Part 4 (2/2)

Education is an object in which the Government, as an individual portion of the Province, and the people at large possess, in some respects, a common interest, consequently they should exercise a joint or common control.... And in an equitable and patriotic administration of Government, the more its agents and the people's agents are a.s.sociated together in promoting the common weal, the more strongly will mutual respect and confidence and co-operation between the people and the Government be established, the less room there will be for Executive negligence, or partiality, or popular or local abuse; and the less opportunity there will be for either despotic oppression or demagogue misrepresentation.”

In 1834 there was a General Election, which resulted in the return to the a.s.sembly of a large majority in favour of reform principles, and wholly opposed to the arbitrary and aristocratic ideas of the Legislative Council. Bidwell, Rolph, and William Lyon Mackenzie were three leading spirits in the new House.

When the a.s.sembly opened the Governor laid before the members a despatch from the Colonial Office, stating His Majesty's readiness to transfer 240,000 acres in the settled towns.h.i.+ps in return for the School lands which were in towns.h.i.+p blocks and not then saleable.

A bill was pa.s.sed by the Legislature renewing for two years, 1835 and 1836, the increased grant of 5,650 for Common Schools.

A grant of 200 was also made to Mechanics' Inst.i.tutes at York and a grant of 100 to one at Kingston.

Considerable time was spent in the a.s.sembly upon two bills which were rejected by the Executive Council. One was a bill to regulate Common Schools which would have given them a thorough organization and made them subject to popular control by elected Boards and Superintendents.

The Executive Council had no faith in control by the people. They doubted whether ”the respectable yeomanry of the country” were capable of choosing suitable Superintendents. The other was a bill to amend the charter of King's College. These amendments were designed to remove all religious tests and to have the College governed by a Council, half of whom were to be appointed by the a.s.sembly and half by the Legislative Council. The only reasons given by the Council for rejecting these amendments were that they knew of no university so governed and that a university must have as a basis some established form of religion. In the meantime, while the hide-bound wors.h.i.+ppers of European traditions who made up the Council were delaying the active work of King's College, the youth of Upper Canada, preparing for the learned professions, were compelled to seek university advantages in the United States or Great Britain. More than this, owing to the lack of advantages in their own country, many who could otherwise have afforded it were wholly deprived of the higher education and training necessary for the professions they had in view.

The Legislative Council at this time, and for many years afterwards, made boasts of their loyalty to the Crown, and upon some occasions arrogated to themselves and their friends a monopoly of all loyal spirit in Upper Canada, and yet they firmly refused to surrender the charter and endowment of King's College when requested and even urged to do so by His Majesty's Colonial Secretary[46]. From 1831 to 1835, the Council refused to accept any substantial amendments made in that charter suggested by the a.s.sembly, although Lord G.o.derich had, in 1831, made it quite clear that His Majesty's Government wished the question of the charter to be settled by the Upper Canada Legislature.

[46] See letter of Lord G.o.derich of Nov. 2nd, 1831, to Sir John Colborne.

When, upon the 6th of May, 1835, Sir John Colborne sent to the Colonial Secretary the King's College Charter Amendment Bill pa.s.sed by the a.s.sembly, he urged the immediate opening of King's College, although he had declared to the College Council that ”not one stone should be placed upon another” until the charter was amended. It may also be gathered from this despatch to Lord Glenelg[47] that Sir John Colborne accompanied it with a draft of amendments which he thought would be acceptable to both branches of the Legislature of Upper Canada. His Lords.h.i.+p was too astute a politician and too thoroughly informed concerning Canadian public opinion to be easily misled. Sir John Colborne, as a concession to the a.s.sembly, proposed that five out of seven of the governing body should be permanently of the faith of the Church of England. The other two members were to be the Lieutenant-Governor and the Archdeacon of York! Lord Glenelg, in reply, says: ”I cannot hesitate to express my opinion that this plan claims for the Established Church of England privileges which those who best understand and most deeply prize her real interests would not think it prudent to a.s.sert for her in any British Province on the North American Continent.... I would respectfully and earnestly impress upon the Members of both these Bodies [a.s.sembly and Council] the expediency of endeavouring, by mutual concessions, to meet on some common ground.

Especially would I beg the Legislative Councillors to remember that, if there be any one subject on which, more than others, it is vain and dangerous to oppose the deliberate wishes of the great ma.s.s of the people, the system of national instruction to be pursued in the moral and religious education of youth is emphatically that subject.”[48] Lord Glenelg concludes by referring the question of amending the charter back to the Legislature of Upper Canada and states that His Majesty will act as mediator only if the two branches of the Legislature fail to agree and then only upon their presenting a joint Address.

[47] See D. H. E., Vol. II., p. 214.

[48] See copy of letter in D. H. E., Vol. II., pp. 213 and 214.

CHAPTER IV.

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

During the Legislative session of 1836, Sir John Colborne was replaced by Sir Francis Bond Head as Lieutenant-Governor. It would seem that the difference of opinion between Sir John Colborne and Lord Glenelg of the Colonial Office was responsible for the former's asking to be recalled.

His last official act as Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada, and one intimately connected with educational controversy at a later date, was to sign patents for the endowment of forty-three Anglican rectories out of the Clergy Reserve lands.

In the Legislature no real progress was made in education, although a lengthy report[49] and a draft School Bill were presented by a member of the a.s.sembly, Doctor Charles Duncomb. This report was based on a visit paid by Doctor Duncomb to the Eastern, Middle and Western United States.

It is interesting and emphasizes the importance of a suitable education for women.

[49] See Appendix to Journals of a.s.sembly of U.C., 1836. See also a.s.sembly Journals for 1836, pp. 213 and 214.

The most important event of the year in its after effects upon education in Upper Canada was the formal opening of Upper Canada Academy[50] at Cobourg, under a Royal Charter secured by Egerton Ryerson.

[50] See Chapter I.

In resigning his position as editor of _The Guardian_, the official organ of Methodism, Ryerson referred to the condition of education in Upper Canada, emphasizing the supreme importance of elementary instruction for every child in the country. It is also interesting to note that at this date, when he had probably never dreamed of having any official connection with elementary education, he should have touched the very root of the problem by pointing out the utter impossibility of making any real progress without a body of educated and trained teachers.

<script>