Georgetown University: From Founding Proposal to Early College

Georgetown University began as Georgetown College, a project promoted by John Carroll in Georgetown on the Potomac River, then part of Maryland. At a meeting at White Marsh in November 1786, clergy decided to establish a school and appointed five directors: Carroll, James Pellentz, Robert Molyneux, John Ashton, and Leonard Neale. They were responsible for raising funds, appointing teachers, and managing the undertaking.

The deed to the original site was formally delivered on January 23, 1789, after construction had already begun. This became the institution's accepted founding year, but it was not the year of the first classes. Historian Curran distinguishes the stages: the decision in 1786, construction beginning in 1788, the first student's arrival in 1791, and teaching in 1792. Shea's 1891 history describes an “opening” in 1791, which should therefore be distinguished from the subsequent commencement of formal instruction.

References: [2] [3]

The founding proposal of about 1787 placed the spread of knowledge alongside the cultivation of young people's moral character. It envisaged accepting students with elementary literacy and teaching reading, writing, arithmetic, elementary mathematics, English grammar, and classical languages, preparing them for more advanced study. The college described here was not yet equivalent to a modern comprehensive university with multiple professional schools and graduate education.

The proposal declared that students of different religious beliefs would be accepted. Those whose faith differed from that of the administrators could attend worship and religious instruction designated by their parents, while all would observe common rules of conduct. Carroll's Catholic educational aims thus coexisted with interdenominational admission. The reasons for choosing Georgetown were also practical: healthy air, convenient connections, and relatively low living costs. The later advantage of proximity to the federal capital was not the sole consideration behind the original site.

References: [1] [2]

The initial project relied on donations and existing church property. The 1786 resolution provided for fundraising in North America, the Caribbean islands, and Europe, and allocated construction money from a land sale. The first site measured about an acre and a half, with an agreed price of £75. Carroll's correspondence in 1788 also discussed construction delays caused by rejected bricks, showing that plans and pledges did not translate directly into usable classrooms.

The school received support from Rome's Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, British donors, and figures such as Father Charles Plowden, though Shea described the overall fundraising response as disappointing. Meanwhile, an official university research report in 2016 confirmed that the organizers regarded income from Maryland plantations and the sale of enslaved people as sources of educational funding. A large sale of enslaved people in 1838 later helped relieve the college's debts. Its finances therefore cannot be described solely as charitable giving; their connections with enslaved labor and slave trading must also be acknowledged.

References: [2] [5]

The first president, Robert Plunkett, was responsible for turning the plan into everyday teaching. The earliest registered student was William Gaston of North Carolina. Shea's history records sixty-six students enrolled by the end of 1792. Most early students initially lived in houses near the college in town, under supervision by the president and teachers, an arrangement distinct from later centralized boarding.

The prospectus signed by President Du Bourg and the directors on January 1, 1798, makes the intended age group and system of management clearer. Boarders were admitted between eight and fourteen years old, had to be able to read and write beforehand, and could remain to complete the course. The prospectus prescribed common clothing, meals, and routines. Non-Catholic boarders had separate accommodation and different religious arrangements, while academic and disciplinary requirements remained the same.

References: [2] [4]

The 1798 prospectus gave classical languages a prominent place while emphasizing everyday practice in English and French: foreign students learned English and American students French, making the students' linguistic environment a teaching resource. The curriculum also included handwriting, arithmetic, mathematics, geography, the use of globes, and public speaking, divided among seven professors under the president. Spanish was valued because of the United States' proximity to and trade with Spanish territories.

The document described history, moral philosophy, and natural philosophy conditionally: teachers would be provided when students reached the appropriate level. All the announced advanced subjects therefore cannot be treated as already running reliably. Music, drawing, and dancing carried extra charges. Families were required to pay accounts six months in advance and appoint a local contact for students from farther away. Curricular expansion, recruitment across regions, and the collection of fees were interrelated concerns.

References: [4]

On March 1, 1815, James Madison approved the congressional Act concerning Georgetown College. It authorized the incumbent president and directors and their successors to confer on the college's students, or others deserving academic honors, the degrees customarily awarded by other American colleges and universities, and to issue the corresponding diplomas. It confirmed degree-awarding authority; it was not the same legal step as the institution's foundation associated with 1789.

The proposals, prospectus, and Act of Congress show Georgetown developing from an institution for elementary and classical education into a college authorized to grant degrees. This process depended on clergy and transatlantic support networks, while remaining constrained by building costs, staffing, students' level of attainment, and wider socioeconomic structures. The specific arrangements recorded in early documents reveal more about how the school operated than a history compressed into a single founding ceremony.

References: [1] [2] [4] [6]