ILLINOIS
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN
PRODUCTION NOTE
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library Brittle Books Project, 2012.COPYRIGHT NOTIFICATION
In Copyright.
Reproduced according to U.S. copyright law USC 17 section 107. Contact dcc@librarv.uiuc.edu for more information.
This digital copy was made from the printed version held by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
It was made in compliance with copyright law.
Prepared for the Brittle Books Project, Preservation Department, Main Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
by
Northern Micrographics Brookhaven Bindery La Crosse, Wisconsin
2012BULLETIN of the
Ilnturrattg of l&nrtlf (Earolfna
The Contributions of C. G. Memminger to the Cause of Education
BY
MATTIE CROUCH KNEECE
ISSUED SEMI-MONTHLY BY THE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION DIVISION
No. 177 Feb. 15, 1926
COLUMBIA. S. C.
Second-Class Mail MatterTHE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA IS IN ITS
122ND SESSION
And Offers Courses in
College of Arts and Science
School of Education
Graduate School
School of Engineering
School of Law
School of Commerce
School of Journalism
School of Pharmacy	-	'
Degrees
Bachelor of Arts Bachelor of Arts in Education Bachelor of Arts in Journalism Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
Bachelor of Science in Commerce
Bachelor of Science in Pharmacy
Pharmaceutical Chemist
Graduate in Pharmacy
Civil Engineering
Bachelor of Laws
Master of Arts
Doctor of Philosophy
Summer Session
For Superintendents, Principals, and High School
Teachers.Secretary of the Treasury of the Confederate States of AmericaThe Contributions of C. G. Memminger to the Cause of Education
BY
MATTIE CROUCH KNEECE
(Mrs. J. f. Kneece)
University Extension Division University of South Carolina 1926Z'M.ir 7
d,
W
FOREWORD.
Every study of education in South Carolina in the generation just preceding the Confederate War brings one upon many traces of the strong influence of C. G. Memminger on the education, not only of Charleston, but of the State. Yet, so far as we know, there has hitherto been no connected account of Mr. Memminger’s contributions to education.
This study by Mrs. Kneece was undertaken with the twofold purpose of supplying a needed link in the story of education in the State and of doing delayed justice to the memory of a great South Carolinian.
Patterson Wardlaw.CONTENTS.
PAGE
INTRODUCTION .................................    7
1.	Purpose of Study ......................... 7
w2.	Scope ................................... 7
3.	Sources ................................. 7
I.	BRIEF SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF MR. MEM-MINGER .............................................. 9
II.	EARLY ACTIVITIES FOR EDUCATION ................. 13
1.	Studies Free School System............... 13
2.	Opposition to “Pauper” Schools .......... 13
3.	Sends His Children to Public Schools i... 14
4.	Chairman of Committee on Education in the Leg-
islature ............................... 15
5.	Interested in the Education of the Deaf, Dumb
and Blind .............................. 15
6.	Trustee of South Carolina College........ 17
III.	REORGANIZATION OF CHARLESTON SCHOOLS . 19
1.	Commissioners Had Failed to Interpret Act of
1811 ................................... 19
2.	Members of the New Board and Their Policy .. 19
3.	Description of the New System ........... 23
4.	Activities in the Legislature............ 28
IV.	THE NORMAL SCHOOL .............................  29
1.	Events Leading to Its Establishment...... 29
2.	Mr. Memminger’s Report to the Legislature .. 29
3.	The Act Providing for the Normal School .... 32
4.	Subscriptions by Charleston Citizens .... 33
5.	Purchase of Site and Letting of Contract. 33
6.	Work Begins at the Normal School ........ 35
7.	The Aims of the Normal School ........... 36
V.	GROWTH AND INFLUENCE OF THE CHARLESTON SCHOOLS ......................................   38
1.	Charleston in Line with Other Cities..... 38
2.	More Schools Built .....................  39
3.	Reports of Committees ................... 40
4.	Influence in Other Sections ............. 45
5.	Opposition Encountered .................. 47
6.	Interruption of the Schools by the War .. 52CONTENTS—Continued.
PAGE
VI.	RESUMPTION OF WORK IN 1867 ...................... 54
1.	The Opening of the Schools.................54
2.	Provision for the Education of the Negroes_54
3.	Contributions from Peabody Fund ........... 56
4.	Report of the Board in 1868 ............... 56
5.	The Report of 1869 ....................... 59
6.	Removal of the Board of Commissioners by Gov-
ernor Scott............................   59
VII.	CLOSING PERIOD OF SERVICE....................... 62
1.	Schools Reopened by Mr. Memminger ......... 62
2.	Appropriate Names Given to Charleston Schools 62
3.	Institution of Competitive Examinations....63
4.	Legislation Introduced by Mr. Memminger____64
5.	The System of Public Schools Becomes More
Popular ...............................   64
6.	Resignation of Chairmanship of the Board of
Commissioners .........................   66
7.	Editorial in the News and Courier......... 67
8.	The Memminger Memorial ................... 69
9.	Death of Mr. Memminger...................  71
10.	Tributes by the Bar and by	the Press ..... 71
VIII.	CONCLUSIONS ....................................   73
IX.	EXHIBITS:
A ..........................................    75
B ............................................ 76
C ............................................ 77
D ..........................................     77
E ...........................................  79
F .........................................      80
X.	BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................  83INTRODUCTION
1.	Purpose of Study.
In making a study of the history of education of our State one constantly comes across references to the “great work of Mr. Memminger”. The purpose of this study is to find out what were the contributions of C. G. Memminger to the cause of education.
2.	Scope.
This study contains only the educational contributions of Mr. Memminger. Due credit will be given those who worked with Mr. Memminger in the execution of his great plans.
3.	Sources.
Valuable material has been found on the subject in the Memminger School library, the Charleston library, the State library, and the University of South Carolina library.
4.	Acknowledgment.
The writer desires to express appreciation to Dr. Patterson Wardlaw, of the University of South Carolina, for his valuable suggestions in the treatment of this subject, also to thank the librarians and other individuals in the State who so cheerfully gave their cooperation in finding material on the subject.
For the loan of valuable books and pamphlets, the writer especially thanks Dr. Yates Snowden, of the University of South Carolina, Superintendent A. B. Rhett, of the Charleston City Schools, and Judge R. Withers Memminger of Charleston.CHAPTER I.
BRIEF SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF MR. MEMMINGER
Christopher Gustavus Memminger was born in Nay-hingen, in the Dukedom of Wurtemberg, Germany, January 9, 1803. His father was Christopher Godfrey Memminger, Quartermaster of the Prince-Elector’s Battalion of Foot Jaegers, or Riflemen. His mother, Eberhardina Elizabeth Memminger, was the daughter of John Michael Kohler. Soon after the birth of his only son, the father was killed in battle at Heilbronn.
The mother and little son emigrated to America with Mr. Kohler and his family. They settled in Charleston where the mother soon died. We may find entered on the books of the Charleston Orphan Home under date of January 29, 1807, the following: “Took into consideration the application of Magdalena Kohler for the admission of her grandchild, Christopher Gustavus Memminger, aged four years, and agreed thereto.” (3-12)* After securing a home for the boy the grandparents moved to Philadelphia.
It was at this Orphan Home that Mr. Thomas Bennett, who afterwards became governor, was attracted to the little orphan and took him at the age of eleven into his own home and gave to him all of the advantages and social heritage that he gave to his own children. “The best training that tutors could give was provided for him, while on his young mind and aspiring nature a lofty ambition and determined purpose was fixed by one who took him gently by the hand and led his thoughts into deep channels of truth, and who strengthened his spirit by a noble example of manhood.” (3-19)
*Thruout this study sources are indicated by numbers in parentheses. The first number given refers to the title of the same number in the bibliography. The second number is the page reference.10	University Extension Division
Before young Memminger reached his thirteenth birthday he entered South Carolina College, where he graduated four years later at the age of sixteen with second honor in a class of thirty-two.
After graduation Mr. Memminger entered the law office of Mr. Joseph Bennett, the brother of his great benefactor. He studied law in the office of Mr. Bennett, who was at that time in partnership with Mr. B. F. Hunt. It was impossible for Mr. Memminger to be admitted to the Bar until he could perfect his naturalization papers. An act providing for such cases was passed under the recommendation of President Van Buren, and under it Mr. Memminger became a citizen of the United States, and was admitted to the Bar in 1825. Mr. Memminger at once entered upon a successful professional career.
His biographer, Capers, says of him: “His mind was eminently logical. In his orations, or addresses, he always sought to convince his hearers by argument and not to lead them by appeals to their emotions. Those who knew him well, and were long associated with him at the Bar and in the legislative councils of the State, testify that he possessed to a remarkable degree, the power of stating his propositions with such clearness, and presenting them in such an earnest manner, that he brought conviction of their truth even before they were supported by an argument. It was this peculiar characteristic that made him so effective before a jury.” (3-184) Hon. Joseph D. Pope said: “Mr. Memminger was one of the best of our lawyers in consultation in a law case of any intricacy, in determining what should be put forward and what should be kept back, and hence he was a superb examiner of witnesses. In a case of purely business character involving the details of commercial transactions Mr. Memminger was the superior to Mr. Petigru or of any lawyer I have ever known.” (3-185)Memminger and Education
11
In 1832 Mr. Memminger was married to Miss Mary Wilkinson, a daughter of Dr. Willis Wilkinson, formerly of Virginia. He was married a second time in 1878 to Miss Sarah A. Wilkinson, a sister of his former wife.
In the days of nullification we find Mr. Memminger not in sympathy with the movement. By his writings he contributed greatly to the strength of the anti-nullification party in South Carolina. While he was young he identified himself with the Unionist party which at that time had the support of some of the strongest men of the State.
Before Mr. Memminger’s legislative period of service began, he had been elected alderman in the city of Charleston and had been instrumental in bringing about some important improvements, among these being condemnatory proceedings for the widening of the southern part of King Street.
In 1836 Mr. Memminger was sent to the legislature as one of the representatives from the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael. He remained a representative until 1860 with the exception of the years 1853 and 1854. At his first term in the legislature he was placed on three important committees, the Finance, the Federal Relations, and the Education Committees. He was made chairman of the Education Committee. In the legislature he gave much of his attention to the financial policy of the State and the banking system then authorized by law, and never neglected any opportunity of serving his people in the advancement of public education. On the pages of the Journals of the House of Representatives we can find Mr. Memminger’s name connected with all important legislation for a period of a quarter of a century prior to the War Between the States. We find him opposed to a national bank, but not to the maintenance of a state bank under proper restrictions. Many of his longest speeches were in the interest of the bank movement.12
University Extension Division
In 1860 Mr. Memminger was sent as a commissioner to Virginia to urge the cooperation of that state in matters of defense. It was decided, however, that each state must act for itself, and in default of the support desired from Virginia, South Carolina determined on withdrawing from the Union. Mr. Memminger’s address to the General Assembly of Virginia is published in his biography by Capers. It is considered one of his best speeches.
The most active period of Mr. Memminger’s educational services to the State began in 1854 when he was appointed on the Board of Free School Commissioners from the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael. This service lasted for thirty-three years.
Mr. Memminger served the Confederacy as Secretary to the Treasury for the first three years of the war. This was a laborious and difficult position to fill, but Mr. Memminger gave it his best attention and energy. He was only an officer executing the will of Congress, which body was often opposed to his judgment and recommendations. On June 14, 1864, Mr. Memminger offered his resignation to President Davis. This resignation, which gives reason for this step, may be found in Capers’ biography of Mr. Memminger.
Mr. Memminger in 1864 retired to his summer home in Flat Rock, N. C., where he remained until after the close of hostilities. He then rejoined his former partner, Mr. William Jervey, and began again the practice of law in Charleston. In 1873 the University of South Carolina conferred upon Mr. Memminger the degree of Doctor of Laws.
In 1877, altho he was then in his seventy-fifth year, Mr. Memminger was again elected to the legislature and continued to serve his State in many capacities until his death on March 7, 1888.CHAPTER II.
EARLY ACTIVITIES FOR EDUCATION
1.	Studies Free School System.
Mr. Memminger, as a young man, proved himself to be the champion of free schools. He believed that South Carolina could have as good schools as any other section of the country and he determined to do what he could to make them so.
In 1834 he and Mr. W. Jefferson Bennett, his foster-brother and co-laborer in the work for many years, undertook the reformation of the public school system of Charleston. They traveled thru many northern and New England states and made a study of the best schools in those sections with a view to introducing the same system in Charleston and later in all parts of the State. (3-110) His idea was to make the Charleston schools models so that other sections would be attracted to them and would be induced to adopt the same improvements in their schools.
2.	Opposition to “Pauper” Schools.
The free schools were patronized chiefly by the poorer classes of people who could not afford to hire tutors or send their children to private schools. (15-116) The act of 1811 had provided that the schools should be free for all, preference being given to poor orphans and children of indigent parents. The great cause of the failure of the system of free schools seems to have been this favoring of paupers. (15-111) Many referred to the schools as “pauper” schools. It seems natural that the injustice of the term would arouse the resentment of Mr. Memminger who had himself, as a little orphan, been the recipient of public benefactions. It always grieved Mr. Memminger to have those who were un-14
University Extension Division
fortunate referred to as “paupers”. He determined to change the attitude of the people towards the schools, by improving them in such a way that all classes would be attracted to them and would give them patronage. (25-Mar. 8, 1888)
3. Sends His Children to Public Schools.
In order to make the common schools popular Mr. Memminger decided to send his own children to them. He also induced many of his friends to do the same thing. (25-Mar. 8, 1888) The writer has at hand a letter from Mr. Memminger’s son, Dr. Allard Memminger, in which he says that his two sisters attended the public schools against their will. This at that time was a very unpopular thing to do. It took great courage, but it was courage that no other leader hitherto had shown. Col. R. F. W. Allston had felt that such a step was necessary when he said:
“The only way of exciting in them a generous ambition, is to bring them into contact with the enlightened neighbors, and to present, as a common right, what, if offered to them could be considered only as an alms. A general system, in which rich and poor were put upon the same footing, in which all distinctions of class and fortune were merged in the distinction of children of the commonwealth, would awaken a new order of competition which had never been felt before. The love of knowledge will never spring up spontaneously in them; it must be inspired from without, and the common school system seems to us precisely the machinery by which it can be imparted.” (19-144)
While many had felt the need of making the schools popular for all, Mr. Memminger was the first to take a decided step to make them so. This he did when he became a patron of the schools. When the more prosperous began to patronize the schools they were then looked upon with more favor by all classes.Memminger and Education
15
4.	Chairman of Committee on Education in the Legislature.
In November, 1836, Mr. Memminger was elected a member of the House of Representatives from the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael, in which was located the city of Charleston. Immediately Mr. Memminger was placed upon three important committees. He was made chairman of the Education Committee. He was a member of the legislature from 1836 to 1860 with the exception of the two years 1853 and 1854. He also returned for a later period after the war. As a member of the legislature he was in a position to present arguments for much of the necessary legislation for carrying out his plans for improving the public school system.
5.	Interested in Education of Deaf, Dumb, and Blind.
Mr. Memminger always interested himself in the needs of the unfortunate. The writer finds in the reports of the General Assembly of the date December 13, 1841, the following:
“Mr. Memminger submitted a resolution, which was unanimously agreed to, and ordered to the Senate, directing the commissioners to provide for the education of the Deaf and Dumb children of this State, to appropriate one-half the amount appropriated for the education of the Deaf and Dumb, to the education of the Blind of this State, at institutions for the Blind.”
In the reports of the General Assembly of 1844, there was listed one application that year, a young man, E. Feaster, a native of Fairfield County, who was sent to the Institution for the Blind at Boston in June.
Under date of December 4, 1860, in the reports of the General Assembly, Mr., Memminger as Chairman of Commissioners of the Deaf, Dumb, and Blind reported:
“That in February last they took possession of the new building erected at Cedar Spring, although not com-Campus of the University of South Carolina (then South Carolina College) when Mr. Memminger was trustee. Lithographed from
a painting by E. Dovilliers, about 1840.	•Memminger and Education
17
pletely finished according to contract. The report of the Principal of the Institution, herewith enclosed, will present the details of management and the present condition of the pupils now in the Institution; as, also, of many who have been educated there. The pupils and inmates have enjoyed their usual good health and made the usual favorable impressions at the general examinations. The commissioners deem it due to the teachers and officers, that they should express to your honorable body their approbation of their faithfulness, diligence, and skill. The buildings and grounds are not yet entirely completed. Several imperfections appeared in parts of the work, which required time to develop, and the architect is now engaged in making a final survey, with a view to closing the contract. The proper improvement of the grounds is a work of time, and as it is quite important that it should be done in a tasteful, as well as a useful style, the commissioners have awaited the developments of nature, and will proceed with the portion of the work as circumstances will permit, and will ask further appropriation with a sparing hand. At present the only recommendation which they make is, that the usual number of reports of the Principal be printed in pamphlet form for the use of the Institution.
Respectfully submitted,
C. G. Memminger and Sam'l McAliley, Commissioners of Deaf, Dumb and Blind.
December 4, 1860-2.”
There were reported in the enclosure sixteen mutes and seventeen blind in attendance at this school.
6. Trustee of South Carolina College.
Mr. Memminger was elected trustee of South Carolina College by the legislature in 1837. He continued to serve his alma mater in this capacity for about a quarter of a century. This period as trustee was almost coinci-18
University Extension Division
dent with his time of service in the legislature. Opportunities came to him to assist in bringing about needed legislation for the advancement of the institution. In the 1877 session of the legislature Mr. Memminger brought forward a bill for the reorganization of South Carolina College.CHAPTER III.
REORGANIZATION OF CHARLESTON SCHOOLS
1.	Commissioners Had Failed to Interpret Act of 1811.
The Board of Free School Commissioners in their report to the Legislature in 1854, strange to say, made the same mistake that the commissioners had made since the passage of the Act of 1811. They embodied in their report that year these words: “We would respectfully suggest to the Legislature the necessity of passing ail act to require the poor to send their children to our schools for a portion of the year at least.” (1-183) They emphasized the fact that the free schools were for the poor when the act had distinctly said “that every citizen of this State shall be entitled to send his or her child or children, ward or wards, to any free school in the district where he or she may reside free from any expense whatsoever on account of tuition.” This meant that all were to share the free education, that the schools should be common schools.
2.	Members of the New Board and Their Policy.
In 1855 the Legislature made »many changes on the Board of Free School Commissioners from the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael. There were seven new members. Mr. Memminger was elected chairman of the board which consisted of the following members: C. G. Memminger, John Russell, William Lebby, W. Jefferson Bennett, William C. Bee, George Buist, George S. Bryan, Frederick Richards, William Jervey, Samuel H. Dickson, M.D., Col. James Simons, Charles M. Furman, and Daniel Horlbeck.
This is the beginning of Mr. Memminger’s most active period of service to the cause of education. He remained on the Board for thirty-three years and was chairman all that time with the exception of one term.20
University Extension Division
Mr. Henry P. Archer, in his history of the Charleston schools, says: “We now enter (1855) upon that period in the history of the city public schools which may be not inaptly called the period of development. It is in fact an epoch in their history, since from this year are dated the improvements on the old system of State free schools in Charleston.” (1-184)
The following is a quotation from an official circular issued by the Bureau of Education of the United States in 1889:	“The Charleston commissioners, especially
C. G. Memminger, A. G. McGrath, and W. Jefferson Bennett, roused from their lethargy, and in the face of bitter prejudice revolutionized the system. They worked on a totally different plan. Their aim was to provide schools for all and not for paupers only.” (3-112)
In the Report of the Commissioner of Education of the United States of 1871, we find: “About this time an incidental visit was made to the city of Charleston by Hon. Henry Barnard, who was invited to attend a meeting of a club, composed of the most prominent literary gentlemen of the city. The meeting of the club on this occasion was held at the house of James J. McCarter. At the suggestion of Mr. McCarter, the question proposed for the evening’s discussion was waived, and the Hon. Mr. Barnard was invited to speak upon the public school system of the North. A discussion upon various points evolved by Mr. Barnard’s address succeeded, which created quite an interest among the members present.
“Soon after this two public-spirited citizens, Colonel Memminger and W. J. Bennett, Esq., visited the free schools of several northern cities, to observe the working of their respective plans, and to see if they could properly be transferred, with or without modification, to the city of Charleston. The impressions created by this visit were deep and favorable, resulting in the exercise of the influence of Colonel Memminger, who was then a member of the legislature, for the creation of a systemMemminger and Education
21
of education for the city of Charleston. The legislature adopted such a plan, and provided the requisite means for an experiment, and about the 1st of July, 1856, with appropriate ceremonies, the first public school under the new regime was opened.” (16-1871, P. 344)
Mr. Memminger was now in a position to put into execution the plans he had wished to carry out for many years. He had thoroly studied the success of the system of public schools in the north, and now, with the hearty cooperation of his co-workers, he began to introduce this perfected system of the Northern States. In all his work, Mr. Memminger had the assistance of some of the best and most able men of Charleston, especially that of W. J. Bennett and A. G. McGrath. By referring to Exhibit F at the end of this study, we notice that a large number of the most fearless members of the board of which Mr. Memminger was chairman, remained on the board with him for many years, thus making it possible to carry out their great plans for the schools of Charleston. The policy of the new board was active and progressive. Their plan was consolidation and classification of the schools. They began to plan the erection of a schoolhouse, with a basement of 9 feet, and 3 stories, each 16 feet high. Mr. Bennett made the plan of this schoolhouse which was built on St. Philip Street, near George. They modeled this school after the public schools in New York City. The board decided to get the equipment and the teachers from the north. (1-185) Mr. Archer says:
“In April, 1856, Mr. Memminger and Mr. Bennett went to New York, Brooklyn and Philadelphia for the purpose of purchasing furniture for the new schoolhouse and for engaging a male Principal and two female teachers. After a diligent examination of several weeks, they invited Mr. J. D. Geddings and the Misses Edmonds. Mr. Geddings had been the Superintendent of Schools in Brooklyn and was highly recommended by Mr. Henry22
University Extension Division
Barnard, the Commissioner of Public Schools of Rhode Island and afterwards United States Commissioner of Education; the Misses Edmonds were teachers from the schools of New York/5 (1-185)
Miss Anna C. Brackett, one of the first teachers of the Normal School, in an article on Charleston written for Harper's Magazine, pays the following tribute to the Board of which Mr. Memminger was chairman: “They meant to have good schools, and they were determined to have good teachers, and in time to have them educated in their own city. The men who initiated the movement and who gave it their personal attention, and not merely the weight of their names, were the men who should begin such enterprises. They were a power in the community, and commanded universal respect and confidence. They made up their minds that as to schools they must learn of the north, and they faced the necessity of the situation with a noble courage. Their ultimate purpose was to supply their city with good schools, taught by native teachers, and they hesitated at no sacrifice of their life-long prejudices to attain their end. They must have large and convenient houses. They built them, sparing no expense and no trouble to make them as good as any. They needed teachers in line with the best theories, and familiar with the most tested practice of the profession. They took them from the principals of New York and Providence grammar-schools. They demanded the best, and they offered those men and women salaries sufficient to draw them from their positions in those two cities, and to make the question of their acceptance to the offers only a matter of time. They made these schools free to all the children of the city, and bought the books which were to be used. They furnished the rooms with everything that could make them attractive and healthful. They sought in the city for the best teachers, men and women, that they could find, and made them assistants to the northern principals, to learn ofMemminger and Education
23
and to be trained in their ways; and when all this had been done they put their own children, not only boys, but girls, into these public free schools, side by side with any who might choose to come. Never was there a nobler instance of entire singleness of purpose and of the sacrifice of preconceived opinions to conviction.” (2-Harper’s Magazine)
3. Description of the New System.
Mr. Memminger in his report to the legislature in the year 1856, gives a detailed description of the system. He enumerates the advantages of the new experiment and calls the attention of the legislature to the needed legislation for the benefit of the schools. This report explains the system so completely that it is given in full, as follows:
“The commissioners of Free Schools for the Parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael respectfully report:
“That since their last report they have completed the new schoolhouse on St. Philip’s Street, and on the 4th of July last inaugurated its occupation by a public celebration in the city of Charleston, on which occasion the board, in the terms of the Act of 1811, offered the benefits of the school to every resident citizen of the election district. The schoolhouse affords accommodation in its various departments for about eight hundred children. It is so arranged as to make a complete division between the boys and girls over eight or nine years of age. The boys occupy the third story of the building and that portion of the lot which is separated for their use. The girls occupy the second story and have the use of one-half of the lot, which is set apart for their use; and the little children occupy the first story in a primary department, and are permitted to play in the grounds set apart for the girls at hours when the girls are engaged in the school. In this way there are three distinct schools24
University Extension Division
in the building, each having a large assembling hall, with appropriate class rooms. Over the whole establishment is a competent male Principal, who has general superintendence, with a special charge over the Boys’ Grammar School, as Principal of that department, with appropriate teachers under him. The Girls’ Grammar School is under the special charge of a competent female Principal with appropriate teachers under her; and the primary department, consisting of the smaller children of both sexes, is under another competent female Principal, with appropriate teachers under her. The children begin their education in this primary department, and whenever sufficiently advanced, they are transferred to the respective grammar schools above.
“The Board were induced to erect and furnish this large and commodious building with a view to revive or establish a system of common schools. But they would have hesitated in adopting this plan, had they not been convinced that the erection of such a building would be a gain even to the free school system. It seemed to them to be a wise economy to erect one large building instead of the many others which would be required to accommodate separate schools. But the improvement and economy was still more manifest in the classification of pupils and selection of teachers. In separate schools the same teacher is required to teach the highest and lowest class ; and it is manifest that both must suffer from absolute want of time. But when the pupils from many schools are gathered in one, they can easily be separated into classes of the same grade of knowledge, and each class can then be supplied with teachers with appropriate qualifications and attainments. The principal teachers can thus devote themselves to the higher classes, and young ladies or girls of very moderate attainments and salaries are sufficient for the lower classes. In conformity with these views the Board have transferred five of their separate schools into this large school,Memminger and Education	25
and at the same time have invited parents and guardians of other children without distinction to use the same as a common school. This invitation has been accepted by a large portion of the community; and while abundant provision has been made in this and in the remaining free schools for children to whom preference is given by the Act of 1811, the Board have been able to inaugurate an experiment to test the relative value of the two systems.
“Although the experiment is but six months old, yet with all the disadvantages of the new system, it already exhibits advantages which must establish it in the good opinion of our State.
“The following summary will exhibit some of these advantages:
“(1). The first advantage is the improvement in the grade of education, which is produced by introducing higher classes of pupils, and requiring higher qualifications in teachers.
“(2). The decrease to the whole community in the expense. It is confidently beileved, that when the schools are fully established, with a proper corps of teachers, that a complete English education can be had at the expense of about $12 for each pupil per annum.
“(3). The bringing together the children of the rich and poor will benefit both, by removing from one any disposition to arrogance and self-will, and from the other the spirit of envy and jealousy. Talent and merit will take its proper place, and all classes will be better united, as they grow up, in advancing the public welfare.
“(4). The tax payer will derive a benefit from schools, which he has heretofore been obliged to support without any participation in their benefits.26
University Extension Division
“(5). The parents of all children in the community will take a common interest in the schools, and by their observation and superintendence will insure the employment of better teachers and more perfect teaching. The schools for the poor have greatly suffered from the little interest taken in them by the community.
“(6). Both teachers and pupils will be stimulated to greater exertion, from the greater consideration which they will receive from society. The occupation of the teacher will soon come to be regarded as among the most important occupations in society, and the pupil will be relieved from the feeling that he is a dependent upon charity.
“(7). The more perfect classification of the pupils enables all classes to be taught by appropriate teachers. The more advanced will receive the attention of the best teachers, and for the classes of smaller children, female teachers can be employed. Thus, while the pupils will gain the advantage of being taught by those whose patience, sympathy and power to teach, exceed that of men, the community will gain the important advantage of opening a new and honorable employment to young women.
“(8). The system has the advantage of having been thoroughly tested, and of being approved in the various nations on the continent of Europe, and in most of the States of the Union.
“In a schedule annexed hereto, the Board respectfully submit a copy of their account of receipts and expenditures of the moneys collected by them, under the taxing powers confided to them, and also the usual return as to the Free Schools under their charge.
“The Act which authorizes the levying of the tax, is somewhat indefinite in the objects to which the Commissioners are authorized to apply the fund. Your hon-Memminger and Education
27
orable body will perceive from the account that the Board have applied the money chiefly to the erection of a school building. But they have applied and are applying part to defray the expenses of the Common School, which has been opened in the building. Although they have felt authorized to make this application under the general term used in the Act, yet, in as much as they do not desire to assume powers in any way doubtful, they respectfully ask your honorable body to amend the Act, by distinctly exposing the powers which are to be exercised.
“The Board would also respectfully recommend that the taxing power granted by the Act be enlarged. The applications for admissions into the school are so numerous that the school accommodations are not sufficient to satisfy them. This fact would, of itself, suggest the expediency of erecting another school building. When to this fact is added the certain expectation that these applications would be greatly increased for another school, the expediency is more apparent. When the present was established the pupils of five of the schools were transferred to it.
“This fact, with the preference given by the law to poor scholars has operated to enlarge that class of pupils, and to create some degree of prejudice against the school in the minds of the higher classes of society. Another school would be relieved from this embarrassment, and would be promptly filled with scholars of higher education and attainments. The Board believe that such a school would so clearly exhibit the superior advantages of the system as to establish it in the good opinion of the community, and they are confident that the people of Charleston would willingly contribute the means requisite for so great an end. All of which is respectfully submitted.
By order of the Board,
C. G. Memminger, Chairman.28
University Extension Division
4. Activities in the Legislature.
We find that Mr. Memminger introduced a Bill in the Legislature on November 29, 1856, to extend the system of public education in this State, but it was ordered to lie on the table.
On November 27, 1856, Mr. Memminger introduced a Bill to extend the powers of the Commissioners of Free Schools of the Parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael, which was ratified December 20, 1856.CHAPTER IV.
THE NORMAL SCHOOL
1.	Events Leading to its Establishment.
The Memminger High and Normal School, named in honor of Mr. Memminger was the first training school for teachers established in South Carolina.
At a meeting of the Board of Free School Commissioners of the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael, held February 5, 1855, the merits of a training school for teachers was discussed. They came to an agreement of the necessity of a normal school and thereupon passed the following resolution:
“Resolved, That the Hon. C. G. Memminger, the Chairman of this Board, be requested to call the attention of the General Assembly of the State when making the next annual report to that body, to the urgent need of a Normal School for training teachers in the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael.,, (14-1910)
2.	Mr. Memminger’s Report to the Legislature.
We may find in the reports and resolutions of the General Assembly that Mr. Memminger on the 19th of November, 1857, made to the legislature the following report:
“To the General Assembly of South Carolina :
“The Commissioners of Free Schools for the Parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael respectfully report that during the last year they have been eminently prospered in the school under their charge. The public school in St. Philip Street has continued to command public confidence, and the applicants for admission are so numerous that although the Board have admitted pupils to the utmost extent of its physical capacity still they are obliged to refuse a large number of applicants. TheCHARLESTON HIGH AND NORMAL SCHOOL—Front View (Name changed to MEMMINGER SCHOOL in 1876)Memminger and Education
31
School underwent a careful examination under the inspection of committees of citizens, and the Board would respectfully invite the attention of the Legislature to the report of these committees herewith submitted. The Board considers the experiment which has been made so satisfactory that they would not have hesitated to commence the erection of another building but for the exhaustion of the means at their command. They respectfully submit that the time has come for an increase of means and they ask that their taxing power be extended to thirty per cent on the General Tax. The Board would also respectfully bring to your notice the urgent need that exists for a Normal School for the education of teachers. This subject has received the attention of many of the other states, and they seem to prefer the establishment of several schools in different parts of the State. The Board would respectfully suggest the propriety of establishing two in our State, one in each division. This Board is willing to assume the charge of such a school in Charleston, and they think that by way of beginning, provision might be made for a school for girls in which the higher branches of education should be taught, and where they might be prepared for the duties of teaching. The proximity of the other schools would enable them to put into practice the training which they would receive at the Normal School.
“The Board would also bring to your notice that they have reorganized all the other schools under their charge, furnishing them with books, furniture and additional teachers. This has increased considerably the expense of the year, but its result is manifested in the large accession of numbers to each school. The schedule herewith submitted will exhibit the actual condition of all the schools and their expenses.
Respectfully submitted,
C. G. Memminger, Chairman.”32
University Extension Division
3. The Act Providing for the Normal School.
Mr. Memminger’s report of the schools made such a favorable impression on the legislature that they passed on the 21st of December, 1857, the following Act providing for a Normal School in this State:
“Whereas, it is necessary to any system of public education that provision should be made for the training of teachers in Normal Schools; and, whereas, it is desirable to establish such schools in different parts of the State; and, whereas, the Commissioners of Free Schools of the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael have offered to conduct such a school if the State will authorize and assist the same:
“I. Be It Therefore Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives now met and sitting in General Assembly and by the authority of the same. That the Commissioners of Free Schools for the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael are authorized to establish and conduct a school for the training of female teachers for the State at large, in connection with a Female High School for the said parishes, and for that purpose to erect and furnish a suitable building; and that whenever ten thousand dollars shall have been subscribed by the citizens of said Parishes for the erection and furnishing of said building, the State will subscribe an equal amount and will pay the same in portions equal to the portions paid by the said citizens.
“II. The State will also contribute annually for five years the sum of five thousand dollars for the support of the said school:
“Provided, That at least an equal amount shall also be contributed by the inhabitants of the said parishes annually for the same purpose, either by assessment or contribution.
“HI. The said Commissioners shall receive into the said school free of any charge for tuition, female pupilsMemminger and Education	33
from every part of the State, not exceeding fifteen to each Congressional District, for the purpose of being trained as teachers: Provided, That such applicants shall have the qualifications and shall stand the examinations required of other applicants of equal grade.
“IV. The said Commissioners shall have power to conduct the said school and to make such regulations for its government as they may deem best suited for its beneficial operation, and shall report its condition and expenses annually, with their usual report, to the General Assembly.
“In the Senate House, the twenty-first day of December, in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-seven, and in the eighty-second year of the Sovereignty and Independence of the United States of America.
James Chestnut, Jr.,
President of the Senate.
James Simons,
Speaker House of Representatives.”
4.	Subscriptions by Charleston Citizens.
Immediately after the passage of this Act providing for the Normal School, the citizens of Charleston began to raise the necessary amount of $10,000 required to be raised. The Fellowship Society gave $3,000. There were in all eighty-six subscribers. The largest individual subscription was $600. Mr. Memminger was one of five individuals who subscribed $500 each. The subscriptions amounted to $12,630, which more than met the requirements of the Act. (14-1909)
5.	Purchase of Site and Letting of Contract.
On March 28, 1858, the committee appointed to select a site reported that the lot on St. Philip's Street near Beaufain, occupied by Henry L. Pinckney, Esq., was theCHARLESTON HIGH AND NORMAL SCHOOL (Later MEMMINGER SCHOOL)
Side ViewMem MINGER AND EDUCATION
35
most eligible. The lot was 147 feet 2 inches front on St. Philip’s Street and 119 feet on the north line. It could be had for $8,000. The committee thought the price reasonable and the location good.
On May 3, 1858, the committee reported the purchase of this lot at the price offered.
The contract was given to Benjamin Lucas who had made the lowest bid, that of sixteen thousand seven hundred sixty-one dollars ($16,761.00) for the entire completion of dome and outside plastering.
On November 5, 1863, Mr. Memminger, in a meeting of the Board, called attention of the Board to the purchase by some of the commissioners of some adjoining lots, which were offered by these commissioners at the price paid by them. The Board assumed the purchase of these lots. (14-1909))
6. Work Begins at the Normal School.
On April 23, 1859, the High and Normal School for Girls was opened. Mr. Frederick A. Sawyer of the Brimmer School, Boston, was the first principal. Two of the assistants came from Massachusetts, and the other was from Pennsylvania. (1-187) Miss Anna C. Brackett of Boston was one of the two ladies who came from Massachusetts to start the first session of the Normal School. In later years she wrote of the schools of Charleston. She says: “For this school, in which was the hope of the entire system, the teachers were all selected from the Northern States—the most convincing proof, if anything further were needed, of the noble courage and fearlessness of purpose which characterized every act of the Board of Commissioners. ... I have before me now a card on which the girls of the first class wrote their names together for me, and to look it over is to recall much of sadness, though much of devotion, faithfulness and high courage. The planning of this work is exquis-36
University Extension Division
itely neat, as was all the work that they did. Here are the names of two sisters who afterwards became teachers in our places when we came away .... Sweet and strong they pass before me in memory, the girls of that first class, with the happy days in which we lived together in the close relation of teacher and taught. They had never before been in a large school, and its life and regulations were new and striking to them. They grew mentally like plants given a new sun and soil, and the work to the educator was beyond measure delightful, yielding a rich harvest.”
Young ladies attended from all parts of the State. The enrolment reached one hundred the first year.
7. The Aims of the Normal School.
The report of Mr. Memminger issued in July, 1859, gives the aims of the school as follows:
“The purpose of the school is two-fold. First, it proposes to add to the advantages of primary instruction given by the various Public Schools of lower grade, all the advantages of higher education which are offered by the best schools for girls. From the great advantages which a large public school, with ample resources, can always command over private schools, it is safe to say that in all the elements necessary to insure success, this school must be without a rival in our community, in furnishing that education which cultivated parents desire for their daughters. Its second purpose is the education of young ladies for the profession of teachers. It is proposed to form into a special class all those whose purpose it is to devote themselves to this honorable work, and whose qualifications admit of their receiving the proper course of instruction, and to devote as much time and labor to such exercises as will be of value to them in their future duties. These exercises will be such as would be of high value to any pupils sufficiently advancedMemminger and Education
37
to engage in them—to those who propose to teach they are indispensable. The power of teaching well comes not by intuition; the best kind of education would probably give it to most men, but most of even the well-educated men and women are without it, though to no person of average ability is its acquisition impossible. It comes, however, only as other arts come; by special training, by well-directed efforts, and by patient labor. By no means a secondary purpose in importance is that of furnishing to our city and State a corps of well-educated and intelligent young ladies, who will train in their turn, the minds and hearts of the thousands who will be committed to their charge. The School is supplied with teachers of tried ability and large reputation, in all its departments. The several congressional districts of the State have a right to send fifteen pupils each to this school to enter the normal department.” (16-1867-8) There was a Saturday Normal conducted on that day by the teachers of the Normal School. It gave instruction in the art of teaching to those who were already engaged in teaching. The Saturday Normal attracted teachers from all parts of the State.CHAPTER V.
GROWTH AND INFLUENCE OF THE CHARLESTON
SCHOOLS
1. Charleston in Line with Other Cities.
An official circular of the United States Bureau of Education of 1889, reported: “The commissioners of Charleston had seen the intent of the original act, and had set to work to carry it out. Public schools had succeeded in Nashville and in New Orleans, and why not in Charleston? This is what Mr. Barnard pointed out when he had prepared a communication on public schools at the request of Governor Alston and others.” (3-112)
Mr. Henry Barnard, at the time of the inauguration of the new system of public schools in Charleston, was Superintendent of the Schools of Connecticut and later became the first Commissioner of Education of the United States. In his great work for education he may be compared to Horace Mann. Mr. Barnard rendered Mr. Mem-minger valuable assistance in starting the new system in Charleston. He addressed a Charleston audience in 1855, speaking on the subject, “The Public School System of the North.” In articles in his Educational Journal, Mr. Barnard made many references to the public school system of Charleston. (15-194)
The Board of Commissioners, of which Mr. Memminger was Chairman, had undertaken to plant in their city the very best school system that could be found anywhere, and to do this they had taken as models the best schools of the northern cities.
The following is an excerpt from a letter recently received by the writer from Judge R. Withers Memminger: “The fundamental idea of Mr. Memminger’s desire to change the school system in South Carolina was that the public schools were known as ‘common schools’, and it was a kind of badge of pauperism for parents toMem MINGER AND EDUCATION
39
send their children to them. This was obnoxious to Mr. Memminger. He was a very wealthy man for those days, even after the war. He traveled extensively in Europe studying the various systems of free education. On his return he abolished the 'common school’ idea and sent his children to the public schools and prevailed upon many of his friends to do likewise, so as to entirely wipe out the supposed stigma of pauperism referred to. This led to the closing of private schools and almost all parents sent their children to the public schools, which every one no doubt admits now is for the best of all.”
2. More Schools Built.
Heeding Mr. Memminger’s plea for building more schoolhouses, the legislature made provision for the execution of the plans of the Board of Commissioners, by authorizing the levy of an additional tax. This made provision for the building of the normal schoolhouse and another large grammar schoolhouse. Both of these buildings were being constructed at the same time. The contract for the grammar schoolhouse was given to Mr. Walter Cade. It was a large brick building with all modern conveniences.
The progress of the schools is thus reported by Mr. Archer in his history of education in Charleston: "As an evidence of the progressive spirit which characterized the Board of Commissioners, it may be here stated that before the completion of the two schoolhouses mentioned, they had purchased an eligible lot at the corner of Morris Street and Jasper Court for the erection of their fourth schoolhouse. On the 11th of April, 1859, the Building Committee reported the completion of the Friend Street Schoolhouse, and the Board thereupon elected Mr. P. F. Smith, Principal, and Mr. John A. Blum, Vice-Principal of the St. Philip Street School since its opening.” (1-187)40
University Extension Division
Schools Number 1 and Number 5 were united in the Friend Street School, and Numbers 2, 3, 4, and 11 were transferred to the Morris Street School. The five others had already been transferred to the first large school on St. Philip Street. The Board were thus making effective their policy of classification and consolidation of the schools. (1-187)
3. Reports of Committees.
On December 12, 1857, the Senate Committee on College, Education and Religion, to whom were referred the report of the Board of Visitors to the Charleston Schools and the report of the Board of Commissioners of the Free Schools of St. Philip and St. Michael, made the following interesting report:
“That they have with much care examined these papers and cannot refrain expressing the great gratification which they have derived from their perusal. The public schools in St. Philip and St. Michael are not only prosperous, but progressively prosperous. They had under their instruction during the current year, one thousand six hundred and eighteen (1,618) scholars, at a total charge for tuition and books, of $17,023.00, being an average of only $10.53 for the year, for each scholar. This sum although very moderate, for the education of a child for.the whole year, and especially so when compared with the cost of teaching elsewhere, and even in some of our own Free Schools, may nevertheless appear to be large, when compared with the pittances which are charged for teaching in our Free Schools generally thruout the State. But how immeasurably wide apart is the value and extent of instruction afforded under the two systems. Whilst the reports of the commissioners of Free Schools from all parts of the State come to us with the stereotyped complaints of meager, poor, and unsatisfactory instruction to their pupils, arisingMemminger and Education
41
from the ignorance and worthlessness of the teachers; from the sparseness of their population and the indigence of parents who withhold their children from school, we have from the Visitors who examined the Common Schools in Charleston, the most gratifying testimony of their efficiency and prosperity. To the full reports of these visitors the Committee would most respectfully invite the particular attention of every Senator. They eannot forbear in this place, as being altogether pertinent to the subject referred to them, from presenting to the Senate a few extracts from them.
“The Hon. Mitchell King, from the Committee to whom was allotted the examination of the Boys' School, testifies as follows:
‘The several classes, under the word and motion of their teachers, and with the utmost regularity and promptness, left the hall for their respective class rooms. There was no confusion—no disorder. All seemed to know their proper places and to be in them. It was really astonishing to witness the constant attention and alacrity exhibited by apparently every member in every class under examination. It must be witnessed to be thoroly understood. The usages and discipline must be admirable and effective, to produce such remarkable results. The highest class of boys were thoroughly examined, and gave abundant evidence of their progress in reading, arithmetic and geography. . . . Every boy seemed anxious to distinguish himself. . . . The usages of the school, the motions of the body in which the pupils are trained, the manner in which they are taught—in which knowledge is communicated to them, attracted special notice. Their attention is kept constantly excited. They seem to acquire the power of concentrating the mind, in an extraordinary degree, on the subject with which they are immediately engaged, indeed they cannot well wander from it. The discipline, the exercises,42
University Extension Division
the regulations generally, seem well calculated to cultivate a capacity for undivided application, activity of mind, quickness of perception, propriety of behavior, docility of conduct, and ready obedience to legitimate authority. . . .’
“Mr. Trenholm, from the Committee which examined the Girls’ School, gives the following testimony:
‘We regarded, with profound interest, the experiment of the new Public School, and accepted the invitation to be present at the First Annual Examination with feelings of anxious solicitude for the result. ... We can hardly express too emphatically the favorable impression made upon our minds by all that we witnessed. It was with great satisfaction, therefore, that we observed the marked attention that had been bestowed upon this important consideration. Here were eight hundred children all assembled under one roof, and actively engaged for five successive hours in the exercises of the school; and yet under the happy influences of a cool and pleasant atmosphere, and abundant supply of pure air for the lungs; with commodious seats, and ample space for all, we saw no evidences of fatigue, exhaustion or depression of spirits. This happy result was no doubt, sensibly promoted by the relief incident to the frequent movement of the arms and other members of the body, and repeated rising to the feet and sitting again during the exercises—parts of the system which must be seen to be perfectly understood and appreciated. . . . Another of equal importance in their estimation is to be found in the novel feature of teaching the children most of the lessons in opposition to the old method of setting lessons to be memorized at home, and merely recited in the school room. . . . The Committee were not free from prejudices. There were those amongst them who believed that this new method of teaching, though encouraging at first by the easy acquisition of knowledge thruMemminger and Education
43
the imitative faculty of children, would inevitably have the effect of destroying individuality of character, and reduce children of different intellectual grades to one common level of respectable mediocrity. The impressions made upon this committee on this occasion contradict this supposition. We found, on the contrary, that the exercises are so conducted as to secure such emulation and honorable rivalry amongst the pupils; that a constant interest in the lessons and incessant vigilance and activity of mind, were sustained throughout; that good scholarship had every opportunity of exhibiting its excellence, and merit received its just reward. . . . Cleanliness and neatness, gentleness and docility, and all the attractive virtues of children reared under more favorable circumstances, evidently diffused themselves thru-out the school, and exercised their beneficial influence in a pleasing, and conspicuous manner/
“The Rev. J. L. Kirkpatrick, from the same Committee which examined the Girls’ School, adds: ‘ . . . The animation exhibited by the pupils in the exercises of the examination, their eager attention, their cheerful countenances, their natural, appropriate characteristics of a healthy, happy childhood and youth—rendered our attendance upon the occasion a recreation and delight. The whole scene was in such contrast with some of a similar import we have witnessed, and participated in, that some of us were led to ask whether going to school, and reciting lessons and standing examinations, could be now the same things they once were/
“The Rev. C. P. Gadsden, from the Committee which made the examination in the Primary Department, expressed their high gratification at all the exercises and their conviction of the complete success of the system, in securing order and attention among the pupils, together with a very thorough knowledge of the studies in which they have been engaged. ‘Five hours were44
University Extension Division
spent in examing the seven classes embraced in this department of this school. We began with those who were learning the alphabet and the first rudiments of education. The method of instruction was admirably adapted to awaken their attention, and we have never seen children who, at so early an age, were more familiar with their letters, and with easy spelling, or who answered with so much readiness questions, the replies to which called for the exercise of memory. ... As we have intimated, the order which reigned thruout the school, the system which pervaded every department, and the animated attention of the children, made a strong and very favorable impression upon us. Intelligence beamed from every eye, interest marked every countenance; and there was none of that listlessness and apathy which is not infrequently to be seen upon the faces of children professedly engaged in study. We were forcibly struck, at the conclusion of the long examination, with the unflagging interest which they appeared to take in all that was going on around them/
“The Rev. C. C. Pinckney testified on a point so rarely witnessed in a public school—the perfect preservation of the property of the school:	‘The recitations pleased
me much. The order, method, punctuality, and habits of promp obedience which we witnessed pleased me more; but the admirable preservation of the building, its bright desks and unmutilated seats, pleased me most, because I regard it as a branch of education too much neglected in America. . . . The influence of the teacher over the scholar must be strong where it can wholly restrain the destructive tendency of human nature in a school of four hundred boys. Yet in passing through the rooms, I saw no wall scribbled, no desk injured, no door defaced by ink or knife, or pencil. . . . This is a lesson which young America especially needs; and any successful effort in teaching it, I regard with unalloyed satisfaction/Mem MINGER AND EDUCATION
45
“The. testimony of such men, whose reports were made, as they inform us, 'On behalf of the Board of Visitors,’ composed of eleven others of our citizens, all of whom are, in the highest degree qualified for the duty, affords, in the opinion of the Committee, the fullest evidence of the excellence of the new system of Common Schools, which has been inaugurated in the city of Charleston, and amply vindicates the success of the experiment. Indeed the Commissioners of Free Schools for those Parishes report to us that they have already 'admitted pupils to the utmost extent of the capacity of their building' and are now obliged to refuse a large number of applicants for want of accommodation. They need another building; but as their means are exhausted under the present power of taxation, which is limited to fifteen per cent, they apply to the Legislature for authority to extend the power to 30 per cent on the general tax. The Committee perceive no objection to giving them this power, but would rather hail it as an evidence of enlightened liberty, and an example worthy to be followed by other School Districts of the State. They therefore recommend that the Bill, which has been referred to them, entitled a Bill to extend the powers of the Commissioners of Free Schools of the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael, be passed. . . . They cannot too strongly recommend to the favorable consideration of the Legislature, the proposition of the Commissioners of Free Schools for St. Philip and St. Michael."
4. Influence in Other Sections.
In the editorials and other articles of the Keowee Courier of the years just preceding the War Between the States, may be found many references to the success of the system of public schools in Charleston. The editor encourages the teachers of his district to visit the Charleston Schools with the view of learning the system and introducing it in their schools.46
University Extension Division
The editor of the Cheraw Gazette in July, 1858, says: “We do not know when we have read any document that afforded us so much pleasure as the report of the Board of Common Schools in Charleston, read by Col. C. G. Memminger, Chairman. ... These schools, we believe, owe their origin and success almost entirely to the gigantic and persevering exertion of Mr. Memminger.”
The above article of the Cheraw Gazette was reprinted in the Keowee Courier in July, 1858, and these words were added by the editor of the Keowee Courier:
“We can see no reason why our children should not enjoy the benefits of such an instruction as that of the Free School in St. Philip Street, at least upon a small scale.”
In a pamphlet on Reminiscences of Charleston by J. N. Cardoza, copyrighted 1860, may be found an article on Charleston Educational Institutions and Free School System. A complete description of the Free School System of Charleston is given by the author. It is so full and so much like the description already given in Mr, Memminger’s report that it is unnecessary to quote from it. Preceding this article, however, may be found words which occasioned the preparation and writing of this detailed description given the Charleston Schools.
A correspondent, after a visit of five years to Savannah, returns to Charleston and writes to the editor of the Savannah Daily News and Herald, the following:
“Charleston, June 4, 1866.
“When about leaving Savannah, I was requested to obtain as detailed an account as possible of the free school system of Charleston, which has worked well, as the trustees and tutors of Savannah Free Schools were about to reorganize their free school system. For this purpose I placed myself in communication with a gentleman who had devoted much time and attention to the subject of the free schools, and to whom I am indebtedMemminger and Education
47
for the following lucid and satisfactory statement/' Then followed the article of the Free School System.
In a later letter, the same correspondent on June 7, 1866, wrote: “I stated in a previous letter, that at the request of one of the Savannah Free Schools, I had furnished an account of the Free School System of Charleston. This account must be understood as applying to the system as it was in operation before the occurrence of hostilities." (4)
There is a historical sketch of the Charleston Public Schools in the Report of the Commissioner of Education of the United States of year 1876; much of the material for this sketch was taken from Barnard's Common Schools and Public Instruction, 1873. The following statement was made in this article: “These schools by their pleasant buildings, excellent equipment, classified arrangement, and skillful instruction under teachers brought in from the North, were fast revolutionizing public sentiment in South Carolina when the fires of another revolution burst upon the State December, 1860, and for the time swept schools and school laws quite away." (16-1876)
Miss Anna Brackett, one of the first teachers of the Normal School wrote: “We had visitors, men and women to all of whom our work was of the greatest interest, and to whom it was a comparative novelty to be allowed to visit a school, and to see the work going on. I was greatly puzzled at first by the saying which I heard often, that they had come To see the system', as if we had some patent method of conveying information and of training, which had to be applied in some well-defined manner. I have since learned that this idea is not peculiar to the South." (2)
5. Opposition Encountered.
Some people claimed that the new Board had overstepped their limits when they set up common schools as the law had only called for Free Schools. (15-117)48
University Extension Division
On November 25, 1856, Mr. Richard Yeadon introduced into the legislature the following resolutions:
“Resolved, That the Committee on Education be instructed to inquire into and report, during the present session of the Legislature:
(1)	The circumstances connected with the removal or non-election at the last session of the Legislature of a majority of the old Board of Commissioners of Free Schools, for the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael, and the substitution or election of new commissioners in their places; and into the causes and purposes, secret or open, of such removal or non-election of the old commissioners and of the substitution or election of new commissioners as aforesaid.
(2)	The conformity or non-conformity of the common school lately inaugurated .... with the provisions of the Free School Act of 1811, and with the other Free School legislation of the State in respect to the system of instruction, the central locality of the school building, and generally.
(3)	The manner in which the said Board of Commissioners have exercised their power of local Free School taxation, and whether they have not excessively and illegally exercised that power.
(4)	The manner in which the said Board of Commissioners have exercised the power of electing and compensating teachers in and for the said common schools, and their powers generally.
(5)	The amount of money raised by the said Board of Commissioners, under the power of local Free School taxation, and the manner in which they have disbursed the same; and especially whether the said Board have not, in their official capacity, illogically incurred a heavy debt, and pledged for its payment the future revenue to be derived from local Free School taxation in the said parishes.Mem mincer and Education	49
“Resolved, That the said committee, in order to enable them to make complete and satisfactory report in the premises, have power, if they see fit, to send for persons and papers.”
On December 4, 1856, Mr. Sullivan presented the report of the Committee on Education, referred to above. It was ordered for consideration on the following Monday. The report of this committee was sent to the Senate for concurrence December 18, 1856. The report is not given in the House Journal.
We find in the Reports and resolutions of the General Assembly of that year, that on December 20th an act was passed by the Senate to extend and define the powers of the commissioners of Free Schools of the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael.
Mr. Richard Yeadon, who had introduced the above resolutions in the legislature concerning the possible irregularities of the inauguration of the new system by the new Board, was one of the members of the Board of Commissioners of the years 1853 to 1855. He had served eleven years as a member of the Board of Commissioners.
The Senate Committee at this period, on December 14, 1856, made the following report:
“The Committee on the College, Education, and Religion to whom was referred the report of the Commissioners of Free Schools for the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael, and also a bill to define and extend the power of commissioners of Free Schools of St. Philip and St. Michael, ask leave to report: That they have carefully examined the papers, and learn from the report that the Commissioners proposed to enlarge the range of popular education in the city of Charleston, by advancing from the usually low grade of free school instruction to the higher standard of the best order of common schools. That, in order to make this experiment, they have had50	University Extension Division
erected a suitable building, with all the necessary furniture and appendages, and capable of accommodating about eight hundred scholars, in which the school has been in successful operation since July last.
“From the facts which have come before them, and the reasons presented for this change, your Committee are favorably impressed with the plan and think it may be advantageously adopted in all towns and villages where there are children enough living sufficiently near to be gathered into one building, provided with the necessary teachers and a competent head over them. But as this scheme does not limit itself to the instruction of poor children alone, such as usually fill our free schools, but embraces all the children of both sexes, whether rich or poor, who are within reach of the school; and as it is intended as a substitute for both the private, but more expensive, schools of the wealthier children and for the humbler free schools, it becomes necessary, in order to carry it out, to begin by erecting the buildings, with all suitable arrangements for keeping the sexes apart, and classifying the pupils according to their proficiency.
“As too, this scheme of common schools contemplates a much higher grade of education, and therefore much more competent teachers, than are to be found in the present free schools, in more senses than one, called 'poor schools—and as it further contemplates the furnishing to the pupils the most approved books, maps, and apparatus, for imparting this higher grade of education, it is obvious that these several advantages cannot be obtained except by a much larger expenditure of money, to begin with, than is now placed under the control of the commissioners from the free school fund, to say nothing of their having authority by law to extend the appropriation for such purposes.
“It is with a view, then, to obtain authority to raise the funds to carry out this scheme of common schools,Memminger and Education	51
with all the advantages which it promises, that the bill before your committee appears to have been introduced. It is limited in its application to the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael; and although in a matter of such gem eral interest, the committee are usually not in favor of local legislation, there is yet, in this case, much to induce them to make those parishes, at this time, an exception. Your committee, therefore, respectfully recommend the passage of the bill and with a view to extending more generally the information in relation to this new and important scheme of common school education, which has been so succinctly but clearly presented by the intelligent board of commissioners of St. Philip and St. Michael, your committee further recommends that eight hundred copies of their report to the Legislature, on that subject, be printed for the use of the members of free schools throughout the State. All of which is respectfully submitted,
J. Townsend, Chairman.
In the columns of the newspapers in the period just before the Confederate War we may find that some people opposed the new system of common schools. A spirited correspondence between two writers for the Charleston Mercury appears in that paper during the month of December, 1860. These articles were signed by “Blue Cockade”, who wages warfare against the Yankee teachers, and “Minute Man” who writes in defense of the teachers and schools. “Blue Cockade” says: “I sincerely regret that Charleston should be presented to the world in so humiliating a light as to acknowledge her unfitness to educate her children by her own people or that her sons and daughters are too obtuse to acquire a particular system of teaching (wonderful though it may be) in the lengthy space of four years.”
“Minute Man” writes: “I am quite sure that those who wear the blue ribbon, at least, will not approve the52
University Extension Division
taste exhibited by the writer in dragging before the public the names of estimable ladies, who have been actually invited to take up their abode in our midst, and who have not yet been suspected of being ‘wolves in sheep's clothing',but, on the contrary have gained the esteem of all around them. Let us trust that the ladies and gentlemen mentioned have been with us long enough to discover that the course pursued by ‘Blue Cockade’ will hardly receive the approbation of the Charleston public." (6-Dec. 1860)
6. Interruption of the Schools by the War.
Mr. Archer reports: “On the memorable night of December 11th, 1861, the Friend School-house was destroyed by fire. Its exercises were suspended until January the 3rd, 1862, when they were resumed, those of the Boys' Department at the Hall of the German Friendly Society, on Archdale Street, those of the Girls' Department at the school-house to the rear of St. Stephen's Chapel on Anson Street. Twenty years afterward (1882) it was rebuilt on the same model, and was called the Crafts School, in honor of Mr. William Crafts, Jr., who so ably defended the cause of popular education in the Legislature of 1813. ... In November, 1863, the pupils and teachers of the Friend Street School were transferred to the St. Philip Street School because of the shelling of the lower part of the city by the Federal forces on Morris Island, and in October the next year all the schools excepting the Normal, were united at the Morris Street house, because of the increased range of the Federal guns. The exercises of the Normal School were conducted at the house on the southeast corner of Pitt and Calhoun Streets, now the residence of the Rev. R. N. Wells, Pastor of the Bethel Methodist Church. On the 17th February, 1865, the schools were all disbanded because of the general demoralization consequentMemminger and Education	53
upon the occupation of the city by the Federals, and remained closed until January 1st, 1867.” (1-188)
Miss Brackett tells of the close of the schools: “The shadow grew heavier and the parting nearer as the months went on, full of stir, till the day in June when I left my class to meet the chairman of the special commissioners for our school in the dome-room, not to stand there again. Mr. Bennett had brought me my salary, then due; he paid me as usual in gold and he said: ‘We are very sorry that you feel you must go. We want you to say when this trouble is over you will come back to us,’ and he reached out his hand for a leave-taking with the old-time courtesy of which we had so much since we had made our home in Charleston. I said: ‘Mr. Bennett, I am sorry to go! But I cannot promise to come back. I am afraid that neither you nor I nor any one knows how long this trouble is going to last and I cannot say anything about coming back!’ And so I had to turn away from my girls, and travel to Massachusetts by way of Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York. I have the notes of that journey still, kept in pencil as we went, full of excitement and wonder. As the war went on, the schools had to stop; all the beautiful fabric so wisely and so nobly planned was destroyed, and the labor seemed to have been in vain.” (2)
Mr. Meriwether makes the following statement concerning the Charleston schools: “In 1860 the attendance was four thousand.” (16-117) Mr. Memminger in the report of 1868 says: “The greatest number in the schools at any former time was 2,690.” Mr. Memminger’s report of 1868 gives the number registered in 1860 as 4,044, the number belonging that year 2,573, and the average attendance 2,091.
Before the beginning of the experiment the Board had reported for the year 1854 the enrolment to be 1,133.CHAPTER VI.
RESUMPTION OF WORK IN 1867
1.	The Opening of the Schools.
Five members of the Board of 1855 were still serving on the Board of Commissioners of 1867, which was then composed of the following: Hon. C. G. Memminger, Charles M. Furman, John Russell, W. Jefferson Bennett, Frederick Richards, Hon. W. Alston Pringle, Hon. Wm. D. Porter, Hon. Henry Buist, Hon. Charles H. Simonton, William S. Henery, Benjamin Lucas, P. J. Coogan, and F. A. Sawyer.
Mr. Memminger, as chairman of the Board, ordered the opening of the St. Philip School Jan. 1, 1867, with Mr. Henry P. Archer as Principal and Gen. William S. Walker, Vice-Principal. In 1867 the Board had resumed possession of all the school-houses except the one on Morris Street which remained in the possession of the Freedmen’s Bureau.
In October, 1867, the Normal School was opened with Rev. Henry M. Mood as Principal, who was succeeded on the 22nd of February, 1869, by Miss A. R. Simonton, who held the position until September 30, 1897. Mr. Archer gives this tribute to her: “Miss Simonton’s name is most prominently identified with all that concerns the Memminger High and Normal School. She was nominated for the Principalship by the Hon. Mr. Memminger himself .... and for nearly thirty years she administered affairs with signal ability.” (7-1887)
2.	Provision for the Education of the Negroes.
The War Department at Washington would grant the restoration of the Morris Street School-house to the Board of Commissioners only on the condition that it be opened for the education of colored children. In December, 1866, the legislature had authorized the commis-Memminger and Education
55
sioners to make provision for the education of colored children. The Board provided to open the Morris Street School for colored children September 23, 1867. Mr. T. W. Glen was made Vice-Principal of this school. (1-189)
On November 15, 1885, the editor of the Charleston News and Courier wrote of Mr. Memminger: “The system was so extended as to comprise in the days of emancipation and enfranchisement, the colored people and the white people alike. Unwavering was he always in the desire and demand for the education of the whole people, and, when the colored people became a constituent part of the body politic, their rights were to him as the rights of the whites. There was the law; but there was a higher law. Mr. Memminger, the staunchest supporter of the free school education, without unnecessary distinction of class or race, was the leading opponent—the ablest and strongest, by far, of any and every measure that tended to put the colored people in a position in which they could, or might, overcome the whites by force of numbers. There was no question of relative power or influence of activities or possibilities. It was merely that the colored people, the negroes, must not have the power to overcome the whites, to their own detriment and that of the whites as well. This led to his opposition in the State and General Conventions of the Episcopal Church to every project that could give to colored clergymen, or lay delegates, any effective voice whatsoever in determining the policy and conduct of the Church. It is to be hoped that it will never be forgotten that it was one and the same man—the same Carolinian —who gave free schools to the whites, and free schools to whites and blacks, and who, for conscience sake and because of his blood, was leader of the dissident and seceding delegates in the last Diocesan Convention.” (25-Nov. 5, 1888)
The negro schools in Charleston were run under the same plan as that of the white schools. The teachers56
University Extension Division
for those schools for a long period were white and were highly educated.
3.	Contributions from Peabody Fund.
The following is quoted from Mr. Archer's report of schools:
“In January, 1868, Dr. Barnas Sears, the General Agent of the Peabody Educational Fund, visited the Public Schools of the city in company with ex-Governor Aiken, one of the Trustees, and on his return to Boston forwarded a check for one thousand dollars, voted by the Peabody Board to help the Charleston Schools. This timely addition to the finances of the commissioners was greatly appreciated, and a vote of thanks was promptly returned." (1-189)
This donation was a great help to the Normal School which now suffered the lack of the former appropriations from the legislature.
4.	Report of the Board in 1868.
The following is the report of Mr. Memminger, as Chairman of the Board of Commissioners for the year ending September 30, 1868:
“To the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:
“The commissioners of Free Schools for the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael, respectfully report:
“That they have continued to discharge the duties of their office up to the present time, and, notwithstanding the destruction of one of their best school buildings, they now have in their schools more children than at any previous period. The greatest number in the schools at any former time was 2,690, while there are now 2,818, of whom 2,024 are white and 794 colored. The colored school occupies the Morris Street School-house, which is the last and best building erected by the Board, and is organized and conducted upon the same plan with theMemminger and Education
57
white schools. The destitution of the pupils has induced the Board to make greater allowance for books for colored pupils in indigent circumstances, and it will be seen, by reference to Exhibit H, that the amount expended per capita is larger. The difference in the respective number of pupils arises from the fact that schools for colored children have been furnished from other sources, and thus provision has been made for the entire population of the city. This result has been made evident by the fact, that while the Board has been unable to receive all the white pupils which have been offered, not a single colored pupil has been excluded, and the building provided for their accommodation has still room for several hundred more. It is proper to add that the colored school has been well conducted; and its pupils, under the care of kind and patient teachers, have greatly improved in deportment and knowledge.
“The amount expended during the past year is $45,-748.82, of which a more particular detail will appear in the account herewith submitted, marked Exhibit F.
“The finances of the Board are embarrassed by the failure of the State Government to make the usual appropriation for the year from the State Treasury, and the Board respectfully ask that this omission may now be supplied, and that provision be also made for the coming year. Unless this shall be promptly done, the Board will be without the means of carrying on the work entrusted to them.
“The Board deem this a fitting time to present to the General Assembly the result of their work since the inauguration of the present system of public schools in Charleston. They, therefore, caused tables to be prepared setting forth these results, in the various details which they presume would interest the public, and they have submitted this with this report. As a general result, from these tables, it will appear that for a period of ten years, during which this system has been in opera-58	University Extension Division
tion, there have been admitted into the schools 18,855 children, and that their education has cost $810,480.40, an average of $16.91 for each pupil; this average will compare favorably with the amounts paid elsewhere, notwithstanding the fact that for several years of this period the expense of education was largely increased by the depreciation of currency.
“The Board further report, that they have always regarded the normal instruction of teachers as an integral part of public education. They have, therefore, deplored the necessity which compelled them to discontinue it upon the scale which was originally designed. The destruction of one of the public schools, and the withdrawal by the Legislature of the appropriation for the Normal School, were the causes of this result, and they earnestly hope that both these calamities may soon be repaired. They take great pleasure in stating that the injury to the public has been materially reduced by the generous contribution made to this object by the Trustees of the Peabody Fund. The sum of $1,500 has been supplied by these gentlemen during the past year, for the purpose of providing Normal instruction, and two classes of pupils have been formed, numbering about 60, of whom two-thirds are preparing to become teachers. This wise and judicious application of their funds is most encouraging in its results, and the Board hope that the example will react upon our own General Assembly, and induce a renewal of the appropriation which was formerly made by the State.
Respectfully submitted,
C. G. Memminger, Chairman.
Some of the exhibits referred to in the above report appear at the end of this study.Mem MINGER AND EDUCATION
59
5.	The Report of 1869.
In his report for the year ending September 30, 1869, the secretary mentions a number of improvements; among these were a revision of the list of textbooks and a general increase in teacher s’ salaries. Notice was made of the State teachers’ regular quarterly examinations held for that year. Twenty-four out of sixty teachers in Charleston had passed the preceding year. The information, concerning the schools and teachers as given in the report of 1869, has been rearranged in the accompanying table.
6.	Removal of the Board of Commissioners by Governor Scott.
From Archer’s history of the Charleston Schools I quote: “Under the new constitution of the State, adopted in 1868, the Educational Department was put under an executive officer known as the State Superintendent of Education, the county machinery, under a County School Commissioner, and the townships under Trustees.
“In compliance with the provisions of the constitution, and of Section 48 of a School Act, approved Feb. 16, 1870, Governor R. K. Scott removed the Board of which Mr. Memminger was Chairman, and appointed J. D. Geddings, William McKinlay, Samuel L. Bennett, M. A. Warren, Arthur Sumner, Wm. H. Birney, Thomas Small, and James M. Eason, Esq., in their stead.
“By the provisions of the School Law, the School Commissioner of Charleston County, Mr. Moulton Emery, was the Chairman ex-officio. . . . The school law of the State was again amended in March, 1871, and Section 48 was made to read as follows:	‘That at the next regular
Municipal election held thereafter, one School Commissioner shall be elected by the legal voters of each Ward, who shall continue in office until his successor is elected and qualified. The School Commissioners so elected shallCharleston Schools and Teachers, 1869.
Name of School	Location	Commissioner 8	Principal of Male Dept.	*+r> as O -w ©‘ 09	Principal of Female Dept.	No. of Ass’ts.	Principal of Primary Dept.	No. of Ass’ts.
Normal	St. Philip St.	Porter			Miss A. R. Simon-	12		
School		Pringle Sawyer,			ton			
		Chairman						
St. Philip	St. Philip St.	Richards	Henry P. Archer	6	Miss C. C.	6	Mrs. M.	12
Street		Russell Simonton,			Harbers		Whitehead	
		Chairman						
Meeting	Meeting St.	Furman			Miss Isabelle	6		
Street		Henery Coogan,			Blair			
		Chairman						
Colored	Morris St.	Bennett	T. W. Glenn	4	Mrs. Elizabeth	5	Mrs. Elvira L.	9
School		Buist Lucas,			Harnett		Oxlade	
		Chairman						
Saturday Normal for Teachers
H. P. Archer
Assistants: Miss C. C. Harbers, Mrs. E. Hamett, Miss Etta A. Kelly and Miss Mary C. Cantwell.Memminger and Education
61
constitute a School Board, and they may assemble at any time and elect a Chairman, and Clerk, and Superintendent of City Schools, whose term of office, duties and compensation shall be prescribed by said Board; but his term of office shall not exceed that of the Board electing him. The duties of the Board aforesaid shall be the same as those of the Board of School Trustees for the several School Districts.’ The next regular Municipal election in the city of Charleston was held in August, 1871, and agreeably to the provisions of the above Section, Rev. W. B. Yates was elected School Commissioner for Ward 1, Jacob William, Esq., for Ward 2, Hon. G. Lamb Buist for Ward 3, Hon. C. G. Memminger for Ward 4, Hon. William Aiken for Ward 5, T. E. Hogan, Esq., for Ward 6, J. W. Reed, Esq., for Ward 7, and A. L. Tobias, Esq., for Ward 8.” (1-190)
Mr. Memminger was immediately elected Chairman of this new Board.CHAPTER VII.
CLOSING PERIOD OF SERVICE
1.	Schools Reopened by Mr. Memminger.
Mr. Memminger, as Chairman of the Board in 1871, began another active period of service to the schools.
Mr. Archer writes: “Mr. Memminger’s work was not yet ended. Welcomed again to the council of the schools, he was unanimously elected Chairman of the Board of the new regime, and entered upon the duties of the office with the same ardor and enthusiasm that he had done seventeen years before. He found the schools in a most embarrassed condition; the salaries of the teachers and other employees had not been paid for over six months, and the schools had been closed. With that practical sagacity which had always characterized him, he at once suggested the ways and the means of removing difficulties. He called the attention of the Board to the authority conferred upon them by the school law, and expressed the opinion that the proceeds of the constitutional two-mill tax, the local tax of a mill and a half, and the poll tax, would be sufficient to meet the current expenses of the schools. He, therefore, suggested that they be re-opened on the 1st of January, 1872, and that all necessary arrangements be made with a view to that end. Section 48 of the new school law provided that the Board might elect a Clerk and a Superintendent for the purpose of facilitating the working of the schools, and accordingly, in December, 1871, they elected Jacob Willi-man, Esq., Clerk, and Mr. E. Montague Grimke, Superintendent.^ (1-191)
2.	Appropriate Names Given to Charleston Schools.
In June, 1876, Mr. Wm. L. Daggett, in a Board meeting, made a motion that the Normal School be given the name Memminger School, in honor of Mr. MemmingerMemminger and Education	63
who had done such distinguished service for the public schools of the city. (1-193)
It will be remembered that Mr. W. Jefferson Bennett began the great work with Mr. Memminger long before either of them were on the Board of Commissioners of 1855. They had labored together in the interests of the public schools until the death of Mr. Bennett in February, 1875. He had planned the first school-house on St. Philip Street, and it was a most fitting tribute to his memory that the Board had his name engraved on the front of this building, and gave it the name Bennett School. (1-192)
Mr. William Crafts, Jr., had been the friend of free schools and had defended them most ably in the legislature in 1813. When the Friend Street School-house was rebuilt in 1882, the Board named it Crafts School. (1-188)
In April, 1874, the Trustees of the Shaw Memorial Fund transferred to the City Board of School Commissioners the title to their building and grounds, and the Schaw Memorial School came under the management of the City Board of Commissioners. It continued to be called by the same name. (1-192)
The Morris Street School and the Meeting Street School kept the names of the streets on which they were located. It became the policy of the Board to name the public schools for those who labored faithfully in the cause of education.
3. Institution of Competitive Examinations.
The Board of 1885 instituted competitive examinations for teachers of the Charleston Schools, so that the most proficient applicants might be secured. They also subjected the candidate to a probationary test of one month before they elected him formally.
The system of regular quarterly examinations for teachers of the State had been used since January, 1868.64
University Extension Division
In the report of 1869, Mr. Grimke states that since that system had been inaugurated 41 out of 92 applicants had passed.
4.	Legislation Introduced by Mr. Memminger.
After the restoration of the government by the white people in 1876, Mr. Memminger was again elected as a representative to the legislature from the parishes of St. Philip and St. Michael. When he returned to the legislature in 1877, Mr. Memminger was almost seventy-five years old.
During this session of the legislature, Mr. Memminger brought forth a bill to reorganize South Carolina College.
On February 13, 1878, Mr. Memminger asked and obtained consent to introduce a “Joint Resolution to authorize the City Board of School Commissioners of Charleston to raise money for the support of the City Schools.” This bill was passed December 20, 1878.
The session of 1878 closes the long legislative service of Mr. Memminger which had begun in 1836, forty-two years before. More than half of this time he represented his section in the legislature.
5.	The System of Public Schools Becomes More Popular.
In the Report of the United States Commissioner of Education for the year 1879 is this statement:	“The
State Superintendent says that for thoroughness of school training, both in instruction and discipline, and for an efficient system of public schools, Charleston compares favorably with any city in the country.” In the Report of the United States Commissioner of Education for the years of 1885 and 1886, much is said of the growth of the public schools of the State, as: “In no portion of this educational field are the signs of progress more striking than that occupied by the public schools. With a steadiness truly wonderful the enrolment of pupils hasMemminger and Education	65
risen from 30,448 in 1870 to 183,966 in 1886, and the average attendance, which is a better test of the actual work, has risen without a break from 101,816 in 1882, when first recorded, to 126,696 for 1886.
“The desire for the establishment of the well-organized graded-school system is widening and deepening year by year. The economy of the system, the freshness, thoroughness, and facility of the teaching done under it, the improvement in discipline and general results, are so convincing that its adoption by all the towns in the course of a few years may be safely predicted.
“The most cheering fact in the survey is the well-marked improvement in the teachers. Among the large number of them there is now manifested more professional interest, a keen desire for self-improvement, and a more eager purpose to master the best methods of teaching. All these encouraging features are unquestionably the direct results of a few slight changes in the law, a progressive raising of the standard of examinations, and the influence of the State and County Normal Institutes.” (16-1885)
Miss Brackett said of the schools:
“But the work of those schools was not lost, for one by one they who had been our girls took up the task with the spirit we had helped to inspire in them, and one of them has made not only on her city, but on the wide Southern Country from which her girls come to her wise guidance, an abiding mark. After the war was over, and the time of mismanagement and misuse, the seed that had been sown in earnest faith, unswerving purpose, and singleness of spirit, brought forth a hundred fold.”
When writing of the Charleston schools in the year 1887, Mr. Archer states:	“They have grown to six
schools, with one hundred and eight teachers, and four thousand five hundred and eighty-three pupils. . . and under the administration of the present Board of Com-66	University Extension Division
missioners, they rank among the best schools in the South.” (1-199)
6. Resignation of Chairmanship of the Board of Commissioners.
On November 4, 1885, the Board of Commissioners received the resignation of Mr. Memminger from the position as Chairman of the Board. Upon motion of Major Julian Mitchell, the Board unanimously adopted the following resolutions:
“Whereas, the Hon. C. G. Memminger, by reason of impaired health, has tendered his resignation, both as a member of this Board and as its presiding officer, dissolving thereby a relation which he has sustained for the past thirty years with great honor to himself and with eminent usefulness to the State; and whereas, it is the desire of this Board to put on record its appreciation of the signal success which has characterized his long administration, and the invaluable and unstinted services which he has given to the cause of education; therefore, be it resolved—
“(1) That in retiring from a work of which he is the acknowledged founder, and to which he has devoted the best energies of his life, he carries with him the thanks of the public, and the regard and esteem of his colleagues.
“(2) That though the Board, at his urgent request, accepts his resignation only so far as to relieve him of the active and pressing duties of Chairman, we are unwilling to lose the valuable experience of his many years of usefulness, and therefore ask him to retain his position as a member of our body.
“(3) That he be requested to permit the Board to take such steps as will secure the preservation of his features in enduring form by a competent sculptor, that we may mark our grateful recognition of his long and faithfulMemminger and Education	67
services, and show to posterity the high esteem in which he is held by his fellow-citizens.
“(4) That this preamble and these resolutions be spread on our minutes, that an engrossed copy of them be sent to Mr. Memminger by our Clerk, and that they be published in the News and Courier ”
Mr. Memminger acknowledged the receipt of these resolutions with the following reply:
“I acknowledge with feelings of grateful appreciation the very kind action of the City Board of School Commissioners. The requests made of me in the resolutions of the Board are in fact compliments which, however far beyond the merits of the recipient, it would not be courteous to decline, and I beg that the Board will accept my thanks for the high honor which they have done me and for their expressions of kindly feeling.” (1-196)
7. Editorial in “News and Courier.”
In the issue of the Charleston News and Courier f November 7, 1885, the editor wrote the following:
“The retirement of the Hon. C. G. Memminger from the Chairmanship of the Board of City School Commissioners closes a most important chapter in the educational history of Charleston and South Carolina. Mr. Memminger is justly regarded as the father of the city public schools, and of the present State public school system. Of his long life, which fills no mean page in history, the best years and most earnest efforts have been spent in the cause of public education. Now, that, at the advanced age of nearly eighty-three, he lays down the burden assumed more than thirty years ago, he can look back with pride to the record of his work and rejoice in the fact that the people appreciate its value.
“It was in 1854 that Mr. Memminger, in co-operation with Mr. W. J. Bennett, undertook the reformation of68
University Extension Division
the public school system of the State. Before that time the free schools were only open to those children whose parents could not aiford to pay for their education. Mr. Memminger and Mr. Bennett made a tour of the principal Northern cities, thoroughly studied the system of public schools, and sought competent men to aid in the establishment of a public school system in South Carolina. Mr. Memminger then brought up the subject in the Legislature, and in spite of great opposition succeeded in framing the necessary laws for the accomplishment of his purpose. To overcome the social opposition to the schools, Mr. Memminger sent his own children there, and induced many of his friends to do the same. This had the desired effect and the public schools of Charleston soon became model educational institutions, which, if we except a few years of interruption caused by the war, they have been ever since.
“From the beginning until now, Mr. Memminger has been the constant champion and untiring servant of the public schools, and in his retirement he takes with him the warmest thanks and best wishes of every friend of public education.” (25-Nov. 7, 1885)
After seeing the above editorial in the News and Courier, Mr. Memminger wrote the editor this letter:
“Flat Rock, Henderson Co., N. C.,
November 10, 1885.
“My Dear Sir:—Some years ago I had a severe spell of sickness while Mr. Yeadon was editor of the Charleston Courier. When I recovered and first again met with him, he accosted me by saying that I had made a great mistake in not dying then, as he had on hand an obituary which would have made me famous for all time, and which he seemed to think was worth dying to secure. In reading your very kind and chaste obituary over part of my career in your paper of Saturday, it does not ap-Mem MINGER AND EDUCATION
69
pear to me that I have lost anything in your having taken Mr. Yeadon’s pen, and you must allow me to offer you my thanks for your consideration and tribute.
“With much esteem,
Very truly yours,
C. G. Memminger.”
(25-March 8, 1885)
8. The Memminger Memorial.
Having secured the consent of Mr. Memminger for making plans for the preservation of his features in enduring form, the Board laid the matter before the General Assembly of South Carolina. By an act of the Legislature they were authorized to expend an amount of money sufficient to secure the execution of a suitable memorial of Mr. Memminger. The Board decided on a mmorial embracing a marble bust and pediment. The committee immediately entrusted the work to the distinguished sculptor, Valentine of Virginia.
At a meeting of the City Council, July 26, 1887, Mayor Bryan suggested that the City Hall would be a most suitable place for the memorial since Mr. Memminger had spent so many years in service to the people of the city. The Council voted to ask the Board of Commissioners to place the bust of Mr. Memminger in the City Hall. The Board thereupon agreed to accept the offer of the City Council.
The inscription on the pediment of the bust is as follows:70
University Extension Division
“Christopher Gustavus Memminger,
Founder
of the Public School System of Charleston.
The City Board of School Commissioners,
With the Approval of the Legislature of South Carolina,
Erect this Memorial,
In Grateful Appreciation of his Services for Thirty-three Years.
‘Heaven doth with us as we with torches do;
Not light them for ourselves; for if our virtues Did not go forth of us, ’twere all alike As if we had them not.’
1887.”
The bust was unveiled at five P.M., February 29, 1888. Invitations had been issued to the teachers and trustees of the public schools and colleges in Charleston, to members of the Memminger family, to the senators and representatives from Charleston, and to a few distinguished guests who were in the city. Addresses were made by Mayor Bryan, Judge Simonton, and Miss Daisy Smith, a pupil of the Normal School. Judge Simonton said: “Notwithstanding the absorbing cares of the most absorbing profession, he entered with his whole soul into the work of the schools. He devoted much of his valuable time in promoting, maintaining and finally placing on a permanent basis our present admirable system. He achieved wonderful success. His influence has extended beyond the limits of the city. All over South Carolina are springing up graded schools based upon the same system. Everywhere is felt the reviving breath of new life in our public schools.”
Mayor Bryan said: “It is our especial duty to bestow that thoughtful care upon a worker in a very differ-Memminger and Education
71
ent field remote from the crowd .... the truest friend and the benefactor of the people, and chiefest conservator of their liberties and their free institutions. It is in recognition of such a benefactor and to make enduring memorial of such services that we have unveiled the bust which reveals to us and will reveal to the most distant posterity the features of C. Gustavus Memminger, the author of the present common school system in Charleston.’1
Miss Daisy Smith said: “None beside him have labored for thirty long years to influence public opinion, withstanding the storm of opposition in two sessions of the legislature, and meeting and defeating all obstacles with an indomitable will. He faltered before no foe but age.”
9.	Death of Mr. Memminger.
Mr. Memminger’s death, March 7, 1888, followed just a few days after the unveiling of the marble bust. The funeral services were conducted by Rev. W. H. Campbell and Rev. C. C. Pinckney at four o’clock, March 9, at St. Paul’s Church. The pall bearers were: Seniors— Mr. Montague Grirnke, Hon. W. A. Courtenay, Mr. H. P. Archer, Dr. M. Michel, Hon. Ed. McCrady, Mr. Julien Mitchell, Hon. C. H. Simonton, Mr. J. C. Simons, Mr. B. J. Whaley, and Mr. C. F. Hanckel.
Juniors—Gen. Ed. McCrady, Mr. B. F. Alston, Mr. L. G. Trenholm, Mr. A. Mazyck, Mr. C. S. Bennett, Hon. James Simons, Mr. W. S. Hastie, and Mr. C. A. Chisholm.
Mr. Memminger’s remains were sent to his summer home at Flat Rock, N. C., for interment.
10.	Tributes by the Bar and the Press.
In the News and Courier, March 10, 1888, may be found a lengthy account of the proceedings of the Court of General Sessions. At this meeting resolutions were drafted by the Bar expressing their grief on the occasion72
University Extension Division
of the death of Mr. Memminger. Mr. Simonton said: “In his own home, the city of Charleston, he continued his services to his fellow-citizens, almost to the last of his long and useful life, in the administration of that system of public education which his enlightened wisdom founded, and which has conferred and will continue to confer its blessings upon generations of our people.”
Mr. McCrady said: “I have often been struck with the fact that though he had attained such great age he was living in the present and not in the past.”
Judge Pressley in referring to the memorial of Mr. Memminger added: “We need no such resemblance so long as the monuments which he himself reared in this community last.”
Mr. Jervey said: “Beautiful and enduring monuments of his labor and success in this department of his life -exist now in the schools which have been erected throughout the city, and the system of their government.”
In the issue of March 9, 1888, the editor of the News und Courier wrote: “It was not in him, nor in the line of his ripest usefulness, to weigh the popularity of words or consider the popular effect of phrases. Mr. Memminger and his associates were representatives and not mere delegates. ... He spoke and acted always in accordance with his own convictions and without a thought of popular favor. There were all too few of the public men of this old and grand old school. . . . There was no change in him; no wavering, under wooing zephyrs or raging gale. Those who could not accept him as a guide were ready always in acknowledgment of his lucid force, his abiding sincerity, his everlasting trust in his conception of faith and duty.”CHAPTER VIII.
CONCLUSIONS.
Mr. Memminger’s services to the State in the advancement of public education were unique in many phases. We do not wish to claim for him more credit than he is due. We know that others worked for the schools. Others helped to make and execute the great plans. There can not be leaders without followers. There was much concerted action by the board of commissioners of the Charleston schools in 1855. Their broad-mindedness was wonderful. To undertake to plant in Charleston the system during those years when feelings of animosity between the sections were growing so bitter, to introduce the system with teachers from the North, and to so successfully establish the system, was a most remarkable accomplishment.
Others had served on the board of commissioners even longer than Mr. Memminger, but the administration of no other leader has shown such remarkable advancement in the schools. His period of service on the Board began in 1855, and extended until his death in 1888. Long before 1855, Mr. Memminger had begun to work for the schools, having gone North in 1834 to study the system in that section. After the war, he traveled in Europe making a study of free education. He used his influence in the legislature in advancing the cause of popular education, this time of service extending over many of the years from 1836 to 1878. He labored for the system of free education from the period of his early manhood to the time of ripe old age giving his active attention to the schools.
The Charleston Schools took the lead of all other schools in the State. Other sections gradually adopted the same system. In 1878, Superintendent Thompson, in his report referred to Charleston and Winnsboro as74	University Extension Division
having the only high schools in the State. It was in the year 1877, when Prof. R. Means Davis took charge of the Winnsboro School, the first graded school outside of Charleston.
After making the study of the great gratuitous services of Mr. Memminger, the writer believes, that Mr. Memminger, more than any one man deserves credit for the early establishment of the present public school system in Charleston and for the extension of the same system into the State at large.IX.
EXHIBIT A—From Mr. Memminger’s Report of 1868.
Abstract of Public School Reports, year ending 30th September, 1868
SCHOOL	Reg. No.	No. in Sch.	Av. Attendance	Per cent.	No. Admitted	Number Discharged										Totals											Commissioners Visits	No. Teachers
						Moved	Business	Irregular	Deaths	Dissatis- faction	Unknown	Pub. Sch.	Priv. Sch.	Sickness														
																	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10		
WHITE																												
Normal School 			622	451	378	84	622	55	31	29		8	3	10	21	37	93	287	26	31	44	50	48	48	49	46	53	52	12	11
St. Philip St., Male 		338	228	194	85	il6	34	35	23					27	3		122	34	36	38	42	38	39					13	7
St. Philip St., Female 		351	259	212	82	351	25	7	22				14	21	3		92	41	40	47	46	41	41					14	7
St. Philip St., Primary 		930	566	484	86	525	59	2	53	1	4	11	179	15	20	7	351	55	56	58	58	58	58	58	54	66	66	13	11
Meeting St. School 				531	287	232	81	302	41	1	5		....	51	75	21	22	39	255	43	53	50	48	61	72					10	7
Total white scholars 		2772	1791	1500	84	1916	214	76	132	1	12	65	278	105	85	139	1229											62	43
																												
COLORED																												
Morris St., Male 		258	87	67	77	258	11	9	45		4	37	28	7	5	7	153	24	31	30								18	4
Morris St., Female 		316	137	107	78	316	8	32	13	1	54	11	5		6	10	140	29	41	46	42							13	5
Morris St., Primary 		1079	392	282	72	1079	77	92	252	1		9	113	34	15	1	594	36	45	65	56	58	92	10	2¡..			28	8
Total colored scholars 		1653	616	456	74	1653	96	133	310	2	58	57	146	41	26	18	887											59	17
																												
» Grand Totals 		4425	2407	1956	81	3569	310	209	442	3	70	122	424	146	111	157	1994											121	60
																												76	University Extension Division
EXHIBIT B—From Mr. Memminger’s Report of 1868.
Statement showing the Estimated Value of Property Held by the Board of Commissioners of Free Schools, September 30, 1868.
Normal School.
St. Philip St., below Wentworth Street:
Buildings_____________________$19,000.00
Lot---------------------------- 8,000.00
Furniture _____________________ 2,000.00
$ 29,000.00
St. Philip St. School.
St. Philip St., near George Street:
Buildings_____________________$20,000.00
Lot  _________________________ 4,000.00
Furniture ____________._______ 3,000.00
27,000.00
Meeting Street School.
Meeting St., near Mary Street:
Buildings_____________________$ 6,500.00
Lot __________________________ 3,000.00
Furniture ____________________ 500.00
10,000.00
Morris Street School.
Morris Street, Corner of Jasper Court:
Buildings----------------------$24,000.00
Lot____________________________  7,000.00
Furniture _____________________  3,000.00
34,000.00Memminger and Education
77
Friend Street School lot______	5,000.00
House No. 12, Beaufain Street	4,000.00
House No. 1, St. Philip Street	1,000.00
Total ____________________ $110,000.00
EXHIBIT C—From Mr. Memmingers Report of 1868.
Statement showing the average numbers belonging to each of the Public Schools of the City of Charleston, during the year ending September 30, 1868, the cost of education, and the average expense per capita.
Normal School 		Average No. of Pupils Belong .... 451	C08t Per Cap. $13.72	Current Expenses $ 6,189.75	Value of Books Loaned to Indigent Pupils $ 88.00
St. Philip St. School 			1053	12.30	12,952.55	112.95
Meeting St. School 		. . . . 287	8.79 •	2,539-70	•75
Total White Schools ..		1791	$12.11	$21,682.00	$201.70
Morris Street School (for	Col-			
ored Persons) 		.... 616	$15.28	$ 9,415-29	$326.10
Books for use in all of	the			
Schools 				$ 5,160.33	
Sundry Expenses appertaining				
to all of the Schools			2,629.34	
Totals 		....2407	$16.15	$38,886.96	
EXHIBIT D—From Mr. Memminger’s Report of 1868.
E. Montague Grimke, Treasurer, in Account with Commissioners of Free Schools.
Dr.
Year ending September 30, 1868—
To balance on hand October 1, 1867 ---------$18,806.55
To cash received. from assessment of 25 per
cent levied upon General Tax------------22,618.1178
University Extension Division
To cash received from Sheriff on account of
Tax	Executions _____________________    7,625.97
To cash	received from	Rents	of Buildings___	651.00
To cash received from Peabody Educational
Fund___________________________$1000.00
Less Exchange on check on New York 5.00
----------- 995.00
To cash	received from	sale	of	Books	to	Pupils 8,243.00
$53,939.63
Cr.
Year ending September 30, 1868—
By cash paid Teachers’ Salaries______________
By cash paid Janitors and Labor______________
By cash paid Gas and Fuel--------------------
By cash paid Printing and Advertising________
By cash paid Rents and Insurance---------„—
By cash paid Secretary’s Salary and Incidental Expenses _________________________________
By cash paid for Building and Re-
pairs ___________________________$1,913.11
By cash paid for Furniture —----------2,301.95
By cash paid Land, etc. -------------- 2,646.80
$28,500.60
1.245.00 299.29 187.52 968.08
2.433.01
--------- 6,861.86
Stationery and Books---------------------------- 5,253.46
Discounts on State Bills receivable ——_— 4,239.75 Balance on hand _______________________________  3,951.06
$53,939.63
E. Montague Grimke,
Treasurer C. F. S.Memminger and Education	79
EXHIBIT E—From Mr. Memminger’s Report of 1S68.
Statement Showing the Cost of Tuition per Scholar, in some of the Principal Cities of the United States, for the Years 1866, 1867, 1868.
City	State	Year	
New York City	New York	1866	$21.00
San Francisco -	California	1867	19.34
Boston	Massachusetts	1867	17.52
New Orleans	Louisiana	1867	17.52
St. Louis	Missouri	1867	14.85
Brooklyn	New York	1866	14.40
Springfield	Massachusetts	1867	13.42
Baltimore	Maryland	1867	13.33
Louisville - 		_ -Kentucky	1866	13.00
Cleveland	- Ohio	1866	13.00
Zanesville	Ohio	1866	12.10
Roxbury	Massachusetts	1866	12.10
Cincinnati	Ohio	1866	12.01
Charleston	South Carolina	1868	11.84
New Bedford	Massachusetts	1866	11.77
Albany	New York	1866	11.71
Columbus	Ohio 		1866	11.62
Davenport	Iowa	1866	11.42
Chicago	Illinois	1866	11.12
Toledo	Ohio	1866	11.09
Lawrence	Massachusetts	1866	11.08
New Haven	Connecticut	1866	10.70
Lowell	Massachusetts	1866	10.38
Worcester	—Massachusetts	1866	10.0780
University Extension Division
EXHIBIT F—From Charleston Year Book, 1888.
List of School Commissioners of Charleston with dates of Service from 1811 to 1888.
Names
Rev. Dr. S. F. Gallagher
John Horlbeck, Jr......
John Geddes ...........
Joseph Kirkland, M.D. .
Thomas Bennett, Jr.....
Myer Moses ............
John Parker . .........
Philip Moser, M.D. ....
Bartholomew Carroll ...
Philip Gadsden.........
Thomas Roper ..........
Adam Tunno ............
Henry Deas ............
Charles J. Steedman .... Rev. Dr. Andrew Flinn . Joseph Johnson, M.D. ...
William Clement .......
Benjamin Elliott ......
Rene Godard ...........
Robert Y. Hayne .......
William Trescott ......
James L. Petigru ......
Daniel Ravenel ........
James Jervey...........
Lionel H. Kennedy .....
Col. William Rouse ....
Thomas S. Grimke ......
Charles M. Furman .... Elias Harry ...........
George W. Cross .......
George W. Egleston ....
Date of Service	No. Years
.... 1811-1820	9
	36
	15
	 1811-1817	6
	9
	12
	3
	18
	18
	3
	3
	3
	6
	3
	6
	18
.... 1814-1817	3
	15
	6
	3
	3
	6
	9
	9
	15
	6
	6
	47
1832-1835	6
	3
1847-1850	9
	6
	21
	 1829-1835	6
Chairmanship Service 1811-1815 1818-1820	8 yrs.
1815-1818	3 yrs.
1820-1832 12 yrs.
1832-1835	3 yrs.
John Bryan ...........
Rev. Christian Hanckel Rev. Basil Manley
1844-1855 11 yrs.Memminger and Education
81
Names
Rev. B. M. Palmer...............
H. W. Peronneau ................
Peter J. Shand ...............
Daniel Horlbeck ................
Rev. John Bachman ..............
George B. Eckhard ..............
Rev. Dr. Christopher Gadsden
Rev. John Forrest ..............
Hon. Robert B. Gilchrist .......
Col. Thomas Lehre ..............
Jacob Axon .....................
John Huger ...................
Col. Thomas O. Elliott .........
Richard Yeadon .................
George Buist ...................
George S. Bryan ................
William Jervey .................
James Simons ...................
Samuel Wilson, M.D..............
Hon. C. G. Memminger ...........
John Russell ...................
William Lebby ..................
W. Jefferson Bennett............
William C. Bee .................
Frederick Richards .............
Samuel H. Dickson, M.D..........
Hon. A. G. Magrath .............
Hon. W. Alston Pringle .........
Gen. Wilmot G. DeSaussure ......
Hon. George A. Trenholm ........
Hon. William D. Porter .........
Hon. Henry Buist ...............
Hon. Charles H. Simonton .......
William S. Henery ..............
Benjamin Lucas .................
P. J. Coogan ...................
F. A. Sawyer ...................
J. D. Geddings ..................
Date of		Chairmanship
Service	No. Years	Service
1829-1835	6	
1829-1835	6	
1829-1832	3	
1829-1855	24	
1832-1835 1847-1850	6	
1829-1847	18	
1844-1847	3	
1844-1847	3	
1844-1847	3	
1844-1847	3	
1844-1847	3	
1844-1847	3	
1844-1850	6	
1844-1855	11	
1847-1861	H	
1847-1867	2°	
1847-1861	14	
1847-1858	II	
1847-1850	3	
1855-1870		1855-1870
1872-1888	3i	1872-1878
1855-1870	15	1880-1885 26 yrs.
1855-1867	12	
1855-1870	15	
1855-1867	12	
1855-1870	15	
1855-1858	3	
1858-1861	3	
1858-1870	12	
1858-1867	9	
1861-1867	6	
1861-1870	9	
1861-1870	9	
1867-1870 1885-1888	6	1885-1888 3 yrs.
1867-1870	3	
1867-1870	3	
1867-1870	3	
1867-1870	3	
1870-1872	2	82
University Extension Division
Ñames
Date of	Chairmanship
Service No. Years Service
William McKinlay .................. 1870-1872	2
Samuel L. Bennett ................. 1870-1872	2
M. A. Warren ...................... 1870-1872	2
Arthur Sumner ...................... 1870-1872	2
Moulton Emery ..................... 1870-1872	2
William H. Birney ................. 1870-1872	2
Thomas Small ...................... 1870-1872
1874-1876	4
James M. Eason, Esq................ 1870-1872	2
Rev. William B. Yates ............. 1872-1878	6
Jacob Wimmiman .................... 1872-1874	2
Hon. G. Lamb Buist ................ 1872-1876	4
Hon. William Aiken ................ 1872-1874	2
Thomas E. Hogan ................... 1872-1874	2
J. W. Reed ........................ 1872-1874	2
Augustus L. Tobias ................ 1872-1874	2
James L. Brawley . ................ 1874-1876	2
E. Baynard Seabrook .............. 1874-1878	4
Benjamin Evans .................... 1874-1876	2
Samuel R. Cox ..................... 1874-1876	2
E. J. Beard ....................... 1876-1878	2
William L. Daggett ................ 1876-1880	4
John M. Gregg ..................... 1876-1878	2
Rev. William S. Bowman, D.D. . . . 1876-1878	2
Col. Joseph D. Aiken .............. 1878-1880	2
George D. Bryan ................... 1878-1884	6
Daniel M. O. Driscoll ............. 1878-1884	6
Rev. William H. Campbell ....... 1878-1880	2
Louis E. Cordray .................. 1878-1888	10
William E. Vincent ................ 1878-1880	2
Julian L. Moses ................... 1880-1884	4
Thomas Hartigan ................... 1880-1884	4
S. Cordes Boyleston ............... 1880-1884	4
Rev. A. Toomer Porter, D.D.........1880-1888	8
Col. T. Pinckney Lowndes .......... 1884-1888	4
Dr. C. F. Panknin ................. 1884-1888	4
James Allan ....................... 1884-1888	4
Major Julian Mitchell ............. 1884-1888	4
Hon. Wm. A. Courtney .............. 1884-1888	4
Capt. F. W. Dawson ................ 1884-1888	4
G. Wesley Dingle ..... ............ 1884-1888	4
1870-1872	2 yrs
1878-1880 2 yrsMemminger and Education
83
X. —BIBLIOGRAPHY.
1.	Archer, Henry P., The Public Schools of Charleston. Charleston Year Book, 1886.
2.	Brackett, Anna C., Charleston, 1861. Harper's Magazine, May, 1894. New York.
3.	Capers, Henry )D., Life and Times of C. G. Memminger. Richmond, E. Waddy, 1893.
4.	Cardoza, Jacob N., Reminiscences of Charleston. Charleston, S. C. Joseph Walker, 1866.
5.	Charleston, Reports of Board of School Commissioners, 1855-1885.
6.	Charleston Mercury, 1860-1864. Charleston, S. C.
7.	Charleston Year Book, 1880-1888.
8.	Elliott, Stephen, Jr., and Thornwell, Jos. H., Report of the General Assembly on Free Schools, 1839. Legislative reports.
9.	Keowee Courier, 1855-1860. Pickens, S. C., Wal-halla, S. C.
10.	Memminger, Dr. Allard, Letter dated Jan. 26, 1925.
11.	Memminger, R. Withers, Letter dated Feb. 5, 1925.
12.	Memminger School Manual, 1909-1910; 1922-1923.
13.	Meriwether, Colyer, Higher Education in South Carolina with a Sketch of the Free School System. Washington Government Printing Office, 1889.
14.	Mills, Robert, Statistics of South Carolina. Hulbut and Lloyd, 1826. Charleston, S. C.
15.	Reports of United States Commissioners of Education, 1869-1888.
16.	South Carolina University Catalogs, 1836-1878.
17.	South Carolina Acts of the General Assembly, 1811; 1836-1878.
18.	South Carolina Reports of State Superintendents of Education, 1870-1888.84	University Extension Division
20.	Southern Quarterly Review, Vol. II., 1856. Columbia, S. C.
21.	Stoddard, J. A., Backgrounds of Secondary Education in South Carolina.
22.	The Charleston Daily News, 1867-1873. Charleston, S. C.
23.	The Charleston News and Courier, 1873-1888. Charleston, S. C.
24.	The Columbia Daily Register, 1888. Columbia, S. C.
25.	The Fairfield Weekly Herald, 1866-1872.	1888.
26.	The Sumter Watchman, 1857. Sumter, S. C.
27.	The Tri-Weekly News, 1865; 1866. Winnsboro, S. C.
28.	The Weekly Gleaner, 1869-1870. Columbia, S. C.
29.	Thornwell, James Henly, Letter to Governor Manning on Public Instruction in South Carolina, originally published in November, 1853, and republished in the editions of the News and Courier, July, 1885. Charleston, S. C.SERVICES OF THE EXTENSION DIVISION
Bureau of Publications:
University Weekly News South Carolina Education-Bulletins
Bureau of Educational Information
School Surveys Standard Tests
School Buildings and Grounds
High School Activities:
Championship Games Debate
Declamation and Expression English Latin
Stenography and Typewriting Track and Field Athletics Prep School Meet
Bureau of Public Discussion:
Package Libraries Club Programs and Outlines Debates
Plays and Pageants Declamations and Readings Home Reading Courses
Lecture Service Conferences and Institutes:
High School Conference
Economic and Social Surveys Visual Education:.
Motion Pictures
• •This book is a preservation facsimile produced for the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
It is made in compliance with copyright law and produced on acid-free archival 60# book weight paper which meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (permanence of paper).
Preservation facsimile printing and binding
by
Northern Micrographics Brookhaven Bindery La Crosse, Wisconsin 2012