Class j ^- A -^^ ^ Book._ -^^^ -^-'^-O- GopiglitN^_. C.ORlKlGHT DEPOSm SUPPLEMENTARY EDUCATIONAL MONOGRAPHS Published in conjunction with THE SCHOOL REVIEW and THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL Vol. Ill September 1920 No. 2 Whole No. 13 THE HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO FROM 1 803 TO 1 850 By EDWARD ALANSON MILLER* Ph.D. THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO CHICAGO, ILLINOIS mOntgnph PUBLICATIONS EDITED BY THE FACULTY OF THE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO JOINT EDITORIAL COMMITTEE CHARLES HUBBARD JUDD, Chairman JOHN FRANKLIN BOBBITT SAMUEL CHESTER PARKER HENRY CLINTON MORRISON Articles and editorials of the School Review ROLLO LA VERNE LYMAN MORTON SNYDER Reviews GUY THOMAS BUSWELL ROLLA MILTON TRYON Articles and editorials of the Elementary School Journal FRANK NUGENT FREEMAN HARRY ORRIN GILLET Supplementary Educational Monographs WILLIAM SCOTT GRAY MARCUS WILSON JERNEGAN SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE ON CURRENT EDUCATIONAL PROBLEMS THE SCHOOL REVIEW THE School Review is an open forum for the discussion of progressive movements in secondary education. It prints scientific studies in regard to the junior high school, supervised study, standards and tests, problems of organization and class instruction, etc. It presents practical material in the form of discussions of classroom methods and administrative devices. It includes a department of reviews which keeps the reader in touch with significant publications from month to month. THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL THE Elementary School Journal emphasizes progressive movements in elementary education, publishes studies which contribute results of value to teachers, pro- motes the scientific study of school problems, and devotes much space to reviews of recent literature and to news notes on major movements in education. THE SUPPLEMENTARY EDUCATIONAL MONOGRAPHS 0* THE Supplementary Educational Monographs present a body of scientific and practical material covering reading, arithmetic, penmanship, algebra, and the administrative organization of elementary schools and high schools. These represent a type of quantitative scientific material which is indispensable to the student of current educational problems and to the school administrator. The monographs include a series of significant historical surveys of American education. ' SUPPLEMENTARY EDUCATIONAL MONOGRAPHS Published in conjunction with THE SCHOOL REVIEW and THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL Vol. Ill September, 1920 No. 2 Whole No. 13 The History of Educational Legislation in Ohio From 1803 to 1850 First printed in Ohio Archaeological and Historical Quarterly Volume XXVII, Nos. i and 2 The History of Educational Legislation in Ohio From 1803 to 1850 By EDWARD ALANSON MILLER, Ph.D. Professor oj Education Oberlin College THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO CHICAGO, ILLINOIS Copyright 1920, By THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Published September 1920 JUL II 1922 ©CI.A681096 •^i^ PREFACE Ohio's educational history has been an especially interesting one. Many causes have combined to make it so. It was the first state admitted from the Northwest Territory, and as such carried on the earliest experiments with the great state-wide grant of school lands that has characterized our policy since that time in the admission of new states to the Union. It was settled with unexampled rapidity, changing from a wilderness frontier to a great and prosperous commonwealth in a single generation. The settlement was a singularly heterogeneous one, coming from the East, the Middle States, and the South, with a considerable influx directly from Europe. These early settlements were being estab- lished, too, while those democratic and individualistic tendencies that marked the first decades of the nineteenth century were in progress. During these years the district school idea was at its height in Massachusetts and the East, the private academy was displacing the town grammar school, and state control of public education was at low ebb. These causes, with others more local in nature, were instrumen- tal in shaping the educational activities of the state in the first fifty years of its history and have left their imprint on all the later development. It is my purpose to give a careful study and interpretation of the educational legislation of the state from territorial days down to 1850. In this legislation one finds the truest expression of the constructive educational thought and activity of the period. In such a study there must be included not merely the laws that bear on the development of a state system of public education, but the much larger number that are concerned with private educational ventures of various kinds. To these must be added those laws that bear on higher and professional education, all that touch upon supplementary agencies of any kind, and also any provisions made for the indigent, defective, and delinquent classes. A study of this kind is needed as a background before any adequate state or national history of education is possible. Such a study also gives the general student of history a view of one of the vi PREFACE most important phases in the social development of a state, and a closer acquaintance with the growth of some of the most important institutions that society has discovered to aid it in its progress. I have attempted in the following pages to present the material in such a way that it will be of service to the general student, and also in the appendixes to furnish a guide for anyone desiring further information from the source material on any particular phase of the state's educational activities. The plan of arrangement is as follows: A discussion and inter- pretation of the laws passed from 1803 to 1850; Appendix A, a classified list of the titles of the more important acts; Appendix B, a complete index, page and volume, to all the legislation that in any way touches upon education, in the session laws of Ohio from 1803 to 1850, including both the general and the local laws. In many cases I have not given the exact titles in the appen- dixes, for the sake of both brevity and clearness; enough of titles and content to indicate the general meaning of the act is given. In Appendix A a brief abstract of the laws is also included where it seemed necessary to give more information than the title itself conveys. This is especially the case in the acts of incorporation of that large number of secondary and higher institutions that were so abundant in the first fifty years of Ohio's history. A complete tabulation of these acts is here given, and, as it is the only complete list of these institutions that has been made, it seemed best to preserve in a few words the chief points of historical interest that appear in the laws. I felt this to be particularly the case with the secondary schools. These have nearly all passed out of existence, and, as they mark one of the most important stages in the development of our secon- dary education, a somewhat more complete abstract is given than that dealing with most of the other subjects. The public-school laws are more easily accessible and they are usually indicated by title only. There was an exceptionally large amount of legislation, especially of a local and special character, dealing with the school lands. The more important of these acts are included by title in the first appendix with a mere tabulation of those that had only local significance. The laws in Appendix A are grouped under the following headings: PREFACE vii I. The public-school system. 1. General legislation. a) Acts to incorporate the original surveyed townships including provisions for districting, establishing schools, apportioning money, etc. b) General school laws. c) Special acts concerning public schools. d) Fines, fees, etc., applied to the support of public schools. 2. City and town school charters. a) Laws concerning common schools in cities and towns. b) Acts concerning local school funds. c) Acts concerning schools for poor children. II. Laws concerning school lands. 1. General laws concerning school lands. 2. Special acts concerning school lands. III. Secondary and higher education. 1. Acts incorporating secondary institutions. 2. Acts incorporating school associations. 3. Acts concerning higher institutions. a) Colleges, universities, and theological seminaries. 4. Acts concerning professional education, o) Medical education. b) Legal education. IV. Acts concerning the education of defectives, dependents, and delin- quents. 1. Education of defectives. 2. Education of dependents. 3. Education of delinquents. V. Acts concerning the education of teachers. VI. Acts concerning supplementary educational agencies. Appendix B furnishes a page and volume index to all laws, resolutions, and memorials that have any educational significance in either the general or the local laws from 1803 to 1850. The indexes in the volumes of the session laws themselves are some- times defective, and they are, too, an unreliable guide, as many important items are found in laws the titles to which give no hint that they contain material that relates in any way to education. The primary source material has been the session laws of the state of Ohio. The Revised Statutes for this period have also been consulted. It was found necessary to examine all the laws of the period, special and general, as the titles and indexes were not dependable. A considerable quantity of material was also found in the resolu- tions and memorials. viii PREFACE The United States Statutes at Large were used to secure federal legislation concerning school lands in Ohio. Nashee's A Compilation of Laws, Treaties and Ordinances Which Relate to Lands in the State of Ohio was relied upon especially for acts passed during the territorial period. The earliest congressional legislation was secured from the Journals of the American Congress, reprinted by Way and Gideon, in 1823, under the title as given. The chief secondary sources consulted are indicated in the bibliography. CONTENTS CHAPTER General Introduction PAGE xi I. The Sources of Ohio's Public-School System 1 Introductory. Ohio's admission to the Union. Consti- tutional provisions for education. Traditions of decentral- ization. Early settlements and centers of influence. Growth in population. Conflicting educational ideals. Dominant educational influences at the time of settlement. New Eng- land influences. School lands. Early practice in New England. Its extension in Ohio. The Ordinance of 1785. The Ohio Company and Symmes Purchases. The state- wide grant. New England men and school legislation. Ephraim Cutler and the law of 1821. Caleb Atwater and his report. Nathan Guilford and the law of 1825. The work of Samuel Lewis and the law of 1838. The schools that preceded the school laws. II. The Development of the Public-School System 16 Organization. Summary. School support. Rates. Revenue from school lands. Permanent funds. State school fund. Surplus revenue. Taxation. Fines and pen- alties. Control and supervision. Certification of teachers. Curricula. Length of school year. School officers. Schools for colored children. City and village schools. Cincinnati. Cleveland. Portsmouth. Zanesville. General laws for cities and towns before the Akron Act. Dayton. Columbus. Mt. Vernon. Akron. Akron Act made general in applica- tion. III. The Public-School Lands 54 Various tracts and grants. Methods of survey. School grants for the different tracts. Reasons for lack of uni- formity in the method of granting the lands. Location of the tracts receiving grants other than Section 16. Legislative responsibility for the school lands. Formal legal guarding of school rights. Methods of making the grant productive. Temporary leasing. Results. Permanent leasing. Results. Atwater's report. Cessation of leasing. Memorial to Congress for authorization to sell the school lands. The sale of the lands. State losses in selling the leased land. Summary. CONTENTS IV. Secondary and Higher Education 75 Secondary education. Legal provisions. The recom- mendations of Superintendent Lewis for township high schools. Kinds of secondary institutions. Method of in- corporation. Enumeration and classification of secondary schools. Education societies. Denominational influences. Curricula. Manual labor influence. Limits of state control. Higher education. Enumeration of institutions incorporated. State influence on higher education. Ohio University. Miami University. State aid to other colleges. Denomina- tional influences. Agricultural education. Summary. Pro- fessional schools. Medical education. Legal education. V. The Education of Defectives, Dependents, and Delinquents 99 Legislation concerning the education of the deaf and dumb. Legislation concerning the education of the blind. Legislation concerning dependents. Orphan asylums. Edu- cation of delinquents. VL The Training of Teachers 106 State attitude. Voluntary associations. The Western College of Teachers. The Teachers' Institute. Private enterprises. County teachers' institutes authorized. Pri- vate normal schools. VII. Supplementary Educational Agencies 110 Libraries. Lyceums. Institutes. Athenaeums and literary societies. College societies and fraternities. Mis- cellaneous organizations of educational significance. 114 VIII. Conclusion Main features. Decentralization. Permissive legisla- tion. Educational experimentation. Advanced position on taxation for schools. Lack of efficient organization. The blunder of 1840. Disastrous experience with school lands. Attitude toward secondary and higher education. Influence of early history on the later educational development of the state. Appendix A 119 A Classified Collection and Abstract of the Educational Legislation of the Period: 1803-50. Appendix B 179 A Page and Volume Index to All Educational Legisla- tion in the Session Laws of Ohio from 1803 to 1850. Bibliography 225 Index 231 GENERAL INTRODUCTION This monograph is the second of a series on the history of the educational legislation of various states, principally in the period 1776-1850. In the first monograph, "Educational Legislation and Administration in the State of New York from 1777 to 1850," by Elsie Garland Hobson, there will be found a general introduction to this series explaining its scope and purpose. Attention is called to the fact that these monographs represent an effort to vitalize Ameri- can educational history by emphasizing its institutional aspects, heretofore greatly neglected. The tendency to consider educational theory and method as the chief subject-matter of our educational history has done much harm, for no great progress can be made toward a comprehensive understanding of the evolution of Ameri- can education until we have an accurate knowledge of all the laws passed by each state, affecting either public or private education. That knowledge is not now available. It may be noted also that detailed studies of this sort are of great importance to students of the general history of the United States, or the individual states, as well as to those who are especially interested in our social, religious, economic, or political history. The lack of such studies is the reason for the inadequate and inaccurate account of American education in general and special histories of the types mentioned above. The present volume is of special interest because it shows how the first frontier state formed from the Northwest Territory reacted to the problem of education and how it dealt with the difficult problem of the management of the federal land grants for the endowment of public education. The experience of Ohio had great influence on the attitude of other western states toward this problem. Professor Miller has made available information from original sources, hitherto practically inaccessible, and has given in the appendixes the data which make it possible for one to inves- tigate in still greater detail the relation of the state of Ohio to education to 1850, so far as it is expressed in the legislation. Marcus W. Jernegan University of Chicago March 24, 1919 xi CHAPTER I THE SOURCES OF OHIO'S PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM INTRODUCTORY Ohio was admitted into the Union as a state February 19, 1803.^ It was the first state admitted from the Northwest Territory and the first state to which the grant of Section 16 for school purposes was made. The legislation concerning school lands was intimately connected with the development of the public-school system, and in the method to be adopted to make this great grant productive of the desired results Ohio had no precedents or warnings for her guidance.^ The constitution adopted when Ohio became a state remained in force until 1851. It made no specific provisions for education, but stated that means of education^ should be encouraged by legislative enactments; that all institutions of all grades, endowed in whole or in part from revenues derived from the donations of the United States, should be open without distinction to all scholars; and that associations of persons might receive letters of incorpora- tion from the legislature to enable them to hold estates for the support of their schools, academies, colleges, and universities. No provision for public schools was made by any general law during the first eighteen years after Ohio's admission, the first school law being passed in 1821.^ From this period until 1850 eight general school codes were enacted with numerous amendments and supplementary acts and a mass of special legislation concern- ing particular districts or territories. The traditions of Ohio were from the first against centraliza- tion.^ The first constitution was formed soon after the bitter political struggle between Jefferson and Adams, and at a time when the arbitrary domination of the territorial governor, Arthur ' Statistical Abstract of U.S., 1910, p. 21. ^ Land set aside for individual towns had been common in New England and elsewhere, but there was no precedent to direct action in the case of a state-wide grant intended for the use of the individual townships. 'O.L., I., Art. 8, Sec. 3; Art. 8, Sec. 25; Art. 8, Sec. 27. ^O.L.,XIX. 51. * Orth, TIte Centralization of Administration in Ohio, p. 11. 1 2 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO St. Clair, had prejudiced the people against centralized executive power. Nowhere is this prejudice against centralized administra- tion better illustrated than in the various phases of educational legislation. The tendency throughout the period under discussion was to depend largely upon local initiative and control. The encouragement of education by legislative provision specified in the constitution was interpreted by the legislature to mean the passing of a larger number of local acts to meet the special needs or desires of particular districts, or even, in the case of school lands, the desires of individuals, while the general laws may be said to have pointed out methods of organization and control rather than to have devised any efficient system of supervision or penalties actually to bring about specific educational results. The general laws are largely permissive in character, with the initiative left in many cases to the discretion of the local community. There are doubtless other reasons for this than the prejudice against the acts of Arthur St. Clair and the general political state of mind in the West during the early period of Ohio's history. Ohio in its early statehood was a frontier community, settled by a class of people that in the very nature of the case were com- pelled largely to be self-reliant and to solve their own problems, educational as well as other. It was a heavily timbered area. Means of communication were difficult. It would have been a hard matter to establish any general system of control or super- vision in the early period, and when means of communication had become simplified, through a system of state roads and canals,^ the people had become habituated to attending to their own edu- cational needs. The settlers in Ohio, too, had no common educational back- ground. They came from New England, from Virginia, Maryland, and Kentucky, and, in fact, from nearly all the older states.^ A glance at the map on page 55 shows that the state was divided into a number of separate districts such as the Western Reserve, the Ohio Company's Purchase, the Symmes Purchase, the Vir- ginia Military Lands, and the United States Military Lands. The early settlements in these sections were usually made up of people who came into the wilderness together from one or another of the older states of the Union. * A large part of the early legislation of Ohio is concerned with state roads, turnpike companies, plank roads, canals, etc. 2 .\t\vater, A History oj the State of Ohio, Natural and Civil, p. 351. SOURCES OF OHIO'S PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 3 Each of these districts, in its customs and ideals, reflected the current thought and practice of that part of the country from which its settlers came, and in no field was this more evident than in that of education. The Ohio Company's Purchase and the Western Reserve were at first largely settled by colonists from New England. Marietta, dating from 1787, and Cleveland, from 1796, were the respective centers of influence in these two districts. Three colonies were planted in the Symmes Purchase in 1788; the one at Losantiville, later rechristened Cincinnati by Governor St. Clair, was destined to be in many ways a leader for the entire state as well as for the Miami country. The early settlers here, as at Marietta, had many of them seen service in the Revolutionary War. They came from no single locality, but New Jersey men seemed most prominent in the early settlement, aided by the other Middle States.^ Later there were many settlers from Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York, and the New England states. The Virginia Military Lands,^ located between the Little Miami and the Scioto rivers, received its first settlers from Virginia and the South. General Nathaniel Massie and Duncan McArthur founded Chillicothe, on the Scioto River, in 1796, the first colony in this district. On the eastern edge of the state, south of the Western Reserve, are the so-called Seven Ranges, the name given to the ranges of townships first surveyed in Ohio. While there was no such coloni- zation here as in the districts already named, the first settlers were largely from Pennsylvania, and of German stock, with a con- siderable number of Irish, Scotch, and Scotch-Irish. The United States Military Lands seem to have had no early homogeneous group, but drew settlers from all the older states. There was also a considerable French settlement at Gallipolis and a sprinkling of French all along the Ohio River. From 1830 on there was a very considerable German influence from the influx of German immigrants that began at that time.' The population increased with astonishing rapidity after Ohio was admitted as a state, constant accessions from the older states were added to the early settlements, and in the years from 1810 to • Charles Cist, Cincinnati in 1841 — Its Early Annals and Future Prospects, p. 38; Hinsdale, The Old Northwest, pp. 288-89. ^ Ibid., p. 290; Western Reserve Historical Society, II, pp. 153-54. 'Orth, The Centralization of Administration in Ohio, p. 164; Chaddock, Ohio Before 1850. A Study of the Early Influence of Pennsylvania and Southern Populations in Ohio, p. 30. 4 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO 1840 tlic transformation from a thickly wooded frontier to a settled farming; community had largely taken place. The census figures from 1800 to 1850 give some idea of this transformation. At the beginning of the century the population was 45,365; fifty years later it had increased to 1,980,329. The record of increase by decades which follows gives an even better picture of the sudden changes that must have occurred : 1800 45,365 1810 230,760 1820 580,434 1830 937,903 1840 1,519,467 1850 1,980,329' The census figures for the last decade of this period show a foreign-born population of 218,193. In 1850 there were almost as many people of foreign birth in the state as its entire population had amoimted to only forty years earlier in 1810. These people of foreign birth were largely of German stock. It was no easy problem to develop a system of education to meet the needs of this surprising growth, coming as it did from all the older states and from foreign shores. There was in these early years no agreement as to the means of financing any general system of education, nor any real agreement as to the needs of such a system. The educational traditions were quite different in different portions of the state. Samuel Lewis in his second annual report in 1838 says: "The people have not hereto- fore followed any particular system. The directors of each district have done that which was right in their own eyes, and generally adopted, as far as they could, the particular system of the state from whence they came."^ Those from the South brought tradi- tions of the private school and parental responsibility for education. The New F^ngland settlers brought with them the idea of a public- school system, with taxation and public control, but unfortunately for Ohio's subsequent educational history the New England migra- tion came at a period when the public-school sentiment in Massa- chusetts and the East was at a comparatively low ebb, and when the decentralizing tendency that gave Massachusetts the district- school legislation of 1789 was at its time of greatest influence. ' Statistical Abstract of U.S., Washington, 1911, p. 40. 2 Ohio Documents, 1838, Doc. 32, p. 30. SOURCES OF OHIO'S PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 5 From this time for nearly forty years the process of decentralization went on. Martin says the year 1827 is "the high-water mark of modern democracy and the low-water mark of the Massachusetts school system."^ The New England influence in Ohio began with the Marietta colony in 1787. By 1830 the population of the state had reached nearly a million, and it was during just these years that the school sentiment in Massachusetts was lowest. It was at this time, too, that the academy was supplanting the Latin grammar school of the colonial period as the typical secondary school. The New England settlers favored the public-school idea, but it was the highly decentralized district system with which they were familiar. The academy idea was the common possession of settlers from all the states. The common school as a district school, the secondary school as an academy, were two fundamental conceptions in the minds of all those who were active in securing Ohio's early school legislation. While many influences were thus instrumental in shaping Ohio's early educational history, her debt to New England for the men and ideas most significant in determining her early public-school system is so large that a brief sketch of a few of these men and of the forces that worked through them is a necessary prerequisite to an intelligent study of the development of that system. The most important of these forces were, first, the school lands ;^ secondly, the conception of a state system of schools; and, thirdly, the idea of state-wide taxation for the benefit of such a system. The use of public lands for the aid and support of schools had its origin in New England. The men most instrumental in urging Ohio's first law, giving a legal basis to the conception of a state system of schools, were born in New England. The men most active in legalizing the idea of state-wide taxation to support this system were also New England born, and the man who did most to make these ideas, incorporated into law, actually operative in the establishment of schools and to give a real organization to the system legally created was a man of New England birth. When Ohio was admitted as a state. Section 16 in each town- ship, or an equivalent amount of land in those districts not belong- ' Martin, The Evolution oj the Massachusetts School System: A Historical Sketch, p. 92. ^ A discussion of the school lands, with maps, methods of survey, etc., is given in chapter iii. 6 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO ing to the United States, was permanently set aside for the use of schools. This grant gave for the use of schools an amount of land equal to one square mile, or 640 acres, for each surveyed township of 36 square miles. The practice of using public lands for the support of schools had been from early colonial times a common New England device, and by 1647 certain towns had "assumed responsibility for the support of schools out of public property, partly through gifts of land to schoolmasters, partly by setting aside tracts of land as a permanent endowment."^ This New England practice first found state-wide expression when Ohio was admitted to the Union, and from that time on became an established policy in the admission of all later states. The Ordinance of 1785 "for ascertaining the mode of disposing of lands in the Western territory "^ reserved Section 16 in each town- ship "for the maintenance of public schools within the said town- ship." This provision, according to Donaldson,^ was the inception of the rule of the reservation of certain sections of land for school purposes. The first action in accord with this provision occurred within the next two years, when Manasseh Cutler, as agent for the Ohio Company, completed the bargain for the lands acquired by the company at the mouth of the Muskingum.^ Not only did Mr. Cutler obtain a reaffirmation of the provision for the grant of Section 16 for school purposes, but a grant of Section 29 in each township for the support of religion, and also an added grant of two townships for the support of a university. It was this bargain of the Ohio Company, engineered by Manasseh Cutler, that put into actual operation the provisions of the Ordinance of 1785 con- cerning school lands. This was followed immediately by the Symmes Purchase, between the Miami rivers, and Sections 16 and 29 were similarly reserved. With the admission of Ohio as a state the same provision for schools. Section 16 or its equivalent for each township, was extended to the remainder of the state except the portion still held by the Indian tribes. Ultimately the reservation was extended to all territory within the state. * Jemegan, "The Beginnings of Public Education in New England," School Review, XXUI, 379. 2 Laws of U.S., 1789-181S, Vol. I, chap, xxxii. ^ T. Donaldson, The Public Domain, chap. xiii. * Hinsdale, The Old Northwest, p. 268. SOURCES OF OHIO'S PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 7 In this state-wide grant was found an interest that directed the attention of settlers in all parts of the state, and from all parts of the United States, to the purpose for which the grants were made, the schools. The first legislation concerning schools is found in efforts made to work out a method of handling the school lands, and they remain during Ohio's early statehood one of the persistent incentives to educational legislation and a constant suggestion of a state school system. The first general school act for Ohio was passed January 22, 1821.^ It is a significant fact that the four men most instrumental in putting on the statute books of Ohio laws providing for a tax- supported system of common schools were all born in Massa- chusetts. These men were Ephraim Cutler, Caleb Atwater, Nathan Guilford, and Samuel Lewis. Ephraim Cutler, of Ames, Washington County, near Marietta, was the son of Manasseh Cutler, the inspired lobbyist of the Ohio Company. He was born in Edgartown, Massachusetts, but spent his boyhood in Killingly, Connecticut, with his grandparents and came to Ohio in his early manhood. He was one of the drafters of the state constitution, and it was due to his efforts that there were incorporated the clauses providing that "religion, morality and knowledge, as essentially necessary to good government," were to be supported by the General Assembly and "that schools and the means of instruction shall forever be encouraged by legis- lative provision."^ Judge Cutler in December, 1819, introduced a bill in the House of Representatives providing for a system of common schools. The bill as introduced was passed by the House, but was allowed to die without action in the Senate. It was this bill, however, that led to the law of 1821, a substitute measure that did little more than outline a method of school organization and in so doing recognized the state's responsibility of legislating for schools. Caleb Atwater was born in North Adams, Massachusetts.^ He was appointed one of a committee of seven, in December, 1821, to consider the subject of schools and school lands and report to the House of Representatives. As a result of the deliberations of this committee a commission of five was appointed, January, 1822, 'O.L.,XIX, 21. ^ Cutler, Life and Times of Ephraim Culler, pp. 8, 1 14. ' History of Franklin and Pickawy Counties, Ohio, p. 98. 8 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO to report to the next General Assembly on a system of common schools. This commission collected much valuable material, which was presented to the Assembly in 1823, but the friends of education were in a minority, and no legislative action was taken during that session. One of the members of this commission was Nathan Guilford, a book-dealer and publisher of Cincinnati, the editor of The Freeman's Almanack, a western counterpart of Poor Richard, popularly known as Solomon Thrifty s Almanack. Mr. Guilford was born in Spencer, Massachusetts,^ and was (educated at Yale. He was a constant advocate of popular educa- tion and of taxation for schools in Ohio. Samuel Lewis, Ohio's first and greatest state superintendent of schools, was born in Falmouth, Massachusetts,^ but came to Ohio as a boy. He was the author of, and prime mover for, the school law of 1838, which gave to Ohio its first completely organized school system. The act of 1821 had done little more than legalize means by which the settlers in the townships could move to lay off districts and establish schools. It made no provision for taxation and organized no definite system. It was, however, important as the first state recognition of a system of common schools. It was evident to friends of public education that the law of 1821 was inadequate and ineffective, and there began at once a campaign for a more effective law. Nathan Guilford used the sayings of Solomon Thrifty to arouse the people of the state to the need of a free common school educa- tion. In 1824 he says: "The Legislatures of Ohio and Kentucky have taken the subject of free schools into consideration. It is hoped that their zealous endeavors to establish a system of common education will be crowned with success. Millions unborn would rise and bless them."^ Caleb Atwater and his committee , after careful study and much correspondence, had recommended a commission of seven to report on the subject of the school lands and a school system. This com- mission^ consisted of Caleb Atwater, Rev. John Collins, Rev. James Hoge, Nathan Guilford, Ephraim Cutler, Josiah Barber, and 1 Randall and Ryan, History of Ohio, III, 374. ^ William G. W. Lewis, Biography of Samuel Lewis, p. 13. s "Maxims and Advice of Solomon Thrifty," The Freeman's Almanack, 1824. * Atwater, A History of the State of Ohio, Natural and Civil, p. 259. SOURCES OF OHIO'S PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 9 James Bell. The number corresponded with the total number of different grants of school lands, and each man was to study and report upon the condition of the lands in the territory assigned him. Caleb Atwater was assigned the Congress Lands; John CoUins, the Virginia Military Lands; James Hoge, the Refugee Lands; James Bell, the United States Military Lands; Ephraim Cutler, the Ohio Company Lands; Nathan Guilford, the Symmes Purchase Lands; and Josiah Barber, the Connecticut Western Reserve Lands. It was evidently the original opinion of many of the settlers in Ohio, and perhaps the design of Congress, that these land grants, if properly managed, would support public schools without a tax upon the citizens. There was a growing belief, however, that this one source of income would continue to prove inadequate. Nathan Guilford, who strongly advocated taxation, did not serve upon the commission, evidently believing that he could aid the cause of education better as a free lance. He addressed a public letter to the chairman of the board arguing for a school tax upon property and insisting that an adequate school fund could not be raised from the school lands alone. The commission had been directed to report upon three topics: the actual condition of the school lands; a bill proposing a system of school law; a report on the necessity and value of the system proposed. Pamphlets were issued on these topics and widely cir- culated, and they served to awaken an interest throughout the state in public education. The system proposed was modeled on the New York state system.^ It provided for an economical management of the school lands, but made no provision for taxation. The legislature of 1823 was, however, opposed to any liberal action for public education. Atwater says: "In this legislature were many influential men who were opposed to a school system, to a sale of school lands and to internal improvements This session had a majority of both houses opposed to a school system and the sale of school lands, and all that was done by them was to quarrel about these subjects. They finally broke up in a row and went home."2 In the campaign for the state election of 1824 the subjects of internal improvements, the public-school system, and the taxation ' Lewis, Biography of Samuel Lewis, p. 101. 2 Atwater, A History of the Slate of Ohio, Natural and Civil, p. 261. 10 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO system of the state were the main issues before the people. A majority favorable to the public schools and internal improvements was chosen, among them Nathan Guilford, elected to represent Cincinnati. When the legislature assembled, Governor Morrow presented the necessity for adequate legislation on all these ques- tions. His message recognizes the difficulty of bringing people of divergent educational views, with no common educational inheri- tance, to united action for public schools. In discussing the subject he says:^ "In this state there are causes, extensive in their nature, for difference of opinion on the subject. The population is com- posed principally of emigrants from the different States of the Union, with habits and modes of thinking on the subject, as dif- ferent as are the regulations of the States from whence they came. . . . . The act of the 22nd of January, 1821," he declares, is ineffective because the establishment of schools and school districts was made optional for the voters in each township. "Was this act made positive, and in some respects modified, we should have a system in force — perhaps not perfect — for the regulation of com- mon schools, which could be further improved, as experience under it should point out its defects." A joint committee^ was at once appointed in the General Assembly to study the subject and report an adequate bill. Mr. Guilford was made chairman of this com- mittee and drafted the report and bill, which finally passed both houses without amendment and became the law of 1825. There was a widespread feeling in the state against imposing a tax for general school purposes, but Mr. Guilford and Mr. Cutler stood firm for this measure, and, with the assistance of the supporters of the public-school idea, insured its passage by forming an active coalition with those legislators who were working in the interests of internal improvements, especially the advocates of state canals. In this work Mr. Guilford showed himself a skilled lobbyist and shrewd judge of men in his personal campaign among the members of both houses.' While the vote was proceeding in the house Mr. Cutler stood beside Mr. Guilford as they anxiously awaited the outcome, and when the result was announced, and it was assured that taxation for education had prevailed, he turned to his companion and » Taylor, A Manual oj the Ohio School System, pp. 132, 133. "^Ibid^X). 141. ' Lewis, Biography of Samuel Lewis, p. 103. SOURCES OF OHIO'S PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 11 exclaimed: "Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation." The great initial victory for public education had been won, and had been won primarily by New England ideas backed up by New England men. It remained to give these ideas and this system effective organi- zation. This was not accomplished until thirteen years later, in 1838, under the leadership of Samuel Lewis, when a wholly new school code was adopted. Following the act of 1825 there were numerous modifications and amendments of the law, but no essen- tial change in the system of administration was made until 1838. The law of 1825 had made no provision for centralized control, and had created no adequate machinery for uniting the various schools and districts established into a true state system. There was no state, county, or township supervision, and but little actual knowledge, and no control, of what various communities were doing educationally. While the law had established the fundamental principle of taxation for schools, the actual system remained a head- less, disjointed, decentralized, and ineffective one. The first suggestions for reform came from the friends of educa- tion in Cincinnati. A group of teachers and other earnest advo- cates of popular education had organized a voluntary association known as the College of Teachers or Western Academic Institute.^ This body met annually for the discussion and study of educational topics and attracted to its meetings, not only Ohio teachers, but educational leaders from the other western states as well. Partly as a result of a demand for a better organization created through the discussions of this association,^ a bill was introduced in 1837 to create the office of state superintendent of common schools. It met with determined opposition, but finally passed the House by a vote of 35 to 34, and became a law in March, of the same year, with a decisive vote in its favor in the Senate. Samuel Lewis, of Cincinnati, was the first and only incumbent of the office, which he held for three years. The law of 1838 was a direct result of the work of his first year and of his study of the needs and conditions of schools as he saw them while touring the state visiting the schools and addressing meetings in an attempt to arouse people to an active interest in the need of better school ' O.L., XXX, 232. 2 Lewis, Biography of Samuel Ltwis, pp. 119, 120. 12 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO conditions. In this work he visited more than three hundred schools, traveHng on horse-back over twelve hundred miles over the rough country roads, visiting schools by day, addressing public meetings by night, and everywhere preaching the gospel of a better school system and a free education for every Ohio boy and girl. He always found it hard, and often discouraging work. He whites from Cleveland in November, 1837: I arrived here today almost worn down; have rode on an average twenty-six miles a day this week. I generally spend three or four hours a day in conversa- tion, answering questions, giving explanations, and making suggestions. It is harder than it would be to deliver an address every day an hour and a half long. .... I fear you overvalue my efforts I shall, however, do my best. I leave here on Monday, if health permit, and shall get along as fast as I can to Columbus, visiting on my route, as I suppose, about sixteen counties The task before me is so great, that with all my time and close attention, I shall hardly be able to get through. In a later letter he writes: On Saturday last, I delivered an address at Canton, and after riding twenty- six miles on Monday, spoke in the evening to a large audience, and I believe I did good I work hard day and night, and I find it a kind of up-hill business. If men would only do something, even in opposition, it would be better than it is. Almost every man agrees with me; thousands listen and applaud; and even candid men of sense declare they have never heard this subject treated with so much interest, and then leave it to go alone, or get on unaided by their efforts. Still I am not discouraged, but am determined to work on till my report is in, hoping at least for the final triumph of sound principles and practice. ' His report for the year 1837, based on his own observation and such statistics as he could gather from the county auditors, gave the first assembled information about the common schools of the state. The report found the legislature in a receptive mood, and the law of 1838 was passed with but little opposition. The essential feature of the new law, in comparison with those that had preceded, consisted in the fact that it gave organization and headship to the system. The new code retained the state superintendent at the head of the schools; the act of 1837 had created the ofifice, but had done nothing to change the rest of the law or the machinery of adminis- tration. In each county the new law made the county auditor also the county superintendent of schools, and, as such, responsible 1 Lewis, Biography of Samuel Lewis, p. 123. SOURCES OF OHIO'S PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 13 to the state superintendent in all educational affairs. Similarly in each township the township clerk was made the township superin- tendent of schools, subordinate to the county superintendent. An organization had been established by means of which an authorized state officer could reach out into the most remote dis- trict of the state, either to give help or information or to see that the law was obeyed. If equipped with the proper men, Ohio, through this law, had the mechanism for effective educational administration. The real strength of the system rested in the office of state superintendent. Mr. Lewis filled the office for three years, and in those three years did the same kind of work for Ohio that Horace Mann was doing for Massachusetts. Unfortunately for Ohio and her subsequent educational history, Mr. Lewis, because of failing health, gave up the office after three years of tireless service, and the legislature, because some opposition had developed, transferred the work to the office of the secretary of state. This office was given four hundred dollars additional for clerk hire, and the work became the collection of statistics and making of reports, not the administration of a state-wide school system. We have seen that the old New England idea of using lands for schools first found application in Ohio, and that New England men were chiefly instrumental in giving to the state the first law of 1821, the principle of taxation in 1825, and the organized system of 1838. We may now turn to a more detailed study of the laws themselves. Before doing this, however, we must say a few words about the schools from 1803 to 1821, the date of the first school law. The general type of common schools during this period was the pay or subscription school.^ The following agreements and adver- tisements give a picture of the practice, such that any added explanation is unnecessary. An advertisement in the Western Spy, October 22, 1799, reads as follows: English School. — The subscriber informs the inhabitants of this town that his school is this day removed, and is now next door to Mr. Thomas Williams, skin-dresser. Main Street. Gentlemen who have not subscribed may send their 1 Historical Sketches of Public Schools in Cities, Villages, and Townships of lite State of Ohio, a Centennial publication; gives an account of the development of the school system in 47 cities and villages of the state. In 41 cases the writers mention some form of private school as preceding or paralleling the public school. 14 HISTORY OF ILDUCATIONAL Lr.GISLATION IN OHIO scholars on the same terms as subscribers, (commencing this day). He also intends to comnicnre an evening school in the same house on the third day of November next, where writing and arithmetic, etc., will be taught four evenings in each week, from 6 to 9 o'clock, during the term of three months. The terms for each scholar will be two dollars, the scholars to find firewood and candles. He akso furnishes deeds and indentures, etc., on reasonable terms. James White* 'Hiis is ^ivcn by VcMial)k', together with the following, appearing ill a Cincinnati paper in 1804: Notice. — The jjublic in general and my former subscribers in particular, are respectfully informed that I e.xpect to commence school again on the 1st day of January, 1805. I shall teach reading, writing, arithmetic and English gram- mar, indiscriminately, for two dollars per quarter. The strictest care will be given to the school, as my circumstances will then admit of my constant presence with the school. Those who place confidence in my abilities and fidelity may be assured that both will be employed to please the parents who shall commit, and bcnefil the children who shall be coniinitted to my care. Ezra Spencer^ The two iigreements between teacher and parents which follow illustrate the common practice in the employment of a teacher and establishment of a school: This article between the underscribed subscribers, of the one part, and Jabez P. Manning, of the other, Witnesseth: That said Manning doth on his part engage to teach a school at the school-house near the center of Youngstown for the term of one quarter, wherein he engages to teach reading, writing, arithmetic and English grammar; and furthermore, that the school shall be opened at 9 o'clock A.M. and close at 4 r.M., of each day of the week (Saturday and Sunday excepted), and on Saturday to be opened at 9 o'clock and close at 12 o'clock a.m., and we, the subscribers, on our part individually engage to pay unto the said Maiming $1.75 for each and every scholar that we subscribe at the end of the term; and we, furthermore, engage to furnish the necessary expense of furniture, wood, and all other things necessary for the use of the school. Furthermore, we do engage that unless by the 6th of April of the present year the number of scholars subscribed amount to 35, that the said Manning is in no way obligated by this article. I'urthermore, we allow the said Manning the privilege of receiving five scholars more than are here specified. {Signed) J. P. Manning' YouNC.sTovvN, March M, IS18. We the subscribers, do hereby mutually agree to hire Miss Sally Rice to teach a school in the school-house near Mr. William Smith's, for the term of ' \'cniil)lc, / Ohio Documents, 36th G.A., Doc. 17, p. 45, ^ Ibid., p. 20. ^O.L., XXVIII, 57. *0.L., XXIX, 414. * O.L., XXXII, 25. 22 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO if the officers do their duty, will, if computed at the average price of day labor, amount to a heavier tax than is assessed in money for the support of schools, .... There are now 38,740 officers, enough certainly to break down any system however otherwise good.' To summarize: On the side of local organization, the law of 1825 directed the township trustees throughout the state to lay off the townships into school districts, in which the electors might organize by choosing directors, the only compulsion for either township or district coming from a loss in the share of the school tax. County contact with the township and district was first estab- lished in the law of 1825,^ by which the county officials were made responsible for the collection and distribution of the school tax,^ and through the appointment of a board of examiners by the Court of Common Pleas. This county relationship was concerned only with the distribution of school funds and the examination"* of teachers, and had in it no direct element of control or supervision. The certification of teachers by a county authority, rather than a local authority, did, of course, introduce one element of control. The next step in the direction of county organization was taken in the law of 1836,^ which provided that the county auditor should open an account directly with each school district in the county, and made the further provision that each district school clerk should report annually to the county auditor. The county auditor became the intermediary officer in gathering information for the use of the state as to the general school conditions. It is evident that the legislature felt the need of information regarding school conditions throughout the state as a basis for legislative action. The directions are specific as to the information wanted and include the following items: the enumeration of white children from four to twenty-one years old in the district; the time the school had been kept in the district; the time the school had been supported by the school fund; the time the school had been sup- ported by taxation; the time the school had been supported by voluntary subscription; the amount of money from each source; the number of children that had been taught; the whole amount ^ Ohio Documents, 36th G.A., Doc. 17, p. 19. ^O.L., XXIII, 36. ^ See p. 33 for full explanation of this tax. * See p. 41. * O.L., XXXIV, 19. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 23 spent for teachers' v/ages; the amount paid for schoolhouses and repairs, giving as separate items the sum raised by taxation for this purpose and that raised by voluntary subscription. Each county auditor was directed to make an abstract^ of the information so gathered for his county, and to report the same annually to the General Assembly. It will be seen that the law up to this point connected the state, county, and district in a loose organization through a system of reports and through certain financial contacts in the collection and distribution of the school tax. The system lacked a supervising head with definite respon- sibility for following up the directions given by the law and for seeing that the information asked for was actually gathered and used. The legislature evidently realized this, and the following year,2 1837, passed a law creating the office of superintendent of common schools, with an annual salary of five hundred dollars. The chief duties of the office so created were to collect and tabulate statistics, to investigate the conditions of the various school funds resulting from the sale of lands, and, in general, to study the school needs of the state and suggest plans for better regulation and control of educational affairs to the General Assem- bly. Samuel Lewis, of Cincinnati, was appointed to the office April 1, 1837.^ Following his recommendations, the legislature- enacted in 1838'* an act for the support and better regulation of common schools and to create permanently the office of superin- tendent of common schools. Mr. Lewis had recommended legis- lation the preceding year, which had included : school libraries; a state school fund of two hundred thousand dollars; township high schools; township Boards of Education; evening schools in towns and cities; county superintendents; a school journal to be distributed to school officers gratuitously; encouragement for the formation of Teachers' Institutes; authority ^ It was largely from these abstracts that Mr. Lewis made up the statistical tables in his first report. He recognized the incompleteness and inaccuracy in them, but despite that gathered much valuable information. In commenting upon the laxness shown in the reports he says: "If all the districts had reported accurately, the result would be bad enough; but they have not There are in the state 75 counties of which 62 have reported in whole or in part; some are extremely defective, not only on account of the work of the school officers, but also the extreme carelessness of some of the auditors. Most of the auditors, however, have done the best they could with the materials furnished." (Ohio Documents 36th G.A., Doc. 17, p. 45). 2 O.L., XXXV, 82. ^ O.L., XXXV, local, 560. *0.L., XXXVI, 21. 24 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO for districts to borrow money to erect school-houses; the employment of women as teachers; and full reports from teachers and school officers.' The resulting legislation was the most important and complete act bearing upon public education passed in Ohio from 1803 to 1850, and was the last school code passed during the period. Much of its effectiveness was destroyed by subsequent amendments that will be indicated, but the act in itself attempted to establish an organized system of common schools for the state, with state, county, township, and district officers. The state superintendent stood at the head of the system. In each county the county auditor was made superintendent of common schools for the county, and in each township the township clerk was made superintendent of common schools for the township. The district meeting elected three directors, as in the case of the preceding laws. The district clerk was directed to make an annual report to the district meeting and to file a copy of his report with the township clerk. This report was to contain full financial and educational statistics of the district for the year. The duties of the township clerk, acting as superintendent, were as follows: to take an enumeration of the youth of school age in each district of the township (for failure to do this a fine of liiilS was imposed upon him); to fill vacancies that occurred in any board of directors in his township; to appoint direc- tors in case the district meeting failed to elect them, or in case the directors failed to serve, and, if those who were appointed refused to serve, to perform the duties of the directors himself for the dis- trict in question. He was directed further to report annually to the county superintendent an abstract of the reports made by the district clerks, and it was made his duty to visit each common school in the township at least once a year to examine the teacher's record and the discipline and mode of instruction and to keep a journal of his observations. He was also directed by the law to estimate each year the additional amount necessary to be raised in the district to maintain six months' school for all children. The chief duties of the auditor as county superintendent of schools consisted in transmitting an abstract of the reports from each township to the state superintendent, and in distributing blanks, circulars, and other information from the state superin- tendent to the proper township and district officers. 1 Ohio Documents, 36th G.A., Doc. 17, pp. 11-34. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 25 It will be seen that in its working the system was nominal rather than actual, so far as any control of the local unit, the dis- trict, was concerned. It was designed chiefly to afford convenience for the collection of data needed by the state superintendent, and the dissemination of information from the state superintendent's office. It did provide for district officers, and even the possible establishment of schools, where the district failed to act, by giving the township clerk power to exercise the authority of the directors, and it also made some pretense at supervision through the same officers. Aside from this, it was a loose and inefficient system, depending for its value upon the energy and ability of the state superintendent in arousing educational sentiment throughout the state and upon the thoroughness with which the township clerk performed the duties laid upon him. There was still no actual compulsion in the law. The strong points of the system consisted in the definite relation- ship established through state, county, township, and district officers, and the possibility of dissemination and collection of educational information through these channels. Its real effective- ness depended upon the wise leadership of the state superintendent. The law pointed out the way to a school system, and the superin- tendent, as an authorized educational agent, could do much to arouse state-wide interest in the schools. In his Third Annual Report, in 1839, Mr. Lewis speaks of the law in the following words: This law, though not perfect, was the best that could be passed; and with all its imperfections, I still think it is better adapted to our wants than any other school law that has come under my notice. It gives to the people the power to do their own business, whether in townships or districts, as the majority may think best. The widest possible latitude is given for popular action. The most that the law does is to prescribe certain general rules within which the people can act under the sanction of the law, and it gives to such popular action the aid of law to effect its purpose. An arbitrary law imposing duties binding upon the people without their assent could prescribe the forms and details of the work in a few words and with great simplicity. Such would do for despotic countries, but in a free country where the actors are a people whose action depends upon their own wills, there must be a wide scope given, allowing each district to accom- modate its own peculiar views, requiring it only to keep within the general out- lines (and they must be only outlines) laid down by the law.' The effectiveness of the organization was destroyed by action of the legislature March 23, 1840,^ when the office of state superin- • Third Annual Report of the Superintendent oj the Common Schools, made to the Thirty-eighth General Assembly of the State of Ohio, p. 4. ^ O.L., XXXVIII, 130. 26 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO tendent was abolished and the work of tabulating and transmitting school statistics and other educational information was transferred to the office of the secretary of state. The one other point at which the law had promise of effective- ness was In the creation of the township and county superintendents. The weakness, of course, was In attaching these offices as mere appendages to the duties of the county auditor and the township clerk. The supervisory duties of the township clerk were made depen- dent upon the decision of the township trustees In 1839,' and the amount of pay for the supervision of any one school was limited to a maximum of one dollar for any one year. This made actual supervision practically Impossible. The results of these two acts were to leave the system without effective leadership and largely to destroy any possibility of controlling the school work of the district through supervision. There were portions of the state where the organization was felt to be Ineffective. Samuel Lewis had advocated county supervision, and the appointment of the county auditor to this position was felt by many not to meet edu- cational needs. Voluntary associations of teachers- discussed the question of school organization In their conventions. In 1846 Henry D. Barnard, of Connecticut, came to Ohio and lectured In numerous towns and cities,^ urging the cause of free public schools. As one result of these discussions numerous petitions were cir- culated In the northern and central portions of the state, asking for a law that would give county supervision. In 1847^ the legis- lature passed a weak permissive act applicable to twenty-five counties located largely in the Western Reserve and In the central portion of the state near Columbus. This act shows clearly the general legislative willingness to legalize educational procedure and the unwillingness to adopt means to enforce the measures given the sanction of law. The twenty-five counties In question were allowed to have county superintendents. The initiative was left in the hands of the county commissioners, who were authorized to set aside such sum as they deemed proper for the payment of a county super- 1 O.L., XXXVII, 61. ^ See chapter vi, p. 106, for a brief account of some of these associations. ' Taylor, A Manual of the Ohio School System, p. 359. < O.L., XLV, 32. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 27 intendent. They were allowed to levy a tax for the purpose if they wished to do so. If a sum were set aside for the support of this office, the county superintendent was elected by the district clerks of the county. He became chairman of the county Board of Examiners, and was directed to visit annually each common school in the county as a supervising officer. The provisions of this act were made applicable to all counties in the state the next year, 1848.^ The act remained virtually a dead letter in the original twenty-five counties as well as in the rest of the state. It simply pointed out a way in which a county might legally appoint a county superintendent of schools if it really wished to do so, and it left the initiative in the hands of the county commissioners, who were likely to be guided in action by financial considerations more than by educational needs. ^ The legislature in 1850^ passed another act that created again the office of state superintendent, but in a quite different form. This law was not permissive in form, but never actually came into operation since the General Assembly, which was the appointing body, allowed it to lapse through its failure to appoint the officers provided for in the law. In brief, this law provided for a state board of public instruction to consist of five members, appointed by the General Assembly. The first members were to be appointed for one, two, three, four, and five years. After that one member was to be appointed each year. Each member, during the last year of his term, was styled the state superintendent of common schools and carried on the duties of that office. These duties were largely limited to the collection of statistics and the reporting of the results to the General Assembly. The state was to be divided into four districts by the board, and each of the other members was to serve as a district superintendent. In this service they co- operated with the county examiners, and their signatures were necessary to give validity to teachers' certificates. The state superintendent was to prepare questions for all teachers' examina- tions. Teachers were required to pay one dollar on the receipt of certificates. The payment of this dollar entitled each teacher to receive a state educational paper and to attend teachers' institutes. 1 O.L., XL VI, 86. 2 Two counties, Ashtabula and Sandusky, elected superintendents under this law (Taylor, A Manual of the Ohio School System, p. 360). 3 O.L., XLVIII, 44. 28 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO All fees and subscriptions to the school paper were to be paid to the state treasurer, and out of the fund so created the salaries of the state board were to be paid. The salaries were one thousand dollars for each district superintendent, and twelve*^ hundred dollars for the state superintendent. The law specifically provided that no money from any other source should be used in the pay- ment of these salaries. This law represented the efforts of the teachers' associations and the friends of education throughout the state. They were successful in getting the law upon the statute books by placing the responsibility for financing it upon the teachers themselves. The law, however, as has been said, was never put in active operation. Summary. — The district was the unit of school organization throughout this period. A state organization was formed in 1838 with county and township officers. The effectiveness of the county and township organizations was largely nullified by the fact that the duties of the school officials were attached to offices primarily created for other purposes. The greatest possibility of usefulness in the system rested in the state superintendent, and this office, after a three years' trial, was abolished, and its duties transferred to the office of the secretary of state, where it became largely a clerical function. METHODS OK COMMON-SCHOOL SUPPORT The subject of the support of common schools during this period is an involved one as there are many sources of revenue and frequent changes in legislation. These sources may be classified as follows: school rates paid by parents; the revenue from school lands; permanent funds; revenue from the United States surplus; a guaranteed state school fund; state taxation for school support; county taxation for school support; optional township taxation for school support; district taxation for school support; revenue from fines, penalties, and fees of various kinds; district taxation for school buildings; voluntary contributions for school buildings; contributions and bequests. Rates paid by parents. — It has already been said that the earliest schools in Ohio were subscription or pay schools. The responsibility for the education of the child during the first twenty- two years of statehood rested on the parents, not upon society or the state, except as the money received from Section 16 might DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 29 assist in maintaining the local school. The principle of school rates for at least a portion of the expense was recognized in the laws of 1821,1 1829,2 i831,» 1834," and 1836.^ In the three acts last cited it was provided that the parents should pay any addi- tional amount needed, unless it were raised by voluntary subscrip- tion. Provision was also made for the exemption of indigent students. School rates, as a source of revenue, were not specifically recognized in the code of 1838,^ but reappeared the following year in an amendment,^ and remained until 1850 as a legal source of support. The practical working of the law and its amendments is well shown by another quotation from Mr. Lewis' first report: As it will be impossible to give a full history of my observations, an example of the several classes must suffice. In one town a free school is taught three months in the year, by one teacher, in a district where more than one hundred children desire to attend; they rush in and crowd the school so as to destroy all hope of usefulness, the wealthy and those in comfortable circumstances, seeing this, withdraw their children or never send them; the school thus receives the name of a school for the poor, and its usefulness is destroyed. This example is one that represents nearly all the free schools in the State, as well in the country as in the cities and towns. Another and much larger number of the districts, adopt a practice of which the following is an example: The district has funds which would pay a teacher one quarter or less, but in order to keep up a school as long as possible, it is divided between two or more quarters; the teacher makes his estimate of the amount, besides public money, that must be paid by each scholar and gets his subscription accordingly. Here none send but those who can pay the balance; of course the children of the poor, the very intemperate and careless, with some- times the inordinate lovers of money are left at home. This mode though it defeats the primary object of the law, really secures a greater aggregate amount of instruction than the other. Another class proceeds on the same plan, with the exception that the teacher is bound to take the very poor free, if they prove their total inability to pay. This is but little, if any, better than the last, since the poor woman must humble herself, and in effect take the benefit of the poor law, before she can get her children into school Another part of this class is, where the directors agree with the teacher at so much per month, and, after expending the school money, levy, under the statute, i0.L.,XIX, 51. H).L., XXVII, 73. 'O.L., XXIX, 414. ^O.L., XXXII, 25. ^O.L.,XXXlV, 19. "O.L., XXXVI, 21. 'O.L., XXXVII, 61. 30 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO a tax on the scholars for the residue, sometimes admitting the poor, and some- times rejecting all that are unable to pay the difference. In some towns all the teachers receive a portion of the public money at the rate of so much per scholar, which they deduct from the subscription price. In these cases the schools are all strictly private, and no provision whatever is made for the poor. The officers in one place where this practice prevails, said that "if the schools were free, they would be so crowded as to be useless, unless they had more funds, but by the mode they adopted, every man who sent to school got a part of the public money;" if he was not able to pay the balance he was punished by losing the whole; which is certainly a bad feature in the practice, and a gross violation of law. Another custom is not to draw the school money for several years, and then, say once in two or three years, they can keep a crowded free school from three to six months. In some places public schools have not been taught this two years. These examples give the practice in all the school districts in the State; the second and third named prevail the most generally; but it is not uncommon to find all the examples adopted in different districts in the same township.' Revenue from school lands. — The revenue from Section 16, or land given in lieu of Section 16,^ was by the terms of the grant to be used for the education of the children of the township or district of^^country to which it belonged. The basis of distribution within the township finally came to be the number of white unmarried youth from four to twenty-one years. The different bases of dis- tribution used before this were as follows: 1805' — So that all citizens in the township shall obtain equal advantages. ISIO"* — In proportion to the scholars and the time taught. 1825^ — In proportion to the number of families in each district. 1834" — In proportion to the unmarried white youth from four to twenty-one. In the Virginia Military District the basis for distribution by the act of February 9, 1829,^ was made all children from the age of four to sixteen, instead of four to twenty-one. This was changed to children from the age of four to twenty-one in 1831,^ and a five- hundrcd-dollar penalty was assessed upon county auditors if they failed to make triennially a report of the number of school youth * Ohio Documents, 36th G.A., Doc. 17, pp. 8 ff. *0.L., Ill, 47, Enabling Act, reprinted. 'O.L., ni, 230. *0.L., VHI, 100. *0.L., XXni, 36. «0.L., XXXII, 25. ^O.L., XXVII, 51. * O.L.. XXIX, 229. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 31 of this age in their respective counties. In 1836^ the proportionate amount of territory in each county was used as the basis of appor- tionment in this particular district. Permanent funds. — Schools lands: In 1809^ the school lands set aside for the Virginia Military District were offered for sale at a minimum price of two dollars per acre, and the funds were deposited with the state treasurer to be funded and the income used for the support of schools within this district. The policy of selling the school lands in the rest of the state was adopted in 1827^ and was followed immediately by another act^ creating a permanent school fund. The money from the sale of school land was to be paid into the state treasury and placed to the credit of the particular townships to which the land belonged. This was impossible in the case of such districts as the Western Reserve, the Virginia Military District, and the United States Military District, as the land had not been given to the townships, but to the districts as a whole. In these cases the money was set aside for the use of schools in the territories named. The amount so paid in constituted an irreducible fund upon which the state pledged its faith to pay an annual interest of 6 per cent for the use of schools in the township or district.-^ The lands were to be sold at the appraised value with no minimum price attached. This act also provided that the money from the sale of the salt lands, which had not been originally given for the use of schools, should become a permanent fund belonging in common to the people of the state for school use. To this fund was to be added any dona- tions, bequests, etc., that might be made to the state for the use of schools. The moneys from the two last sources were to be funded until 1832, and thereafter interest was to be distributed to the counties of the state in proportion to the white male inhabitants over twenty-one years of age. These funds were loaned to the state for the purpose of building canals in 1830,^ and from this time on the principle was followed of using the funds for state purposes and pledging the faith of the state for the payment of annual interest on the debt so incurred. > O.L., XXXIV, 469. 2 0.L., VII, 109. 3 O.L., XXV, 56. «0.L., XXV, 78. s The money paid into the treasury from the school lands was used by the state in its canal projects, and interest was paid upon the debt so incurred. « O.L., XXVIII, 56. 32 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO The amount of funds derived from this source is shown for the years 1830, 1836, and 1846, as follows r^ Virginia Military School Lands. U.S. Military School Lands. . . . Salt lands Section No. 16 Western Reserve School Lands . Moravian Tract School Lands. . Totals $47,014.31 27,895.50 10,004.20 82.626.31 $167,540.32 1836 1846 $117,884.64 101,256.71 24,788.22 563,578.63 147,027.01 $135,033.96 119,871.09 999,963.24 158,659.01 1,049.82 $954,535.21 $1,414,577.12 Surplus revenue. — In 1837^ the surplus revenue received from the United States was apportioned among the counties, the net income from this source to be used for the support of common schools. The method used for deriving an income was as follows: each county was held responsible for the payment of 5 per cent interest annually on the amount apportioned to it.^ This 5 per cent Vi'as paid annually to the state treasurer and redistributed throughout the state for the use of schools. Any amount of revenue that the county had derived from the fund above 5 per cent might be retained by it and used for internal improvements, for the support of common schools, or for the building of academies. The entire fund apportioned to Ohio from this source was $2,007, 260. 34.'* This fund was used in this way for the support of schools until 1850, but was finally pledged by the state for the payment of debts incurred in the building of state canals, and passed from the school finances subsequent to this date. State school fund. — The law of 1838'' established for the first time a guaranteed state common-school fund of two hundred thousand dollars. This was to be derived from the interest on the surplus revenue,^ the interest on the proceeds of salt lands, and the revenue' from banks, insurance, and bridge companies. The state was to supplement from other funds whatever amount was * O.L., XXVIII, Auditor's reports; O.L., XXXV, Auditor's reports; O.L., XLV, Auditor's reports. "O.L., XXXV, 97. ^The amount distributed to the Ohio counties in 1837 was $1,882,418.92. *Ohio Documents, 36lh G.A., Doc. 3, p. 8. ^O.L., XXXVI, 21. * Ohio's share of the surplus revenue distributed to the several states by the United States amounted to $2,007,260.34. ^ The revenue from the state tax on banks, insurance, and bridge companies is reported by the state treasurer in 1837 as $64,931. .S3. Ohio Documents, 36th G.A., Doc. 2, p. 3. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 33 needed to bring the total annual revenue up to two hundred thou- sand dollars. The added amount, when necessary, was raised, in fact, by a state tax. The amount of this guaranteed fund was subsequently in 1842^ reduced for one year to one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, and in the following year^ the money arising from licenses on peddlers, from auction duties or licenses on auc- tioneers, and from taxes levied on lawyers and physicians was added to this fund, the effort evidently being to raise the amount of the fund without the necessity of taxation. The basis for dis- tribution of this fund to the counties was made the number of white youth between the ages of four and twenty years, resident in the county. Taxation.— -The principle of taxation for the support of schools first appeared in the general school act of 1825,^ by which the county commissioners in each county were directed to levy a tax of one-half mill on the taxable property of the county for the use of schools. This principle continued from this date, and was later supplemented by a state tax and an optional township or district tax. The pro- visions of the laws concerning taxation up to, and including, the general law of 1838 are summarized in Table I, page 34. (This includes only taxation for school support. The provisions for taxation for school building purposes are given separately.) In 1839^ the law was amended to allow the county commis- sioner to reduce the county tax to any sum not less than one mill, instead of maintaining a flat rate of two mills throughout the state as the act of 1838 had done, and in 1847,^ the sentiment against taxation for school support was so strong in the General Assembly that the county commissioners were forbidden to levy more than two-fifths of a mill for the use of schools. This was the lowest point reached in taxation for school support after the law of 1825. The following year, 1848, the privilege of levying a local tax for the support of schools was extended from the township to the dis- trict.^ The district clerks were directed to make an estimate of the ' O.L., XL, 59. ^O.L., XLII, 38. *0.L., XXni, 36. * O.L., XXXVn, 61. ^ O.L., XLV, 60. •O.L.. XLVI,83. 34 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO amount needed in addition to the funds provided under the laws in force to keep a school in session for six months. The district meeting was then allowed to decide by vote whether an additional tax should be levied for this purpose. In no case could this added district tax exceed one mill. The same year the county commis- sioners were authorized to raise the tax from two-fifths of a mill to 1 milU but they were not directed to do so. TABLE I Year Amount Remarks County tax required'. . . 1825 i^mill County tax required^. . . 1829 % mill County tax required'. . . 1831 % mill County commissioners may assess J^ mill additional. County tax required^. . . 1834 1 mill County commissioners may assess J^ mill additional. County tax required^. . . 1836 VA mills County commissioners may assess A '""iH additional. County tax required'. . . 1838 2 mills Township tax' 1836 Optional If the county commissioners failed to levy the additional ^-mill tax, the township might vote to raise an additional 13/^-mill tax. Township tax 1838 Optional The township might vote an added amount necessary to maintain schools six months.* Not to exceed 2 mills additional. State tax 1838 Variable An amount necessary added to the revenue from the permanent fund to produce v$200,0009 annually." One- half mill levied by the state in 1838. ' O.L., XXIII, 36. 2 O.L., XXVII, 73. 3 0.L., XXIX, 414. * O.L., XXXII, 25. 5 O.L., XXXIV, 19. 6 0.L., XXXVI, 21. ' O.L., XXXIV, 19. «0.L., XXXVII, 61. » Reduced in 1842 to $150,000 (O.L., XL, 59). 10 O.L., XXXVI, 85. The status of taxation for the support of schools at the close of the period was as follows: The state guaranteed a fixed school fund derived from various sources. When other sources failed to make up this sum, a state 1 O.L., XLVI, 28. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 35 tax was levied to do so. (The fund had been reduced from two hundred thousand dollars in 1838 to one hundred and fifty thousand dollars in 1842.) The county commissioners were directed to levy a tax in each county. This had been two mills in 1838, but was reduced to two- fifths of a mill in 1847, and was left optional, but not over one mill, in 1848. Each township might vote to raise an added two-mill tax for the support of schools in the township. Each district might vote to raise an added one-mill tax for the support of schools in the district. The progress that had been made by the law of 1838 with its state-wide county tax of two mills and state tax amounting to one-half mill had been largely lost by allowing the county com- missioners to reduce the amount of the county tax and by the reduction of the guaranteed school fund to one hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Taxation for school buildings. — The law of 182P authorized the householders in any school district by a two-thirds vote to levy a tax to build a schoolhouse and to pay for the schooling of indigent pupils, and stipulated the tax should not exceed one-half the amount that might be levied for state and county taxes the same year. The next law, that of 1825,^ simply said that the district meeting should provide means for building a schoolhouse and for furnishing fuel, but gave no further directions as to how money was to be raised. In 1827^ a maximum of three hundred dollars for a schoolhouse was established, and the district meeting might, by a three-fifths vote, decide whether the district should be taxed for building purposes or not. If it was decided to raise the money by a tax and the amount falling on any householder was less than one dollar, a minimum sum of one dollar was charged against him. The tax might be commuted by labor on the schoolhouse or by the furnishing of material for it. This last law evidently aroused opposition on the part of non-resident taxpayers, and in 1830^ an amendment to the school law provided that not more than fifty dollars might be levied in any one year for building purposes unless one-third of the property in the district was owned by residents. ^O.L., XIX, 51. 2 O.L., XXm, 36. ' O.L., XXV, 65. * O.L., XXVIII, 57. 36 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO If one-third to one-half of the property was so owned, the amount raised might be one hundred dollars. If one-third to two-thirds of the pro|:)erty was owned by residents, the sum was increased to two luMidred dollars. This method of raising the money for buildings remained with but slight changes until 1838. The mini- mum tax for a resident taxpayer was reduced from one dollar to fifty cents in 1830,' and to twenty-five cents in 1836.2 In 1838^ the decision as to a building tax for a schoolhouse was for the first time left to a majority vote of the district meeting, and the partial exemption for non-resident taxpayers and the minimum tax features disappeared. Fines, penalties, licc7ises, fees, etc. — In 1827^ the principle of using fines for the support of schools, assessed for various offences, first appears. By the provisions of this act all fines imposed and collected by justices of the peace for offences committed were to be used for the support of schools in the district in which the offences were committed. This was repeated in 1829,^ and then disappeared from the school law, but the principle reappeared in a series of acts concerning various offences and remained as a definite method of school support to the end of the period. These offences and fines are .so numerous that they are given here only in tabulated form (Table II). TABLE II Date of Penalty .Area to Which Offense I'iNES Were Law Min. Max Distributed 1829*.... Selling liquor without license. . $10.00 $ 50.00 County 1829*.... Liquor-seller permitting riot- ing, drunkenness, or ganil)iing 10.00 50 . 00 County 183()t.... Killing nuiskrats out of season. 1.00 each Township 1831t... Sabbath-breaking 1.00 5 . 00 Township 183U.... Selling ficjuor on Sunday "to others than travelers" 5.00 Township 18.^U.... Disturbing religious meetings. 20.00 Township 18311.... Profanity .25 1.00 Township 1831t... Exciting disturbance in a tav- ern, etc .50 5 . 00 Township 183U.... Playing bullets, running horses or shooting guns in town . . . .50 5 . 00 Township 1831t... Liquor tlealcr keeping nine-pin alley 10.00 100.00 Township 'O.L., XXVni,.S7. ''O.L., XXXIV, 19. 'O.L., XXXVI, 21. Ohio Documents, ,S8th G.A., Doc. 17, p. 51. 2 Ohio Documents, 37th G.A., Doc. 32, p. 67. s Ibid., p. 70. *0. L., XXIII, 36. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 41 to the districts that did so. In 1829^ the provisions were repeated, and a minimum term of three months was estabHshed as a con- dition of receiving the district's proportion of school tax due. There was a fine of two dollars assessed on any person elected as a director or clerk and refusing to serve,^ and also fines on the district officers responsible for making returns of the enumeration of school youth^ in case of failure to report. It was found necessary in 1848^ to pass a special act for the purpose of securing school statistics from the districts and townships. This forbade the township treasurers to pay any teacher a salary unless there was presented with the order an abstract of the teacher's record of attendance. The township treasurer was fined ten dollars unless he settled annually with the auditor of the county, and the possession of these abstracts was a necessary preliminary to the settlement. Other than this the state devised no means for controlling the educational procedure of the district. CERTIFICATION OF TEACHERS In 182P the district school committee was authorized to employ competent teachers, and no mention was made of certification. In 1825® the principle of county certification appeared and with the exception of a two-year period, 1836 to 1838, remained until 1850. The law of 1825 provided for the appointment of three examiners of common schools in each county by the Court of Com- mon Pleas, who should examine and certificate teachers and, as previously noted, might visit and examine schools. No teacher could legally recover any part of the pay due from public funds unless a certificate had been granted to such teacher. In 1827^ the Court of Common Pleas was allowed to appoint such number of examiners as they might deem expedient, not to exceed one for each organized township in the county. It was the evident intent of this law to allow single examiners, for the sake of convenience, to examine within the township. * O.L., XXVII, 73. ^O.L., XXVIII, 57. 'O.L., XXXIV, 19. *0.L.. XLVI,28 'O.L., XIX, 51. fO.L., XXIII, 36. 'O.L., XXV, 65. 42 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO In 1829^ the Court of Common Pleas was directed to appoint not less than five examiners nor more than the number of organized townships in the county, and any two examiners might grant certificates. In 183P the examiners were directed to give the certificate in the branches in which the teacher was found qualified to teach, and no certificate was to be granted unless the candidate was qualified to teach reading, writing, and arithmetic. The examiners might require the examination to be public and could determine upon uniform forms of certification. This law was evidently deemed a little too rigorous and was amended at the following session in December, 1831,^ to permit a district that wished to do so to employ a female teacher to teach reading, writing, and spelling only, and the examiners were author- ized, on the presentation of a written request from the directors, to grant a certificate in these subjects. In 1834"* the court was directed to appoint five examiners, and the examination was to be given publicly each month at the county seat, with the provision that the examiners might appoint one examiner in each township to examine female teachers only. Reading, writing, and arithmetic were required for all certificates. In 1836^ the township became the unit for certification, and the method of choosing examiners changed. Each township was to elect annually three examiners, but with the code of 1838^ the county became definitely the unit for certification, and the mode of appointment was again by the selection of the Court of Common Pleas. The number of examiners was fixed at three. Examina- tions were to be held quarterly by the board. Each teacher must be qualified to teach reading, writing, and arithmetic, and the certificate stated what other branches the teacher was qualified to teach. No teacher in any common school was allowed to teach a study not named in the certificate. In 1849^ English and geog- raphy were added to the requirements for certification. ' O.L., XXVII, 73. ''O.L., XXIX, 414. ' O.L., XXX, 4. * O.L.. XXXII, 2S. * O.L., XXXIV, 19. •O.L., XXXVI, 21. ^ O.L., XLVII, 43. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 43 SCHOOL STUDIES No mention was made of the subjects to be taught in the com- mon schools until 1834/ when reading, writing, and arithmetic and "other necessary branches" were specified. The state insisted on nothing more than these subjects, but in 1838^ allowed other studies to be taught at the option of the directors, and allowed any other language beside English to be taught, but the three R's must be taught in English, This was amended in 1839^ as a con- cession to German settlers^ to allow each school district to have its school taught in whatever language it might prefer. In 1849^ on application of three householders the directors were instructed to add English and geography to the subjects taught. LENGTH OF SCHOOL YEAR The minimum length of the school year was first fixed at three months in 1829^ for any school receiving an appropriation of the money raised by taxation, and as much longer than three months as the appropriation paid the wages of the teacher. Nothing was done to extend the time until 1838,^^ when the township superin- tendent was directed to estimate for the township the amount it would be necessary to raise by taxation in addition to the funds already provided to furnish six months good schooling to all the white youth of the township. The decision as to raising the amount needed to maintain the schools six months was decided by the voters at the township election, who voted "school tax" or "no school tax." A six months' school remained the ideal held up by the law for district schools until 1850. That this modest ideal of a six months' school was not com- monly reached is shown in Mr. Lewis' first report, in which he gave the total number of children of school age in the state as 468,812; the number attending more than two months and less than four as 84,296, and those attending over four months as 62,144.^ These figures show that 322,372 children of school age ^O.L., XXXII, 25. *0.L., XXXVI, 21. ^O.L., XXXVII, 61. ' Taylor, A Manual of the Ohio School System, p. 170. *O.L., XLVII, 43. « O.L., XXVII, 73. ^O.L., XXXVI, 21. ' Ohio Documents, 36th G.A., Doc. 17, p. 44. 44 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO either attended school less than two months in the year or that they did not attend at all. In his last report, three years later, for 1839, he gives the total number of schools (public) as 13,049 — partly estimated — and the average length of the term as four months; the total number of pupils in attendance as 455,427, an increase of over 300,000.^ These figures are a significant indication of the changed attitude toward public schools that the law of 1838 had wrought under the leadership of a capable and devoted state superintendent. SCHOOL OFFICERS The township trustees were throughout the period given the power of establishing districts. District officers were as follows: 1814 — Three district trustees.^ 1821 — Three district trustees and a collector.' 1825 — Three directors.'' 1827 — Three directors and a treasurer to be appointed by the directors.^ 1829 — Three directors, a clerk, and a treasurer.^ 1838 — Three directors, the directors appointing one of their own number as clerk and treasurer.'' The law of 1838 also created the offices of state, county, and township superintendents, the two latter being ex officio attached to the offices of county auditor and township clerk. 1840 — The office of state superintendent was abolished, and its clerical functions transferred to the office of the secretary of state.^ 1848 — Counties were given the right on their own initiative to elect county superintendents of schools.' SCHOOLS FOR COLORED CHILDREN The first provision found in the general laws for the education of colored children occurs in 1848,^° when a department of common schools for black and mulatto children was created. Prior to this time the property of colored people had been exempt from taxa- tion for school purposes. This law provided that their property should be taxed the same as property of white people, and the 1 Ohio Documents, 38th G.A., Doc. 17, p. 44. 2 0.L., XIII, 295. 'O.L., XIX, 51. * O.L., XXIII, 36. * O.L., XXV, 65. * O.L., XXVII, 73. ^O.L., XXXVI, 21. 8 O.L., XXXVIII, 130. » O.L., XLVI, 86. >0O.L.,XLVI, 81. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 45 money used to support colored schools wherever they were estab- lished, but added to the common school funds in those districts in which colored children were allowed to attend the common schools. Any city, town, village, or township containing twenty colored children was created a district for the purpose of establishing a colored school, and the colored citizens were given authority to organize by the election of directors, in accord with the general school law. If there were less than twenty colored children in the areas enumerated, they were allowed to attend the common schools unless there was a written protest filed by someone having a child in the school. In the latter case they were not allowed to attend, and the property of colored people was not taxed. At the next session of the legislature, in 1849,^ the law was changed, and the authorities in towns, cities, villages, and townships were required to create one or more districts for colored children if they were not admitted to common schools. The colored citizens then organized with their own officers and supported the schools by taxation upon their own property. CITY AND VILLAGE SCHOOLS Ohio's growth in population in the early decades of the nine- teenth century was a phenomenal one. In 1800, three years before statehood, her rank in population was eighteenth. In 1820 she stood fifth in the sisterhood of states, and in the next ten years the numbers within her borders again almost doubled, jumping from 581,434 in 1820 to 937,903 in 1830.^ This growth in the early years was almost wholly a rural one. In 1820 there were only two towns in the state with a population of 1,000 or over: Cincinnati with 9,640, and Dayton, estimated to have 1,000. Ten years later Cincinnati had grown to a city of 24,830, Dayton and Columbus were approaching 3,000 each — 2,950 and 2,435, respectively — while three other towns, Cleveland, Springfield, and Canton, had just passed the 1,000 mark. In the years from 1830 to 1850 the growth of towns and cities was a rapid one. Cincinnati had increased to 46,340; Dayton, Columbus, and Cleveland had each passed 6,000, and there were eight other towns in the state with a population of over 2,000 each according to the census reports of 1840; while by 1850 Cincinnati 1 O.L., XLVII, 17. 2 Statistical Abstract of U.S., Washington, 1911, p. 34. 46 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO was a thriving metropolis of 115,435, Columbus and Cleveland were vigorous young cities of 17,000 each, Dayton had something over 10,000 inhabitants, and Zanesville and Chillicothe were rapidly approaching this number, while fifteen other centers had attained a population of 3,000 to 6,000 each.i The school legislation of the first thirty years of Ohio's statehood recognized only the district school in the general school laws that were passed. This was partly a reflection of the rural character of the state in these early years, and partly a result of the decentraliz- ing tendency in school affairs that the early settlers had brought with them. It was not until the law of 1838 was passed that any recognition was given to the fact that the educational needs of cities and towns were not the same as those of the country districts. Samuel Lewis speaking to the legislature at this period said : In towns and large villages, the common schools are poorer than in the country. In the latter, neighborhoods depend more upon them, and, of course, take a deeper interest in their control, while in the former there is too frequently but little attention paid to these schools by persons able to provide other means of instruction.^ A few cities and towns had early felt the inadequacy of the general laws in providing any suitable system of schools, and had asked and received special charters from the state. By 1840 a number of municipalities had organized their schools under special charters, and in the years from 1840 to 1850 there was a general awakening in the urban communities to the need of better provi- sion for public schools. This aroused interest was shown in the school charters of Cin- cinnati, Toledo, Cleveland, Portsmouth, Zanesville, Dayton, Columbus, Mt. Vernon, and, finally, Akron, and the generalization of the "Akron Act" in such form that all municipalities in the state — of 200 or more inhabitants — could make use of it. There was much that was progressive and enlightened for the period in the legislation for Ohio's cities and towns from about 1830 to 1850. The one great lack — found in all Ohio's school legisla- tion prior to 1850, and for a half-century after that — was the lack of any form of compulsion. The general applications of the laws for municipalities were wholly permissive in character. They ' U.S. Census Reports, 1830, 1840, 1850. 2 Ohio Documents, 36th G.A., Doc. 17, p. 10. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 47 simply pointed out ways in which the schools could be legally established and organized, but, however excellent and needed these ways might be, no municipality was under the slightest compulsion to follow them. The earliest special legislation for towns is found in the case of Marietta.^ The legislature in 1825 granted her the right to vote in town meeting a sum for the support of schools. There was no further legislation for Marietta until 1841,^ when an act was passed dividing the town, which had been united into one district by the law of 1838, into separate districts again, with three directors for each, and the ordinary rural district system. Cincinnati. — Cincinnati was the leader in all the early efforts for better educational conditions. In 1829^ she set an example to the rest of the state by securing a school charter that gave the city an organized, tax-supported, free system of common schools. This charter divided the city into ten districts, two for each ward, and provided for the building in each district of a two-story building of brick or stone. The city council was required to provide at the expense of the city for the support of common schools, and to levy a tax of one mill on all the property of the city as long as needed to defray the expense of acquiring sites and erecting buildings, and an additional tax of one mill for the support of schools. The voters in each ward elected annually a trustee and visitor of common schools. The persons so elected constituted the Board of Trustees and Visitors of Common Schools, and had general super- vision of school affairs. They were authorized to employ teachers and to visit schools as often as once a month. They also were to appoint six examiners and inspectors, whose duty it was to examine and certify teachers, and to visit and inspect schools. Once a year a public examination of the schools was to be given under the direction of the mayor, the Board of Trustees and Visitors, and the Board of Examiners. The schools were to be open at least six months of each year, and to be free to all white children. Black and mulatto children were specifically excluded. Reading, writing, spelling, and arithmetic made up the curriculum. 1 O.L., XXIII, local, 65. 2 O.L., XXXIX, local, 22. ' O.L., XXVII, 33. 48 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO While numerous amendments occur, there are few significant changes before 1850. In 1840^ German schools were established, and evening schools provided for "such male youth over twelve years of age as are prevented by their daily avocation from attend- ing day schools." The latter schools were to be open in the months of November, December, January, and February. In 1845- the trustees were authorized to divide the city into suitable districts without reference to ward boundaries, and in 1846^ they were given power to establish such other grade of schools as might seem necessary and have such other studies taught therein as they might prescribe. In 1850^ provision was made for the annual election by the qualified voters of a "Superintendent of Common Schools, whose duty it shall be to visit and superintend all the common schools in said city, to establish courses of study, and perform such other duties as the Board may prescribe." City of Ohio and Toledo. — In 1836^ and 1837^ the city councils in these two cities were given general superintendence over the common schools, with power to divide the city into districts, to erect school buildings, and to make provision for the government and instruction of children therein. It was left wholly optional to the city council as to what should be done. Cleveland. — Provision for the government of the Cleveland schools was included in the city charter, adopted in 1836.'' The provisions were quite similar to the Cincinnati plan. The council appointed one person from each ward instead of the voters electing as in Cincinnati. The people so appointed constituted the Board of Managers of Common Schools. In 1848^ the Board of Managers was made five for the entire city instead of one from each ward, and the council was authorized to establish a high school, for which purpose the city was to con- stitute one high-school district. Portsmouth and Zanesville. — In 1838^ the city charter of Ports- mouth was amended to include most of the provisions of the Cin- > O.L., XXXVIII, local, 157. 2 0.L.,XLIII, local, 413. 3 0.L.,XLIV, local, 91. ^ O.L., XLVIII, local, 662. * O.L., XXXIV, local, 226. « O.L., XXXV, local, 32. ^O.L., XXXIV, local, 271. 8 O.L., XLVI, local, 150. 9 O.L., XXXVI, local, 329. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 49 cinnati plan, and in the following year^ the city of Zanesville secured a charter for the support of schools that had many similar features. The Zanesville charter provided for the election of six directors to be known as the Board of Education. The schools were to be kept in constant operation except for "reasonable vaca- tions," and any deficiency in funds sufficient to keep the schools in constant operation was raised by a levy upon the parents. The board was allowed to exempt indigent students from payment of school fees. General law for cities and towns before the Akron Act. — The general law of 1838^ made each incorporated city, town, or borough, not specially regulated by charter, a separate school district. The voters in such a district elected three directors, who were given corporate authority and power to increase the number of directors so that there might be one for each subdistrict. They were author- ized to divide the territory for which they were responsible and to establish schools of different grades therein. The question of an additional tax to furnish a school at least six months each year was to be decided by the vote of the community. The general law, as was so usual in Ohio legislation, merely pointed the way, but did not attempt to enforce the organization of city and town schools. The one compulsory feature that appears occurred the next year, 1839,^ and stated that in towns, cities, and boroughs it was the duty of the directors to provide a sufficient number of night schools for the male youth over twelve years of age whose "daily avocation" kept them from attending day schools. While this law was com- pulsory in form, there was no machinery devised for its enforcement. Dayton, Columbus, and Alt. Vernon.— In 1841* and 1845^ the cities of Dayton, Columbus, and Mt. Vernon were granted special charters for the government of their schools. Dayton and Colum- bus each continued the principle of school rates in addition to taxa- tion. The schools were to be kept in constant operation except for vacations, and any deficiency made up by a levy on the parents. The general features of control were similar to the Cincinnati plan. The Mt. Vernon charter retained the district system and made each council member a special school director for his ward. Build- " O.L., XXXVII, local, 194. ^O.L., XXXVI, 21. 'O.L., XXXVII, 61. * O.L., XXXIX, local, 135. ^ O.L., XLIII, local, 57; O.L., XLIII, local, 150. 50 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO ing taxes were to be collected from the subdistricts in which the buildings were erected, and were not assessed on the property of the city in general. Akron. — In 1847^ Akron secured school legislation that was especially significant, as the legislature the following year- allowed cities, towns, and villages to adopt the provisions of the act and its amendments on petition of two- thirds of the voters, and in 1849' enacted most of its provisions into a general law. By this means the Akron law became the plan usually followed in the establish- ment of graded schools in Ohio. This legislation is of sufficient importance to merit a brief description of the steps that were taken in securing it, and the school conditions in Akron preceding its enactment. The description, with some omissions, is the one given by Judge Bryan in an "Historical Sketch of the Akron Public Schools." In 1846 there were within the incorporated limits of the village of Akron six hundred and ninety children between the ages of four and sixteen. Of this number there was an average attendance at the public and other schools the year through of not more than three hundred and seventy-five. During the sununer of 1846 one of the district schools was taught in the back-room of a dwelling house. Another was taught in an uncouth, inconvenient and uncom- fortable building gratuitously furnished by Captain Howe for the use of the district. There were private schools, but these were taught in rooms temporarily hired and unsuited for the purpose in many respects It was, in view of this state of things, that Reverend I. Jennings, then a young man and pastor of the Congregational Church of Akron, self-moved, set himself to reorganize the common schools of Akron. There were many friends of a better education in the place who co-operated with Mr. Jennings, and on the 16th day of May, 1846, at a public meeting of the citizens, a committee was appointed of which he was chairman "to take into consideration our present educational provisions and the improvement, if any, which may be made therein."' As a result of this interest, a committee of three was appointed to draw up plans and secure necessary legislation. The plan of the committee was as follows : 1. Let the whole village be incorporated into one school district. 2. Let there be established six primary schools in different parts of the village so as best to accommodate the whole. * O.L., XLV, local, 187. '^ O.L., XLVI, 48. 'O.L., XLVII, 22. * Historical Sketches of Public Schools in Cities, Villages, and Townships oj the State of Ohio. Bryan, "Historical Sketch of the Akron Public Schools," pp. 1-28. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 51 3. Let there be one grammar school centrally located where instruction may be given in the various studies and parts of studies not provided for in the primary schools and yet requisite to a respectable English education. 4. Let there be gratuitous admission to each school in the system for the children of residents, with the following restrictions, viz. : No pupil shall be admitted to the grammar schools who fails to sustain a thorough examination in the primary school, and the teachers shall have power with the advice of the superintendents to exclude for misconduct in extreme cases, and to classify the pupils as the best good of the schools may seem to require. 5. The expense of establishing and sustaining this system of schools shall be provided for: first, by appropriating all the school money the inhabitants of the village are entitled to, and whatever funds or property may be at the disposal of the board for this purpose; secondly, by a tax to be levied by the Common Council upon the taxable property of this village for the balance. 6. Let six superintendents be chosen by the Common Council, who shall be charged with perfecting the system thus generally defined, the bringing of it into operation, and the control of it when brought into operation. Let the six superintendents be so chosen that the term of office of two of them shall expire each year. The essential provisions of the plan adopted by this committee were incorporated in the law enacted February 8, 1847.- The more important features of this law may be summarized as follows : 1. The election of a board of education of six members, which should have full control of school property and school funds. 2. The incorporation of the city into one school district. 3. Provision for six or more primary schools and one central grammar school to teach "subjects requisite to a respectable En- glish Education." 4. Free admission to all schools. 5. Examinations for promotion, and teachers given the power to classify pupils. 6. Assessment as a tax by the city council of the amount estimated by the board for erecting schoolhouses and for conducting the schools. ' O.L., XLV, local, 187. 52 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO 7. All school property vested in the city council. 8. Three examiners appointed by the council. 9. Annual public examinations. In the original law there was no limit placed on the amount that might be estimated as necessary for school expense by the Board of Education, and the law directed the council to levy the estimate as a tax. In 1848/ in order to make a concession that would meet the objection of the property-owners who opposed this feature, the maximum tax that might be raised in any one year for current expense was placed at four mills. The power of making the levy was taken from the council and placed in the hands of the Board of Education, which reported its estimate direct to the county auditor, who was directed to assess the amount in the same manner as other taxes. On February 14, 1848," the act was extended to any incor- porated town, city, or borough in the state upon petition of two- thirds of the qualified voters. This required too large a majority to allow the act to be adopted in localities where there was not an overwhelming sentiment in favor of better school conditions, and in the following year^ a general act was passed for cities and towns which might be adopted by a majority vote. The main provisions of this act were similar to the Akron laws, as may be seen by inspec- tion of its chief features: 1. Any incorporated city, town, or village including within its limits and the territory attached, for school purposes, two hundred inhabitants might organize into a single school district. 2. The question of adopting the law to be decided by a majority vote of the community. 3. A board of education of six members elected by the voters. 4. Building expenses and purchase of sites to be decided by popular vote. When so decided and reported to the county audi- tor, the amount to be levied as a tax upon the property of the community. 5. Primary and graded schools provided for. No language other than English or German to be taught. 6. Schools to be free to all children in the district. * O.L., XLVI, local, 40. " O.L., XLVI, 48. ^O.L., XLVII, 22. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL SYSTEM 53 7. Schools to be kept in operation not less than thirty-six nor more than forty-four weeks each year. 8. Board of education to estimate the amount needed for running expenses not to exceed a four-mill tax annually. Auditor to levy the amount estimated as a tax. 9. If the amount raised is insufficient to keep the schools open thirty-six weeks, the balance to be raised by school rates on the parents. Indigent pupils exempt from such rates. 10. A board of three examiners to be appointed by the school board. In 1850^ the provisions of this act were extended to townships and to special districts, provided such township or district had five hundred inhabitants. The question of the adoption of the law was left, as in the case of towns, to the majority vote of the territory interested. By far the most interesting and significant feature in the edu- cational legislation of Ohio in the years just preceding 1850 are these laws passed for towns and cities. They indicate an awakening in the urban districts to the need of universal free education. Cin- cinnati had pointed the way to the other cities of the state since 1829, and had been followed by a considerable number of munici- palities. The law passed for the benefit of Akron came when the social consciousness of towns and cities was ready for it, and the legislature responded to this sentiment by allowing communities to adopt its provisions, at first by a majority of two-thirds, but within a year by a simple majority.^ The state made possible a town or city system that, on the whole, was an excellent system for the period, but the question of organizing under the system was left wholly to the educational interests or municipal pride of the individual communities. » O.L., XLVni, 40. ^ Not all towns that adopted it were satisfied. Between 1847 and 1850 three special acts were passed repealing the provisions of the Akron law in the case of three towns that adopted it. Seven other special acts for schools in towns and cities were passed in these three years to meet the desires of municipalities that wished certain different features. CHAPTER III THE PUBLIC-SCHOOL LANDS An enormous mass of legislation was passed by the General Assembly of Ohio, between the years 1803 and 1850, concerning the state school lands. Many of these laws were general in char- acter, many applied to large individual tracts such as the Western Reserve, the Virginia Military Reserve, the United States Military Lands, and the Ohio Company and Symmes Purchases, and in addition to these there were approximately five hundred that were wholly local or special in their application. A brief description of the more important of these reserves and purchases, some explanation of the various systems of survey used in Ohio, an account of the varying nature of the school grant in these different divisions, and a study of the accompanying maps and diagrams are an almost necessary prerequisite to any clear understanding of this legislation. The most important of these grants, with their total acreage, including the school lands, are as follows:^ Acres The Virginia Military Reserve 4,204,800 The Western Reserve 3,840,000 The United States Military Lands 2,560,000 The Ohio Company's Purchase 1,227,168 The Symmes Purchase 311,682 In addition to these there were a number of smaller tracts, but the names of only two of them appear in the discussion of the school land legislation. These two were the Refugee Tract, 138,240 acres, and the Moravian Tract,^ 12,000 acres. Over 12,000,000 acres were included in these various special districts. The remaining portions of the state were known as Congress Lands, and belonged to the federal government.^ That portion of the government land which lay on the eastern border of the state, just south of the Western Reserve, was the first to be ' A. A. Graham, "The Land and Township System of Ohio," A nnual Report of the Secretary of Slate to the Governor of the State of Ohio for the Year ISS5, pp. 22, 23, 25, 29. 2 F. H. Swift, A Ilistory of Public Permanent Common School Funds in the United States, 1795-1905, p. 370. ' The Indians still had title to lands in the state. Most of these titles were vested in the government by 1817, but the last titles were not stilled until 1842 (A. A. Graham, "The Land and Township System of Ohio," Annual Report of the Secretary of State to the Governor of the Stale of Ohio for the Year 1SS5, p. 28). 54 PUBLIC-SCHOOL LANDS 55 Fig. 1. — Land grants and Congress lands in Ohio 56 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO ] [ II 36 30 24 18 12 6 6 5 4 3 2 1 35 29 23 17 11 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 34 28 22 16 10 4 18 17 16 15 14 13 33 27 21 15 9 3 19 20 21 22 23 24 32 26 20 14 8 2 30 29 28 27 26 25 31 25 19 13 7 1 31 32 33 34 35 36 III IV 2 1 3 4 3 2 4 1 Fig. 2. — Methods of surveying Ohio lands PUBLIC-SCHOOL LANDS 57 surveyed into townships, and was commonly spoken of as the Seven Ranges, because seven ranges of townships west from the Pennsylvania line were included in this first survey.^ It has already been pointed out that a state-wide grant of land for school purposes began with Ohio's admission as a state, and that the precedent thus established has been followed in admitting all the later states.^ It is also true that the rectangular method of laying out townships with meridian lines, sections, towns, and ranges was first practiced in the Ohio surveys,' and the method here established became, too, the universal practice in all sub- sequent government surveys. Two great American inventions were thus first tried in Ohio — the state-wide grant of school lands, and the rectangular method of survey into six-mile square townships, with thirty-six sections, of one mile square, in each. Ohio was not only the first state to receive Section 16^ as a school grant; it was the first state to have any Section 16. The surveys in Ohio, however, were not all uniform in the method of laying out and subdividing the townships. The Seven Ranges, as has been said, were first surveyed. The townships here were laid out six miles square, and divided into thirty-six sections, each one mile square, but the numbering of the sections differs from that in the later surveys. The numbering was that shown on page 56, Fig. I. Section 1 is located in the lower south- east corner of the township, and the sections are numbered upward, in tiers of six, from the base line of the township. This method of laying out townships and numbering sections was also used in the Ohio Company and Symmes Purchases. In the Western Reserve and the United States Military Lands the townships were laid out in five-mile squares instead of six, and at first were not surveyed into sections, but simply divided into four 20,000-acre blocks in each township and these numbered as shown in the diagram on page 56, Fig. IV. The Virginia Military District is the only part of Ohio in which the rectangular system of survey was not employed. The early 1 A. A. Graham, "The Land and Township System of Ohio," Annual Report of the Secretary of State to the Governor of the State of Ohio for the Year 1885, p. 20. ^ See page 6. ^ Western Reserve Historical Society Tracts, II, 188. * Section 16 was the section reserved for school purposes in each township in the "Congress Lands" of Ohio and in the Ohio Company and Symmes Purchases. The precedent established has been followed in all the later states, and Section 16 has regularly been the school section. Since 1848, with the admission of Oregon, Section 36 has been added to the school grant. 58 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO settlers here chose each "for himself his lands, locating them by any natural boundary, however irregular it might be, taking care only to get the full amount of land demanded by the warrants."^ "This led to no regular survey, and, as a consequence, an irregularity in township and county lines followed, which were generally based on the boundaries of the warrants." The rest of the state was made up of Congress Lands, and in all of these the method of survey was that of the six-mile square town- ship, and the division into sections. The manner of numbering the sections was changed from that in the Seven Ranges and in the Ohio Company and Symmes l^urchases. Section 1 in these lands is located in the upper right-hand cor- ner—the northeast corner — of the township, and the sections are numbered to the west and east alternately, Section 6 lying in the northwest corner of the township, and Section 7 located just be- neath Section 6 and numbering back to the east again, as shown in the diagram on page 56, Fig. II. This method of numbering was settled by federal legislation in 1799- and has remained the same since that time. The Land Ordinance of 1785-'' "for ascertaining the mode of disposing of lands in the Western Territory," provided that "there shall be reserved the lot No. 16 of every township for the main- tenance of public schools within said township." In accordance with this provision, as has been seen. Section 16 was reserved for schools in both the Ohio Company and Symmes Purchases. In these two tracts there is also found a reservation for religion as well as for education, a thing not true elsewhere in the state. As a part of the bargain in the purchase of these lands Section 29 in each township was granted by the government to the purchasers for religious purposes, and these sections have ever since been known as the Ministerial Lands. When Ohio was admitted to the Union the provisions of the Ordinance of 1785, concerning school lands, were carried out as fully as possible in the rest of the state. In all of the Congress Lands Section 16 in each township was permanently reserved for 1 Annual Report of the Secretary of State to the Governor oj the State oj Ohio for the Year ISXS, p. 25. The stalcmcnts concerning the surveys in Ohio are in the main based on A. A. Graham's article on "The Land and Township System of Ohio," Annual Report of the Secretary of Stale to the Governor of the Stale of Ohio for the Year 1SS5, pp. 18-29, and Col. Charles Whittlesey's discussions on "Surveys of Public Land in Ohio," Western Reserve Historical Society Tracts, U, 187-91 and 281-86. ^ Western Reserve Historical Society Tracts, II, 282. * T. Donaldson, The Public Domain, chap. xiii. PUBLIC-SCHOOL LANDS 59 the schools of the township. It was not in the power of Congress to grant Section 16 in such tracts as the Western Reserve, the Virginia MiHtary Reserve, and the United States MiHtary Lands. These lands either did not belong to the federal government or there were prior claims and unsatisfied land warrants that stood in the way of any such granting of specific sections. The United States did not own the land on the Western Reserve, and in the case of the so-called Military Lands the private ownership of much of the land, through the taking up of land scrip or bounties by the soldiers of the Revolu- tion, in the service of the federal government and Virginia, might conflict in any township. For this reason the assigning of school land in these portions of the state could not take the form of reserving Section 16 in each township. Some other method of setting aside one thirty-sixth part of the land for the use of the schools in these regions had to be devised. The land originally reserved for schools in the Virginia Military Lands was, in amount, one thirty-sixth of the entire tract, to be selected by the legislature of Ohio from the unlocated lands, after the warrants issued by the state of Virginia had been satisfied.^ In 1807^ Congress, in response to a petition from the state legislature,^ appropriated eighteen quarter-townships and three sections in lieu of the original grant. These new lands, however, were not located within the Reserve itself, but to the northeast, between the Western Reserve and the United States Military Reserve. This territory was in Congress Lands, title to which had been purchased from the Indians. In two very significant ways a grant of this kind differed from the grant of Section 16 in each township. In the first place, an assignment of this character could not be made for the township individually, but had to be for the schools of the Virginia Military Reserve as a whole. Secondly, the school lands were at a distance, and not something immediately at hand and under the observation of all as in the case of Section 16 in each township. Something of this same sort was true in the case of each of the other large reserves, and this was bound to be reflected in some differences in legislation concerning these various grants. ^ U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. II, 225. 2 Nashee, A Compilation of Laws, Treaties and Ordinances Which Relate to Lands in the State of Ohio, p. 157. ^O.L., V, 132. 60 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO The land reserved for the United States Mihtary Tract^ was similarly assigned by quarter-townships, but the reservation was made within the United States Military Lands themselves. The amount of the grant in this case was fourteen quarter-townships. It must be remembered in comparing this grant or that of the Western Reserve with those of other parts of the state that the townships in these two regions contain only twenty-five square miles, as compared with thirty-six elsewhere. The school lands first selected for the Western Reserve consisted of fourteen quarter-townships, not located in the Reserve itself, but in the United States Military Lands. To this was added by the act of Congress in 1834^ land that amounted to 37,758 acres, to be selected from the unlocated lands of the United States within the state, by sections, half-sections, and quarter-sections. This additional grant of 1834 was in lieu of one thirty-sixth part of that land in the Western Reserve, which belonged to the Indian tribes when Ohio was admitted, but the Indian title to which had been extinguished in 1805. The Moravian Tract, mentioned once or twice in the legislation, was a comparatively small reserve of 12,000 acres in Tuscarawas County, originally granted by Congress to the Society of United Brethren, in trust for Christian Indians. These lands reverted to the United States in 1824, and in the same year Congress^ set aside one thirty-sixth part of the tract for the use of schools. The location of the more important of these various tracts can be most easily gained by consulting the map on page 55. The Western Reserve is a strip of land on the northern boundary of the state approximately thirty-five miles wide and one hundred and twenty miles long, extending west from the Pennsylvania border. It was this land, which Connecticut claimed and to which she refused to cede her interests when the other states were yielding their claims in the Northwest Territory to the United States, that was known as the Connecticut Western Reserve, or, more generally, simply as the Western Reserve. The Virginia Military District is located between the Scioto and Little Miami rivers, projecting to the northward considerably past the middle of the state. It takes its name from the fact that * U. S. Statutes at Large, Vol. II, 225. 2/6«0.L.,XIX, 161. 66 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO Lands, Section 29, in the Symmes and Ohio Company Purchases, this plan had been adopted as early as 1806.^ The first school land to be so leased was the section belonging to the town of Marietta in I8O8.2 From this time until it became a general policy, the wishes or needs of various communities were met by these special legislative actions. It is interesting to note that in ten of the twenty-five acts so passed the reason assigned is the establishment of a flour mill, sawmill, or similar industry. In these cases Section 16 evidently furnished desirable mill sites and water power, but lessees were unwilling to erect mills, so essential to newly settled communities, without some guaranty of per- manence. In general, the policy of permanent leasing was found undesir- able. From the present standpoint it can be seen that if it had been persisted in, and the leasing and revaluation had been carefully managed, it would have preserved to the state a school property of enormous value, which would eventually have produced an income far in excess of the method of selling the lands and funding the proceeds. From the standpoint of the men of that time it was found undesirable because it did not succeed in producing any adequate revenue then for the schools. Land was abundant and cheap. Money for the support of schools was scarce. The state was rapidly filling up,^ but desirable settlers preferred to obtain land in fee simple. It doubtless appeared to those most friendly toward schools and education that it would be more desirable to take advantage of the opportunity to sell, getting the best terms possible and assuring to the schools some definite support from the grant that had been made. Up to this time the actual revenue derived from the lands had been very small. ^ Caleb Atwater, of Cincinnati, a warm friend of the schools, as chairman of a committee in the Lower House, said in a report to the Assembly in 1822: From all the committee have been able to learn it would seem^ that more money has been expended by the state in legislating concerning these lands than they have yet or ever will produce, unless some other method of managing them 1 O.L., IV, 38. ^O.L., VI, 96. ' See p. 4. * Atwater, speaking of the first eighteen years of the state's history, said: "Scarcely a dollar was ever paid over to the people for whose benefit the land had been given" (Atwater, A History of the State of Ohio, Natural and Civil, p. 253). !■ Ibid., p. 25S. PUBLIC-SCHOOL LANDS 67 be devised than any hitherto pursued The committee are impressed with the belief that unless these lands are soon sold .... no good and much evil will accrue to the state from the grant of these lands by Congress. He was not alone in his opinion. A memorial addressed to Congress by the General Assembly in the same year/ speaking of school lands in general in the West, said that these lands had as yet been very unproductive, and while the legislatures of the states in which they are situated are restricted by the conditions attached to these grants they must ever be so. Indeed, it may well be doubted whether more money has not been spent than the whole amount derived from the lands. The legislature at this session was evidently impressed by Atwater's report and convinced that the policy of leasing under any of the plans tried was a failure. The lands belonging to the Western Reserve were still being leased on temporary leases with a maximum of fifteen years' duration. Throughout the rest of the state the policy of permanent leasing was the authorized method. The unleased lands belonging to the Western Reserve were first withdrawn from leasing. This act, passed January 21, 1822,^ forbade any further leasing of unoccupied lands, and allowed occupied lands to be released not longer than to April 1, 1826. The following year, January 27, 1823,^ the legislature authorized the surrender of leases for school lands throughout the entire state, and forbade the granting of any new leases for a period of one year. The intent of this law was evidently not to compel a surrender of leases, but to provide a way in which they might be legally ter- minated at the desire of the lessee, with a prospect of sale in fee simple at some future time. This same act directed the various county auditors and the register of school lands in the United States Military District to make a complete report to the auditor of state showing "the whole amount of school lands in each county, what proportion is leased, what is vacant, how the lands are divided, distinguishing each tract by the number of acres, range, township, section and quarter, showing what parts are leased, what rent is reserved on each tract leased, how long the lease is to run, whether renewable, and if so, whether subject to reappraisement." * O.L., XX, 64. 2 O.L., XX, 34. 2 O.L., XXI, 33. 68 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO It is evident that neither the legislature nor any state officer knew just what the situation was in regard to school lands through- out the state. This lack of information was the natural result of the various policies adopted for handling the lands. In organized townships the township trustees were in charge of the leasing and in unorganized townships, the county commissioners. In the United States Military District the Court of Common Pleas super- vised the leasing of both the lands reserved for that district and those belonging to the Western Reserve, while in the Virginia Military District a land officer, appointed by the General Assembly, was in charge. There was no central office or body which had general supervision except the legislature itself. This body now felt the necessity of a general change of policy, but found that it lacked information as to what had already been done. The cessation of leasing and the acquiring of the information desired prepared the way for this general change in policy. It was felt that more advantageous results could be obtained by selling the lands outright, but there was doubt in the minds of the legisla- tors as to the authority of the state to permit the lands to be dis- posed of in this way. By the terms of the original grant, the lands had been set aside for the use of schools in the particular townships and districts forever. While the general management of the trust was vested in the legislature, it seemed doubtful if actual alienation of the lands was originally contemplated, even though the funds should be permanently invested for the use of schools. In 1824,^ a carefully phrased memorial was submitted to Con- gress, asking, first, for an additional grant of land for the use of schools in the Western Reserve,^ and, secondly, that Congress confirm the right of the state of Ohio to sell the school lands. As an indication of the sentiment of the time it is an interesting docu- ment. It shows, first, that the general attitude of the state toward the grant from the United States was that the lands had been ceded by the United States in return for certain concessions made by Ohio, and, secondly, the difficulties that inhered in the attempt to derive a revenue from the lands themselves. The memorial argues * O.L., XXII, local, 153. ^ When the original grant was made for the Western Reserve, no lands were set aside for the use of schools in the lands then held by the Indian tribes within the Reserve. When the Indian title was extin- guished, Ohio immediately asked for an additional grant equal to one thirty-sixth part of the land so held. This grant was finally made by Congress in 1834. (U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. IV, 679.) PUBLIC-SCHOOL LANDS 69 that the original grants were in the nature of a compact made with the state and were "granted upon full consideration arising from the increased value of the remaining lands belonging to the United States and also from the relinquishment, on the part of the state of Ohio, of the right to tax the lands of the United States within the state of Ohio until five years after the sale thereof"; "that it was the intention of the parties to the compact aforesaid that one thirty-sixth part of all the lands within the state of Ohio should be granted to the people thereof for the use of common schools, and should be placed under the control of the legislature," and that the state is of right entitled to the additional grant for the Western Reserve. The memorial goes on to say that, in relation to the lands already appropriated, the legislature has "resorted to various methods of rendering them productive, and, in particular, that of leasing them to such individuals as have applied therefor; that experience has fully demonstrated that this fund will be wholly unavailing in their hands in its present shape"; that to accomplish the objects contem- plated "the legislature should possess unlimited control over the lands" with the power of disposing of them in fee. "The objections which are urged against the present mode of administering that fund are in the first place that by reason of the facilities which the state of Ohio affords for acquiring property in real estate, a necessity exists of leasing the lands to persons almost destitute of pecuniary means whereby the avails of these lands are rendered, at least, uncertain. In consequence also, that as these lands are detached over the whole of the state of Ohio, the expense which must necessarily be incurred by creating a superintendence over them renders them less productive than your memorialists conceive they might be rendered if the lands were sold and the proceeds concentrated in one fund." "The fact, also, before adverted to, that these lands must necessarily be entrusted to the possession of those of the lowest class of the community, and who possess no permanent interest in the soil, has produced a waste upon these lands of their timber and otherwise, equal perhaps to the whole revenue which may have been derived from them." The memorial recites further that the method of leasing "will invite and retain a population within her boundaries of a character not to be desired and in amount so great as to create an evil which 70 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO can only be conceived of in a country where every individual posses- sing a very moderate portion of industry and economy may, within a single year, appropriate to himself in fee a quantity of land sufificient to furnish means of support for an ordinary family." The memorial continues by saying "that these evils arise wholly from the system of granting leases and are such as cannot be remedied by legislative action, if, as some have supposed, the state have not the power, under the terms of the original grant, of dis- posing of these lands in fee." The memorialists believe that the state has the right, but "they are of the opinion that an act of the Congress of the United States declaratory of the extent of the grant aforesaid will be productive of much benefit in case the legislature of the state should hereafter determine to dispose of the same; that it will have the full effect of removing the doubt in the minds of the purchasers and thereby enhance the price which will be obtained for the same." They therefore asked Congress to grant them the right to dis- pose of the lands in fee, the proceeds to be invested in a permanent fund, the income of which should be applied for the use of common schools in the townships or districts to which the lands were orig- inally granted, provided that Section 16 should not be sold without the consent of the inhabitants of the township to which the land belonged. Congress passed the desired legislation February 1, 1826,^ and on January 27, 1827,^ the legislature passed an act directing each township in the state possessing school land to vote upon the ques- tion of its sale, and also authorizing the inhabitants of the United States Military Districf and the Virginia Military District* to decide the same question. Legislation authorizing a vote on the Western Reserve'' was not passed until the following year. In the meantime the policy of special legislation to meet local needs had continued. From 1817 to 1823,^ the period of permanent leasing, twenty-one local acts had been passed making special provisions for leasing or extending the time for making payments • U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. IV, 138. 2 0.L.,XXV. 56. 'O.L.,XXV, 10.?. * O.L., XXV, local, 4.S. *0.L., XXVI, local, 135. *0.L., XIX, 35, 72, 75 are e.xamples. PUBLIC-SCHOOL LANDS 71 on leases, and from 1823 to 1827 eleven more acts were passed authorizing the revaluation of lands leased, changing the conditions for lessees, or authorizing short-time leases, etc. The general policy inaugurated by the legislation of 1827 and 1828 remained the policy of the state until 1850, though certain changes were made correcting some of the more undesirable features. The legislation of 1827 provided that the townships or districts interested should decide upon the sale of their school lands and described the method by which the sale was to be made in case the vote was favorable. It did not actually authorize the sale. This was to be done after the vote was taken by additional acts of the legislature, or in the case of the United States Military District by proclamation of the governor. The provisions governing the sale were as follows: Land that was unoccupied was to be appraised by the county assessor. The land was then advertised and offered for sale to the highest bidder by the county auditor. No bid could be received for less than appraised value. Payments were made to the county treasurer, and the money received by him was deposited with the state treasurer to the credit of the township or district to which it had belonged. When the money was all paid, the pur- chaser received a deed from the state. It was in the legislation concerning the occupied lands that the greatest loss occurred to the state. Holders of permanent leases were allowed to surrender their leases, and by the payment of the appraised value upon which it had been originally leased receive a deed in fee simple. The terms of payment were easy, running over periods of seven to ten years, and by subsequent legislation further extended in many cases. The following year, 1828,' the legislature authorized sales to be made in thirty-nine counties in which the vote had been favorable. From this time until 1850 there was a constant succession of local acts authorizing sales in various townships and counties; making provisions for leasing lands where the assent was not given to the sale; authorizing revaluation of lands where lessees thought the original valuation was too high, or the townships considered it too low; giving additional time in which to make the payments due; and in general enacting various laws that had only local application. Between 1827 and 1850 approximately four hundred such acts were > O.L., XXVI. local, 4. 72 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO passed. In 1828^ those townships that had not voted to sell their school lands were authorized to lease it for periods of not less than three years for improved lands nor seven years for unimproved lands. In case the consent of the townships had been given and the lands remained unsold, they might be leased from year to year on the best terms obtainable. The entire arrangement and responsi- bility were placed in the hands of the township trustees. In 1838,^ largely through the influence of Samuel Lewis, the state superin- tendent of schools, the practice of allowing the holders of permanent leases to surrender their leases, and, by payment of the first ap- praised value, receive a deed in fee simple, was stopped, and by an act of 1843' such surrender was authorized only upon the land being reappraised and the amount of its new valuation paid. From 1839'' on it was a common practice to include a minimum price below which the land could not be sold, and in 1845^ a general act was passed forbidding the sale of any school land in the state for less than fiVe dollars an acre. This act of 1845 is the last important school land legislation during the period 1803-1850. SUMMARY The Inst attempt of the legislature was to preserve the lands and make them productive through a system of short-term leases which provided for the payment of rents through improvements made upon the lands. This system was followed until 1817 with the exception of the land belonging to the Virginia Military District. The system of temporary leasing was found unsatisfactory, and in 1817 the state embarked on the policy of authorizing permanent leases with a revaluation of lands at periods of thirty to thirty-five years. This system also proved unsatisfactory in practice. From 1827 on the state legalized the sale of school lands in fee simple, but allowed the local community to decide whether the lands should be sold, and in case they were not, the management was left in the hands of the township trustees, with certain limita- tions as to the length of time for which leases might be granted. The money from lands sold was paid through the county treasurer's > O.L., XXVI, 80. » O.L., XXXVI, 63. » O.L., XLl, 20. ^.n,, of the incorporation the trustees were directed t(j confine instruction to "the common and necessary branches of an English education" and not to extend it to the higher branches of such an education until the funds were sufficient to provide for all the poor children in the city. The total number of secondary schools incorporated from 1803 to 1850 was 172, classed as follows: Academies— 1803-10 4 1811-20 8 1821-30 10 1831-40 44 1841-50 27 93 Seminaries — 1803-10 1 1811-20 1 1821-30 1831-40 20 1841-50 10 Institutes— 1803-30 1831-40 13 1841-50 17 High schools— 1803-20 1821-30 1 1831-40 8 1841-50 5 32 30 14 ' O.L., XXVIII, local, 116. ^'O.L., XXIX, local, 43. " O.L., XXV. local, 62. 78 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO Boarding school 1 Universal school 1 Independent school 1 3 Total 172 The names of these schools and the dates of their incorporation arranged in chronological order are shown on pages 78-83 and their location is shown on the map that accompanies this list. The Erie Literary Society, located at Burton, on the Western Reserve, leads the list in 1803, followed by academies in Dayton, Worthington, and Chillicothe in 1808. The Western Reserve far outstrips any other section of the state in the number of these institutions, having more than three times as many as any other section. The map shows, however, that with the exception of the western portion of the state, where the settlements were much later, these schools were fairly abundant in all parts of Ohio. The ambitious boy or girl had before him the incentive to a higher education than the common schools afforded and the possi- bility of attaining it without going to any great distance. The omnipresence of the Ohio man later in our country's history may be in no small part accounted for by the omnipresence of the Ohio academy and college. The list given and the institutions located on the map by no means give all schools of this type founded before 1850. Only those that received articles of incorporation from the state legisla- ture are here shown. Secondary Institutions in Order of Chartering, 1803-50 1. Erie Literary Society, Burton 1803 2. Dayton Academy 1808 3. Worthington Academy ^ 1808 4. Chillicothe Academy 1808 5. New Lisbon Academy 1810 6. Steubenville Academy 1811 7. Gallia Academy, Gallipolis 181 1 8. Cincinnati Lancaster Seminary 1815 9. Montgomery Academy 1816 10. Tallmadge Academy 1816 11. Florence Academy 1818 12. Cadiz Academy 1819 SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION 79 13. Union Academy, Muskingum County 1819 14. Lancaster Academy 1820 15. The Academy of Alma, New Athens 1822 16. Urbana Academy 1822 17. Rutland Academy 1822 18. Franklin Academy, Mansfield 1824 19. Norwalk Academy 1824 20. Belmont Academy, St. Clairsville 1824 21. Circleville Academy 1824 21J/^ Academy of Perry County 1827 22. Nelson Academy 1828 23. Hillsborough Academy 1829 24. The High School of Elyria 1830 25. Woodward High School, Cincinnati 1831 26. Columbus Female Academy 1831 27. Ashtabula Institution of Science and Industry 1831 28. Delaware Academy 1831 29. Kinsman Academy 1832 30. Canton Academy 1832 31. Farmington Academy 1832 32. Ashtabula Academy 1832 33. Huron Institute 1832 34. Chillicothe Female Seminary 1833 35. Ravenna Academy 1834 36. Union Academy, Wayne County 1834 37. Vinton Academy 1834 38. Springfield High School 1834 39. Female Academy of Mt. Vernon 1834 40. Stephen Strong's Manual Labor Seminary, Meigs County 1834 41. The Richmond Classical Institute 1835 42. Kingsville High School 1835 43. Conneaut Academy 1835 44. Windham Academy 1835 45. Granville Female Seminary 1835 46. Fellenburgh Institute, Brunswick, Medina County 1835 47. Western Female Seminary, Mansfield 1835 48. Wadsworth Academy 1835 49. Academic Institution of Richfield 1835 50. Hamilton and Rossville Female Academy 1835 51. Circleville Female Seminary 1835 52. Bishop's Fraternal Calvanistic Baptist Seminary, Athens County. . 1835 53. Universal School of Massillon 1835 54. Putnam Classical Institute 1836 55. Seneca County Academy 1836 56. Madison Liberal Institute , 1836 57. Wooster Academy 1836 58. Shaw Academy 1836 59. Academy of Sylvania 1836 80 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO .n^ J ^ Seminary A Institute •S High school Fig. 3. — Secondary institutions chartered in Ohio from 1803 to 1850 SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION XI 60. Granville Academy 1836 6 1 . Sharon Academy 1 836 62. Medina Academy 1836 63. Cieves Independent School 1836 64. Middieburg High School I {^3^-, 65. Warren Academy 1837 66. Sheffield Manual Labor Institute 1837 67. Neville Institute, Colimibiana County 1837 68. New I lagcrstown Academy I337 69. Berea Seminary 1837 70. Philomathean Literary Institute, Antrim I337 71. Monroe Seminary, Monroe County I837 72. Troy Academy J837 73. New Philadelphia Academy 1837 74. Massillon Academy 1837 75. C'leveland Female Seminary Ig37 76. Akron High School 1838 77. Cambridge Academy, Guernsey County 1838 78. Massillon I''emale .Seminary 1838 79. Western Reserve Wesleyan Seminary, Streetsborough 1838 80. Edinburgh Academy 1838 81. Wayne Academy Ig38 82. Norwalk Female Seminary 1838 83. Chester Academy, Geauga County 1838 84. Eaton Academy 1838 85. Sandusky Academy \S3S 86. Union Academy, Union County 1838 87. Dover Academy, Tuscarawas County 1838 88. Marion Academy, Marion County 1838 89. Bigelow High School, Xenia 1839 90. Martinsburg Academy, Knox County 1839 91. Blendon Young Men's .Seminary 1839 92. Ashland Academy, Richland County 1839 93. Western Reserve Teachers' Seminary, Kirtland 1839 94. Oxford Female Academy 1839 95. Asbury Seminary, Chagrin Falls 1839 96. Worthington Female .Seminary 1839 97. Universalist Institute, Ohio City 1839 98. Parkman Academy, (ieauga County 1839 99. Barncsville Male Academy 1839 100. Brooklyn Centre Academy 1839 101. Auglaize .Seminary, Wapakoneta 1839 102. Lithopolis Academy 1839 103. Meigs County High .School and Teachers' Institute 1839 104. Mt. Pleasant Boarding School 1839 105. Cuyahoga Falls Institute 1839 106. Ravenna Female Seminary 1839 107. New Hagerstown Female Seminary 1839 82 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO 108. Bascom Seminary of Waynesburg 1840 109. Greenfield Institute 1840 110. Streetsborough High School 1840 111. Willoughby Female Academy 1840 112. Protestant Methodist Academy of Brighton 1840 113. Edinburgh Academy 1841 114. Burlington Academy 1841 1 15. Athens Female Academy 1841 116. Canton Male Seminary 1841 117. Middletown Academy and Library Association 1841 118. Gustavus Academy 1841 119. Pine Grove Academy, Porter 1842 120. Canaan Union Academy 1842 121. Tallmadge Academical Institute 1842 122. Bath High School 1842 123. New Lisbon Academy 1843 124. St. Mary's Female Educational Institute, Cincinnati 1843 125. Maumee City Academy 1843 126. Lebanon Academy 1843 127. Oakland Female Seminary of Hillsborough 1843 128. West Lodi Academy 1844 129. Franklin Academy, Portage County 1844 130. Salem Academy 1844 131. Lorain Institute, Olmstead 1844 132. Waynesville Academy 1844 133. Keene Academy, Coshocton County 1844 134. Tallmadge Academical Institute, Second Incorporation 1845 135. Bedford Seminary 1845 136. Cincinnati Classical Academy 1845 137. Columbus Academical and Collegiate Institute 1845 138. Aurora Academical Institute, Portage County 1845 139. Cooper Female Academy, Dayton 1845 140. Akron Institute 1845 141. Rocky River Seminary 1845 142. Findlay Academical Institute 1845 143. Vermillion Institute, Haysville 1845 144. Cottage Hill Academy, Ellsworth 1845 145. Normal High School, Carroll County 1845 146. London Academy, Madison County 1845 147. West JefTerson Academical Institute 1845 148. Baldwin Institute, Middleburg 1845 149. Loudonville Academy 1846 150. Norwalk Institute 1846 151. Liverpool Seminary 1846 152. Mansfield Academical Institute 1847 153. Xenia Academy 1848 154. Richland Academic Institute 1848 155. Felicity Female Seminary, Clermont County 1848 SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION 83 155K- Medina Academy 1848 156. Oxford Female Institute 1849 157. Miller Academy, Washington 1849 158. Pomeroy Academy 1849 159. Springfield Female Seminary 1849 160. Cadiz High School 1849 161. Mansfield Female Seminary 1849 162. Mt. Pleasant Academy 1849 163. Elliott Female Seminary, Iberia 1850 164. Vinton High School 1850 165. Defiance Female Seminary 1850 166. Western Reserve Eclectic Institute, Hiram 1850 167. Tiffin Academy, Seneca County 1850 168. Xenia Female Academy 1850 169. Hartford High School 1850 170. Soeurs de Notre Dame Female Educational Institute, ChilHcothe. . 1850 School Companies and Associations 1. Union School Association, Harpersfield and Madison 1818 2. Milford Union School Society, Clermont County 1824 3. Jefferson School Association 1824 4. Literary Society of St. Joseph's (to erect academies) 1825 5. The Mesopotamia Central School Society 1826 6. Goshen School Association, Logan County 1828 7. Trustees of the Columbus Presbytery (to found an academy) 1829 8. The Education Society of Painesville 1829 9. The Bricksville Academical Association, Cuyahoga County 1831 10. St. Mary's Female Literary Society (to promote female education) 1B32 11. The German Lutheran Seminary of the German Lutheran Synod of Ohio and adjacent states (to promote learning, morality, religion) 1834 12. North Union School Association of Carroll County 1836 13. Rome Academical Company 1836 14. Springborough School Company, Warren County 1836 15. High Falls Primary Institute, Chagrin Falls (the education of youth) 1838 16. Newark Association for the Promotion of Education (to establish a high school) 1838 17. The Monroe Academical Association 1839 18. Harveysburg High School Company, Warren County 1839 19. Cincinnati New Jerusalem Church School Association 1841 20. Berkshire Education Society, Delaware County 1841 21. Western Reserve Freewill Baptist Academical Society (blacks and mulattoes not to be received on an equality with white persons) 1843 22. Sylvania High School Company, Lucas County 1844 23. Madison Education Society, Lake County 1846 There were also incorporated during the same period twenty- three school or education societies whose purpose was to found 84 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO academies or other schools, or in some way offer better educational facihties to the communities interested. The denominational influence does not seem to have been great in founding these secondary schools. Some twenty-one of the schools and societies are more or less denominational in control or in sympathy, as indicated by the act of incorporation or the name. In six cases the Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church either appointed the trustees or had some part in the appointment of them. The other schools and societies that show denominational influence are scattered among the Presbyterian, Baptist, Catholic, German Lutheran, and Quaker sects. It is true that prior to 1836 there were also eighty-four church incorpora- tions in which the churches were given a right to maintain a school by the articles of incorporation. The usual form in which this was done was by limiting the use of funds to the support of a church "and to any institution of charity or education connected there- with." In 1836' a general law was passed which gave any religious society incorporating after that date the right to apply property not exceeding an annual value of one thousand dollars to the sup- port of public worship and such institutions of learning and charity as might be connected with such society. How far the rights thus extended were used by the churches to found schools of secondary grade the laws themselves give no hint. Only a careful search of church records could do this. It is probable, however, that a secondary school of any importance would have followed the custom of the time and sought independent incorporation. The financial limitations both in special and in general acts would have prevented an extensive educational institution. The comparatively small denominational influence exerted on secondary schools was not due to any lack of religious or sectarian interest. Numerous sects and varied religious beliefs^ were com- mon, but this very multiplicity was a source of religious toleration, and in the founding of schools for the children of the community a common interest was found, in support of which the adherents of creeds that were not too divergent often united. There are frequent indications in the articles of incorporation of an effort to keep the schools free from any cause of religious >0.L., XXXIV, 17. * Chaddock. Ohio Before 1850. A Study of the Early Influence of Penttsylvania and Southern Popula- tions in Ohio, p. 313. SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION 85 controversy. Sections appear prohibiting the introduction or teaching of any religious tenets peculiar to any Christian sect.^ Sometimes there is recognition of the fact that there are other pos- sible causes of dissension, as when a clause appears providing that "no political, religious, moral or literary association shall have an ascendancy in the directory."^ The curriculum was not usually specified in the articles of incorporation, but was frequently hinted at in the right given to the trustees to determine what branches of the "arts and sciences" should be taught, or sometimes the phrase ran "learned languages, arts and sciences," or branches of a "polite and liberal education." The manual labor influence first appeared in 1834 with the incorporation of Stephen Strong's Manual Labor Seminary.' The Ashtabula Institution of Science and Industry had been founded as early as 1831,* but in 1835* the name was changed to the Grand River Institute, and there is nothing but the earlier name to indicate anything other than the ordinary secondary institution. The name of Pestalozzi's one-time associate, Fellenberg, was doubtless in the minds of the incorporators of the Fellenburgh Institute in Medina County in 1835,® though no mention is made of manual labor in the articles of incorporation. There are only four other secondary institutions whose articles of incorporation make any mention of this phase of education.' One of these, Bishop's Fraternal Calvanis- tic [sic] Seminary, chartered in 1835, specifies that there shall be manual labor for both males and females.* The only control the state exercised over these institutions was in limiting the amount of property they might hold, the amount of the annual income, or the amount of stock that might be issued. It was also common to find an express stipulation forbidding an incorporated company of this character to engage in the banking business or to issue any medium of exchange. The legislature, too, commonly reserved the right to alter the articles of incorpora- ' O.L., XIII, 132; O.L., XX, 11; O.L., XX, 27; O.L., XXII, 14. ^O.L., XIII, 132. 'O.L., XXXIII, local, 5. *0.L., XXIX, local, 137. 'O.L., XXXIII, local, 79. •O.L., XXXIII, local, 112. ' The Sheffield Manual Labor Institute, Bishop's Fraternal Calvanistic \sic] Seminary, the Huron Institute, and Kerea Seminary. *0.L., XXXIII, local, 328. 86 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO tion at any time, and in 1839^ a general act was passed to regulate incorporated literary societies, which included all associations for literary purposes except common schools, colleges, and universities. The first general provision of this kind was enacted as early as 1817, in a rather cumbersome act "to provide for the incorporation of schools and library companies. "^ By the terms of this law the association that wished to incorporate submitted the articles they had prepared to the "President of the court of common pleas," in the circuit in which the association was to be established. If the "president" approved, he indorsed the same and submitted them to the inspection of two judges of the supreme court. They were then examined by these judges and, if found comformable to the provisions of the law, were approved and indorsed, and deposited with the recorder of the county in which the association was located. This procedure established the association as a body politic and corporate under the laws of the state. It seems to have been from the first a dead letter, although not formally repealed. It was the first general law of the Ohio legislature that had primary reference to education, or educational institutions, and is of interest for this reason. By the provisions of the act of 1839 the capital stock and prop- erty of academies could not exceed forty thousand dollars, unless increased in the act of incorporation. The act also stated that no part of the funds of such an institution should ever be used for banking, nor should certificates of deposit or drafts which in any manner could be used as a circulating medium be issued. From this time on, too, the directors or trustees were held individually liable for all debts of the association. There was no thought of state supervision or control of these institutions until 1838,^ and then only to see that funds given were being used for the purpose for which they were donated. The law at that time directed the state superintendent to collect information concerning all funds and property given in any way for education, except in the case of chartered colleges, and allowed him to direct procedure against the corporation by the local prosecuting attorney in case any misap- plication of funds appeared. 1 O.L., XXXVII, 49. ^O.L., XV, 107. 5 0.L.,XXXVI, 21. SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION 87 HIGHER EDUCATION UNIVERSITIES, COLLEGES, AND THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTIONS A large number of institutions of higher learning were incor- porated during this period of Ohio's history, the total number of such incorporations before 1850 being forty-four. Among these are a number which are still in existence, including some of the best known institutions in the state. In the period from 1803 to 1810 the Ohio University, 1804, originally chartered in 1802; Cincinnati University, 1807, and Miami University, 1809, were founded. Between 1821 and 1830 Kenyon College, 1824; Western Reserve University, 1826; Lane Seminary, 1829, were incorporated; followed in the period from 1831 to 1840 by Denison University, 1832; Marietta College, 1832; Oberlin College, 1834, and Muskin- gum College, 1837; while in the last ten years from 1841 to 1850 Wesleyan University, 1842; Wittenberg College, 1845; Otter bein University, 1849; Capital University, 1850; Urbana University, 1850, and Hiram College, 1850, appeared. A number of these institutions were not incorporated under the names which they now bear. Ohio University was originally incor- porated during the territorial period as the American Western University.^ Kenyon College first appeared as the Theological Seminary of the Protestant Episcopal Church ,2 Western Reserve University as Western Reserve College,^ Denison University as the Granville Literary and Theological Institution,* Marietta College as the Marietta Collegiate Institute and Western Teachers' Semi- nary,^ Oberlin College as the Oberlin Collegiate Institute,^ and Hiram College as the Western Reserve Eclectic Institute.' In a few cases academies or other secondary schools were later given the right to confer collegiate degrees,^ while in some instances institutions incorporated as colleges or universities were doubtless, in fact, secondary in character, and in other cases were never actually founded, the act of incorporation representing only the purpose and ideals of the incorporators. 1 Nashee, A Compilation of Laws, Treaties and Ordinances Which Relate to Lands in the State of Ohio, p. 220. 2 O.L., XXIII, local, 12. ^O.L., XXIV, local, 93. * O.L., XXX, local, 88. s O.L., XXXI, local, 18. * O.L., XXXII, local, 226. ^O.L.,XLVIII, local, 627. 8 O.L., XLVI, local, 7; O.L., XXXVII, local, 308; O.L., XLIV, local, 65. 88 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO State influence on higher education. — The attitude of the state toward higher education as toward secondary education was marked by a wilHngness to legaHze by incorporation the educational aspira- tions of any group of people, while taking on itself a minimum amount of responsibility for the resulting institution either through support or control. Three townships had been set aside for the support of higher institutions of learning, two in the Ohio Company's Purchase^ and one in the John Cleve Symmes Purchase.^ The Ohio University at Athens and the Miami University at Oxford grew out of these two grants. These two institutions were under limited state control. The General Assembly appointed their trustees, deter- mined by legal enactment the manner in which their lands were to be disposed of, and in the acts of incorporation laid down certain regulations, but in no real sense did the state in this period assume any responsibility for them. Ohio University. — On December 18, 1799,^ the territorial legis- lature, by resolution, requested Rufus Putnam, with two associates, to lay off in the college townships (Townships 8 and 9 in Washington County) a town plat with a square for the colleges and lots for the president and professors, "bordering on or encircled by spacious commons." The following year the report of "said Putnam" was accepted, and the town of Athens established,^ and on January 9, 1802,'' the university was incorporated under the name of the American Western University, with Rufus Putnam and Return Jonathan Meigs, afterward governor of Ohio and Postmaster- General of the United States, as members of the first Board of Trustees. In 1803 Ohio was admitted as a state, and at the second session of the legislature, February 18, 1804,^ a second act of incorporation was passed, in which the name was changed to "Ohio University." A board of twelve trustees, exclusive of the governor of the state and the president of the university, ex-officio members, was ap- pointed, and power was given to them to appoint teachers and ' Nashee, A Compilation of Laws, Treaties and Ordinances Which Relate to Lands in the State of Ohio, p. 154. * O.L., III, Enabling Act, 69. ^ Nashee, A Compilation of Laws, Treaties and Ordinances Which Relate to Lands in the Slate of Ohio, p. 219 * Ibid., p. 220. « Idem. « O.L., II. 193. SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION 89 officers. Vacancies in the board could be filled temporarily by the board itself until appointments by the legislature at its next session. The faculty was directed to report to the corporation "from time to time" and to hold public examinations of the students of each class quarterly. Two townships were set aside "for the sole use, benefit and support of the state university forever," and direc- tions were given for laying off, appraising, and leasing the lands. This latter provision directed that the land should be leased on ninety-year liens, renewable forever with an annual rental of 6 per cent, revaluation at thirty-five and sixty years, and another revalua- tion at the end of the ninety-year period. All the land in the two townships, together with the buildings, was exempted from all state taxes. The statement given above includes all the points in which the state exercised any control. It appointed the trustees, it directed the faculty to report "from time to time" to the trustees, it directed that quarterly examinations of the students should be held, and it specified how the land granted for the use of the university was to be leased. The next year^ the legislature changed the form of the lease to ninety-nine-year leases, renewable forever, omitting the clause calling for a revaluation, and forbade the leasing of any land at less than one dollar and seventy-five cents per acre, but in 1807^ the trustees were authorized to lease the land that had been ap- praised at less than one dollar and seventy-five cents at its appraised value. The legislation of the next ten years is concerned only with different phases of leasing of the land and the appointment of trustees, but in 1817,^ an act was passed authorizing a lottery to raise the sum of twenty thousand dollars "to defray the expense of completing the college edifice lately erected at Athens, and to purchase a, library and suitable mathematical and philosophical apparatus for the use of Ohio University." On February 1, 1825,'* an appropriation of one thousand dollars was made for the purpose of paying debts and purchasing philosophical apparatus. In 1826,^ during the same period in which the sale of school lands was begun, 1 O.L., III, 79. ^O.L., V, 85. 3 0.L.. XVI, 37. *0.L., XXIII, 19. *0.L., XXIV. 52. 90 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO the trustees were authorized to sell the remaining lands in the college townships which were not encumbered by leases, and to convey title in fee simple to lessees who paid a sum which would yield at 6 per cent a revenue equal to the yearly rental. The money received from such sales was to be deposited with the state treasurer, and the state pledged itself to pay 6 per cent on the sums so de- posited and reserved the right to repay the money at any time.^ In 1836^ and again in 1837^ the legislature passed resolutions demanding reports from the university, particularly as to the expenditures and receipts, and in the second resolution asking for the number of professors engaged, the branches of literature and science taught by each, and a list of the number of students of each year from 1826 to 1837. In 1838* the commissioners of the Canal Fund were authorized to loan five thousand dollars to the university to be paid back in annual instalments of one thousand dollars each, with interest at 6 per cent, and in 1847^ the president and trustees were authorized to fund the debts of the university in an amount not to exceed ten thousand dollars, and the debt so funded was exempt from taxation. In 1843" the legislature passed an act declaring that it was the true intent of the law passed in 1805, authorizing ninety-nine-year leases, that the land should never be revalued. This meant a great annual loss to the university, as the lands were originally appraised and leased at a low valuation and rental, and by this act the rental could never be increased. The Supreme Court of the state had already passed on this question and had decided that the lands were legally subject to reappraisal. The act of 1843 was passed to nullify that decision.^ These chief points in the legislation concerning Ohio University in the period from 1803 to 1850 show how little there was of either state aid or state direction. One appropriation of one thousand dollars, authority to raise twenty thousand dollars by means of a lottery, a loan of five thousand dollars, and the privilege of funding a debt of ten thousand dollars without taxation, and the exemption ' The amount received from these sales was comparatively small. The state auditor's report from 1838 to 1848 shows a credit of $1,897.39 to Ohio University from this source. 2 0.L.,XXXIV. local, 643. ^ O.L., XXXV, local, 543. * O.L., XXXVI, local, 204. 6 O.L., XLV. local, 176. * O.L., XLI, local, 144. ^ F. W. Blackmar, The History of Federal and Slate Aid to Either Education in the United States, p. 217, SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION 91 of the lands in the college townships from state taxation comprise all the assistance of a financial nature given by the state. The appointment of trustees, the requirement of a report asked for twice, and certain general requirements specified in the charter include all of the control or guidance on the educational side. It is evident that the institution was not regarded in any true sense as a state university, if by that term is meant an institution supported by the state and governed by policies of state initiation. If further evidence were needed, it is found in a memorial addressed to Con- gress by the legislature in 1829,^ asking Congress to grant two town- ships of land for the support of colleges and universities. The memorial states that Ohio "has no adequate means of creating and fostering scientific institutions without resorting to the odious measure of direct taxation." "Possessing no national domains and having amongst its citizens few or none whose love of literature would prompt at the same time their wealth would make them able, to endow public seminaries of learning. . . . the interests of science must be neglected and languish, unless aid can be obtained in the mode now proposed." "Ohio has received no grant of this character, unless the land included in the Ohio Company's Purchase and Symmes' Purchase should be so considered, but neither the state nor the inhabitants of those districts have ever thus regarded them." They were intended to be for the special benefit of the inhabitants of those districts, and the location of the seminaries was confined to them. Miami University. — The legislation concerning Miami Univer- sity is of the same general type. The college township was located in I8O32 and the university incorporated in 1809.^ By the act of incorporation all benefits and advantages were to be open to all citizens of the state. A board of twelve trustees was appointed, and the faculty was directed to hold at least once in every year a public examination of the students in each class. Succeeding legislation was concerned only with the appointment of trustees, the leasing of college lands, and the collecting of rents, with the exception of an act in 1814* which required the trustees to make an accurate statement of all proceedings "both as respects the ' O.L., XXVII, local, 174. 2 0.L., I, 66. 3 0.L., VII, 184. « O.L., XII, 83. 92 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO disposal of land, as well as the state of the funds arising from the proceeds," to the legislature. There seems to have been no finan- cial aid of any kind extended to Miami University prior to 1850, and, as in the case of Ohio University, no control or initiation of educational policies. The state for the first time shows an awaken- ing responsibility in 1849^ by the appointment of a committee of three "to examine into and report to the next General Assembly the condition of the Miami University and the cause of its decline, with such recommendations as they may deem proper to make." Other institutions. — A grant of five hundred dollars each was made to two other institutions by the legislature by an act passed in 1836.^ The two institutions receiving this aid were the College of Ripley in Brown County and Franklin College in Harrison County. The act of incorporation for the College of Ripley' specified that vacancies in the Board of Trustees were to be filled by the General Assembly. Aside from this, these two institutions seem in no way to differ from others founded during the same period. The appro- priation made was evidently incidental and due to local influence, and did not indicate any general policy of state aid. It is also an indication that the state regarded other institutions in about the same way that it regarded Ohio and Miami universities. In 1828'* the legislature warmly seconded the efforts of Philander Chase, the president of Kenyon College, in his attempt to obtain a grant of lands from Congress for the support of that institution, and requested its senators and representatives to use their efforts in Congress to support such legislation. These instances include all of the state's activities in the interests of higher education. In the case of other institutions chartered, the state exercised no control, except that it became customary after 1830 to specify in the incorporating act that the right to amend or alter the charter was reserved by the legislature. There also appeared frequent limitations as to the amount of real property that might be held, or the annual income that might be derived from it. Denominational influences. — It is impossible to say from a study of the acts of incorporation how far denominational influence was instrumental in the founding of the large number of colleges and * O.L., XLVII, local, 398. 2 0.L.,XXXIV, local, 610. 3 O.L., XXVIII, local, 88. * O.L., XXVI, local, 176. SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION 93 universities that appeared during this period. It was certainly much more influential than in the case of secondary institutions. Twenty-one of the forty-four schools show evidence of denomina- tional influence either in the act itself or in the name given, while a few of them had from the first the preparation of ministers for a particular sect in mind. It is quite probable that others were under denominational influence where nothing in the charter or name indicates it. Agricultural schools. — It is interesting to note that as early as 1846^ a Farmers' College was incorporated in Hamilton County, whose purpose was declared to be "to direct and cultivate the minds of the students in a thorough and scientific course of studies particularly adapted to agricultural pursuits." This institution was the result of private initiative and was founded by a stock company. Summary. — The period was one of activity and interest in higher education with a determined effort to afford the advantages of college and university training to the young people of the state without the necessity of going beyond the state border for it. The state's attitude was shown in its willingness to assist through legaliz- ing such efforts by acts of incorporation, but with no conception of any adequate responsibility in the matter, even for those institu- tions which might naturally have been considered state foundations. MEDICAL EDUCATION During the first eight years of the state's history there was no legislation that bore in any way upon medical practice or indicated any state requirements for entering the profession. In 181P an act was passed to regulate the practice of physic and surgery. The state was divided into five medical districts each having three medical censors or examiners, and it was made obligatory upon anyone who wished to practice medicine as a means of livelihood to obtain a license from one of these boards of examiners. The qualifications for a license included satisfactory evidence that the candidate was of good moral character, and that he had attended three full years to the theory and practice of medicine under the guidance of some able physician or surgeon, or that he had a license from some medical society showing that he had been admitted as 1 O.L., XLIV, local, 165. '^ O.L., IX. 19. 94 HISTOKY OF ICDIICATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO a pnuiitioiuT. lie was also rf(|uir(' ■' (hi' fust medical school in the state was incorporated in Cincinnati under the name of the Medical College of Ohio. The IM'camble recites that the students of medicine in Ohio are so distant from any well-regulated college as to labor under .serious disadvan- tages in the prosecution of their studies. The purpose of the college was to give instruction in physic and surgery and the au.xiliary sciences. There were four incorporators, and the act of incorporation evidently followed the desires of those responsible for the institution. Six professorships were created, and the subjects of instruction of each were indicated. The state very early assumed a certain amount of control of this institution, at first indirectly, through authorizing^' the State Medical Convention to appoint two delegates annually to .it lend the conunencement of the medical college, take part in the examination, vote on the candidates, and sign diplomas on behalf of the convention. This Medical Convention consisted of delegates from the various medical districts in the state, and was given at the same time (1821)" the exclusive right to grant licenses for practice. It was allowed to select each year two indigent > O.L., X, S8. •' O.L., XV, 19.S. SO.L., XVI, 105. «O.L.,XVU,37. » O.L., XIX, 28. • Idem. SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION 95 medical students and recommend them to the Medical College, whose duty it was to give them instruction gratuitously. In 1822^ on recommendation of the Medical Convention, a board of thirteen trustees of the college was appointed by the General Assembly, and they were given general control of the insti- tution, and it was provided that from this time the trustees were to be so appointed. In 1.825^ the legislature directed that the moneys raised by auction fees in Hamilton County should be appropriated for four years to the use of the Medical College, unless otherwise directed by the General Assembly.^ This was extended to five years at the next meeting of the legislature, and in 1831'* one-fourth of the money from the same source was appropriated for five years, not, however, to exceed twenty thousand dollars for the period. In 1838^ there were fifteen hundred dollars appropriated outright from the state treasury to be applied to liquidate any unsatisfied claims against the school. There were no other provisions for financial aid, but in 1833^ the medical examiners were allowed to appoint one indigent student from each medical district for free instruction, and on the same date the governor was requested to appoint a committee of five to investigate the organization, government, and condition of the Medical College, and to report to the General Assembly, suggesting "the proper means of advancing the prosperity and utility of the state medical college as an institution of the state, and of medical science therein." For the first thirty-five years there was no medical institution incorporated in any of the other cities of the state. Two other institutions were chartered in Cincinnati in 1828,^ the Western Eye and Ear Infirmary, whose trustees had power to appoint "surgeons, advising physicians, lecturers, and teachers," and the Cincinnati Medical Academy,^ designed to give a systematic course preparatory to admission to a medical college. 1 O.L., XXI, 4. 2 O.L., XXIII, 19. 3 O.L., XXIV, 4. * O.L., XXIX, local, 66. ^ O.L., XXXVI, 37. «0.L., XXXI, local, 269. ^ O.L., XXVI, local, 28. * O.L., XXVI, local, 54. 96 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO From 1839 to 1850 eight other institutions were chartered in the state for various types of medical instruction. There were also incorporated nine local and county medical societies, evidently associations of physicians organized for the advancement of medical science. The State Medical Society was incorporated in 1848^ with power to organi/X' auxiliary societies. The state took no part in the control or support of the later institutions incorporated. LKGAL EDUCATION There is almost no legislation bearing on legal education prior to 1850. In 1819^ a law was passed that no person should be licensed to practice as an attorney unless he had studied law atten- tively for the period of two years previous to his application for a license. In 1846"^ appeared the first indication of any definite legal instruction in an act authorizing any male citizen of the state of good moral character to take the oath of ofiice and receive a license to practice on producing to two judges of the Supreme Court a certificate from the law department of the Cincinnati College. Colleges, Universities, and Theoi-ogical Seminaries Chartered in Ohio: 1803-50 1. Ohio University 1802 2. Miami University (locating college townships) 1803 Miami University (charter) 1809 3. Cincinnati University 1807 4. Worthington College 1819 5. Kenyon College 1824 6. (College of Alma 1825 } PVanklin College (name changed) 1826 7. Western Reserve College 1826 8. Lane Seminary 1829 9. College of Ripley 1830 10. The Trust cos of the firanviile Literary and Theoiogicallnstitiition . . 1832 11. Marietta Collegiate Institute and Western Teacher's Seminary. . . . 1832 12. Oherlin Collegiate Institute 1834 13. Willoughhy University of Lake Erie 1834 14. German Reform Synod of Ohio 1836 15. St. Clairsville Collegiate Seminary 1837 16. Muskingum College 1837 17. Baptist Literary and Collegiate Institute of Huron County 1837 18. Weslcyan Collegiate Institute 1837 19. Logan College 1838 '0.L.,XLVI, local, 231. *0.L., XVII,92. 'O.L..XLIV. local, 157. SECONDARY AND HIGHER EDUCATION 97 20. Theological Seminary of the Associated Reform Synod of the West. 1838 21. Central College of Ohio 1842 22. St. Xavier College 1842 23. Ohio Wesleyan University 1842 24. Lafayette University 1842 25. Germania College 1843 26. Providence College 1843 27. Beverly College 1843 28. < Methodist Female Collegiate Institute 1843 ( Wesleyan Female College (name changed) 1846 29. Bellefontaine College 1843 30. English Lutheran Theological and Collegiate Institute of Wooster. . 1844 31. Ft. Meigs University 1845 32. Protestant University of the United States 1845 33. Wittenberg College 1845 34. Farmers' College 1846 35. Marietta Female College 1847 36. S Muhlenberg College 1848 ( Judson College (name changed) 1849 38. Newton College 1848 39. Edinburgh College 1848 40. Mt. Washington College 1849 41. Otterbein University 1849 42. Capital University 1850 43. Cambridge College 1850 44. Geneva Hall 1850 45. Urbana University 1 850 98 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO Fk;. 4. — Colleges, universities, and theological seminaries char- tered in Ohio from 1803 to 1850 Note: 37 shown on map is Medina Academy CHAPTER V THE EDUCATION OF DEFECTIVES, DEPENDENTS, AND DELINQUENTS The institutions for the education of the deaf and dumb and the bhnd were definitely recognized as a state responsibility, and ample and intelligent provision was made by the state for children of this class. This conception of the state's responsibility was not recognized at once, however, but was a matter of gradual growth. The deaf and dumb school preceded the school for the blind by ten years, and in the legislation that centers about it the gradual development of the idea of state responsibility for financial support can be seen. THE EDUCATION OF DEFECTIVES Education of the deaf and dumb. — In an act passed in 1822^ the Court of Common Pleas was authorized to appoint guardians for deaf and dumb persons, and the power of the guardians was ex- pressly extended to the protection, education, and maintenance of their wards. In case the guardian or parent was unable to teach such children to read and write, the law permitted the county com- missioners, on application, to appropriate money from the county treasury for such instruction. The law was wholly permissive in character and simply legalized appropriations for the instruction of deaf and dumb children in cases in which the county commis- sioners saw fit to grant aid. By the same law the township officers were required to report to the county auditors the number of deaf and dumb persons in the township, and the auditors were directed to report the results to the state auditor. This was followed at the next session in 1822^ by an act the sole purpose of which was to ascertain the number of deaf and dumb persons in the state. Five years later, in 1827,^ an act was passed to incorporate the "Trustees of the Ohio Asylum for PLducating the Deaf and Dumb." Eight trustees were named in the act of incorpora- ' O.L., XX, 49. *0.L., XXI, s. * O.L., XXV, 87. 99 100 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO tion, and they were authorized to receive gifts and bequests for the purpose of educating the deaf and dumb, and were directed to report to the next General Assembly as to the location of the schools, the kind of buildings needed, with an estimate of expense for buildings and instruction, and a plan for its organization and government. The funds of the institution were to be under the management of the trustees subject to the regulation of the General Assembly, and reports were required annually as to the expenses, number of students, number taught at state expense, and the number who paid tuition, together with general information as to the status of the school. The trustees were allowed to draw on the treasury of the state for the support of one indigent student from each judicial circuit an amount not to exceed one hundred dollars for any student, and no student was to receive such aid longer than three years. The governor was ex-officio president of the Board of Trustees, and it was specifically stated that the incorporated body was under the control and direction of the General Assembly. The idea of the legislature seems to have been to organize an institution under state management and control, but financed by private donations, with the state giving a minimum amount to the support of indigent students. The following year, 1828, the first appropriation of state money was made, amounting to $376.76.^ In 1829^ the trustees were authorized to open the asylum in rented houses until suitable buildings were erected, and an additional appropriation of one thousand dollars was made. The same year it was decided to locate the institution permanently in Columbus,' and the trustees were authorized to receive any donations of land or to purchase a site. In the meanwhile Congress had been urged* to appropriate a township of land, or an amount equivalent to that, located in smaller tracts, to aid in the education of the deaf and dumb. The grant was not made, and in 1830* another appropria- tion of one thousand dollars was made, and the trustees were again authorized to receive one indigent student from each judicial circuit at state expense, but the amount to be expended was reduced from •O.L.. XXVI, 4. * O.L., XXVII, 63. 'O.L.,XXVII, local, 171. * O.L., XXV, local. 113; O.L., XXVI, local. 178. »0.L., XXVIII 30. DEFECTIVES, DEPENDENTS AND DELINQUENTS 101 one hundred dollars to seventy-five dollars for each student.^ The next year the number of students receiving state aid was increased to two from each circuit,^ a total of eighteen, and an appropriation of sixteen hundred dollars^ was made for expenses. This was followed in 1832 by an act appropriating one-fourth of the money arising from sales at auction in Hamilton County^ and by another fifteen-hundred-dollar appropriation from the treasury.^ The state had not reached a point where it was ready to assume the burden of the school, and it again applied to Congress in the same year^ for assistance through a land grant. In this memorial it was estimated that a proper housing and equipment would cost from fifteen thousand to twenty thousand dollars, with a total annual expenditure of nearly ten thousand dollars. It was pointed out that Ohio, in common with many other states, did not possess land of her own which might be appropriated, and that the only resource, unless Congress came to the state's aid, was by drawing from revenue derived by direct taxation for other purposes. The memorial declares that everyone will admit that this measure is impolitic and ought to be avoided, and that it may be deemed quite sufficient to provide in this way for indigent students.'' From this time on appropriations of fifteen hundred to three thousand dollars were common until 1846,^ when a systematic budget was evidently adopted and regular appropriations made to meet it. The appropriation for expenses in this year amounted to nine thousand dollars, with an added four thousand dollars for building needs. Provision was made in 1838^ by a two- thousand- dollar appropriation for the erection of workshops and the intro- duction of mechanical employment as a part of the work of the institution.^" ' There were nine judicial circuits. The expense Involved amounted to $675. 2 0.L.,XXIX, 427. 3 0.L.,XXIX, local, 246. * O.L., XXX, 20. *0.L., XXX, local, 318. » O.L., XXX, local, 336. ^ This memorial states that Ohio had established such a school, that it had been in operation two years, and that it had three teachers and nearly thirty pupils, with a prospect that the number of pupils would be doubled as soon as accommodations were furnished. *0.L., XLIV, 130. «0.L., XXXVI, 92. *" The legislature voted a grant of one hundred dollars annually in 1828 for two years to the trustees of a private school for educating deaf and dumb persons, located in Tallmadge Township, and bearing the name of the Tallmadge School for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb. This is the only hint that appears in the legislation of a private institution of this kind {O.L., XXVI, local, 169). 102 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO Education of the blind. — With the exception of two special acts to assist individuals, one afterward repealed, the state took no steps looking toward the education of the blind until 1835.^ In this year the governor was requested to direct the county auditors to make a complete report on the number of blind persons in the state,^ and in the following year^ a committee was appointed to study the question of the education of the blind in letters and mechanical arts and to report to the General Assembly the results of their findings with an estimate of the probable expense of establishing a public school for that purpose. This committee made a careful study of the subject. They quote largely in their report* from the address of Dr. S. G. Howe, director of the New England Institution for the Blind, which he had made to the trustees of that institution. In this address of Dr. Howe's there is given a synopsis of the development of the edu- cation of the blind in the different European nations and some description of the beginnings of such work in the New York and New England institutions. In addition to the information so gained the committee ad- dressed a list of specific questions to the directors of the New York, New England, and Pennsylvania institutions for the blind asking for definite information about expense, number of teachers needed, textbooks available, types of industry suitable to be taught in a school of this kind, and other questions of a similar nature. Pro- vision was also made for Dr. Howe to visit Columbus during the session of the legislature to "deliver lectures and exhibit one or two of the pupils in such a manner as to prove their attainments." The committee estimated the number of blind in the state as 500, basing the estimate on the United States census and the reports made by the county auditors. Of this number there were 60 under sixteen years of age whose names and residences were known. The report closes with the following recommendation: In order to commence a school it will be necessary to rent a suitable house, and furnish the books and apparatus for a class, and procure one teacher who is qualified to give instruction, and provide for the support of those children who 1 O.L., IX, 68; O.L., X, 68; O.L., XVII, 7. * O.L., XXXIII, local, 453. * O.L., XXXIV, local, 648. * Ohio Documents, 35th G.A., Doc. No. 10, pp. 1-24. DEFECTIVES, DEPENDENTS AND DELINQUENTS 103 are indigent. For this purpose it is supposed that, if the Legislature shall deter- mine in favor of the measure, an appropriation of $1,500 will be necessary. — And if it shall be deemed expedient to purchase a site on which permanent build- ings may hereafter be erected, a further sum of $1,000 may be needed. It is desirable also, that as early as practicable, musical instruments may be procured, and the necessary arrangements may be made, for teaching music, not only as a solace and a pleasure to the blind in their disconsolate condition as strangers to sight; but as a means of contributing to their own support in the school, and afterward also. And it is especially desirable, and indeed highly important, that a superintendent of work, together with implements and materials for some prof- itable manufactures, should be furnished; and thus every pupil, when discharged, may be able to make his own living. In conclusion the Trustees .... beg leave, most respectfully and most earnestly, to recommend to the General Assembly the immediate establishment of an Institution for the instruction of the Blind.' On the Fourth of July, in 1837, the first "school was opened with prayer, in the Presbyterian Church in the presence of the Teachers and scholars of the Sunday Schools connected with the different denominations in Columbus, who, to the number of 900, had assembled to celebrate the sixty-first anniversary of Indepen- dence. On this day the Teacher and five pupils were present. This number was increased to nine, at the middle of September, and still further to eleven in the month of November."^ The experience of the legislature with the deaf and dumb school had prepared it to accept the responsibility for the school for the blind in a larger way, and in 1837^ trustees were appointed, and a sum of fifteen thousand dollars was authorized for buildings and ten thousand dollars appropriated for the purpose of building materials and to pay the expense of beginning the school at once. In 1838^ fifteen thousand dollars was appropriated to complete the building, and the trustees were authorized to receive twelve students at state expense. A tuition and maintenance fee not to exceed one hundred and twenty dollars annually was fixed for other students. The trustees were authorized to procure all necessary material and implements for the purpose of instruction in useful arts and trades. In 1843^ the limitation as to the number of students received at state expense was removed, and it was left to the discretion of the » Ohio Documents, 35th G.A., Doc. No. 10, p. 23. * Ohio Documents, 36th G.A., Doc. No. 10, p. 4. 3 O.L., XXXV, 1 16. * O.L., XXXVI, 49. * O.L., XLI, 57. 104 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO trustees. The regulations on this subject appear to have been administered leniently, both in the case of the school for the blind and in that for the deaf and dumb, as frequent resolutions appear allowing exceptions in special cases. In 1845^ the legislature made another appeal to Congress for a land grant to assist in the education of the blind and the deaf and dumb, asking that such a grant be made in all the states where it had not been done; but the grant was not made, and the state was forced to assume full responsibility for both institutions. THE EDUCATION OF DEPENDENTS The first appropriation authorized from the state treasury of Ohio for educational purposes of any kind is found in the case of an Indian orphan girl whose mother had been shot by a citizen without provocation. In 1820^ three hundred and fifty dollars was voted to pay for her support and education for seven years. This was repealed the following year,^ but in 1823"* twenty-five dollars annually was definitely appropriated for that purpose until she should reach the age of twelve years. This is the only time the state made any financial provision for the education of dependent children prior to 1850. In 1806'^ in an act concerning apprentices and servants it was directed that in all indentures for binding or putting out a child as servant or apprentice there should be a clause that every master or mistress should at least cause such child "to be taught and instructed to read and write." In 1824'' this was extended to embrace as much arithmetic as would include the single rule of three, and the further provision that at the expiration of the term of service each minor child was to receive a new Bible and two suits of wearing apparel. This embraces all the state provisions on the subject from 1803 to 1850, and it is interesting to note that the two laws last cited are the only laws passed during the period that in any way touch upon compulsory education, and these carry no penalties for failure to obey. ' O.L., XLIII, local, 434. *0.L., XVni,66. »0.L., XIX, 144. " O.L., XXI, 39. »0.L., IV, 72. "O.L., XXII, 381 DEFECTIVES, DEPENDENTS AND DELINQUENTS 105 Orphan asylums and schools for poor children. — Orphan asylums were incorporated in Cincinnati in 1833,^ in Cleveland in 1837,^ in Columbus in 1838,'' and in Dayton in 1844.'' These four institu- tions were all incorporated by women, and were to be under the management of women, as indicated in the acts of incorporation. A second asylum was incorporated by a Catholic society in Cin- cinnati in 1843,'' and in 1845" an asylum for colored children was incorporated in the same city. The Stark County Orphans' Institute appeared in 1837,'' but its charter was revoked three years later because it had embarked in the banking business.* There were also three endowed schools incorporated for the benefit of poor children, one in Cincinnati in 1827,'' one in Zanesville in 1834,*" and one in Kendal in 1826." Their purpose, however, was to afford instruction free to children whose parents were unable to pay for it, not primarily to care for the wholly dependent. These three schools were the Woodward Free Grammar School, the M'Intire Poor School, and the Charity School of Kendal. THE EDUCATION OF DELINQUENTS Education of delinquents. — No state provision was made for the education of delinquents prior to 1850, and but little was done through private or municipal effort. In 1843'^ an act was passed for the regulation of county jails, which directed that each prisoner should be supplied with a Bible, and that the sheriff should keep a record of the means furnished for literary, moral, and religious instruction. In 1845'^ the directors of the penitentiary were author- ized to employ some suitable person as a religious and moral instructor, and in the same year the city of Cincinnati was author- ized to erect a house of correction.'^ These three laws, one of them local in application, comprise the entire activity of the state for the moral and intellectual advance of delinquents prior to 1850. ' O.L., XXXI, local, 52. « O.L., XXXVIII, local. 87. 2 0.L., XXXV, local, 51,?. »O.L., XXV, local, 62. »0.L., XXXVI, local, 185. '»0.L., XXXIV, local. 514. * O.L., XLII, local. 172. » O.L.. XXIV, local, 36. ''O.L.,XLI, local, 112. "'O.L., XLI, 74. «O.L..XLIII. local, 101. "O.L..XLIII, local, 446. ^ O.L., XXXV, local, 201. " O.L., XLIII, local, i^i; O.L., XLV, local, 112. CHAPTER VI THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS In the preparation of teachers, as in other phases of educational activity, Ohio depended upon the sentiment and effort of individ- uals and communities, and did nothing through state aid or direction other than to legaHze through incorporation the concerted efforts of groups of teachers or charter institutions established by private initiative. As a result of the educational awakening that accompanied the passage of the general school law of 1838, and the appointment of a state superintendent, some attention was given by the legislature to the state's responsibility, and the state super- intendent was asked in the same year^ to report to the next General Assembly "first, upon the expediency of establishing a state univer- sity or universities for the education of teachers and other students; second, if he shall deem it expedient to establish such university or universities then upon the subject of the proper system therefor, and the proper location thereof; third, also upon the proper mode of supporting same, the probable expense thereof to the state, and such other views and information in relation to the subject generally as he may deem it proper to communicate." Mr. Lewis in his report strongly urged the necessity for the need of schools to train those expecting to teach ,2 but no action was taken by the General Assembly to found such an institution. It was through the activity of voluntary associations of teachers and friends of education that the first efforts were made to raise the standard of the teaching profession. As early as 1829* such an association had been meeting regularly in Cincinnati for the discussion of educational problems, and at a general convention to which friends of education throughout the Mississippi Valley were invited an association was formed called the Western College of Teachers. As one result of this association the first educational 10.L..XXXVI, local, 418. 2 Ohio Documents, 37th G.A., Part 2, Doc. 72. ' Taylor, A Manual of the Ohio School System, p. 333. 106 TRAINING OF TEACHERS 107 journal in the Northwest, The Academic Pioneer, was established and continued for some ten years. The original association was incorporated by legislative action February 13, 1832,^ under the name of the Western Academic Institute and Board of Education, and its purpose was declared to be the promotion of "harmony, co-operation and efficiency in the diffusion of elementary knowledge, and discussing such sub- jects as may be considered conducive to the advantage of education generally." This association was intended to exercise an influence through the Mississippi Valley, and of its four vice-presidents one was from Harrodsburg, Kentucky, and another from Rising Sun, Iowa. Two years later, through the leadership of many of the same men, an act was passed to incorporate^ "The Teachers' Insti- tute." The preamble and first section are of interest and show an advanced educational sentiment on the part of the incorporators and a definite attempt to meet the needs for better trained teachers, and illustrate the general legislative willingness to legalize educa- tional effort through incorporation. Whereas it has been reported to the General Assembly that a literary institu- tion devoted to the instruction of professional teachers is much wanted within this state, and would be of much public utility. Therefore, be it enacted, etc., that there shall be established and instituted in the name hereinafter directed, a college for the instruction of candidates for professional school teachers, and for the purpose of qualifying such teachers in the best manner to instruct and govern schools, and other seminaries of learning, and to advance the intellectual and moral cultivation of youth. Among the incorporators were many warm friends of the public schools. The names of Lyman Beecher, John P. Foote, Nathan Guilford — through whose efforts the school law of 1825 took final form — Robert Picket, David L. Talbott, and others appear. The school for teachers that these men had in mind did not materialize, but there were continued until 1845 regular conventions of teachers and friends of education, and their discussions and influence were instrumental in awakening educational sentiment throughout the state.^ 1 O.L., XXX, local, 232. 2 0.L.,XXXII, local, 217. ' Taylor, A Manual of the Ohio School System, p. 334. 108 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO In 1832^ the Marietta Collegiate Institute and Western Teachers' Seminary, which three years later became Marietta College, was incorporated. The original purpose was declared to be "the instruction of youth in the various branches of useful knowledge, and especially the education of teachers for common schools." Other incorporations were the Wayne County Ohio Teachers' Association in 1833,^ the Teachers' Institute at Fairmound,' the Meigs County High School and Teachers' Institute,* and the American Lyceum of Education in Cincinnati.^ This last institution planned to establish a common school "for the purpose of furnishing a model school, and one in which experi- ments might be made as to the best modes and means of instruction, with a view to advancing the interests of common school education throughout the state." In 1847® the state passed a permissive act allowing teachers in eleven counties of the state to incorporate teachers' institutes. Ten of these counties were located in the Western Reserve. This act allowed the county commissioners in the counties named to use a portion of the money derived from the surplus revenue fund for the support of the institutes so organized. The counties had been held responsible by the act distributing the surplus revenue'^ for the payment of 5 per cent annually for the use of common schools. Any amount derived over this the counties had been allowed to devote to the support of common schools, the promotion of internal im- provements, or the building of academies. They were now allowed in the eleven counties named to include teachers' institutes among the objects to which aid from this extra fund might be extended. The money was to be used under the direction of the school examiners of the county in the employment of instructors and lecturers, and in the purchase of a common school library for the use of the association. This act was made general for the state in 1848^ by the same act that permitted counties to provide for county superintendents 1 O.L., XXXI, local, 18. 2 O.L., XXXI, local, 193. 3 O.L., XXXV, local, 417. * O.L., XXXVII, local, 257. s O.L., XXXVIII, local, 192. * O.L., XLV, 67. ^ O.L., XXXVI, 79. 8 O.L., XLVI, 86. TRAINING OF TEACHERS 109 if they wished to do so. The following year, 1849/ the county commissioners were allowed to appropriate from other sources whatever sum was needed to bring the total annual amount for this purpose up to one hundred dollars, but before doing so the teachers petitioning for such an institute were required to present evidence to the commissioners that they had already raised one-half of the total amount needed for the support of the institute, and the petition had to have the signature of forty regular teachers within the county, and also of the county board of examiners. The Farmington Normal School in Trumbull County on the Western Reserve was incorporated in 1849^ through the efforts of the citizens of Farmington, who gave a site and raised by voluntary subscription $2,575.00 for its support. A stock company was formed with shares selling at twenty-five dollars each. "One great object" of the school was declared to be "a thorough educa- tion of common or elementary school teachers, of both sexes, and to secure a course of intellectual and moral discipline for the youth of the country." Nothing else appears in the legislation of the state prior to 1850 that has any reference to the training of teachers. Many of the academies assisted in supplying the deficiency and special courses were often organized in them for training teachers. The state, however, had no direct contact with this work. Governor Hartley voiced a feeling that was held by many friends of education that the state ought to take an active part in training teachers when he said in his message of December 3, 1844:^ The subject of normal schools or seminaries for the education of teachers is attracting much attention in several of the states of the Union, and in other countries, and by the pre-eminent advantages afforded by this means for advanc- ing the cause of education, it commends itself to your favorable consideration. Departments for the education of professional teachers in Ohio and Miami Universities could be established under the authority of the state, and by a part of the means derived from the large endowments which these institutions have received from the government.'* 1 O.L., XLVII. 19. 2 0.L.,XLVII, local, 261. 'Taylor, A Manual of the Ohio School System, p. 180. ^ The plan proposed by Governor Bartley was the one finally followed by the state fifty-seven years later in establishing normal departments in these two schools. CHAPTER VII SUPPLEMENTARY EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES LIBRARIES The first recognition of libraries in the laws of the state is found in the charter of the Dayton Library Society, February 21, 1805.^ There is plenty of evidence, however, that the early settlers estab- lished libraries before this, but had not sought the legal sanction of a state charter. Venable^ says that the first library in the territory northwest of the Ohio was at Belpre, near Marietta. This was organized in 1796, and was first known as the Putnam Family Library, later as the Belpre, or Belpre Farmers' Library. This library was owned by a joint stock company, the common method of procedure in the formation of later libraries and library com- panies. Another of these early ventures, much better known than the preceding, was the so-called 'Coon-skin Library. This was located at Ames, Washington County, also near Marietta. The reason for the name popularly given to it and the circumstances of its beginning are thus told by one of the founders: At a public meeting of the* inhabitants of Ames, called to devise means to improve our roads, and to consult about making one to connect the settlement at Sunday creek with that on Federal creek, held in the autumn of 1802, the intellectual wants of the neighborhood became the subject of the conversation. It was suggested that a library would supply what was needed, but the settlers had no money, and with few exceptions were in debt for their lands. Mr. Josiah True, of Sunday creek settlement, proposed to obtain the means by catching 'coons, and sending their skins to Boston by Samuel Brown, Esq., who expected to go east in a wagon the next summer. Esquire Brown was present and assented to this proposition. Our young men were active hunters; the 'coon skins and other furs were furnished and sent to market, and the books were bought. The Rev. Thaddeus Harris and the Rev. Dr. Manasseh Cutler selected for us about fifty volumes of choice books, and to these additions were made from time to time. As the settlement increased and children grew up, readers were multiplied, and all could have access to the library.' 1 O.L., III, 288. 2 Venable, Beginnings of Literary Culture in the Ohio Valley, Eistorical and Biographical Sketches, p. 135. ' Cutler, Life and Times of Epkraim Culler, p. SO. 110 SUPPLEMENTARY EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES 1 1 1 These early attempts to furnish opportunity for community study and improvement were followed by an increasing number of similar organizations during the first four decades of the nineteenth century. Atwater, writing in 1838,^ said that most of the towns in Ohio had reading-rooms where a traveler could read all the principal newspapers and periodicals, and that libraries were increasing in number as well as size. The record of incorporations in the session laws bears witness to the probable truth of his statement. One hundred and ninety-two library societies had been incorporated by 1850. The record of incorporation in the preceding decades is as follows: 1805-10 6 1811-20 15 1821-30 45 1831-40 95 1841-50 31 192 The State Library at Columbus received regular appropriations from 1824^ on. In 1846'^ district school libraries were authorized, but their support was left wholly to the initiative of the district. The law authorized the district to raise by taxes a sum not to exceed thirty dollars for the first year, and not more than ten dollars for each succeeding year. The decision was left to a meeting of the taxpayers of the district, called for the purpose of voting on the question. LYCEUMS, INSTITUTES, ATHENAEUMS, AND LITERARY SOCIETIES In addition to the library societies, there were frequent incor- porations of lyceums, athenaeums, institutes, and literary societies, the total number of such incorporations being 64. These developed rapidly after 1830, prior to that time only three institutions of this type being incorporated. The record of their incorporation is as follows: * Atwater, A History of the Slate of Ohio, Natural and Civil, p. 348. ! O.L., XXII, local, 36. ^O.L., XLIV, 81. 112 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO 1805-30 3 1831-40 40 1841-50 21 64 These latter institutions seem designed to afford meeting- places for their members for discussion and opportunity for reading and study. The use of their funds is usually limited to the pur- chase of books, maps, charts, pamphlets, and newspapers. Among them were eight mechanics' institutes, seven of these incorporated after 1831. The first one of the latter was the Ohio Mechanics' Institute of Cincinnati in 1829,^ and its purpose was declared to be for "advancing the best interests of the Mechanics, Manu- facturers and Artizans by the more general diffusion of useful knowledge in these important classes in the community." COLLEGE SOCIETIES The first college literary society incorporated was the Erodel- phian Society of Miami University in 1831, ^ followed in the same year by the Philomathesian Society of Kenyon College.^ By 1850 twenty-three college and university societies were thus given sanction. Four of the number were incorporated under Greek-letter names. MISCELLANEOUS In addition to the various types of educational endeavor repre- sented in the preceding paragraphs there were also incorporated the following institutions, whose names indicate a wide range of literary and artistic interest supplementary to the regular educa- tional agencies: the Historical Society of Ohio, 1822;^ the Cin- cinnati Academy of Fine Arts, 1828;^ the Lancaster Harmonic Society, 1830;^ the Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio, 1831;^ the Eclectic Academy of Music in Cincinnati, 1835;^ the » O.L., XXVII, local, 92. 2 O.L., XXIX, local, 74. 3 O.L., XXIX, local, 196. * O.L., XX, local, 47. * O.L., XXVI, local, 30. « O.L., XXVIII, local, 179. ' O.L., XXIX, local, 122. «0.L., XXXIII, local, 161. SUPPLEMENTARY EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES 113 New Paris Musical Institute, 1843;i the Western Academy of Natural Sciences, 1836;2 the Cleveland Academy of Natural Sciences, 1840;-* the Cincinnati Astronomical Society, 1844;^ the Ohio Institute of Natural Sciences, 1849 i^ the Western Art Union, 1848;« the Columbus Art Union, 1849.7 ' O.L., XLI, local, 174. 2 O.L., XXXIV, local, 110. ' O.L., XXXVIII, local, 138. * O.L., XLII, local, 122. ^ O.L., XLVII, local, 256. « O.L., XLVI, local, 228. ^ O.L., XLVII, local, 267. CHAPTER VIII CONCLUSION The two essential features of Ohio's educational policy as illus- trated by the legislation passed from 180v3 to 1850 are, first, the lack of any efficient central control of local educational activities, and, second, the permissive character of a large part of the legis- lation passed, and the lack of any compulsory features. The large amomit of educational legislation enacted shows that there was no lack of educational interest in the state, either in the pubhc at large or in the people's representatives in the General Assembly. There was a widespread belief in universal education and a desire for it. While there was, as elsewhere, much opposition to taxation and to the idea of distributive responsibility for free schools, the general educational sentiment was good. The laws themselves show in many cases excellent educational possibilities. The weakness of the legislation was due to the fact that the theory followed seemed to be that the function of educational legislation was to establish general rules of organization and control in accord with which the (onimunit ies might regulate their own educational activities and have legal sanction for them, but that it was not the function of the state to develop any legal machinery that would definitely bring about educational results. The w(jrds of Samuel Ix'wis are so significant in this connection that they are (luoted once more. Speaking of the law of 1838, far the best educational legislation of the entire period, he said: It gives to the people the power to do their own business whether in town- ships or districts as the majority may think best. The widest possible latitude is given for popular action: the most that the law does is to prescribe certain general rules within which the people can act under the sanction of the law, and it gives to such popular action the aid of law to effect its purpose.' This expresses as well as it can be done the state theory that vscems to underlie all the educational legislation prior to 1850. ' Third Annual Report of the Sttperinlcndcnt of the Common Schools, made to the Thirty-eighth General Assembly of tlie Slate of Ohio, p. 4. 114 CONCLUSION US One result of this type of legislation was great freedom in edu- cational experimentation, with legislative sanction when that was asked for. In communities where the general school sentiment was high, as in Cincinnati, Cleveland, Akron, and some other towns and cities, this resulted in an excellent type of school system, and through this experimentation a legalized model was given to other communities throughout the state. The results were excellent for those communities which chose to follow the example set, and there were many that did so. On the other hand, there were no penalties in any of the legislation prior to 1850 to compel even towns and cities to organize schools other than those of the district type, and the only compulsion to organize schools of any kind was the loss of the community's share of the school tax if it did not do so. Ohio early took an advanced position on the right and desira- bility of taxing all property in the state for vSchool purposes. This principle appeared in 1825, when the commissioners of each county were directed to levy a half-mill for school support, and it remained in all subsequent laws in some form. With this principle estab- lished, the state did not concern itself further to compel either the taxation or the establishment of schools. These were matters to be decided by smaller local areas. The general idea seemed to be that self-interest and a desire to use the share of money to which each district was entitled would be sufficient incentive for the establishment of public schools in the districts throughout the state. The results of the next fifteen years show that this belief was in large part justified. Mr. Lewis estimated the number of district schools taught in Ohio in the year 1839^ at 13,049, and he based this estimate on actual reports from 5,442 districts in which 7,295 schools were taught. The state, however, took no responsi- bility for seeing that the children of the district attended the school so established, and but a minor responsibility for the activities that were carried on in it. This lack of compelling power and lack of efficient administra- tive officers made the system a loose and ineffective one, under which the various communities continued largely to do that which was right in their own eyes. The great educational blunder of Ohio was in the abolition of the office of state superintendent in 1840. Although the office as > Third Annual Report of the Superintendent of the Common Schools, made to the Thirty-eighth General Assembly of the State of Ohio, p. 48. 116 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO created in 1837 did not carry with it the possibihty of exercising any large legal powers, and was confined largely to the gathering of school statistics and the dissemination throughout the state of educational information concerning the laws in force and other matters of educational interest, it did centralize the educational interest of the state in one office, and had in it great possibilities of usefulness. The law of 1838, with the state superintendent at the head of the system, contained much of educational promise. It is not too much to say that if Mr. Lewis or a leader of equal ability could have continued the work begun so ably by him from 1837 to 1840, the educational development of Ohio might have paralleled that in Massachusetts under the guidance of Horace Mann. The explanation of its failure to do so must be found in the fact that, in spite of much educational interest, the people as a whole were not ready for such leadership. Whatever the causes may have been, the result was to leave Ohio educationally a generation behind the position she might have occupied had she lived up to the full promise of the law of 1838. Nowhere is there a better illustration of the need of a cen- tralized administrative ofiice capable of giving to the legislature advice founded upon knowledge of the facts, and of administering the policies adopted uniformly throughout the state, than in the legislation concerning Ohio school lands. Educational interest, state economic interests — such as the question of internal improve- ments — local interests, and, too often, individual interests were all presented to the legislature, which acted in many cases upon a one- sided presentation of the facts. The result was a mass of confused facts and conflicting legislation that as it multiplied left the legisla- tors themselves in ignorance as to the exact law that applied in particular cases. Opportunities for carelessness and downright dishonesty in the local handling of the funds and the selling and leasing of the lands were afforded, and, as the records show, not all local officials were either careful or honest. Aside from care- lessness and occasional dishonesty, the conflict between the im- mediate interest of a neighbor and the more distant interest of the schools, that often confronted the local appraisers of lands, must have been frequently disastrous for the schools. John Brough, the auditor of state, said in 1840 that "anyone who would seek the records and gather the melancholy facts they contained would be convinced of the waste that had taken place." CONCLUSION 117 The state had no clearly defined state-wide policy applicable in all instances and under all circumstances, and it lacked efficient machinery of government to administer carefully the policies that were initiated. It is not probable that dishonesty or wilful carelessness was the cause of the legislation that made great loss possible, but rather ignorance of conditions and a hand-to-mouth expediency to meet present needs. This could have been largely avoided through the establishment of a central office, interested primarily in preserving for the educational interests of the state the first state-wide grant made by the general government for the use of schools. There is little to be said in summarizing the state's attitude toward secondary and higher education. Ohio lacked in the beginning, and failed to develop during the period, any state edu- cational policy that embraced elementary, secondary, and higher education. Her interest in public education was an interest in public elementary education only, not in secondary or higher institutions. One explanation for this is doubtless found in the abundance of local secondary and higher institutions established by private initiative, and a second in the fact that the three town- ships granted by the government for higher education were located in the Ohio Company's Purchase and in the Symmes Purchase, and that the resulting institutions were regarded as largely local and only quasi-state in nature. With a lack of clearly recognized state institutions of college or university rank, there was no pres- sure from above for a system of preparatory schools under state control. Secondary education was still generally regarded as a privilege to be obtained by those who could afiford to pay for it, not as a recognized part of a free state system. Private secondary schools had been established in abundance. It was not surprising that the development of a state system of secondary schools came as a part of the general high-school movement that began to take on vigorous growth about 1850. The characteristic features of Ohio's educational legislation during her first half-century of statehood left a strong impression upon the state's educational policy for the next fifty years. The lack of any efficient centralized control, the absence of compulsory local supervision of any kind, an abundance of excellent permissive laws, which legalized advanced educational procedure without 118 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO compelling it, the passing of lawe general in form but local in applica- tion, lack of any state agency for training teachers for her schools — these continued throughout the next half-century, from 1850 to 1900, as marked traits of the state's educational procedure. It is only in very recent years that Ohio has freed herself from some of the most undesirable features of her early legislative inheri- tance and has adopted a modern, progressive, centralized state system of education, with state-wide supervision, that places her on a parity with her most advanced sister-states. APPENDIX A A CLASSIFIED COLLECTION AND ABSTRACT OF THE EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION OF THE PERIOD: 1803-50 GENERAL LEGISLATION ACTS TO INCORPORATE THE ORIGINAL SURVEYED TOWNSHIPS, INCLUDING PRO- VISIONS FOR DISTRICTING, ESTABLISHING SCHOOLS, APPORTIONING MONEY, ETC. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L. O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L. O.L, O.L, IV, 66, January 2, 1806. VIII, 100, February 6, 1810. XIII, 295, December 5, 1814. XXIX, 490, March 14, 1831. GENERAL SCHOOL LAWS XIX, 51, January 22, 1821. An act to provide for the regulation and sup- port of common schools. (The first school law.) XX, 86, January 31, 1822. Resolution. Seven commissioners to report a system of common schools. XXIII, 36, February 5, 1825. An act to provide for the support, etc. XXV, 65, January 30, 1827. An act supplementary to the above. XXV, 78, January 30, 1827. An act to establish a fund for the support of common schools. XXVII, 73, February 10, 1829. An act to provide for the support, etc. XXVIII, 56, February 18, 1830. An act in addition to the act to establish a fund, etc. XXVIII, 57, January 14, 1830. An act to amend the school law. XXIX, 414, March 10, 1831. An act to provide for the support, etc. XXIX, 423, March 2, 1831. An act to establish a fund for the support of common schools. XXX, 4, December 23, 1831. An act to amend the school law. XXXI, 18, December 3, 1832. An amendment regulating fees of county treasurers for handling school funds. XXXI, 24, February 13, 1833. An act supplementary to the act concern- ing the school fund. XXXI, 24, February 25, 1833. An act to amend the school law. XXXII, 25, February 28, 1834. An act to provide for the support, etc. XXXIV, 19, March 12, 1836. An act to provide for the support, etc. XXXIV, 654, March 11, 1836. Resolution for a committee to prepare a school district manual. 119 120 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO O.I.. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. 0.1-. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. XXXIV, 654, March 14, 1836. Resolution nriiitsliiiK C. E. Stowc to .study and report on European schools. XXXV, 82, March 27, 1837. An act crtatinj; the office of superintendent of common schools. XXXV, 560, Ajjiil 1, 1837. Resolution ai)|)ointin^ Samuel Lewis superin- tendent of common schools. XXXV, 97, March 28, 1837. An act for the distrihution, etc., of United States surplus revenue. XXXVI, 79, March 19, 1838. An act amending the preceding act. XXXIX, 41, March 27, 1841. An act further to amend the preceding. XXXVI, 21, March 7, 1838. An act for the support, etc. XXXVI, 399, December 16, 1837. Resolution granting certain privileges to the sui)erintcndent of schools. XXXVl, 411, March 9, 1838. Resolution ap]K)iiUing .Samuel Lewis super- intendent for five years. XXXVI, 73, March 17, 1838. An act concerning the distribution of the school fund in certain districts. XXXVI, 85, March 19, 1838. An act levying a tax for school purposes. XXXVI, 90, March 19, 1838. An act regulating the fees of county auditors. XXXVI, 402, January 4, 1838. Resolution concerning Professor Stowe's report on European education. XXXVI, 404, January 4, 1838. Resolution thanking Professor Stowe for the report. XXXVI, 404, January 16, 1838. Resolution appropriating $500.00 for Professor C. K. .Stowe for his labor. XXXVI, 410, March 7, 1838. Resolution providing for the distribution of the report of the superintendent of schools and C. E. .Stowe's report. XXXVI, 412, March 13, 1838. Resolution asking for the amount of school tax levied on colored people. XXXVI, 415, January 16, 1838. Resolution (hat 8,500 copies of the report of the superintendent of schools be printed and distributed. XXXVII, 394, January 16, 1839. Resolution that 9,500 copies of the annual report of the superintendent be printed and distributed. XXXVII, 61, March 16, 1839. An act amending the school law and creating permanently the oflicc of superintendent. XXXVIII, 130, March 23, 1840. An act to abolish the oflice of superin- tendent of schools. XXXIX, 44, March 29, 1841. An act to amend the school law and all acts amendatory thereto. XL, 49, March 7, 1842. An act to amend the school law. XL, 59, March 7, 1842. An act making appropriations. Reduces the school appropriation to $150,000.00. XLI, 59, March 11, 1843. An act further to amend the school law. XLII, 38, March 6, 1844. An act to increase the school fund. XLII, 48, March 12, 1844. An act to amend (he school law. XLIV, 81, I-'ebruary 28, 1846. An act authorizing districts to establish school libraries. APPENDIX A 121 O.L., XLIV, 114, March 2, 1846. An act to amend the preceding act of March 11, 1843. O.L., XLV, 26, February 8, 1847. An act to amend the school law. O.L., XLV, 60, February 8, 1847. An act to amend the act for levying taxes. O.L., XLV, 67, February 8, 1847. An act to incorporate teachers' institutes. O.L., XLV, 32, February 8, 1847. An act to provide for the appointment of county superintendents. O.L., XLVI, 28, January 21, 1848. An act to secure the returns of school sta- tistics. O.L., XLV, local, 187, February 8, 1847. An act for the support of common schools in Akron. (This act made general in 1848.) O.L., XLVI, 40, January 28, 1848. An act to amend the preceding act. O.L., XLVI, 48, February 14, 1848. An act making general the Akron Act. O.L., XLVI, 69, February 22, 1848. An act to amend the act for levying taxes. O.L., XLVI, 81, February 24, 1848. An act to provide a department of common schools for colored persons. O.L., XLVI, 83, February 24, 1848. An act amending the school law. O.L., XLVI, 86, February 24, 1848. An act amending the act to encourage teachers' institutes. O.L., XLVII, 17, February 10, 1849. An act authorizing separate schools for colored children. O.L., XLVII, 19, February 16, 1849. An act amending the act to incorporate teachers' institutes. O.L., XLVII, 22, February 21, 1849. An act for the regulation of public schools in cities and towns. O.L., XLVII, 39, March 6, 1849. An act amending the school law. O.L., XLVII, 43, March 12, 1849. An act to amend the school law. O.L., XLVII, 45, March 15, 1849. An act to amend the Akron Act. O.L., XLVII, 52, March 24, 1849. An act to amend the school law. O.L., XLVIII, 40, March 13, 1850. An act to amend the law concerning public schools in cities and towns. O.L., XLVIII, 41, March 22, 1850. An act concerning school district taxes, etc. O.L., XLVIII, 44, March 22, 1850. An act for the appointment of a state board of public instruction. O.L., XLVIII, 47, March 23, 1850. An act supplementary to the preceding. O.L., XLVIII, 728, January 28, 1850. Resolution for the appointment of a committee to report on the defects of the present school system. SPECIAL ACTS CONCERNING PUBLIC SCHOOLS Special acts for the following purposes were passed during the period from 1829 to 1850: Creating district or changing boundaries of districts 29 Allowing districts to make appropriations, borrow money or tax them- selves for school purposes 26 Authorizing the sale of school lots or other lots for school purposes. ... 18 Authorizing the apportionment of school funds when the school census had not been made 13 Changing the form or powers of the district organization 4 122 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO Governing the distribution of school funds in special cases 6 Relief of individual school ofificers 2 FINES, FEES, ETC., APPLIED TO THE SUPPORT OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS O.L., XXVII, 11, January 28, 1829. An act to regulate grocers and retailers of spirituous liquors. Licenses, $5.00 to $50.00. Fines for operating without license, permitting rioting, drunkenness, gambling, etc., $10.00 to $50.00. All moneys to go to the schools of the county. O.L., XXIX, 161, February 17, 1831. An act for the prevention of immoral practices. Sabbath-breaking— Fine $1.00 to $5.00 Selling liquor on Sunday — Not to exceed 5.00 Disturbing religious meetings — Not to exceed 20.00 Using profanity . 25 to 1 . 00 Exciting disturbance in a tavern, etc .50 to 5.00 Playing bullets, shooting, running horses in towns .50 to 5.00 Liquor dealer keeping nine-pin alley 10.00 to 100.00 Exhibiting a puppet show, juggling, etc 10.00 Tearing down public notices 10.00 Selling liquor within one mile of religious gatherings ex- cept by licensed dealers at place of business, etc 20.00 Bull-baiting, bear-baiting, etc., not to exceed 100.00 Cock-fighting — not to exceed 100.00 Horse-racing on public road 1 . 00 to 5 . 00 All moneys to go to the schools of the township in which ofTenses occur. O.L., XXIX, 304, March 14, 1831. An act regulating sales at auctions. Selling without license 500.00 Failure to render account, not to exceed 1,000.00 All moneys to go to State Literary Fund. O.L., XXIX, 313, March 14, 1831. An act for granting licenses. Peddling without license 20.00 to 100.00 All moneys to go to schools of district in which the ofTense occurs. O.L., XXIX, 446, February 28, 1831. An act to regulate public shows. Exhibiting circus without permit 100.00 Money to go to schools of the county. O.L., XXIX, 469, January 18, 1830. An act to protect the fur trade. Killing muskrats out of season 1 .00 Money to go to schools of township. O.L., XXIX, 477, March 9, 1831. An act concerning the inspection of certain articles. Neglecting to have fish inspected and barrels branded. . . 5.00 Failure to bury offal when fish are packed 5.00 to 50.00 Inspector violating regulations 50.00 Money to go to schools of the county. APPENDIX A 123 O.L., XXXII, 20, February 27, 1834. An act to provide for the punishment of certain crimes. Medical malpractice of various kinds 100.00 to 500.00 Money to go to schools of the county. O.L., XXXII, 47, March 3, 1834. An act for the inspection of salt. Selling or removing salt liable to inspection. Per barrel. 1.00 Money to go to schools of the county. O.L., XLVI, 36, February 7, 1848. Amending the act granting licenses, etc. Peddler's license fees to go to state school fund. Fine for peddling without license 50.00 Money to go to schools of the township. O.L., XLIII, 17, February 10, 1845. An act to prevent firing of cannon upon public streets, etc. Money to go to schools of the township 50 . 00 O.L., XLIV, 10, January 17, 1846. An act to prevent gambling. Proprietor of gambling-house or common gambler 500.00 Money to go to schools of the county. O.L., XLIV, 76, February 28, 1846. An act to protect enclosures. Fine not to exceed 100 . 00 O.L., XLII, 37, March 6, 1844. An act to prevent the introduction and spread- ing of Canada thistles. Allowing to mature or selling seed containing Canada thistle seed 10.00 to 20.00 Money to go to schools of the township. O.L., XXXII, 38, March 1, 1834. Obstructing navigation in the Muskingum River 50.00 O.L., XXXVI, 68, March 17, 1838. Officer or corporation disregarding court orders in quo warranto procedure. . . 10,000.00 Money to go to schools of the county. O.L., XXXVIII, 4, January 17, 1840. Keeping breachy or unruly animals . 25 to 1 . 00 Money to go to schools of the district. O.L., XXXVIII, 57, January 17, 1840. Harboring intoxicated Indians 5.00 to 25.00 Money to go to schools of the district. O.L., XXXIX, 34, March 26, 1841. Selling liquor within two miles of a religious society gathered in a field or wood- land 10.00 Money to go to schools of the township. CITY AND TOWN SCHOOL CHARTEPS LAWS CONCERNING COMMON SCHOOLS IN CITIES AND TOWNS O.L., XXIII, 65, January 8, 1825. An act authorizing the township meeting at Marietta to vote a sum for schools. O.L., XXVII, 33, February 12, 1829. An act creating a school system in the city of Cincinnati. O.L., XXXVIII, 157, March 19, 1840. Amending the preceding act. O.L., XLIII, 413, March 12, 1845. Supplementary. City of Cincinnati. 124 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO O.L O.L O.L. O.L. O.L, O.L. O.L. O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L. O.L O.L O.L, O.L, O.L, O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. O.L. XLIV, 91, February 11, 1846. An act for the better classification of the common schools of Cincinnati and Dayton. XLV, 193, February 6, 1847. An act authorizing the City Council of Cincinnati to levy taxes for school purposes. XLVIII, 662, March 23, 1850. An act authorizing the appointment of a superintendent of conmion schools in Cincinnati. XXXIV, 226, March 3, 1836. An act incorporating the city of Ohio. Pro- vides for school system. XXXV, 32, January 7, 1837. An act incorporating the city of Toledo. Provides for school system. XXXIV, 271, March 5, 1836. An act incorporating the city of Cleveland. Provides for school system. XLVI, 150, February 18, 1848. An act for the better regulation and sup- port of the Cleveland schools. XXXVI, 329, March 16, 1838. Amending the act to incorporate the town of Portsmouth. School system adapted from the Cincinnati charter. XXXVII, 194, March 12, 1839. An act for the support and better regula- tion of the schools in the town of Zanesville. XXXIX, 22, February 20, 1841. An act to regulate schools in the town of Marietta. XXXIX, 135, March 27, 1841. An act to incorporate the city of Dayton. Adapts provisions of the Cleveland and Cincinnati schools. XLHl, 57, February 3, 1845. An act for the support and better regulation of schools in the city of Columbus. XLVH, 230, February 16, 1849. Amending the preceding. XLIII, 150, February 26, 1845. An act incorporating the town of Mt. Vernon. Provides for the control of schools. XLVH, 205, March 9, 1849. An act concerning taxes, schools, and sewers in the city of Toledo. XLIV, 261, March 2, 1846. An act to regulate common schools in Maumee City, Lucas County, and in Elyria. XLV, 121, February 8, 1847. An act for the support and better regulation of schools in District 1, in Ravenna. XLVI, 185, •'"ebruary 18, 1848. An act for the support and better regula- tion of schools in Lithopolis. XLVI, 199, February 19, 1848. An act for the support and better regula- tion of schools in Lancaster. XLVIII, 647, February 13, 1850. Amending the preceding. XLVI, 237, February 24, 1848. An act for the support and better regula- tion of schools in Lebanon District, Warren County. XLVH, 253, March 21, 1849, An act repealing the Akron Act in the town of New Lisbon. XLVIII, 648, March 22, 1850. An act to repeal the provisions of the act for the regulation of schools in cities and towns etc., so far as it is in force in the town of Hanover. XLVIII, 662, March 21, 1850. An act to exempt Mt. Vernon from the provisions of the Akron Act. XLVIII, 373, March 21, 1850. Amending the act to incorporate the town of Fulton. (Providing for schools.) APPENDIX A 125 O.L., XLVIII, 421, March 19, 1850. An act incorporating the city of Piqua. (Providing for schools.) O.L., XLVIII, 446, March 21, 1850. An act to incorporate the city of Spring- field. (Providing for schools.) O.L., XLVIII, 648, March 1, 1850. An act extending the provisions of the act for regulation of schools in cities etc., to Union School District No. 7 in Springfield and Suffield Townships in Summit and Portage counties. O.L., XLVIII, 651, March 19, 1850. An act authorizing the citizens of Wooster to vote for or against the provisions of the Akron Act. ACTS CONCERNING LOCAL SCHOOL FUNDS O.L., XXVII, 22, January 5, 1829. An act establishing a fund for common schools in Clermont County. O.L., XXVII, 180, February 11, 1829. \ O.L., XXVIII, 56, February 2, 1830. { Acts supplementary to the preced- O.L., XXVIII, 57, January 14, 1830. j ing act. O.L., XXIX, 210, March 11, 1831. ) O.L., XXXII, 100, February 20, 1834; O.L., XXXVIII, 149, March 17, 1840. Acts establishing a common school fund in that part of Warren County in the Virginia Military District. O.L., XXVIII, 93, February 18, 1830. An act incorporating the trustees of the Windham School Fund. O.L., XXXVII, 50, February 16, 1839; O.L., XLI, 26, January 16, 1843. Acts supplementary to the preceding. ACTS CONCERNING SCHOOLS FOR POOR CHILDREN O.L., XXIV, 36, January 24, 1826. An act to incorporate the Charity School of Kendal, Stark County. O.L., XXVII, 76, February 10, 1829; O.L., XLVIII, 625, March 7, 1850. Acts supplementary to the preceding. O.L., XXV, 62, January 24, 1827. An act to incorporate the trustees of the Woodward Free Grammar School. O.L., XXXIV, 514, March 14, 1836. An act to incorporate the M'Intire Poor School, in Zanesvillc. O.L., XXXVI, 208, March 7, 1838. An act to incorporate the Emigrants Friends Society of Cincinnati. LAWS CONCERNING SCHOOL LANDS GENERAL LAWS CONCERNING SCHOOL LANDS Journals of the American Congress. 1774-88. Vol. IV, 520. May 20, 1785. An ordinance for ascertaining the mode of disposing of lands in the Western territory. United States Statutes at Large. Vol. I, 51. July 13, 1787. An ordinance for the government of the territory of the United States northwest of the River Ohio. 126 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION IN OHIO Journals of the American Congress. 1774-88. Vol. IV, Appendix, 17. Powers to the Board of Treasury to contract for the sale of the Western territory. United States Statutes at Large. Vol. II, 175. April 30, 1802. Enabling Act for Ohio. Nashee's Compilation, page 161, Territorial Act. November 27, 1800. An act authorizing the leasing of school lands, etc., in Washington County. O.L., I, 61, April 15, 1803. An act to provide for the leasing of school lands. O.L., III, 230, February 20, 1805. An act directing the mode of leasing Section 16. O.L., III, 321, April 15, 1805. An act to provide for leasing school lands. O.L., IV, 66, January 2, 1806. An act to incorporate the original surveyed townships. (Leasing school lands.) O.L., VI, 125, January 14, 1808. An act accepting certain lands offered by Congress for the use of schools in the Virginia Military Tract, in lieu of those heretofore appropriated. O.L., VII, 109, February 17, 1809. An act directing the manner in which the school lands in the Virginia Military Tract shall be surveyed and dis- posed of. O.L., VIII, 100, February 6, 1810. An act to incorporate the original surveyed townships. (Leasing school lands.) O.L., VIII, 254, February 16, 1810. Amending the act concerning the disposi- tion etc., of the school lands in the Virginia Military Tract. O.L., XIII, 295, December 5, 1814. An act supplementing the act to incorporate townships. (Leasing school lands.) O.L., XIV, 418, February 26, 1816. An act directing the manner of leasing the school lands in the Virginia Military Tract. O.L., XV, 202, January 27, 1817. An act to provide for leasing the school lands. (99-year leases.) O.L., XIX, 161, February 21, 1821. An act to provide for leasing school lands in the United States Military District. O.L., XX, 34, January 31, 1822. An act regulating the school lands in the Connecticut Western Reserve. O.L., XXI, a, January 27, 1823. An act to authorize the surrender of certain leases, etc. (School lands.) O.L., XXV, 56, January 29, 1827. An act to provide for the sale of Section 16. O.L., XXV, 103, January 19, 1827. An act to provide for obtaining the consent of the inhabitants of the United States Military District to the sale of school lands, and to authorize the surrender of leases and the receiving of certificates of purchase. O.L., XXV, 45, January 29, 1827. An act to enable the inhabitants of the Vir- ginia Military District to vote on the sale of school lands. O.L., XXVI, 23, January 28, 1828. An act to provide for the sale of the school lands in the Virginia Military District and to authorize the surrender of leases and the receiving of certificates of purchase. O.L., XXVI, 135, February 11, 1828. An act to enable the inhabitants of the Connecticut Western Reserve to give their consent to the sale of their school lands. APPENDIX A 127 O.L., XXVI, 80, February 11, 1828. An act to provide for granting temporary- leases of certain school lands. O.L., XXVIII, 16, February 9, 1830. An act to amend the act providing for the sale of Section 16. O.L., XXVIII, 18, December 31, 1829. An act to enable the inhabitants of the Connecticut Western Reserve to give their consent to the sale of their school lands. O.L., XXIX, 490, March 14, 1831. An act to incorporate the original surveyed townships. (Management of the school lands.) O.L., XXIX, 187, March 3, 1831. An act making further provision for the sale of Section 16. O.L., XXXIII, 128, February 25, 1835. An act authorizing the electors in the several counties of the Western Reserve to give their assent to the sale of additional school land. O.L., XXXVI, 63, March 16, 1838. Amending the act to provide for the sale of Section 16. O.L., XXXVII, 78, March 18, 1839. An act for the relief of holders of leases on Section 16. O.L., XXXVIII, 62, March 21, 1840. Amending the act providing for the sale of school lands in the United States Military District. O.L., XXXVIII, 164, March 20, 1840. An act providing for the sale of three tracts of Moravian school lands in Tuscarawas County. 0,L., XLI, 20, February 2, 1843. An act to regulate the sale of ministerial and school lands and the surrender of permanent leases, O.L., XLIII, 58, March 4, 1845. An act to fix the minimum price of school lands. O.L., XLVI, 38, February 8, 1848. An act to enable the inhabitants of the Western Reserve to give their consent to the sale of their school lands. O.L., XLVII, 232, February 17, 1849. An act to provide for the sale of the Western Reserve school lands. SPECIAL ACTS CONCERNING SCHOOL LANDS 1803-17 Granting permanent leases 25 Concerning other features of leases 5 1817-23 Concerning leases 18 Extending time of payment of rent 3 1823-27 Calling for a revaluation of land 4 Granting one-year leases 2 For the relief of lessees 4 Leasing less than legal amount 1 1827-31 Calling for a revaluation of land 15 For surrendering leases 15 Authorizing sales of school lands 12 Making special provisions for leasing 5 128 HIS'IORY Ol' i:i)lICATI()NAI. LFCtUSLATION FN OHIO Distrihiitinji funds from leased lands 4 Leasing less than lenal amount 2 For the relief of lessees 1 1831-38 Providinti for sales 47 Changing provisions for surrendering leases 17 Postponing payments due 17 Leasing less than legal amount 7 Distributing funds from leased lands 6 Sfx-eial [jrovisions in lease 3 Concerning a revaluation of land 5 1838-45 Concerning the surrender of leases 21 Postponing payments 14 Acts legalizing sales 13 Special provisions for leasing 11 Sixty-four of the acts of this period included a minimum price ranging from (wo to thirty dollars per acre. The minimum price that appears most frequently is five