without natural capacity, attainments, or aspirations-and now and then even persons of bad morals. There were among them no teachers' institutes or associations, no circulating libraries, no educational periodicals-in short, nothing approaching the modern appliances provided with a view to professional elevation. There was no examination of teachers, no issuing of license as a condition precedent to obtaining a school, and no supervision. Every teacher was isolated, entirely dependent upon his own ability to modify methods or originate better ones, and completely and absolutely independent in the little realm over which he held sway. The obtaining of a school was entirely a matter of contract between himself as teacher and his proposed patrons. The latter were often utterly incompetent to judge of the teacher's qualifications, and hinged their acceptance or rejection of him solely upon the rates at which he offered his services. A vivid picture of one of the more harmless of this class of 'old field school-masters,' as they were called, is drawn in the person of Michael St. John, in the Georgia Scenes, a book of infinite humor, written by my venerated and revered preceptor, Hon. Augustus B. Longstreet; while a type of the more brutal class is given us in the character of Israel Meadows, of the cele brated Philemon Perch Papers, of which Col. Richard M. Johnston, now of Pen Lucy Academy, near Baltimore, is the author." THE POOR SCHOOL SYSTEM. The next subject we will consider is the poor school system, in regard to which it has been said,' that this "so-called system had no system in it, that it was full of defects, and that it was lacking in a hundred of the elements that make up an efficient public school system." Nevertheless "it answered a valuable purpose in its day. It placed the elements of an imperfect English education within reach of the entire white population, among whom the means of comfortable support were so general as to be well-nigh universal." ORIGIN OF THE SYSTEM. This system took its rise in the act of July 31, 1783. By the fourteenth section of that act, and in pursuance of a provision therein made respecting the erection of a free school in the town of Washington, Wilkes County, the Governor, upon proper application, was empowered to grant one thousand acres of vacant land for the establishment of free schools in the several counties of the State. Here was the beginning of 1 Doctor Orr's Address on the Educational Needs of the South, p. 7. 2 Report on Public Education, by Mr. Lewis, of Hancock, with Appendices giving Statistics of School Returns, and other Documents on the Subject. Milledgeville, Ga., 1860. Popular Education in Georgia; a History of Education in the State, with Suggestions to an Improved System of Public Schools, by Martin V. Calvin. Augusta, Ga., 1870. Pp. 12. Also Cuthbert's, Prince's (2d ed. to 1837), and Cobb's Digests. Under the the poor school system in Georgia, although it was not thoroughly inaugurated, and no decided action was taken until December 18, 1817, when an act was passed to create and establish a fund for the support of free schools throughout the State,' and an appropriation of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars was made for that purpose. By au act for the "permanent endowment of county academies, and to increase the funds heretofore set apart for the encouragement and support of free schools, and for the internal improvement of the State," approved December 21, 1821, the General Assembly provided for the division of. five hundred thousand dollars equally between the academies and free schools. Hence originated the distinction which so long obtained in Georgia between the Academic and the Poor School Funds. act of December 22, 1823,3 provision was made for the investment of the latter fund, and the distribution of the annual income, amounting to between twenty and thirty thousand dollars, among the counties in proportion to their white population, for the education of the poor children, and in payment for their tuition. An act of the preceding year had specified what persons should be the beneficiaries of the fund.4 "It was not," we are told,5 "the policy to establish separate schools for these indigent children. Such teachers of the academies and of the inferior or elementary schools as were willing to submit to an examination, which was often a mere matter of form and conducted by incompetent examiners, were entitled, if approved, to receive their pro rata of the public fund for teaching any children adjudged by certain magistrates as belonging to the class known as 'poor scholars,' who may have entered their schools." 1 Prince's Digest, p. 18. 2 Ibid., p. 19. 3 Dawson's Compilations, p. 14. 4 * Act of December 23, 1822. The sixth section says that "no child shall be sent to school under the age of eight or exceeding eighteen years; and no child shall be sent to school at public expense more than three years." (Dawson's Compilations, p. 11.) But an act to amend the second and fourth sections of an act to provide for the education of the poor, assented to 27th of December, 1843 (in which it was declared that, in order to be received and educated, the poor children must be between the ages of eight and sixteen years), provided that the children to be returned to the inferior courts by the justices of the peace, or other persons in the several militia districts, should be between the ages of six and sixteen years, and that the poor children to be reported by the justices of the inferior court of each county to His Excellency, the Governor, should be between the ages of six and sixteen years. (Act of February 14, 1850. Laws of 1850, p. 154.) See also act of December 17, 1857 (Laws of 1857, p. 10). " Dr. Orr's Address on the Educational Needs of the South, p. 7. 6 From the New York Teacher for May, 1855 (Vol. IV, p. 88), we find that "every indigent child in Georgia had the right to go to school at six and a quarter cents a day, to be paid by the county." According to Mr. Lewis's Report on Public Education, which was published in 1860, the whole number of poor children then in Georgia was safely estimated at from forty to fifty thousand-about one-third of all the children in the State between the ages of six and sixteen, the whole number of the latter being, by computation, something over one hundred and forty thousand. By an act of December 23, 1836, one-third of the surplus revenue, amounting to three hundred and fifty thousand dollars, was set apart as "a permanent free school and education fund," and a joint committee of five, two from the Senate and three from the House of Representatives, was appointed, whose duty it was "to digest a plan of common school education best adapted to the genius, habits of life and of thought, of the people of Georgia," and two of whom were authorized to visit, during the ensuing year, different parts of the United States, and particularly the New England States, ascertain the operation of their several school systems, and report to the General Assembly at its next session a plan of common schools. They were also empowered to "institute a correspondence with such persons as they might think proper, either in the United States or Europe, or both, for the purpose of getting information of some of the different systems of common school education which likewise prevail in some of the European countries." They fulfilled their mission. The report, as submitted by the committee, while objecting to the moral and social tendency of the manual labor system considered as a system of general education to be adopted and followed by the Government, as well as to the general application of the Laveleyean plan of instruction, recommended the adoption of a system not unlike that in vogue in the Eastern and Middle States. It assumed, above all, as a leading principle, that the good of the community required that the rich and the poor should be educated together at common schools. It was further stated, as the result of investigation, that out of eighty-three thousand children in the State, only twentyfive thousand of that number were in attendance upon schools.2 The Legislature amended and modified this report, and in 1837 passed an act establishing a general system of education by common schools,3 to take effect in 1839. By that act the academic and poor school funds were consolidated; and, together with the interest on one-third part of the surplus revenue, were constituted "a general fund for common schools." In the following year this act was modified in some of its provisions, and the inferior courts (at their discretion), on the recommendation of the grand jury, were authorized to levy an extra tax in their respective counties, not exceeding fifty per cent. on the general tax.. The amount thus raised was to be added to the common school fund.* REPEAL OF THE ACTS PROVIDING FOR A COMMON SCHOOL SYSTEM. In 1840 the acts of 1837 and 1838, establishing a system of common schools, were repealed, and the funds for their support were set apart as a poor school fund.5 This legislative act was amended in 1843, and 1 Prince's Digest, pp. 26-7. 2 American Annals of Education, Vol. VIII, p. 39 (published 1838) (Laws of 1837, pp. 94-9.) 1 the inferior courts were authorized to raise by an extra tax an amount sufficient, when added to the pro rața distribution from the State, to educate the poor children in their respective counties. The leading provision of the law establishing the poor school system made it the duty of the magistrates in the districts to report to the inferior court, an. nually, the names of all the children in their respective districts deemed by them proper persons to receive a portion of the fund set apart for the education of the poor. These returns were sent by the inferior court to the "executive office," and formed the basis for the distribution of the fund, which amounted to about twenty thousand dollars.2 OBJECTIONS TO THE POOR SCHOOL SYSTEM. This duty of the magistrates, under the law, to make returns of the poor children, was often entirely neglected. Even when made these returns were very imperfect. Not more than three-fourths of the poor children in the State were returned, and of those returned (as was learned from commissioners of the poor school fund in a few counties), little more than half were sent to school, and those who went did not attend four months in the year. In 1849 thirty-two counties made no returns of their poor children. In 1850 fifteen counties failed to make returns; and notwithstanding the law provided that counties making no returns should participate in the educational fund agreeably to the last return on record,3 in the same year eight counties received nothing because they had never made a return. In further illustration of the general indifference then felt on the subject of poor schools, we quote from Governor George W. Crawford's message of 1845. He says that "during the past year [viz, 1844] only fifty-three of the ninety-three counties of the State made application at the treasury for their allotments of the poor school fund," and when, too, the penalty for default was known to be an absolute forfeiture of claim 5 Another objection to the poor school plan were its gross injustice to the poorer counties, where there were the greatest number of poor children and the least ability to bear taxation. For instance, the counties of Newton and Jasper paid into the treasury, as State tax, $3,910, and returned some 120 poor children; whilst those of Union and Gilmer, which paid a State tax of $1,594, returned 2,884 poor children. Mr. Calvin presents the following view of the poor schools, as they An act to provide for the education of the poor, assented to December 27, 1843. (Laws of 1843, pp. 43-5.) 2 Lewis's Report, p. 26. The poor school fund seems to have been originally much larger, for the same writer (p. 31), referring to the provision made for the education of indigent children, says that "as far back as 1836, forty thousand dollars were annually distributed for this purpose.” 3 Prince's Digest, p. 22. 4 Lewis's Report, p. 27. 5 Ibid., p. 83. 6 Ibid., p. 27. existed in 1869:1 "Under the laws now in force," he writes, 66 * a board of education in each county, consisting of the Ordinary, as ex-officio treasurer of the poor school fund, and a commissioner appointed by the judge of the superior court, issues license to almost any person, authorizing said person to teach when, where, and how he or she may please. As a general rule, the teacher provides his own school-room and school furniture (of the most primitive kind), and is allowed seven cents a day for each pupil in actual attendance; he files his account with the Ordinary quarterly, and receives compensation at the expiration of the year. No argument is necessary to prove that the absolute effect of this system is to transform the State schools from common schools (such as the people wish) into the veriest pauper or poor schools,' as they are termed. The law-making power seems all the while to have been laboring under the impression that the children in our State belong to two classes-regarding the one as belonging to rich families, and the other as paupers. This is a mistake, though measurably adhered to still. We have made these schools mere charities. * The 'poor schools' of this State, by reason of the law which creates them, are robbed of the influence for good that they might otherwise wield. The very law subjects every patron of these schools to the jeer of pauperism." In the same spirit had Governor William Schley written, as far back as 1837. In referring to the distinction as made by the General Assembly of academic and poor school funds, he remarked: "There should be no such designations as academic and poor school, because they are invidious and insulting. Poverty, though a great inconvenience, is no crime; and it is highly improper, whilst you offer to aid the cause of education, to say to a portion of the people, 'You are poor.' Thousands of freemen who, though indigent, are honest, patriotic, and valuable citizens, will refuse your bounty and despise the hand that offers it, because it is accompanied with insult."2 The truth of Governor Schley's observation was abundantly confirmed by the results which everywhere attended the workings of the poor school system. We are told by Kiddle and Schem3 that in 1850 there were in Georgia 213,903 white adults, of whom twenty per cent. were unable to read and write; and a reference to the United States Census of 1860, when the number of illiterates had been reduced to eighteen per cent., shows that there were then in the State 16,900 males and 26,784 females (white) over twenty-one years of age, ignorant of even the simplest rudiments of learning. Amply had it been demonstrated that the poor school system in its then state was wholly inadequate to meet the educational demands which it was designed to supply. Clearly apparent it was that a reform in 1 Popular Education in Georgia, p. 5. 2 Lewis's Report, pp. 76-7. 3 Cyclopædia of Education. New York and London, 1877. Page 347. |