Parrish and Magill
Oct. 3rd, 2004 08:15 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
indecisionwinsI'm in McCabe reading through this really interesting dissertation on the history of Swarthmore (it's by Homer D. Babbidge, if you're interested in finding it), and I just finished reading this account of a feud between Edward Parrish and Edward Hicks Magill early in the history of the College that's really, really fascinating.
Edward Parrish (who Parrish is named for) was the first President of the College, as you may know. He was one of the early leaders in gathering support for forming Swarthmore (Benjamin Hallowell and Martha Tyson were the ones who came up with the idea at the very beginning, but Parrish was an early supporter of the school, and partly because he was a lot younger than Hallowell and Tyson, he did a lot of the difficult stuff from nearly the beginning). After he was appointed President in 1865, he worked for 4 years (almost singlehandedly, at times) to raise enough money to get the school to open. Then, when the school opened in 1869, he was the first president, and really enjoyed it. This source is based largely on Parrish's personal diary, so it may be a little bit biased, but even though it had been a huge amount of work, he really loved the college, and he loved leading it. He was ahead of his time in that he really trusted the students, so even though there were definitely moral restrictions, there were no harsh and arbitrary moral codes. He also apparently really believed in having Swarthmore be among the best educationally, which was a pretty high standard, especially since the Hicksite Quakers who founded Swarthmore generally weren't that interested in formal education. And, it sounds like, he was apparently a very honest and trusting person in general.
But after the first year, Magill, who believed in a much stricter disciplinary tradition from classical schools, really didn't like Parrish's relatively loose disciplinary standards. (Magill was the head of the Preparatory division of Swarthmore at the time, which was actually a lot bigger than the college at first.) It wasn't like Parrish was OK with Swarthmore students having orgies or anything like that, but if you've heard of the "100 Laws", which are these really arbitrary and extremely strict standards that were in place at Swarthmore for about 40 years--those were by Magill, and those were the kinds of arbitrary rules that Parrish (and Hallowell, and, according to Babbidge, Quaker tradition) was against. So...Magill quietly started turning members of the board of managers against Parrish, by convincing them that Parrish was being too lax on discipline. And so, after making Swarthmore his life's work, and after really ignoring all of his personal affairs since he became President, Parrish was forced to resign in 1871. He was devastated by this, although he tried to still be polite to the Managers of the college, as "an independent outsider, looker on, and well wisher of Swarthmore." But soon after that, his wife, who he says helped take some of the burden off of him, died in January 1872 (on their 25th wedding anniversary). Then, later in 1872, Parrish agreed to go to Oklahoma to mediate a disagreement with Indian tribes, "against the advice of his friends". While he was there, he contracted malaria and died on Sept. 9, 1872, at the age of 51. And Edward Hicks Magill went on to be President of Swarthmore for the next 20 years.
Wow...who knew that there was stuff like this in the history of Swarthmore? (Of course, Parrish's view eventually won out, but not until the 1920's...) Sad, but fascinating...
Edward Parrish (who Parrish is named for) was the first President of the College, as you may know. He was one of the early leaders in gathering support for forming Swarthmore (Benjamin Hallowell and Martha Tyson were the ones who came up with the idea at the very beginning, but Parrish was an early supporter of the school, and partly because he was a lot younger than Hallowell and Tyson, he did a lot of the difficult stuff from nearly the beginning). After he was appointed President in 1865, he worked for 4 years (almost singlehandedly, at times) to raise enough money to get the school to open. Then, when the school opened in 1869, he was the first president, and really enjoyed it. This source is based largely on Parrish's personal diary, so it may be a little bit biased, but even though it had been a huge amount of work, he really loved the college, and he loved leading it. He was ahead of his time in that he really trusted the students, so even though there were definitely moral restrictions, there were no harsh and arbitrary moral codes. He also apparently really believed in having Swarthmore be among the best educationally, which was a pretty high standard, especially since the Hicksite Quakers who founded Swarthmore generally weren't that interested in formal education. And, it sounds like, he was apparently a very honest and trusting person in general.
But after the first year, Magill, who believed in a much stricter disciplinary tradition from classical schools, really didn't like Parrish's relatively loose disciplinary standards. (Magill was the head of the Preparatory division of Swarthmore at the time, which was actually a lot bigger than the college at first.) It wasn't like Parrish was OK with Swarthmore students having orgies or anything like that, but if you've heard of the "100 Laws", which are these really arbitrary and extremely strict standards that were in place at Swarthmore for about 40 years--those were by Magill, and those were the kinds of arbitrary rules that Parrish (and Hallowell, and, according to Babbidge, Quaker tradition) was against. So...Magill quietly started turning members of the board of managers against Parrish, by convincing them that Parrish was being too lax on discipline. And so, after making Swarthmore his life's work, and after really ignoring all of his personal affairs since he became President, Parrish was forced to resign in 1871. He was devastated by this, although he tried to still be polite to the Managers of the college, as "an independent outsider, looker on, and well wisher of Swarthmore." But soon after that, his wife, who he says helped take some of the burden off of him, died in January 1872 (on their 25th wedding anniversary). Then, later in 1872, Parrish agreed to go to Oklahoma to mediate a disagreement with Indian tribes, "against the advice of his friends". While he was there, he contracted malaria and died on Sept. 9, 1872, at the age of 51. And Edward Hicks Magill went on to be President of Swarthmore for the next 20 years.
Wow...who knew that there was stuff like this in the history of Swarthmore? (Of course, Parrish's view eventually won out, but not until the 1920's...) Sad, but fascinating...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Wow.
Date: 2004-10-03 10:21 pm (UTC)I am amused, amazed, and more than a little sad for Parrish.
Where can I learn more of the "100 Laws"? (On a side note, doesn't that designation just scream "purity test"?)
Re: Wow.
Date: 2004-10-03 11:17 pm (UTC)Hmm, I'm looking in Tripod and I'm not seeing anything, but it couldn't be that hard to find if you did some digging. (Or at least if you ask in FHL.) I first heard of them in the little pamphlet about Swarthmore history that they gave to incoming freshmen, last year I think. (They ended up giving everyone copies later, but you probably got one... So if you still have it, you may find a few of them in there, along with maybe a cite to the full list. I saved my copy, and I know it's around my room someplace, but I can't find it. But if I do find anything interesting, I'll post another comment here...
But I know they include something like having to keep at least one foot on the floor at all times if you're in the room of someone of the opposite sex. Actually, no, that doesn't sound right, because I'm almost sure students weren't allowed in the rooms of people of the opposite sex at all until long after Magill retired. But I know there are some incredibly arbitrary ones there.
And I definitely like the idea of a purity test... ;)
Re: Wow.
Date: 2004-10-04 06:50 am (UTC)Re: Wow.
Date: 2004-10-04 06:06 pm (UTC)Re: Wow.
Date: 2004-10-04 07:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-04 11:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-10-04 11:47 pm (UTC)