CONTENTS—Ode to Canada—Early events—First English child in America,
1587—In New England—First French child, 1621—First in Upper
Canada, 1783—In Prince Edward—Adolphustown—Ameliasburgh—North of
the Rideau—Indian marriage ceremony—Difficulty among first
settlers to get clergymen—First marriage in America, 1608—First in
New England, 1621—First in Canada, 1620—Marriageable folks—No one
to tie the matrimonial knot—Only one clergyman—Officers marrying—
Magistrates empowered—Legislation, 1793—Its provision—Making valid
certain marriages—Further legislation, 1798—In 1818—1821—1831—
Clergymen of all denominations permitted to marry—Methodist
ministers—Marriage license, 1814—Five persons appointed to issue—A
noticeable matter—Statements of Bates—Mode of courting in the
woods—Newcastle wedding expeditions—Weapons of defence—Ladies’
dresses—The lover’s “rig”—A wedding ring—Paying the magistrate—A
good corn basket—Going to weddings—“Bitters”—Old folks stay at
home—The dance, several nights—Marriage outfit—Frontier life—
Morals in Upper Canada—Absence of irregularities—Exceptional
instances—Unable to get married, Peter and Polly—A singular
witness—Rev. Mr. Stuart—Langhorn—McDowell—How to adorn the bride—
What she wore—A wedding in 1808—On horseback—The guests—The
wedding—The banquet—The game of forfeits—The night—Second day
wedding—The young folks on horseback—Terpischorean—An elopement by
Canoe—The Squire—The chase—The lovers successful—The Squires who
married.
“ODE TO CANADA.”
Canada faithful! Canada fair!
Canada, beautiful, blooming and rare!
Canada, happiest land of the earth!
Hail to thee, Canada! land of my birth!
Land of fair freedom, where bought not and sold,
Are sinews and sorrows, for silver and gold!
Land of broad lakes, sweet valleys and plains!
Land where justice for rich and poor reigns!
Land of tall forests, famed rivers and rills!
Land of fair meadows, bold mountains and hills!
Land where a man is a man, though he toil!
Land where the tiller is lord of the soil!
Land where a people are happy and free—
Where is the land that is like unto thee?
Thou hast for the stranger that seeketh thy shore
A smile, and a cheer, and a welcome in store;
The needy, relief; and the weary repose;
A home for thy friends; and a grave for thy foes.
Thy nobles are those whose riches in store
Is the wealth of the soul, and the heart’s hidden lore;
They cringe to no master, they bow to no lord
Save Heaven’s, each night and each morning adored.
Land of swift rivers, sweet-gliding along!
Land of my pride, and land of my song!
Canada, prosperous! Canada, true!
Canada loyal, and virtuous, too!
Canada, happiest land of the earth!
Hail thee, forever, sweet land of my birth!
THE FIRST NATIVES OF UPPER CANADA.
We turn from the sad pictures which have been truthfully, if imperfectly
done, which represent the darker side of the pioneer life of the
refugees, to others more pleasing. In those primitive times, events
which now seem trivial to a general public, were of general interest,
and the recollection cherished by a whole community. In the absence of
those stirring events which characterize the present, incidents of
comparative unimportance, became household words, and recollections.
Hence, it comes that posterity may, in some instances, know who were
first married in certain places in America, of the first birth, and who
first died.
“The first child born of English parents in America, was a daughter of
Mrs. Dore, of Virginia, October 18, 1587.” “There is now standing in
Marshalfield, Cape Cod, a portion of a house built by Perigrine White,
the first male child born of English parents in New England.” According
to the testimony of the registrar of Quebec, the first white child born
in Canada, was upon the 24th October, 1621, which was christened the
same day by the name of Eustache, being the son of Abraham and Margaret
L’Anglois; Abraham was a Scotchman, named Martin Abraham. He was king’s
pilot, and married to Eustache. The plains of Abraham derive their name
from him.
In the obituary notice of Rev. Mr. Pringle, a Methodist preacher, it is
stated that he was born in Prince Edward, in 1780, but this must be a
mistake. There is sufficient proof that the first settlement at Smith’s
Bay commenced in 1784, when the first part of Prince Edward became
settled. Perhaps, indeed, very likely, the first children born of
European parents, was the late Colonel John Clark, of Dalahousie, and an
elder brother and sister. His father, an Englishman, came to Quebec,
attached to the 8th regiment in 1768. From a sergeant-major, he was
appointed in 1776, clerk and naval store keeper at Carleton Island.
Here, Sarah and William Clark were born during the progress of the war.
Col. Clark says, “I was born at Frontenac, now Kingston, in 1783, and
was baptized by the Rev. Mr. Stuart.”
The Rev. Mr. Pringle, before alluded to, was the first, or among the
first-born in Prince Edward.
A son of Thomas Dorland, claimed to be the first white child born in the
fourth township; but the honor was disputed by Daniel Peterson. Mrs. Wm.
Ketcheson, now living in Sidney, daughter of Elizabeth Roblin, of
Adolphustown, was born there in 1784. She must have been one of the very
first, as the first settlers came that same year. On the 16th January
1785, Henry VanDusen was born in Adolphustown, being one of the first
natives.
Upon the 26th April, 1868, was buried Mrs. Bush, she was the first
female born in Ameliasburgh. Mr. Bleeker, yet living at Trenton, was the
first male child born in Ameliasburgh. Mrs. Covert, was also one of the
first persons born in Ameliasburgh.
The first person said to have been born in Toronto, was Mr. J. Cameron,
of Yonge Street, in 1798.
The first child born of white parents north of the Rideau, was Colonel
E. Burritt, Burritt’s Rapids, a relative of Elihu Burritt.
MARRYING IN EARLY TIMES.
The native Indians of America practiced no important ceremony in
connection with marrying. Certain steps had to be taken by the one who
might desire to have a certain female as his partner, and those
proceedings were always strictly attended to. But the final ceremony
consisted in little more than the affianced one, leaving the wigwam of
her father and repairing to that of her future lord and master. In many
cases the first settlers of America experienced some difficulty in
obtaining the services of a Christian minister to solemnize matrimony.
In French Canada there was not this difficulty, as from the first the
zealous missionary was ever beside the discoverer as he pressed on his
way.
The first Christian marriage solemnized in America, took place in
Virginia in 1608, between John Loyden and Ann Burras. The first marriage
in New England was celebrated the 12th May, 1621, at Plymouth, between
Edward Waislow and Susannah White. The first marriage in the colony of
French Canada, was between Guillaume Couillard and Guillmet Hebert, July
1620. This is found in the first parish register, which was commenced
this year, 1620.
Among the pioneers of Upper Canada, were persons of every class as to
age, from the tender infant at the breast, to the gray-headed man. There
were young men and young women, as well as the aged, and as hopes and
desires exist to-day in the breast of the young, so did they then. As
the gentle influence of love animates at the present time, so it did
then. But there was a serious drawback; the consummation of courtship
could not easily be realized. Throughout the vast length of the
settlements there were but few clergymen to celebrate matrimony, and
many sighing swains had to wait months, and even years of wearisome time
to have performed the matrimonial ceremony. At the first, when a
chaplain was attached to a regiment, he was called upon, but when the
settlers commenced to clear, there was no chaplain connected with the
regiment. Indeed, Mr. Stuart, of Kingston, was the only clergyman in all
Upper Canada for a few years. But the duties of the chaplain were
frequently attended to by an officer, especially at Niagara, and many of
the first marriages in the young colony were performed by a colonel, an
adjutant, or a surgeon. Subsequently, magistrates were appointed, who
were commissioned to tie the nuptial knot.
* * * * *
In the second session of the first Parliament, 1793, was passed “_An Act
to confirm and make valid certain marriages heretofore contracted in the
country now comprised within the Province of Canada, and to provide for
the future solemnization of marriage within the same._”
“Whereas many marriages have been contracted in this Province at a time
when it was impossible to observe the forms prescribed by law for the
solemnization thereof, by reason that there was no Protestant parson or
minister duly ordained, residing in any part of the said Province, nor
any consecrated Protestant church or chapel within the same, and whereas
the parties having contracted such marriages, and their issue may
therefore be subjected to various disabilities, in order to quiet the
minds of such persons and to provide for the future solemnization of
marriage within this Province, be it enacted and declared by the King’s
Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the
Legislative Council and Assembly of the Province of Upper Canada, that
the marriage and marriages of all persons, not being under any canonical
disqualification to contract matrimony, that have been publicly
contracted before any magistrate or commanding officer of a post, or
adjutant, or surgeon of a regiment, acting as chaplain, or any other
person in any public office or employment, before the passing of this
Act, shall be confirmed and considered to all intents and purposes as
good and valid in law, and that the parties who have contracted such
marriages, and the issue thereof, may become severally entitled to all
the rights and benefits, and subject to all the obligations arising from
marriage and consanguinity, in as full and ample a manner as if the said
marriages had respectively been solemnized according to law.
“And be it further enacted, that in order to enable those persons who
may be desirous of preserving the testimony of such marriage, and of the
birth of their children, it shall and may be lawful, at any time, within
three years from the passing of this Act, for any magistrate of the
district where any such parties as may have contracted matrimony as
aforesaid, shall reside, at the request of either of said parties, to
administer to each an oath that they were married on a certain day, and
that there is now living issue of the marriage.” This attestation to be
subscribed to by the parties and certified by the magistrate. The Clerk
of the Peace recorded these certificates in a register for the purpose,
which thereafter was considered sufficient evidence of such matters.
It was further enacted, “That until there shall be five parsons or
ministers of the Church of England, doing duty in their respective
parishes in any one district,” persons “desirous of intermarrying with
each other, and neither of them living within the distance of eighteen
miles of any minister of the Church of England, may apply to any
neighbouring Justice of the Peace,” who should affix in some public
place, a notice, for which he should receive one shilling, and no more.
The purport of the notice was that A. B. and C. D. were desirous of
getting married, and there being no parson within eighteen miles, if any
person knew any just reason why they should not be married, should give
notice thereof to such magistrate. After which a form of the Church of
England was to be followed, but should a minister reside within eighteen
miles of either parties the marriage was null and void.
It is related that these notices of marriage were often attached to
trees by the road side, and as it was considered desirable in those days
to keep intending marriages secret, not unfrequently the intending
parties would watch and remove the notice which had been put up.
In the year 1798, an Act was passed to extend the provisions of the
first Act, which provided that “it shall be lawful for the minister of
any congregation or religious community of persons, professing to be
members of the Church of Scotland, or Lutherans, or Calvinists” to marry
according to the rights of such church, and it was necessary that one of
the persons to be married should have been a member of the particular
church six months before the marriage. The clergyman must have been
regularly ordained, and was to appear before six magistrates at quarter
sessions, with at least seven members of his congregation, to prove his
office, or take the oath of allegiance. And then, if the dignitaries
thought it expedient, they might grant him a certificate that he was a
settled minister, and therefore could marry, having published the
intended marriage upon three Sundays previous.
In November, 1818, a brief act was passed to make valid the marriages of
those who may have neglected to preserve the testimony of their
marriage.
In the year 1821, an act was passed “for the more certain punishment of
persons illegally solemnizing marriage, by which it was provided, that
if persons, legally qualified to marry, should do so without the
publication of banns, unless license be first had, should be guilty of a
misdemeanor.”
There was no further legislation until 1831, when provision was again
made to confirm marriages contracted “before any justice of the peace,
magistrate, or commanding officer of a post, or minister and clergyman,
in a manner similar to the previous acts.” It was at this time enacted
that it should be lawful for ministers of the church of Scotland,
Lutherans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptists, Independants,
Methodists, Menonists, Tunkers, or Moravians, to solemnize matrimony,
after having obtained certificates from the quarter sessions. According
to the act of 1798, only the church of Scotland, Lutherans, and
Calvinists, beside the English church, were permitted to marry persons.
So it will be seen by this act of 1831, important concessions were made
to different denominations. This act was by the Methodists, especially
regarded as a deserved recognition of the constantly increasing number
of that denomination. It certainly, at this time, seems remarkably
strange, that so obvious a right, was for so long a time withheld, not
alone from them, but other denominations. But the effort was strong, and
long continued to build up the church of England to the exclusion of all
others.
The restriction upon the Methodist ministers was to them greater from
the fact, that for a long time they were members of a Conference
existing, where all denominations were alike endowed with the power to
perform the marriage ceremony. And it is recorded, that in a few
instances, the ministers stationed in Canada, either forgot the
illegality of marrying, or felt indisposed to submit to the unjust law,
and did actually marry some persons. Elder Ryan was one, and was
consequently banished; but was shortly pardoned by government, because
of his known loyalty. His son-in-law, Rev. S. B. Smith, was another; but
he defended himself at the trial and got free. Another was the Rev. Mr.
Sawyer, who at once, being accused, fled the country for a time.
It appears that on the 31st May, 1814, government appointed five persons
to issue marriage licenses. One at Queenston, one at York, one at
Kingston, one at Williamsburgh, and one at Cornwall. John Cumming was
appointed for Kingston. Prior to this, licenses had been occasionally
issued, probably, however, only by application to government. Marrying
by license was so noticeable an event, that it was considered elegant to
state in the marriage notice, “married by license.”
According to a letter in our possession, sometimes the issuer of license
would be without any, when he would give a certificate to the applicant,
by which the party could get married, and subsequently he would furnish
him with the license.
Having given the legal and legislative facts relative to marrying in
early times, it may not be inappropriate to adduce some items of a
social nature.
Roger Bates, of Newcastle, in his memoir at the parliament library,
speaks thus pleasantly and graphically in referring to his father’s
courtship and marriage, which took place at the commencement of the
present century. “The mode of courting in those days was a good deal of
the Indian fashion. The buxom daughter would run through the trees and
bushes, and pretend to get away from the lover; but somehow or other he
managed to catch her, gave her a kiss, and they soon got married, I
rather think by a magistrate. Time was too valuable to make a fuss about
such matters.” Whether this mode of courting was practiced elsewhere,
than in Newcastle, it may be doubted. Speaking of the weddings, and the
journey to get the knot tied, he says, “they generally furnished
themselves with tomahawks and implements to defend themselves, and to
camp out if required. The ladies had no white dresses to spoil, or fancy
bonnets. With deer skin petticoats, home-spun gowns, and perhaps
squirrel skin bonnet, they looked charming in the eyes of their lovers,
who were rigged out in similar materials.” Again, about the wedding
ring, which could not then be procured, he says, “I have heard my mother
say, that uncle Ferguson, a magistrate, rather than disappoint a happy
couple, who had walked twenty miles, made search throughout the house,
and luckily found a pair of old English skates, to which was attached a
ring, with this he proceeded with the ceremony, and fixing the ring on
the young woman’s finger, reminded her, that though a homely substitute,
she must continue to wear it, otherwise the ceremony would be dissolved.
That curious token was greatly cherished, and is still among the family
relics.”
Mr. Sheriff Sherwood, speaking of his father, one of the first
magistrates appointed by Simcoe, says “he probably joined more
individuals together in the happy bonds of matrimony, than any other
person ever has, in the county of Leeds. I have often heard him mention
the circumstance of a young man asking him to marry him, but who said, I
cannot get the money to pay you, but I will make you a good wheat fan,
which he readily accepted, as it was an article much used at that time.
At another time an old man came on the same errand, and said to him, I
cannot get the money to pay you, but I will make you a good corn basket,
with oak splints, and so tight that I will warrant it to hold water, and
the old man punctually fulfilled his promise.”
We have some interesting information from an old lady who settled in
Ameliasburgh, and who still lives. Getting married at the beginning of
the present century was a great event. The Carrying Place was the usual
place of resort. They placed in a lumber waggon, a number of chairs, and
each gallant was supposed to support his partner upon his knee, and thus
economise room. “Bitters” were indulged in, but no fighting allowed. If
one began that, he was put out. Keeping good natured was a point of duty
insisted upon. No old persons went to the wedding, but they joined in
the dance, when the youngsters got back. A wedding without a dance was
considered an insipid affair; and it was generally kept up two or three
successive nights at different places. Francis Weese’s was a half-way
house between McMan’s corners, (Rednerville), and the Carrying Place.
Weese was a distinguished player upon the fiddle, and the wedding
parties often stayed with him the first night.
“A yoke of steers, a cow, three or four sheep, with a bed, table, two
dozen chairs, was regarded a very decent setting out for the bride. And
if the groom was heir to 50 or 100 acres of land, with a little cleared,
he was thought to have the worldly “gear,” to constitute a first-rate
match.”
The history of frontier life; of the advance body of pioneers in the far
west, frequently exhibits great irregularity in morals; a non-observance
of God’s commandments. But the record of the first settlers of Upper
Canada is remarkably bright. When it is recollected that they were but
scattered settlements in a wilderness; far away from civilized life;
excluded from the world, and removed from the influence of the salutary
power of public opinions, it is a matter of wonder, that great and
frequent violation of God’s law, with regard to marrying did not take
place. But such was not the case, as a general thing; the holy bonds of
matrimony, were employed to bind man and woman together, whether through
the officer, the magistrate or the clergyman. For years there was but
few clergymen to marry, and also but few magistrates, and there were
secluded settlements where the clergyman or magistrate came not, and
from which the inhabitants could not go, perhaps for many miles to get
married. But a few, and they are very few instances, are recorded where
parties deviated from the righteous way. Upon the shore of the bay, in a
remote locality, about the year 1796, lived two individuals, whom we
will call respectively Peter and Polly. They were living in the same
family, she as a “help,” and he as a hired man upon the farm. This
couple had desired to enter the bonds of matrimony; but the ministers
and squires lived some distance off, and they could not get away to be
married, so they had to wait for the coming of one who would marry them;
they had to wait, it would seem for several years, in the mean time they
consoled themselves with genuine, and no doubt honest love. At last it
came to pass that a Squire visited that neighbourhood, and stopped at
the house where they lived.
The family bethought them of the wishes of Peter and Polly; and that now
was the time to have the legal knot tied. So Polly was called from the
kitchen just as she was, and Peter from the field besmeared with sweat,
and clean dirt, and the two were made one. Among the witnesses of the
interesting ceremony, was a bright eyed boy who trotted unceremoniously
from the bride to the groom, calling them respectively “mozzer” and
“fadder.” The time came when this same boy was the owner of the land
whereon he had been born. This fact, from excellent authority, stands
out as an exception to a general rule, although there is not about it
that flagrant violation of moral principle which is too often seen at
the present day, under other circumstances which afford no excuse.
The Rev. Mr. Stuart, living at Kingston, was not often called upon to
marry, by persons outside of that village, and persons rarely found time
to go all the way to him. When Mr. Langhorn came and opened a church at
Adolphustown, and Bath, a more central place was supplied, and he
consequently was often employed. But Mr. McDowell was the one who most
frequently was required to marry. Being a minister of the church of
Scotland, he enjoyed the privilege of marrying, and unlike Langhorn, he
would marry them at their homes. So when making his rounds through the
country, on his preaching excursions, he was frequently called upon to
officiate in this capacity.
In the region of the Bay, were some who had in previous days, lived in
comfort, and had not wanted all that belonged to the well-to-do
inhabitants along the Hudson, and at New York. In some cases, these
families brought with them the fine clothes that had adorned their
bodies in former times. Not only was it difficult for them, in many
cases, to get some one to perform the marriage ceremony; but to the
female, especially, it was a grave matter how to adorn the bride with
that apparel which becomes the event. In those cases where rich clothes,
which had been used by parents, were stored away, they were brought
forth, and by a little alteration, made to do service; but by and by
these relics of better days were beyond their power to renovate, and
like others, they had, if married at all, to wear the garb mentioned by
Roger Bates, or some other plain article; a calico print, bought of a
pedlar, or a calamink, or linsey-woolsey petticoat, or a woolen drugget,
were no common luxuries in the wilderness home. An old lady who is still
living, tells us that she was married in 1807, and wore the
last-mentioned; and was thought very extravagant indeed. A venerable
lady, a native of the Bay, and now well-nigh eighty, remembers to have
attended a wedding about the year 1708, up the river Moira. She was
living with her uncle, Col. C. The wedding was one of some importance,
as both parties were well-to-do. There was but a path along the banks of
the river, and they went on horse back. At that time riding on horseback
was a common practice, not a single person merely, but in couples. It
was no unusual thing to see man and wife riding along together, also
brother and sister, and as well lovers. The guests to this wedding all
came on horse back, generally in pairs. They assembled early in the
forenoon, and the happy pair were soon united. The bride’s dress was
unusually grand, being of lawn; the two bridesmaids graced the occasion
by being dressed in muslin. She bears a distinct recollection of the
entertainment. The banquet was crowned with a majestic chicken pie, in a
pan capable of holding some twelve quarts; by roast goose, and with pies
and cakes of all sorts, in abundance. The bride’s father was the deacon
of a church, and did not allow dancing, but the afternoon and evening
were spent in joyous mirth and jovial “plays” in connection with which
forfeits were lost and redeemed. But, however much these plays may have
degenerated in recent days, they were then conducted with purity of
thought, and innocence of soul. The party did not break up the first
day. Half of the company repaired to the house of the groom’s father,
where beds were arranged for them. In the morning they went back to the
scene of the wedding, upon the banks of the river, which at this point
is particularly attractive. After breakfast, the young people, with the
newly married pair, set out for the front, to the mouth of the river.
They formed a joyous, and it must have been a picturesque cavalcade.
Each gentleman selected his fair partner, and having mounted his horse,
she was duly seated behind him. And thus they set out for their
destination. Pleasant, indeed, must have been the ride; striking the
scene, as they wended their way along the running water, and the bright
autumn sun shone upon them through the variegated leaves which clothed
the thickly standing trees. This night was spent at Myers’ Creek, in
following the notes of the fiddle with the nimble feet. This terminated
the wedding party. This is adduced as an illustration of marrying in
early times. Another will be briefly given: it was a case of elopement,
and occurred many years before the wedding above mentioned. A certain
Squire had been for many years in the enjoyment of wedded bliss. His
wife was the daughter of Capt. ——, a half-pay officer, an honest but
wayward Dutchman. The Squire’s wife died, and, in due time, he sought
the hand of another daughter of the Captain. But this the latter would
not listen to; he was determined they should not marry; because she was
his late wife’s sister. The worthy Squire could not see the force of the
objection, and the lady in question was likewise blinded by love. They
resolved to run away, or rather to paddle away, in a convenient canoe.
Clandestinely they set out upon the head waters of the bay, intending to
go to Kingston to obtain the services of a clergyman. But the Captain
learned the fact of their departure and started in pursuit with his
batteau and oarsmen. According to one account, the flying would-be
groomsman, who was paddling his own canoe, saw the angry parent coming,
and made haste to quicken his speed, but finding that they would be
overtaken, they landed upon an island in the bay, and hauled up the
canoe; and concealed it, with themselves, in a cavity upon the island;
and, after the Captain had passed, returned homeward and procured the
services of a Squire to marry them. But, according to another statement,
the lovers set out while the Captain was absent at Montreal, and arrived
at Kingston, unfortunately, as he was returning home. Seeing the Squire,
he had his suspicions aroused, and began to look about for his daughter.
She had, however, concealed herself by throwing an Indian blanket about
her person, and over her head, and by sitting down among some squaws.
The statement goes, that it was well the Captain did not find her, as he
would, as soon as not, have shot the Squire. The end of it was, they
were married, to live a long and happy domestic life. Although there may
be a little doubt as to the details of this early elopement on the bay,
there is no doubt that it took place in some such manner as described.
Among the Squires upon the Bay, the following were the most frequently
called upon to marry: Young, of the Carrying Place; Bleeker, of the
Trent; Lazier, of Sophiasburgh. The magistrates residing nearer Kingston
and Adolphustown had less of this to do, as clergymen could there be
more easily obtained.