Maryland Manual 1994-1995 State Department of Education /229

Some public schools were founded; a pattern of local diversity also was established with no statewide
uniformity or accountability. The legislature kept passing local laws relating to public education for each
county, and sometimes for the districts within a county. Legislative appropriations were continued to
favored private academies, while the Free School Fund dribbled monies to the county boards which could
divert funds to academies, invest the funds, or actually expend them on local schools.

A uniform system of primary school education for Maryland was attempted in 1825 (Chapter 162, Acts of
1825). Subject to referendum, the law was ratified only by a few counties and then amended repeatedly by
local legislation until little uniformity remained. The act called for a Superintendent of Public Instruction to
prepare a statewide plan for education and oversee its execution. The levy court in each county was to appoint
nine commissioners of primary schools who would divide the county into school districts, call a meeting of the
taxpayers of each district, and receive the county's share of the Free School Fund, accruing under the act of
1812. Taxpayers in each school district were to elect a clerk and three trustees, select a site for a schoolhouse,
and vote on a rate of tax to support the district school. The trustees were in charge of building, repairing, and
furnishing their district school, as well as hiring the teacher and submitting an annual report. Appointed by the
levy court, school inspectors not only were to visit each school in the county, but also to certify teachers. This
requirement may have reflected dissatisfaction with unqualified teachers; however, since no education was
required to be a school inspector, the standards for teacher certification potentially could be very disparate.

Baltimore City was excepted from the provisions of the 1825 act if it established its own system of
public education by 1830. This precedent caused problems later, as the vigorous resistance of Baltimore
City to each successive attempt at a statewide system certainly caused several efforts to fail. Baltimore City
opened its first public school in 1829, charged tuition of one dollar per term, and had an impressive
percentage of its children, girls and boys, enrolled in schools.

In 1837, the General Assembly again considered public education. The interest on Maryland's share of
surplus federal revenue (roughly one million dollars invested at 5% ) was set aside to support free schools
(Chapter 285, Acts of 1837). Half was to be distributed according to the proportion of white population; the
other half was to be divided into twenty-one equal parts and a part allotted to each county and Baltimore City.
In anticipation of these funds, the House Committee on Education had looked into the expediency of
establishing a uniform system of public education and the propriety of using the State's share of surplus federal
revenue for education. The Committee's report in 1836 favored a general system of public instruction supported
by a combination of State funds and district taxation, such as that set up by the 1825 law, which since its passage
had "slumbered on the statute book" (Maryland Public Documents, 1836, O). The report then cited Anne
Arundel County as an example of the successful implementation of the act, even though it had been amended
to meet local needs. Also, the Committee had been unable to obtain any statistical information about the Anne
Arundel County schools and went by hearsay. The Committee could not agree on whether to continue support
to academies and colleges or use those funds to establish a university. The majority thought that a university
would benefit only the wealthy.

Despite the Committee's belief that the 1825 act made the best provision for schools in Maryland, the
legislature in 1842 directed the Secretary of State, the Treasurer of the Western Shore, and the State
Librarian to draft new legislation in the form of a code for the government of common schools and for
the promotion of general education. They studied the organization of schools in New England and New
York and concluded that Maryland's great deficiency was the lack of an administrative head. (Under the
1825 act, Maryland's Governor had appointed a Superintendent of Public Instruction, but after 1827 no
one seems to have served in that capacity.) Northern states required annual reports from each school district
which were then compiled for legislative review. In Maryland, the Committee in 1836 could not get
statistics from just one county; for the 1843 report, statistics were requested from all twenty-one counties.
Only fourteen responded, and the information submitted was incomplete. The proposed Code for the
Support of Common Schools presented to the legislature in 1843 retained much of the local structure
found in the act of 1825. It followed New York and Pennsylvania practice by designating the Secretary of
State as Superintendent of Common Schools and also required local districts to raise revenues before State
funds were released to them. The proposed code required of Baltimore City only an annual report and
stopped appropriations to all private institutions and academies, except St. John's College and Charlotte
Hall Academy. The code proposed in 1843 was never enacted.

Debate over public education continued at the Constitutional Convention of 1850-1851. Where
legislation repeatedly failed, constitutional provision might succeed. The Convention's committee on
educational matters recommended a permanent and adequate school fund, a uniform system of public
school education, an elected superintendent of education, and a normal (or model) school to train teachers.
Old grievances over distribution of the Free School Fund caused the proposal to be postponed. The more
populous counties and Baltimore City believed a State system would continue to deprive them of their