Colonial Chapter in the History of American Education. (continued 3)

"I attach the greatest importance to the Normal School. I have no doubt the Legislature will be disposed to support it when once established.... I hope, however, that you will have in view the providing for it hereafter, and some appropriation for school libraries ... from which an offer to a district or township, five pounds for example, upon the condition that it would also contribute so as to purchase books from a list recommended by the Provincial Board of Education, and, therefore, the most suitable for the young and grown-up people of the country....

"It has been mentioned to me, and I have thought that the term inspector, instead of superintendent, would be the better designation of the District overseer of Schools....

"I this day transmit to Mr. Secretary Daly my 'Report on a system of Elementary Instruction for Upper Canada.'... I have introduced no debatable topics, except that of Christianity, the principle of maintaining which as the basis and cement of a system of public instruction, I have discussed at large. On the defective modes of teaching those branches (viz., reading, writing, arithmetic, grammar and geography), which are taught in the Common Schools, I have also dwelt at some length in order to furnish District Superintendents and other persons concerned with a proper standard of teaching and examination, and in order to inculcate the true principles of teaching which are applicable to all subjects. I hope the Report will be the means of laying a good foundation in the leading minds of the country on the great work of public instruction.

"I should add in respect to my Report that, in pointing out defects in systems of instruction and modes of teaching, I have almost invariably quoted American authors, and have thus incidentally exposed the defects of almost every part of the American system, and have practically shown that every redeeming feature of the American school system has been or is being borrowed from European governments."

Objections to Dr. Ryerson's School Bill of 1846 Answered.

In a private letter to Hon. Attorney-General Draper, dated 20th April, 1846, Dr. Ryerson replies to several objections made in the House of Assembly and by the press to his first School Act of 1846. I quote the following:—

"The Montreal Pilot objects to appointing trustees for three years. This is one of the improvements adopted in the New York law of 1843. The superintendents, in their reports, speak largely of the evils of the annual system, and strongly on the advantages of the triennial one. The opposition to the Bill seems to be based on notions derived from what the State of New York system was several years ago. The opponents do not seem to be aware that it was amended in 1841, and amended again in 1843. Messrs. Price, Roblin, etc., seem to be where the Americans were ten years ago.

"I anticipate the objection to the rate-bill clause. I look upon that above all others to be the poor man's clause, and at the very foundation of a system of public education. It is objected to by precisely the class of persons or rather by the individuals that I expected. I have heard of one rich man objecting to it, who educates his own children at colleges and ladies' seminaries, but who looks not beyond his own family. He says, I am told, that 'he does not wish to be compelled to educate all the brats in the neighborhood.' Now, to educate 'all the brats in every neighborhood' is just the very object of this clause; and, in order to do so, it is proposed to compel selfish, rich men to do what they ought to do, but what they will not do voluntarily.[46]

"Mr. Gowan's statements as to the evils of not extending the period of keeping a school open in each district beyond three months of the year are substantially what have been communicated to me in many reports and letters. In several of the annual district reports which I have received, it is stated that giving public money to districts in which a school is not taught more than three months of the year is an actual injury rather than a benefit, and an abuse of the intentions of the Legislature."

First and Second Councils of Public Instruction, 1846 and 1850.

Dr. Ryerson was assisted in his important work by an able council of representative men, who were appointed in 1846. The members of this first council were as follows:—

Rev. Egerton Ryerson, D.D., Chief Superintendent of Schools; Right Rev. Michael Power, D.D., Roman Catholic Bishop of Toronto; Rev. Henry James Grasett, M.A., Rector of Toronto; Hon. Samuel Beaty Harrison, Q.C., Judge, County of York; Joseph Curran Morrison, Q.C., M.P.P.; Hugh Scobie, Esq., Editor of the British Colonist; James Scott Howard, Esq., Treasurer, County of York.

Dr. Ryerson proposed to Bishop Strachan that he should represent the Church of England on the new Board. The Bishop was quite pleased at his request, and so expressed himself. He declined, however, on the ground that he feared his appointment might embarrass, rather than aid, in the promotion of the new scheme of education. He suggested that Rev. H. J. Grasett be appointed in his place.[47] He also gave friendly advice to Dr. Ryerson to be careful not to recommend a personal enemy for appointment on such a board.

Two more members were added in 1850, viz., Rev. John Jenning, D.D., Presbyterian Minister; Rev. Adam Lillie, D.D., Congregational Minister. Not one of the gentlemen named survive; but, in their day, they rendered effective service to the country as members of the first and second Councils of Public Instruction.

The Hon. S. B. Harrison (afterwards Judge of the County of York) was nominated by Rev. Dr. Ryerson, as Chairman of the reconstructed Board of Education in 1850 (then named the Council of Public Instruction), as successor to the lamented Bishop Power, who died in 1847.[48] Mr. Harrison held that position until his death, in 1862.

Dr. Ryerson did not enter practically upon the duties of his office until about the middle of 1846. In the meantime, the correspondence and routine duties of the Education Office were (on Dr. Ryerson's suggestion) placed in the hands of his friend, the Rev. Alexander MacNab, D.D., now Rector of Darlington (Bowmanville).

Religious Instruction in the Common Schools, 1846.

Among the first duties of the new Provincial Board of Education was the establishment of a Normal School, the authorization of a series of text-books, and the preparation of regulations for the government of the Common Schools. The most important of these regulations was the one relating to religious instruction in the schools. Before submitting it to the Board for adoption Dr. Ryerson consulted various representative persons on the subject. In a private letter to Hon. Attorney-General Draper, dated December 17th, 1846, Dr. Ryerson thus explained his proceedings in regard to the preparation of the clause in the new regulations relating to religious instruction in the schools. He said:—

"I submitted the clause first to Rev. Mr. Grasett. He quite approved of it, as he felt exceedingly anxious that there should be such an explicit recognition of Christianity in our school system. I then waited on the Roman Catholic Bishop, who examined it and concurred in it.... I showed it also to the Bishop of Toronto. After he had read the section he said he believed I had done all that could be done on that subject, and that ... he would write a circular to his clergy, recommending them to act as school visitors, and to do all in their power to promote the efficiency and usefulness of the Common Schools."

In his report for 1847, Dr. Ryerson stated that he consulted other ministers on the subject. The Hon. Mr. Draper, in a private note to Dr. Ryerson, dated 1st January, 1847, said:—

"I am more gratified than I can express that you have so successfully met the difficulty about the religious instruction of children in Common Schools. You (to whom I expressed myself about three years ago on the subject of the importance of not dividing religion from secular instruction) will readily understand the pleasure I feel that in Common Schools at least the principle and promoted application of it, for mixed schools, has been approved by the Bishop of my own Church and by the Roman Catholic Prelate."

In a letter to the late Hon. Robert Baldwin, written in 1849, Dr. Ryerson thus refers to the question of religious instruction and the Bible in school: "Be assured that no system of popular education will flourish in a country which does violence to the religious sentiments and feelings of the churches of that country. Be assured, that every such system will droop and wither which does not take root in the Christian and patriotic sympathies of the people—which does not command the respect and confidence of the several religious persuasions, both ministers and laity—for these in fact make the aggregate of the Christianity of the country."

Speaking in a subsequent letter of another feature of the question of the Bible in schools, Dr. Ryerson says: "The principal opposition which, in 1846 and for several years afterwards, I encountered was that I did not make the use of the Bible compulsory in the schools, but simply recognized the right of Protestants to use it in the school (not as an ordinary reading book), as it was not given to teach us how to read but to teach us the way to Heaven), as a book of religious instruction, without the right or the power of compelling any others to use it. The recognition of the right has been maintained inviolate to the present time; facilities for the exercise of it have been provided, and recommendations for that purpose have been given, but no compulsory authority assumed, or right of compulsion acknowledged; and the religious exercises in each school have been left to the decision of the authorities of such school, and the religious instruction of each child has always been under the absolute authority of the parents or guardian of each child."

To the objection urged against the reading of the Bible in the schools because "a majority of the teachers are utterly unfit to give religious instruction," Dr. Ryerson replied: "The reading of the Bible and giving religious instruction from it are two very different things. The question is not the competency of teachers to give religious instruction, but the right of a Protestant to the reading of the Bible by his child in the school as a text-book of religious instruction. That right I hold to be sacred and divine."

State of Common School Education in Upper Canada, 1845.

From the reports then made to him by the County Superintendents of Schools, I select the following extracts, showing what was the actual state of education in the province when Dr. Ryerson commenced his labors as Superintendent of Education.

Mr. Hamilton Hunter, Superintendent of Schools in the Home District (County of York), in his report for 1845, says:—

"There is one fact with which I have been forcibly struck, in my visits to the schools, which shows, in the clearest manner, the great necessity that existed in this Colony for the establishment of a system of Common School education. It is this: That in our schools the amount of attainment, on the part of the pupils, is generally in an inverse ratio to their size and age, after they have reached their twelfth or thirteenth year. The largest scholars that attend our schools are by far the lowest in point of attainment, which shows how sadly the education of that portion of the community, now about to attain the years of manhood and womanhood has been neglected. In many of our country schools, it is a very common thing to find persons advanced to the age of young men and women commencing to learn the first rudiments. The mind feels pained upon contemplating this; but it is gratifying to think that a remedy has been provided against it in the establishment of our Common Schools, by which the elementary branches of education are brought within the grasp of all. It leads us to reflect upon the melancholy state of ignorance that must have existed at no distant period in this Province had no means been provided other than those which formerly existed for placing the elements of knowledge within the reach of the rising generation."

Hon. Hamnett Pinkey, Superintendent of Schools in the District of Dalhousie (Carleton, etc.), in his report, says:—

"The Common Schools are very indifferently conducted, and the masters in general very inadequately perform the duties required of them; a reform is expected from the establishment of the District Model School."

Rev. Alexander Mann, M.A., Superintendent of Schools in the Bathurst District (Lanark, etc) says:—

"In existing circumstances I have declined giving a regular certificate to any teacher.... I made an effort on my own responsibility, and at my own expense to improve teachers, by opening a private school, solely for their benefit, but as I did not meet with proper encouragement I was obliged to relinquish my purpose."

Richey Waugh, Esq., Superintendent of Schools in the Johnstown District (Leeds and Grenville), says:—

"The trustees of many schools employ teachers only for whatever time the school fund will pay their wages, and they receive but little benefit from the public money thus expended."

Patrick Thornton, Esq., Superintendent of Schools in the Gore District (Wentworth, etc.), says:—

"It is a matter of regret that the old parrot system of repeating words without attaching ideas to them, does still in too many instances prevail; and the dregs must remain till some of the old formal teachers are off the field."

Rev. Newton Bosworth, F.R.S., Superintendent of Schools in the Brock District (Oxford, etc.), says:—

"The diversity of books and modes of teaching referred to in my last report, still exists, nearly to the same extent; and in the qualifications of teachers also, as great a variety was observable as before.... It appears to me that parents should be impressed, to a much greater extent than at present, with a sense of the necessity and importance of education for their children."

George Duck, jr., Esq., Superintendent of Schools in the Western District (Kent, etc.), says:—

"In many townships little or nothing was raised by rate-bill. In many places the poverty of the settlements prevented it; and the only school that was kept open in these districts was just during the time that the allowance from the aggregate fund was sufficient to pay the teacher. This course is, in fact, of very doubtful benefit, as the school is seldom kept open for more than three months in the year, and the children lose so much benefit continuous education produces."

School Houses and School Teachers in 1845-1850.

The Rev. Dr. Ryerson, in his report for 1845-46, speaking of school houses in the Province, says:—

"With a few exceptions, the school houses are deficient in almost every essential quality of places adopted for elementary instruction. Very few are furnished with any thing more than desks and forms of the most ordinary kind, and have no apparatus for instruction, nor appendages, or conveniences either for exercise or such as are required for the sake of modesty and decency."

In his annual Report for 1847, Dr. Ryerson incidentally refers to the character of teachers in some districts. He says:—

"In one district, where intemperance heretofore prevailed to a considerable extent, even among school teachers, the Superintendent gave notice that he would not give a certificate of qualification to any but strictly sober candidates, and that, at the end of six months he would cancel the certificates of all teachers who suffered themselves at any time to become intoxicated.... I know of two other districts in which the Superintendents have acted thoroughly on the same principle, with the same happy results.... In a note in reference to it in the printed Form of Regulations, I remarked that 'no intemperate or profane person should be intrusted with the instruction of youth.'... No one will doubt that there are fewer unqualified and immoral teachers employed now than there were before the passing of the present School Act (of 1846)." Pages 8 and 9.

In his circular issued to the newly formed County Boards of Examiners, dated 8th October, 1850, Dr. Ryerson thus referred to this matter:—

"Many representations have been made to this Department respecting intemperate and profane and Sabbath-breaking teachers.... I cannot but regard it as your special mission to rid the profession of common school teachers of unworthy character, and ... to protect the youth against the poison of a vicious teacher's example." Report for 1850, pages 305, 306.

Dr. Ryerson's Practical Agencies to give Information and Remove Prejudice.

It will thus be seen from the foregoing, that at this time educational affairs were at a low ebb. Dr. Ryerson, therefore, sought in every practical way to overcome this educational apathy and inertia. His pen and personal effort were freely used. The first circular to municipal councils—prepared by him—was issued by the new Provincial Board of Education in August, 1846. This he followed up by one from himself addressed to county councils, in which he explained fully and at length the scope and objects of the new scheme of popular education. This was done under three heads:—1. That it was "based upon the principles of our common Christianity." 2. That "upon the duty of educating the youth of our country there exists but one opinion, and, therefore, there should be but one party." 3. That "the system of elementary education is public, not private."

Another agency Dr. Ryerson sought to employ to aid the Department in its great work. And by it he hoped to educate and rightly influence public opinion in favor of the new departure then in progress. The plan he proposed to the Government in 1846, to authorize the issue, under his direction, of a departmental Journal of Education, "to be devoted," among other things, to the exposition of every part of our school system," then new to the people, ... "and to the discussion of the various means of promoting the efficiency of the schools." This the Government felt unwilling at the time to do. He, therefore, undertook the expense and responsibility of the publication himself in January, 1848. And it was not until years had demonstrated the practical value and success of the proposed agency that the expense of the publication was provided for by an annual vote of the Legislature.

A third agency which Dr. Ryerson successfully employed to aid the Department was that of personally holding county school conventions. In explaining this project to the Government in 1846, he said:—

"I propose ... to visit and employ one or two days in school discourse and deliberation with the Superintendent, Visitors, Trustees and Teachers in each of the several Districts of Upper Canada. I know of no means so effectual to remove prejudice, to create unanimity of views and feelings, and to excite a general interest in the cause of popular education," etc.

This project was concurred in by the Government, on condition that the expense of the proposed nearly three months' visitation "should not exceed £75."

Thus was inaugurated, in 1846, a series of county school conventions which, at intervals of about five years each, were held all over the country. The early ones involved travelling in all kinds of weather and in all kinds of conveyances, so as to keep engagements made weeks before. They were, however, of immense service to the Department in removing prejudice, settling difficulties and solving doubts as to the practicability of plans proposed for improving the condition of the schools and raising the intellectual and social status of the teacher.

Combined Opposition to the Projected System of Education.

It was not to be expected that so comprehensive a scheme of education as that proposed by Dr. Ryerson in 1846 and 1847 would meet with general acceptance. The very reverse was the fact. It was assailed as revolutionary and oppressive. It certainly was revolutionary in the best sense; but not oppressive, for it was largely permissive and wholly tentative. And, for many years the Town of Richmond, in the County of Carleton, refused to establish schools under its provisions. The new measures were so far revolutionary that they differed almost wholly from the former projected school acts. The system proposed was composite. Its machinery was adopted chiefly from the State of New York. The principle upon which the schools were to be supported was taken from New England—Normal schools, from Germany, and the uniform series of school books, from Ireland. All were, however, so blended together and harmonized, to meet the requirements and circumstances of the country that they became, in Dr. Ryerson's moulding hands, "racy of the soil."

Up to this time no one but Dr. Ryerson had been able to give a practical turn to the rather crude theories which had been held on the subject of popular education. He, however, had to pay the penalty of all such reformers; but yet he lived to see the fuller details of his system of education worked out on his own lines.

It is needless to say that Dr. Ryerson's scheme was assailed as impracticable. This I have explained. It was held to be too comprehensive for the country. Even his reference to the compact and systematized plan adopted in Prussia was seized upon as an indication of his covert design to introduce the baneful system of so-called "Prussian despotism." His commendation of "free schools," as a prospective feature of our educational system was denounced as an attempt to legalize an "outrageous robbery," and as communistic "war against property." As an example of the injustice of these criticisms on Dr. Ryerson's scheme of education, he said in a lecture on education in 1847:—

"I have seen in certain of the public prints, a provision of our school law ascribed to Prussia, which was borrowed from the school law of the City of Buffalo; and another provision declared to be incompatible with the rights of man which forms the basis and glory of the common school system of Massachusetts."

Although opposition to Dr. Ryerson's educational plans, as embodied in his school acts, was somewhat general, yet it was singularly illogical. The sore point was that it touched men's pockets in the form of school rates.

Educational Proceedings of District Councils in 1847, 1848.

An influential district council in the West sought to influence all of the others against the new system, especially against the establishment of a Normal School. In a memorial to the Legislature (which it sent broadcast), dated Hamilton, 10th November, 1847, and signed by James Little, Chairman of the Education Committee, John White and Francis Cameron, and adopted by the Gore District Council, the following passages occur:

"With respect to the necessity of establishing a Normal, with Elementary Model Schools in this Province, memorialists are of opinion that, however well adapted, such an institution might be to the wants of the old and densely populated countries of Europe, where services in almost every vocation will scarcely yield the common necessaries of life, they are, so far as this object expected to be gained is concerned, altogether unsuited to a country like Upper Canada.... Nor do your memorialists hope to provide qualified teachers by any other means, in the present circumstances of the country than securing as heretofore, the services of those whose physical disabilities from age render this mode of obtaining a livelihood the only one suited to their decaying energies, or by employing such of the newly arrived emigrants as are qualified for common school teachers year by year as they come amongst us, and who will adopt this as a means of temporary support, until their character and ability are known and turned to better account for themselves."

This memorial having been sent to each of the district councils in Upper Canada for their concurrence, and with a view to procure the repeal of the School Act, 9 Vic., ch. 20, the Colborne District Council not only refused to concur in it but subjected it to severe criticism. In regard to the foregoing extract from the Gore District Memorial, the Colborne Council (now Peterboro' and Victoria) in its report on that memorial said:

"That the moneys required to pay for the establishment and support of Normal and Model Schools are little less than a waste of so much of the Legislative grant, is an opinion in which your committee are so far from concurring, that they believe it is from these sources must mainly arise the instrumentality through which the friends of education can alone hope for the first considerable amelioration of the evils they lament.... Nor can your committee reconcile it either with their just expectations, or their sense of duty to rest satisfied with the services of those whose physical disabilities from age and decaying energies render them unfit, or of those 'newly arrived emigrants,' whose 'unknown character and abilities' render them unable to procure a livelihood by any other means than by becoming the preceptors of our children; the dictators of their sentiments and manners; the guardians of their virtue; and in a high degree the masters of their future destinies in this world and the next."

This report was prepared by Mr. Thomas Benson, Chairman of the Education Committee, and Warden of the District (father of Judge Benson of Port Hope). It was adopted by the Colborne District Council in February, 1848.[49]

The Western District Council, in its memorial to the Legislature against the School Act, represented that "spite, hatred and malice between neighbors and friends," existed, and was "occasioned by the present School Act." It added:

"So numerous are the petitions on the subject that more than half of the time of the Council is taken up in endeavoring to settle the differences, but unfortunately without any beneficial effect."

The Chief Superintendent, in his report, referring to this statement says:

"Now, in examining the printed report of the committee, to whom all these petitions were referred, I find that of the twenty-nine petitions presented to the Council, one prayed for the establishment of a female school in one of the sections (which was granted); one prayed for a local school tax in a section; two related to the formation of new school sections, and the remaining twenty-five related to the disputes as to the boundaries of school sections and the non-payment of school moneys by township superintendents. Thus not one of these disputes could have arisen out of the School Act, but must have all been caused by an improper division of the school sections, either by the township superintendents under the late Act, or by the Council under the present statute."

In this (Western) District the Council says:

"We well know that a very large number of the trustees can neither read nor write, and, therefore, it must be obvious that the greater part of the requirements of the law remain undone."

On this statement the Chief Superintendent remarks:

"In other districts where the trustees can read and write, and where the councillors an correspondingly intelligent and discreet in their school proceedings, no disputes or inconvenience have, as far as I am aware, occurred on this subject."

In the District of Dalhousie, the Chief Superintendent states:

"Still greater dissatisfaction and confusion were created by the mode of proceeding adopted by the council. Before the passing of the present School Act the council of this district never imposed a school assessment.... The introduction of a district assessment (under the new Act) would naturally excite some dissatisfaction, and especially in a district bordering on counties in Lower Canada where the school assessment had been resisted.... In addition the Chief Superintendent adds:

"The Council in the autumn of 1847 passed a by-law to this effect:

"Whereas the school section division mode by this Council at its last session, are in many instances, discordant to the convenience and wishes of the inhabitants, and that to correct them satisfactorily this present session is impracticable. The District Superintendent is empowered and required to make a distribution of the school fund (legislative grant and county assessment) 'share and share alike,' among qualified teachers without reference to the number of scholars under their tuition, but in proportion to the time such teachers may have been teaching, etc."

Thus the Superintendent remarks, "this by-law contemplated the abolition of the statute requiring the school grant to be distributed according to the school population of each section. It made no distinction between the able teacher who taught sixty scholars and the young one who taught twenty; it had no regard to the engagements which may have been made by trustees according to law; it required of teachers conditions which the law had not enjoined, and proposed to deprive many of them of advantages which the law had conferred.... Of course I pointed out the illegality and injustice of the by-law and it was not acted upon. At the session of the Council lately held, a resolution was adopted praying the Governor-General to dissolve the Council that the sense of the inhabitants of the Dalhousie District might be taken on the school law.... It is doubtless probable that many of the inhabitants have not distinguished between the provisions of the law and the proceedings of their own Council—attributing to the former what has been occasioned by the latter."[50]

Contrast the enlightened discussion of such questions to-day with the ignorant dogmatism of that day, and you can form some idea of the magnitude of Dr. Ryerson's labors,—not only in laying broad and deep the foundations for his superstructure, but in seeking to overcome the deep-rooted and unreasoning prejudices of those days—days indeed of anxiety and toil and fierce opposition, which I so well remember.

Estimate of Lord Elgin's Character by the Hon. W. H. Draper.

On the arrival in Canada of Lord Elgin, as Governor-General, Dr. Ryerson wrote confidentially to Hon. Attorney-General Draper (on the 16th February, 1847), asking him for his "opinion of the new Governor-General." Mr. Draper replied on the 22nd as follows:—

"As far as my opportunities of judging go, I think Canada will find cause of satisfaction in having Lord Elgin for a Governor. He is industrious in habit, pleasing in manner, extremely courteous and affable in bearing. I find him also diligent and shrewd in inquiry; and the observations which fall from him show that he has studiously kept pace with the great questions of the day (I do not mean our Canadian politics simply), and besides the cultivation of classical education in its broader sense, he possesses a mind stored with facts bearing on and illustrative of those questions. In these respects, or more correctly speaking in the latter, and as regards trade and finance, he reminds me more of Lord Sydenham than any other governor of my time. I think he possesses also caution and firmness;—that he will not resolve hastily, that he may not have to change his resolves. He has large ideas of the capabilities and resources both of Canada and of the British North American Provinces, and, as it strikes me, without any reference to a political union of these provinces, thinks that a course might be taken to develop the whole, by separate parts taking a common course in matters in which they have a common interest—internal communication, favorable to our European commerce and connections will serve as an illustration of the sort of questions to which I allude.... All this, of course, is mere opinion, but such are my first impressions, and as such, and no more, I readily give them to you in reply to your enquiry, etc."

Subsequently, Dr. Ryerson met Lord Elgin in Montreal, and, in a letter to me, dated 24th July, 1847, he says:—

"At his own request I have had an interesting interview with Lord Elgin. He is exceedingly well versed in systems of education, and is a thoroughly practical man on the subject."

Invaluable Assistance given to Dr. Ryerson by Lord Elgin.

It was fortunate that just at this crisis Canada was favored with the presence of one of the most accomplished, in every sense of the term, of the Queen's representatives, the Earl of Elgin and Kincardine.

That distinguished statesman, who afterwards filled with great dignity the highest post in the civil service of Great Britain, that of Governor-General of India, reached Canada at a critical transitional period in our history. Few can recall the incidents of those days without a feeling of admiration for the fearlessness, tact, and ability with which he discharged the delicate and difficult duties of his high office.

When Lord Elgin arrived in Canada in 1847, and when he removed to Toronto, after the riot and burning of the Parliament House in Montreal in 1849, educational affairs were fiercely discussed and were yet almost at the low ebb at which Dr. Ryerson had found them. Not that they had previously reached a higher plane and had gradually settled down to a lower one. The reverse was the fact, but the question of education had only then (in Dr. Ryerson's hands) begun to attract serious public attention. It was, however, as I have explained, in an adverse direction, for the whole subject, in the advanced form in which it was presented by Dr. Ryerson, was unpopular. It involved taxation and other unpalatable "burdens," as its opponents averred. Notwithstanding the zeal and ability with which Dr. Ryerson had collected and arranged his facts, analyzed the various systems of education in Europe and America, and fortified himself with the opinions of the most experienced educationists in these countries, the system which he projected, and the school law which embodied it, continued to be fiercely assailed by a portion of the press, and by hostile politicians. This hostility culminated in an event which brought things to a crisis in 1849.

At this time, an administration was in office, one or two members of which were personally unfavorable to Dr. Ryerson's continuation in office. One of these, a prominent and popular member of the cabinet (Hon. Malcolm Cameron, who afterward became a warm friend of Dr. Ryerson) induced his colleagues to assent to the passage of a school bill which practically legislated Dr. Ryerson out of office, besides being objectionable in other respects. He at once tendered his resignation. The Hon. Robert Baldwin, Attorney-General, declined to recommend its acceptance. By advice of the Cabinet, the operation of the bill was suspended until a new one, framed by Dr. Ryerson, could be prepared and passed. The result was the passage of the School Act of 1850—popular in its character and comprehensive in its provisions. It now forms the broad basis of the present school system of Ontario.

It was at this period of our educational history that Lord Elgin first came into official contact with our educational system. Being familiar with the Scottish parochial school system, he soon mastered the whole subject, and perceived the great importance to the whole country of the question which was then being so fiercely discussed.

Being in England in 1853, Dr. Ryerson wrote to me there:—

"I was glad to learn that Lord Elgin was to go in the same steamship with you from Boston. I have no doubt it will have proved interesting to him as well as to you, and perhaps useful to you. I miss you very much from the office, but I do not like to employ any more aid without sanction of the Government, though I could get no one to take your place. I would wish you to write me what Lord Elgin may have thought or have said as to our doings and plans of proceeding. If the library plan succeeds, it will achieve noble results.[51] I feel that our success and happiness in the Department are inseparably united."

It was indeed fortunate for my mission that I was on the same Cunard steamer to England with His Excellency the late lamented Lord Elgin, to whom I entered into full detail in regard to the objects of that mission. Before leaving the steamer, Lord Elgin most kindly promised to aid me in every way he could while in England, and wrote me his address as "Broom Hall, Dumfermline," in case I should have occasion to refer to him. He also added the following paragraph to the letter of your instructions and authority, which, in more than one instance, I found to be of essential service to me:—

"I believe the object of Mr. Hodgins' mission to be most important to Canada, and I trust that he will meet with all support and encouragement.

(Signed) "Elgin and Kincardine, "Governor-General.

"September, 1853."

One of my letters, reporting to Dr. Ryerson as far as I had gone, my proceedings in England, having been enclosed to the Hon. Mr. Hincks, he said in reply:—"I return you Mr. Hodgins' interesting letter, with thanks for its perusal. It was fortunate he went by the same steamer as Lord Elgin. I am much interested in the success of your libraries, which is beyond my most sanguine expectations.

"Quebec, 11th Oct. 1853."

I recall with pleasure the great services which Lord Elgin then rendered to the cause of education at a critical period of its history in this Province. His speeches and addresses on the subject at that time had a wonderful effect in moderating the opposition which Dr. Ryerson received while laying the foundations of our system of education. They had also the potent effect of popularizing that system in the estimation of the people which it was designed to benefit. That popularity has, happily, continued to this day, thanks in a great degree to the dignity imparted to the subject by the persuasive eloquence of Lord Elgin. His eminence as a distinguished graduate of Oxford, and his general knowledge of European systems of education, enabled him to speak with a precision and certainty which few could gainsay. It was a gratifying fact that he identified himself personally, as well as officially, throughout the whole of his seven years' administration, with the general education and intellectual improvement of the people of Canada. The first bill to which His Excellency assented in the Queen's name was the School Act of 1850, to which I have referred.

Proceedings of the First Council of Public Instruction—The Normal School.

One of the first and necessary acts of the Provincial Board of Education, or first council of public instruction, was the adoption of a uniform series of text-books—one only on each subject. Those chosen were the Irish National Series, with two additions. The next important step taken by the Board was the establishment, in November, 1847, of a Normal School, with the necessary adjunct of a Model School. The old Government House was fitted up as a Normal School, and the stable connected with it was renovated and converted into a Model School, or school of practice for teachers-in-training.[52] On the removal of the seat of government to Toronto, in 1849, the Normal School was held in the Temperance Hall, and other arrangements were made.

So successful were these schools in raising the status of the teaching profession that the government of the day—the memorable Baldwin-Lafontaine administration—willingly listened to a proposition of the Provincial Board of Education to grant funds for the purchase of a site and the erection of suitable buildings for these schools. The Hon. Francis Hincks, who was Inspector General, had (upon Dr. Ryerson's estimate) a proposed grant of £15,000 put in the estimates of 1850 for the purposes named. A site of seven acres and a half of land was purchased from the estate of the Hon. Peter M'Gill. The writer of this retrospect had the pleasure (in the absence of Dr. Ryerson in Europe) of signing the cheque for the purchase money, £4,500, and of seeing that the deed was duly made out in the name of Her Majesty the Queen and her successors, and transferred for safe keeping to the Crown Lands Department.

After the plans for the buildings had been approved, certain important additions were considered desirable (chiefly a theatre, or central lecture hall, etc.). As the grant already made was quite insufficient for the proposed additions, Mr. Hincks was once more appealed to. He responded very promptly and heartily, and recommended to his colleagues that a further grant be made, which was done, and an item of £10,000 additional was placed in the estimates of 1851 and concurred in by the Legislature. The work then proceeded and near the close of the second year it was brought to a conclusion.

So carefully had these two grants been husbanded that when the buildings were completed and furnished, there was a balance left over of £90. With this sum the expense of fitting up the Departmental Library was defrayed. The result was highly gratifying to Mr. Hincks, and he so expressed himself at the opening of the buildings in the following year.

Laying the Corner Stone of the Normal School Building, 1851.

On Wednesday, the 2nd of July, 1851, the imposing ceremony of laying the corner stone of the new edifice took place. The guard of honor was the 71st Highlanders, under Sir Hew Dalrymple. Ministers of both Houses of Parliament, the city corporation, etc., attended. The inscription on the brass plate—I quote from the original, as written by Dr. Ryerson—was as follows:

"This Institution, Erected by the Enlightened Liberality of Parliament, is Designed for the Instruction and Training of School Teachers upon Christian Principles."

Right Rev. Bishop Charbonnell, to whom was assigned the duty of presenting the Governor-General with the silver trowel, spoke with great cordiality, and with French grace and eloquence. He said:

"Monseigneur,—Je suis très heureux et très honoré d'avoir èté choisi par le Conseil de l'Instruction Publique, dont votre Excellence a daignè me faire membre, pour lui prèsenter cette truelle d'argent aux industrieuses emblèmes du blazon des Bruces.

"L'etablissement dont votre Excellence va poser la pierre angulaire, Monseigneur, sera un des plus glorieux monuments de tout ce que son libéral gouvernment aura fait pour la prospérité, de ce pays: ad ædificationem."

This in substance is as follows:—

"My Lord,—I am very happy and am highly honored to have been chosen by the Council of Public Instruction—of which your Excellency has condescended to make me a member—to present to you, on their behalf, this silver trowel emblazoned with the industrial emblems which form the arms of the Bruces.

"The institution, of which your Excellency is about to lay the corner stone, is destined to be, my Lord, one of the most glorious monuments amongst all of those which your liberal administration has devised for the welfare of this country."

In laying the corner-stone, Lord Elgin was particularly happy in his reply to these remarks, and to the address of the newly-constituted Council of Public Instruction. He said, addressing Dr. Ryerson:—

"It appears to me, sir, ... that this young country has had the advantage of profiting by the experience of older countries—by their failures and disappointments, as well as by their successes; and that experience, improved by your diligent exertions and excellent judgment ... and fortified by the support of the Council of Education, and the Government and Parliament of the Province, has enabled Upper Canada to place herself in the van among the nations in the great and important work of providing an efficient system of general education for the whole community.... I do not think that I shall be charged with exaggeration when I affirm that this work is the work of our day and generation—that it is the problem in our modern society which is most difficult of solution.... How has Upper Canada addressed herself to the execution of this great work?... Sir, I understand from your statements—and I come to the same conclusions from my own investigation and observation—that it is the principle of our educational system that its foundation be laid deep in the firm rock of our common Christianity.... Permit me to say, both as an humble Christian man and as the head of the Civil Government of the Province, that it gives me unfeigned pleasure to perceive that the youth of this country, ... who are destined in their maturer years to meet in the discharge of the duties of civil life upon terms of perfect civil and religious equality—I say it gives me pleasure to hear and to know that they are receiving an education which is fitted so well to qualify them for the discharge of these important duties; and that while their hearts are yet tender ... they are associated under conditions which are likely to provoke amongst them the growth of those truly Christian graces—mutual respect, forbearance and charity."

One of His Excellency's last acts in Toronto, when about to leave the country, was to visit those buildings and express his satisfaction with the several departments of the system therein conducted.

The County Model Schools of 1843-1850.

The necessity of these schools was felt more than forty years ago, and provision was then made for their establishment. Thus, in the first School Act passed in 1843 to regulate Common Schools in this province, section 57 of that Act declares:—

"That it shall and may be lawful for the court of wardens of any county in Upper Canada ... to raise and levy by county rate a sum not exceeding £200 ($800), and to appropriate and expend the same for the maintenance of one or more County Model Schools, within such county and to constitute, by by-law, or by-laws, to that effect, any township, town, or city school, or schools within the county, to be, for any term not less than one year, such County Model School or Schools," etc.

"A sum not less than £40" was appropriated to each such school towards 'the payment of the teachers and the purchase of books and apparatus.' The 66th section of the same Act also declared:—

"That in every such township, town or city Model School gratuitous instruction shall be given to teachers of Common Schools within the township, town or city, wherein such Model School may be established during such periods and under such regulations of the township, town or city superintendent may from time to time direct."

"Again, in the first Common School Act prepared by Dr. Ryerson, and passed in 1846, after providing for the establishment of District Model Schools—it was declared (sec. 40):—

"That at every such District Model School gratuitous instruction shall be afforded to all teachers of Common Schools within the district in which such Model School may be established during such period and under such regulations as the district superintendent may from time to time direct."

These County Model Schools (as will be seen) had higher functions than have the County Model Schools of the present day. They were designed to afford instruction to persons who were already teachers, and were thus in Dr. Ryerson's views constituted local Normal Schools for that purpose. So much importance did Dr. Ryerson attach to the value of training institutions for teaching, and so much did he anticipate a demand for them that on page 162 of his "Report on a System of Public Elementary Instruction," published in 1845, he said:—

"As soon as examples of the advantages of trained teachers can be given, I believe the ratio of demand will increase faster than that of supply, and that an additional Normal School will soon be required in each of the most populous districts."

Then again so jealously was the efficiency of these District or County Model Schools guarded that in the same Act, 9 Victoria, chapter 20, it was provided that no teacher could be appointed to such school without the approval in writing of the district superintendent, and unless he held a certificate from the Normal School (which was established in 1847). In addition to these requirements power was given to the district superintendent to suspend or dismiss Model School teachers and to appoint others in their places, in case the local trustees neglected or refused to do so. This district superintendent was also authorized to examine (as they often did at the Model School) all "candidates for teaching in Common Schools" and to give them certificates of qualification, special or general, at his discretion.

The question may here be asked, "Of what practical value were these County Model Schools in the work of training school teachers, and did they at all discharge the higher functions to which reference is made?"

It was clear that these schools were regarded in those early days as a necessary adjunct to our system of education, for the very purpose of aiding teachers in their professional work. Thus, Mr. Hamilton Hunter, in his report as School Superintendent of the Home District for the year 1844 says:—

"The deficiency in the qualification of teachers could be remedied by establishing in each district a Model School upon a good scale, and having it under the management of a superior teacher or teachers.... The School Bill makes provision for this, etc."

In his report for 1847 Dr. Ryerson thus speaks of the operation and success of these schools wherever they had been established:—

"The School Superintendent of Dalhousie District says: 'In this [County Model School] I have there held public examinations of Common School teachers; and on some occasions, when reluctant to give them certificates, I have sent them to the Model School Master for information and examination.... [These teachers] did not make any permanent stay except one, merely learning the mode of instruction, the value of the studies and discipline of the school.'... The Superintendent of the Johnstone District says:— ... 'Much good has been done by the establishment of the Model School in this district. Several teachers, whose education was by no means good, have acquired a sound knowledge of the subjects which are required to be taught in the Common Schools.' The Superintendent of Schools in the Midland District says:—'Almost every teacher who has attended the Model School for any length of time is now teaching with good success.'"

In the Act which was hurriedly passed in 1849, but which, by Order-in-Council, never went into operation, provision was made to establish, or continue the County Model Schools "in any township, town, or city," and granting to each of them "£25 over and above the sum to which such schools would be entitled as a Common School ... which sum shall be expended in the payment of a teacher or teachers, and for no other purpose."

In the Act of 1850, provision for the establishment and maintenance of Township Model Schools was made. Township councils were authorized to raise a special tax for the support and efficiency of these schools; and it was "provided likewise, that tuition to student-teachers in such Model Schools should be free."

The reason why Township Model Schools were substituted for county ones, is given by Dr. Ryerson in his circular to town reeves, dated 12th August, 1850. Other reasons contributed to this change, but the circular gives the chief reason.

"The attempts of district councils to establish Model Schools have thus far proved entire failures...: The late district councils have in every instance, except one, abandoned the attempt.... To the success and usefulness of a Model School, a model teacher, at any expense, is indispensable, and then a Model School-house, properly furnished, and their judicious and energetic management."

In addition, I may say that the causes of failure of these valuable training institutions in 1850, may be incidentally learned from the very words here used by Dr. Ryerson by way of suggestions to town reeves. These schools had neither model teachers, nor were the buildings "model school-houses." Besides, the district superintendents of that day, and after them, the township superintendents, had, as a rule, no experience as trained teachers themselves.

By the Act of 1871, the status and qualifications of these most important officers were raised to their present high standard. The very name was changed, and that of inspector was substituted.

It was felt by Dr. Ryerson that until these new officers had secured some degree of popular favor, and had proved their efficiency as organizers of schools, and as practical judges of the necessary qualifications of teachers, it would be useless for him to attempt the re-establishment of the County Model Schools. Before that time had fully arrived he retired from office—leaving this important and necessary duty to be undertaken (as it was efficiently) by his successor, Hon. Adam Crooks, as Minister of Education.

Fundamental Principles of Dr. Ryerson's Scheme of Education.

In founding the system of public instruction for Upper Canada, Dr. Ryerson wisely laid down certain fundamental principles which he believed to be essential to the success and stability of that system. These general principles may be thus summarized:

1. That the machinery of education should be in the hands of the people themselves, and should be managed through their own agency; they should, therefore, be held, be consulted, by means of public meetings and conferences, in regard to all school legislation. This he himself did every few years.

2. That the aid of the Government should only be given where it could be used most effectually to stimulate and assist local effort in this great work.

3. That the property of the country is responsible for, and should contribute toward the education of the entire youth of the country; and that, as a complement to this, "compulsory education" should necessarily be enforced.

4. That a thorough and systematic inspection of the schools is essential to their vitality and efficiency.

These and other important principles, Dr. Ryerson kept steadily in view during his long administration of the school system of his native Province. He was not able to embody them all at once in his earlier school bills, but he did so in the final legislation on the subject with which he was connected in 1870-1874. Their judicious application to the school system contributed largely, under the Divine blessing, which he ever sought, to the wonderful success of his labors.

Can Upper Canada Emulate the State of New York in Educational Matters?

In his "Address to the People of Upper Canada" on school affairs in 1850, Dr. Ryerson thus answers this question:—

"Another ground of encouragement in our country's educational work is the practical proof already acquired of the possibility of not only improving our schools, but of successfully emulating our American neighbours in this respect. Often have we heard this, both publicly and privately, pronounced utopian; and often have we sought in friendly discussion to prove that it was neither impracticable nor extravagant to aim in rivalling our New York neighbours in our Common Schools."—Journal of Education for Upper Canada, vol. 3, page 2.

In his report for 1851, Dr. Ryerson returns to this subject. He says:—

"The period is very recent when the [subject of educational comparison with the State of New York] would have been an absurdity—when the word 'contrast' must have been employed instead of the word 'comparison,' when not a few of our fellow countrymen, and some of our public men, considered the project, or the idea of emulating the Common School doings of our New York neighbours, as presumptuous and chimerical. I have not viewed the noble and patriotic exertions of the American people in any spirit of jealousy.... I hold up their example to the admiration and imitation of the people of Canada; but I have not despaired of, much less depreciated my own country; and have had, and have still in a higher degree than ever, a strong conviction that there are qualities in the people of Upper Canada, which, under a proper and possible organization, and with judicious counsel, would place schools and education in this country upon more than a level with what we have witnessed and admired in the State of New York. It is true our American neighbours have had more than thirty years the start of us; but I am persuaded we shall not require half that time to overtake them—profiting, as we have done, and doubtless will do, by their mistakes and failures, as well as by their ingenuity and success. To rebuke an unpatriotic spirit of Canadian degradation in which some Canadians indulge,[53] and to animate the hopes and exertions of the true friends of our intellectual and social progress, I will show what has already been accomplished in Upper Canada in respect to Common Schools by a comparison, in a few particulars, with what has been done in the State of New York." (The particulars which Dr. Ryerson points out are seven in number).—Report for 1851, (written in 1852), page 17.

In his reply to a complimentary letter from the Municipal Council of the County of Norfolk, in 1851, Dr. Ryerson thus referred to this subject:—

"No person who has at all studied the subject of comparative school legislation between Canada and other countries, can fail to observe that there is an extent of local discretion and power in each of our School and County Municipalities not found in any one of the neighbouring States, while there are other elements incorporated into our school system, which secure to the remotest municipality of Upper Canada the information and facilities which can alone be acquired and provided by a Public Department. But the rational conviction and voluntary co-operation of the people themselves have been relied upon and appealed to as the basis of exertion and the instrument of success. When, therefore, steps were taken to improve the text-books of the schools, a set of the books recommended was procured and furnished to each County Municipality in Upper Canada, that the people might examine and judge of the desirableness of the books proposed, in regard to both excellence and cheapness. In promoting an improvement in the condition and character of school-houses, plans and illustrations of school-houses and premises were procured and placed in the hands of the local councils, and several of them were published in the Journal of Education. The same course has been adopted in respect to School Maps, etc. And in pressing upon the public mind the necessity and advantage of duly qualified School Teachers, an institution has been established to train them; and the specimens of Teachers thus trained (though but partially trained in most instances, from the short period of their training) have excited a desire and demand for improved teachers in every County in Upper Canada. I trust this year will witness the introduction of Libraries—thus completing the establishment of every branch of our school system.

"In all this there has been no coercion—but a perfect blending of freedom and unity, of conviction and action; and the entire absence of any opposition to the school system during the recent elections throughout Upper Canada, shows how general and cordial is the conviction of the people as to its adaptation to their circumstances and interests.

"I have the deepest conviction of the strong common sense and patriotism of the Canadian people at large—a conviction founded on long observation and comparison between the people of Canada and those of many other countries; and I have a faith, little short of full assurance, as to the advancing and glorious future of our country. With this conviction and faith, and animated with the consciousness of general approval and co-operation on the part of the people, I shall renew my humble contributions of labour to the common treasury of Canadian progress and civilization."

Establishment of the Educational Depository, and its Results.

In 1850-51, Dr. Ryerson, while in England, made arrangements for establishing a library, a prize book and an apparatus and map depository, in connection with his Department. His reasons for doing so may be thus briefly stated:

1. He felt it to be practically useless to train teachers in the best methods of imparting instruction, and in the use of apparatus and other school appliances in the normal school and not provide for them, when in charge of schools, a constant and abundant supply of these necessary appliances at the very cheapest rates.

2. He held it to be equally necessary that the pupils, who had acquired a taste for reading and knowledge in the schools, should have an equally abundant and perennial supply of the best and purest literature as it is issued from the press; otherwise they would be sure to procure reading matter (often pernicious, as he had painful proof) for themselves.

3. He could see no distinction, and therefore could not admit of any, in the principle of providing such a two-fold supply of school material and reading matter, and in that of providing trained teachers and skilled inspectors at the expense of the Province, as well as a money bonus to aid in maintaining the schools in a state of efficiency.

4. He further felt that it was immaterial whether the money voted by Parliament was expended in one direction or the other, so long as in each department of the system the best interests and necessities of the schools were consulted, and the symmetry and efficiency of the school system, as a whole, were preserved and promoted.

5. He projected this plan of supply on a purely commercial basis, and so arranged and successfully carried out his scheme that while there was distributed nearly a million dollars' worth of school material and books up to the time when the depository was closed, it did not cost the country anything for the expenses of its management, as it more than paid its way. An elaborate report on this subject was prepared by Mr. James Brown, an experienced accountant, under the direction of Hon. Adam Crooks, the first Minister of Education. It more than sustained the statement here made. The particulars are as follows:—

Abstract of Depository Schedule Presented to the Legislature in 1877.

Total amount of legislative grants to the depository for all purposes, viz.:

(1) Purchase of stock, and (2) Salaries and the entire cost of management, etc., 1850 to 1875 inclusive$811,523 72

Total value of books, maps and apparatus despatched from the depository, 1850 to 1875 inclusive803,067 86

Difference to be accounted for8,455 86

Net value of the stock on hand at the end of 1875, after paying all expenses of management, etc79,509 41

Deduct the difference to be accounted for (as above)8,455 86

Grand total of profits made by the depository after paying all charges, as above, during the years 1850-187571,054 55

Dr. Ryerson a Commissioner on King's College, etc., New Brunswick in 1854.

On the 1st of May, 1854, the Legislature of New Brunswick passed an Act empowering the Lieutenant-Governor to appoint a Royal Commission:—

"To enquire into the present state of King's College, its management and utility, with a view of improving the same, and rendering that institution more generally useful, and of suggesting the best mode of effecting that desirable object," etc.

In accordance with this Act, Sir Edmund Head, the then Lieutenant-Governor, in August, 1854, appointed the following gentlemen as commissioners, viz.:—Hon. John Hamilton Gray, (late Judge of the High Court of British Columbia), Rev. Dr. Egerton Ryerson, John William (now Sir Wm.) Dawson, Hon. John Simcoe Saunders, and Hon. James Brown.

In accepting the position of commissioner, Dr. Ryerson, at the close of his letter to Provincial Secretary Partelow, said:—

"When I mentioned to the head of the Canadian Administration the request which had been made to me from New Brunswick, and the probability that a compliance with it would cause my absence for two or three weeks from the duties of my department, he thought I ought, by all means, to go—that it was part of my appropriate work, and that we should regard each Province of British North America as a part of our own country.

"New Brunswick is so to me, in a peculiar sense, as the birth-place of my sainted mother and my elder brothers and sisters."

The commission met first at Fredericton, and afterwards at Toronto. To Dr. Ryerson was entrusted the principal duty of drawing up the elaborate report, and in Hon. J. H. Gray's letter as chairman, accompanying the report in December, 1854, he says:

"I beg to express, with the full concurrence of my fellow commissioners, our acknowledgements of the very valuable assistance afforded us by Dr. Ryerson. His great experience and unquestioned proficiency on all subjects connected with education, justly entitle his opinion to great weight."

Sir Wm. Dawson, in a letter to Mr. Gray, thus summarizes the contents of the report:—

"1st. The improvement of the College course of instruction and its extension by the introduction of special courses. 2ndly, The definition of the true place of the Provincial College in its relations to the other educational institutions of the Province, and to the religious beliefs of the people; and 3rdly, The union of all the educational institutions in a Provincial university system, under official supervision."

A change in the Government of New Brunswick in 1854, prevented the report being considered in the Legislature at that time. In a letter from Mr. Gray to Dr. Ryerson, dated May 15, 1855, he says:—

"The change of Government prevented our report being adopted and acted upon, but it met with universal approbation, and from every portion of the Province the voice of praise has gone up. I give you credit for it all; and in my remarks in the House, I made my acknowledgements publicly to you and Mr. Dawson."

In a confidential letter to me, on Separate School matters, from Dr. Ryerson, dated Quebec, January 30, 1858, he said:—

"Sir Edmund Head (now Governor-General), highly approved of my Report, etc., on the New Brunswick College question and has sent it to the authorities of McGill College to see if they cannot adopt something of the same kind."

Mr. Gray had hoped that the comprehensive bill proposed by the commission in 1854, and to give effect to their recommendations relating to King's College, Normal and Model Schools, and a Chief Superintendent of Education, would be passed in the following year, 1855. In this he was disappointed, for the bill did not pass until 1860. In a letter to Dr. Ryerson from the Hon. Charles Fisher, dated Fredericton, 14th May, 1860, he said:—

"After years of controversy and difficulty we have passed an Act to remodel King's College on the plan proposed by your commission, under the title of the University of New Brunswick. We have not connected the College or the head of it with the other educational interests in the Province, but confined him to the University, and he must be a layman. This provision was inserted to prevent difficulty."[54]

Partial Chronological Sketch of Dr. Ryerson's Educational Work, 1855, etc.

I will now give a brief summary, in chronological order, of the successive steps which Dr. Ryerson took to develop the system of education which he had founded.

In 1855 Dr. Ryerson established meteorological stations in connection with twelve selected county grammar schools, ten following the coast line of the lakes and on the large rivers, and two entirely inland. In this he was aided by Colonel now General Sir (J. H.) Lefroy, R.E., for many years director of the Provincial (now Dominion) Magnetical Observatory at Toronto. Sets of instruments, having been purchased in London and tested at the Kew Observatory, were sent out to the twelve stations, duly equipped and provided with all necessary appliances.

In 1857 Dr. Ryerson made his third educational tour in Europe, where he procured, at Antwerp, Brussels, Florence, Rome, Paris and London, an admirable collection of copies of paintings by the Old Masters, statues, busts, etc., besides various other articles of a typical character for an educational museum in connection with the Department. In 1867 I was deputed to largely add to this museum collection, which I did in Paris, London, etc., especially in the direction of Egyptian and Assyrian antiquities, busts, casts, fictile ivory, etc.

In 1858-61 Dr. Ryerson took a leading part in a protracted public discussion before a committee of the House of Assembly, in favor of grants to the various "outlying" denominational universities, chiefly in terms of Hon. Robert Baldwin's liberalized University Act of 1853. He maintained that these colleges "did the State some service," and that it was right that their claims should be recognised in a substantial manner, as colleges of a central university. He deprecated the multiplication of universities in the Province, which he held would be the result of a rejection of the proposed scheme. His plan was not adopted, and universities were increased from five to eight subsequently. Twenty-five years after the close of that discussion a scheme for the confederation of these colleges was again considered but without much effect.

In 1862, Dr. Ryerson addressed a circular to boards of trustees in cities and towns, deploring the "numbers of children in these centers of population, growing up with no other education than a training in idleness, vagrancy and crime." He added: "I have, at different times, submitted three propositions or plans for the accomplishment of the object of free schools in cities and towns. First, that as the property of all is taxed for the common school education of all, all should be compelled to allow their children the means of such education at either public or private schools. Or, secondly, that each municipality should be empowered to deal with the vagrancy of children of school age, or the neglect of their education, as a crime, subject to such penalties and such measures for its prevention as each municipality, in its own discretion, might from time to time adopt. Or, thirdly, that the aid of religious benevolence should be invoked and encouraged to supplement the agency of our present school system."

Before bringing the matter again before the Government, Dr. Ryerson solicited the opinion and suggestions of the school boards on the subject.

Bishop Fraser's Estimate of the U. C. System of Education in 1863.

In 1863, Rev. James (afterwards Bishop) Fraser (of Manchester), was appointed a Royal Commission to enquire into the American and Canadian systems of education. From his report, published after his return to England, I quote the following passages:—

"The Canadian system of education, in those main features of it which are common to both Provinces, makes no pretence of being original. It confesses to a borrowed and eclectic character. The neighboring States of New York and Massachusetts, the Irish, English and Prussian systems, have all contributed elements, which have been combined with considerable skill, and the whole administered with remarkable energy, by those to whom its construction was confided. It appears to me, however, that its fundamental ideas were first developed by Mr. (now, I believe, Sir Arthur) Buller, in the masterly report on the state of education in Canada, which he addressed in the year 1838 to Lord Durham, the then Governor-General, in which he sketched the programme of a system, 'making,' as he candidly admitted, 'no attempt at originality, but keeping constantly in view, as models, the system in force in Prussia and the United States, particularly the latter, as being most adapted to the circumstances of the colony.'

"As a result of Mr. Buller's recommendations, (not, however, till after the legislative union of the Provinces which Lord Durham had suggested, as the best remedy for the various political ills under which they severally laboured,) a law was passed in 1841, covering both Provinces in its range, for the establishment and maintenance of public schools. It provided for the appointment of a Superintendent of Education for the whole Province, with two Assistant Superintendents under him, one for each of the sections. A sum of $200,000 was appropriated for the support of schools, which was to be distributed among the several municipal districts, in proportion to the number of children of school age in each of them; $80,000 being assigned to Upper and $120,000 to Lower Canada, such being the then ratio of their respective populations.

"The circumstances of the two sections, however, particularly in the proportions of Roman Catholics to Protestants in each, and the extent to which the Roman Catholic religion may be said to be established in Lower Canada, were soon found to be so different that insuperable difficulties were encountered in working a combined system under one central administration, and in 1845 the law was changed. The nominal office of Chief Superintendent was abolished, and the entire executive administration of the system was confined to the sectional superintendents, and the Provinces, for all educational purposes, again became separated. The law itself was thoroughly revised and adapted to the peculiar wants of each Province, as ascertained by experience; and ever since there have been two systems at work, identical in their leading idea, differing, sometimes widely, in their details, administered by independent executives, and without any organic relations at all.

"Before we proceed to observe the manner and record the results of its practical working, it is proper to premise that it is a purely permissive, not a compulsory system, and its adoption by any municipality is entirely voluntary.... Entering a Canadian school, with American impressions fresh upon the mind, the first feeling is one of disappointment. One misses the life, the motion, the vivacity, the precision—in a word, the brilliancy. But as you stay, and pass both teacher and pupils in review, the feeling of disappointment gives way to a feeling of surprise. You find that this plain, unpretending teacher has the power, and has successfully used the power, of communicating real, solid knowledge and good sense to those youthful minds, which, if they do not move rapidly, at least grasp, when they do take hold, firmly. If there is an appearance of what the Americans call "loose ends" in the school, it is only an appearance. The knowledge is stowed away compactly enough in its proper compartments, and is at hand, not perhaps very promptly, but pretty surely, when wanted. To set off against their quickness, I heard many random answers in American schools; while, per contra to the slowness of the Canadian scholar, I seldom got a reply very wide of the mark. The whole teaching was homely, but it was sound. I chanced to meet a schoolmaster at Toronto, who had kept school in Canada, and was then keeping school at Haarlem, New York, and he gave Canadian education the preference for thoroughness and solid results. Each system—or rather, I should say, the result of each system—seems to harmonize best with the character of the respective peoples. The Canadian chooses his type of school as the Vicar of Wakefield's wife chose her wedding-gown, and as the Vicar of Wakefield chose his wife, "not for a fine, glossy surface, but for such qualities as will wear well." I cannot say, judging from the schools which I have seen—which I take to be types of their best schools—that their choice has been misplaced, or that they have any reason to be disappointed with the results. I speak of the general character of education to which they evidently lean. That the actual results should be unequal, often in the widest possible degree, is true of education under all systems, everywhere.

"One of the most interesting features in the Canadian system is the way in which it has endeavored to deal with what we find to be one of our most formidable difficulties, the religious difficulty. In Canada it has been dealt with by the use of two expedients; one, by prescribing certain rules and regulations, which it was hoped would allow of religious instruction being given in the schools without introducing sectarianism or hurting consciences; the other, by permitting, in certain cases, the establishment of "separate," which are practically denominational, and in fact Roman Catholic schools.

"The permission under certain circumstances to establish separate, that is, denominational schools, is a peculiar feature of the system both of Upper and Lower Canada. Dr. Ryerson thinks that the admission of the principle is a thing to be regretted, though at the same time he considers that the advantages which it entails entirely rest with those who avail themselves of its provisions, and he would not desire to see any coercion used either to repeal or modify them.

"Such, in all its main features, is the school system of Upper Canada. A system, in the eyes of its administrators, who regard it with justifiable self-complacency, not perfect but yet far in advance, as a system of national education, of anything that we can show at home. It is indeed very remarkable to me that in a country, occupied in the greater part of its area by a sparse and anything but wealthy population, whose predominant characteristic is as far as possible removed from the spirit of enterprise, an educational system so complete in its theory and so capable of adaptation in practice should have been originally organized, and have been maintained in what, with all allowances, must still be called successful operation for so long a period as twenty-five years. It shows what can be accomplished by the energy, determination and devotion of a single earnest man. What national education in Great Britain owes to Sir James Kay Shuttleworth, what education in New England owes to Horace Mann, that debt education in Canada owes to Egerton Ryerson. He has been the object of bitter abuse, of not a little misrepresentation; but he has not swerved from his policy or from his fixed ideas. Through evil report and good report he has resolved, and he has found others to support him in the resolution, that free education shall be placed within the reach of every Canadian parent for every Canadian child. I hope I have not been ungenerous in dwelling sometimes upon the deficiencies in this noble work. To point out a defect is sometimes the first step towards repairing it; and if this report should ever cross the ocean and be read by those of whom it speaks, I hope, not with too great freedom, they will perhaps accept the assurance that, while I desired to appreciate, I was bound, above all, to be true; and that even where I could not wholly praise) I never meant to blame. Honest criticism is not hostility."

In a letter addressed to Dr. Ryerson in 1875, the Bishop says:—

"I take it very kindly in you that you remember an old acquaintance, and I have read with interest your last report. I am glad to observe progress in the old lines almost everywhere. I was flattered also to find that some words of mine, written in 1865, are thought worthy of being quoted.... It is pleasant to find a public servant now in the thirty-second year of his incumbency, still so hopeful and so vigorous. Few men have lived a more useful or active life than you, and your highest reward must be to look back upon what you have been permitted to achieve."

Speaking of the character of Dr. Ryerson's educational work and of the way in which he met difficulties in accomplishing it, Mr. J. Antisell Allen, of Kingston, in his paper on "Dr. Ryerson, a Review and a Study," says:—

"There is hardly a foot-length of our civilization on which he has not left his mark. For those who believe that, on the grounds of expediency, a government is justified in interfering with the ordinary working of the great human life-struggle, and so, in taking one man's money to benefit another man's children, that is to a majority so overwhelming as to come almost under the category of universal, as to be every one's belief—what system of general education can recommend itself more fully, or work more smoothly, than does his? In his struggles in this direction, neither seduced by friends, nor cowed by enemies, nor damped in his ardour by the vastness of the undertaking—turning neither to the right hand nor to the left—he has raised to himself a "monumentum perennius ære," and has bequeathed to us and posterity a system of public and high school education second to none anywhere, and, making some deduction for possible mistakes incident to our weak humanity, a system almost as perfect as we in this generation are perhaps capable of generally acquiescing in."

In 1867 Dr. Ryerson made his fourth and final educational tour in Europe and America. On his return he submitted to the Government a highly valuable "Special Report on the Systems and State of Popular Education in the several countries in Europe and the United States of America, with practical suggestions for the improvement of public instruction in Upper Canada." He also made a separate and interesting "Report on the Institutions for the Deaf and Dumb in various countries." A few years afterwards he had the happiness of seeing institutions of a similar kind in successful operation in this Province.

Character of the Important School Legislation of 1871.

The fifth and last series of conventions was held in 1869, and on the results of the consultations and deliberations of these conventions, Dr. Ryerson framed that crowning measure of his administration, which received the sanction of the legislature in 1871—twenty-one years after the first great departure in school legislation—that of 1850.

For the various objects which he had recommended during the years from 1850 to 1871, liberal grants were made by the Legislature. The policy of the Government during those years was to sustain Dr. Ryerson and to second his efforts to build up and consolidate the system of public instruction which he had taken such pains to establish. The result was that our school system expanded and grew in every direction, and became firmly rooted in the affections of the people. In this way it came to be regarded as one of the most successful and popular systems of education on the continent. And yet, as I have shown, he was continually suggesting improvements in it, for he always held that there was room, as well as a necessity, for them.

School legislation, chiefly in regard to high schools and matters of detail, took place at intervals during the intervening years, but it was is 1871 and 1874 that the final legislation under Dr. Ryerson's auspices took place. That of 1871 was strikingly progressive and took a wide range. That of 1874 was largely supplemental and remedial.

The Act of 1871 introduced into our school law for the first time some important principles, which, as yet, had not received legislative sanction. They were chiefly those which related, among others, to the following matters:

1. Governmental, combined with improved local, inspection of schools.

2. A high and fixed standard of qualifications for inspectors of public schools.

3. The abolition of non-certificated township superintendents of schools, and the substitution therefor of duly licensed county inspectors.

4. The institution of simultaneous and uniform examinations in the several counties for teachers desiring certificates of qualification. This principle was soon extended to other examinations, including competitive examinations in counties, etc.

Review of the School Legislation of 1871.

At Dr. Ryerson's request I prepared for him and wrote the text of his education report for 1870. In that report I reviewed in detail the various provisions and improvements introduced into our school system by the School Act of 1871. I reproduce here the more salient points of that report, touching upon the reasons for the passing of that progressive measure, and indicating some of its main features. I said:—

So many and important have been the changes recently made in the law affecting our System of Public Instruction, that it may be well, as a preliminary to a discussion of those changes, briefly to refer to a few facts relating to the history and progress of our School System.

In 1844, our municipal system (on which our then elementary School Law was engrafted), was in its infancy. The principle of local self-government was new, and much opposition was experienced in giving effect to the School Law then in operation. The theory of local taxation for the support of schools was in some places vigorously opposed, and in others regarded as a doubtful experiment. Even as late as 1850, some municipalities refused to accept the improved law enacted that year, or act under its provisions, and thus deprived their constituents of the great boon of popular education. It is only six years since the last disability, caused by such refusal, was removed,—thus uniting the entire Province in a cordial acceptance of the School Law.

The following brief statistical references will illustrate the growth and advance of our School System:—

In 1844, there were but 2,610 Public Schools, in 1870, there were 4,566. In that year, (1844), the school population was 183,539—of which 96,756 children attended the Public Schools, while 86,783 (or nearly as many more) were reported as not in attendance at any school whatever.

In 1870, the school population was 483,966—of which 420,488 children were in attendance in our schools, and 63,478 reported as not in attendance—not one-seventh, instead of nearly one-half of the children of school age, as in 1844. In 1844, the whole sum available for the support of the Public Schools was about $280,000—of which, approximately $190,000 were raised by local taxation.[55] In 1870, the whole sum available for Public Schools was $1,712,060—of which $1,336,383 were raised by local taxation and fees—an increase of more than seven hundred per cent over 1844!

There are few Canadians who do not now refer with an mixed pride and satisfaction to the vastly improved condition of our Public Schools under the operation of the present law, revised in 1850, and now revised and extended.[56] On no one point have we greater cause for thankfulness and congratulation, than in the fact of the unanimity and cordiality with which our School System is supported by all classes of the community, by men of all shades of political feeling, and, with a single exception (and that in part only), of all religious persuasions in the Province.

Objections to Improve our School System Answered.

It is a singular and gratifying (yet in some respect it has proved an embarrassing) fact that the chief difficulty experienced in promoting the improvement of our School System has arisen from the somewhat over-sensitiveness of the friends of our Schools, lest the proposed changes should disturb the foundations of a system which they had learned to regard with so much favor and affection. This solicitude arose partly from a mistaken view of the condition and necessities of our system, and partly from a misapprehension of the scope and objects of the proposed ameliorations in our School Law. It will be my aim, however, in the following remarks to justify and illustrate the principles and policy involved in the recent important changes which have been made in our School Law.

I would, in the first place, remark that were we, in making improvements in our School System, to confine our observation and experience to our own Province alone, we might be disposed to look with complacency upon that system, and to rest satisfied with the progress which we have already made. The effect of such a state of feeling would be that we would seek to profit little by the educational experience and advancement of other countries. But such a short-sighted and unpatriotic course, though approved by some on the principle of "let well-alone," yet would not commend itself to the maturer judgment of those who are accustomed to look at the "stern logic of facts," and to take a comprehensive and practical view of the underlying causes of the social progress in other countries.

5. The fixing and rendering uniform of a higher standard of qualification for public and high school teachers.

6. Giving the profession of teaching a fixed legal status, and providing more fully and equitably for the retirement and united support, by the profession and the legislature, of worn out or disabled teachers.

7. The establishment by law of a national system of free schools.

8. Declaring the right by law, as well as the necessity, of every child to attend some school, thus recognizing the principle of, and providing for, "compulsory education."

9. Requiring, by law, that adequate school accommodation, in regard to school house, playground and site, be provided by the trustees, for all of the resident children of school age in their localities.

10. Prescribing a more systematic and practical course of study for each of the classes in the public schools.

11. Discriminating, by a clearly defined line, the course of study in public and high schools respectively.

12. Providing for the establishment and support of collegiate institutes, or local colleges.

13. Requiring municipalities to maintain high schools and collegiate institutes, equally with the public schools, and as part of the general school system.

14. Providing, at the option of the ratepayers, for the substitution of township boards of education, in place of local trustee boards.

15. Authorizing the establishment of industrial schools.

Such were the main features of the comprehensive and progressive School Act passed in 1871. In many respects it revolutionized the existing state of things. It gave a wonderful impetus to the schools, and to every department of school system—the effects of which we feel to this day.

We are a young country, placed in close proximity to a large and wonderfully progressive people. In the good providence of God, we are permitted to construct on the broad and deep foundations of British liberty, the corner-stone of a new nationality, leaving to those who come after us to raise the stately edifice itself. Apart from the vital Christianity of our people, what more lasting bond and cement of society in that new nationality, than a free and comprehensive system of Christian education for the youth of the land, such as we have sought to establish? Our aim should, therefore, be to make that system commensurate with the wants of our people, in harmony with the progressive spirit of the times, and comprehensive enough to embrace the various branches of human knowledge which are now continually being called into requisition in the daily life of the farmer, the artizan, and the man of business. In no department of social and national progress have our neighbors made greater advances, or prided themselves more justly, than, in that of free popular education. On the other hand, in no feature of progress under British institutions up to a late period has there been less satisfaction, as a whole, or less positive advancement than in that of public education. By many of our neighbors on the other side of the lines, such inertness and non-appreciation of a vital part of national life has been regarded as inherent in monarchical institutions. The fact, however, has been overlooked that the lingering effects of the long prevalence in Britain of the feudal theory, on which her social and political institutions were originally founded, has, in spite of various ameliorations in the condition of her people, exercised a sure but silent influence against the earlier adoption of the principle of the free and universal education of the people. But so surely and certainly has this latent feeling of opposition to popular education given way before the prevalence of more enlightened views, that, even in the most monarchical countries of Europe, the desire felt and the efforts put forth for the diffusion of public education in all its comprehensiveness and fulness have been remarkable. Nevertheless, even among ourselves, that principle of latent opposition to popular education did exist in the earlier stages of our educational history. Its gradual removal, therefore, under the beneficent operation of our School Laws, and the prevalence of juster and more patriotic views in matter of education are subjects of sincere congratulation to our people.

Necessity for the Changes in the School Law of Ontario in 1871.

We will now proceed, in the light of the educational facts and illustrations which we have given from other countries, to discuss the recent improvements which have been effected in our own law.

The population of this Province, according to the recent census, is 1,620,842. The number of children of school age is 483,966, or a little over one-fourth of the whole. The number of Elementary Schools is not much below 5,000, and are maintained at an annual cost of nearly $1,800,000, or one dollar per head of the population. Such being the magnitude to which our Educational System has grown, every man will feel how imperative it is upon us to see that that system is as thorough and complete in all of its details as possible; and that in no respect should it be allowed to fall below the standard now reached by the other educating countries to which we have referred.

So long as our system of schools was in its infancy, and might be fairly regarded as yet an experiment, so long as we confine our efforts to mere elementary organization and be content with very moderate results. Experience has shown, however, that without great care and constant effort the tendency of all systems of education, and ours among the rest, is to a state of equilibrium, or to a uniform dead level of passable respectability. This is the stage in its history, as elsewhere, at which our system has arrived, and at which, as we have explained, many of its friends are disposed to leave it. But those who have carefully studied the subject in all its bearings, and have looked more closely into the educational history, the progress and failures of other countries, know full well that our school system would fall behind that of other countries and become stationary, unless it embodies within itself from time to time the true elements of progress, and provides fully and on a sufficient scale for the educational wants of the youth of the country.

Since 1850 it was left to the ratepayers in each school division to decide annually whether the schools should be free or partly supported by rate-bill on pupils attending the school. The principle, that a Public School education is the right of every child in the land, and that every man should contribute, according to his property, to the education of every child in the community, by whose influence and labors such property is protected and rendered valuable, had greatly obtained, so that Free Schools had increased from one hundred to five hundred per annum, until upwards of four thousand of the four thousand four hundred Public Schools were made free by actual experiments, and by the annual discussions and votes in these primary meetings of the people. The demand was very general for several years, that all the Public Schools should now be made free by law, and all local disputes on the subject be thus terminated. This has now been happily accomplished by the new law.

It is not necessary to go farther into detail in this retrospect, as the foregoing extracts indicate the scope and spirit of the improved Act of 1871.

Hon. Adam Crooks on the School Inspection Legislation of 1871.

In his speech before the Legislative Assembly on the 18th of February, 1877, the first Minister of Education for Ontario, in referring to the improved system of school inspection introduced by the Act of 1871, and the more certain tenure of office secured to County Inspectors under that Act, said:

"I have also been ready to say that most valuable results were secured by the change in the law in 1871, under which the present mode of school inspection took the place of the old plan of local superintendence. Inspectors now must possess high qualifications, both as teachers and in scholarship, while the emoluments of the office make it an object of ambition to every school teacher; and we have many teachers in the Province who posses qualifications of the high standard prescribed for Public School Inspectors. The tenure of the office of County Inspector is such as should secure their impartiality. So long as an Inspector discharges his duties efficiently, he can be removed only by a two-thirds majority of the County Council. It is unlikely that such two-thirds majority would be found unless the Inspector had given reasonable cause for his dismissal. It would not be wise therefore to alter the tenure by which County Inspectors hold office."