MAP OF SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA SHOWING LOCATION OF PRINCIPAL MEETINGS

EARLY QUAKER EDUCATION
IN PENNSYLVANIA

By
THOMAS WOODY, Ph.D.
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

TEACHERS COLLEGE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
CONTRIBUTIONS TO EDUCATION. No. 105

Published by
Teachers College, Columbia University
NEW YORK CITY
1920

Copyright, 1920, by Thomas Woody

PREFACE

The purpose of this monograph is to present to the students of education, especially to those interested in the historical phase of it, some materials relating to education among the Quakers in Pennsylvania previous to 1800. Since the greater part of the source material on the subject is almost inaccessible, it has been thought desirable to incorporate in this work many reports on schools, such as may be convenient references for others who are interested in the early educational history of Pennsylvania.

The manuscript records which furnish the most direct light on this study are found in various depositories in southeastern Pennsylvania. Those that have been preserved and made accessible to the writer have been examined by him in person. With the exception of a few cases, the minutes of the preparative meetings have not been well kept; hence, that source of information is very limited.

If this work possesses merit, it is by reason of the coöperation of many men and women. I am obligated to the members of the Society of Friends who, as custodians of records, have been instrumental in forwarding the investigation. It is also a great pleasure to acknowledge the friendly encouragement and assistance given by Albert Cook Myers, of The Historical Society of Pennsylvania. I wish also to thank Professor Paul Monroe for the initial encouragement and continued interest during the progress of the investigation.

T. W.

Teachers College, New York
July 11, 1917

CONTENTS

EARLY QUAKER EDUCATION
IN PENNSYLVANIA

CHAPTER I
ORIGIN OF THE QUAKERS

An essential in leaders

Reforms, discoveries and inventions are, at the outset, conceived by individual minds; seldom, if ever, are they the simultaneous product of several. The original connection is seen and made by an individual, and afterwards may be accepted by his fellows, who may appropriate the new idea to themselves and make its applications manifold. The novel idea or relationship, once seen, thoroughly comprehended and expressed becomes either the common property of many, extending far afield from its original source, or is rejected because it fails to prove attractive to human interests or necessary for the satisfaction of human needs. By this means changes are wrought in a group or society of individuals, and the belief or the contribution of one individual becomes the faith or the possession of a nation. The meaning of the above statement is at once made clear by mere mention of a few names, such as Luther, Bacon, Pestalozzi, Confucius, Whitefield, Gœthe and Fox. It is with the ideas and the formally stated doctrines of the last mentioned that we are in this connection chiefly concerned.

Brief study of Quaker beliefs necessary

In a study of education among the Quakers it is desirable, if not absolutely imperative, to go back to the origin of the society and note, at least in part, the tenets of the society and the reasons for its foundation. For this purpose the best materials are to be found in the life and works of George Fox, the founder of the Society of Quakers. It would, perhaps, be unnecessary at present to make any considerable study of beliefs or tenets, if it were not for the fact that, in times past, some of the expressions of their belief have been misconstrued. For instance, reference may be made here to the so-called doctrine of inner light which was promulgated by George Fox at the very beginning of his work in 1647.[1] It will be of advantage to first sketch briefly the early life of this exponent of Quakerism.

Fox’s youth and early education

George Fox was born July, 1624 (old style), at Drayton-in-the-clay,[2] in Leicestershire, England. His father, Christopher Fox, otherwise known as “Righteous Christer,” was a weaver by trade and “an honest man.” His mother, he says, was of the stock of martyrs.[3]

His earliest life was spent in the home of his parents, under whose tutelage he received a careful religious training. He says of himself that he was unusually grave for a youth of his age and that his thought constantly turned to subjects of religious nature. This characteristic religious disposition, noticed by his mother, was the cause of a more indulgent attitude toward him than was granted the other children in the family, especially in regard to their religious instruction. Of his school education we have but a meagre account; according to Sewell, his only education was received in the home and consisted of the bare necessaries such as reading and writing.[4] The essence of his religious education seems to be adequately summarized in his own words as follows:

The Lord taught me to be faithful in all things, and to act faithfully two ways, viz., inwardly to God, and outwardly to man; and to keep to yea and nay in all things.[5]

As he advanced in years some of his people, being aware of his religious tendencies, would gladly have had him enter the priesthood, but others dissenting, he was placed with a man who was a shoemaker, grazier and dealer in wool.[6] In this employment he seems to have given much satisfaction to his employer, and, as for himself, he too enjoyed the work of shepherd, affording, as it did, ample opportunity for close communion with nature and limiting his connections with the corrupt society of mankind, from which he sought to free himself.[7]

Beginning of his travels

About the age of nineteen, his dissatisfaction with the world and the people about him caused him to leave his relations and acquaintances and to seek out a more lonely existence in some place where he was quite unknown. This decision being made, he journeyed “at the command of God,” first to Lutterworth, Northampton, Newport-Pagnell, and came finally, in 1644, to Barnet. During these days he was often in great despair and questioned whether he had done rightly in leaving his parents and friends. In these periods of misgiving he consulted often with priests concerning his condition and sought thereby a remedy, which, however, he did not find. Driven by sheer desperation he continued to travel, and, after leaving Barnet, came to London where he remained for a short time only, having come now to a decision that he should return again to the home of his parents.[8]

His return home

The return to his native village, however, was no cure for his mental ill, though his conscience was thereby somewhat stilled. He continued his visits to various priests, especially one Nathaniel Stevens, with whom he was wont to argue religious questions, and who, after Fox had enunciated certain beliefs, which will be mentioned later, became one of his most cruel persecutors.[9] Each succeeding experience with the priests was but a repetition of a former and it became clear to him that they saw nothing but the externals of his condition and had not the power to penetrate to the innermost complexities of his situation. According to his view their recommendations met only the demands of the ecclesiastics; his need was genuine and he was enabled to see the narrow limitations which hamper the activity of one man who attempts to parcel out salvation to another.

Three of Fox’s conclusions; fundamental

George Fox was now in his twenty-second year. It is pertinent that mention be made at this place of three fundamental beliefs or principles, whose truth, up to this time, had made itself manifest in his mind. The second of these is the one which, being so often misquoted, has become the basis for the belief on the part of many, that the Society was opposed to education.

1. And the Lord opened to me that, if all were believers, then they were all born of God, and passed from death unto life, and that none were true believers but such; and though others said they were believers, yet they were not.

2. The Lord opened unto me, that being bred at Oxford or Cambridge was not enough to fit and qualify men to be ministers of Christ; and I wondered at it, because it was the common belief of the people.

3. At another time it was opened to me, that God, who made the world, did not dwell in temples made with hands.... But the Lord showed me clearly that he did not dwell in these temples which men had commanded and set up, but in people’s hearts; for both Stephen and the apostle Paul bore testimony that he did not dwell in temples made with hands, not even in that which he had once commanded to be built, since he put an end to it; but that his people were his temple, and he dwelt in them.[10]

These doctrines which he began to promulgate in 1647 were recognized as fundamental, and their influence is plainly to be seen in the organization and discipline of the society which finally resulted.[11]

But not untried

It may well be mentioned here that though these tenets were incorporated in the foundation principles of the Quakers, they were by no means new, in the sense that they had never been accepted, in part, at least, by any other group of people. J. Brown, writing concerning the Quakers, states that Caspar Schwenkfeld, a Silesian of high birth, had promulgated the same doctrines of inner light, direct revelation and the inadequacy of the sacraments at least two centuries before the time of Fox in England.[12] The dispersion of Schwenkfeld’s adherents in 1547 led to the spread of their doctrines outside of Silesia, being embraced by a part of the Mennonite Church of Amsterdam, whence their entrance was made into England, and found acceptance in the minds of the Quakers.[13] This view is held also by other students of Quaker history,[14] and the similarity of doctrine is clearly seen in the statement of the Mennonite creed, as given by B. L. Wicks, a student of Mennonite history.[15] Further, it is known that some of the earliest preachers among Quakers went to Amsterdam and vicinity and found there a kindly reception by a part of the people, making converts among both the Baptists[16] and the Mennonites.[17] An instance of their kindly attitude toward Quakers and also of the recognition given their belief on the part of the Quakers, is shown in the account by Thomas Chalkley, concerning his journey of some nine hundred miles in Holland, Friesland and Germany.[18]

Kindly reception given to Quaker ministers

As I have had great peace and satisfaction in my travels in Holland and Germany, so, for inciting others under the like exercise, I may truly say that there is encouragement for faithful ministers to labor in the work of the gospel. I know not that I ever met with more tenderness and openness in people than in those parts of the world. There is a great people whom they call Mennonites, who are very near to truth, and the fields are white unto the harvest among divers of them, spiritually speaking.[19]

At Kriegsheim in the Palatinate Quaker exhorters like Ames and Rolfe, who had been sent out by the direction of George Fox, 1657, succeeded in winning converts among the Mennonites, though they were received unfavorably by the magistrates who fined those who offered to give them any entertainment.[20] It is from this same district that both Quakers and Mennonites made their voluntary departure and came to settle in Pennsylvania. Their prompt attention to school affairs on their first arrival is very similar to that of the Quakers, though in their case it was often the work of the laity, and not through the church organization.[21]

Journey of Fox, Penn, Furly, Barclay and Keith

A still more extensive missionary journey was undertaken at a later date, 1677, by several Quakers, among them Fox, Penn, Furly, Barclay and Keith. They visited Brill, Leyden and Haarlem where they held meetings, preaching to both Quakers and Mennonites.[22] The tour continued up into the Rhine region where Penn and his party came into touch with members of the Pietist group. It is doubtless true that this journey and the impression which was made by Penn must have played an important part a few years later when he opened his colony to settlers on the well known liberal principles.

In the presentation of the foregoing material it has been pointed out: (1) how the doctrines of the Quakers were rapidly spread broadcast by the itinerant preachers; and (2) that there was a great similarity between Quaker and Mennonite in doctrine and belief.

Increased number of ministers

The number of adherents estimated

The work of spreading the new gospel, as instanced by the work of Ames and Rolfe in 1657, was carried rapidly forward; as early as 1654, seven years after George Fox had begun to preach, he had enlisted the services of some sixty preachers who travelled continually up and down the country.[23] Such a number of leaders bespeaks a considerable following, though we have no record of a census of the followers made during Fox’s lifetime. Brown is apparently willing to accept Barclay’s statement that by 1675 they numbered ten thousand in London and by the end of the century, sixty thousand.[24] It does not seem that this is too large an estimate. It can be estimated from the work of Besse on Sufferings that between 1650 and 1689 there were approximately fifteen thousand individual cases of “sufferings.”[25] Since his work is compiled from “authentic records” it may be considered to be fairly accurate, though the errors, if any, would likely be to make the number too small rather than too large. As a matter of fact his collection includes some cases between 1689 and 1700, but the vast majority of them are from the period above stated. Certainly we must suppose that if such a large number actually came under the hand of English tolerance, then the total number of adherents very probably equalled or exceeded the estimate previously mentioned. Whatever objection may be made to the accuracy of these figures they may certainly be taken as fairly indicative of the growth of the sect; for that purpose they are intended.

Fox’s doctrine the basis in their educational practice

Just as the church discipline and organization are traceable to the hand of Fox, so also is the attitude on educational affairs. It has been said that the doctrine of the inner light made all education unnecessary, and this perverted idea has doubtless possessed even some members of Quakers to the extent that they came to regard learning as an instrument of Satan, a thing to be carefully avoided. However true this statement may have been of some members of the group, it certainly is not representative of the belief and practice of the Quakers as a whole. Some of the more ignorant may have interpreted the inner light to mean just that thing; but it is certainly true that such an idea was never expressed by George Fox, nor did it become the accepted belief of the organization, as is shown by their practices. The actual practice, educational, among Quakers is to be followed in this monograph. A later chapter will be devoted to a consideration of the views on education held by various individuals who have left some tangible monuments to their beliefs. In the present chapter, however, it is intended to indicate merely the position assumed by Fox in regard to the question at the outset of his labors.

As has been previously mentioned (page [2]) George Fox had the advantage of only a limited education. Opposition to the higher education, if he exhibited such, might find an explanation in this fact, assuming that not having shared its delights and advantages, he chose to deprecate it altogether. From a study of his utterances and his actions throughout his career it seems, however, that the facts point rather to a true appreciation rather than deprecation of education. The evidence appears to support, in a very satisfactory manner, the following points:

Fox’s educational creed

1. That he placed a great emphasis on moral and religious training.

2. Education should be of practical value; apprenticeship education recommended.

3. That the establishment of schools was believed to be necessary.

4. The objection to classical training was its inadequacy to prepare for a minister of the gospel.

5. That the scope of education was not limited to Quakers alone, nor even to the Whites, but should include also Negroes, Indians and the poorer classes of society as well as the rich. The remainder of this chapter will be devoted to a brief consideration of the foregoing statements.

First, in regard to moral and religious instruction, it seems hardly necessary to do more than state simply that he did urge moral education at all times. His whole life being permeated with the desire to propagate his newly founded society, it certainly is to be expected that he would recommend and insist on instruction of that nature. If proof be desired, however, it may be found in statements made from time to time, which are quoted below. The system of moral education based on the utterances of Fox was chiefly a prohibitory one, and it might well be questioned whether the result would not be passive rather than active virtues.

Prohibitions, moral, social and educational

... in warning such as kept public houses for entertainment, that they should not let people have more drink than would do them good; and in testifying against their wakes and feasts, May games, sports, plays and shows, which trained up people to vanity and looseness and led them from the fear of God: ... in fairs also, and in markets I was made to declare against their deceitful merchandise, cheating and cozening; warning all to deal justly, to speak the truth, to let their yea be yea and their nay be nay: ... I was moved also to cry against all sorts of music, and against the mountebanks playing tricks on their stages, for they burdened the pure life and stained the people’s mind to vanity. I was much exercised, too, with schoolmasters and schoolmistresses, warning them to teach their children sobriety in the fear of the Lord, that they might not be nursed and trained up in lightness, vanity and wantonness. Likewise I was made to warn masters and mistresses, fathers and mothers in private families, to take care that their children and servants might be trained up in the fear of the Lord; and that they themselves should be therein examples and patterns of sobriety and virtue to them.[26]

I was to bring them off from all the world’s fellowship and prayings and singings, which stood in forms without power: ...[27]

Kept prominent place in the church

These prohibitions and many others that were enunciated from time to time in his speaking and writing, were to be in time a part of the discipline of the organization, and were as religiously imposed on all members as the ardor of the meeting and the difficulty of the task would permit. The cases coming up before the monthly meetings for discipline are largely composed of infringements of the regulations, which grew out of Fox’s recommendations. These are, without question, of very ascetic nature. One instance which illustrates the incorporation of these ideals in the discipline of the organization may be cited in this connection.

All Friends, train up your children in the fear of God; and as they are capable, they may be instructed and kept employed in some lawful calling; that they may be diligent, serving the Lord in the things that are good; that none may live idle and be destroyers of the creation, and thereby become burdensome to others, and to the just witness in themselves.[28]

Apprenticeship education recommended

Second, the emphasis placed on the values to be derived from a practical education, to be gotten, to a large degree, through a careful system of apprenticing the children of members to people, members if possible, who would also be careful in regard to their moral instruction, is unmistakable. The practice as recommended, indicated below, became the general rule in Quaker communities, as is adequately evidenced in the meeting records. In this connection, however, it should be kept in mind that apprenticeship education could be legally enforced.

Being in London, it came upon me to write to Friends throughout the nation, about putting out poor children to trades. Wherefore I sent the following epistle to the quarterly meetings of friends in all counties:

My Dear Friends,

Let every quarterly meeting make inquiry through all the monthly and other meetings, to know all Friends that are widows, or others that have children fit to put out to apprenticeship; so that once a quarter you may set forth an apprentice from your quarterly meeting; and so you may set forth four in a year in each county, or more, if there be occasion. This apprentice, when out of his time, may help his father or mother, and support the family that is decayed; and in so doing all may come to live comfortably. This being done in your quarterly meetings you will have knowledge through the county in the monthly and particular meetings, of masters fit for them, and of such trades as their parents or the children are most inclinable to. Thus, being placed out with Friends, they may be trained up in truth; and by this means in the wisdom of God, you may preserve Friends’ children in the truth, and enable them to be strength and help to their families, and nurses, and preservers of their relations in their ancient days.... For in the country you know, you may set forth an apprentice for a little to several trades, as bricklayers, masons, carpenters, wheelwrights, ploughwrights, tailors, tanners, curriers, blacksmiths, shoemakers, nailers, butchers, weavers of linen and woolen stuffs and serges, etc., and you may do well to have a stock in your quarterly meetings for that purpose. All that is given by any Friends at their decease (except it be given to some particular use, person or meeting) may be brought to the public stock for that purpose. This will be the way for the preserving of many that are poor among you, and it will be the way of making up poor families. In several counties it is practised already. Some quarterlies set forth two apprentices; and sometimes the children of others that are laid on the parish. You may bind them for fewer or more years, according to their capacities....[29]

G. F.

London, 1st of 11th month, 1669.

The following lines, taken from the meeting records, are sufficient proof of the working out of this recommendation concerning apprenticeship education.

And executed in various meetings

It is agreed and concluded upon by this meeting, that the meeting take care of all Friends’ children that are left as orphans and unsettled, to inspect and see that all such be taken care of and settled in the best and suitablest manner, according to their capacity, that thereby they may discharge their duty and all such be eased by taking such due care.[30]

Third, the establishment of schools was believed to be necessary; for a proof of this attitude may be cited his action in regard to the establishment of schools at Waltham and Shacklewell.

Establishment of school advised

Then returning towards London by Waltham, I advised the setting up of a school there for teaching boys; and also a girls’ school at Shacklewell, for instructing them in whatsoever things were civil and useful.[31]

This statement would certainly indicate a liberal attitude towards education. Fox himself makes no further comment on what the nature of the school was to be. His interest in these schools, it is asserted, never flagged, and many visits were made in behalf of their prosperity.[32]

But classical education not the first essential for ministers

Fourth, the popular idea that has at times prevailed, that Quakers objected to giving an education such as was enjoyed by other sects, was probably founded on a misunderstanding of certain statements made by Fox with regard to education. Let us examine some of these statements, and seek to learn his intended meaning.

I saw that to be a true believer was another thing than they looked on it to be; and I saw that being bred at Oxford or Cambridge did not qualify or fit a man to be a minister of Christ; what then should I follow such for? So neither these, nor any of the dissenting peoples could I join with, but was a stranger to all, relying wholly upon the Lord Jesus Christ.[33]

I was to bring people off from Jewish ceremonies and from heathenish fables, and from men’s inventions and worldly doctrines, by which they blew the people about this way and the other way, from sect to sect; and from all their beggarly rudiments, with their schools and colleges for making ministers of Christ, who are indeed ministers of their own making but not of Christ; ...[34]

They could not know the spiritual meaning of Moses; the prophets and John’s words, nor see their paths and travels, much less see through them, and to the end of them into the kingdom, unless they had the spirit of Jesus; nor could they know the words of Christ and of his apostles without his Spirit.[35]

Then we came to Durham, where was a man come from London to set up a college there, to make ministers of Christ, as they said. I went, with some others, to reason with him and to let him see that to teach men Hebrew, Greek and Latin, and the seven arts, which were all but the teachings of the natural man, was not the way to make them ministers of Christ.[36]

These statements represent a small selection from many similar ones, and may be fairly taken as indicative of his position concerning this one point. They are the most drastic prohibitory statements made on the subject in all of his works. But even here we fail to find either (1) a condemnation of general or ordinary education or (2) a wholesale condemnation of classical education; indeed we read no objection to a minister’s possessing a knowledge of classical authors, such as was the case of both Penn and Barclay, provided he possess also the “light.” His statements may be summarized as follows:

Summary of educational statements

1. Classical training is inadequate as a preparation for ministers of the gospel.

2. Divine guidance is the one requisite for their preparation.

3. There is no objection to the classical learning if it be added to the qualification under (2).

Education not limited to Friends

Fifth, their conception of the scope of education did not limit it to their own people alone, but extended it rather to all peoples, Negroes and Indians, the rich and the poor. This is made perfectly plain in his address sent to the Governor of the Barbados in 1671.

Consider, Friends, it is no transgression for a master of a family to instruct his family himself, or for some others to do it in his behalf; but rather it is a very great duty incumbent upon them.... We declare that we esteem it a duty incumbent on us to pray with and for those in and belonging to our families; ... and to teach, instruct and admonish them; ... now Negroes, Tawnies and Indians make up a very great part of the families in this island; for whom an account will be required by him who comes to judge both quick and dead, at the great day of judgment, when every one shall be rewarded according to the deeds done in the body, whether they be good or whether they be evil.[37]

The effect of the above statements must tend to convince even the skeptical that any statement or belief, to the effect that the founder of Quakerism was opposed to education, is chiefly a myth based on either ignorance or gross misunderstanding.

SUMMARY

The origin of the Quakers and the organization and discipline of the Society are due almost entirely to the influence which first came from the founder, George Fox. He extended his belief in his native country and even into foreign countries by (1) preaching, (2) letters, (3) extensive travels on his own part, and (4) through the agency of many capable men whom he attracted to his service. For this service the leading of the inner light was deemed the only preparation which was absolutely necessary. The society experienced a rapid growth in numbers and, due to the policy of its founder, laid great stress on the moral and practical education of their youth. A great similarity existed between the beliefs of Quakers and those of the Mennonites, both of which came to form a large part of the population of the colony of Pennsylvania. The Mennonite beliefs are thought, by some special students of their history, to have been the determining influence in forming those of Friends; but this is not clearly proven. It is pointed out, by certain references to utterances of George Fox, which to a great extent formed the basis for Quaker practices, that the common belief in their objection to education is erroneous. The system of moral education was exacting and full of sweeping prohibitions, and, in those respects, according to modern ideals, quite inadequate.

CHAPTER II
MEETING ORGANIZATION: ITS CONNECTION WITH EDUCATION

An organization developed

The organization of meetings in the Society of Friends was based almost entirely on the recommendation of its founder, and still obtains without many variations from the type which was thus early begun. The organization thus planned was not developed completely at one time, but depended rather on the growth of the society in this or that section of the country. Meetings, as at first established, were not so specialized in their functions as they came to be later; there were those for worship and sufferings, the latter becoming in due time a specialized part of the yearly meeting, and for taking action in regard to poor members. The time was further occupied in disciplining those members who were not faithful to the doctrines of the church.

The place of organization in the establishment of schools

It is of particular importance for us to understand the ordinary arrangement of the meetings and their relation to each other, since it was by virtue of this organization of the church that its schools were set up. Perhaps no other factor played so important a part in the success which was met with in setting up schools, as that through the organization of the meetings all localities were kept in closer touch with each other than would otherwise have been possible at that time. As it was, the local meetings were literally forced to listen to the school-proposition, even though they were in the backwoods of America, or inhabited the Barbados. The chief means of communication established were church letters, travelling ministers, representatives from the constituent meetings, and reports of general meetings which were distributed to all those belonging thereunto.[38]

Purposes of the organization

Originally the purpose of the church organization seems to have been twofold. It was realized that among those who became members some would be less constant in their behavior than others; hence some sort of oversight was necessary to keep each and every one in line. In the second place, there were many adherents in limited circumstances and the Quakers’ belief made it imperative that these people be taken care of in the best manner possible.[39] Realizing the existence of these conditions among members, it was clear to Fox that a definitely organized meeting was necessary whereby (1) the necessary assistance could be extended to those in need, (2) discipline could be enforced for the maintenance of the religious life of the organization, and (3) new meetings could be officially established when and where they became necessary.

Early meetings established

The earliest mention that is made of a meeting established for these purposes is in the case of Balby, in Yorkshire, in 1658.[40] This statement is not exactly accurate, it seems, for we have also mention made of a general meeting, or what came to be known as a yearly meeting, as early as 1654 when one was held at Swannington in Leicestershire.[41] The meeting at Balby seems to have been of considerable importance and is frequently mentioned as one of the stopping places of George Fox. He recounts a meeting held at that place in 1660 “in a great orchard of John Killam’s where it was supposed some thousands of people and Friends were gathered together.”[42] The business of the yearly meeting seems to have been to devote some time to the affairs of the church; at any rate, this idea is expressed by Fox in writing of a similar meeting held at Skipton in 1660.[43] The characteristic of these meetings, that is always mentioned, is that they were attended by representatives from various towns and counties. The yearly meeting is still a representative body.

Meetings develop from larger to the smaller

The smaller meetings for worship were, of course, the first established. Aside from the question of worship, however, the development of the organization was from the larger unit to the smaller. We have noted above the beginning of the general or yearly meeting. As the sect grew in numbers, and the labor of caring for these, sometimes in a physical sense and again in the religious, increased, it became necessary to have a finer organization, the smaller units of which would reach the smallest communities. By 1665 there were established (1) the yearly and (2) the quarterly meetings, and in 1666 Fox recommended the establishment of a smaller unit, the monthly meeting, saying:

Then I was moved of the Lord to recommend the setting up of five monthly meetings of men and women in the City of London (besides the women’s meetings and the quarterly meetings) to take care of God’s glory, and to admonish and exhort such as walked disorderly or carelessly, and not according to the truth. For whereas Friends had had only quarterly meetings, now truth was spread, and Friends were grown more numerous, I was moved to recommend the setting up of monthly meetings throughout the nation. And the Lord opened to me what I must do, and how the men’s and the women’s monthly and quarterly meetings should be ordered and established in this and other nations; and that I should write to those where I did not come, to do the same.[44]

Number of monthly meetings set up

Immediately after this, there is mentioned the establishment of monthly meetings in Essex, Suffolk and Norfolk, Huntingdonshire, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire and Warwickshire and many others.[45] Three years later (1669) he reports fourteen monthly meetings in the county of York.[46] The rapid increase in the number of meetings and the extent of territory covered by them is a fair indication of the phenomenal growth of the society.

Following his resolve and subsequent exertions toward setting up of monthly meetings, during which he made very extensive campaigns, there came the great step which was taken to organize all under the general leadership of a yearly meeting, that of London. This was accomplished in 1672.[47] This general meeting of ministers drew up a resolution or minute to this effect:

London Yearly Meeting established

It is concluded agreed and assented to by Friends present that for the better ordering, managing and regulating of the public affairs of Friends relating to the Truth and the service thereof, there be a general meeting of Friends held at London once a year, in the week called Whitsun-week, to consist of six Friends for the City of London, three for the city of Bristol, two for the city of Colchester and one or two from each of the counties of England and Wales respectively.[48]

The meeting convened in the year following, in accordance with the above resolution. Many of the duties performed by the General Meeting of Ministers were transferred to the representatives of the various meetings. The ministers, though in fact subject to the approval or disapproval of monthly meetings, did not relinquish their oversight of each other.

The preparative meeting the smallest unit

The smallest unit in the organization was the particular or preparative meeting. This meeting is not mentioned in all localities, though it is clear from Fox’s statements that he recognized this as a part of the organization, for in a letter of 1669 he writes concerning the representatives of the quarterly meetings that,

none that are raw or weak and are not able to give a testimony of the affairs of the church and Truth, may go on behalf of the particular meetings to the quarterly meetings, but may be nursed up in your monthly meetings.[49]

Details of organization worked out by Fox

This statement is given here merely for the purpose of pointing out how completely the ideas of Fox were embodied in even the smallest unit of church organization. There is adequate proof of their existence in all sections occupied by the Quakers in Pennsylvania, and of their great importance in carrying out the details both of relief work for the poor, and in the establishment of schools.[50]

There have been noted different phases of the development of the meeting organization. When finally it was complete in all its parts, there existed a hierarchy of meetings, the lower and smaller units of which were subject to and under the direction of the higher. This resultant organization may be made somewhat clearer by means of a diagrammatical representation.

Functions of yearly meeting

The above diagram represents the relation of the various kinds of meetings in the organization of the Society of Friends. The yearly meeting (Fig. 1, Y) is the general head of the entire organization. Its functions are of a general directive nature and its influence of very wide extent. For example, it will be shown a little later that the Yearly Meeting of London issued, very early, certain communications concerning education which were sent to each meeting belonging to the London Yearly Meeting. In the same manner it exercised its influence along other lines than education. There is no special virtue in the number of meetings represented above; for example, the three Q’s do not mean that each and every yearly meeting had three quarterly meetings under its care. The number is not specified. In the case of the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting there are at present nine quarterly meetings and two half-yearly meetings.[51] The same variation is also true in the number of monthly meetings in a quarter, Caln Quarterly having only one monthly meeting, while Western Quarterly has six.[52] The same is true as to the number of preparative meetings.

Functions of the quarterly meeting

The quarterly meeting is representative of the monthly meetings which comprise it. Its functions are chiefly directive and advisory, though it may often occur that a bad case of discipline may be turned over to it by the monthly meeting. In the case of school regulations, its chief concern was to pass on the recommendations of the yearly meeting to the monthly meetings and to repeat them frequently, that the lower meetings might be stirred up to action.[53] It was also through the quarterly meetings that the reports on the conditions of schools in the monthly meetings were collected and sent to the yearly meeting. It was also quite customary for the monthly units to pass any of their decisions on a matter up to the quarterly unit for its formal approval or disapproval. Especially is this marked in educational affairs, and particularly in the Philadelphia Quarter.[54] This is most marked in the earliest years after establishment, and is due, no doubt, to a lack at that time of a very close differentiation in the functions of the meetings.

Monthly meeting the business unit

The monthly meetings are primarily the business units of the organization. Before them come all cases of care for the poor, apprenticing of children, enforcement of discipline, establishment of schools, requests for permission to marry, to remove to a new location and still many others. They may settle some of these finally, or they may act in connection with their superior meeting as mentioned above.

Function of the preparative meeting

The preparative meeting is the smallest organization unit and has its finger on the pulse of the local community at all times.[55] Officially it acts as the agent of the monthly meeting in carrying out the details of any piece of work that must be done, and which the monthly meeting is willing to delegate thus far.[56] Thus in the case of Horsham, for instance, the business of the schools in the scope of the preparative meeting is turned over to it and their organization and maintenance are under the care of its school committee.[57] The preparative meeting is at all times cognizant of breaches of discipline among its members and responsible to report such to the monthly meeting for settlement. One might go to great length to enumerate and explain all the detailed duties of each of these branches of the organization, but it is believed sufficient has been said of them, to make their action in educational matters intelligible.

We have noted, somewhat briefly to be sure, the organization and interrelation of the meetings in the Society of Friends. It is now necessary to point out what connection existed between this organization and the program put forward for the establishment of schools. This will be done by the presentation of certain extracts from meeting records which seem in all cases to have been responsible for kindling an interest in education in near and distant meetings, and keeping that interest alive by virtue of many advices until some material results were forthcoming. The selections presented are not continuous; they are chosen because they are representative and illustrative of the point in question.

Attention of yearly meeting to education in 1690

The Yearly Meeting of London was established (see page [17]) in 1672. Consistent with the purpose of its establishment, as then stated, it began at once to busy itself with certain important problems of the church. Among the first that received a considerable amount of attention was the education of the youths of members in the society, which was, of course, soon extended to include others. For instance, in 1690, there is given out this educational advice.

And, dear Friends, it is our Christian and earnest advice and counsel to all Friends concerned (so far as they are able or may be capable) to provide schoolmasters and mistresses who are faithful Friends, to teach and instruct their children, and not to send them to such schools where they are taught the corrupt ways, manners and fashions of the world and of the Heathen in their authors and manners of the heathenish gods and goddesses....[58]

And again in the year following we find the following advice:

1691

We are glad to hear that care is taken in some places, according to former advices, for the providing of schoolmasters and mistresses who are faithful Friends to instruct Friends’ children in such method as Truth allows. And we desire that Friends may go on in the care to provide such education and schools, for the advantage of their children and posterity.[59]

More specific instructions follow in 1695.

1695

And it is desired ... to take special care for the good education and order of Friends’ children in God’s holy fear, ... and also to see that schools and schoolmasters who are faithful Friends, and well qualified, be placed and encouraged in all counties, cities and great towns, or places where they may be needed; and that such schoolmasters, as much as may be, sometimes correspond with one another for their help and improvement in such good and easy methods as are agreeable to the Truth and the children’s advantage and benefit; and that care be taken that poor Friends’ children may freely partake of such education, in order to apprenticeship.[60]

At a much later date, 1745, very similar instructions are found among those issued.

and 1745

And, dear Friends, though frequently and repeated advices have been given from this meeting, respective of the education of our youth in sobriety, godliness and Christian virtues; yet, this being a matter of very great moment for the welfare of the present and future generations, we think it our incumbent duty again to recommend an especial care therein.... We also recommend to schoolmasters and mistresses, to educate the children committed to their charge, in the frequent reading of those sacred writings and such other good books as tend to their instruction in true Christianity; whereby their minds are in danger of being corrupted and led aside from the way of truth and holiness.[61]

A casual reading of the above statements, or any of numerous others like them, will suffice to point out to what great extent they are similar to the statements of Fox and other Quakers who were interested in education.[62] For convenience, the content of these extracts from the yearly meeting minutes may be summarized in something like the following:

1. To educate morally, according to Friends’ standards.

2. To train the individual in some practical employment.

A summary of important points in the extracts

They are accompanied by:

1. Select schools.

2. Teachers of approved morality.

3. Selected subject matter.

4. Apprenticeship training.

5. Schools to be in all communities, the stronger assisting the weaker.[63]

Exemplified in schools set up

The influence of these fundamental ideas about education is clearly reflected in the type of schools that were first set up in England. Those recommended by Fox at Waltham and Shacklewell in 1667, for both boys and girls, represent the first attempt.[64] At a later date, 1702, Clerkenwell was established under the oversight of London and Middlesex Quarterly Meetings, and in the latter part of the century the Ackworth School, founded by John Fothergill in 1779.[65] In all the schools established, of which those mentioned are representative, there is always found this primary emphasis on moral and useful training.[66]

Influence exerted by means of ministers, epistles and tracts

The great influence of English Quaker education on that in America was made secure by virtue of the very intimate relation between the meetings in both countries; this relation being constantly maintained through the traveling ministers, and tracts and epistles sent out by the yearly meetings. The same alertness, characteristic of London Yearly Meeting in these affairs, was likewise assumed by the Burlington and Philadelphia Meetings, from whence came numerous advices. As concrete evidence of this close relation existing, and the consequent communications, a few extracts thereof are inserted.

There was brought to this meeting (Middletown Monthly) the last London printed epistle, which was read, containing sundry weighty advices and exhortations with some comfortable account of the prosperity of the Truth in divers places, as also the extracts of our last yearly meeting (Philadelphia) wherein is recommended amongst other things, a half collection for the next year, and some proposals concerning the settling of schools in the country....[67]

That these letters of advice were not mere formalities but were really seriously considered and acted upon favorably or unfavorably, as in the first case below, is shown adequately in the following:

This meeting taking into consideration the proposals of last yearly meeting concerning the settling of schools in the country, are of the opinion that the method proposed will not answer for the Friends who live remote from each other in the country....[68]

Had definite results

In the case of Darby Monthly Meeting, later in the century, there is an instance in which the recommendations of the yearly meeting (1778) are followed most minutely in the reorganization.

In consideration of improving our school, agreeable to the recommendations of the last Yearly Meeting in 1778, and subsequent advices down to this time having been spread in this meeting and so and several remarks made thereon, pointing out the advantages which may arise therefrom to the present rising and succeeding ages, and the loss sustained for the want thereof, tending to animate a desire to pursue the interesting prospect. It is therefore now agreed that in future five Friends be appointed and called the overseers of the Darby School, three of whom shall be deemed a sufficient number to transact any business within their appointment, viz.: to have the oversight of and visit the school, examine the progress the scholars make in their learning, remark thereon as appears to them necessary; inspect the teachers’ conduct, and from time to time as occasion may be, with the approbation of the meeting, agree with and employ a teacher or teachers, and on sufficient cause appearing, discharge any such teacher or teachers, as also any unruly scholars who cannot be brought to submission to the rules and orders of the school; hear and determine upon all differences relative to the school which may arise between any teacher and employer, take into consideration and endeavor out after some eligible plan for raising a fund for the benefit of the school and as way shall open for it, pursue the same accordingly, and every matter and thing tending to promote a settlement for a school agreeable to the recommendations before cited; and as some of our deceased brothers have made donations to this meeting for the benevolent purpose of schooling children of the poor, therefore, the aforesaid overseers are hereby empowered and directed to receive and collect from the trustees thereof for the time being, the interest arising from the said donations, dispose thereof agreeable to the intentions of the Donors, and when necessary, advise and assist the trustees in taking better securities for the principal, and as future donations may be made for the benefit of the school, the overseers are directed to extend care therein, as the same shall become necessary, and keep fair minutes of all moneys received and expended and other matters of importance which come before them, to be produced in this meeting when called for, and preceding the quarterly meeting in the 8th month annually make to this meeting a clear statement of the amount received, expended and remaining in hand and outstanding and of the capital under their care; what donations made within the year past and for what purposes; and of such other matters as they may judge needful to enable this meeting to transmit the true estate of the school to the Quarterly Meeting, and as a fundamental of their proceedings they transcribe a copy of their minutes, together with such other writings as are necessary for their government in what is now constituted their cares.[69]

A committee was accordingly appointed and directed to choose their officers, that their business might be begun at once and properly performed.

Works of Penn, Barclay, Sewell, Turford, and others distributed

In addition to the advices sent out in the form of letters from the yearly sessions, the meeting also furthered regularly the distribution of books, tracts and pamphlets, usually the expression of prominent Friends, such as, for example, Penn’s Advice to His Children, Barclay’s Apology, Sewell’s History of Quakers, Barclay’s Catechism, Turford’s Grounds of a Holy Life, and many others of similar nature. Works of this kind were frequently sent over in lots, sometimes for free distribution, or to be sold to members; as witness the following:

Joseph Kirkbride and Walter Faucit, having been lately in London upon the service of Truth, did subscribe for 100 of Barclay’s Apologies on behalf of this yearly meeting, which the said meeting approves of; and agreed that Samuel Carpenter pay for them out of the yearly meeting stock and distribute them to each meeting according to their proportion of books that they usually receive, that so they may be given away by the several meetings for the service of truth.[70]

Sam Nixon informs the meeting that he brought from last quarterly meeting ten small books, entitled Reflections and Maxims, wrote by William Penn and printed for the use of schools, which he desired us to take the care of and to apply to the use intended as occasion may require.[71]

Produced at this meeting, 6 Barclay’s Apologies, 12 Richard Davis’ Journals, 7 Daniel Stanton’s Journals, 4 Hugh Turford’s Grounds of a Holy Life, 8 Barclay’s Catechisms; 37 books under care of Thos. Pickering, Thos. Watson, and Robert Kirkbride—to lend to the poor or others, as they think useful.[72]

The foregoing presentation of conditions within the church organization, their method of interaction, has been made so that the reader may understand that whatever activities may be later noted among the Quakers in Pennsylvania in connection with the establishment of schools, were intimately connected with and were in fact the result of the English influence.

SUMMARY

The form of organization of the meeting in the Society of Friends was due to the needs then existing, and was planned, even to the smallest unit, by the founder of the society. The chief purposes of the organization, when first begun, were (1) moral and religious discipline of members, (2) assistance to the poor among their number, and (3) to protect themselves against the oppression of outsiders (function of the meeting on sufferings). The functions of the higher meeting (yearly) were chiefly advisory in character, while those of the lower meetings (preparative) were to work out the details. Educationally, the yearly meeting exercised an influence very early by its frequent recommendations and the literature sent to the smaller individual meetings. This rôle was likewise assumed by the Burlington and Philadelphia Yearly Meeting.[73] This close relationship between the meetings of different order and the educational influence is in part shown by extracts taken from the meeting records.

CHAPTER III
EDUCATIONAL IDEALS OF QUAKER LEADERS

Criticism inevitable; beneficial

Any institution one may name has its adverse critics. The basis of their criticism is often ill-defined; it is sometimes fact, sometimes imagination; it may spring from a knowledge of truth, or possibly from ignorance.

Some criticism based on misunderstanding

Certain doctrines

Quakerism has had many critics and the effect of wise criticism may be seen in some of the changes from the old to the modern Quakerism. Much of that which was unjust and without foundation of fact, failed to have any effect whatever. But though the effect on the institution may have been nil, it occurs in some cases that the criticism still lives in the popular mind and is accorded a good degree of authenticity. By those better informed it may not be so considered. It is with one of these criticisms, concerning the attitude of Quakers toward education, that we are chiefly concerned in this chapter. Due chiefly to a misinterpretation of the doctrine of inner light and its application, which was mentioned in the first chapter, there arose an erroneous conception of the Quakers’ attitude towards education. This conception is not always constant; it varies now to this side, now to that, but does not cease to persist. In order that this criticism may be put as clearly as possible before the reader, use is made here of a quotation from the works of S. H. Cox, at one time a member of Friends, who expresses with clearness the opinion of a very considerable group of critics.

The criticism offered by S. H. Cox

But there is one feature of the system of Friends which deserves a recognition here—its inimical regard to classical and scientific learning. I do not say that all Friends are thus hostile, or that they are all alike hostile to liberal learning but I charge this hostility on the system. That such is its character, appears from the denunciation, the indiscriminate proscription of Barclay, and that not in a few places in his book. It appears in the general hostility of Friends to all colleges and seminaries where the elevated branches are thoroughly taught. Not one young Friend out of five hundred, even in this free country, ever obtains a liberal education in fact or in name; certainly never becomes graduated in the arts at any chartered institution, and where an instance occurs, it is always attended with special difficulties. They have no college of liberal science in the world! Some, I know, of the suspected worldly sort in Philadelphia have proposed and would have forwarded so excellent an object, but they were always awed into despondency by the unlettered, all-knowing light within. And in this, their obsequiousness was quite consistent, for if schools, academies, and universities are all in their nature wrong, and as such forbidden of God, it is certainly right to desist totally and at once from the prosecution of their cause! Incidental evils they will always include, but the system is not chargeable with these, unless in its nature it approves and fosters them. There will always be, perhaps, hypocrites at the communion table but christianity does not make them, and the purest ministry of the gospel will often become a savor of death unto death, but sinners themselves and not such a ministry are to blame for the consequence. And so the best organized system of intellectual education that the world has seen has often presented the appalling spectacle of profligate and wicked students perverting its privileges. But what of that? Shall we burn our colleges? Why not our primary school houses too? What beneficient institution, what bounty of the blessed God is not perverted and abused in this naughty world....[74]

I cannot leave this matter without remarking the power of education especially with Friends. Their mode of education is the making and the keeping and the secret of their sect. They subdue the infant conscience with the direct rays of the inward light. They identify all divinity and right in the associations of their children with the light within and its friendly fruits. Here the spell commences that grows with their growth and strengthens with their strength. Investigation is much akin to skepticism and is devoutly precluded—but what worse skepticism it is to suppose that investigation could raze the foundation of our faith. They must take everything for granted or see it in the light. They must wear a ridiculous cut and color of clothes, such as are orthodox or common to the clanship and use the plain language and act like Friends, and then if they feel awkward or foolish, if their garb appears ridiculous to themselves, if their manner expose them to jeering and affront, if they are insolently struck (as I have often) in the street by worthless boys and cursed as a “Quaker,” if their effeminate holy whine is profanely mocked, as it often is by saucy passengers, and if a thousand other inconveniences accrue, especially if they are sometimes asked for one good reason for such singularity in gratuitous opposition to mankind, they must just bear it all for righteousness sake, not be afraid of the cross, but remember early Friends how much more they endured in the same cause. Now much of this which they call a guarded education, is just the worst kind of sorcery. It is a fascination and religious tyrannizing over the blighted attributes of mind. It is a system exactly calculated to prostrate every noble, courageous and manly sentiment, and to transmute a fine ingenuous boy into a sorry, sly, and often simulating creature in the form of a man.[75]

Contrast Cox’s statements above with those of early Quakers in regard to education

It is not necessary to discuss directly the views set forth in the above quotation, as they are stated clearly enough in the author’s own language. However, in the following pages, there will be presented the views on education of as many prominent Friends as space will permit, that in so doing they may be considered in connection with the remarks of their critics and a just comparison made. In presenting the views of Quaker educators reference may be made to salient points in the criticism, which seem out of keeping with the ideas set forth and without foundation as matters of fact.

Only a few of the leaders’ statements to be considered

There are quite a number of men, in the brief period studied, who stand out clearly and express themselves definitely in favor of education, though they do not consider it the first requisite for a minister of the gospel.[76] From this number it will be feasible to select only a few for the chief consideration, relegating the remainder to a place of comparative unimportance and incidental notice. The work of George Fox, though he was poorly educated, had a remarkable effect on the educational work of the society. But it is not necessary to review that in the present chapter as it has been presented in the first.[77]

By far the most familiar of all characters in Quaker history is that of William Penn. And to his influence must be attributed largely the hearty interest in education shown, not only in Philadelphia, but also in the surrounding communities. He was well educated, but it is not desired to make a case for or against him on the basis of his education; let us judge by his written or spoken expression and actual procedure in practice. No attempt is made to prove or disprove his contentions as to what was right or wrong, necessary or unnecessary in education. The questions asked in his case and the others that follow is: What did they approve or disapprove of in education?

Penn recommends practical virtues

Not only in works that might be called strictly educational did Penn give educational advice, valuable alike to youth and to parents, the directors of youth. His advice to his children on the value of diligence and its necessity for success, and the propriety of frugality, even in the homes of the rich, embodies many of the most essential principles in education at any time. It is especially applicable to the education of the man of business, emphasizing the importance of the practical duties in life. Some pointed statements are especially worthy of repetition.

Diligence

Frugality

Diligence ... is a discreet and understanding application of onesself to business; ... it loses not, it conquers difficulties.... Be busy to a purpose; for a busy man and a man of business are two different things. Lay your matters and diligence succeeds them, else pains are lost.... Consider well your end, suit your means to it, and diligently employ them, and you will arrive where you would be....[78] Frugality is a virtue too, and not of little use in life, the better way to be rich, for it hath less toil and temptation.... I would have you liberal, but not prodigal; and diligent but not drudging; I would have you frugal but not sordid.[79]

This bit of philosophy is educational in its bearing in very much the same way as that of Benjamin Franklin.

In the letters to his wife and children, referring to the care for their education, he is more specifically concerned with actual school education.

School education recommended; the useful emphasized

For their learning, be liberal. Spare no cost, for by such parsimony all is lost that is saved; but let it be useful knowledge such as is consistent with truth and godliness, not cherishing a vain conversation or idle mind; but ingenuity mixed with industry is good for the body and the mind too. I recommend the useful parts of mathematics, as building houses, or ships, measuring, surveying, dialing, navigation; but agriculture especially is my eye. Let my children be husbandmen and housewives; it is industrious, healthy, honest and of good example, ...[80]

Private tutors desired

His preference, as might be expected from an Englishman of that time, was for a tutorial system of education. His reasons therefore seem to have been based chiefly on moral grounds.

Rather have an ingenious person in the house to teach them, than send them to schools; too many evil impressions being received there.[81]

The above quotation alone would seem to be adequate proof that Penn did not oppose education, but urged it for others and in his own family. But still more convincing and irrefutable evidence is found in the preamble to this school charter, whence an extract is taken.

Public education essential for the welfare of a people

Whereas, the prosperity and welfare of any people depend in great measure upon the good education of youth, and their early instruction in the principles of true religion and virtue, and qualifying them to serve their country and themselves, by breeding them in writing and reading and learning of languages, and useful arts and sciences, suitable to their sex, age and degree; which cannot be effected in any manner or so well as by erecting public schools for the purposes aforesaid, therefore....[82]

His ideals expressed in action

Yearly meeting recommend French, High and Low Dutch, Danish, etc.

If, as must be admitted, the previous statement points out the lack of any opposition to the ordinary rudimentary education that is necessary for the everyday walks of life, the last one certainly does the same in reference to his attitude towards a higher classical education. Moreover, this is not a mere skeleton of words never clothed with the flesh of action. The principles set forth in the charter were actually incorporated in the work of the schools established in Philadelphia, and we find them maintaining a classical school for languages and higher mathematics.[83] The practical elements received the just emphasis which belonged to them; it was necessary that the boys and girls be made able to earn a living and be at least ordinarily intelligent citizens. The example of Philadelphia was followed by other communities; practical needs were given the first consideration and a higher classical education offered when it became possible. Not only were these studies, which we would term higher education, mentioned by Penn and other writers among Quakers, but they were taken up and recommended by the yearly meeting. For example, in 1737, the minutes recommend that as opportunity can be found, children should be privileged to learn “French, High and Low Dutch, Danish, etc.”[84] This particular recommendation was made by the meeting because of a felt need.[85] If then in case of a need for a particular subject, they were willing to recommend that it be taught, can it be truly said that they opposed all education?

Barclay’s position defined

It may be well to examine Barclay, since it is with him and his writings that Cox takes issue. In his Apology for Christian Divinity Vindicated is to be found a very clear statement of his position on the subject, and he voices it as the principle of the whole society as well. He seems to be answering some critic, who has taken him to task for his educational views:

In his Apology

He goes on after his usual manner saying, I inveigh against all human learning that has been made use of any ways in Theology; but where he finds this asserted I know not, whether the words he would declare it from, to wit: that man hath rendered the plain and naked truth obscure and mysterious by his wisdom, will bear such a consequence is left to the reader’s judgment. But he thinks he has found out our secret design of being against learning and schools of learning, which is neither our affirmation nor our principle, but his own false supposition. We would, saith he, have all those banished, that we might more easily prevail with our errors. But methinks the man should be more wary in venting his own false imaginations, unless he would bring some ground for them; for his assertion is so far untrue, that if he had been rightly informed, he might have known that we have set up schools of learning for teaching of the languages and other needful arts and sciences,[86] and that we never denied its usefulness; only we denied it be a qualification absolutely necessary for a minister, in which case alone we have opposed its necessity.[87]

Benezet’s early life and education

Another character of very great importance in this connection is Anthony Benezet. Born, 1713, at St. Quentin in France, of “an ancient and respectable family” he spent his early years in France and then in Holland, whither his father had fled for refuge.[88] A few months were spent in Rotterdam and the family then moved to London where the father entered into the mercantile business and retrieved to some extent his fallen fortunes. This enabled him to give Anthony sufficient education to qualify him for that business, for which, however, he seemed to evince but little taste. Being of a very religious nature, he became a member of Friends at about fourteen years of age, and in that society found the field of his whole life’s activity, which was chiefly educational.[89] Considerable space will be devoted to his work in respect to the education of Negroes, so that will be entirely omitted in this place.[90] He was a voluminous writer, producing chiefly tracts and letters, and a great majority of these have a definite educational bearing. Because of the great number of them it is impossible really to do them justice, but an attempt will be made to state a few brief theses for which he unchangingly stands.

Education a function of government, but often neglected as such; hence individual effort necessary

First, education is a religious and social duty.[91] It is exceedingly interesting to notice that he looks upon education as in the first place a governmental function, if the governments of this world were influenced by true wisdom, they would make the proper education of youth their first and special care;[92] but since governments have neglected to do this, it occurs to him that it is a service for which Quakers are remarkably well fitted. It is a service for which the wage is very small and which secures no return of special social favors for the laborer. But they, being a quiet people, not wishing to gain great wealth or to shine in social positions, can find their sphere of activity in the education of the youthful members of society.

Children represent “capital”; they must be educated

Second, a special care in the education of the poor is urged.[93] This should become the duty and secure the interest of the well-to-do public spirited man, for if the upper class does not safeguard it, they cannot be educated. The poor child represents so much unimproved property, the owner being unable to improve it, which, if taken over by philanthropists, may become of some consequence to himself and perform great services for society at large. Such a movement would, besides being a great aid to the poor and uneducated, be also a worthy occupation for those who at present have nothing but time and money to spend. It would help them to realize that there is something real in the world, something greater than wealth and broader than religious denominations. The heart of Benezet knew no bounds; in his philanthropy he included all classes.

Third, a definite stand is made for higher standards for teachers.

I do not know how it is amongst you, but here any person of tolerable morals, who can read and write, is esteemed sufficiently qualified for a schoolmaster; when indeed, the best and wisest men are but sufficient for so weighty a charge.[94]

He endeavors to show that the work of a teacher is pleasant and should interest a better class of masters than it has in the past. The experiences of Benezet in the school work were of most pleasant nature. Not only by his own statement, but judged also by the accounts given in his memoirs by Robert Vaux, it seems that he was unusually kind and sympathetic as a master, which won him the greatest respect of his pupils.[95] The tasks of schoolteaching are only unpleasant when being performed merely for the sake of the wage obtained. Those who attempt to teach large numbers for the sake of a large income find it disagreeable; they form the class of teachers against whom he would discriminate.[96] Add to these three principles, his great contribution toward the freedom and education of the Negroes, his long life of service, and we have all for which he lived. It is stated that he had no private life; at any rate it sinks into oblivion in comparison with his interest and active work in public philanthropies.[97]

John Woolman, his position in regard to education

The responsibility of tutors and parents

The educational influence of John Woolman in regard to Negro and Indian education will be mentioned in another chapter,[98] but concerning education generally he was equally outspoken, and being a member of some consequence he was able to make his influence felt. Like Benezet, he regarded education as a social duty, both to each individual and to the community of individuals. This duty could not be performed by immoral tutors and schoolmasters, for the pupil could be made to rise no higher than the master; so the result would be an immoral society.[99] The responsibility, in the last analysis, for the right conduct of schools falls upon the parents. If they are indifferent, nothing can be accomplished for the schools, for the whole community is no better or more insistent in its demands than the individuals constituting it. For this reason he urges individual philanthropy to come to the aid of the schools, which are badly neglected; those who possess wealth can do no better, for, as he says:

Meditating on the situation of schools in our provinces, my mind hath, at times, been affected with sorrow, and under these exercises it hath appeared to me, what if those that have large estates were faithful stewards, and laid no rent or interest nor other demand, higher than is consistent with universal love; and those in lower circumstances would under a moderate employ, shun unnecessary expense, even to the smallest article; and all unite humbly in seeking the Lord, he would graciously instruct and strengthen us, to relieve the youth from various snares, in which many of them are entangled.[100]

Tuke, Whitehead, Crouch as advocates of education

If to this list of advocates of education, it is necessary to add others, mention should be made of Henry Tuke, George Whitehead, and William Crouch. In defending certain differences between the Quaker doctrine and that of other denominations, the former discusses this one, in not considering human learning essential to a minister of the gospel.[101] The reasons adduced are chiefly biblical; the knowledge of human literature is not recommended by the New Testament as being necessary for a minister, and this is considered conclusive proof. Moreover, it is pointed out that Paul, though a well educated man, disclaimed the value of his education for that service, and wished always to appear to the people as an unlettered man of God.[102] But Tuke goes on to explain that though it is not essential for a minister, learning is not unesteemed nor its usefulness slighted.[103] Members are desired to direct their attention to education, for a right use of it may promote religion and benefit civil society.[104] That the use of Latin and Greek is not decried may be seen in the work of Penn and Whitehead, who were both scholars, and whose works are full of classical references and illustrations. In one instance their chief argument against swearing is produced from certain references to the works of Socrates and Xenocrates, pointing out that the Greeks were aware of a higher righteousness excelling that of the legal Jews.[105] The same point of view with reference to a knowledge of the classics is taken by William Crouch, as is understood at once by this statement:

They acknowledge the understanding of languages, especially of Hebrew, Greek and Latin, formerly was and still is very useful, yet they take them not therefore to be necessary to make a minister nor so profitable as that one unacquainted with them must be styled an idiot, illiterate and of no authority.[106]

The Latin School of Philadelphia exemplifies contention of those quoted above

Education an asset; but apt to be perverted

Moreover, from various sources one is assured that a classical education was not abhorred by the Quakers of Philadelphia. The work offered in the classical school was for any one who had the ability to do it and its attainment was encouraged by Friends. The higher education was for girls as well as for boys, as we may judge from reading the journal kept by Sally Wister (or Wistar), a Quaker girl of the days of the Revolution.[107] She attended the school kept by Anthony Benezet,[108] which was one of the highest class, moral and literary, and patronized by the best classes of the citizens. Extracts from her Journal indicate that her education had not been limited to the mere rudiments, but that she enjoyed also an elementary knowledge, at least, of Latin and French.[109] This sort of education was clearly not uncommon among Friends and it was not the object of opposition on their part. It must, however, be kept in mind that the Quakers never confused education necessarily with true Christianity.[110] Religion in this life and the salvation of one’s soul in the next was a problem which concerned the poor as well as the rich, the untutored as well as the learned. How could the demands be greater for one than the other; the same tests had to be met and passed by all, the educated one received no favors though more might be expected of him.[111] Education was looked upon as an asset which might be turned to great use for Christianity, but the lack of it was never a bar to Christianity.[112] On the other hand, education might easily become, according to the Quakers’ views, a definite hindrance to Christianity.[113]

Scheme of education suggested by Thomas Budd

It would be quite improper in connection with this subject to fail to mention the scheme, Utopian in that day, which was conceived in the mind of Thomas Budd, for the development of a system of education for Pennsylvania and New Jersey. At the very outset it seems more comprehensive than anything suggested by any other leader, and in fact it embodied so much that it was quite beyond the limit of expectation for either of the colonies. Thomas Budd, though not at first a member of Friends, became convinced of the justice of their principles and joined the society before the year 1678.[114] He was a man of affairs and became greatly interested in the colonization of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, whither he soon came as a colonist himself. At that time it was equally true, as at the present, that if a scheme or undertaking was to be put through, it must be made as attractive as possible to the prospector. The attempt to do this called forth a considerable exercise of individual initiative, and one result was the educational plan outlined by Thomas Budd and published in Philadelphia in 1685. The details of the scheme as outlined are deemed of sufficient interest and importance to warrant their reproduction here.

Children to be in public school seven years or more

1. Now it might be well if a law were made by the Governors and General Assemblies of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, that all persons inhabiting the said provinces, do put their children seven years to the Public School, or longer, if the parent please.

To receive instruction in the arts and sciences and to learn a trade

2. That schools be provided in all towns and cities, and persons of known honesty, skill and understanding be yearly chosen by the Governor and General Assembly, to teach and instruct boys and girls in all the most useful arts and sciences that they in their youthful capacities may be capable to understand, as the learning to read and write true English and Latin, and other useful speeches and languages, and fair writing, arithmetic and bookkeeping; the boys to be taught and instructed in some mystery or trade, as the making of mathematical instruments, joinery, turnery, the making of clocks and watches, weaving, shoemaking or any other useful trade or mystery that the school is capable of teaching; and the girls to be taught and instructed in spinning of flax and wool, and knitting of gloves and stockings, sewing, and making of all sorts of useful needlework, and the making of straw work, as hats, baskets, etc., or other useful art or mystery that the school is capable of teaching.

Eight hours per day allotted to studies and chosen trade

3. That the scholars be kept in the morning two hours at reading, writing, bookkeeping, etc., and other two hours at work in that art, mystery or trade that he or she most delighteth in, and then let them have two hours to dine, and for recreation and in the afternoon two hours at reading, writing, etc., and the other two hours at work at their several employments.

Regular school work five and one-half days per week; moral instruction on Saturday

4. The seventh day of the week the scholars may come to school only in the forenoon, and at a certain hour in the afternoon let a meeting be kept by the schoolmasters and their scholars, where good instruction and admonition is given by the masters to the scholars and thanks returned to the Lord for his mercies and blessings that are daily received from him, then let a strict examination be made by the masters, of the conversation of the scholars in the week past, and let reproof, admonition and correction be given to the offenders, according to the quantity and quality of their faults.

Similar arrangement for girls educated separately

5. Let the like meetings be kept by the school mistresses, and the girls apart from the boys. By strictly observing this good order our children will be hindered from running into that excess of riot and wickedness that youth is incident to, and they will be a comfort to their tender parents.

Land endowment for schools

6. Let one thousand acres of land be given and laid out in a good place, to every public school that shall be set up, and the rent or income of it to go towards the defraying of the charge of the school.

Indians and the poor to be educated free of cost

7. And to the end that the children of the poor people, and the children of Indians may have the like good learning with the children of the rich people, let them be maintained free of charge to their parents, out of the profits of the school, arising by the work of the scholars, by which the poor and the Indians as well as the rich, will have their children taught, and the remainder of the profits, if any be to be disposed of in the building of the schoolhouses and improvements on the thousand acres of land, which belongs to the school.[115]

The industrial and commercial values to be derived are pointed out

The author does not claim to be entirely original in his scheme, having been influenced, he says, by a similar thing described by Andrew Yarenton in a book, England’s Improvements by Sea and Land.[116] His chief interest seems to be in the benefit to be derived for the commercial life of the colonies, and for that reason there is accordingly a great stress on the industrial education. By this introduction of the industrial schools, spinning for example, in the larger cities and the preparation of children at an early age for participation in that great occupation, the production of linen cloth could be made equal not only to the domestic demands but also a considerable margin for the foreign trade.[117] It is pointed out that the colonial consumer pays twice as much for his purchase as its cost of production in France or Germany, and that he pays this extra cost into the coffers of the English merchants. This profit should accrue to the home merchants.

Scheme to be encouraged by the government

Essential points urged in the scheme

The lack of governmental support; supplied through meetings of Quakers

The educational and also the industrial scheme is to receive the backing of the colonial government. It is recommended that laws be passed for the encouragement of linen manufacturers and that farmers “that keep a plow” should sow an acre of flax and two of hemp, with which to supply the manufacturers.[118] Educational support by the government was not secured, as is amply evidenced by the unsurpassed development of private and parochial schools of all denominations. The churches were the sponsors for education. It is worthy of note, however, that the elements emphasized by Budd, (1) education in the arts and sciences for all those capable of it, (2) industrial education for a trade for every one, (3) moral and religious training, and (4) equal educational opportunities for poor and rich or otherwise unfavored classes, are the same as those urged officially by the Quakers.[119]

Far from receiving governmental support, it was necessary that the schools be supported by individual or small group enterprise. The society recognized this, and it is stated in the organization of the church that the duty of the monthly meeting is to provide for the subsistence of the poor and for their education.[120] Furthermore it is recommended that all special bequests of Friends be kept as a distinct fund for the purpose originally intended by the donor, and that if expended for any other purpose, it must be again made up by the quarterly meeting.[121] One of the most frequent uses designated, judging from the records, seems to have been the educational.[122]

Have Quaker schools kept pace with the public?

The reader may have perused the foregoing pages with more or less interest; a curiosity may have been aroused concerning the present-day attitude of Friends, educationally. Have they experienced any considerable change? The institutional evidences of their continued interest are familiar enough to the educationist. But what is the attitude within the schools: Is instruction stiff and more formal there than in the public schools, and what can be said of the progress among the teachers? To answer all of these questions and similar ones is not the purpose of this present work. And in the following excerpt, taken from an expression drawn up by a body of teachers, it is not hoped to find conclusive proof of this or that, but perhaps it may be taken as a fairly reliable indication of the present professional attitude.

The pupil as an individual to be emphasized

Well-equipped teachers needed; and their academic freedom essential

The teachers’ subjects are not Mathematics, nor Latin, nor Scripture, nor Quakerism—they are boys and girls. The information imparted is, in a sense, a minor matter: the growth of the mind that assimilates it is all-important—growth in keenness, efficiency and power....

To the Society at large we would put forward this view that the principles urged above are deserving of careful consideration in making any forward move. The quality of the teaching given in our schools is in a measure in the hands of Friends; they have raised admirable buildings in many places—these are a small matter compared with the character of the staff. The freedom of the teacher, which is an indispensable condition of excellence is a gift they can grant or withhold. And that we who are responsible for the term of school life may have the best chance and the best reward, we would press upon Friends the need of laying foundations and awakening interest in the days of childhood, and of turning to best account the powers of those who go forth from our schools.[123]

SUMMARY

Summary of Cox’s position

This chapter treats of the attitude of Friends towards education. At the beginning there is presented a criticism of S. H. Cox, which is a concrete example of the type of criticism referred to in these pages. Following this there are presented the educational views of several Friends,—Penn, Barclay, Benezet, Woolman, Whitehead, Crouch, Tuke, and Thomas Budd, in order that the reader may judge of the truth or error presented in the criticism. The chief points made in Cox’s criticism are: (1) hostility of the Quaker system to classical education, (2) general hostility of the Friends to colleges and seminaries of learning, and (3) that the “light within” was sufficient without any education.

Summary of points maintained by certain Quaker leaders

From the material next presented it is shown that: (1) Penn recommended both practical and higher education, (2) useful arts and sciences are recommended to be taught in public schools, (3) the classics were introduced as a part of the curriculum in the Penn Charter School, and also in other schools established by the society, (4) Barclay explains that the society holds a classical education not absolutely necessary for a minister, though it is useful, (5) the learning of languages is recommended by the London Yearly Meeting, (6) education is advocated by Benezet as a religious and social duty; the education of the poor and unfortunate classes and races is urged; a higher education for schoolmasters is recommended, (7) Woolman urges the education of Negroes and Indians as a social duty; the responsibility is placed on the individual, (8) Crouch states that Hebrew, Greek, and Latin are recognized as useful and are not opposed when taught for that purpose, (9) Budd, one of the early Quakers in Pennsylvania, introduced a very comprehensive and Utopian scheme for (a) industrial education and (b) higher education, proposing to organize it under the control of the General Assembly, and (10) indications are that progress, within the teaching body in Friends’ institutions, is quite comparable with that of other institutions, though there is no attempt to produce conclusive evidence either to that effect or the contrary.

CHAPTER IV
EDUCATION IN PHILADELPHIA[124]

On ye 27th day of October, 1682, arrived before ye Towne of New Castle from England, William Penn, Esqe., whoo produced twoo deeds of feofment for this Towne and twelve myles about itt, and also for ye twoo lower counties, ye Whoorekills and St. Jones’s—wherefore ye said William Penn received possession of ye Towne ye 28th of October, 1682.[125]

The date of Penn’s coming disputed

It is probable that Penn reached Philadelphia in the latter days of October or the early part of November,[126] though no student of Philadelphia history has yet been able to settle the question of the day absolutely. Tradition says he came up the river in an open boat and landed at the landing on Dock Street near the new tavern, the Blue Anchor, which had just been erected by George Guest, a Quaker.[127] The formal ceremony of transferring the territory which had been arranged between Penn and the Duke of York before leaving England,[128] was accomplished with the Duke’s commissioners, Moll and Herman,[129] and the official debut of Pennsylvania in colonial society was no longer a hope but a reality.

Education provided for in first Frame of Government

The foundation of the colony’s educational institutions had, however, not been delayed till the formalities of “making” a colony were over. Education received early consideration in the Frame of Government which was drawn up from England by Penn and agreed to on April 25, 1682, before he prepared to depart for Pennsylvania.[130] In that document it is clearly set forth that education was the function of the civil authority, though the intentions of the author were not realized fully for more than a hundred and fifty years.[131] The same idea is present in each of the three Frames of Government which were drawn up; the first, April 25, 1682;[132] the second, April 2, 1683;[133] and the third, November 7, 1696,[134] under Governor Markham. The instrument drawn on April 2, 1683, contained in part the following stipulations, which bear the impression of the Quaker ideal of education.

The provisions

Tenth. That the Governor and the Provincial Council shall erect and order all public schools and encourage and reward the authors of useful sciences and laudable inventions in the said provinces and territories thereof.

Eleventh. That one-third of the Provincial Council residing with the Governor from time to time shall, with the Governor, have the care and management of public affairs relating to peace, justice, treasury and improvement of the province and territories, and to the good education of the youth, and sobriety of the manner of the inhabitants therein aforesaid.[135]

Quaker Council provides a school

The plan for education as above set forth was not destined to be the one followed consistently for more than a century and a half of development, though throughout the first decades the relations between the schools of Friends and the governing Council were very close.[136] It is significant that the first school was actually ordered by the Council, in keeping with Penn’s provisions. About one year after Penn’s arrival in Philadelphia the educational problem came to the attention of the Council and received decided recognition, as the following witnesses:

The Governor and Provincial Council having taken into their serious consideration the great necessity there is of a schoolmaster for the instruction and sober education of the youth in the town of Philadelphia, sent for Enock Flower, an inhabitant of said town, who for twenty years past has been exercised in that care and employment in England, to whom having communicated their minds, he embraced it upon the following terms: to learn to read English 4s by the quarter, to learn to read and write 6s by the quarter, to learn to read, write and cast accounts 8s by the quarter; for boarding a scholar, that is to say, diet, washing, lodging, and schooling, ten pounds for one whole year.[137]

Additional provisions or books

Charter of 1701 does not refer to education as did the former ones

Thus the first impetus to education in Pennsylvania came through properly constituted governmental authority. The Council records show that the interest in educational affairs was maintained for some time. In the month following a law was proposed for making several sorts of books for the use of persons in the province, and also recommended that care be taken about “Learning and Instruction of youth, to witt: a school in the arts and sciences.”[138] This interest in, and the close relation of the Council to, education were not long continued however; for this there is no satisfactory explanation, though it is very clear that the attitude on the part of the government did change.[139] This change is evidenced in the policy as outlined by the Charter of 1701, in which there is no reference made to education or the responsibility of the Governor or Council therefor.[140] To the writer it seems that the withdrawal of the Council from any very active participation in the affairs of education may have been due to two reasons: first, the willingness evinced by private interests to establish schools and thus take over to themselves the duties of educators (evidenced by the establishment of Keith’s school by Friends in 1689 without the assistance or advice of the Council);[141] and second, the urgent details of establishing a new government, which occupied their first attention.

If further proof of the withdrawal of the colonial government from the active establishment of schools, and of the fact that they did accept and recognize the assistance of private agencies is desired, it is to be found in various acts of legislation of the first half century. Specific instances of such permissive legislation were the acts of May 28, 1715,[142] and also of February 6, 1730-1.[143] This legislation is chiefly concerned with granting privileges to purchase and hold land and erect buildings for the use of institutions stated therein, among which schools are mentioned. In this connection the statute of 1715, which evidences the facts stated above, is quoted.

Be it enacted by Charles Gookin, Esq., by the royal approbation Lieutenant-Governor, under William Penn, Esq., Proprietary and Governor-in-Chief of the Province of Pennsylvania, by and with the advice and consent of the freemen of the said provinces in General Assembly met, and by the authority of the same, that it shall and may be lawful to and for all religious societies or assemblies and congregations of Protestants, within this province, to purchase any lands or tenements for burying grounds, and for erecting houses of religious worship, schools and hospitals; and by trustees, or otherwise, as they shall think fit, to receive and take grants or conveyances for the same, for any estate whatsoever, to and for the use or uses aforesaid, to be holden of the lord of the fee by the accustomed rents and services. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that all sales, gifts or grants made to any of the said societies, or to any person or persons in trust for them, or any of them, for or concerning any lands, tenements or hereditaments within this province, for and in any estate whatsoever, to and for the use and uses aforesaid, shall be and are by this Act ratified and confirmed according to the tenor and true meaning thereof, and of the parties concerned therein. And where any gifts, legacies or bequests have been or shall be made by any person or persons to the poor of any of the said respective religious societies, or to or for the use or service of any meeting or congregation of the said respective societies, the same gifts and bequests shall be employed only to those charitable uses, or to the use of those respective societies or meetings, or to the poor people to whom the same are or shall be given or intended to be given or granted, according to what may be collected to be the true intent and meaning of the respective donors or grantors.

The first meeting of record

The probable length of Flower’s tenure as teacher

On “11th month, 9th, 1682,” the Friends met and enacted business relating chiefly to the sick, a meeting house, purchase of books and such other details of importance, but made no reference to schools or the education of youth.[144] This remained true for all meetings till 1689,[145] the chief part of business in the meantime having to do with either (1) strictly religious affairs or (2) raising money for the poor and the orphans. The absence of any remarks or any plans for schools from 1682 to 1689 is more easily understood when it is recalled that the school under Enock Flower was set up in 1683.[146] There is no evidence to prove definitely that Flower continued as schoolmaster during the whole of this time, but (1) the absence of any record of change, (2) no record of schools kept by the Friends Meeting, (3) the fact that he was a teacher of long experience (twenty years) and probably as satisfactory as any to be found, and (4) the absence of keen competition on the part of neighboring places to draw him away, would lead one to believe it probable that he remained there for the greater part of the period at least.

In 1689 Friends determined to establish a school, designed to meet the demands of rich and of poor,[147] which does not seem at all strange since they were known to have been supporting their poor and the orphans by subscriptions since their first establishment.[148] The transaction of the business relating thereto was performed in the monthly meeting and referred to the quarterly meeting (higher) for its approval. The following extract from the records of the meeting gives the result of their decision:

Friends school set up under Geo. Keith

Friends being to encourage a school in this town, and in order hereunto they have agreed with George Keith to assure him a certain salary of 50 pounds per year to be paid quarterly, with house rent, convenient for his family and school, with the profit of his school for one year, and for two years more to make his school worth to him 120 pounds per year, if he shall think fit to stay in this place, the said George also promiseth to teach the poor (which are not of ability to pay) for nothing. The abovesaid Keith having heard the proposals of Friends, readily assented and agreed thereto, his salary beginning from the time school begins. It is agreed that it be also mentioned to the next Quarterly Meeting for their concurrence with the same, as also agreed that Anthony Morris give notice to the several monthly meetings in this county.[149]

A larger school needed

Makin hired as usher

The number of children who attended this school is not known, but it is clear that it grew rapidly. In January, succeeding the first establishment, the new master complained of the “inconvenience and straitness” of his school and Anthony Morris and Samuel Carpenter were appointed to consult with Robert Turner for a more convenient situation.[150] The first interpretation of “straitness” would undoubtedly be that it was crowded, and that might well have been true without there having been an increase in the size of the school; more conclusive proof of the rapid increase in numbers is to be found in the fact that Thomas Makin was hired as usher to assist Keith,[151] probably about February, 1690.[152] A more convenient room for the school was arranged for with John Fuller at thirteen pounds per year, three pounds more than was paid for the first.[153]

Thomas Makin recommended by Keith to be master

Makin chosen

In the 3rd month, 1691, Keith made known his intention of leaving the school,[154] whether because of dissatisfaction with the school itself or the beginning of the feeling against the Quakers which resulted in his rupture with them,[155] it is not known, and recommended to the meeting the appointment of his usher, Thomas Makin, to take his place.[156] It was Keith’s desire to leave on 4th month, 10th and he may have discontinued teaching at that time, but it appears that his account against the meeting was not settled until the eleventh or the twelfth month, 1691.[157] According to his suggestion concerning Makin, the meeting appointed a committee to consult with him,[158] the outcome of which was a satisfactory agreement. It would appear from numerous references to the subject, that the matter of getting the subscriptions and keeping them paid was a chief source of trouble, which required their constant energies and attention.[159] In 1693 Thomas Makin brought in a bill against the meeting for £12/15/7, which was still owing for his services as usher in 1690.[160]

Penn said to have written letter to Lloyd about the school

The last four years of the century saw greater strides made in the better establishment of education as a system. In 1696 it was agreed that there should be established four meetings a year, the chief function of which was the religious education of the youth in the principles of Friends.[161] Steps were shortly taken for the establishment of the so-called “free school.” Penn had written to Thomas Lloyd, President of the Council, in 1689, advising that a grammar school be set up (that of George Keith)[162] and it was this same school which in 1697 the meeting desired to make a “free school.” On 10th month, 31st, 1697:

A paper for the encouragement of a free school was this day read, whereupon Samuel Carpenter and James Fox are desired to treat with Daniel Pastorius and Thomas Makin concerning the same, and—they desire the Friends of the town to meet together this day week, about the 1st hour at this meeting house to consider further of it, and that Daniel Pastorius and Thomas Makin be present.[163]

Pastorius and Makin in the school

In the month following (11th month) Samuel Carpenter reported to the assembly that the committee had met with Daniel Pastorius and Thomas Makin and agreed to pay each of them forty pounds per year for keeping school.[164] The means of support was the familiar subscription blank, Samuel Carpenter and James Fox being the first appointed to take them. School was to begin the first of the following month, in the room over the meeting house, which had been prepared for that purpose.[165] In the 12th month a petition was sent to the Governor and Council, requesting the ordaining and establishment of the “Public School.” The text of the petition is as follows:

Petition to Council to incorporate the school

The humble petition of Samuel Carpenter ... in behalf of themselves and the rest of the people called Quakers, who are members of the Monthly Meeting, ... showeth that it has been and is much desired by many that a school be set up and upheld in this town of Philadelphia, where poor children may be freely maintained, taught and educated in good literature, until they are fit to be put out as apprentices, or capable to be masters or ushers in the same schools. And forasmuch as in the laws and constitution of this government it is provided and enacted that the Governor and Council shall erect ... public schools ... reward the authors of useful sciences and laudable inventions ... therefore, may it please the Governor and Council to ordain and establish that in the said town of Philadelphia a public school may be founded, where all children and servants, male and female, whose parents, guardians and masters be willing to subject them to the rules and orders of the said schools, shall from time to time with the approbation of the overseers thereof for the time being, be received and admitted, taught and instructed; the rich at reasonable rates, and the poor to be maintained and schooled for nothing. And to that end a meet and convenient house or houses, buildings and rooms may be erected for the keeping of the said school, and for the entertainment and abode of such and so many masters, ushers, mistresses and poor children, as by orders of said meeting shall be limited and appointed from time to time. And also that the members of the aforesaid Meetings ... make choice and admit such and so many persons as they think fit, to be masters, overseers, ushers, mistresses and poor children of the said school, and the same persons ... to remove or displace as often ... as they shall see fit. And that the overseers and the school aforesaid, may ... be ... in name and deed, a body politic and corporate, to have continuance forever by the name of the Overseers of the Public School founded in Philadelphia at the request of the people of God called Quakers. And that they, the said overseers, may have perfect succession, and by that name they and their successors may hold and enjoy, all lands, tenements and chattels, and receive and take all gifts and legacies as shall be given, granted or devised for the use and maintenance of the said school and poor scholars, without any further or other license or authority from this Government in that behalf; saving unto the chief Proprietary his quitrents of the said lands. And that the said overseers by the same name shall and may, with consent of said meeting, have power and capacity to devise and grant by writing, under their hand and seal and of said lands and tenements and to take and purchase any other lands ... for ... advantage of said school. And to prescribe such rules and ordinance for the good order and government of the same school ... successively, and for their and every of their stipends and allowances, as to members of the said Meeting for the time being ... shall seem meet; with power also to sue and to be sued, and to do and perform and execute all and every other lawful act and thing, good and profitable for the said school, in as full and ample manner, as any other body politic or corporate more perfectly founded or incorporated, may do.[166]

The petition granted and charter issued by Penn in 1701

This request was immediately granted by the Council,[167] and the school thus incorporated in 1697.[168] In 1701 Penn confirmed its incorporation by the following charter:

William Penn True and absolute Proprietary and Governor in Chief of the Province of Pennsylvania and territories thereunto belonging. To all to whom these presents shall come sendeth greeting. Whereas Charles the Second, late King of England by his letters patents bearing date the fourth day of March in the three and thirtieth year of his reign did grant unto me my heirs and assigns the said Province And Absolute Proprietary thereof with full power to me by the assent of the freemen there to make laws for the good and happy government of the same with divers other powers preheminsures jurisdictions, privileges and immunities therein specified. And Whereas I with a great colony of the People of God called Quakers for the free enjoyment of liberty of our consciences in matters of religion as of other privileges and advantages in the said patent granted as well to me the said Proprietary and Governor as also to the said people did transport ourselves unto the said Province and at our own risk costs pains and charges settled and planted the same the soil also of the said Province being first by me purchased of the Indian Natives. And forasmuch as by the laws of the said Province since enacted the Governor and Council have power to erect and order all public schools of literature and science. And Whereas Samuel Carpenter—Edward Shippen—Anthony Morris—James Fox—David Lloyd—William Southby and John Jones in behalf of themselves and the rest of the said people called Quakers Members of their Monthly Meeting at Philadelphia in the said Province by their petition to the Governor and Council of the said Province and territories at Philadelphia the tenth day of the twelfth month Anno Domini one thousand six hundred ninety seven (eight) set forth that it was the desire of many that a school should be set up and upheld in the said town of Philadelphia where poor children might be freely maintained taught and educated in good literature until they should be fit to be put apprentices or capable to be masters or Ushers in the said school requesting the Governor and Council in the said petition to ordain that at the said town of Philadelphia a Public School might be founded where all children male and female whose parents guardians or masters might be willing to subject them to the rules and orders of the school should from time to time with the approbation of the overseers thereof for the time being be received or admitted taught and instructed the rich at reasonable rates and the poor to be maintained and schooled for nothing. And that to that end a meet and convenient house or houses buildings or rooms might be erected for the keeping of the said school and for the entertainment and abode of such and so many Masters Ushers Mistresses and poor children as by the order and direction of the said Monthly Meeting should be free from time to time limited and appointed and also that the members of the aforesaid meeting for the time being might at their respective monthly meeting from time to time make choice of and admit such and so many persons as they should think fit to be Overseers Masters Ushers Mistresses and poor children of the said school and the same person or any of them to remove and displace as often as the said meeting shall see occasion, and that the overseers and school aforesaid might forever thereafter stand and be established and founded in name and in deed a body politic and corporate to have continuance forever by the name of the Overseers of the Public School grounded in Philadelphia at the request cost and charges of the people of God called Quakers. And that the said Overseers might have perpetual succession, and by that name they and their successors forever, have hold and enjoy all the lands tenements and chattels and receive and take all gifts and legacies that should be given granted or devised for the use and maintenance of said schools and poor scholars without further or other license or authority from the government on that behalf. Saving unto the Chief Proprietary his quit rents out of the said lands and that the said Overseers by the same name might with consent of the said Meeting have power and capacity to demise and grant by writing under their hand and common seal any of the said lands and tenements and to take and purchase any other lands and tenements and hereditaments for the best advantage of the said schools and to prescribe such rules and ordinances for the good order and government of the said school and of the masters ushers mistresses and poor children successively and for their and every of their stipends and allowances as to them members of the said monthly meeting for the time or the major part of them should seem meet, with power also to sue and be used and to do perform and execute all and every other lawful act and thing good and profitable for the said school in as full and ample manner as any other body politic and corporate more perfectly founded and incorporated might do and by the said petition which I have seen may more fully appear whereupon my then lieutenant Governor and Council did grant and order that the said schools should be founded and erected with the incorporation privileges and powers as desired. Now forasmuch as those of the said petitioners that are living have made fresh application to me in Council for confirming the said lieutenant Governor and Councils order and grant upon the said petition which being well weighed and considered by me I greatly favor the good inclinations and just and laudable desires and conscientious regards of the said petitioners and people for the education instruction and literature of their children and posterity and more especially their care and concerns for the poor on that behalf....

Therefore Know Ye that pursuant to the powers to me granted as aforesaid and to the laws of the said Province already enacted I have (by and with the consent of my Provincial Council) granted and confirmed all and every request matter and thing ... contained in the said petition and do by these presents for me my heirs and assigns grant ordain and establish that the said Public School shall be erected and founded, and I do grant, ordain and found the same to be kept forever hereafter in the said town of Philadelphia or in some convenient place adjacent as the overseers of the said school for the time being shall see meet and I do likewise grant and ordain that in the said school all children and servants as in the school petition requested shall from time to time (with approbation of the said Overseers) be received admitted taught and instructed as in the same petition is mentioned and desired and to the end that all meet and convenient houses, rooms, chambers and buildings may be erected for keeping of the said schools and entertainment of the masters ushers mistresses and poor children to be therein admitted as hereinafter mentioned. I do by these presents for me my heirs and successors grant and ordain that from the day of the date of these presents forever hereafter the members of the Monthly Meeting of the said People called Quakers in the town of Philadelphia for the time being shall have full and absolute power and authority and the same power is hereby given unto them in their respective monthly meetings from time to time to make choice of and admit such and so many persons as they shall think fit to be Overseers Masters Ushers Mistresses and poor children of the said school and the same persons or any of them to remove and displace as often as the said Meeting shall see occasion and likewise that the said Overseers shall have like powers and authority (with the direction and consent of the said Meeting) from time to time to frame and erect or cause or procure to be framed and erected such and so many houses and buildings as they shall see meet for the use and service of the said schools. And moreover I do by these presents for me my heirs and successors grant and ordain that the overseers and schools aforesaid shall forever hereafter stand and be established and founded and are hereby founded erected and established in name and in deed a body politic and corporate to continue forever by the name of The Overseers of the Public School founded in Philadelphia at the request cost and charges of the People of God called Quakers. And also that they the said overseers shall have perpetual succession and by the said name they and their successors shall forever have hold and enjoy (to the use of the said school) all the messuages lands tenements hereditaments goods and chattels and receive and take all gifts and legacies already given granted and devised or that shall be hereafter given granted or devised to the use and maintenance of the said school and masters ushers mistresses and poor scholars thereof without further or other leave license authority or power whatsoever from me my heirs or successors or from this government or any therein on that behalf saving unto me my heirs and successors the respective quit rents and other duties and payments out of the said messuages lands tenements and hereditaments and every of them reserved and payable in and by their several original grants and patents and furthermore I do by these presents for me my heirs and successors give and grant unto the said Overseers by the name aforesaid full power license and authority to give grant bargain sell alien enfeoff or demise with the consent of the said meeting by writing under their hands and common seal (or the hands and said seal of so many of them as shall make a quorum) to such person or persons his or her heirs or their heirs executors administrators and assigns as shall be willing to purchase or rent the same all or any of the aforesaid messuages lands tenements and hereditaments goods and chattels and likewise to purchase receive and enjoy all or any other messuages houses lands tenements and hereditaments for the best advantage of the said school. And also to frame make and prescribe such rules orders and ordinances for the good order and government of the said school and of the masters ushers mistresses and poor children thereof successively and for their and every of their stipends salaries and allowances as to the members of the said Monthly Meeting for the time being or the major part of them (in their respective meetings) shall seem meet with power also to the said overseers by the name aforesaid to sue and be sued and to do perform and execute and suffer to be done all and every other lawful act and thing good and profitable for the said school in as full and ample manner as any other body politic or corporate more perfectly founded and incorporated may and can do. And I do for me my heirs and assigns ordain and grant that the said school and the masters ushers members officers and scholars and all other persons placed or to be placed in the said school shall forever hereafter be accepted and freed from all visitation punishment and connection to be had used or exercised by any person or persons whatsoever other than the said Overseers for the time being and their successors. In Witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand cause the Great Seal to be affixed dated at Philadelphia the five and twentieth day of the eighth month in the thirteenth year of the reign of William the third over England etc. King etc. and the one and twentieth of my government Anno Domino one thousand seven hundred and one 1701. Recorded the 5th 10th 1701.[169]

Wm. Penn.

For Aaron K. Dunkel, Sec’y of Internal Affairs,
W. B. Huston.

Rechartered in 1708, and 1711, extended privileges

Made a self-perpetuating corporation

The charter of 1701 was confirmed and enlarged by another of 1708,[170] according to which the corporation was to consist of fifteen persons (Quakers) by the name of “The Overseers of the Public School, founded in Philadelphia, at the request of, cost and charges of the people called Quakers.” The charter of 1711[171] contained extended privileges[172] and also provided that the election of new members of the board of overseers should be the right of the overseers themselves, thus constituting them a self-perpetuating corporation.[173] From this the reader might expect that the school at once became independent of the Friends’ meeting, but this did not occur, since the original members or overseers were Friends and continued to appoint Friends as their successors. Reports on the various details of the business of the school continued to come into the monthly meeting, but it is not to be considered that we find there a complete story of its existence.[174] In 1699 it was found that the affairs of the school took too much time in meeting and therefore it was decided that Friends in the care of schools and press should meet on sixth day before monthly meeting, transact their business and keep a record thereof in books provided for the purpose.[175]

Mistresses employed in schools

The affairs of the school continued much the same as though no charter had been requested or granted. The records lead one to think that the growth was very rapid. Pastorius and Makin had become the masters in 1697 and by 1699 the indications are that “mistresses” were also employed, money being turned over to Anthony Morris to “pay the schoolmasters’ and the mistresses’ salaries.”[176] This is the first mention made of women as teachers. Pastorius having severed his connections with the school in 1701 steps were taken to fill the vacancy, it being decided that the newcomer should show his ability by competing with the one remaining master, Thomas Makin.[177]

Cadwalader to fill vacancy made by Pastorius’ leaving

Griffith Owen ... recommended John Cadwalader as a person very fit for an assistant in the school, and it being proposed a good method for the better improvement of the scholars that they be equally divided between them for trial to see which of them best discharged their duty, there having been great complaint of former neglect. The meeting approves thereof and desires the said Griffith to acquaint John Cadwalader thereof, and that he may have twenty pounds for a half year for a trial, as the former master had, and Anthony Morris is desired to show Thomas Makin this minute for his information in the matter.[178]

MASTERS AND MISTRESSES FROM 1700 TO 1800

Makin plans to leave school

Cadwalader becomes headmaster

Salaries increased

Nothing like a complete or connected story can be given with reference to the masters and mistresses of this period, due to a lack of adequate available records. In August, 1701, Thomas Makin announced his intention of leaving the school and requested that his accounts be settled.[179] John Cadwalader, who had been his assistant since 1700, was interviewed as to his ability to undertake the headship of the school; intimating if he thought himself fit, he would be further considered.[180] There is no direct record of how Mr. Cadwalader rated himself as teacher, but he was continued in the capacity of master. He found the limited salary[181] almost too small for the support of his family and upon his request it was soon raised to fifty pounds per year.[182] At the same time the salary of a mistress, Olive Songhurst, whom we meet for the first time and with scant introduction, was increased five or ten pounds. The prospect of a higher salary does not appear to have attracted him much for we learn of his intended separation from the school in May, 1702. It is not clear that he did actually sever his connection therewith at that time, for in June, 1703, it was desired that John Cadwalader, schoolmaster, be paid ten pounds that was left by Robert Jones for the use of the Public School.[183] This sum may have been for other services such as copying, which he frequently performed,[184] but it is more probable that he was convinced of the advantages of remaining at a salary of fifty pounds per year, with the additional sums paid for the copying work.[185]

John Every, usher

Makin returns

Jacob Naylor suggested for teacher

John Every’s connection with the school as usher is first announced in April, 1702, when he made demands for an increase of salary to thirty pounds, which was agreed to.[186] He remained there nearly two years and then departed, making a place for Thomas Makin, who returned at his request, agreeing to accept the salary previously paid to Every. These two masters, Makin and Cadwalader, appear to have been employed continuously until 1706, when they decided the school could not furnish a competent living for both of them and Cadwalader accordingly left.[187] There were further suggestions considered at that time and Friends appointed to endeavor to secure a qualified master from England. So far as the meeting’s minutes record, it seems that Thomas Makin was the only master employed from 1706 to 1708, when it was suggested that Jacob Naylor be employed as a teacher.[188]

Extra school room duties

The duties of the schoolmasters were by no means limited to the routine of the schoolroom. They were required to be careful of their several scholars and often had to do police duty among them during the meetings on first day.[189] The master’s only hope for any respite from the imposition of such duties was to stand firmly for his rights, else he might have been given charge of all the children in the meeting. John Walby, a master, when asked to perform a similar service, made answer that “he would take care of his own scholars, but did not care to undertake any further.”[190] His objection was sustained and another Friend endeavored to perform the task.

William Robbins

Richard Warden

Thomas Makin

Richard Brockden

In 1711 William Robbins[191] came to wield the rod in Friends School, having requested permission to keep school in a part of the Friends’ schoolhouse, which was “granted for the present.”[192] It cannot be determined how long he remained in that capacity, but the following year it was proposed that Richard Warden be allowed to teach school in one end of the schoolhouse, and it is quite probable that he filled the place of Robbins.[193] On the other hand, if Robbins did leave at that time he had returned again to the school in 1715.[194] Thomas Makin had in the meantime severed his connection with the school, but not permanently. Seven years after the employment of Richard Warden (1719) a vacancy occurred and a committee was appointed to visit the overseers requesting them to take action regarding the vacancy.[195] From this it may be judged that the overseers were at times remiss in their attention to their trust. The overseers were set in action, and Thomas Makin was secured to fill the place, provided he would agree to teach six children of the poor and give up the house when Friends ordered him to do so.[196] He doubtless filled a minor position at this time, though he was offered a better one, later in 1722, provided Richard Brockden were willing to leave it, which does not appear to have met with the said Brockden’s approval.[197] Of Richard Brockden little is known, save that he had been schoolmaster at Byberry about 1710 or 1711.[198] In 1724 William Robbins[199] mentioned above as a teacher some years earlier, applied for a place as master. It was agreed that he be allowed to teach on the condition that he would agree to teach at least four children for the use of the house, if ordered to do so.[200]

J. Walby

Death of T. Makin

It is quite probable that for most of the ten years preceding 1730 the school was under the charge of three or four masters just mentioned, Robbins, Brockden, Makin and Warden. They shifted quite often, that is certain. In 1730 mention is made of a John Walby as master; but no further account of him is given.[201] Thomas Makin’s career as teacher very likely came to an end in that period, as he was getting aged, though he may have taught up to the time of his death. An account of his death is given in the Weekly Mercury of 1733.[202]

Anthony Benezet employed 1742

Robert Willian master in 1748

From 1730 there is only an occasional mention made of the masters employed at the public school, until we come to the period about 1770 when the names were occasionally given in committee reports on the condition of the schools. However, with the fourth decade came a period of real greatness, for in 1742[203] began the services of Anthony Benezet, of whom considerable mention is made elsewhere, who continued in the public school till 1782.[204] He had throughout his life been interested in the Negroes and for several years previous had cherished a desire to work in their schools. His request, in that regard, was accordingly granted in 1782, after John Houghton relinquished that position.[205] He continued to teach the Negro school, until the time of his death two years later.[206] In 1748 Robert Willian came from England for the purpose of keeping Friends school, and was accordingly accepted into their meeting, having produced the customary certificate from his home meeting at Scarborough in Yorkshire.[207] The next mention of a new master in the ranks is concerned with Josai, who married in 1763.[208] Encouragement was at all times given to women as teachers, mention having already been made to their employment as early as 1699.[209] In 1764:

Ann Brientnall establishes small school

The meeting being informed that Ann Brientnall is desirous of keeping a small school for the instruction of Friends children only in reading and sewing and not being at present able to hire a place suitable for the purpose, requests the use of a vacant lower room in one of the alms-houses, and Friends approving her proposal, it is agreed that she may make use of one of these rooms for that purpose until she can accommodate herself elsewhere, or it may be wanted (for other purposes).[210]

The recommendations of the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia in 1778,[211] produced a very beneficial effect upon the school affairs in all of its monthly meetings. Thereafter, reports were sent in, bad, good and indifferent, which were much superior to anything that had been done previously, though they were still too infrequent and abbreviated in regard to information contained. A digest of the report of 1779 follows, which shows the number of teachers in the several schools at that time:[212]

Schools reported in 1779

1. The Grammar School was presided over by John Thompson who also taught writing and arithmetic.

2. John Todd taught reading, English, writing, arithmetic and some branches of mathematics.

3. Another master was Joseph Yerkes, who taught the same branches as Todd.

4. George Smith taught reading, writing and arithmetic to the children of Friends and others.

5. Anthony Benezet at this time was employed in teaching the Girls’ School in which were received also the children of other denominations besides Friends.

6. Sarah Lancaster taught the younger children of both sexes the rudiments of learning, and other branches suitable to girls.

7. Rebecca Jones and Hannah Cathrall taught together in the same school, which was for girls, a large number of them poor.

8. A school for younger boys and girls of various societies was taught in Pine Street by Essex Flower.

9. Spelling and reading were taught the younger children by Ann Rakestraw.

It appears from the meeting’s records that these masters and mistresses were all Friends, and that the schools which they taught were under the direction of the overseers of the public school.[213] Five years later another report was prepared and presented on the state of schools. At the later date several new names are found among the teachers.[214]

Schools and teachers reported in 1784

1. The Latin and Greek Grammar School is under the direction of Robert Proud, the historian.[215]

2. John Todd still continues in his old place.

3. Isaac Weaver teaches boys reading, writing, and arithmetic.

4. Sarah Lancaster continues in her old position as teacher of young children.

5. William Brown, engaged in teaching a girls’ school.

The five schools above mentioned were under the direction of the school corporation of overseers, and poor children were taught there free of expense. The committee also reported on five other schools, whose masters and mistresses were either Friends or made the professions of that religious society.[216]

Other schools reported

1. Mary Harry, teaching in Charters Alley.

2. Joseph Clarke, teaching in the girls school.

3. Mrs. Clarke (wife of Joseph).

4. Ann Marsh, teaching about fifty girls.

5. Mary McDonnell, teaching fifteen children.

Richard Hartshorne superintendent of the new school established at Westtown

This report of 1784 is the best during the century which gives a clew to the members in the teachers’ ranks. The growth from a school employing one teacher to a system employing ten does not seem great when measured by our present standards of increase, but for that century it is significant of rapid growth. Many of the teachers were people of no great importance, whose names were probably never known outside of Quaker circles; others were distinctly well known. In 1799 we find one other Quaker schoolmaster mentioned, Richard Hartshorne. The idea of a boarding school for Friends’ children had received quite an impetus about 1791, due largely to the interest and influence of Owen Biddle,[217] and by 1799 the school was ready to begin operations.[218] Richard Hartshorne was chosen to serve as its first superintendent and with the permission of the Monthly Meeting of Philadelphia moved to Westtown in 1799.[219]

SUPPORT OF THE SCHOOLS

Three chief means of support

From the very beginning of the schools in Philadelphia their primary means of support lay in voluntary subscriptions. We have already seen that this was the accepted means of raising money to maintain the poor and orphans,[220] and also to build their meeting houses; it was quite the natural way, really about the only way then familiar to them for maintaining their school system. As the meeting grew and the schools also increased many members were led to believe that it was advisable to endow them with legacies. This being in accordance with the recommendations of the Yearly Meetings of London and Philadelphia,[221] it became quite a common procedure in Philadelphia, as also in the other monthly meetings. Their third means of support was the rate which was paid by all children whose parents were able to bear the expense of their education.

Subscriptions urged, but not compulsory

Subscription method not entirely satisfactory

As has been stated, subscriptions were made voluntarily, though they might be rigorously solicited, enough at least to make some feel uncomfortable who did not contribute when they were able. There are instances which might be considered as mandatory though such cases are very rare. One such occurred in 1701 when, Tobias Dinnock desiring a certificate, the meeting reported there was nothing to hinder it save that he had not paid anything toward the school.[222] This does not mean that he had to subscribe but it was doubtless unpleasant pressure to have brought to bear on one. Subscriptions were usually made and paid at the subscriber’s convenience, or on a date which he designated when making the subscription. Though this was ideally satisfactory it often failed to work out just at the right time, so it was necessary to appoint a committee to go out after the subscriber and get that which he had promised to pay. The first record of a committee appointed on a service of this kind was in 1691. The work of such committees was continued throughout the century, and the following extract will indicate very well their function, without further explanation or reference.

Whereas several of the subscriptions towards the school are unpaid, the Meeting being engaged for the same, they have requested Alexander Beardsley, Anthony Morris, Francis Rawles, John Delavall and Samuel Richardson to use their endeavors to get what is unpaid of the said subscriptions, and they are desired to pay what money they receive unto Robert Turner and give account thereof to the next Monthly Meeting.[223]

Rates charged

The rates paid by parents in the earlier years of their colony are seen in the establishment of Flower’s school in 1683.[224] The next references made to the amounts paid for instruction, under the rate system, are in the report of the school committee of the Overseers in 1784.[225] Flower received four shillings per quarter for teaching reading, six shillings for reading and writing, and eight for reading, writing and casting accounts; if by the year, then everything was furnished for ten pounds. In 1784 Isaac Weaver received thirty shillings per quarter for teaching the same subjects which Flower had taught for eight.[226] William Brown also received the same amount for the same subjects which he taught the whole day.[227] Joseph Clarke was teaching for thirty shillings. For instruction in the three R’s it appears that the general tendency for the cost in 1784 was about twenty-two shillings higher than it was in 1683.[228] Small children were taught generally at about fifteen shillings per quarter, or half the customary price for older pupils whatever that might be. The general custom was that in cases where the school corporation sent poor children to a teacher they were admitted for a lesser rate than the others; if fifteen shillings were paid by others, then ten shillings might be paid for the poor children, schooled at the trustees’ expense. These prices for teaching among the Quaker masters are quite comparable with those demanded by other private masters in the city at about the same dates.[229]

Special bequests and legacies recommended and their probable effect

As was cited previously in this work,[230] the practice of making special donations, bequests and legacies was urged by the yearly meeting as a proper means of support for the schools or other institutions. These recommendations of the yearly meeting which were written in the form of letters, were transmitted to the quarterly meetings and through them reached all members of the monthly and preparative meetings in the compass of the general assembly. It cannot be doubted that they were a very important means to instill a desire to give to a worthy cause, and the very similar procedure in all monthly meetings seems to indicate that they constituted the most effectual means for getting anything definite done towards establishing any permanent foundation.

Will of John Lineham

Legacies of Wade and Richards

Nothing in the way of a complete survey of various legacies and donations given to the schools in Philadelphia will be attempted here, even granting that it might be interesting enough, but a few of them will be treated briefly. The first example of this individual philanthropy came before the monthly meeting in 1699, when the will of John Lineham was read, by which he proposed to leave “twenty pounds for the use of the public school.”[231] This sum was not to be expended at once for present needs but was to be kept as a “stock forever for that use.” Two members, John Kinsey and Ralph Jackson, were ordered to pay in the said amount that it might be turned over to Edward Shippen the treasurer. Other legacies were left by Robert Wade[232] and Mary Richards.[233] In regard to the former there was trouble about getting it settled, which lasted for many years.[234] The above names are only a few of the many who are mentioned by the minutes up to 1700 as having left donations for the school. There were indeed many others. In that year (1702) it was considered advisable that an account be kept of all legacies which had been granted to the use of the public school, as also those granted for the poor. Isaac Norris was appointed to prepare this account. Its purpose was probably to straighten out the tangle into which some of them had fallen (especially that of Robert Wade) and that one man might be held responsible for the expenditure of funds. No funds were to be paid out for the use of schools by Norris, except on the order of the overseers. Funds for the poor might be expended at the order of the monthly meeting.[235]

Trouble over the R. Wade legacy

The appointment of some one to see that an account of legacies be kept, resulted in some investigation of those already granted. It appears that that of Robert Wade, who probably died before 1686,[236] had not been paid at all according to the stipulation of the donor, which stated that £5 should be paid yearly for the use of the school. The first record of a payment of the £5 was in 1699.[237] David Lloyd and John Jones were accordingly appointed to attend to it.[238] Their success does not seem to have been very marked as in 1704 the minute again urges them to treat with John Wade (brother) concerning the legacy.[239] This was done, but their efforts met with a refusal to pay the money,[240] so a committee of three Friends was appointed with others to advise whether it should be sued for or not. Such activity continued without any significant variant features until 1707, when it was proposed by those “concerned,” presumably his brother, to buy off the legacy. Having been unpaid for several years past, it was considered best that something be gotten out of it, so a committee of three of the overseers was appointed to treat with the buyers and make as satisfactory terms as they could.[241] The minutes point to the fact that it was not settled to any one’s satisfaction. In 1712 it was still before the meeting and again in 1727 the overseers are directed to use “their care to get the legacy left by Robert Wade secured.”[242] Among other legacies, obtained more easily, was one devised by Jonas Langford, which was brought to the attention of the meeting in 1711. The amount of it was £50 in Antigua money.

Negro school likewise received gifts

The Public School, established by charter, was not the only recipient of such permanent endowments. The Negro School was a popular and proper object of philanthropy and was benefited by bequests very early after its establishment in 1770.[243] The first donation came in 1771 when £2, Pennsylvania currency, were given to Israel Pemberton and Anthony Benezet or their executors to be appropriated for the promotion of the school for Negroes, and to be paid to such trustees as might be appointed to the care of the said school.[244] In the year following another legacy of £10 was left for the instruction of the Negroes, and paid to Richard Blackham, treasurer of that institution.[245] Anthony Benezet at his death left a considerable sum as a legacy, which, added to the amount of salary which was still owing him for services in the said school, had amounted by 1800 to £103 and 4s.[246] The amount of other donations to that institution up to date amounted to £117/5/11.[247]

Funds also raised by bonds, rarely

In addition to the ways already mentioned there was also occasional recourse to a bond issue for raising funds, but the last was not common, being used only in emergency cases. The first example of it, which has come to the writer’s attention, was in 1701, when it had been decided to build a school house and the work being begun, a lack of funds occurred which prevented continuing. To meet this emergency it was agreed that the committee having charge of the financial matters should “take up 100 pounds upon interest for one year, giving bond jointly for the same and this meeting does engage to indemnify them for the payment.”[248]

BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS

Place of first school

School in loft of the meeting house

Various items on buildings and grounds occupy a considerable amount of attention on the part of the monthly meeting though the minutes are usually of general nature. The place of Keith’s school (1689) was doubtless no more than an ordinary house procured for the use of his family and the school at the same time.[249] This proved satisfactory only for a short time, and to remedy Keith’s complaint (1690)[250] of its “straightness” another more convenient room was arranged for by the committee with John Fuller for the rent of £13 a year. The former had cost but ten.[251] It is likely that the school continued to be held in the same house, others similarly, for about seven years; there is, at any rate, no mention of change of place or location for that period of time. At the end of that time the meeting made preparation to receive the school into the “inner chamber over the meeting house,” the expense of fitting it up being paid out of the meeting’s stock.[252] It was in this school in the loft of the meeting house that Daniel Pastorius and Thomas Makin first taught the school together.[253] The meeting house served thus as schoolhouse until early in the year 1698, when property was purchased for the purpose, the meeting minute of the transaction being as follows:

Property purchased for the Public School

Whereas Friends have purchased an house and lot of Lionell Brittain for the service of the public schools, according to that has already been agreed to by this meeting, and the said purchase is approved, and David Lloyd is desired to draw the writings for confirmation of the same unto Edward Shippen until he be secured the money, and then he to reconvey it again for the use aforesaid.[254]

First record of house built for school

In 1701 we find the first record for building a house for the sole use of the school, presumably on the lot previously purchased by the meeting.[255] Robert Burrough and Nathaniel Edgcomb were appointed to get the subscription for the building and pay to Anthony Morris, who was to agree with suitable workmen for the building.[256] The dimensions, “20 feet wide by 60 feet long,” were, at first consideration, thought to be satisfactory, but it was finally decided to build it 24 feet by 60 feet.[257] The work was at first to be supported by subscriptions, but before its completion it became necessary to issue bonds for the amount of £100.[258]

Property acquired by gift

The acquisition of property, this time by gift, continued. In 1701, Daniel Lloyd reported that a deed for the lot in High Street, given by Samuel Carpenter to Friends for the use of the free school, was signed to the said Samuel, and the meeting directed him to get another drawn to the overseers of the school.[259] It might easily appear that the new schoolhouse, just proposed, was to be built on this lot and not that previously purchased of Lionell Brittain. After due consideration it seems, however, that the greater weight is in favor of its having been built on the Lionell tract. The minutes show that as late as 2d month, 24th, 1708, the deed for the lot from Samuel Carpenter to the meeting had not been drawn up.[260] But as was previously mentioned, Anthony Morris had been told to engage workmen (3d, 30th, 1701)[261] and the statement that £100 had to be raised by bond to carry on the work (2nd month, 28th, 1701)[262] would indicate that the work had actually been begun and was perhaps well towards completion by the end of that year. It seems quite impossible that any such building program would have been carried on so long before the transfer of property was properly drawn up and signed. The years 1704 and 1705 are busy with the details of getting several pieces of property, purchased and received as gifts, confirmed by the commissioners of property.[263] Late in 1705 it is stated:

Property confirmed

All is done, viz.: a patent for a front lot, a High Street lot and twenty acres of liberty land and also a patent for a bank lot.... But this meeting house, ground and schoolhouse ground, being only in the name of Edward Shippen, in case of mortality, Friends think there is a necessity for a speedy reconveying thereof to more hands and for the particular use intended ... desired that the said Edward Shippen may convey them to Samuel Carpenter, R. Hill and Anthony Morris, being the persons in whose name the Patents are granted unto, adding the names of all the overseers of the Free School in the part belonging to the said school.[264]

Heating facilities

An iron stove placed in the school

Some light is thrown upon the interior arrangement of the school. In 1712 Thomas Griffith was ordered to pay Christer Thomason 12 for “making” a stove in the schoolhouse,[265] presumably an old fashioned brick stove, such as a few years later was condemned by William Robbins as being “injurious to many of the scholars.”[266] Mr. Robbins proposed that a “chimney might be erected,” and Samuel Preston was appointed to have it done, if not inconvenient or expensive. He reported that it would be a greater charge than represented and would hardly answer the end proposed nearly so satisfactorily as an iron stove, which he had thought necessary and had accordingly had set up, to be removed however if the meeting did not approve of his action.[267] The charge for the iron stove was £7.[268] Such items as the foregoing were brought up in the monthly meeting which appointed some one to attend to this or that detail; as the schools grew these were left more in the hands of the school committee or overseers, who reported occasionally thereon.

Overseers assume greater responsibility

This tendency on the part of the meeting to turn over the details of management to the overseers came to a head about 1725,[269] when it was agreed by the meeting that all titles to the schoolhouses and other property be conveyed the overseers of the public schools and a minute be drawn up relating to such decision.[270] In the month following, the minutes of the committee’s report were made referring to the transfer:

Titles to property to be transferred to the overseers

Anthony Morris, Ebenezer Sorge, Samuel Powell and Jones being appointed by the Monthly Meeting of Philadelphia the 2-30-1725, to meet with the overseers of the public school, do acquaint them that the said meeting being concerned for the promotion of the public school have unanimously agreed that the title of the school house and ground with the lots, tenements ... now in the tenure of Evan Owen and Thomas Cannon with all the other titles of real estate and annuities appertaining to the public school, be vested in the overseers thereof and desire for the future distinct accounts may be kept of all legacies and donations made to the said schools in order that the same may be duly applied pursuant to the intentions of the donors respectively.

Then follows a minute of the overseers stating their appreciation of the meeting’s coöperation in the work of the school.

An account of funds to be made

The Monthly Meeting of Philadelphia expressing the same kind inclination to encourage that at first led them to erect the public school and to procure the same to be established by the proprietor’s charter, as it is now under the care of the present overseers, having thought it necessary that an exact account should be taken of all the benefactions intended by the several donors for the use of the said school, the moneys or effects whereof might have come under the direction of the said meeting. In order thereunto appointed some friends to adjust the said accounts with the overseers, which being carefully done, it appears the meeting has received of such benefactions as aforesaid for the use of the school the sum of £226 ... and that they expended in the building the school house which was begun, carried on and finished under their care and direction the sum of £264 and 3d, whereby the meeting is in disburse for the public schoolhouse, above what they received in the sum of £37/15/3, which last sum or balance they were pleased freely to ... grant and release to the said school, together with the lot belonging to it and all those (equipages) and tenements now in the occupation of Evan Owen and Thomas Cannon with their appurtenances and all the rents, profits and issues thereof, and have accordingly ordered the persons who are by legal deeds or instruments vested with the right to the said tenements in trust for the meeting to (grant) and absolutely convey the said schoolhouse and ... with the lots and grounds on which they stand and appurtenances to the overseers of the school, to be held by them and their successors for the use of the public school founded by charter in the town and county of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania, forever.[271]

Papers to be executed conveying the properties

This transfer was at once acknowledged by the overseers in a minute of the same date, and Thomas Griffiths and John Goodson were desired to execute the proper papers conveying the properties to the said overseers of the public schools, which was accordingly done before the next meeting (4th month, 1725).[272]

New building proposed

By this time (1733) the old building erected in 1701 was badly in need of repairs, but on a closer examination it was decided more economical to pull down the old and build a new one, more convenient, on the north side of the school lot.[273]

and begun

New meeting house built large to contain school rooms

The work was begun immediately, though a lack of funds hindered its completion for some time.[274] The demand for an increase of building space seems to have been regular and urgent, indicating a healthy growth of the system. In 1740, when the consideration for a new meeting house came up, it was decided to build it large, “with chambers over it commodious for school rooms.”[275] In 1744 the overseers, finding the old school building inconvenient in divers respects, requested the monthly meeting to name a committee to confer with them on a plan, location and dimensions of a new building. Michael Lightfoot and twelve others were named.[276] The committee decided to locate the building on the south side of the lot devised by William Forest, the dimensions to be about 60 feet by 35 feet in the clear and two stories high, also a cellar under it, rising three feet above the surface of the ground. This quite pretentious building was not to be finished entirely at this time. The plan was to enclose all of it and finish the interior as the size of the school demanded.[277]

New school building requested on the Fox lot

Tenement buildings erected on lots as an investment for the school

For twelve years apparently no further building projects were launched. Then the overseers appealed to the meeting for permission to erect a school on the middle of the lot left to them by George Fox. This was agreed to by that assembly and a committee named to remove the present incumbent of the lot who had not paid the rent for some years past.[278] Their next building was begun, not for the purpose of a place of instruction, but as investment: It was proposed to the monthly assembly in 1760 that several houses be erected on the schoolhouse lot fronting Chestnut Street, expenses defrayed out of the treasury of the overseers, for the purpose of increasing the yearly income of the property.[279] The suggestion was well received and the liberty granted to erect one or more such houses.[280] In 1767 the accommodations for the Girls’ School, being unsatisfactory, the overseers of the school requested permission to have the chamber of the meeting house fitted up as a place for them, which was taken under consideration by a committee of the meeting appointed for that purpose.[281]

Building for negro school requested about 1771

The Negro School, established 1770, was first housed in a building rented for that use,[282] in which it continued for nearly a year. The plans for a permanent school made a building for that purpose desirable, and in 1771 the committee on education of the Negroes requested that a house be built on the lot where the alms-houses were situated, which was granted.[283] This house was occupied by the school until charge of it was assumed by Anthony Benezet (1782), who held the school in his own house.[284]

Restatement of points considered

In the foregoing pages we have mentioned some of the facts of the establishment and development of the school in Philadelphia, with reference to (1) founding, (2) support, (3) masters, (4) properties, buildings and grounds. It is deemed advisable to omit from this chapter any presentation of curriculum, excepting as that has been mentioned at a few places, reserving such presentation to a chapter comprising all the schools established in Pennsylvania. As a fitting close to the previous discussion of the century’s development, we present, almost entire, one of the reports returned by the committee of the meeting, which in a fair way will tell the reader more about the growth up to, and the status of the system in 1784, than will any discussion. Portions of the report are discussed in other chapters.

The report to the monthly meeting (1784) indicates status of schools on that date

The schools under their direction and care within the limits of this meeting, are:

(1) One under the tuition of Robert Proud, by whom about 30 boys are instructed in the Latin and Greek languages and some branches of the mathematics; his salary is fixed at £250 per annum, having an usher who is allowed £80 per annum, at the expense of the estate under the care of the overseers. The present £6 per annum for each scholar for which he accounts to the said overseers and has for one year past received one Guinea entrance to his own use and charges 5/ for fuel. We had some conversation with him on the case necessary to guard against the use of such books, whose contents have a tendency to prepossess the youthful minds with sentiments unfavorable to the Christian faith and the true spirit of the gospel; which appears had his attention, having observed a care therein agreeable to what the occasion requires. In this school are read Barclay’s Apology in Latin and the Testament in Latin and Greek. The overseers have enjoined the attendance of the scholars who are chiefly members of our own religious society, at our meeting on the fifth day of the week, but it had not been sufficiently observed.

(2) One under the care of John Todd, in which are taught reading, writing, the English Grammar, Arithmetic and some other branches of the mathematics. It consists of 88 boys on this list, for 83 of whom he has 20/ per quarter, 2/6 for pen and ink, 5/ for fuel; on the entrance of each 15/ except where the parents or guardians are not of ability to afford it, the other 5 being put to him by the school corporation, he teaches for 10/ per quarter. He remarked there are each day about 70 together. The master appears careful to observe good order in his school and frequently attends our meeting on the 5th day with his scholars. He also kept a night school in the winter season consisting of 82 scholars.

(3) One by Isaac Weaver consisting of about 28 boys, being limited to 10/ per quarter, 2/6 for pen and ink and 5/ a year for fuel, he takes no entrance fee and teaches reading, writing, and arithmetic, and is careful to keep good order in the school, also frequently brings his scholars to the meeting fifth day.

(4) William Brown teaches girls reading, writing and arithmetic, language, 8 whole days at 30/ per quarter 14 in mornings 15/ per quarter 13 in afternoon 15/ per quarter and for some time has been in the practice of taking 7/6 entrance fee, except for those placed with him by the school corporation—he represents some difficulty in enforcing the rules and regulations provided for the schools on account of the greater number of his scholars children of persons not professing with us.

(5) Sarah Lancaster has a school for young children of both sexes consisting of about 64 scholars of whom:

• 35 attend whole days at 15/ per Q.
• 18 attend, sent by school corporation, 10/ per Q.
• 11 attend half days, also sent by them, 7/6 per Q.

Also pay for fuel. She teaches both sexes to spell and read and the girls to sew and appears to have an orderly school.

In all the foregoing schools, which are under the direction of the school corporation, 41 poor children are taught at their expense. We also visited the following schools, the masters and mistresses of which are either members or make profession with our religious society, but are not immediately under the care of the board. (I give here only a digest of their report).

(1) Mary Harry.

• School in Charters Alley; 15-16 children at 15/ per Q.
• Income is about 40 pounds per year.
• Not a Friend but attends our meetings.

(2) Joseph Clarke.

• School in Fifth St.; about 30 girls.
• Curriculum—reading, writing and arithmetic.
• For 25 he receives 30/ per Q. and others gratis.

(3) Mrs. Clarke (wife) and Joseph Clarke.

• Same house; 15-16 boys reading; and the girls, sewing at 15/ per Q. each; they try to attend our fifth day meetings.

(4) Anna Marsh.

• 50 (approximately) girls and boys.
• Taught reading, and the girls, needlework; 20/ per Q.
• Each has a right of membership with Friends.

(5) Mary McDonnell.

• 15 young children at 15/ per Q.

In the most of the schools there are nearly one-half if not more of the children of the people of the societies and we wish Friends children may not be too frequently excluded for want of room, evident inconvenience being very observable in the present mixed state of schools, it is much to be desired that a more select mode of education could be effectually promoted; in the meantime it would be well that master be not too lax in the observance of the rules.[285]

Boarding school encouraged by Owen Biddle

Approved by quarterly and yearly meetings

Rules drawn up therefor

The other item of very great interest, though not in reality immediately connected with the schools in Philadelphia, concerns the establishment of a boarding school, which was to be founded and planned after one of the oldest and largest schools of the society, the great Ackworth School in England.[286] The project was greatly encouraged by Owen Biddle, who (6th month, 10th, 1790) published a pamphlet of 52 pages in which the plea for such a school was elaborated.[287] A committee was appointed to confer with him, and reported they wished to present their wishes also to the other monthly meetings of the city,[288] and they concurring, to present the wishes of the monthly meetings to the quarterly and so on to the yearly meeting.[289] The report, when presented to the other two monthly meetings, met with favor,[290] and it was accordingly agreed (1792) to bring the matter before the quarterly meeting.[291] The approval of the quarterly and yearly meetings[292] in the time immediately ensuing resulted in the plans being set on foot for a subscription of £5000 and which was made open to all members of the yearly meeting in whatsoever quarter; the amount of these, in 1797, was £247/10.[293] The school established at Westtown on the tract of land purchased by the yearly meeting, was opened in 1800,[294] with Richard Hartshorne as the first superintendent.[295] Rules and regulations for its conduct had been drawn up by a committee appointed by the yearly meeting in 1794.[296]

OTHER SCHOOLS IN PHILADELPHIA COUNTY

First school probably as early as 1710 or 1711

The date of the first school in Byberry has not been definitely determined, though it can surely be placed at a very early period in its history, as early as 1710 or 1711. Richard Brockden, who later taught school in Philadelphia,[297] was a teacher in the school at Byberry, for a minute of Abington monthly meeting states in the 4th month of the later year that “At this meeting Richard Brockden, late schoolmaster at Byberry, had a certificate granted him in order to go to England.”[298]

Greater activity near middle of century

This would indicate that the said Richard had been teaching at Byberry, and it is quite probable that he had, but it is not conclusive evidence that he did so. About the middle of the eighteenth century the Byberry Meeting became very active in schooling the children of poor Friends. This movement, it seems from all records found, was due in large measure to an apportionment received from a legacy left by William Carter to the charge of Abington Meeting, for the schooling of the children of Friends in poverty.[299] In 1755, it was:

... agreed that Horsham, Germantown, Byberry meetings shall have 40 shillings each for the ensuing year, and Oxford twenty shillings, Abington three pounds for the same time, (of the annuity left by William Carter) in order that the same may be employed in paying for the schooling of such children as the said meetings may think proper objects thereof if they find any, and the Friends of the said meeting are desired to see that the same be well applied and that the children who partake of the benefit thereof do go regularly to school.[300]

Donations under care of trustees, used for schooling poor

The money thus devised to the meeting was in the care of the committee appointed by the same, whose duty it was to receive requests and to investigate all cases where help was requested or found to be necessary. The accounts of the said committee were audited at a period when necessary by Friends appointed especially for that purpose.[301] This form of philanthropy became very popular here, as in other meetings, almost every meeting bearing forward a new record of it. In 1758 James Thorntown and Giles Knight reported that they had received of James Paul (treasurer of Abington Monthly Meeting) the sum of £6, part of the donation left for the poor children’s schooling, and had applied £2/5 of the same to that use, leaving a remainder of £3/15 in the hands of Knight.[302] In 1770 the records run in this manner:

It appears that Phillip Wells stands in need of some of the moneys that were given to the use of schooling poor Friends children; Thomas Townsend is therefore ordered to pay forty shillings of the money in his hands.[303]

Though very few references are made throughout the early period of the schools, it is quite certain from the nature of these reports on education of the poor that the schools were continued regularly. When the yearly meeting began to demand reports on the condition of the schools, there was no stir about the matter whatever, the first report being that those who have our school under care “report that it is in good order.”[304] The requests coming into the preparative meeting for information on schools, were referred to the standing school committee.[305]

Case of schools under standing committee

The standing committee performed all duties in connection with the school, with the exception of certain cases of difficulty, where it was necessary to call on the meeting for assistance, at which time that body coöperated with them through specially appointed committees.[306] The Byberry Preparative Meeting was, of course, not independent in this matter of school organization; their place was very much in accord with that suggested by a committee report to the various preparative meetings in 1790:

General plan for encouragement of better schools

We of the committee appointed to attend the preparative meetings with the extracts in order to spread the concern of our last yearly meeting, have attended to the appointment and taken into due consideration that part of them relating to schools, and being desirous to adopt it in so far as our present circumstances will admit, and in order to encourage any charitably disposed persons who may incline in their last will and testament or otherwise to give or bequeath something towards so laudable a purpose as to raise a certain fixed union for the support of schools, it is our desire that it may be safely counted to the care of the preparative meetings, he or she appointing, if they see fit, their own trustees and that Friends earnestly endeavor to provide for the schoolmasters a house lot, ground, etc., either purchasing or renting, whenever it may be necessary, and that our minds being deeply impressed with a sense that a guarded religious education of the rising youth is a matter of great importance it is our sense of judgment that Friends within the compass of this meeting should be pressingly urged to consider the necessity of employing conscientious and pious persons as schoolmasters, being members of a religious society and that the preparative meeting continue to appoint committees from time to time as occasion may require to have the care and oversight of such schools and that they visit the respective schools at least once in six weeks to see that good order be observed, and for the encouragement of the children in their learning, and render an account thereof to the preparative meeting once in six months. Signed the 28th of the 4th month, 1790.

By Samuel Gummere, Silas Walmsley, Thos. Walmsley,
John Townsend and Naylor Webster.[307]

In the month following the reception of these suggestions from the monthly meeting’s committee, the Byberry school trustees made the following report on the conditions of the schools, and the nature of their own activities.

Byberry report on schools

We, the trustees appointed by the meeting to have the care of the schools under the direction of the meeting, do inform, agreeable to our trust, we have several times met within the year past at the school in order to encourage the children in their learning, also to see that good order be kept by the master and children and we believe this a good measure complied with, and we further inform, that we have endeavored to comply with the intentions of the donor, by distributing the donations of William Carter, by schooling such children as we apprehended proper objects and have engaged as many as to take most of the money now in hand. (Clerk asked to give the committee a copy of the monthly meetings extracts that they comply with the regulations concerning schools.)[308]

Summary of a later report

The gist of their report six months thereafter is as follows:[309]

1. The trustees have met several times at the school in the last six months.

2. Afternoons are usually spent hearing the scholars read and in examining their learning.

3. The masters keep strictly the rules, which the trustees have laid down.

4. We believe the school is kept in good order.

School house to be enlarged

In 1792 it was considered necessary to enlarge the schoolhouse to make adequate facilities for the increasing number of children. The committee appointed on the subject decided there should be an addition of ten feet for the length; their suggestion was approved and a subscription begun to carry forward the work as speedily as could be done.[310] Thomas Walmsley was appointed to have oversight of the work.[311] The status of the school at the end of the century is stated in the report to Horsham Monthly Meeting, as follows:

School’s status at end of century

We have one school under the care of the meeting, to which our members send their children, except some Friends who live remote. It is supported by subscription; the tutor is a Friend and we believe endeavors to discharge the important trust committed to him. The children of such as are in straightened circumstances are schooled by donations left for that purpose—A committee appointed by the meeting frequently visits the said school and reports the state thereof.[312]

GERMANTOWN

Pastorius in Philadelphia

It has already been mentioned that Francis Daniel Pastorius taught in the Friends School at Philadelphia during the period from 1697 to 1700.[313] While in the school at Philadelphia it appears that he left his residence at Germantown vacant and took up his abode in the city. The following letter, written by his children, to their grandfather in Windsheim, indicates their longing for their “own home” at Germantown and the tedium of their school days in the Philadelphia school.

Wir Wünschen gar offt bey dir zu seyn / ach dass du hier wärest und in unserm Hause zu Germanton Wohntest / welches einen schönen Obsgarten hat / und der Zeit leer stehet / indeme wir zu Philadelphia wohnen / und täglich 8 Stunden lang in die Schul gehen müssen / ausgenommen den letzen Tag in der Wochen / da wir Nachmittag daheim bleiben dörffen.[314]

Early school at Germantown

The school at Germantown was opened on January 11, 1702, though Dr. Seidensticker thinks that this must have been preceded for some time by an evening school.[315]

Contributors

The first overseers chosen were Aret Klincken, Peter Schumacher, and Paul Wulff.[316] Those who contributed voluntarily to the school were: Anton Loof, Peter Schumacher, Paul Wulff, Jacob Delaplaine, Jonas Potts, Isaak Schumacher, Walter Simons, Levin Herberdink, Johann Bleikers, Dirck Jansen ... Johannas Umstett, Heifert Papen, Jan Lensen, Peter Bon, Hermann Bon, Dirck Keyser, Claus Tamson, Gerhard Ruttinghusen (and two others whose names can not be deciphered).[317]

Patrons of the school

The patrons of the school for the first year were: Aret Klincken, Reinert Tysen, Tünes Künders, Wilhelm Strepers, Paul Kästner, Reinier Hermans, Abraham op de Graeff, Christian Warmer, Arnold van Vossen, Johann Cunrad Codweiss, Cornelis Sivert, Aret Küster, Jan Doeden and Lanert Arets.[318]

Tuition

Evening school

The school admitted both boys and girls for instruction. The amounts paid by voluntary contributors varied from 2/ to 15/ per year, while the tuition charged was from 4d. to 6d. per week.[319] The evening school was intended for those who were forced to work during the day time, or for others who, because of their age, could not enter the regular day school.[320] Among the patrons from 1706-1708 there are to be found a great number of English names,[321] which may no doubt indicate that the school under the German master was recognized by English inhabitants to be of very high standard. His experience in Philadelphia would speak for that.

The school probably taught in English

Some question has been raised as to whether Pastorius taught the school in the English or the German tongue. Though in his manuscript it is found that he did use somewhat broken English,[322] we know that he taught the English school at Philadelphia, where most of the children were English.[323] The majority of his pupils at Germantown were, of course, German,[324] and doubtless German was spoken between them, and the teacher at times. The fact, however, that the titles of Pastorius’ school books were written in English, is pointed out by Seidensticker as an indication that the language of the province was given preference in the school.[325] It is also to be noted that the General Court had in 1696 ordered that the minutes of the Ratsbuch be transcribed into English, lending further evidence to the idea that the importance of the official language was recognized.[326] The length of continuation of the Friends’ school at Germantown is not known, though it seems likely that Pastorius may have continued in its service till the time of his death, or at least until 1718.[327]

SCHOOLS AT EXETER MONTHLY MEETING

Youths meetings established 1758

Exeter Monthly Meeting, established 1737, being set off from Gwynedd Monthly,[328] did not have any schools under their jurisdiction at a very early date. The first indication that the subject of education was being seriously considered was about 1758 when youths’ meetings were established, two each year, one at Exeter and the other at Maiden Creek.[329] These youths’ meetings, sanctioned by the quarterly meeting,[330] and another at Robeson several years later,[331] were the first steps taken for education of youth, and controlled by the meeting. It is true, there was a school (day school) even at this time situated near Samuel Lea’s, as we learn from a chance reference,[332] but though it was attended by Friends children in part, it was neither controlled by them, nor under the monthly meeting. This condition lasted until the recommendations of the yearly meeting of 1777 and 1778 caused the monthly meeting to look into the educational situation.

Committee appointed on schools

A new committee to visit the preparatives

In accord with the recommendations concerning “the proper education of youth” published in these years, and sent out, the meeting at Exeter appointed Samuel Hughes, Abel Thomas, Benjamin Pearson, Mordecai Lee, James Thomas and John Scarlet to take the question under their consideration.[333] For two years and a half the substance of the reports of the above named committee and its successors, was to the effect that not much had been accomplished.[334] In 1781 the committee reported they had visited the preparative meetings (two of them), and recommended to them the careful consideration of the youths’ education, under good moral tutors.[335] A year later, the committee was released, having, according to reports, accomplished nothing.[336] Those delegates who attended the quarterly meeting in 1783, brought back new advices, and were directed to furnish each preparative meeting with a copy and request a report on school conditions among them; at the following monthly assembly more of the preparatives were ready to report.[337] Despairing of any report, unless of their own making, the monthly meeting appointed a committee of nine men to visit all the preparatives and report what they thought of their schools.[338] They produced the following statement.

Report of the committee

No school of Exeter Preparative

A school at Maiden Creek

School at Reading

School at Robeson

Most of the committee appointed two months ago to take into consideration and report the state of schools have given attention to the service; and divers of us have attended each of the preparative meetings belonging to this meeting and after a time of conference thereon, ’tis agreed to report, there is no school within the village of Exeter Preparative Meeting under the care of Friends; But we are of the mind that it is necessary that one be established there; and although work has been begun, yet we have but little expectation of its accomplishment in a short time;

That there is a ... school at Maiden Creek kept by Thomas Pearson, a Friend, who is at present engaged for a year, has 15 scholars entered for that time and 8 quarterly ditto scholars at the rate of 40/ per annum for each, which is under the direction of three overseers chosen by the employers. The school house built on a piece of ground belonging to a Friend which contains about five acres. There is likewise a school at Reading kept by Benjamin Parks and wife in their own house; they are members of the society and have about 50 scholars; such as spell at 7/6 and others at 10/ per quarter but is not under the direction of the meeting, nor are there any overseers chosen to superintend the same, yet we are of the mind a school established there under proper regulations and care of the monthly meeting, might be useful and deserves encouragement.

The schools within the verge of Robeson Monthly Meeting are kept by a person who inclines to go to our meetings, has about 20 scholars, amounting to about £34 per annum. Endeavors are also used to get a school established there upon a better plan and near the direction of the yearly meeting, but how far they may be successful is at present unknown. We do therefore recommend the whole to the notion of alleviation of the Monthly Meeting as a matter wherein friends are deeply interested.

Which we submit to the Meeting.

Amos Lee, Thomas Lightfoot, Samuel Hughes, Fannie Ambree, Owen Hughes, (which was approved by the Monthly Meeting, and decided that the substance be made a report to the Quarterly Meeting—The Committee to be continued to the service of Schools and report in the future).[339]

Maiden Creek secures land for school

Attempt to establish school at Reading

Maiden Creek was at this time (1784) making earnest efforts to meet the standards set by the general meeting. In the eleventh month they requested a number of persons to be named to whom they might give a deed of trust for the ground agreed upon for the use of their school.[340] Three were suggested and the deed and declaration of trust accordingly drawn up. Efforts in the meantime had been made towards establishing a school at Reading and a committee to conduct a subscription for that purpose named.[341] Help was solicited from the yearly meeting, but James Pemberton answered for that body that there was no money to be spared at the time, so Reading was advised to build such a house as their circumstances would permit.[342] Near the close of 1787 those having direct charge thereof made the following report of their progress:

Committee report on Reading school

We the committee appointed to have the school education of youth under care, have given close attention to a school proposed to be opened in a short time at Reading by Caleb Johnson, in a house now in building by Friends there, and nearly finished, which we are of the mind should be under particular care and direction of the monthly meeting; and that it may be well that a committee be thereby appointed to superintend and monthly to visit said school; we have also drawn up and agreed on certain rules to be observed and attended to by the employers, master and scholars concerned therein for the regulation and well ordering thereof: which we have ready for the examination and inspection of the monthly meeting if thought necessary. All which we submit thereto. Signed on behalf of the committee, Francis Parvin.... Which minute being read was allowed of and it was directed that a copy thereof be kept in open view in said school and that the original be lodged among the meeting papers; Benjamin Pearson, Samuel Jackson, John Mears, Francis Parvin, Johannes Lee, Jr., and James Iddings are appointed to have the said school under care and visit it once a month or oftener as necessity may require and report of their care. The former committee is continued.[343]

School discontinued

After the school had been in progress two years, Samuel Jackson reported that it “appeared to be in an increasing way”[344] but its prosperity was not to be long continued. In 1705 it was reported “discontinued,”[345] and no reason assigned for it excepting “the situation of the Friends there” which, taking into consideration the shortage of funds when it was begun, we may infer, had reference to the financial situation. The action of the monthly meeting in regard to it was left entirely to their own judgment.[346]

SUMMARY

Scope of chapter

In this chapter we have considered the schools of Philadelphia (city and county), and also those at Exeter Monthly Meeting, which belonged to the Philadelphia Quarter.

Education to be function of government

First school

School established by monthly meeting

Overseers made independent

Education in the Quaker colony was initially provided for in the instrument of government, drawn up before the Proprietary left England; in accord with said provisions the first school (Flower’s) was set up by the Council in 1683. Thereafter, however, the initiative was usually taken by the Quaker meeting, which in 1689 set up a school and in 1697 applied for a charter under the laws of the province. This petition was granted and Penn gave the first charter in 1701. Later charters, in 1708 and 1711, granted extended privileges; by the last one the body of overseers were made self-perpetuating, and thus as independent of the meeting as they wished to be. The letter said to have been written to Thomas Lloyd, which credits Penn with suggesting the school of 1689, has not yet been discovered.

Earliest masters and mistresses

Growth of system

The earliest masters were Keith, Makin, Pastorius, and Cadwalader. Mistresses were mentioned in connection with the schools from about 1699, Olive Songhurst being the first one named. Salaries were not high and seem in some cases to have hardly sufficed for the family of the master; increases were made upon complaint. Extra duties for the teacher included keeping charge of the boys and girls in meeting. From 1689 to 1779 the system increased from employing one to one which required nine. In 1784 ten were reported.

Means of support

Philadelphia Friends’ schools were first supported by (1) rates and (2) subscriptions, while (3) legacies and special gifts soon came to form a considerable item in their support. Bequests were also a factor in the support of the Negro School. Funds were occasionally raised by bond issues, and derived from tenements built on school property.

Place of first schools

Property by purchase and gift

Overseers more independent

Schools were first held in rented property and in the meeting house, but in 1698 steps were taken to purchase property of Lionell Brittain for the use of schools. Property was received as a gift from Samuel Carpenter in 1701. The first record of a schoolhouse was the one to be begun in 1701. In accord with their charter rights the power and independence of the overseers increased. In 1725 the monthly meeting conveyed to them all money and the titles for all school property. The Negro School was provided with a building in 1771. The end of the century is marked by the establishment by the yearly meeting of a Boarding School at Westtown in Chester County.

Byberry

The exact date of Byberry’s first school is not determined; but must have been early, since Richard Brockden is reported to have been schoolmaster there in 1711. School activity, however, seems to have increased greatly near the middle of the century. The school was under the care of a standing committee, which was to visit schools every six weeks and make two reports thereon each year. Poor children were schooled by the trustees of the school funds.

Germantown

Germantown school began in 1702, though perhaps an evening school existed before that date. Pastorius continued in this school as master, at least until 1718. The official language used in the school was probably English. The names of the first patrons were all German; a large number of English names among them in 1708 is an indication of how the school and its master were regarded.

Exeter Monthly

Maidencreek Reading Robeson

In 1758 youths’ meetings were established by Exeter, but no school committee was appointed until 1778. This committee accomplished nothing and made no report of value. By a report of 1784, Maidencreek, Reading, and Robeson were credited with one school each, which measured up in some ways to the desired standards. Exeter had none. The Reading School was discontinued in 1795.

The total number of schools reported at Philadelphia, Germantown, Byberry, and Exeter monthly meeting, was fifteen.

CHAPTER V
SCHOOLS OF BUCKS COUNTY

Schools of five monthly meetings to be discussed

The establishment of schools in Bucks County will be discussed (1) under the head of the monthly meetings therein situated and (2) in the order of their establishment in point of time. The several monthly meetings and their dates of establishment, respectively, are as follows: Falls, 1683; Middletown, 1683 (known as Neshaminy until 1706); Buckingham, set off from Falls, 1720; Wrightstown, set off from Buckingham, 1734; and Richland, set off from Gwynedd (in Montgomery County) in 1742.[347] Of these meetings, all were a part of Bucks Quarterly Meeting save Richland, which belonged to that of Abington.[348]

Apprenticeship looked after by meetings; placed among Friends

The first way in which the early Quakers usually looked after education was to arrange for a useful apprenticeship suitable to the individual, which was calculated to enable him or her to earn a living. The moral training was always considered when an apprentice was to be placed. The placing of youths as apprentices was in the charge of Friends appointed by the monthly meeting. The early records of Falls Monthly Meeting show them active in regard to this type of education. In 1704 this report was made before the meeting.

A complaint having been made to this meeting that the children of Abraham Clement are not placed out to the satisfaction of Friends, it is the mind of this meeting that the Friends formerly appointed do take care to speak with Samuel Carpenter and Benjamin Collins about them, and make report to next meeting.[349]

A similar one of 1714 points out the continued interest and attention in that respect.

It being proposed to this meeting that there is a necessity of some Friends being appointed to take care about placing out John Linton’s children as apprentices, therefore this meeting doth appoint Joseph Kirkbride, Thomas Watson, Jr., and Joseph Fell to care about placing them out.[350]

Moral education in youths’ meetings;

Another phase of education, more particularly the moral, was cared for in the youths’ meetings, which were established at intervals, usually not more than four or five times during the year. It was the practice for the youths’ meetings to be established by the quarterly meetings, in conjunction with representatives of the monthly meetings. In 1713, Bucks Quarterly took up the re-establishment of those within their limits, and ordered them accordingly, as the following extract states.

established by Bucks Quarterly

It being thought necessary by this meeting that the youths’ meeting be once a year at Buckingham, once a year at Bristol and but once a year at Falls and once at Middletown, therefore agreed that they be on the days ... etc.[351]

Question as to early school at Falls

To locate the date of the first school at Falls is difficult; it seems impossible to do so from the information to be gleaned from the records. We may be certain, however, that there was a school in the neighborhood at a very early date, though we can hardly determine the year. In 1730 the following request was made of the meeting:

Some Friends of Falls Meeting requested to have the use of the old schoolhouse, and it wanting repairing, they would repair it at their own charge, which is left to be considered at next meeting.[352]

Contradiction in the minutes of Falls

The presence in their vicinity, of an old schoolhouse which, moreover, needed repairs before it could be used, would indicate that a school had been there for a number of years. Taking fifteen years as a very moderate span for the life of the building, before it should need any considerable repairs we could state with a good degree of assurance that the school building had probably been built not later than 1715, and that the school dated back to that time at the very latest.[353] But at the next meeting this encounters a very dangerous obstruction. That meeting, referring to the request of the seventh month, second, speaks of “the request about having the old meetinghouse,” instead of, old schoolhouse.[354] It further mentions that it was desired for the purpose of a school.[355] From this it appears that the truth of our above conclusion depends upon the accuracy of the records for seventh month, second, 1730 and for eighth month, seventh, 1730. If the record of the first date is correct our conclusion is unfounded and the date for the first established school can probably be placed about 1730, or shortly thereafter.[356]

House for masters’ accommodation proposed in 1759

Property conveyed to trustees for use of schools

The records for the next thirty years reveal but little of the activities of the schools in Falls Monthly Meeting, though we are led to believe them in continuance, but perhaps not regularly. In 1759 the meeting had agreed to allow a house to be built on their grounds for the accommodation of a school master, but the house was not built there, since Mahlon Kirkbride had already purchased some adjoining ground on which there was a house built for that purpose.[357] The said Kirkbride offered to convey the same property to some Friends, in trust for the meeting, and Robert Lucas, Story Kirkbride, Mahlon Kirkbride, Jr., Jonathan Palmer, Jr., and Edward Bayly, Jr., were appointed to receive the conveyance. This is the first record of any permanent benefaction received. In 1783 the urgent Advices of the Yearly Meeting being brought to their attention,[358] a committee was appointed which reported the results of their investigation up to that time in the following manner.

Report of school committee

Ground purchased for use of school

Standing committee on education recommended; and visitation

We, the committee appointed, in the first month 1779 respecting the institution of schools for the instruction of our children in useful learning, having conferred together ... agree to report that we have divers times met and had this important matter under our ... consideration, and are desirous that this important subject and necessary care should meet with every proper encouragement and improvement; and we may inform the meeting that there have been several improvements made on the lot of ground lately purchased from Samuel Rhoads for the advantage of the school and benefit of the master, and that the committee have endeavored to encourage and pay for the schooling of such poor children as are in the limits of the school kept at or near this place whose parents are in low circumstances and are willing to accept thereof. We have likewise extended our consideration and views to the schools belonging to the other preparative meetings, and although the circumstances of things at present do not afford so promising and encouraging a prospect as we could desire, yet we are desirous that every proper encouragement may be afforded to promote the good and necessary work, therefore, we are free to propose to the meeting’s consideration that of having a standing committee appointed for this purpose by the monthly meeting, and that each preparative meeting should likewise appoint a committee for the like purpose that should have this important matter under their consideration in order to promote this so necessary care in their respective meetings; and that the said meeting’s committee should at proper and suitable times visit the several preparative meetings’ schools and unite with the said preparative meetings’ committees in affording and giving such help and assistance as to them from time to time may appear necessary in order to promote this so good and necessary a work and care. Signed at the desire and on behalf of the committee, by James Moon.[359]

Monthly meetings’ committee to join those of the preparatives

Three schools reported

In accord with the above report the monthly meeting urged each preparative meeting to appoint a committee on schools; the monthly meeting named James Moon, John Merrick, Jonathan Kirkbride, William Satterthwaite, William Bidgood, Jr., John Stapler and Joseph Gillingham to join with those of the preparatives for that service.[360] Five months thereafter they reported,

The three several schools kept within compass of our respective preparative meetings are conducted in some measure under the care of a committee of Friends appointed for that purpose and that the several teachers are members of our society.[361]

The three preparative meetings were Falls, Makefield, and Bristol, the last named being transferred to Middletown in 1788.[362] Makefield Meeting was considerably assisted by help from private sources; they reported to the monthly meeting in 1787:

Individual aid

We hereby inform the monthly meeting that lately there has been a house built on the ground belonging to Makefield Preparative Meeting for the accommodation of a school master, chiefly at the expense of Bernard Taylor, which he is desirous should be under use for that purpose, to be subject to a moderate yearly rent to be paid to Friends of that meeting for the use of the said meeting: the said house to be their property and under the care and the direction of said meeting with the advice and assistance of the Falls Monthly Meeting as occasion may require.[363]

New building proposed at Falls; not built till later

In 1790 a committee of the quarterly meeting was appointed to confer with those of the monthly meetings on schools, hoping that the union of all might be more productive of results than all working separately.[364] In 1794 plans were set on foot for a new schoolhouse at Falls Preparative, said house to be two stories in height and about twenty-two feet by thirty.[365] It was to be placed “near the line” of the meeting’s land at the west end of the meeting house. The monthly meeting was to pay £75, the employers who are members, £75, and the school committee £50 from the money arising from donations left for the purposes of schools. The house was not built until 1799, due to some unknown delay; its dimensions were twenty-four by twenty-six feet, one story high, with a cellar of the same dimensions.[366]

Attention called to the boarding school

In 1797 the attention of the monthly meeting was called to the proposals of the yearly meeting for the founding of a boarding school.[367] Copies of the printed rules proposed for its government had been received, and a committee was appointed to distribute them and to take subscriptions from any who were interested to contribute.[368]

Support of schools in Falls Monthly

The problem of school support occupied a considerable part of Falls Meeting’s time. The means of support were here, as in others already mentioned, (1) subscriptions, (2) donations and (3) rates. In 1760 it was considered necessary to appoint a committee of fourteen members to take an inventory of all legacies and donations, lands and benefactions which had been left to the meeting.[369] Some had been given for definitely stated uses; and others allowed the application to be determined by the members of the meeting. It was the will of the assembly that the committee appointed should especially determine what funds might be applied to the use of the schools. They reported at the next meeting that the legacy left by Elinor Bryner might be applied to the use of schools, along with those given definitely for that purpose.[370] The method by which the funds were to be applied to that use were indicated in the suggestions of the committee at a later meeting, as follows:

A committee to have oversight of education of the poor

We ... are of the opinion that the most that can be done at present, will be to appoint Friends to have the care of the schools and to examine what poor children may be amongst us, they being the proper objects of the charity designated by the givers of the money, and that the said Friends have power to agree with a master to teach such children; and also to draw orders for the payment thereof out of the interest arising from the money appropriated to the use of schools. Nominated seven Friends for that service and submitted the names and the report to the monthly meeting. The Friends above named are appointed to that service with the powers therein mentioned and are desired to lay an account before the monthly meeting at least once in each year and oftener if the meeting shall see fit to call for it.[371]

Such a plan as here indicated was consistently followed throughout the century in regard to school support. The interest on legacies had to be paid annually.[372]

Rhoads proposes to sell land for a school; considered

In 1781 the meeting was advised that Samuel Rhoads of Philadelphia had offered to sell four acres of ground adjoining the schoolhouse lot, to be used for the promotion of the school, and the benefit of the schoolmasters.[373] The consideration asked was £60, and Rhoads and his two brothers-in-law, Joseph Pemberton and Samuel Pleasants, offered to donate £20, making it cost the meeting but £40. The committee on school support was directed to consider this proposal. Bristol Preparative also received very valuable assistance for the use of poor children’s schooling, in the bequest of £50 Pennsylvania currency which was left them by John Baldwin of Philadelphia.[374] The great concern of the meeting for the best expenditure of these donations for educating not only the poor Whites but also the Negroes, is seen in their minute of 1787.[375] Careful account was kept and the accounts frequently audited, sometimes at the request of individuals.[376] In 1790 the committee reported their concerns as follows:

Report of committee on education of the poor

We the committee appointed by the monthly meeting to have the care of schooling poor children; also to have the distribution of the interests accruing on the several donations given for that use, have given attention to the service to which we were appointed: and the schooling a considerable number of children has accordingly been paid for, but as it is allowed that a change of the teacher at times may be useful or advantageous to a school, we are united in the sentiment that if such a change was to take place in the school kept at this place, it would be a means whereby the school might be considerably enlarged and the design and end of the several donations left for the use of the said school more fully answered. (Report submitted and accepted and the committee continued to the further service.)[377]

Establishment of funds of basic importance

The establishment of these permanent funds was frequently expressed by the numerous committees as the most important consideration for the execution of the school idea. They attempted again and again to provide a uniform means of establishing such funds, but due to the unequal circumstances of the several meetings it was impossible to do so.[378] The uniform plan was kept as an ideal to be striven for and recommended to the quarterly meeting for its advisement in the matter;[379] in the meantime individual contributions were urged on all who felt inclined to endow a worthy cause.[380] The amounts given were frequent though small, many of them being about £5.[381]

In addition to the local expenses of the meetings, (1) for worship, (2) for the use of schools, (3) for the maintenance of the poor, etc., there were also quotas to be raised for the yearly meeting stock, which added materially to the burden of each of the preparative meetings. The quota for the meetings belonging to Falls in 1797 was £500.[382]

If we may look over the Quaker treasurer’s shoulder as he runs his accounts at the end of the century, we find him situated financially as follows:

Financial status of Falls at end of century

We the committee appointed to examine and settle the Treasurer’s accounts, having attended thereto, find a balance in his hands of £136/8/11 school money; also, £3/10/7 poor money; and £9/00/00 of interest received on John Large’s legacy, making the whole £148/19/6, in the treasurer’s hands, and the monies upon interest stand as in the following statement, viz.

Middletown

The Middletown Meeting began its educational work more promptly than did Falls.[384] Ten years after the first establishment of the meeting a request was brought forward as follows:

School requested in Middletown meeting house

Some Friends have signified the likeliness of having a schoolmaster hereabouts to instruct children and also requested that they might have the privilege to teach in the meeting house, to which this meeting does give their free consent, provided it be no hindrance to Friends Meetings.[385]

Again requested

It is quite probable that the school established as requested, was a temporary and irregular affair, depending on the will of the individual patrons. Certainly, it had not any official connection with the meeting, and probably did not have for many years. In 1699, a request similar to that of 1693 was made by Thomas Stackhouse and others, desiring the use of the meeting house for a schoolmaster,[386] which implies they had not advanced much beyond their state of 1693. This request was likewise granted, provided no hindrance be caused to the meetings.

Middletown not in harmony with yearly meeting’s proposals

Because of very inadequate records in this regard, much is left to be surmised concerning the continuation of the schools thus early begun. The meeting was in continual touch with the desires and proposals of the yearly meeting,[387] and it does not seem justifiable to suppose that education languished, because scant records of it remain. The general tone of their minutes is one of self-satisfaction, and implies that they themselves were well pleased with their state. The elaborate recommendations of the yearly meeting in 1750[388] did not meet with their approval as they thought it quite impossible for those members living remote in the country districts.[389] That they disagreed with the plan indicates neither a lack of interest in the subject, nor a lack of schools in their locality. Rather, it may indicate the opposite.

Donation 1755 for a free school

Under control of monthly meeting

In 1755 there was made the first donation to a permanent foundation for a free school. At a meeting in that year an extract of Adam Harker’s will was produced, where it appeared he had,

given a sum of money to them with others in trust to be employed toward raising a fund for settling and maintaining a Free School under the care and direction of this meeting ... shall and will therewith purchase an annuity or yearly ground rent, or in such other manner as they may think most proper employ the said sum (£40) towards raising a fund for settling and maintaining a Free School in Middletown aforesaid, under the direction and control of the monthly Meeting of Friends there.[390]

Whether there was a new school erected as a result of the bequest or whether it was turned to the use of one already existing does not appear; the latter suggestion is much the more probable. The advices of 1777 and 1778 and the years following aroused the members to the responsibilities which they must accept. In 1779 they made report as follows:

Although it appears that the education of the youth has been too much neglected, we believe there is an increasing care that Friends may be more careful in that weighty concern.[391]

And in 1780:

We believe a good degree of care is taken by some in regard to the education of those under their care, and that an increase in that is necessary.[392]

All details under the care of a committee on schools

All questions in regard to schools or educational affairs whatsoever were dismissed summarily, and given to the charge of the committee on schools.[393] A committee reported in 1782 that nothing had been done more than to visit the school they already had.[394] The failure to bring forth results may have been with the committee; at any rate the meeting decided to try a new one.

New committee appointed

This meeting taking into consideration the several matters recommended in the extracts ... respecting the education of the youth and their school tuition, are of the opinion that a reappointment on those important subjects is necessary; wherefore, Woolston J. Paxson, W. Blakeley, J. Watson and R. Hartshorne are appointed as committee to those services, and they are desired to closely attend thereto in order that the present and former advices may be carried as fully into execution as possible.[395]

Activities of the committee not effective

In 1785 this committee reported that visits had been made to families in the interests of education but that little was effected.[396] The committee was released and the consideration of education left to the next meeting,[397] at which a new committee of three was appointed. This one, so far as their record goes, was neither more active nor more successful than the others. In 1788 they report “nothing much has been done in respect to schools since last year,” which report was sent to the yearly meeting.[398] The record is not complete to the end of the century, but for the period considered does not offer any evidence of more than passing educational interest and activity. Nothing unusual is to be noted in the finance and support of the school at Middletown. Mention was made of Harker’s will, which, it seems, was the first legacy left to its benefit.[399]

Care of poor orphan; apprenticing

The attention of the meeting was early given to the care of the orphans and the poor, and especially to their satisfactory placement among people as apprentices. The following from the records for 1699 will serve for illustration.

It is agreed and concluded upon by this meeting that the meeting take care of all Friends children that are left as orphans and unsettled, to inspect and see that all such be taken care of and settled in the best and suitablest manner according to their capacity, that thereby they may discharge their duty and all such be eased by taking such due care....

Buckingham

Apprentices; care in their certification

The attention of Buckingham Meeting was also turned toward the education of apprentices, and careful scrutiny given those who removed to apprentice themselves elsewhere, as also those who removed to Buckingham Meeting. In 1764 Mahlon Michener, son of John, removed his certificate to Philadelphia, “having been placed as apprentice” in the vicinity of that meeting.[400] John Parry, minor, an apprentice to Thomas Fell, blacksmith, produced a certificate in Abington Monthly,[401] which was accepted and also that of Isaac Gommere from the same place.[402] The poor were provided for by the legacy left for that purpose by John Holcomb in 1749.[403] Whether this might, a part of it, have been spent for schooling is not known.

Harker legacy for a free school

Committee appointed on schools

In 1755 there was a minute entered in the records to the effect that a legacy had been left to Buckingham by their deceased friend Adam Harker, for the purpose of establishing a free school in that place.[404] The amount of the bequest was the same (£40) as that left to the Middletown Meeting by Harker.[405] This was the first bequest for definite school purposes; the indications are that many followed. In 1778, a minute gives their financial status as £244/4/11½ and they entertained a proposition and concluded to raise £500 more.[406] At the same time, the recommendations from the yearly meeting being read,[407] a committee of the following persons was appointed for investigation and assistance on the subject of schools, viz.: Paul Preston, Joseph Watson, Joseph Preston, John Gillingham, Benjamin Paxson, Benjamin Kinsey, Thomas Watson, Joseph Eastburn, John Kinsey, John Balderston, Jonathan Shaw, Benjamin Cutler, Thomas Good, Jr., John Brown, and Robert Kirkbride.[408] The action of this committee is not brought out in the minutes of the meeting.

Visiting schools required

The quarterly meeting made a new appeal in 1780 for a more decided action by the various tributary meetings which was followed by the appointment of a new committee.[409] They were requested to “visit the school” for the “help and assistance” of the master and to report their action to a future meeting. In the twelfth month of the same year they made these recommendations:

Committee’s recommendations

The committee appointed for the proper establishment and regulation of schools made report in writing that it is their sense and judgment that the monthly meeting should recommend to the particular meetings severally, to promote subscriptions toward the setting up and building upon their meeting’s lands as may be convenient for schoolhouses and such conveniences as may accommodate settled persons who live near the same, as also to encourage their contributions toward making up funds or salaries for the constant support of schools therein which is recommended to the preparative meetings.[410]

Appointment of trustees necessary

A new committee was appointed in 1784.[411] They convened with the committees of the preparatives and discussed the recommendations and means suggested by the yearly meeting. Their conclusion was to the effect that one thing in the recommendations was absolutely necessary, namely, that all funds, legacies, properties, etc., provided for the schools, should be vested in trustees for that purpose.[412] Without taking this step they saw no way to attain even the least success. It was further suggested that the trustees or committee thus appointed should investigate the present houses for schools, their condition and location, in each of the particular meetings, that a wiser plan might be followed in locating the new ones. The meeting considering the report decided to adopt its suggestions and accordingly appointed thirteen men,

to inspect into the state of such schools as are now kept and where it may be necessary, to promote others,

and make a report as soon as possible.[413] Its report, produced in the first month, 1785, was quite long. Only the essential points of it are given in the following digest.[414]

Summary of committee’s report of 1785

1. Most of the committee appointed met and decided to confirm the former committee’s report.

2. We find that there are many schoolhouses within the bounds that include the members of the meeting.

a. These are not well situated for the service of schools.

b. Some are well situated, however, as (1) one on land granted by Samuel Eastburn and vested in the school trustees, (2) one on land granted by Thomas Goode, vested in members of the meeting, but not in trust for the meeting.

3. They suggest that these two houses be used as previously and that new houses be erected not more than three miles apart.

4. They maintain an uncertain state has prevailed among the schools.

5. The following places are recommended for new schools to be built:

a. At the schoolhouse near Samuel Eastburn’s.

b. On the work road between William Jitchin’s and Thomas Rose’s.

c. On the road from Newtown to Coryell’s Ferry.

d. At the intersection of the lower work road and the street road.

e. Near the south side of Watson Weldin’s land.

f. On Durham Road near Thomas Gilbert’s.

g. On Plumstead’s Meeting House land.

h. And at the schoolhouse near Thomas Goode’s.[415]

New school property of Solebury and Buckingham

It was thought such divisions would as nearly answer the needs as rivers and mountains would permit, and would provide for all of Buckingham territory and a little of Wrightstown. Any variation from this proposed building plan was desired to be brought before the committee for their judgment and acquiescence. In accordance with this suggestion the Friends of Solebury (1785) requested the assistance and advice of the committee in locating their school which they desired in a different place from that previously suggested by the committee. They conferred with the committee and finding their choice of site as good as could be obtained, it was agreed to build the new house on the southeast corner of Hugh Ely’s land, of Solebury.[416] In 1786 Solebury Friends requested a committee of the monthly meeting to be named to whom they might give a title for the land.[417] In 1793 Buckingham was permitted to build a school on the meeting house land, the meeting to be in charge of the said school.[418]

Problem of funds attacked

Having settled thus satisfactorily a systematic method of getting the schools located, they addressed themselves to the task of raising school funds.[419] A committee of eleven members was appointed, which, four months later, reported a plan of subscription paper to be used in getting funds for purchasing lands and buildings.[420] The plan as reported and approved by the monthly meeting was the following:

Subscription form presented

We the subscribers do hereby engage to pay or cause to be paid unto A. B. the several sums annexed to our names to be applied to the use of purchasing a lot of land of C. D. and building a schoolhouse thereon, the property and government to belong entirely to the society of the people called Quakers and under the direction of the Monthly Meeting of Buckingham, the title of which is to be wholly vested in the trustees appointed by the said monthly meeting. The rules and orders of the school when erected is to be prescribed by the aforesaid monthly meetings or a committee thereof consistent with our religious principles, and that no tutor shall be permitted to teach in said school until ... approved by the monthly meeting or a committee of the aforesaid.

In 1790 the state of schools in the monthly meeting was given as follows:

State of schools in 1790

It appears that preparatory to the plan pointed out by the yearly meeting last year, there are two schoolhouses under the direction of this meeting. Schools in general among us, both as to tutors and to school government, are in a better state than they formerly were; and some property has been vested in the meeting towards a fund for the use of schools.[421]

The form of subscription above mentioned was used for raising funds till 1793 when a committee on schools incorporated it with a few other suggestions in their plans.[422] These may be summarized as follows:

Summary of later form used for subscription

1. Each contributor to subscribe a principal sum.

2. All sums to be lumped together and invested in trustees, accountable to the monthly meeting.

3. All interests to be paid annually and applied each year to the schools in the compass of the monthly meeting.

4. All tutors to be members of Friends.

5. Funds to be first applied to the schooling of poor Friends’ children, their necessities to be judged by the monthly meeting.

6. The remainder to be applied equally to the payment for other children, proportionate to the time they attend school.[423]

7. Interest to continue till the principal is paid.

8. All principals paid in are to be invested or “put to use” by the trustees.

Amount of subscriptions

The total number of subscriptions listed up to date was 117; the total amount subscribed was £759; the individual subscriptions varied from £1 to £25.[424] The meeting also succeeded in getting such former donations, as Harker’s legacy, appropriated to this permanent fund.[425]

Special committee on schoolmasters

In 1796 Jeremiah Praul, Joseph Yerkes, and Benjamin Kite were appointed to have the care of receiving all applications from prospective masters, and in case of vacancies to seek and have ready a list of available and well-qualified members.[426]

Wrightstown

Progress slow; reasons

One can hardly attempt to place a date for the beginning of the schools in Wrightstown Meeting. But by a report made late in the eighteenth century (1792) we gather a very good idea of the state of schools in that locality. The cause of the rather halting progress is perhaps found in the latter part of this committee’s report, which states that the best plan conceived is for each particular meeting to raise its own subscription for its own school,[427] which in part was right, but more direction on the part of the monthly meeting would doubtless have produced better results. The report of 1792 is here submitted.

Want of money to pay qualified teachers

We the committee appointed to take into consideration the state of schools within the limits of this meeting, after having several times met and attended to our appointment, find the main cause why our schools are so unsettled and so frequently occupied by unqualified teachers is the want of sufficient salaries to make tuition an object of employment worthy the attention of those who are or may be best qualified to discharge that trust; having duly investigated that subject it plainly appears very few amongst us who are interested in schools are of ability to advance money towards raising a fund on any other consideration than that of immediately receiving the benefit thereof; we are, therefore, of opinion nothing affords a fairer prospect of promoting the work than for separate neighborhoods to enter subscriptions for raising funds for the support and establishment of their own particular schools, which was read and referred to the consideration of next meeting.[428]

In 1793 the extracts from the yearly meeting being read and especially those concerned with the establishment of schools, it was decided to appoint a committee “to endeavor to promote that service as recommended,” and make a report that might be sent to the yearly assembly.[429]

Committee on school legacies, etc., reports £248/13/10

In 1790 a committee was appointed to look after the state of various legacies which had been left from time to time for the “support of a free school.”[430] This committee made report shortly thereafter that the amount of the principals and interest at the time was £248/13/10.[431] A question arose as to the proper application of the interest on a legacy left by Jonathan Abbitt and others, and was referred to the school committee. They decided it might be expended for the schooling of Friends’ children in straightened circumstances, provided they be taught in a school kept in Wrightstown.[432]

A number of other legacies were granted from time to time for the encouragement of a free school, among them being one by Adam Harker (£40),[433] who had also benefitted Middletown and Buckingham, and that of David Buckman, the text of which is given below.

Buckman’s will

I give and bequeath to Isaac Wiggins of the township of Northampton, David Buckman and James Briggs of the township of Newtown, and Joseph Hampton and Isaac Chapman of the township of Wrightstown, all in the County of Bucks, and the survivors of them, the sum of £50 in gold or silver currency in trust ... place the same at interest on real security or therewith purchase an annuity or groundrent or such other method as they may think proper for securing the same and apply the interest thereof as the same shall thereafter be received, towards the establishing and maintaining a free school in Wrightstown aforesaid near the meeting house for the instruction of Friends children belonging to the monthly meeting of Friends in Wrightstown, in useful learning, and the said school to be under the care and direction of the monthly meeting aforesaid.[434]

Digest of report on legacies at Wrightstown

In 1791 a committee presented a report on the status of legacies, which is given herewith in shortened form.

1. The will of David Twining.

I give to the monthly meeting of Friends at Wrightstown the sum of five pounds to be applied towards a Free School in Wrightstown, near the meeting house, that is under the direction and care of Friends.

2. A committee of six suggested to take the said legacy and apply its interest to the said school.

3. Report of a committee on Adam Harker’s will.

All trustees have died without having made any purchase of any groundrent or annuity for the purpose aforementioned.

4. The trustees appointed by David Buckman, deceased, in his last will and testament to have the care of a legacy of £50 given by the said David to this meeting for establishing a Free School in Wrightstown, report that they have received said legacy and put it out to interest on a mortgage bearing date the seventeenth day of the third month last.[435]

Funds in chaotic state

In 1799 a legacy of £30 was left to Wrightstown Meeting “to be laid out in the education of poor children in the school house on the meeting house land.”[436] From later records running into the first two decades of the next century, it appears that the state of the donations was never gotten into very good shape. When they came into the hands of the trustees in 1822 they were “indistinguishable one from another,” so far as the purposes for which each was intended. At the time when some of the bequests were made there was a large stone schoolhouse standing on the meeting’s grounds to which they alluded in their wills.[437] This building was torn down about 1815 and two schools set up, one two miles above the meeting house, and the other about three-quarters of a mile below it. The total amount of the legacies had increased by 1822 to about $6,800.[438]

Richland

date of school

Endowment for use of poor

Richland Monthly Meeting (1742), the latest of all in Bucks County to be established, with which we are now dealing, belonged to the Abington Quarter (whose limits were chiefly in Montgomery County). The school, its date of beginning not known (probably in 1742),[439] was early endowed with legacies left voluntarily and primarily for the education of the poor; the first one of considerable worth was that of Morris Morris. An extract from the minutes shows that,

At this meeting were exhibited two bonds for two sums of money amounting in the whole to £100, it being a free and generous donation given by our ancient Friend, Morris Morris, for the use and encouragement of a school to be kept at or near this meeting house, which bonds are legally executed to the Friends heretofore appointed as trustees for this meeting, who are to take care from time to time to lay out the interest arising from the said donation for procuring necessary learning for such poor Friends’ children who may be the most proper objects of such charitable help and the said trustees to render yearly account to this meeting of their service in the said distribution.[440]

This beginning was increased in 1796 by £20 granted from the estate of Edward Roberts.[441] The following record from a school account book of legacies, known as the “Jonathan Walton Fund” is cited, which indicates the manner of the school expenditures[442]:

Items of expenditure for schooling in Richland

SUMMARY

The meetings

Falls

Permanent property acquired

Three schools reported

The establishment of schools of Falls, Middletown, Wrightstown, Buckingham, and Richland meetings is discussed in this chapter. Their first activity was to establish youths’ meetings and look after the placing of apprentices. The date of the first school at Falls is not determined, though the educational activity appears to have been on a par with other meetings. In 1759 property was conveyed to trustees for the use of the school, and at various dates thereafter. A school committee reported three schools, one in each preparative, in 1784. The usual means of support were employed. The school money amounted in 1799 to £777/9/4½.

Middletown

First school in meeting house

Free school endowed

Middletown’s first school was held in the meeting house, in accord with a permit granted by Friends. The real progress of schools among them is not determined, though we know that they are supplied with schools. It is likely, judging from the nature of the committee’s reports, that they did not meet the standards set by the yearly meeting. The free school, endowed with £40 in 1755 by Harker, was to be under care of the monthly meeting.

Buckingham

Plan for buildings and support

Buckingham meeting assumed a regular care in the apprenticing of children, and, like Middletown, was endowed by Adam Harker. A school committee was appointed in 1778, and the visiting of schools required. An unusual plan for building schoolhouses was devised in 1785; and also a scheme for school support in 1785 which was improved in 1793. A special committee of two men had charge of employing masters. Two schools are reported as under the care of the meetings’ committee, in 1790.

Wrightstown

One school under monthly meeting

The cause for the apparently slow progress of Wrightstown concerning schools lay chiefly in a lack of permanent funds. Back of this, there seems to have been a failure on the part of the monthly meeting to unite and direct the activities of its preparatives, for the individual contributions were considerable. Though “schools” are mentioned in the minutes, it seems most likely that only the one at Wrightstown was in reality a school of the monthly meeting.

Richland

Little is discovered concerning the Richland school save that it was endowed in 1762 by Morris. The account books of the Walton fund show that the children were schooled at the expense of the meeting.

Total number of schools

There were probably eight schools regularly established in the five monthly meetings.

CHAPTER VI
SCHOOLS IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY

The meetings

Following the procedure in the preceding chapter, the establishment of schools in Montgomery County will be treated (1) under the head of the monthly meetings in whose limits they were located and (2) in the order of the time of settlement. The monthly meetings in Montgomery County and their dates of establishment are as follows: (1) Abington, 1683; (2) Gwynedd, set off from Radnor, located in present Delaware County, 1714, and (3) Horsham, set off from Abington in 1782.[443] In connection with the schools established in Montgomery County will also be considered briefly the same activity of Warrington Monthly Meeting (York County), which belongs at present to Baltimore Yearly Meeting. Warrington was established as a monthly meeting in 1747,[444] being set off from that of Sadsbury. Brief mention is made of Westland Meeting.

Abington

Youths’ meetings

The first records left by Abington Meeting, which relate particularly to any phase of education, are those in reference to the establishment of youths’ meetings. It is implied by these minutes that nothing was done in this regard till about 1695, when,

It was agreed upon ... that four friends belonging to this monthly meeting be asked to take care of the Youth belonging to each meeting as concerning their orderly walking ... according to the good advice of Friends, in an epistle from the Yearly Meeting at Burlington 1694, wherefore ... men appointed.[445]

Established

This apparently resulted in an agreement that the youths’ meetings should be established at the home of Richard Worrall.[446] It is to be inferred that considerable attention was given to this earliest phase of education. In 1699 the Friends of Abington urged:

Those Friends that are appointed to inspect into the behavior of the youth and their respective meetings; that they may be stirred to discharge their places, and to give account to the monthly meeting.[447]

Youths’ meetings shifted often

The youths’ meetings were not of permanent foundation, and their date for meeting was shifted frequently, which gave them characteristic irregularity.[448] The purposes to be secured by the youths’ meetings were chiefly moral.[449]

Land deeded for meeting and school

The gift of property for the foundation of Abington Friends’ School dates back to 1697.[450] The donor, John Barnes, had purchased 250 acres adjoining the tract possessed by Sarah Fuller, receiving patent for the same on June 1st, 1684.[451] Shortly after this he added to his possessions also the tract formerly possessed by Sarah Fuller.[452] From this total (600 acres) he deeded one hundred and thirty acres on Feb. 5th, 1696, to the use of a meeting house and schoolhouse for the Friends of Abington Meeting.[453] The tract lies about ten miles north of the city of Philadelphia. The Abington School, thus possessing such a large heritage and firm foundation in a material way, at least is a close rival of the Penn Charter School of Philadelphia, the petition for which was presented to the Council 1697-8,[454] and whose first charter was granted in 1701.[455]

Meeting house built

Jacob Taylor concerned in a school

Taylor, land surveyor

The exact date when a school was first held in property on this land cannot be determined. The meeting house on the newly acquired lands was built between the years 1697 and 1700, with assistance from the meeting at Philadelphia. It is probable that a school may have been taught at the meeting house for a time as that custom was followed in many other meetings,[456] but this is a mere probability. The best evidence of a school at an early date is that relating to Jacob Taylor who, about 1701, was “concerned in a school at Abington,” but was to be asked to take the management of a land office.[457] Mr. Bean, writing in the local history of Montgomery County, says that Jacob Taylor was land surveyor from 1706 to 1733.[458] That he was engaged in teaching during the entire period from 1701 to 1706 we do not know, but it is quite probable that he was the first schoolmaster who taught in a regularly established school.

In 1722, referring to the bequest of land by John Barnes, the minute of the monthly meeting states:

Land in care of trustees

Whereas John Barnes deceased, having given a legacy or yearly income towards maintaining of a school at Abington ... and in the said deed of trust to Friends, he left this meeting in power to choose a trustee when any Friends that were intrusted did remove or decease. Now seeing Thomas Canby being one intrusted is removed into the County of Bucks, this meeting does appoint Richard Martin to act in his room.[459]

Carter’s donation

In 1726 Thomas Fletcher was chosen to act as one of the trustees of the said donation and the school affairs, in the place of his deceased father, Robert Fletcher.[460] Everard Bolton’s place (deceased) was filled by Nicholas Austen as trustee in 1727.[461] In 1742 Abington Friends took a deed of conveyance of Thomas Canby for the land and premises belonging to their school and meeting house.[462] Besides the bequest of Barnes already mentioned, there were several others which deserve mention. In 1749 a committee appointed to investigate the donation left to the meeting by William Carter in his last will and testament, reported they had attended to it, and produced to the meeting an extract from the will before mentioned.[463] Quoting from the Abington records the purpose of the will was given to be as follows:

... two certain yearly groundrents one of six, the other of four pounds, are invested in trustees, in order that the same may be conveyed, and ... as this meeting shall think fit to appoint to the intent and purpose that the same shall be annually laid on and expended in the pay for the schooling and teaching of such whose parents or overseers ... in the verge of this meeting are not able to pay for them, or the relief of the poor of this meeting, when and as such poor children are not to be found....[464]

Expenditure of funds in charge of committees

Funds requested for schooling children

The details of the expenditure of money left for such purposes were taken care of usually by the overseers of the poor and also by the school committee, whose duty it was to inquire in each of the preparative meetings concerning children who might be in need of help and whether they would be willing to accept assistance. Their investigations were reported to the monthly meeting to be considered before any expenditures were made.[465] If they were satisfactory to the meeting, disbursements were then ordered to the preparatives according to their needs as stated.[466] The preparative meeting was also free to make a voluntary request for a part of any fund for aid to poor children, if they desired to do so. In 1760,

Horsham Friends requested the sum of four pounds of Carter’s legacy towards the schooling of a poor child; this meeting orders that our treasurer do pay them that sum.[467] And again, the present treasurer, Joshua Morris, is ordered to pay to Thomas Lloyd a sum of eight pounds to defray the charges of dieting Joseph Kirk, a poor Friend’s child, belonging to Horsham Meeting, who is put to school at the charge of Horsham Meeting.[468]

How distributed

It was not always necessary to bring the cases to the monthly meeting to be decided whether aid should be given or withheld. It occurred often that the funds were apportioned to the various preparatives, monthly or quarterly meetings and their representatives allowed to apply it according to their judgment.[469] In 1766 those appointed to view the accounts of the treasurer of Abington Meeting made the following report as to the state of the funds which had accrued:

Report on funds

We the subscribers having perused the accounts of Joshua Morris, the meeting’s treasurer, do report that the said treasurer credits the meeting with several sums received on the meeting’s accounts from the year 1761 ... including £28 for the rent of William Carter’s legacy to this meeting, the whole being the sum of £157/12/11, and that he paid by order of this meeting in that time (including £40 paid for schools for poor children) the sum of £137/11/8; balance in his hands the 24th of the 11th month, 1766 is £20/1/3.

We likewise report that we find five years’ rent of four pounds a year and a year’s rent of six pounds on the said Carter’s legacy outstanding and not yet collected or received by him.[470]

A minute of 1735 entered in the meeting’s records affords us an interesting glimpse into the nature of the books used for the Friends’ schools. These books are very frequently mentioned in many of the meeting’s records, and many of them were always on sale by booksellers such as Franklin in Philadelphia.[471] There seems to be no doubt that they constituted one of the staples of the mental pabulum. The extract in which they are mentioned illustrates also the initiative taken by the meeting in the direction of affairs relating to schools.

Books used in schools

And further to let the quarterly meeting understand that this meeting conceives that reprinting a quantity of George Fox’s Primers and Stephen Crisp’s ditto and of George Fox’s The Youngers might be advantageous to those children of Friends in school or elsewhere. We, therefore, refer the same to said meeting’s consideration.[472]

The Abington Meeting began at an early date to work for a better organization among its schools, coöperating heartily with the suggestions of the yearly meeting from time to time. The yearly meeting in 1746 and 1750 made several suggestions for the improvement of schools,[473] which were in 1751 followed by Abington with a statement that

This meeting has gone through in the several branches thereof in the service of visiting of families and to general satisfaction, and as to the settling of schools we have had it under consideration and some are desirous to promote the same but find many discouragements at the present, yet are in hopes it may be further considered, and....[474]

This report means nothing in terms of accomplishment, but indicates willingness and an active interest in educational problems. In reading of their “discouragements” one must keep in mind the standards set by the yearly meeting, and that their report was their idea of how they measured up to them.

Gwynedd

Schoolhouse mentioned 1721

The first mention of any school (or any reference to indicate there may have been a school in the limits of Gwynedd) is that of 1721, in a petition for a road, entered by Roland Hughes and Robert Humphrey.[475] The mention herein made is of a schoolhouse located near the property of Robert Humphrey and Roland Hughes and not far distant from the road to Philadelphia. Neither has trace been found of any school actually established nor of schoolmaster to have charge over it, yet the presence of a building erected for that purpose lends credence to the view that there was a school there, though perhaps irregularly conducted. Procedure in other districts was usually that schools were present before the schoolhouses were built.[476]

Marmaduke Pardo teacher

The first mention of a schoolmaster is relative to Marmaduke Pardo, who came with the following certificate from Pembrokeshire in Wales.

We whose names are hereunto subscribed, being the curate and others of the inhabitants of the Parish of St. Davids, do hereby certify whom it may concern, that the bearer hereof, Marmaduke Pardo, of the city of St. Davids and County of Pembroke, has to the utmost of our knowledge and all appearances lived a very sober and pious life, demeaning himself according to the strictest rules of his profession, viz., what we call Quakerism, and that he has for these several years past took upon himself the keeping of a private school in this city, in which station he acquitted himself with the common applause and to the general satisfaction of all of us who have committed our children to his care and tuition, etc.[477]

This certificate was signed by Richard Roberts and several others. With such recommendations, the citizens of Gwynedd were very fortunate if perchance they did secure him as a master. Other writers have, it seems, taken for granted that he actually taught in the school, but there is no exact evidence on the point, only a very great probability.[478]

The following extract indicates there was an established school at Morristown in 1766.

School at Morristown Quaker?

Plymouth overseers acquaint this meeting that Mordecai Moore on his own and family’s account and several neighboring friends request the privilege of holding a meeting at the schoolhouse near his dwelling house in Morristown every first day until the general spring meeting. The which is granted.[479]

Committee on schools appointed

As with the schools and school affairs of other meetings, their history becomes more tangible about the last quarter of the century. The recommendations of the yearly meeting being received in 1777 and their attention thus directed consciously to the question of education, a committee was appointed consisting of the following men: David Bacon, John Elliott, Jr., Charles West, David Estaugh, William Brown, Thomas Hollowell, John Gracey, Abraham Liddon, Samuel Lloyd, Abraham Cadwalader, John Heman, David Evans, Samuel Lee, Joseph Penrose, Joseph Lukens and John Evans.[480] The committee reported in 1779 that the establishment of schools had been under consideration, but that no fund had yet been raised or land purchased for the establishment thereof, as the yearly meeting had directed.[481] Accordingly the same committee was continued. In 1780 a minute of the meeting states that:

The matter relating to the establishment of schools is continued and it is desired that the several preparative meetings will attend to that matter as recommended by the committee some time past, and that the committee ... the same under their care and make a report when anything is done toward accomplishing that service.[482]

And again in 1785:

“Little progress” reported

A care remains on the Friends’ minds for the right education of the youth, though little progress hath yet been made in establishing schools under proper regulations, although attention hath been paid thereto. Those matters respecting the Africans are under the care of a committee, though little progress hath been made in inspecting their particular cases.[483]

Committee to aid in raising funds

The activity of the committee does not appear to have been very great. After a consideration of their obligations on the subject again in 1791 it was decided to appoint a new committee which was to work definitely toward a plan for raising a fund for school purposes, and to make a report on the state of schools in the monthly meeting. Their report which appeared in 1793 showed a considerable number of schools but none established on permanent foundations, and many not in the membership of Friends. The state of all the schools as reported is given in the following extract.[484]

School in Montgomery Township

Plymouth school

The committee appointed on schools reports that within the limits of Gwynedd Meeting a school in the township of Montgomery is kept in a house, property of Friends, there is a lot on two acres of land and two rooms for a master to live in, adjoining the schoolhouse, and there is remaining of a donation to the inhabitants of said township in common towards the support of a school, about fifty pounds per annum, to be kept in the said schoolhouse, the master a member of our Society; within the compass of Plymouth meeting, there is a schoolhouse built by a subscription on a small lot of land given as a donation with the interest accruing on five hundred pounds, which is free for all the inhabitants within a mile and a half of the donor’s land, the master not in membership with Friends.

Temporary schools

One school, held in a house adjoining the meeting house at Plymouth which hath for several years been continued under the care and direction of that preparative meeting. There are several temporary schools within the limits of our Monthly Meetings, chiefly made up of persons not of our society, and kept by masters of different professions, no funds provided for any of them, into which Friends in such neighborhood send their children, there is a subscription gone into within the compass of one of the preparative meetings towards building a schoolhouse on a lot of land given for that purpose—the raising of funds for the support of schools has been under care, but not much progress has yet been made therein. Signed in behalf of the committee by

Evan Jones,
John Wilson,
Isaac Weeks.

Education of poor and orphans

The care and education of the poor was an occasion for great concern among the Friends of Gwynedd. This means not only that their education was looked after but that in case father and mother married a second time, the meeting saw to it that the children’s (if any by the first marriage) rights should be regarded. The affairs of the children had to be settled before permission for marriage was fully and freely given.[485] They were not always satisfied with their dealing with such children, however. About 1756 they declared that the children are well taken care of physically but that there is too great a neglect in regard to their learning and apprenticeship among Friends.[486]

Their education neglected

Later they are able to report, no doubt with considerable satisfaction, that after due inspection, no Friends’ children are found placed from among Friends.[487] All cases of necessity in the concern of education were resolutely dealt with, even though, as shown in the following extract, the recipients of the assistance were rather unwilling.

Some unwilling to receive aid

The Gwynedd Friends acquaint this meeting that Robert Roberts, Jr., is in very low circumstances and not able to maintain his wife and children reputably and that they have not been able to prevail with him and his wife to bind their children out to lessen their expense, therefore, this meeting appoints John Davies and John Evans to advise them to comply with Friends’ direction, otherwise, this meeting must take further notice of them.[488]

For a slight insight into the condition of schools in the latter years of the eighteenth century, we can do no better than present a letter written by Joseph Foulke, which furnishes a personal touch not found elsewhere.

Schools as related by Joseph Foulke

My earliest recollection of the schools which I attended was at Gwynedd meeting. There was no house for the purpose, but what was called the “little meeting house” was used. An old tottering man by the name of Samuel Evans was the teacher. The reading books were the Bible and the Testament; we had Dilworth’s spelling book, and Dilworth’s Assistant or arithmetic. Grammar was a thing hardly thought of; there was, however, a small part of the spelling book, called “a new guide to the English tongue,” and a few of the older pupils learned portions of this by rote, and would occasionally recite to the master, but the substance appeared to be equally obscure both to master and scholar.

My next schooling was in 1795, in the house, late the property of William Buzby, on the Bethlehem road, above the spring house. It was a kind of family school taught by Hannah Lukens. Here, Dr. Walton, of Stroudsburg, laid the foundation of his education. I went to Joshua Foulke, my father’s elder brother, an old man. He taught in a log schoolhouse near the eighteen-mile stone on the Bethlehem road. My father, with the help of his neighbors, built this house (about 1798) on a lot set apart for the purpose on the southern extremity of his premises. This log schoolhouse stood about thirty years, and beside Joshua Foulke, we had for teachers William Coggins, Hannah Foulke, Benjamin Albertson, Hugh Foulke (my brother), John Chamberlain, Christian Dull, Daniel Price, and Samuel Jones. I have probably not named all or given them in the order in which they came.[489]

Merion

Merion seems to have left no written records of educational activity. There is a possibility that Marmaduke Pardo[490] may have been connected with a school there, soon after his coming from Wales, but this is little better than a conjecture.[491] In the loft of the present building (which, however, does not date back so early as this study) there is a school room in which are rude tables and benches. One of them bears the date, 1711, rudely cut with a jackknife. If, in the early eighteenth century, the meeting house still sufficed for school, it is quite probable that the same was true much earlier; at any rate, no search thus far has revealed anything concerning an early schoolhouse. The Radnor Monthly Meeting Minutes in 1791 state:

School, at least not according to plan of yearly meeting

At Merion and Valley we have not discovered any progress in laying a foundation for schools in the way proposed by the yearly meeting.[492]

which would favor still further the idea that any school held there at that time was perhaps in the meeting house.

Horsham

The earliest mention made of Horsham Meeting is that in the Abington Minutes of 1777, stating:

It is agreed that there be two overseers chosen for Horsham Meeting, viz., John Michener and Thomas Iredell.[493]

This was doubtless very near the time of its first establishment as a preparative meeting. The earliest preparative minutes accessible are those beginning 1757.[494] We may feel certain, however, that there was a school before this time, for in the Gazette for 1753 there appeared an advertisement which stated:

Any person well qualified for keeping a school and comes well recommended by applying to John Lukens, surveyor, Abraham Lukens, or Benjamin Cadwalader, living in Horsham township, near the meeting house, may meet with proper encouragement.[495]

Assistance by donations

This may have been the same stone house in which Isaac Comly of Byberry taught in 1799, we cannot say. In the records of the preparative meeting on the first page there is an account of donations concerning schools, but the page is so badly mutilated that no straight account can be made of it.[496] It will be recalled from the account given of Abington schools that Horsham members were also benefitted by Carter’s legacy and others.[497]

A committee appointed to investigate the conditions of schools in Horsham Meeting reported (1779):

Report on Horsham schools, 1779

Four schools mentioned

We, the committee appointed, report as follows: That upon inquiry we found that the schoolhouse on the meeting house land is wholly the property of Friends, and the subscribers generally Friends; we also find that there has been a schoolhouse lately built on a piece of land held in trust for that purpose between John Parry’s and John Walton’s wholly by the Friends, and generally Friends subscribers; there is also one other schoolhouse near the Billet on a piece of land held in trust for that purpose by Friends and others, and one other schoolhouse near John Jarret’s upon sufferance; the two last mentioned schools being made up by subscribers of different societies; which, after being considered, the same Friends are continued with John Parry, Samuel Shoemaker (mason), John Conrad, and John Jarrett added to them as a committee, to have the oversight of such schools as may be properly under the notice of this meeting.[498]

Rules drawn for the conduct of schools

And again in 1783 that,

The committee on schools report they have several times visited the schools of Friends belonging to this meeting since their appointment, and that there appears an improvement in them, they having drawn up an essay of rules for the government of said schools, which were read and approved by this meeting....[499]

From 1782 onwards Horsham was a regularly constituted monthly meeting.[500] Almost the first thing performed by this newly constituted body was to order a report on schools which was brought into the monthly meeting in 1784,[501] the text of which is reproduced below.

Report made to Horsham monthly on schools

Four schools named; others, where the houses belong to Friends

No funds established

We, the committee on schools, having met and examined into the situation of such within the compass of this meeting find them as follows, viz.: that within the verge of Byberry meeting there is a school kept in a part of the meeting house under the inspection of part of the same committee, by Christopher Smith, a member of our society, whose number of scholars are about thirty at 10/ a scholar, per quarter, raised by subscription; also another school taught a small distance from said meeting house by Isaac Carver in his own house who formerly was a member among us, to which some Friends send their children, and within the compass of Horsham Particular Meeting there is a school taught on the meeting land near the meeting house by Byran Fitzpatrick, who is not a member, the number of scholars about twenty-five at 10/ a scholar per quarter; there is also one other schoolhouse built by Friends on a piece of land given for a term of years for that purpose in which there is no school kept at present. There are several other schools within the compass of said meeting, the houses of which are the property of Friends and others to which some Friends send their children. There are no funds belonging to any of the aforesaid schools, but there is a donation left to Horsham Particular Meeting, which if it were not for some circumstances attending it, might be of an advantage in establishing schools within the limits of that meeting which we think demands the attention of this meeting.

Signed on behalf of the committee by

Daniel Thomas.

Each particular meeting to name its own committee

Three schools in the preparatives

After this there was no report for nearly two years, when the meeting, taking cognizance of the fact, urged all the preparatives to appoint individual committees of their own to attend to school affairs. In 1787 the committee of the monthly meeting made report that within the compass of the monthly meeting there were three schools under the care of the preparative meetings, in all of which the masters were members of the society of Friends.[502]

Value of the organization cited

The value of the organization of meetings for getting something accomplished can hardly be overestimated. The directing power of the quarterly meeting must have often been the cause which produced a conscious activity in the lower meetings. The quarterly meetings were at all times feeling the educational pulse of their constituents and making suggestions, requiring reports, etc., which did not fail to keep up the local interest. The quarterly meeting at Abington in 1792 made the following suggestions:

At a quarterly meeting held at Abington, November 8, 1792, the subject of schools coming under consideration, it is thought expedient that the meetings be earnestly requested to take that matter into solid consideration and send up in their reports next quarter how far the advice of the yearly meeting has been complied with in that respect. The clerk is requested to furnish each member with a copy of this minute extracted from the minutes of the quarterly meeting.

Nathan Cleaver, Clerk.

The clerk is directed to furnish the preparatives with a copy of the above minute, and they are desired to inform this meeting of their situation in the above respects.[503]

The poor educated; 1792

The report of the monthly meeting in 1792 indicates that that meeting’s concern for the education of the poor was comparable to others mentioned; they state that all of the children “partake of learning freely” and their and other Friends’ children “are placed among Friends” as apprentices.

Warrington

Youths’ meetings

The earliest Quaker settlements in Warrington were in 1735,[504] and their first meetings for worship were held with the Friends at Newberry. Warrington Preparative Meeting was organized in 1745;[505] while the monthly meeting records date to 1747.[506] For nearly thirty years there is no notice in the records concerned with education, saving those which refer to the settling of youths’ meetings. Those were very frequent.[507] The report on the youths’ meetings in 1779 was as follows:

Some of the Friends appointed to attend the Youths’ Meeting report that four of them attended it and gave it as their sense that it was a good meeting, and that if it should be as well attended in the future, it might be of use.[508]

Committees of men and women named on schools

Three years later, 1782, it was considered necessary to leave off holding the youths’ meetings, for what reasons it is not known, but on a protest from some members it was concluded that it might be continued for at least another meeting.[509] In 1778 the yearly meeting extract was received, in which the establishment of schools was recommended; committees of both men and women were at once named for the service and desired to report.[510] In the year following, the report was made on the part of Warrington Preparative Meeting:

Warrington Meeting informs us that they have made choice of William Underwood, Peter Cleaver, Benjamin Walker, and Joseph Elgar for trustees and overseers of a school, with which this meeting concurs.[511]

The trustees thus appointed, it seems, were not so successful as might have been desired, if we may judge by their report made in 1780.

No progress reported 1780

William Underwood, on behalf of the committee appointed to have under their care and labor to promote the education of the youth, as well as a reformation with that respect to other deficiencies in our society, informed this meeting that they have several times met and conferred together on the occasion, but have not proceeded any further in that service, neither have any prospect at this time of proceeding therein, etc.[512]

The tone of the next report of 1782 is more encouraging.

The Friends appointed to the care of schools report they have made some progress therein, some of them having attended each of our preparative meetings and endeavored to encourage Friends in setting up of schools agreeable to the intention of the Yearly Meeting and find there is a willingness in the minds of Friends to endeavor to have schools set up amongst us agreeable thereto, as nearly as the circumstances of the several Meetings will admit of. They are continued and desired to assist where there may be occasions and report to this Meeting in the third month next.[513]

School to be at York

In 1784 it was reported that the committee had attended at York and that there appeared to be a good prospect for a school to be established there according to the desires expressed in the yearly meeting’s advices.[514] It was also stated that some provision was made at each particular meeting for the same, and it was expected a particular report would be rendered thereof.[515] This report, however, did not come into the monthly meeting as it appears.

The conditions at York seem to have been the most promising as presented in a committee’s report of 1784 which is here submitted:

Schoolhouse at York; subscriptions started

The committee appointed to promote the establishment of schools report that they have paid some attention to the service; most of them attended a meeting at York, and find that Friends there have a house nearly finished and have entered into some subscriptions to encourage such a school, of which it is agreed that the Quarterly Meeting be informed, as well as of houses being built for that purpose at Newbury and Warrington, and that the committee be released from the service.[516]

Same statement by quarterly meeting

The statements of the monthly meeting in the above report are corroborated by a later report of the Warrington and Fairfax Quarterly, which was made a few months later, though it appears the schoolhouse at Warrington was not yet completed.[517]

The progress that had been made by Westland Monthly Meeting[518] is indicated by the following report of that date:

The minutes of the school committee for several seasons past being read, and they have proposed a reappointment, William Wilson, Matthew Heald, Jonas Cattell, William Dixon, Joshua Dixon, and Eleazar Brown are appointed to have the general care of schools and admission of Tutors. And it appears requisite that a few Friends be appointed by each Preparative Meeting to have the immediate oversight of the school or schools within the limits of such meetings; said committee to unite and confer together as they see occasion, and the clerk is desired to notify each preparative meeting by a copy of this Minute.[519]

Later reports still indefinite

A still later report of 1797 is no more definite than the former; this is very generally characteristic of the reports, and even at a late date when other meetings were making very definite ones, indicates that a very unsatisfactory state existed in the schools of Westland. Many other reports examined, which were sent in before the committee, of the century, made no improvement in regard to definiteness.

SUMMARY

The meetings

The schools in the limits of Abington, Gwynedd, Horsham, Warrington, and Westland meetings are discussed in this chapter.

Abington

Probably the first schoolmaster at Abington, who was connected with a regularly established school, was Jacob Taylor. Land for the meeting and school uses was deeded by John Barnes in 1696, and a meeting house built by 1700. Assistance was also afforded by a legacy granted by William Carter for educating poor children. Such funds were in charge of, and expended by, trustees appointed for that purpose. Fox’s and Crisp’s Primers are mentioned for use in the schools.

Gwynedd

Morristown schoolhouse mentioned

Three regular schools

Mention is made of a schoolhouse near Gwynedd in 1721, but no records of the school are discovered. Marmaduke Pardo, an experienced teacher, came to Gwynedd from Wales, and being well recommended as such, it is likely that he was employed in school teaching; but nothing explicit to that effect is found. Late in the century Joseph Foulke states he attended school in Gwynedd. A schoolhouse at Morristown is mentioned in 1766. Committees on schools and funds followed the procedure noticed in other meetings. School land, schoolhouse funds, and a house for a master were provided in Montgomery township in 1793. Another school in the compass of Plymouth is mentioned, and another one, “adjoining the meeting house at Plymouth.” Other temporary schools, used under varying circumstances, are said to be maintained. Merion and the Valley do not appear to have met the yearly meeting’s requirements in any way.

Horsham

No explicit mention is made of a school at Horsham in the early minutes, but the advertisement for a teacher in 1753 indicates they were supplied with a school. A report of Horsham Preparative in 1729 mentions four schools, kept “nearly agreeable to direction.” In 1783 a list of rules was adopted for their government. Each preparative meeting was directed in 1787 to have its own committee on schools.

Warrington Westland

Probably twelve regularly established schools

Judging from the minutes of their transactions, the schools of Warrington and Westland meetings seem to have been organized and carried on in a very desultory fashion. Those at York and Warrington were the best situated. There were probably as many as twelve regularly established schools in the above meetings by the end of the century.

CHAPTER VII
SCHOOLS OF CHESTER COUNTY

The meetings considered

The several monthly meetings, which are discussed in this chapter, were, for the period of this study (before 1800) members of Chester (or Concord Quarterly) Meeting, until the establishment of Western Quarterly Meeting in 1758,[520] when a number of them were included in that quarter. In 1800 a new Quarterly Meeting (Caln) was established from those formerly constituting Western Quarterly.[521] The monthly meetings with which we are to deal, the dates of their establishment, and the order of their presentation here, are as follows: (1) Kennett, known as Newark till 1760, 1686, or before; (2) New Garden, set off from Kennett in 1718; (3) Goshen, set off from Chester, 1722; (4) Bradford, 1737; (5) Uwchlan, set off from Goshen, 1763; (6) London Grove, set off from New Garden, 1792.[522] Those just named were situated within the limits of present Chester County.[523] The last meeting to be considered in this chapter, (7) Sadsbury, established in 1737, was situated in Lancaster County.[524]

Kennett

Early care for children

In the records of Kennett (Newark) Meeting, the writer has been unable to find any early explicit reference to education. Among the early references to children, are the minutes of 1715 in regard to those of the widow Howard at the time of her remarriage.[525] The meeting appointed a committee to look after the affairs of her children to see that the will of the deceased father was entirely complied with. Again in 1727 the meeting appointed a committee to see that the provision for the orphan children be fulfilled before allowing the widow to remarry.[526] These two cases serve to point out that an early care and interest in the affairs of children was manifested on the part of the meeting.

Local history credits Quakers with furnishing the foundation of schools

Local historians have very little to offer in the way of clews to the education of the Quakers in the last part of the seventeenth and early eighteenth century, though they all agree that the Quakers furnished the foundations of education, and it was begun very early, even from the first establishment in the various counties.[527] Some of the early schools have already been discussed, in cases where it was possible to state the earliest beginnings.[528]

Yearly recommendations received

School committee appointed

In 1777 those who had attended the Western Quarterly Meeting reported they had received the recommendations of the yearly meeting requiring the monthly meetings to have particular charge of the education of the children, with especial reference to the employment of schoolmasters who were Friends.[529] The same concern being mentioned a month later, with emphasis on the school education, a committee of six Friends was appointed to join with a committee of the quarterly meeting to confer on the matter.[530] In 1779, their action appears to be just a little more definite, but from the records it is difficult to say whether it meant very much or not; the minutes at that time stated:

John Way, John Marshall, James Bennett, Caleb Pierce, David Greame, Samuel Nichols, and Thomas Carlton, Jr., are appointed to unit together and endeavor to promote such schools as (are) recommended.[531]

Union school of Kennett, Bradford, and New Garden

From that date (1779) to 1781, there appears no comment on the subject, save the usual periodic announcements that the Advices of the Yearly Meeting “have been regularly received.” In 1781, however,

Caleb Pierce on behalf of the committee on schools, reports there is a school made up by some of the members of this, Bradford, and New Garden monthly meetings; John Parker and Caleb Pierce are appointed to join with the Friends of those meetings in the oversight thereof, and report to this meeting when necessary.[532]

The school discontinued

New committee has more specific duties

In the seventh month thereafter, in the same year, John Parker reported that the school which he and Caleb Pierce had been appointed to oversee was discontinued.[533] They were released from their service in the care of schools. The former committee on that subject, appointed in 1779, seems, however, from the minute of the tenth month, 1781, to have been continued as a standing committee on the subject.[534] The following extract implies that the committee of 1779 was replaced by another which, by the way, had more specifically named duties. The implication of the minute is that there were at least two schools, perhaps more.

The concern for the promotion of schools, under the directions of Friends revived, Samuel Harlan, John Way, Aaron Hollingsworth,—John Swain, Amos Harvey, Samuel Pennock, and James Jackson are appointed to have the care and oversight of schools, also promote the establishment of schools where there is yet want of assistance, and report to this meeting when necessary.[535]

In the same year it was also recommended to the preparative meetings that each appoint a committee of their own to represent them and act with the committee of the monthly meeting in the concern of schools.[536] The intervening years, from 1783 to 1785, offer nothing beyond the usual general reports concerning the appointment of committees and the like. In 1785, the committee on schools produced this report:

Several schools reported; some according to demand of yearly meeting

We have lately had a conference on the subject, and do find that there are several schools in the compass of our monthly meeting, kept by Friends and under the care of this committee, and may inform that they are kept to a good degree of satisfaction, yet there are some that employ teachers, not members of our society, without the advice of the committee or the monthly meeting. We, likewise, agree to lay before the monthly meeting the reappointment of a committee for this service in future as the members of this committee have been long on the appointment and desire to be released, which we submit to the meeting. Signed—John Way (and five others).[537]

The answer to the fifth query of the same year likewise informs us that care has been taken in the education of the poor children, and Friends’ children “are generally placed among Friends.”[538]

New school committee appointed

The request for the appointment of a new committee on schools, made by the old committee, does not seem to have received consideration till 1788. In the meantime we must assume that the old committee continued to serve, since occasional reports were sent in. The men appointed on the new committee were: Jacob Greave, Samuel Nichols, Amos Harvey, Samuel Harlan, Moses Pennock, Robert Lambourn, Jr., Christopher Hollingsworth, John Way, and William Phillips, Jr.[539] In 1790 the monthly meeting ordered a special committee to recommend a deeper educational concern to the particular meetings.[540]

The desired results, in the shape of a more perfected organization and permanent foundation to be provided for schools, did not come until about 1792 and thereafter. In that year, the committee reported its past activity in respect to schools established, and made certain valuable suggestions to guide future action, as the following extract witnesses:

Ground purchased

Rules adopted for the school

The committee, appointed at last meeting, report: We, the committee appointed by the monthly meeting at the request of Kennett Preparative Meeting, respecting the establishment of schools within the verge thereof, agree to report, we have attended thereto, and find they have purchased a piece of ground, with the approbation of the committee of this meeting, of Abraham Taylor, about two miles and a half westernly from Kennett Meeting House, adjoining the public road, leading to Nottingham, and obtained his conveyance to Jacob Pierce, Samuel Pennock, Townsend Lambourn, Thomas Pierce, William Parker, and David Pierce, trustees for the same, meted and bounded as mentioned in the said conveyance and recorded ... and as it appears to us necessary in order for a fixed object whereon to lay a foundation for establishing a fund agreeable to the Yearly Meeting, that the monthly meeting should appoint some Friends as trustees to have the care of the said school, and that it should have a name to be distinguished by; we therefore propose it to be called by the name “Number One,” within the verge of Kennett Preparative Meeting. We have likewise agreed on some general rules to be observed by the scholars of the said school. Signed by Caleb Pierce, Wm. Lambourn, Caleb Kirk, and Jonathan Greave. 12-24-1790.

The above report, being read, is agreed to be further considered at our next meeting.[541] Unfortunately for the satisfaction of our curiosity about the internal organization of the schools, the rules which they state were drawn up were not incorporated in the minutes of the monthly meeting. They were probably similar, however, to those adopted by the Horsham School Committee at a slightly earlier date.[542]

In consideration of the recommendations made in the above report, the meeting assembled in the seventh month, appointed nine of their members as trustees, to receive all donations for the purpose of schools.[543] About a year thereafter, a report signed by Joshua Pusey and John Jones was submitted by the monthly meeting to the quarterly meeting, which was in substantial accord with all that had already been done.[544] It may be well to summarize briefly their recommendations.

Summary of committee’s report

1. We have considered the relative situation of the members in our compass.

2. The affairs of education have not yet received the attention they deserve.

3. We find several school houses have been erected, but

4. The demands made by the yearly meeting are not met, therefore,

5. Friends must subscribe funds, either in monthly or preparative meetings.

6. The funds must be available for application for meetings. Friends are so scattered and few that they cannot support a school alone and have been forced to patronize “mixed schools.”

7. Those laboring under difficulties should be taught gratis, or at least, at low rates.

In 1795 the committee on schools produced a plan for subscriptions to a permanent school fund,[545] which was referred to the next meeting. A report was then made, but it was thought that since all of the committee had not collaborated it should be, and accordingly was, postponed for the time being.[546] In the fifth month a report was made, but still some changes were thought to be necessary.[547]

Question of a plan for school funds prior to 1795

Not until the twelfth month (1785) was the report finally produced, which is given below. There has been some reference made by local historians of Chester County, stating that Kennett Monthly Meeting had as early as 1787 provided a plan for subscription for the provision of permanent funds.[548] The rule “number 5,” which is quoted by them, is exactly the same rule as the fifth one which is mentioned below. The writer has found no such reference to a plan for funds at the earlier date (1787). It seems quite probable that the statement made in Mr. Cope’s work is an oversight, perhaps an error in setting up an eight in place of a nine. The entire list of nine rules is given.

Scheme for funds reported in 1795

1. A plan for raising fund for the benefit of schools within the bounds of Kennett Monthly Meeting, whereby Friends may have an opportunity of manifesting their benevolent intentions by subscribing thereto.

1st. That each subscriber to this plan pay at the time of subscription, or give his or her note to the treasurer or clerk of the trustees, or their successors appointed by Kennett Monthly Meeting, to have the care of this fund, for a sum of money payable at any time, not exceeding three years after date, with the interest of five per cent. per annum paid annually for the same.

2d. The treasurer shall have a book for that purpose, and keep fair entries of all money due and received; likewise of all money expended and his receipts shall be a sufficient discharge for any money paid to him for the use of schools.

3rd. Whenever the treasurer may receive any new subscription or any money for the benefit of schools, he shall report the same at the next meeting of the trustees of the said schools.

4th. When the trustees receive any money for the use of schools, they shall as soon as they can conveniently put the same to interest upon good security; or they may purchase land or ground rent therewith as shall appear best for the time being.

5th. The trustees shall, as soon as they see occasion, apply the interest arising from this fund to securing the schooling of the children of such poor people, whether Friends or others, as live within the verge of the aforesaid monthly meeting, provided such children comply with their rules.

6th. We recommend it to each other as often as we find an increase of property and openness of heart to add something to our subscription whereby it is hoped the monthly meeting may in time be enabled more fully to comply with the advice of the Yearly Meeting in 1778, respecting schools.

7th. As a variety of circumstances may in future occur which the human eye can not foresee, nor understanding conceive, therefore the trustees shall from time to time manage this fund as shall appear to them best, to promote the welfare of the said schools and the poor thereunto belonging; also if the interest may be to spare, they may assist therewith in keeping the schoolhouse in repair and in paying the salaries of schoolmasters or mistresses within the verge of said meeting, provided the principal be not thereby lessened.

8th. If at any time the trustees may not all judge alike how they ought to proceed in such cases, they are to apply to the aforesaid monthly meeting for assistance.

9th. The trustees shall from time to time be accountable to the monthly meeting of Kennett for their management of this fund, as directed in the minute of their appointment. Signed by order of Kennett Monthly Meeting, held the 15th of the 12th month, 1796.[549]

State of schools in 1798

The condition of the schools in Kennett Monthly Meeting was made known in 1798 in the report presented by Robert Lambourn for the committee. A digest of that report is as follows:

1. They have had the subject “under care.”

2. There are two schools “within their compass.”

3. The town’s schools are taught by Friends’ members.[550]

4. They are under the charge of the meeting’s committee.

New Garden

Care for the indigent

The New Garden Meeting in 1773 made record of having placed £4/11/9 in the hands of Jacob Wright, to be applied at the further directions of the meeting to the placing out of poor Friends’ children or the relief of indigent Friends.[551] Between that time and 1778, we learn no more of this educational philanthropic interest. In that year the usual reminder sent out by the yearly meeting came to them, calling attention to educational needs.[552] A committee was appointed which stated in a report, 1779, “some care is taken therein, and more appearing necessary, they are continued.”[553] An extract of a few months later is as follows:

Two schools; another proposed

The committee respecting schools, having the matter under care, two schools being under their notice, and another proposed to be established, they are continued and desired to report when necessary, and the clerk to enter the substance of the case in their report.[554]

Following the report of 1779, which showed there were two schools in charge of the meeting, there is furnished no further information until 1785. In the third month, 1785, a large committee of thirteen members was appointed to take charge of the “weighty affairs” recommended.[555] This committee produced a report in the eighth month of the same year, which is gratifying in that it is more substantial than many others brought in. It is given herewith.

Report of 1785

The committee in the care of schools report that they have had several conferences together since last meeting, and are of the mind that concern for the right education of our youth rather increases among Friends, and that a new school house has been lately built near Jeremiah Barnard’s on a small piece of land conveyed by him for that purpose, which account is satisfying to this meeting. The committee is continued for further service and desired to report as they may see occasion.[556]

In 1786, George Gawthrop and Thomas Richards were added to the committee.[557] From the first to the fourth month of that year, the committee reported they had visited one school,[558] but their report indicates nothing performed, more than the visit. Four months later it is reported they had attended to the subject of schools somewhat, but that it still required much greater attention; and they were advised to meet with the monthly meeting’s clerk that he might prepare his report on schools for the quarterly meeting.[559]

Though that report and the one of the quarterly meeting really tell us nothing, we are better rewarded in one produced just a year later, which points plainly to some of the difficulties the early school trustees had to face.

Report of 1787

The committee in the care of schools reported as follows: the substance whereof the clerk is directed to insert in our report of the quarterly meeting.

Mistresses employed in summer; some schools not according to advice

The care of schools has been under our care and attention and on conferring together, we agree to report—under the present circumstances of things amongst us, it is found most convenient to employ mistresses, as the teachers in our schools most generally in the summer season, several of which are now under the care of Friends to pretty good satisfaction, and we hope the concern is in a reviving way amongst us, though there are discouragements by some Friends encouraging or promoting schools taught by persons not agreeable to the advice of the society.[560]

In 1794 William Jackson deeded to Joseph Preston and others a piece of ground for a schoolhouse,[561] which was to be in trust for the Friends’ meeting. This is the first transfer of ground for school purposes found among the New Garden Friends. Among the stipulations of the deed are the following:

Requirements for the school at New Garden

1. The master is to be a member of Friends.

2. The master must teach according to the rules laid down (presumably by the school trustees) as before mentioned in the case of the Horsham School Rules.[562]

3. The purpose stated is for the “promotion of piety and good order” and to “propagate useful learning.”

Goshen

On 12-2-1701, some Friends at Goshen applied to their quarterly meeting for the privilege of establishing a meeting for worship,[563] but this request was not approved until the meeting of the quarter in 1703.[564] In 1707 they proposed building a house for worship which was granted by the quarterly meeting in the twelfth month.[565] Their monthly meeting, as stated before, was not established until 1722.[566] The preparative meetings in its compass were Goshen, Newtown, and Uwchlan.[567]

A school in East Bradford for Goshen, Bradford and Birmingham

Though starting at a much later date as a monthly meeting the records of Goshen are in some ways far superior to many other meetings. In the first place, they devoted considerable attention to the yearly meetings’ proposals of 1746 and 1750,[568] which by many meetings received very scant attention. The concrete results of this attention, however, do not stand forth, as reports on the subjects are not plentiful till the “1778 era.” In that year of all years, they received the urgent accounts from the yearly meeting.[569] They appear to have gone to work at once, or perhaps had already begun, as a committee in the care of schools reported in the sixth month, 1779, that “a piece of ground is agreed for and a schoolhouse is now building in East Bradford.”[570] This school was to be made up from the Friends of Goshen, Bradford, and Birmingham,[571] and to be established in accord with the stipulations of the yearly meeting aforesaid.[572] Goshen Monthly Meeting was requested to name some Friend to receive the land in trust, and Thomas Hoopes, Jr., was accordingly appointed for the purpose.[573]

Increased committee reported 1782

In 1782, the present school committee, deciding that something should be done concerning the regulation of schools, desired an addition to their number, those added being Abraham Pratt, William Lewis, John Mailin, and Josiah Hibberd.[574] Two months later this committee brought forth the following proposals, which are self-explanatory.

Land to be purchased for school and master’s accommodations

The building and cost

We have met sundry times since the last meeting on the subject and are unanimous in judgment that it will be convenient for Friends to have a school house built near Jesse Garrett’s smith shop on the east side of the road leading from the valley where about five acres may be purchased of William Garrett and William Garrett, Jr., in order to erect a school house on, and also a house for a school master, which we request the monthly meeting to take under consideration; and if they approve thereof, that it may be encouraged by a subscription amongst Friends only, and to be established on the plan proposed by the Yearly Meeting and subject to the direction of the monthly meeting from time to time, to remove or alter as they may see cause, or time may show to be necessary. We propose the house to be twenty-seven feet square from out to out, and compute the expense of building to be £150 exclusive of the land which will be £25, which we submit to the monthly meeting. Signed in behalf of the committee—Thomas Hoopes, Jr.[575]

Their report was left for further consideration.

Attempt to bestir the preparatives

In 1784 a drive was organized on the preparative meetings. The monthly meeting received a visit from the committee of the quarterly meeting, which suggested the appointment of a large committee and the distribution of the printed advices of the yearly meeting of 1778, to be read before each of the preparative meetings.[576] In conformity with this suggestion, the former school committee was released and a new one of ten members appointed as a standing committee, directed to follow out the previously made suggestions.[577] In their report issued shortly thereafter, there is an account of the beginning of a school in Willistown, which is as the following:

School at Willistown; master’s house, etc., proposed

The committee in the care of schools report that a school is kept in the new house built in Willistown by a Friend, and endeavors are used to have it conducted as near as may be to the directions of the Yearly Meeting, and the building of a house for the master is proposed and a considerable sum of money is subscribed towards the same, provided a sufficiency can in like manner be raised.[578]

Another report for 1785 gives the state of schools for that date.

One school the property of the monthly meeting

There are several schools in the verge of our monthly meeting, kept by members of our society, one of which belongs to the monthly meeting, with several acres of land, whereon Friends are now building a house for a master, which when completed there will be a small fund towards schooling poor children.[579]

The chief concern to which the committee now addressed itself was the problem as to how they might establish a permanent fund for the schooling of poor children in their limits. For this problem they seem to have found a satisfactory solution for the time being, in 1786, which they reported to the monthly meeting for its approval. It appears to have been satisfactory to the meeting in the following form, the essential features being the same as those incorporated in the plans of meetings already mentioned.

Goshen plan for establishing funds similar to others

We, the subscribers, do hereby promise to pay unto ... treasurer for Friends’ schools, within the compass of Goshen Monthly Meeting, or to other Friends as may be from time to time appointed by said committee to that service, the sum of money severally written against our names, which sums are so subscribed to be and remain a permanent fund under the care of and direction of the monthly meeting’s committee of the people called Quakers, held at Goshen for the time being, appointed for this and other such purposes relative to schools, to be by them laid out in such manner as they shall from time to time judge most conducive to securing an income to the said schools, which income or annuity so arising therefrom to be applied to the education of such children as live within the compass of Goshen Monthly Meeting, whose parents, whether Friends or others, are not of ability to pay for the same and other such purposes as a majority of said committee shall from time to time direct, consistent with the object of the institution. Witness our hands—etc.[580]

For the next six years there are but two reports worthy of attention, which may be briefly summarized in this manner:

The state of schools in 1787

1787

1. One school, under the monthly meeting,

a. has a large school house, and

b. a dwelling house and garden for a master, who

c. is a member of Friends

d. The school is in charge of a standing committee

2. Another school house, whose