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:
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 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 1790[1053] to 1796 or 1797.[1054] He was succeeded by Elisha Pickering who probably taught till 1799, being followed by Benjamin Mears.[1055]
John Cadwalader came to Philadelphia in 1699[1056] 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.
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.
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]
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.
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 Fairhill[1078] (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]
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:
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]
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]
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]
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.
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]
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.