CHAPTER IV.

_EDUCATION IN UPPER CANADA FROM 1783 TO 1844--(Continued)._

During the Legislative session of 1836, Sir John Colborne was replaced

by Sir Francis Bond Head as Lieutenant-Governor. It would seem that the

difference of opinion between Sir John Colborne and Lord Glenelg of the

Colonial Office was responsible for the former's asking to be recalled.

His last official act as Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada, and one

intimately connected with educational controversy at a later date, was

to sign patents for the endowment of forty-three Anglican rectories out

of the Clergy Reserve lands.

In the Legislature no real progress was made in education, although a

lengthy report[49] and a draft School Bill were presented by a member of

the Assembly, Doctor Charles Duncomb. This report was based on a visit

paid by Doctor Duncomb to the Eastern, Middle and Western United States.

It is interesting and emphasizes the importance of a suitable education

for women.

[49] See Appendix to Journals of Assembly of U.C., 1836. See also

Assembly Journals for 1836, pp. 213 and 214.

The most important event of the year in its after effects upon education

in Upper Canada was the formal opening of Upper Canada Academy[50] at

Cobourg, under a Royal Charter secured by Egerton Ryerson.

[50] See Chapter I.

In resigning his position as editor of _The Guardian_, the official

organ of Methodism, Ryerson referred to the condition of education in

Upper Canada, emphasizing the supreme importance of elementary

instruction for every child in the country. It is also interesting to

note that at this date, when he had probably never dreamed of having any

official connection with elementary education, he should have touched

the very root of the problem by pointing out the utter impossibility of

making any real progress without a body of educated and trained

teachers.

The Legislature of 1837 set at rest for a few years the vexed question

of an amendment to King's College charter. The majority of the

Legislative Council were stoutly opposed to any modifications that would

lessen the control of the Anglican Church, but they saw that public

opinion was strong enough to prevent the opening of the college until

amendments were made. They also saw that they were running a risk of

having the charter cancelled and a new one granted by the Crown. They

accordingly accepted certain amendments proposed by the Legislative

Assembly. These amendments[51] gave _ex-officio_ seats on the College

Council to the Speaker of the two branches of the Legislature and to the

Attorney-General and the Solicitor-General of Upper Canada; they removed

from members of the Council and from professors every semblance of a

religious test except the following declaration: "I do solemnly and

sincerely declare that I believe in the authenticity and Divine

Inspiration of the Old and New Testaments and in the Doctrine of the

Holy Trinity"; they removed absolutely from religious tests all students

and candidates for degrees; they made the Judges of His Majesty's Court

of King's Bench visitors instead of the Lord Bishop of Quebec, and

vested the appointment of future presidents in His Majesty instead of

conferring that office _ex-officio_ upon the Archdeacon of York.

[51] See Journals of Assembly of Upper Canada for 1837, Legislative

Library, Toronto.

Steps were taken at once to place the college in a position to begin

work. A very able and comprehensive scheme[52] of studies and courses

was drawn up by the President, Dr. Strachan, and everything promised

favourably, when the Rebellion broke out and all operations were

suspended.

[52] See D. H. E., Vol. III., pp. 93-98.

The following sketch of the Common Schools of this period, written by

Mr. Malcolm Campbell, an old teacher of Middlesex, is inserted because

it is believed to be typical of Upper Canada conditions. Mr. Campbell

began to teach in 1835:--

"The School Houses, during the time I taught, were built of round logs

about 14 x 16 ft., with clapboard roofs and open fireplaces. A window

sash on three sides for light, a board being placed beneath them, on

which to keep copies and slates. There were long hewn benches without

backs for seats. There were no blackboards or maps on the chinked walls.

There was a miscellaneous assortment of books, which made it very

difficult to form classes. Cobb's and Webster's Spelling-books

afterwards gave place to Mavor's. The Testament was used as a Textbook,

a supply of which was furnished by Rev. Benjamin Cronyn, afterwards

Bishop of Huron. The English Reader, and Hume and Smollett's History of

England were used by the more advanced classes. Lennie's Grammar, and

Dilworth's and Hutton's Arithmetics, and the History of Cortez' Conquest

of Mexico were used, also a Geography and Atlas, and a variety of books.

Goose-quills were used for pens, which the teacher made and mended at

least twice a day. The hours of teaching were somewhat longer than at

present, and there was no recess. The number of scholars varied from 15

to 30, and school was kept open eight to ten months in the year with a

Saturday vacation every two weeks. Teachers, after having taught school

for some months, underwent a pretty thorough oral examination by the

District Board of Education, and were granted First, Second, or Third

Class certificates according to their merits, real or supposed. They had

the Government grant apportioned to them according to their standing.

Mr. Donald Currie, in the section west of me, drew annually $120 on the

ground of his high qualifications as well as his teaching Latin. My

share of the grant was $80. Mr. Benson east of me drew $50.... The

Government grant was what the teacher mainly depended on for cash. The

rest of his pay, which varied from $10 to $16 a month, Government grant

included, was mostly paid in "kind," and very hard to collect at that.

"The Trustees in these early days assumed duties beyond what they now

possess. In engaging a teacher, they examined him as to his

qualifications in the three R's and as much farther as any of themselves

knew. They fixed the rate bill which each scholar should pay, usually at

a dollar and fifty cents a quarter; and any family sending more than

three scholars should go free, as well as the children of widows.... The

teacher was expected to 'board round' at that rate of pay. He usually

boarded in one or two houses near the school, doing chores morning and

evening. The Trustees assessed each scholar with half a cord of wood

during winter, which was scantily supplied; sometimes the teacher and

bigger boys went with an axe to the woods to make up the deficiency. The

trustees were to examine the school quarterly, and sign the Quarterly

Reports so that the teacher might draw the Government grant."[53]

[53] See D. H. E., Vol. III., pp. 131, 132.

The following "Rules for the Government of Common Schools" prescribed by

the Board of Education for the Niagara District is taken from Gourley's

"Statistical Account of Upper Canada, 1817-1822," Vol. II.; Appendix,

pp. 116-119:--

"1. The Master to commence the labours of the day by a short prayer.

"2. School to commence each day at 9 o'clock and five hours at least

to be given to teaching during the day, except on Saturdays.

"3. Diligence and Emulation to be cherished and encouraged among the

pupils by rewards judiciously distributed, to consist of little

pictures and books, according to the age of the scholar.

"4. Cleanliness and Good Order to be indispensable; and corporal

punishment seldom necessary, except for bad habits learned at

home--lying, disobedience, obstinacy and perverseness--these

sometimes require chastisement; but gentleness even in these cases

would do better with most children.

"5. All other offences, arising chiefly from liveliness and

inattention, are better corrected by shame, such as gaudy caps,

placing the culprits by themselves, not permitting anyone to play

with them for a day or days, detaining after school hours, or during

a play afternoon, or by ridicule.

"6. The Master must keep a regular catalogue of his scholars and

mark every day they are absent.

"7. The forenoons of Wednesday and Saturday to be set apart for

Religious Instruction; to render it agreeable the school should be

furnished with at least ten copies of Barrows' 'Questions on the New

Testament,' and the Teacher to have one copy of the key to these

questions for his own use; the teacher should likewise have a copy

of Murray's 'Power of Religion on the Mind,' Watkin's 'Scripture

Biography,' and Blair's 'Class Book,' the Saturday Lessons of which

are well-calculated to impress religious feeling.

"Note.--These books are confined to no religious denomination, and

do not prevent the Masters from teaching such Catechism as the

parents of the children may adopt.

"8. Every day to close with reading publicly a few verses from the

New Testament, proceeding regularly through the Gospels.

"9. The afternoons of Wednesday and Saturday to be allowed for play.

"10. A copy of these Rules to be affixed up in some conspicuous

place in the School-room, and to be read publicly to the Scholars

every Monday morning by the Teacher."

No doubt much good teaching was done in schools nominally governed by

similar codes of instruction. The teacher is always the real force in a

school and good teachers are never slaves to mechanical rules.

These "rules," however, suggest a form of punishment that was largely

used in those days even by good teachers and has not yet been wholly

banished from the schoolroom--ridicule. Here we see it offered as an

improvement upon corporal punishment. It may have had its advantages

over the brutal punishments sometimes inflicted in the old days, but I

think Dr. Johnson was right in saying that a reasonably severe corporal

punishment was better for both teacher and pupil than either "nagging"

or ridicule. No doubt the systems of Bell and Lancaster were responsible

for the use recommended of ridicule in the Niagara District in 1820.

One important Bill, "An Act to Provide for the Advancement of

Education,"[54] became law during the session of 1839. This Bill set

apart 250,000 acres of waste lands for the support of District Grammar

Schools, made provision for additional schools in districts where they

were needed, and provided for the erection of new buildings and

assistant masters. The Bill also placed the revenue and management of

these schools under the Council of King's College. In this way King's

College, Upper Canada College, and the District Grammar Schools--all the

machinery of higher education--were brought under central authority.

[54] See Journals of Legislature of Upper Canada for 1839. Legislative

Library, Toronto. See also copy of bill in D. H. E., Vol. III., pp. 170,

171.

From a careful reading of a despatch[55] sent by Sir George Arthur to

the Colonial Office, in connection with the Act referred to above, it

seems quite clear that the land grant of 250,000 acres now set apart for

District Grammar Schools was the balance of the original 549,217 acres

granted by the Crown in 1798 for the endowment of Free Grammar Schools

and a University. Thus, after forty years, the intentions of the Crown

regarding Grammar Schools were to be realized. But only in part, because

the Act of 1839 did not make the Grammar Schools free.

[55] Reprinted in D. H. E. See Vol. III., pp. 173-183.

It was confidently hoped by many of the King's College Council, and

especially by the President, Rev. Dr. Strachan, that when the college

charter was amended in 1837 nothing would interfere with the immediate

execution of plans for building and opening King's College. Elaborate

plans and models of a building were prepared and sent out from England,

an architect was employed, advertisements for tenders for a building

were inserted in various newspapers, and the contract was about to be

awarded, when Sir George Arthur hurriedly convened the Council and

ordered an investigation into the finances of the College.

His suspicions had evidently been awakened by some returns on College

affairs presented in response to an Address by the Assembly. The report

of the special audit committee[56] appointed by the Council revealed a

startling condition of affairs and incidentally a strong argument

against allowing any body or corporation to handle public funds without

an annual audit by someone responsible to Parliament.

[56] See proceedings of King's College Council, 1837-1840.

The Bursar, the Hon. Joseph Wells, a prominent member of the Legislative

Council, had diverted to his own use and that of his needy friends some

L6,374, and the sum of L4,312 had been loaned to the President, Dr.

Strachan. There was in use a very primitive system[57] of book-keeping,

and on the whole just such management as might have been expected from

the close corporation which had, up to 1837, made up the King's College

Council. There was also much mismanagement of the financial affairs of

Upper Canada College. These revelations delayed building operations

until 1842.

[57] See Report of T. C. Patrick, Vol. II., manuscript Minutes King's

College Council, pp. 68-73.

On December 3rd, 1839, the last session of the Legislature of Upper

Canada was opened by Charles Poulett Thompson, afterwards Lord Sydenham.

A Bill was passed granting a charter to the "University of Kingston."

When the Bill was introduced into the Assembly, the name was to be the

"University of Queen's College."[58] Why the change was made does not

seem very clear, but perhaps it was because the promoters of the Bill

were not certain that Her Majesty had given her consent to the use of

her name in the Act. The Act placed the College largely under the

control of the Presbyterian Church and wholly under control of

Presbyterians, but no religious tests were to be exacted from students

or graduates except in Divinity. The 15th section of the charter

authorized the representative of Her Majesty in Canada to pay from the

revenues of King's College a sum sufficient to establish a Chair in

Divinity. This arrangement doubtless was the result of a despatch from

the Colonial Office some years previous to the effect that any

modification of King's College charter should provide for a Divinity

Professor of the Church of Scotland. Some readers of the present day may

ask, Why not also for other religious denominations--Methodists,

Baptists, and Congregationalists? The answer is simple. The Churches of

England and Scotland were national churches in Great Britain and

Ireland. The Anglican Church in Canada in 1840 claimed to be an

Established Church, and as the Clergy Reserve controversy was then

unsettled, her claim had reasonable expectation of realization. Had her

claim been allowed, it would have strengthened any claim the

Presbyterian Church might have made also to rank as an Established

Church.

[58] See D. H. E., Vol. III., Chap. XVI., pp. 284-299.

This Canadian charter to the "University of Kingston" was cancelled by

the Crown with the consent of the Presbyterian Church in Canada, and a

Royal Charter issued to the "University of Queen's College." By this

Royal Charter, Queen's lost the Divinity Professorship which, by the

Canadian charter, was to be established out of King's College

foundation. The Crown had power to grant a charter but no power to

interfere with the funds of King's College, which were subject to the

Canadian Legislature.

The Commission[59] appointed by the Legislature in 1839 to prepare a

report[60] on education gave a comprehensive account of the condition of

schools, but without throwing much new light upon them. The total number

of pupils in the District Grammar Schools was still about 300, but the

number in the Common Schools was estimated at 24,000, or about one in

eighteen of the total population. As to the nature of the schools

attended by these 24,000, there is abundant evidence to prove that they

were very inefficient. The Rev. Robt. McGill, of Niagara, says: "I know

the qualifications of nearly all the Common School teachers in this

district, and I do not hesitate to say that there is not more than one

in ten fully qualified to instruct the young in the humblest

department." The London District Board for 1839 says: "The Masters

chosen by the Common School Trustees are often ignorant men, barely

acquainted with the rudiments of education and, consequently, jealous of

any school superior to their own."[61]

[59] The members were: Rev. John McCaul, Rev. Henry Grasett and

Secretary Harrison.

[60] See D. H. E., Vol. III., pp. 243-283. Also Appendix to Journals of

Assembly for 1840.

[61] See D. H. E., Vol. III., p. 266.

The Grammar Schools had been gradually improving since their

establishment, but were still very far from supplying the real needs of

the people. They had no uniformity in course of study or textbooks, and

were under no inspection. In fact, lack of supervision was the weakest

spot in the whole school system.

Lord Durham, in his famous Report,[62] refers to education in Upper

Canada thus: "A very considerable portion of the Province has neither

roads, post offices, mills, schools, nor churches. The people may raise

enough for their own subsistence and may even have a rude and

comfortless plenty, but they can seldom acquire wealth; nor can even

wealthy landowners prevent their children from growing up ignorant and

boorish, and from occupying a far lower mental, moral and social

position than they themselves fill.... Even in the most thickly peopled

districts there are but few schools, and those of a very inferior

character; while the more remote settlements are almost entirely without

any."

[62] See Lord Durham's Report, p. 66.

The Committee recommended better salaries, normal schools for training

teachers, British textbooks, an Inspector-General of Education, and a

Provincial Board of School Commissioners. Looking at the matter

three-quarters of a century later, we can see that really good schools

were not then immediately possible. Schools, like everything else,

cannot be created at command. They are the result of evolution. Upper

Canada College illustrates this. Expensive buildings were erected and

capable masters secured in England, and yet the school was not really

efficient for many years. The country was largely a wilderness. The

people were comparatively poor and their first care was to provide the

necessities of life. The sad side to the picture is that there was among

the mass of the people so little real interest in education and so

little appreciation of its worth. People will never struggle to acquire

that of which they feel no need. It seems quite clear, too, that the

struggle for civil and religious freedom and equality hindered the

development of a good school system. The latter could scarcely be

possible before the former had triumphed. The natural leaders of the

people and those who by superior attainments and education were fitted

for leadership were straining every nerve and mustering every known

resource to overthrow a corrupt oligarchy. Even among the spiritual

leaders of the people there was no unity of purpose. Instead of working

shoulder to shoulder with one another for the moral and intellectual

growth of their people, they were in many cases sapping their strength

through acrimonious and recriminating discussions of state church,

sectarianism, Clergy Reserves, endowment and grants. When once it was

finally settled that Upper Canada was to have responsible government and

that all races and all creeds were to enjoy equal civil, religious and

political rights, it was much easier to lay a solid foundation for the

development of efficient schools.

To this nothing contributed more than the Municipal Act of 1841. It

supplied the necessary local machinery, working in harmony and in close

connection with a central government. It seemed to leave almost

everything to local initiative and local control, thus appealing to

local patriotism. In reality it gave a central authority power to direct

by laying down broad general principles, and it stirred up a maximum of

local self-effort by distributing Provincial grants.

Sydenham's first Speech from the Throne to the Legislature of the United

Canadas in 1841 referred to the necessity of a better system of Common

Schools. During the session the Legislature passed an elaborate Act for

this purpose, and although it proved not to be of a practical nature it

showed an earnest desire on the part of the Legislature to improve the

Common Schools. The Act appropriated L50,000 per year to be distributed

among the Common Schools in proportion to the number of pupils between 5

and 16 years of age in each district. It provided a Superintendent of

Education for the United Canadas and prescribed his duties. It

established popularly-elected Township Boards and passed certain rates

to be assessed on the ratepayers.

The most significant feature of the Bill was that it contained the germ

which later developed into our elaborate system of Separate Schools.

Early in the session, forty petitions were presented asking that the

Bible be used in the schools. There was also a petition from Rev. Dr.

Strachan and the Anglican clergy asking that Anglican children be

educated by their own pastors and that they receive a share of public

funds for support of their schools. The Roman Catholics also petitioned

against some principles of the Common School Bill then before the House.

These things will probably explain why the Bill as passed contained a

clause allowing any number of dissentients (not necessarily Roman

Catholics) in Township Schools to withdraw and form a school of their

own, and also a clause which created for cities and incorporated towns a

School Board, half of whom were Protestant and half of whom were Roman

Catholic. The Catholics and Protestants might work together and maintain

schools in common, or they might constitute themselves into separate

committees, each committee virtually controlling its own schools.

Thus we see that while the Assembly were fighting to break down a system

of sectarianism in university education, they were introducing into the

Common Schools a policy that led to divisions on account of religion.

During the session of 1841, the Upper Canada Academy at Cobourg secured

incorporation as Victoria College with university powers, and also a

grant of L500, which later was made annual. Here, too, the Legislature

was granting public money to a sectarian institution, although it should

be noted that no religious tests were to be exacted of any students, and

that five public officers, the President of the Executive Council, the

Speakers of the two branches of the Legislature, and the

Attorney-General and the Solicitor-General for Canada West were to be

_ex-officio_ visitors and members of the Victoria College Senate.

Early in 1842, Queen's University was opened for the reception of

students. Later in the same year the corner-stone of King's College was

laid with imposing ceremony by Sir Charles Bagot, the Governor-General.

In 1843 the King's College professors began lectures. This gave three

colleges with university powers in active operation in Upper Canada in

1843.

In May, 1842, the Governor-General appointed the Hon. Robert Jameson,

Vice-Chancellor of Upper Canada, to be Chief Superintendent of

Education, and the Rev. Robert Murray, of Oakville, to be Assistant

Superintendent for Upper Canada. Mr. Murray was a scholarly gentleman,

but possessed no special qualifications for so important an office. It

seems probable that as early as 1841 Sydenham had some thought of

giving the position to Ryerson. It also seems probable that Sir Charles

Bagot knew of this and had some communication with Ryerson in respect to

it. It is more than likely that Ryerson had been too active, both in

opposing the arbitrary acts of the Legislative Council and in promoting

the interests of his own Church, to be readily acceptable to His

Excellency's Council, nearly all of whom were Churchmen.

It was soon discovered that the Common School Act of 1841 could never be

put into operation. It had only a single merit--good intentions. In 1843

it was decided to amend it and enact a separate Bill for Upper and Lower

Canada. That for Upper Canada was introduced by Hon. Francis Hincks.

Speaking of the Bill[63] he says: "The principle adopted in the School

Bill of 1843 is this: The Government pays a certain amount to each

Township--the property in that Township pays an equal amount; or if the

Councillors elected by the people choose it, double the amount. This

forms the School Fund, which is divided among the school districts, the

Trustees of which raise the balance of the teacher's salary by a Rate

Bill on the parents of the children. The system is as simple as it is

just.... In framing this system, gentlemen, you will observe that, as

in all other instances, the late Ministry have divested the grant of all

local patronage. Everything has been left to the people themselves; and

I feel perfectly convinced that they will prove themselves capable of

managing their own affairs in a more satisfactory manner than any

Government Boards of Education or visiting Superintendents could do for

them.

[63] See "Reminiscences of His Public Life," by Sir Francis Hincks, pp.

175-177. Library of Parliament, Canada.

"The new School Act provides also for the establishment in each Township

of a Model School--the teacher of which is to receive a larger share

than others of the School Fund, provided he gives gratuitous instruction

to the other teachers in the Township, under such regulations as may be

established.

"There is also provision for a Model School in each county, on a similar

plan, but, of course, of a higher grade. It is left to the people

themselves or their representatives in the several municipalities, to

establish these Model Schools or not, as they deem expedient. But it is

provided that as soon as a Provincial Normal School shall be in

operation (and the system will never be complete without one) the

teachers of the Model Schools must have certificates of qualification

from the professors of the Normal School."

This Act of 1843 is much more elaborate in its provisions than any

preceding legislation affecting Common Schools in Upper Canada. It

provided for county superintendents appointed by wardens and for

township, town or city superintendents appointed by the municipal

council. It would seem that in many points the duties of these two

classes of superintendents would conflict, as both were allowed to

examine and appoint teachers, and both were to visit schools. Every

section was to have a Board of Trustees elected by ratepayers, and to

these trustees was given charge of school property and the regulation of

course of study, including choice of textbooks. It would seem that full

local control was given except in the matter of certificating teachers

and regulating the government grant.

Either Protestants or Roman Catholics might petition for a Separate

School on the application of ten or more resident freeholders, but such

schools when established were maintained and controlled by the same

machinery as other schools. Model Schools were to receive a larger grant

from the Legislature. A county superintendent could issue unlimited or

limited certificates, but all certificates issued by a township, town,

or city superintendent were limited to the division in which they were

issued and were valid for one year only.

The marked weaknesses of the Act may be summed up as follows:--

1. Possible conflict of authority between county and local

superintendents.

2. No uniformity of course of study or textbooks.

3. No accepted standard of qualification for teachers.

4. No method provided for training of teachers, as a Normal School was

merely suggested, and Model Schools were optional.

5. No provision made to secure competent local superintendents. Any man

might be appointed.

But with all its deficiencies the School Bill of 1843 was a proof that

the Legislature earnestly desired to promote elementary education. It

was, no doubt, felt by many public men, and especially by the Governor,

that no man was so well qualified as Ryerson to direct that system at

headquarters. To pave the way for Ryerson's appointment, Rev. Robert

Murray was made Professor of Mathematics in King's College, and in

September, 1844, Ryerson became Assistant Superintendent of Education

for Upper Canada. He was to have leave of absence for travel and for

investigation into the school systems of Europe.

As events proved, Ryerson's appointment as Superintendent of Education

soon bore fruit in a more efficient system of Common Schools. But

university affairs were still in a state of chaos.

The amendments to the charter of King's College made in 1837 were

disappointingly unfruitful of any practical changes. The College

remained in charge of Anglicans, and was in reality, if not in a legal

sense, a Church of England institution. The question may naturally be

asked, why did the legislation of 1837 not effect greater changes? The

answer is simple. In 1837 the seat of government was at Toronto, and the

five _ex-officio_ Government officers could easily attend meetings of

King's College Council. But after the Act of Union in 1841 the seat of

government was moved first to Kingston and later to Montreal. It then

became wholly impossible for the five lay members of King's College to

attend regular meetings in Toronto. The result was that the affairs of

King's College remained practically in the hands of the president and

professors, who made no real efforts to adapt the College to the needs

of the people of Upper Canada. Bishop Strachan, the President, could not

forget his original plans in securing the charter, and was still trying

to realize them as far as possible. In a petition which he presented to

Parliament in 1845 against the Draper University Bill, he makes his real

object very clear. He says: "Above all things, I claim from the

endowment the means of educating my clergy. This was my chief object in

obtaining the Royal Charter and the Endowment of King's College; ... and

was indeed the most valuable result to be anticipated by the

institution.... This is a point which never can be given up, and to

which I believe the faith of Government is unreservedly pledged."[64] As

time went on and the history of the Royal grant of 1798 came to be more

fully discussed and understood, the determination of the people grew

more and more fixed to secure such modifications in the King's College

Charter as would make it a national instead of a sectarian institution.

[64] See D. H. E., Vol. V., p. 137.

The proposal of Baldwin, introduced in 1843, was statesmanlike, and

although it failed to pass owing to the early resignation of his

Ministry, it is interesting because it outlined in part the principles

upon which the University question was finally settled. The Bill

proposed to create a University of Toronto, and leave King's College as

a theological seminary without power to confer degrees. Queen's,

Victoria, and Regiopolis[65] were to become affiliated in connection

with Toronto University, and were to surrender their powers to confer

degrees. In return they were to receive certain grants from the King's

College endowment. Toronto University was to become the only

degree-conferring power in Upper Canada. Baldwin had the Governor's

consent to bring in this Bill, and had his Ministry remained in power

it would doubtless have passed. The Bill had the active support of

Queen's and Victoria, and the bitter opposition of Dr. Strachan.[66]

[65] Regiopolis, a Roman Catholic college incorporated by the

Legislature in 1837, had not, at this time, degree-conferring powers.

[66] See his petition presented to House of Assembly, 1843, against

Bill.

Dr. Ryerson summed up the whole situation in a reply to an eloquent and

very able argument of Hon. W. H. Draper, who appeared at the Bar of the

House of Assembly as Counsel of King's College Council, in opposition to

the Bill. Dr. Ryerson concludes as follows: "The lands by which King's

College has been so munificently endowed, were set apart nearly fifty

years ago (in compliance with an application in 1797 of the Provincial

Legislature) for the promotion of Education in Upper Canada. This was

the object of the original appropriation of those lands--a noble grant,

not to the Church of England, but to the people of Upper Canada. In 1827

Doctor Strachan, by statements and representations against which the

House of Assembly of Upper Canada protested again and again, got 225,944

acres of these lands applied to the endowment of the Church of England

College. Against such a partial application and perversion of the

original Provincial objects of that Royal grant the people of Upper

Canada protested; the Charter of King's College was amended to carry out

the original object of the Grant; the general objects of the amended

Charter have been defeated by the manner in which it has been

administered, and the University Bill is introduced to secure their

accomplishment; and the Council of King's College employ an advocate to

perpetuate their monopoly. The reader can, therefore, easily judge who

is the faithful advocate and who is the selfish perverter of the most

splendid educational endowment that was ever made for any new

country.... I argue for no particular University Bill; but I contend

upon the grounds of right and humanity, that Presbyterians, Methodists

and all others ought to participate equally with the Episcopalians in

the educational advantages and endowments that have been derived from

the sale of lands, which, pursuant to an application from the Provincial

Legislature, were set apart in 1797 by the Crown for the support of

Education in Upper Canada."[67]

[67] See D. H. E., Vol. V., pp. 49-59.

In looking back upon the situation from our vantage-ground, covering a

lapse of nearly three-quarters of a century, we may marvel that all

parties were not ready to compromise upon the basis of a purely secular

and national university. But secular, state-owned colleges are a very

modern growth, and few men among our grandfathers had the courage to

champion such institutions. An educational institution without some

religious basis had uncanny associations. Therefore, it is not a matter

for surprise that many good men were prepared to mutilate the University

Endowment of Upper Canada, and dissipate it among sectarian colleges.

Such, to a large degree, would have been the result had the Draper Bill

of 1845 become law.

The Draper Government made a further attempt to settle the vexed

question in 1846. John A. Macdonald (afterwards Sir John A. Macdonald)

made another unsuccessful attempt in 1847. The Hon. Robert Baldwin then

became Premier, and after securing the Report of a Commission on

University Affairs, he introduced and passed a University Bill in 1849.

This Act has been many times amended, but the final result has been to

preserve for the people of Upper Canada the University Endowment, and to

remove from the management every semblance of sectarian control. The

University has become the property and the pride of all classes,

irrespective of race, politics, or religion.

Egerton Ryerson and Education in Upper Canada · 第 4 / 12 章