Chapter X Masters and Mistresses
Discussion of individual masters to be brief
There is on this subject a considerable amount of available material, though much of it is difficult of access. Of a long list of Quaker masters, and mistresses too, for they employed women from the very earliest date, it will be impossible in the brief space of this chapter to say more than a word. Some will only be mentioned because of scarcity of material concerning them; others must be only mentioned, even though they are of such importance that the story of their lives have required and would require volumes to write.955
Qualifications demanded of teachers; morality, membership and competency
Before a discussion of the masters and mistresses employed in the Quaker schools, it should be ascertained, if possible, what were the ideals or standards which were consciously set up to guide in their selection. What sort of tutors did they desire? This has already been touched upon, in other chapters, so we may simply state the chief criteria without further discussion. These, as stated from time to time by the yearly meetings and reiterated by quarterly, monthly, and preparatives, were: (1) morality, (2) be a member of Friends, and (3) competent to teach the subjects for which employed.956 The selection of teachers possessing such qualifications was usually entrusted to the care of committees as has already been sufficiently pointed out.
Serious attempt made to meet the standards set
In a majority of cases there was a real concern on the part of the monthly meetings’ committees to secure teachers possessing the above named qualities,957 their success in so doing increasing towards the latter part of the 18th century. The fact that they have been successful in securing Friends for teachers is usually mentioned in their reports.958 In bequests of property for use of schools, it was quite customary to state that the masters or mistresses should be Friends, and to be otherwise conducted as directed by the yearly meeting.959 There were of necessity some failures in the attempt to secure such qualified masters, the failures being sometimes recorded in the minutes.960 The failures seem generally to have been caused by the scarcity of the masters rather than carelessness on the part of the meeting or its committees.961
Teachers in lower schools usually from the home locality
The source whence teachers were secured was usually, in the case of the lower schools, home talent, no record having been found where a teacher was sent for or came from a great distance especially to take charge of schools. But innumerable instances, of which a few are cited later in this work, are at hand, where home talent was employed.962 Enoch Flower, the first master employed, was “an inhabitant of the said town.”963
Many Latin School masters came from a distance
Willian
Robert Proud
Peter Warren
In the case of the classical school, the practice was quite different. The difference was doubtless the result of necessity, rather than of choice. The first master, Keith, of the school which was first established by the meeting, and his successors, Makin, Cadwalader, and Pastorius, were, of course, as much native to the place as were any of the early settlers in the city. Of later masters, however, quite a number were brought from England especially for the business of “keeping school” or sought in other of the colonies. Certain specific cases may be mentioned. In 1784 Robert Willian came from England “to undertake keeping Friends’ school,” producing a certificate from Scarborough Meeting in Yorkshire.964 In 1746 the committee had been appointed to write to England concerning a teacher for the Public School.965 Previous to this time a similar attempt had been made to secure someone to take the place of William Robbins.966 Similarly, Robert Proud was recommended by John Fothergill in 1758 to Israel Pemberton (of Philadelphia) as a very suitable master for the school.967 Their “teacher’s agency” in England was constituted by two members, John Fothergill and John Hunt; at any rate, for some forty or fifty years they always informed them as soon as they had need of masters, and except in a few cases, masters were sent over. At one time (1760) not being able to hear of a possible applicant in England, an attempt was made to induce Peter Warren, an inhabitant of Virginia, to come to the position, at a salary of £150, plus £20 to transport his family.968 In the ensuing correspondence it was stated by the said Warren that he chose to go to Pittsburg; to inhabitants of Philadelphia his choice must have seemed ridiculous.
To supply teachers, the apprenticeship system used
However, the overseers of the school were not daunted. Quite in keeping with the system of apprenticing the youth in various occupations to members of Friends, and also in keeping with the general custom of the day, they sought out the brightest and most capable poor lad in their limits, and if they found him interested at all in the “futures” of teaching, they made the offer of an apprenticeship in the school. Instances may be cited which will clarify their procedure.
Samuel Eldridge apprenticed
and others
The extent of the system not great
In 1756 it was proposed that Samuel Eldridge be apprenticed to the board to prepare him to become a teacher of Latin and Greek;969 he was to study Latin, Greek, Arithmetic, Accounts, and Mathematics.970 He was to be furnished, besides the instruction, clothing and board, and was paid £30 annually. In return for this he studied and performed such duties in the capacity of usher as his progress in the various subjects would permit. At the end of the period of his indenture (1760) the board manifested their approval of his services by a gift of £10.971 At another time shortly subsequent thereto there was mentioned the desirability of encouraging James Dickinson, Richard Dickinson, and Joseph Rice to continue their schooling in order to become school masters; members of the board were named to speak with them and to ascertain their desires and intentions.972 One of them, James Dickinson, was in 1762 indented to serve three years in the same manner as Eldridge.973 King also, in 1754, was taken in as usher at a very small salary, later to become a master in the school.974 The exact extent of the apprenticing of school masters is not determined, but it does not seem to have been widely practised in and around Philadelphia. This appearance might, however, be corrected if greater sources of information were available.
The tenure of masters
Cases cited of B. Clift, J. Taylor
G. Keith, Makin and others
One would judge from the complaints of the yearly meetings, and their recommendations, that better and more permanent accommodations be afforded, so that teachers might be more easily kept,975 that the tenure of the early Quaker schoolmaster was short. The yearly meeting recognized the advantage accruing from longer tenure, and did seek to remove some of the causes which worked against it. Just how much they were able to increase the tenure it is impossible to say. We may, however, cite certain cases in which the duration of a master’s service is known. Benjamin Clift was apparently employed to teach in Darby for two years at least.976 Jacob Taylor, who was concerned with a school at Abington about 1701,977 and became a land surveyor about 1706978, may have continued to teach there between those two dates. He seems to have been resident there in that period,979 and the scarcity of teachers was everywhere evident, as has already been pointed out. This is certainly not a proof of his incumbency; it indicates a probability. Keith was employed from 1689980 to 1691;981 Thomas Makin from the latter date, intermittently, until his death, 1733;982 Pastorius from the latter part of 1697 or the first part of 1698983 to 1700;984 Robert Willian probably from 1748985 to 1753;986 Seaton from 1751987 to 1763,988 and Robert Proud, not continuously however, from 1759989 to 1770990 and again master in 1784.991 These were taken at random. The longest period of service, doubtless, must be credited to Anthony Benezet who first taught in Philadelphia in 1742992 and continued there with very brief intermissions until his death in 1784.993
These are only a few cases and the majority of them in the city where it was possible to employ the best, pay them better, and hence, keep them longer. Hence, too much weight must not be given to the facts above stated as proving a long term of service was common. If a study of a number of cases in country districts were possible, the results would probably be very different.
Tenure of mistresses
Songhurst
Burchall
Thornton
Her success questionable
It is difficult to get information about the length of service of the mistresses. When first mentioned in Philadelphia records994 they are spoken of as so many nonentities, their names not given. The term of service of Olive Songhurst, the first mistress whose name is mentioned,995 we cannot determine. The women teachers seem quite frequently to have begun work under the overseers without much notice and to have left off with little more. There are, however, a few cases where we know that the term of service was of considerable length. Rebeckah Burchall seems to have taught continuously at one school from 1755996 to 1761.997 Whether she discontinued service on leaving that school is not known. Ann Thornton was probably not continued in service more than two years. She began in 1755 when she filled Anthony Benezet’s998 place and left in 1757.999 In the meantime, it had been necessary for the board to draw up a set of special rules for the government of her school,1000 from the nature of which it is probable that she did not take another school under their direction.
No system of license found
Recommendation and certificate of removal; their use
From none of the sources of information does it appear that there was any license system whatsoever. The recommendation of well-known Friends was the best pass a teacher could have, as was instanced by those sent over by John Fothergill. In addition to the personal recommendation, the certificate of removal from his home meeting was an assurance to Friends in other parts that an individual was “clear” of all entangling alliances and might be received into full membership. In no case where a teacher came to teach, from a distance, did he fail to take and produce a certificate on his arrival. These, of course, did not certify the things which modern licenses do, but they, in conjunction with the personal recommendation as to ability, seem to have answered the purpose.
The term of employment usually a year
No written contract found
The term for which a teacher was hired was in most cases a year for trial, which was renewed again at the year’s end, if satisfactory to both parties. Mention has been made of Benjamin Clift of Darby,1001 Keith, Makin, Cadwalader, Willian, Proud, and many others. Some were taken for a trial of six months,1002 and there were cases in which the board reserved the right to discharge the individual on three months’ notice.1003 The board desired, and in some cases requested, that the employee should give six months’ notice before his resignation should take place. Such notice was customary in 1755.1004 Two instances have come under the writer’s attention, in which a contract was made for three years. King (son of Joseph King) was employed in 1754 for the three years subsequent thereto at £40, £50 and £60 for the years respectively.1005 Mr. King resigned regardless of the contract, after six months’ notice, because the school did not agree with his health or inclination.1006 The other case was that of Keith who was to be employed for one year at £50 and for two years more at £120 each, if he should desire to stay.1007 In neither of the two cases does there appear to have been any instrument in writing.
Teachers’ salaries; tabulated
The salaries and rates received by many of the teachers have been mentioned in several pages previous to this. For convenience for reference there is presented without discussion a table showing the pay received by various masters at the times their respective services were rendered.1008 One case, neither so prosaic to us, nor so profitable to the master, defies tabulation, so it is given verbatim.
Pay of Friends’ masters similar to that of other private masters
The charge for poor children less
Country masters ill paid
18th Day of X br 1735.
Reced of Richard Buffington, Junior 18 s per Hatt, 4s 6d by stockings, 17s 6d In money—In all forty Shillings; Being in full for a yeare Scholeing, I say Reced per
me Joh Morse1009.
| Name | Year | per Q | per year | (Reference) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flower, E. | 1683 | 4/ 6/ or 8/ or | £ 10 | Col. Rec., I, 13. |
| Keith, G. | 1689 | (following) | 50 | Ph., 5-26-1689. |
| 120 | ||||
| Makin | 1697 | 40 | } Ph., 11-28-1697. | |
| Pastorius | 1697 | 40 | ||
| Cadwalader | 1700 | for a half year trial | 20 | Ph., 1-28-1700. |
| Cadwalader | 1702 | 50 | Ph., 1-27-1702. | |
| Every, J. | 1702 | Usher | 30 | Ph., 4-26-1702. |
| Benezet, A. | 1742 | 50 | P. C. S. M., I, 33. | |
| Willian, R. | 1749 | 150 | Ibid., 73. | |
| Wilson, J. | 1750 | Usher | 60 | Ibid., 84. |
| Seaton, A. | 1751 | (allowed) | 20 | Ibid., 90. |
| Wilson, J. | 1753 | 70 | Ibid., 101. | |
| Johnson, Wm. | 1753 | (allowed) | 10 | Ibid., 106. |
| Benezet | 1754 | 80 | Ibid., 117. | |
| King | 1754 | (proposed in a contract) | 40 | Ibid., 122. |
| 50 | ||||
| 60 | ||||
| Thornton, Ann | 1755 | 20 | Ibid., 130. | |
| Johnson, Wm. | 1755 | (assistant) | 40 | Ibid., 131. |
| Thompson, Chas. | 1755 | 150 | Ibid., 133. | |
| Johnson, Wm. | 1756 | (raised 20 to keep him) | 60 | Ibid., 141. |
| Fentham, Jos. | 1756 | 85 | Ibid., 144. | |
| Patterson, M. | 1761 | 70 | Ibid., 235. | |
| Thompson, J. | 1770 | 200 | Ibid., 341. | |
| Proud, Robert | 1759 | 150 | Ibid., 175. | |
| Proud, Robert | 1784 | 250 | Ph., 1-30-1784. | |
| His usher | 80 | Ibid. | ||
| Todd, J. | 1784 | (for entrance 15/ and 20/) | Ibid. | |
| (for poor sent by Board 10/) | Ibid. | |||
| Weaver, I. | 1784 | 30/ | 30 | Ibid. |
| Brown, Wm. | 1784 | (whole days) 30/ | } | Ibid. |
| (half days) 15/ | } | |||
| Lancaster, Sarah | 1784 | { (children) 15/ | } | Ibid. |
| { (sent by board) 10/ | } | |||
| { (sent by board) half | } | |||
| { (sent by board half day) 7/6 | } | |||
| Harry, Mary | (children) 15/ | Ibid. | ||
| Clark, Joseph | (older girls 30/) | Ibid. | ||
| Mrs. Clarke | 15/ | Ibid. | ||
| Marsh, Ann | 20/ | Ibid. | ||
| McDonnell, Mary | 1784 | 15/ | Ibid. | |
| Clift, B. | 1693 | £12 | Darby, 9-20-1693 | |
| Underwood, Elihu | 1773 | (Credit for school keeping) 2/2/0/ | ||
| by 2 raccoon skins 0/4/0/ | ||||
| By netting a pair of stockings 0/2/6/1010 | ||||
| Meccum, Eliza | 1798 | (Negro School) | 50 | Ph., 2-25-1798 |
| Pickering, Elisha | 1798 | (Negro School) | 150 | Ibid. |
| Benezet, A. | 1794 | (Negro School) | 120 | Ibid. |
| Britt, Daniel | 1793 | (Negro School) | 100 | Ibid., 1-25-1793 |
| Dougherty, Sarah | 1793 | (Negro School) | 50 | Ibid. |
As stated elsewhere in this work, the amounts received by masters and mistresses in the Friends’ school measure about the same as those stated for other private masters in the city at the same time. In the table above, the seeming increase from £50 per year in 1689 to £250 per year paid Robert Proud in 1784, and the slender salaries of the women as compared with those of the men, are worthy of attention.1011 Though all of the teachers in the Negro School had had long experience, their salaries did not equal that of Classical School teachers; but they did keep pace with those in the English School. The price paid for young children was usually low, about one-half that paid for older ones in the same subjects. Children sent by the board were received at a less charge, or perhaps free of charge if that body had already made arrangement to that effect. The contrast between the salary received by the country masters Clift (Darby) and Underwood (Warrington) is very interesting. Such salaries were doubtless effective in causing unrest and a floating teacher population, against which the yearly meeting frequently remonstrated, and earnestly sought to correct.
Mistresses to be first considered
In the pages following, brief attention will be given to several of the Quaker teachers who have come to the attention of the writer during the course of this study. Many of them have been mentioned in other parts of it, reference to whom is to be found in the index. Though the women were given more scanty attention in the records and seem to have filled a less prominent place in the schools, we may gallantly, yet illogically, give them first attention here. In another light, it may not seem illogical. Women were leaders in the Quaker meetings and were privileged to speak, a favor not granted elsewhere. In the early yearly meeting recommendations they urged good mistresses be chosen as well as good masters.1012 Women were also recognized by London Grove Monthly Meeting in 1795, when a committee of women Friends were appointed to meet with a like committee of men to consider the question of schools.1013
Olive Songhurst
As before stated, mistresses in Philadelphia were mentioned by the monthly meeting as early as 1699,1014 but we are not informed who they were. The first, Olive Songhurst, whose name is given, was employed for some time about 1702,1015 and if we may judge her service by a raise of salary granted in that year, it seems to have been acceptable to the meeting. After Olive Songhurst a long period of time passes in which the writer has found no mistress named in the minutes, though mistresses are frequently mentioned. It is not, therefore, to be assumed that this list is complete either in the case of masters or mistresses; those who are mentioned may prove of some interest or service to other students.
Ann Thornton in Girls’ School, 1755
Ann Thornton was mentioned as being employed by the board in 1755, when it was proposed that she might take Anthony Benezet’s place in a Girls’ School, which he had entered the year before. It is not very probable that she was an inexperienced teacher at the time, since the board was usually careful to place strong and proven teachers in its best schools. She was to receive no more than thirty scholars and had to promise to look after them in meeting, which seemingly unpleasant task she hesitated to take.1016 It is the writer’s opinion, based on the fact that the board was forced to make a list of rules especially for her school,1017 and the tenor of her dismissal when Benezet was again available, and that she does not appear to have been employed again by the board, that her work in the school and agreement with the board were not satisfactory.
Burchall employed at same time; duties
Rebeckah Burchall, employed near the same time as Ann Thornton, was engaged in teaching poor children.1018 It was also stipulated that she guard the girls in meetings, especially her pupils.1019 So in 1755, had we entered the quiet Friends’ meeting we would have no doubt seen the two prim Quaker ladies just mentioned sitting in silent and upright watchfulness amid their youthful charges. Gentlemen were not immune from such duties.
Several other mistresses named, many in charge of poor children
Widow Mellor is mentioned in 1755 as keeping a small school,1020 which probably was quite similar to the one kept by Debby Godfrey, a poor woman to whom the board decided to send some poor children to learn to read and write.1021 The minute reads as though it was a condescension, and very likely it was a form of charity on their part. Jane Loftu, likewise, (1761) taught thirty-two poor children, her charge made to the board for the service being £32.1022 Ann Redman seems to have been a teacher of more than ordinary merit. She is first noted as a teacher at the Fairhill School, at which place she was visited by members of the Public School Board, who seem to have been so well impressed with her as a teacher that she was immediately asked to come into the school just vacated by Rebekah Burchall. Her employment was teaching reading, writing, and plain sewing.1023 Mary Wily, a teacher employed by the board in 1762, received very little attention. A question is raised concerning her, however, by an objection made by the board to her account presented for certain schooling.1024 It was settled amicably it seems. Ann Pattison, first mentioned as being employed in 1763,1025 is doubtless the same as the Patterson later employed in 1766.1026 She was employed in teaching poor children. Mary Gosnold, Rebecca Seaton, and Mary Moss are mentioned in 1764 as teachers of poor children.1027 Rebecca Seaton does not appear in the ranks of teachers (at least on Friends’ records) till after the death of Alexander Seaton, her husband. It seems quite evident that the mistresses were assigned, more especially, to the keeping of school for the poor, though it was by no means limited to them. Sarah Mott was also a teacher for poor children.1028
Subjects of instruction; reading, writing, sewing, spelling, and other “suitable subjects for girls”
Other denominations in Friends schools
Hannah Cathall, we feel certain, must have been a teacher of considerable merit. She began her service at least as early as 17651029 and in 1779 was still in that employment, being at that date engaged in a school with Rebecca Jones, for instructing girls in reading, writing, “and other branches suitable to them.”1030 They also received poor girls sent by the overseers. Other mistresses employed by the board in 1779 were Sarah Lancaster, teaching the rudiments to young children of both sexes (sewing especially for girls), Essex Flower in a school similar to Lancaster’s, and Ann Rakestraw who had charge of a reading and spelling school.1031 Sarah Lancaster still continued in the schools’ service in 1784, having in attendance sixty-four scholars, part of whom attended only half days. The other mistresses mentioned at that time were Mary Harry, teaching a school for children, Mrs. Clarke, teaching boys and girls, reading and sewing for the girls; Ann Marsh in a school similar to that of Mrs. Clarke’s, and Mary McDonnell, who taught fifteen young children, what studies we do not know.1032 The committee’s report for that date shows that nearly one-half or perhaps more of the children attending the schools of the Friends’ masters and mistresses were children of the members of other denominations. In almost every case the teachers were Friends, or, as they termed it, “people of friendly persuasions.”
Mistresses in the Negro School
Mistresses devoted their abilities also to the instruction of the Negro children. Sarah Dougherty was for a time (about 1790) employed in the Negro School, but for some reason, unexplained, Elizabeth Meccum was employed in her stead.1033 Elizabeth Meccum remained in that capacity till the time of her death, which occurred between 1795 and 1798.1034 Joseph Foulke, in a letter concerning his schooling at Gwynedd Meeting, mentions Hannah Lukens who kept a “family school” and also Hannah Foulke,1035 both of whom were members of Gwynedd, but further information of them the writer does not have.
Teachers rated by the frequency with which they are mentioned by well recognized writers
If one were to measure American Quaker schoolmasters as some American men of science have been measured, by the amount of space they have gained in literature, they would not stand out very strikingly. Of fifty-five male teachers in and around Philadelphia, but twenty-one of them are mentioned in five standard works on local history and genealogy. None of the fifty-five teachers receive mention in all five of the works; three of them are chronicled in four; seven are mentioned in three of the five; ten are spoken of in two, twenty-one are given a place in one; and thirty-four receive no notice. If rated according to such a scheme, Pastorius, Benezet, and Charles Thompson would head the list, while quite a number group themselves at the other end of it. The scheme, though it has not been carried out fully, for example no attempt has been made to measure the length of the notice, does seem to favor those who stood high at the time of their service.1036
Individual notice to be very brief
In the brief notices following, concerning the male teachers, it is not intended to write biographies. Some of them have already been written, and to them the reader is directed, if he or she wishes a full account of the man’s life. Others will not, cannot, ever be written for obvious reasons. In the space allotted to them here, there is set down only what has been found of interest concerning them as teachers.
Anthony Benezet
Given charge of Girls School
In 1742 Anthony Benezet came from Germantown where he had been engaged in a school,1037 to be employed by the Board of Overseers of Philadelphia. He was employed at a salary of £50 to teach arithmetic, writing, accounts, and French.1038 He appears to have given very satisfactory service and to have remained in the same position until 1754 when he was placed in charge of the Girls School, under the Board’s direction.1039 Some students have been under the impression that the Girls School was entirely independent and a private venture;1040 but this could not have been true, for the Board named the subjects he should teach and specified that he receive at the school “no more than thirty scholars.”1041 The school was, however, the result of Benezet’s proposal.
Attitude as a teacher
Aids children of French neutrals
Not only was he kindly to the pupils as a teacher,1042 but he was a father to the poor lads whenever he could help them in any way. In 1754 Samuel Boulds was bound to him, so that he might look after his schooling, and he further requested the Board to care for the same, if he should die or leave the school before the lad was grown up.1043 His health not being good, he requested leave from his school during the summer of 1754.1044 Apparently his health did not improve sufficiently and he did not return to the school till 1757, taking the place of Ann Thornton.1045 Another instance of his philanthropy came to light in his request (1762) that certain of the children of the poor French neutrals be allowed to go to the Public School which was granted only upon his certification of those he felt sure would attend regularly.1046 Shortly thereafter on account of ill health, he was again forced to leave the Girls School, which he did until 1767, when he returned to resume his work again.1047 It was no difficulty for him to start a school. The suggestion was made to the Board in one month, and in the following he was teaching the school, and made his regular report at their meeting.
Enters the Negro School in 1782
From the information the writer has assembled, it appears that he continued with the White school, after his return in 1767, until 1782, when at his request he was accepted by the committee to take charge of the Negro School.1048 He had throughout his life written eloquently in defense of freedom’s cause,1049 and the origin of the Negro School, in 1770, was perhaps due to him more than to any other man in the Friends’ meeting.
Jonathan Binns
Jonathan Binns was to have taken charge of the Public School in 1734, if his health improved, but no report being made by him it is inferred he did not perform such service.1050 Alexander Buller was employed in 1738 to teach writing, mathematics, and the Latin tongue. Three years later he ran an advertisement in the Pennsylvania Gazette, as follows:
Alexander Buller; one of few who advertised for pupils
Writing, Arithmetic, Merchants’ Accounts, Navigation, Algebra, and other parts of the mathematics are taught by Alexander Buller, at the Public School in Strawberry Alley. He proposes to keep a night school for the winter and begins on the 23d instant when constant attendance shall be given. November 5, 1741.1051
William Brown, Daniel Britt, Pickering and Mears
William Brown was teaching girls reading, writing, arithmetic and language in 1784.1052 Daniel Britt interested himself in the instruction of Negroes in whose school he was employed from about 17901053 to 1796 or 1797.1054 He was succeeded by Elisha Pickering who probably taught till 1799, being followed by Benjamin Mears.1055
John Cadwalader
Thomas Makin
George Keith; dissatisfaction with him
John Cadwalader came to Philadelphia in 16991056 and the year following was recommended by Griffith Owen as a man “fit for an assistant in the school.”1057 He was accordingly employed, it being decided that he and Thomas Makin, who had entered the school as usher to Keith, should compete with each other to show the best results. From the records one cannot determine just when he left the school, though he stated, in 1702,1058 that he intended to do so. It seems likely, from a minute of 1703, that he must have taught longer than he intended when making the above statements.1059 Thomas Makin, with whom he was associated, was employed at various times until his death in 1733.1060 He is credited with being “a good Latinist,”1061 and was the author of a Latin poem in which he celebrated Pennsylvania. George Keith, Scotchman, kindly recommended him for the mastership in 1691, when he (Keith) decided to leave.1062 Keith had come to the school as first master when the school was set up in 1689. He is stated, by writers of history, to have been of disputatious disposition, and this probably accounted for the dissatisfaction which arose in the school. Soon after leaving the school he published in connection with Talbot a critical article, “Means of Quaker Stability,”1063 in which is evident the rancor toward the society, which he had previously concealed.
Clift Clarke
Dickinson
Concerning Benjamin Clift, schoolmaster at Darby, no additional information has been found, beyond that given in the minutes of the monthly meeting. Joseph Clarke was a teacher of a girls’ school in 1784,1064 which was attended by about thirty girls. William Dickinson was first employed (1764) to take the place of Moses Patterson,1065 as usher to John Todd in the Latin School.1066 The Board seems to have taken exception to him, though nothing has been intimated elsewhere as to his character, for they reserved the right to discharge him on three months’ notice, if they desired. Such reservations were not general.
Patterson
Moses Patterson, had begun his teaching career in 1760 when he undertook to teach a school at Fairhill Meeting.1067 He then was made usher to Alexander Seaton in which position he remained till 1764.1068 He desired then to quit as usher, and apparently did; he is next heard of in 1765 as teacher of “poor children.”1069
Masters in Latin School after 1748; Willian
Wilson and King
Robert Willian was employed in 1748, having been brought from England, to teach Latin, Greek and other learning.1070 His first term of employment was for one year, as was the Board’s general custom in hiring teachers, but it seems that his contract was renewed until 1753, at which time his place was taken by John Wilson.1071 Wilson had entered the school’s employ as usher in 1750, but was, in addition to that, granted permission to teach an evening school.1072 It is not known how long he remained as master, but in 1754 there was a proposition to allow J. King to go into the Latin School,1073 and it is likely he took Wilson’s place. King, however, as stated elsewhere, did not remain there more than a year, because of ill health and inclination.1074 Wilson is later mentioned in connection with the Latin school (1769); how much of the time, between 1754 and 1769 he had spent in the Latin School it is impossible to say.
Latin School tries to obtain services of Jackson
Thompson engaged, however
His training and later interests.
When King (1755) announced his intention to resign at the end of six months, the Board attempted to procure Paul Jackson, who at the time was instructor at the Academy.1075 Jackson was well qualified for the place and, besides his work at the Academy, had prepared lectures in “experimental philosophy” which he proposed to give for the “entertainment of the curious.”1076 He did not find himself free at this time to remove from the employ of the trustees of that institution, but Charles Thompson, who had been employed there as usher was engaged for the Friends’ School.1077 It seems that the logical man for the place would have been William Johnson, who first taught a school at Fairhill1078 (1753) and attended Latin School, free of charge, to prepare him to be an usher (1754).1079 The headship was not offered him, however,1080 but a year later his salary for the assistantship was raised £20 to keep him from going to Burlington.1081 We find that Charles Thompson (from the Academy) remained in the Friends’ School until 1760, when he decided to leave the business of school keeping for another.1082 His first training in Latin, Greek, and mathematics was gained in Alison’s Seminary. After leaving the Friends’ School he was interested in political life and became secretary of the Revolutionary Congress in 1775.1083
Robert Proud recommended for master
Time of his service
When Thompson indicated his desire to leave the Latin School, the Board took steps to secure a master from England. A letter was sent to J. Fothergill and John Hunt who recommended Robert Proud as a very likely candidate.1084 This recommendation was favorably considered and Proud accordingly came to Philadelphia. He immediately chose W. W. Fentham as his usher, whom, he stated, the Board might remove if they did not find him satisfactory.1085 It appears that Proud remained master from this time until 1770, when he announced his resignation.1086 He was again in the employ of the Latin School in 1784, having an usher to assist him in instructing the thirty boys who are stated to have been in attendance on that date.1087 How long this period of service continued the writer has not determined. The reader has already been introduced to Proud’s school by means of the rules he constructed for it, which were presented on a previous page. His reverence for learning and his attempt to inculcate that respect for it in the minds of his pupils is perhaps best indicated by these lines:
“To learning ever be inclined;
With good instruction store thy mind,
For without learning, living here
Like Death and Darkness doth appear.”1088
John Thompson recommended
When Proud left the Latin school in 1770, Friends again had recourse to the English supply house, receiving from thence John Thompson, eldest son of Jonah Thompson, who had previously taught in Philadelphia.1089 John Thompson entered the school on twelfth month, fifth, 1770 and remained in that position at least until 1779. At that date he had twenty-four boys in charge, to whom he taught Latin and Greek, with occasionally some writing and arithmetic.1090
An interesting student’s commentary on the “Hon. John Thompson” is furnished by the following extract from the publications of the Public School Gazetteer, 1777.
On Thursday last in the afternoon the Hon. John Thompson, Esq., dismissed the school long before the usual time. This (we hope) is a prelude to the restoration of our rights.1091
Masters of the English School: Seaton
One of the most worthy masters to be noted in the English School, near the middle of the century, was Alexander Seaton. In 1751 he desired to start a school in the upper part of the city, which was to be under the care of the Board. In this school, which was accordingly set up, were taught writing, arithmetic, and mathematics.1092 He was thus employed until 1754 when, as above stated, Benezet desiring to set up a girls’ school, he was requested to take Benezet’s place in the English School.1093 At various dates he was assisted by Moses Patterson, Phineas Jenkins,1094 and George Smith.1095 In 1763, when he died, his place was filled by John Todd.1096
John Todd, a teacher for many years
Severity of his discipline
Todd remained many years in Friends’ School. In 1779 he is reported by the overseers as having 60 boys of various religious denominations, to whom was taught reading, English writing, arithmetic and some branches of mathematics.1097 A like condition prevailed in his school five years later, with the exception that the number of boys had increased to 88. The committee report states that the “master is careful to preserve good order in his school.”1098 This agrees, but is a much less picturesque statement of the case than is portrayed by Watson.1099 He is pictured as immoderately strict and as taking diabolic satisfaction in every opportunity to use the strap. Watson closes his description with the statement that “it was not that his love of learning was at fault, so much as the old British system of introducing learning and discipline into the brains of boys and soldiers by dint of punishment.”1100
Waring, J. Paul, and Yerkes mentioned
A number of other almost unknown masters who taught in and around Philadelphia may be briefly mentioned. William Waring is stated by Watson to have taught astronomy and mathematics in the Friends’ School at the same time with Jeremiah Paul.1101 Associated with the school, at the same time with Paul, Todd, and Waring, was Jimmy McCue, who performed the services of usher.1102 Yerkes, mentioned as having been in a single school, is mentioned by the monthly meeting reports as though it were under the direction of Friends. When so reported (1779) he was teaching not more than 50 scholars (all Friends). The subjects of instruction were reading, writing, English, arithmetic, and some branches of mathematics.1103 No further information of Isaac Weaver has been obtained than is given on page 260.
Snowdon
Thorne
Subjects taught by Thorne
Sitch, Pemberton, Richards, Every and others
Leonard Snowdon was reported to have arrived from London about 1737 to take charge of a school, but no further particulars are found concerning him.1104 In 1757 William Thorne was reported as teaching poor children.1105 He is one of the very few masters who taught in the Friends’ Schools, who advertised in the newspapers for pupils; such advertisement was possibly after he discontinued his services for the Board.1106 The advertisement does, however, serve to give us more information as to his qualifications, than we could otherwise obtain. He was engaged at the time (1766) in conducting a writing, arithmetic, mathematics and merchants’ accounts school in Vidal’s Alley.1107 At another time he advertised to teach writing, arithmetic, geometry, trigonometry, navigation, mensuration, surveying, guaging, and accounts.1108 John Sitch (1758) is mentioned as receiving some of the scholars from William Johnson’s school.1109 Joseph Pemberton was encouraged by the Board to start a school in 1758. Its location, as everything else concerning it, is very indefinite, being “in the upper part of town.”1110 Other masters mentioned by various authors, and to whom reference has been made before, but whose history is almost unknown, are Rowland Richards, John Every, Marmaduke Pardo, John Walby, William Coggins, Benjamin Albertson, Hugh Foulke, John Chamberlain, Christian Dull, Daniel Price, Samuel Jones, and Samuel Evans.1111
Early schoolmasters at Byberry
Character of Moor unsatisfactory to Friends
No extreme cases of lawlessness among Quaker masters
Of Richard Brockden, who taught at Byberry about 1710 or 1711,1112 and later (about 1722)1113 for a short time in Philadelphia, very little is known. The minute just referred to, however, leaves the impression that Friends were very willing for him to leave the school, but, on his request, allowed him to remain. Walter Moor, a schoolmaster at Byberry (about 1753) leaves no record as a master, but we are certain his character was not satisfactory to Friends. In 1753 they complained of his drinking to excess and removing from place to place without giving notice of it.1114 An instance of this sort, though not entirely out of keeping with custom in those days, was severely criticised at all times in the meetings. This is the only explicit case of drunkenness, on the part of teachers who were employed by Friends, which has come to the writer’s attention. The frequent mention of reproof of members for that offense, in the early years of the century, however, would lead one to believe that such great success in eliminating it from those in the teaching profession was scarcely possible. However that may be, no case has been found (in newspaper reports, where the names were mentioned) in which any Quaker master engaged in disreputable brawling was lodged in jail, which was noted on the part of several other private masters of Philadelphia.1115 This latter source of information is perhaps more reliable than the meeting records.
Taylor
Underwood
Teachers previously mentioned
Among Quaker schoolmasters, who have been mentioned frequently, is Christopher Taylor. He was educated in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and, in 1695,1116 published a compendium of the three languages. He was a teacher at Waltham Abbey School,1117 and, coming to Philadelphia in 1682, established a school on Tinicum Island, of which very little authentic information is to be had. William Underwood was a teacher at Warrington about 1740.1118 Elihu Underwood has already been mentioned on several occasions as the most extraordinary master of Warington, having executed an attractive copy of arithmetic exercises from an old English arithmetic.1119 Others, only to be mentioned, were: D. B. Ayres, Richland Meeting, 1793;1120 Christopher Smith, Byberry, 1784;1121 Bryan Fitzpatrick, Horsham, 1784;1122 Joseph Kirk, 1793,1123 and Isaac Carver, at or near Horsham, 1784;1124 Thomas Pearson at Maiden Creek (Exeter Monthly Meeting), 1784;1125 Benjamin Parks and wife, at Reading, 1784;1126 and Caleb Johnson at Reading, 1787.1127 An unknown master of Bucks County is mentioned by General John Lacey in his memoirs, as he comments on his early educational opportunities. He, himself, was a member of a family of Friends.
I was early sent to school, such as it was. The master himself could neither read or write correctly, as he knew nothing of Grammar, it was not to be expected he could teach it to others. Grammar was never taught in any school I went to—no book of this kind, or the remote rudiments of it was—that I remember—talked of at any of the country schools I was acquainted with. None but Quaker families resided in the neighborhood where I was brought up, among whom the Bible and Testament and Dilworth’s spelling-book were the only books suffered to be used in the Quaker schools from which circumstances no one will hesitate to acknowledge the extreme limited education and acquirements of literal knowledge by youth so circumscribed.1128
Such were the country schools, if judged by his writing as a fair sample.
Summary
Standards
The primary requirements for masters and mistresses, as determined by the yearly meeting, were (1) high morality, (2) membership with Friends, and (3) competency to teach the subjects for which employed. These standards were consciously striven for, as indicated by their reports on the subject.
Whence came teachers?
As a rule, the teachers selected for the lower schools were native to the place, though there were exceptions. A large number of the Latin masters, however, were secured through Friends in England. To supply the lack of teachers, in Philadelphia at any rate, recourse was occasionally had to the apprenticeship system, as instanced by the cases of Eldridge, and James Dickinson.
Tenure
No license system
Contracts
The yearly assembly recommended better accommodations for teachers, that they might be more easily retained in the same position. The cases mentioned indicate a very good length of tenure; Clift, two years; Taylor, perhaps five; Keith, about two; Makin, intermittently for about forty; and many others, similarly. These figures are undoubtedly not representative, the majority being taken from the city. Personal recommendation and certificates of removal served some of the purposes of the teacher license system. The contract was verbal only, so far as evidence appears and the term of it usually for one year.
Salaries
Attention is called to the seeming great increase in salaries during the century, and great variation in the amounts paid at any one time, especially between those of country and city masters. The salaries of women appear to have been very meager as compared with those of the men. No appreciable difference is found between the salaries or rates of Quaker masters and those of private masters in the city at the same time. Rates charged for poor children, schooled by the Board, were less than those fixed for others.
Women teachers considered
A few mistresses in the schools are mentioned. For the most part, the length of their service is not known. A large proportion of them were engaged in teaching poor children, though not limited to that. A large proportion, over half of the poor children taught by them, were members of various denominations. Their service was not limited to the schools for Whites, some being employed in the Negro School, near the end of the century.
Masters
Rank
Brief attention is given individual masters. As rated by the frequency of their mention in five standard authorities, Pastorius, Benezet, and Thompson lead the list; it is not believed that this measure is adequate, however. Concerning the qualifications of the masters, we find that all degrees of ability and training were represented. Pastorius may be taken as a type of the classically trained master of the Latin School. The other extreme might be represented by several of the ill-paid country masters. John Lacey describes such a master and his school in his memoirs.
Character
One definite case of drunkenness on the part of a master has come to light. Though not probable that the record is so clear, it does appear that excessive outlawries were not committed. The chief sources studied on this point were the newspapers of the period and minutes of various Quaker meetings.