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