded by Josephine White (Parkes) who was Principal from 1985 to1991. She writes: ‘Oh, you don’t want to go there – it’s really old-fashioned.’ That was the reaction of one colleague when I got the job of Principal, Secretary, clerk to the governors of the Henrietta Barnett School and clerk to the Homestead (almshouse flats). I could see what he meant. To go into The Institute then was like going into a Dickens novel I wasn’t as good as my predecessor in serving the local community or looking after the old ladies in the Homestead – perhaps I placed too much importance on the role of Principal as against the other aspects of the job. But I did bring a wealth of adult education experience to my post. I drew on this experience – and it worked! Our enrolments soon increased enormously. In those days, there were no conditions of service. The Institute had operated on the basis of a simple ‘gentlemen’s agreement’. I spent a long time working on developing conditions of service with my Chairman, Michael Max, and when they were produced it was a relief to everyone.

It is the people I shall remember, though – people in the local community, students and members of staff, both full and part-time. To sum up, I think that my ‘principalship’ covered an interim period, linking the gentleman’s style of my predecessor and the new ways of my successor.’

Fay Naylor was Principal from1991-2008. As she recalls: ‘When I arrived at The Institute in Central Square for interview , I was struck by the serenity of the area, the beauty of the architecture and the civilized atmosphere. After an exciting and successful period working in West and East London, however, I wondered if I might find the Institute not sufficiently challenging. Looking back, I can honestly say that I was never bored and I faced challenges which are seldom experienced in education - including eight years of litigation on the use of The Institute’s buildings ending in a successful High Court case, five years of searching for a new site, and several years of long drawn out planning applications; I certainly felt challenged.

The resolution of the accommodation problems, culminating in the acquisition of the beautiful Arts Centre and the long lease on 11 High Road, N2 was due to the hard work and determination of Chairman Malcolm Davis who remained steadfast to his vision of The Institute’s relocation into purpose-designed buildings. . Throughout this long period of turbulence, The Institute continued to develop the range and quality of its curriculum and it became even more popular with students.

People often asked me what made me stay at The Institute through these difficult times. The answer is that I passionately believe in the value of what the Institute provides and the difference it makes to the lives of individuals and communities. People of all ages, cultures, incomes and social backgrounds are attracted to the college and most find what they are looking for in terms of learning and companionship with like-minded people, which is exactly in accordance with the ideals of the founder, Dame Henrietta Barnett.

The Institute has miraculously survived the many threats to its existence, including floods, financial problems and the wrath of politicians, and I congratulate everyone who contributed to that survival, among them past and present Institute governors, our two former Chairmen Michael Max and Malcolm Davis, the loyal, hard working, talented and committed staff - many of whom are still in post - and the many Institute students throughout the years who have enjoyed learning with us.

My warmest good wishes go to the present Principal, Joy Solomon and her staff who I hope and believe will secure the future of The Institute, which is now one of the few remaining free-standing adult education providers in the country.