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