CHAPTER IV.

It was from this duty of laying the foundations of our University in this young Province that Dr. Ryerson was called to the wider field of fashioning the primary and intermediate education of the whole people.

It would be presumption on my part to attempt to speak to-day of the difficulties which beset him in his task, and of the skill and judgment with which those difficulties were met and overcome. That has already been the more appropriate duty of one who has just spoken, and who was for long years his most valued and honored associate in his life-work.

But, as a Canadian of the fourth generation, and as a Canadian school boy who has enjoyed the advantages of the great work which to-day we commit to the perpetual memory of our country, I may venture to refer to the peculiarly Canadian character of the system founded by Dr. Ryerson. The early schools of this country were very varied in their type. Prepossession and usage rule imperiously in education. Each little colony or settlement, as it was called, had its national prepossessions. Here was an attempt to reproduce a miniature English Eton or Rugby. There was a genuine Scottish parish school with its Bible and Catechism. Here was an Irish school with its predilection for difficult problems in arithmetic and algebra. There was a Yankee school with its spelling-matches and dialogues on examination day. These were the heterogeneous elements of forty-five and fifty years ago. To-day, we have everywhere the Canadian school as unique in its character as any of these, and as well-known in its results all over this continent. The skilful mind that took possession of these materials, that carefully separated the good from the bad, that patiently and wisely removed or overcame prejudices, that calmly waited till the public mind was ready for each progressive movement, and then with vigor pushed it forward to speedy completion—this was the ——le gift which Dr. Ryerson devoted to his country's service. Gathering his materials for building up a perfect educational system from all lands, and from the wisdom and experience of all ages, this great man wrought out his life-task in the face of political prejudices, of national prejudices and of sectarian prejudices. I know of no man of hisday who rose more fully than did he above the narrowness of all these. From the elevation of a broad catholicity, he grasped the great outlines of a comprehensive and national system of education for the Upper Canadian people, and patiently did he work toward that as his ideal. It would be too much to say that he completed the ideal. Such is not often given to mortal man. There are problems in this work still unsolved. There is still something for us to do. But in the solution of these problems we may well thank God for the broad, strong foundations, and structures planned, and so nearly completed by this master workman.

In the inaugural address with which Dr. Ryerson opened his work in Victoria College, I find this passage "The education imparted in this college is to be British and Canadian. Youth should be educated for their country as well as for themselves." This motto, never forgotten, has given character to his great life-work, and has given us a system of public schools and intermediate schools which more enduring than any monument will perpetuate to our children for generations to come, the name of Egerton Ryerson.[9]

Sandford Fleming, C.E., LL.D, C.M.G., Chancellor of Queen's University, spoke as follows:—

Your Honor,Mr. Chairman,Ladies and Gentlemen:

In the name of Queen's University, and at the special request of the Senate of that institution, I come here to-day to take part in these interesting proceedings. On behalf of higher education in Eastern Ontario I have the honor to bear tribute to the memory of Dr. Egerton Ryerson.

However unworthy the individual whom Queen's has sent on this occasion, I am warranted in stating that no institution in this country is more thoroughly alive to the importance of sound education for all classes of the community than the University I come here to represent. Moreover, I venture to say that there is no one here present who more fully appreciates the incalculable value of the school system of Ontario and the work accomplished in its establishment, by him to whose memory we are this day assembled to do honor.

It is not simply an agreeable duty I am called upon to perform, I feel it to be a high privilege to be allowed to take part by my presence on this auspicious occasion. I have but to look back over a period of forty years to recall the living form of the sculptured figure before us, and to remember the time when in the zenith of his strength and intellectual power, he brought to bear on the great work of his life that wisdom and foresight, that indomitable perseverance and patriotism, that zeal and devotion with which he was gifted. I have but to recollect his persistent efforts to initiate and put in successful operation a comprehensive system of common school education in this province, to express my unalloyed satisfaction that those efforts—those great and sustained efforts were not in vain. I rejoiced then, as I rejoice now, that the noble work in which he took so conspicuous a part has been crowned with signal success. I thought then, and I think now, that the people of this province, I may indeed say the people of the whole of Canada, of all ages, of all classes, of all colors and of all creeds, owe a deep debt of gratitude to Dr. Ryerson, and I cannot be wrong in the firm opinion that we all do well to revere and perpetuate his memory.

While Dr. Egerton Ryerson attached most importance to the establishment of the common schools of the country on a sound and efficient basis, he also warmly sympathizedwith every effort to promote higher education. He took an active part in founding Victoria University, of which he was chosen the first president. He was a strenuous supporter of that institution up to the day of his death, firmly believing that the resources of the country could support, and that the people of Ontario should possess, well endowed, independent seats of learning of different types.

As a member of the community I have always had the highest esteem and veneration for this great pioneer of education in Canada. I feel now and have always felt with unnumbered thousands that his life has indeed been that of a foremost public benefactor. I am, therefore, greatly gratified that it has fallen to my lot, on behalf of Queen's University and higher education in Eastern Ontario to bear tribute to the memory of the founder and first administrator of our system of public instruction, a far-seeing Canadian, an enlightened statesman, a man who in his distinguished career rendered the most important services to the country of his birth.

I am glad to have an opportunity of taking part in the formal inauguration of the work of art which we see before us. At the same time I cannot forget that Dr. Egerton Ryerson has left behind him an inheritance to unborn generations of Canadians in the schools which we behold everywhere throughout the land and the free public instruction which they represent. These are now and must always be recognized as his best and most enduring monument.[10]

The Representative of Trinity University, Rev. Professor Clark, remarked that he had the honor of representing the smallest of the universities of Ontario, but one in which they strove to do their work in a spirit of loyalty to their country as well as to their own convictions. He had naturally prepared to make some remarks on the distinguished and illustrious man in whose honor they were then assembled; but, as he supposed, nearly everything which had occurred to him as being suitable to be said had been anticipated by previous speakers.

As he looked upon those Normal Schools by which they were imprinted, he could not help being reminded of the words inscribed on the interior of St. Paul's in memory of its founder, Sir Christopher Wren, "Si monumentum requiris circumspice." "If you ask for his memorial look around you." With equal propriety we might point to those schools as a monument and memorial of Dr. Ryerson, the founder of the educational system of this Province, no less fitting than the statue which had just been uncovered. But more enduring than the building or the effigy was the intellectual and moral work which he had accomplished in our educational institutions, for that work was eternal. Its effects and influences would never pass away, but would go on leavening generations yet unborn. Whatever changes or revolutions might occur, his work and its consequences would still live on.

In one respect, perhaps, it was fortunate that others should have borne testimony to Dr. Ryerson's work and ability, and to the greatness of the work which he had done. His own knowledge of the man and of the work was only second-hand, and he could not speak with the freshness and vividness of those who had personal knowledge of them. "Segnius irritant animos demissa per aurem." But although he had not direct and immediate knowledge of Dr. Ryerson, he had the opportunity of studying several of the publications which gave an account of his history, and especially of his educational work—more particularly some of those written by Dr. Hodgins. From these he had learnt something of the spirit in which the work had been accomplished, and the principles which were embodied in it; and these would account for the eulogiums which had already been bestowed upon the work and its principal doer.

They might learn from such investigations something that would help to guard them from dangers which attended their educational work. It seemed to him that Dr. Ryerson's conception of the work of education was singularly simple, earnest, deep and comprehensive, free from affectation and one-sidedness. They were in danger of forgetting some of these elements, of making education showy instead of solid,—of forgetting that it was the education and discipline of the man and of the mind that we had to accomplish, and not the outward adornment of him, or the mere imparting of knowledge. Some of our dangers have been forcibly pointed out by the President of University College, Sir Daniel Wilson, in the March number of theCanada Educational Monthly. It would not be proper to go into details on such an occasion, but he would recommend those who were interested in these questions to study that article.

There was great danger of their being one-sided in education, of their taking up cries on one side or another. We have often heard of a foolish Anglomania by which some people were possessed. But there are other manias which are quite as silly. There was an Americano-mania and a Canada mania (mania Canadensis, said the Minister), and they were all equally foolish. It was egregious folly merely to imitate an Englishman or an American. But it was equally foolish to imagine that we had everything and could do everything by ourselves. Our business was not to make Englishmen or Americans or Canadians, but to make men, furnished with sufficient knowledge, with cultivated, disciplined minds, with vigorous wills. This is our work, and we must do it with our might, remembering the limitations of our position and realizing what we could and could not accomplish. We must not at present expect the results of the education given at the great German universities or at Oxford and Cambridge, but we might make the best with the materials at our disposal. We might foster in the rising generations a love of truth and goodness, and instil into them a deep sense of duty, and thus help to qualify them for the position they would have to occupy, and the work which they had to perform.

Professor Theodore H. Rand, M.A., D.C.L., representative of McMaster University spoke as follows:—

Twice before it has been my privilege to unite in doing honor by a public memorial to the name of distinguished educationalists,—that of Horace Mann, of Massachusetts, and Alexander Forrester, of Nova Scotia; but in view of the breadth of the area over which Egerton Ryerson wrought, and the really national character of his work, this has been an occasion of surpassing interest to me, and one, I am sure, which marks an epoch in the educational history of Ontario. In speaking as a representative of McMaster University, which is just now being organized as one of the instruments of the higher education of this country, I may be permitted to say that the Christian denomination which controls the destiny of that University has in all parts of the world been in active sympathy with popular education, and in two of our Canadian provinces has been foremost in efforts to secure the efficient organization of systems of free education under government control.

When a country has risen to the position of making adequate public provision against the blighting and destructive influences of ignorance, it has undertaken the discharge of one of those contingent and great obligations which, perhaps, will always await any people who are pressing forward to the attainment of the possibilities of Christian civilization. With all its imperfections our system of public education in an eminent degree commands the affectionate regard of our people and the admiration of strangers. While Ontario was not the first of our Canadian provinces to organize a free system of public schools, and while she has not maintained intact the principle which lies at the basis of the common schools, the grandeur of the outline of our system and the general completeness of its details are, I believe, unsurpassed by those of any other system on this continent or throughout the empire. This is especially true of the completeness of theprovision made for passing from the elementary schools into the work of the higher education. Ontario occupies this advanced position to-day, with all its immeasurable advantages, largely because of Egerton Ryerson. He was possessed of a profound conviction that mind is the great creative power by which all resources of nature are to be turned to account. He had no idea that material good is a good at all only as it is a means for the development of the moral and social possibilities of the individual and of the nation. He did not argue, as many others in the country did, that since the area of the Province is vast, its population widely scattered, its forests waiting to be felled, its lands to be cleared and drained, therefore the organization of an efficient school system was a thing of the far future. On the contrary, having before him such examples as Prussia, Scotland, Ireland, the New England, Middle and Western States, and believing that our civic institutions should afford social conditions inferior to those of no country in the world, he poured all the energy of his great heart and mind into the effort to make available even to the remotest hamlets of the Province the blessings of knowledge. Intelligence, industry and morality were felt to be inseparably bound up with the progress of education. A system good enough for the rich and poor alike, and supported at the public expense, was his aim and his final achievement. The Christian communism underlying our systems of public education on this continent is proving one of the great safeguards of society against the forms of a false communism; and there is yet room, in my judgment, for a still wider application of kindred principles in our social system.

The work of Egerton Ryerson furnishes an additional illustration of the truth that systems of popular education are, so to speak, the gift to the people of the Colleges and Universities. His relations to the higher education enabled him to grasp all the elements involved in the great problem he undertook to solve for Ontario, and to bring all parts of the educational system into helpful and sympathetic relations. Our Universities must always be sources of stimulus and enrichment to the schools of the Province at large, if they discharge in any original and adequate measure their functions to society.

In attributing so important a share to Egerton Ryerson in the establishment of our school system, I am not, of course, unmindful of the public men who seconded his efforts, and above all, of the teachers and inspectors by whose self-sacrificing toils educational advance was rendered possible, and has been sustained. Were he whom we honor in our midst to-day he would be the first to speak thus, and especially of his friend, Dr. Hodgins, who for so many years was his able assistant and valued confidant. This bronze memorial is well—may it long testify to the patriotic virtues of a noble man—but it is as nothing, I trust, in comparison with the living and imperishable memorials of enriched and ennobled human lives. As time witnesses the increasing development of the material and spiritual forces of the present and coming generations of our people, as our social and national institutions are more fully perfected and widely recognized, we shall have hereby and herein perennial memorials of the founder of the school system of Ontario throughout all coming time.

An Historical Retrospect by J. George Hodgins, M.A., LL.D., Barrister-at-law, and Deputy Minister of Education for Ontario.

To-day will long be memorable in the educational history of Ontario—for to-day has been unveiled the first statue ever erected in this province to one of its own sons.

It will be still more memorable from the fact that that special subject of public interest and national concern which has been signally honoured to-day, is the pre-eminently important one of popular education. These two facts combined give to the celebration and pleasant incidents of the day a peculiar significance and a special interest.

One of the first indications of a growing national life and a patriotic national spirit is the erection of statues to noble sons who have rendered such valuable services to the state as are recognized and honoured here to-day.

It is a most hopeful sign, as well as an assuring and happy augury for the future of a country, when its patriotism takes the grateful and graceful form of doing honour to those who have aided in laying the foundation of its future greatness and prosperity. This, we all rejoice has been done by Ontario to-day in the unveiling of the statue of the distinguished founder of her educational system. She has reared to-day to one of the sons of her soil a noble monument, expressive of grateful acknowledgment for services of the greatest importance and value to her and to the thousands of her sons and daughters yet unborn.

The erection of this statue emphasizes in a striking manner a notable fact, chronicled by John Milton, which the mature judgment of the nineteenth century has everywhere endorsed, that—

"Peace hath her victories no less renowned than war."

That is, that it is not heroic deeds of valor alone which call forth a nation's gratitude. It further shows us that unswerving devotion to duty in any of the departments of the public service, or professional or private life, which have to do with matters which concern a nation's progress and welfare, is equally recognized, if not more signally honoured, than were deeds of prowess in the days gone by. We have, at all events on this continent, many notable examples of distinguished honour being done to literary men, to men of science and to noted educationists. Any one who has visited the chief city of Massachusetts cannot fail to have seen, on the broad terrace in front of the capitol, a massive bronze statue to Horace Mann, the well-known Founder of the Public School system, not only of Massachusetts, but practically of the New England States.

So, in like manner we unveil to-day the statue, not only of the Founder of the School System of Ontario, but of one, the impress of whose hand, and the practical suggestions of whose mature experience, may be recognized in the systems of education of some of the Maritime Provinces, and in those of Manitoba and British Columbia. The first Superintendent of British Columbia, and the second of Manitoba were trained in the schools of Ontario, and were thus experienced pioneers in the new Provinces of their educational systems. Also in the West Indies the educational example of Ontario was felt to be of some value by Sir Francis Hincks, when Governor of the Windward Islands.[12]

Even the grand old Mother Country has not failed to acknowledge her indebtedness to him whom we honour to-day, for practical suggestions in the solution of the educational problems which confronted her public men, notably the Duke of Newcastle and the Right Hon. W. E. Forster,[13]during the years reaching from 1860 to 1870.

In 1860, at the request of the Duke of Newcastle, who accompanied the Prince of Wales to Canada, Dr. Ryerson prepared an elaborate sketch of the system of education in Upper Canada, and contrasted it with the English and other European systems of education. This report was embodied in a letter to the Duke, dated 12th October, 1860.

As to the appropriateness of our erecting a Statue to Egerton Ryerson in Ontario, as was done to Horace Mann, in Massachusetts, I may here quote a reference to the equal value of the labors of those two noted men which was made twenty-five years ago by that acute observer and experienced educational commissioner, the late well-known and distinguished Bishop Fraser, of Manchester. He said:

"What Education in New England owes to Horace Mann, Education in Canada owes to Egerton Ryerson."

To-day we honour ourselves by seeking to discharge that obligation, at least in part.

There is one circumstance connected with the erection of this statue which, to my mind, gives it a peculiar value and significance. The erection of statues by popular vote, or by the Legislature, gives aquasi, if not a real national character to such erection, but, a statue erected from the proceeds of thousands of small contributions, as in this case, shows that deep down in the hearts of the people of this country there must have been genuine regard for the man whom they thus seek to honour. When a memorial takes such a form as that we may well regard it as more enduring and precious than either the bronze or marble which constitute the material of its structure.

It devolves upon me, as Chairman of the Committee having charge of this work, and at the kind request of my colleagues,—no less than as the life-long friend and fellow-laborer of him whose deeds and memory we honor to-day—to trace back to their source the origin and underlying principles of our system of education, and to show that these underlying principles and other vital forces were so combined by a master-hand an to form the groundwork, as they have, in their combination, become the charter of our educational system of to-day.

And here, in this connection, a thought or two strikes me; and each thought contains for us a moral and a lesson.

The first is that educational systems are essentially progressive in their character and purposes, and truly they "never continue in one stay."

The second is that the earliest sources of what might be called our educational inspiration are now uncertain guides, and, as such, are to-day of doubtful authority.

No one will venture to affirm that even—as it was then considered—the broad and comprehensive scheme of public education sketched by Dr. Ryerson in 1846, should be considered as the acme of our educational achievements of to-day. Nor would any one at all conversant with the condition and progress of education on this continent alone be content to draw his inspiration from, or limit his range of observation to, the New England States as formerly. The examples to be seen, and the experience to be consulted, and the systems to be studied, must to-day, so far as the United States is concerned—be sought for in the far-off Western States.

In this matter I speak of what I know; and I speak, therefore, with the more emphasis on this point, because of the primary importance of keeping this Province and the Dominion educationally abreast of the most advanced States of the American Union—our near neighbors, and our energetic and actively progressive educational rivals.

As an illustration of these notable facts, I may state that having been selected by the United States Bureau of Education to act as one of the seven international educational jurors, at the New Orleans Exhibition in 1885, it was, during six weeks, my duty with others, to examine into and report upon the condition and results of the various state systems of education in the Union, and in other countries.

I need not more than state, what you likely anticipate, that France, by her enlightened educational legislation of 1881—providing for manual, or industrial, training in all of her schools—and Germany, by her earlier and more systematized educational legislation, stand at the head of European States, as does Japan at the head of the whole Eastern World. But, in this connection, the interest to us should be to note the fact that the educational centre in the United States has within the last few years been gradually shifted from the east to the west. As an illustration, I may say that the highest award for the extent, variety and completeness of its educational system in all its details, was unanimously made by the jurors to Minnesota, while Massachusetts and other New England States, with New York, Pennsylvania, etc., were entitled to only second and third class honors. France and Japan justly received first-class honors, while England and other countries (omitting Germany) had to be placed in the second and third class ranks as educating countries.

A revelation of these and other suggestive facts in regard to the progress of education in countries outside of our own, more than ever convinced me of the wisdom of Dr. Ryerson's policy of observation while head of the Education Department. He laid it down, not so much an educational axiom, as a wise dictum—the result of his educational experience, that—

"There is no department of civil government in which careful preparation, varied study and observation, and independent and uniform action, are so important to success and efficiency, as in founding, maturing and developing a system of public instruction."

He, therefore, wisely devoted a large portion of his time to this "careful preparation," as well as to "varied study and observation" of systems of education in Europe and America. And this fact largely accounts for the "success and efficiency" of his efforts in "founding, maturing and developing" our system of public instruction.

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

"There is no poetry in the establishment and development of a public school system; it is a matter-of-fact-work from beginning to end; and its progress, like the growth of body and mind in an individual, is gradual, and is the joint result of time and labour. I am happy, however, to know that our school system has already become so far developed in its principles, objects and character as to command the attention and almost unanimous approbation of the country. I have laid it down as a first principle to educate the people through the people themselves, by their own voluntary co-operation and exertion, through the usual elective municipalities and other acknowledged and responsible organs of a free people."

When we reflect upon the fact of the immense growth, and the comprehensive character of the educational machinery in operation on this continent alone, and the vast sums expended to keep it in motion, we cannot fail to be profoundly impressed with the serious and grave responsibility which is constantly imposed upon our educational leaders, of being forever on the watch-tower of observation, to note the changes, improvements and advances which are continually taking place in the educational world outside. We are too apt to be content with our own progress, and to measure ourselves by ourselves. In this connection the words recently addressed to the Kingston Board of School Trustees by the Very Rev. Principal Grant, are of special value as an apt illustration of my meaning:—

"During my absence I have studied the school systems of many countries, and have learned lessons that ought to assist me in coming to right conclusions. The world is wider than Canada, or than America. The British Empire itself is wider than this continent, and within its boundaries there are so many educational systems and methods that a man who travels with eyes and ears open cannot help learning many things that confirm opinions previously held, and suggest improvements on what he may have thought perfect, or the necessity of revising his former judgments. He gets new points of view, and that of itself is a great matter."

Our American neighbors became fully alive years ago to the evils of the fluctuating and uncertain character of the prevailing system of educational administration in vogue amongst them. They saw that new and officially untrained men, of merely local experience and knowledge, were constantly being elected to take charge of the administrative department of the schools of a state. Such men were often able educators, but by no means experienced educationists, or masters of systems of education. The American people, shrewd and practical as they are, felt the absolute necessity, therefore, of furnishing such men, and the vast army of their educationists and educators, with full and accurate information on systems and plans of education all over the world. With this object in view, they established a central observatory, or Bureau of Education at Washington. I need hardly say how ably the work of this Bureau was systematized and most efficiently performed under the direction of the Hon. John Eaton, Commissioner of Education. His successive reports and periodical circulars of information are mines of educational wealth. Their fullness and comprehensiveness have been a marvel. They have aroused and stimulated educational workers everywhere. They are largely welcomed, and are highly prized in these Provinces and elsewhere, as suggestive, and as invaluable storehouses of information, and of the practical details of education all over the world. They have, therefore, largely supplied the place of personal inquiry and research, and yet have greatly stimulated both.

It was Dr. Ryerson's ideal that sooner or later a similar Bureau would be established by the Central Government at Ottawa, the object of which would be, not only the supplying of abundant and reliable information to each province on the subject of systems and plans of education, but also, by intercommunication, to secure a general harmony of aim and purpose. And that further, without attempting any interference in local administration, the Bureau would be the means of keeping up an active yet friendly intercolonial rivalry; and thus, on Dominion and national lines, to build up the confederacy, and to stimulate and encourage the efforts made in each province for the promotion of substantial educational progress, combined with efficiency and economy.

The educational history of Ontario naturally divides itself in three periods, viz.:—

1. The early settlement, or United Empire Loyalist period.

2. The period preceding the union of Upper and Lower Canada in 1840.

3. The period since that union, and including the administration of the Education Department by the Rev. Dr. Ryerson, down to 1876.

The United Empire Loyalists period takes us back to a period antecedent to that of their historical prominence as a factor in the events of the war of the American Revolution. In order, therefore, to estimate the value of the educational influence of those times on the future of the provinces in which the U. E. Loyalists settle, we must take a glance at the Colonial chapter in the History of American Education.

It is, therefore, interesting in taking note of our educational progress to give a brief glance at what was done by our fellow colonists at a corresponding early period in the history of the "old thirteen colonies," which formed the nucleus of the present American Confederation.

It has been the custom, probably unwittingly, but chiefly on the part of certain American writers, to exalt every good in their political and social condition, as of revolutionary origin, and reluctantly to admit that anything which was really excellent in both, in the early colonial times, was of British origin. One unacquainted with the processes and progress of civilization in America would, on consulting such writers, suppose that, Minerva-like, the young Republic had sprung from the head of Revolutionary Jove, fully equipped, if not fully armed for the battle of life, into the arena of the new world, and that this phenomenon happened just at the extinction of British power in the old colonies, and as the result of it. The policy of these writers has been either to ignorethe facts of history, or to keep entirely out of view the forces which had been operating in the British colonial mind, before and at the time of the Revolution. They have never stopped to enquire as to the source whence they derived their idea of political freedom, but have attributed it to their own sagacity, or regard it as the outgrowth of their own enlightened speculations and thinkings when emancipated from British control. There never was a greater mistake as to fact, or a greater wrong done to the memory and example of such noble English patriots as Hampden and his compeers, who laid down their lives for political principles which, considering the times in which they lived, were even more exalted and ennobling than those which were professed by the American revolutionists of 1776. In fact, no proper parallel can be instituted between them. John Hampden, in our humble judgment, was as far superior to John Hancock, "President of the Continental Congress," in the purity of his political motives and aspirations, as Cromwell was above Jack Cade.[14]However, it is not our purpose to discuss this question, but rather to vindicate the sagacity of the old colonists, who (at a time when loyalty was the rule, and not the exception), laid the foundation of those educational institutions, which to this day are the glory of the American Republic.

Nor were the British colonists into those early times peculiar in their zeal for the promotion of Education. The Dutch, Swedish, and Irish colonists who settled in Pennsylvania, New York, and Maryland did their part in his great work, and on the whole did it well, according to the spirit of the times.

In 1633, the first schoolmaster opened his school in the Dutch Colony of New Amsterdam; and in 1638, the "articles for the colonization and trade of New Netherlands," provided that, "each householder and inhabitant shall bear such tax and public charge as shall hereafter be considered proper for the maintenance of schoolmasters." General Eaton, the United States Commissioner of Education, in his valuable report for 1875, says:

"We find, in numerous instances, the civil authorities of these Dutch colonies acknowledging, (1) The duty of educating the young, (2) The care of the qualification of the teacher, (3) Provision for the payment of his services, and (4) The provision of the school-house. When, in 1653, municipal privileges were granted to the New Amsterdam [New York], the support of schools was included."

In 1642, the instruction sent to the Governor of New Sweden [Pennsylvania], was "to urge instruction and virtuous education of youth and children." In 1693-6, large numbers of primers, tracts and cathechisms were received from Sweden, for these schools on the Delaware. This was the educational state of the Swedish settlement in what was afterwards known as Pennsylvania, on the arrival of its noble English founder, William Penn. His views on education were well expressed in the following declaration:

"That which makes a good Constitution must keep it, viz.: men of wisdom and virtue; qualities which, because they descend not with worldly inheritance must be carefully propagated by virtuous education of youth, for which spare no cost; for by such parsimony, all that is loved is lost."

The first real systematic efforts to promote popular education began in New England, from thence it has spread in all directions. In 1635 the first school was opened at Boston, Massachusetts, and brother Philemon Purmount was appointed schoolmaster by the Town Committee. Thirty acres of land were given for his support. In 1642 the General Court, (or Legislature) passed a resolution enjoining on the local authorities:

"To keep a watchful eye on their brothers and neighbors, and above all things to see that there be no family in so barbarous a state, that the head thereof do not himself, or by the help of others, impart instruction to his children and servants, to enable them to read fluently the English language, and to acquire a knowledge of the penal laws, under a penalty of twenty shillings for such neglect."

Speaking on this subject, in his inaugural address in 1853, President Walker of Harvard University said:

What most distinguishes the early settlers of Massachusetts, is the interest and care they took in education, and especially in the institution of a system of common schools, to be sustained at the public charge.

Here they were first. In other things they thought wisely and acted nobly; but in this, and perhaps in this alone, they were original. Honor, immortal honor to the men, who, while still struggling for a scanty and bare subsistence, could yet find the means and the heart to do what had never been done or attempted before: placing the advantages of a competent instruction within the reach of all. By taking this course, what a noble confidence they manifested in the truth of their principles and in the justice of their measures.... But the founders and early settlers of Massachusetts did not limit their views of education to common schools. Many of their leading men had studied at the English Universities and were imbued with, or at least, could appreciate the highest scholarship of that day. They also knew, on general grounds and as practical men, that the public good requires the advancement, as well as the diffusion, of knowledge; in short, that both must go together; that the streams will soon cease, if the fountains fail.—Pages 33, 34.

To be brief on this point I may state that in 1847, the first legislative enactment in favor of schools was made in Massachusetts; and in 1670, the Governor of Connecticut declared that "one-fourth of her revenue was devoted to schools."

General Eaton in his comprehensive report of 1875 says:

"History, with hardly a dissenting voice, accords to the English Colonists of New England, the credit of having developed those forms of action, in reference to the education of children, which contained more than any other the distinct features of the systems adopted in this cuntry."

In the early colonial times, before the revolution, there were nine colleges established in seven out of the thirteen colonies.

These colleges, with the date of their foundation, are as follow:—

1. Harvard—Massachusetts, in16382. William and Mary—Virginia, in16933. Yale—Connecticut, in17004. Nassau Hall (now Princeton)—New Jersey, in17485. Kings (now Columbia)—New York, in17546. Brown—Rhode Island, in17657. Dartmouth—New Hampshire, in17708. Queen's (now Rutgers)—New Jersey, in17719. Hampden—Sydney, Virginia, in1775

The Legislature of Massachusetts, aided by the Rev. John Harvard, founded Harvard Congregational College, in 1638, and the colonists of Connecticut, established the Yale Congregation College in 1700.[15]

The New Hampshire colonists endowed the Congregational College at Dartmouth with 44,000 acres of land in 1770. The Episcopalians of the English colony of New York, aided by the Legislature, founded King's now Columbia College, in 1753. Indeed, so true were the English colonists to the educational instincts of the mother land, that when the Dutch Province of New Netherlands fell into their hands in 1644, the King'sCommissioners were instructed "to make due enquiry as to what progress hath been made towards ye foundaçon and maintenance of any College Schools for the educaçon of youth."—(Colonial History of N. Y., Vol. III. p. 53.)

The English Province,par excellence, of Virginia made various praiseworthy efforts to promote education. In 1619, soon after the settlement of Jamestown, Sir Edwin Sandys, President of the Virginia Company, had 10,000 acres of land set apart for the establishment of a University at Henrico for the colonists and Indians. The churches in England gave £1,500 sterling in the same year to aid in the education of the Indians. In 1621, 1,000 acres of land as an endowment, and £150 were granted to establish a school at Charles city. Other efforts were made in the same direction in 1660 and 1688. The colony also nobly determined to establish a University; and in 1692-3, the project was practically realized by the founding by the King and Queen, under royal charter, of the Church of England College at Williamsburgh, of William and Mary. To this College the King gave nearly £2,000, besides 20,000 acres of land, and one penny per pound on all the tobacco exported from Maryland. The Legislature also gave it in 1693, the duty on skins and furs exported, and on liquors imported.[16]The plans of the College were prepared by Sir Christopher Wren. Among the first donors to the College was the celebrated Robert Boyle.[17]Of all the colonial Colleges few exercised a greater educational influence among the leading men than did this royal college. Jefferson, Munroe, Marshall (afterwards Chief Justice of the United States), the two Randolphs, and Governor Tyler, of Virginia, received their education here.

The Irish Roman Catholic Province of Maryland was not, at least in purpose, much behind her English sister. In 1671 an Act was passed by one of the Houses of the Legislature for the establishment of a School or College, but owing to religious differences the other House did not concur. In 1692, the Legislature passed an Act for the encouragement of learning; and in 1696, King William's Free School, Annapolis (afterwards St. John's College), was established.

New Jersey was one of the colonies which early promoted higher education by founding the Presbyterian College at Princeton, under the name of Nassau Hall, in 1746, and the Dutch Reformed College at New Brunswick (N.J.), under the name of Queen's, now Rutger's College, in 1770.

The little colony of Rhode Island did not fail in its duty to higher education, for in 1764 it founded the Rhode Island College, now Brown University.

The Quaker colony of William Penn, following the example of the Anglicized Dutch colony of New York, established the University of Pennsylvania at Philadelphia—the metropolis of the colonies in 1755.

Of these nine ante-revolution Colleges, Harvard, Yale, Columbia and Princeton maintain an equally high reputation, while Brown University, the University of Pennsylvania, Rutgers, William and Mary and Dartmouth Colleges are more or less about the average standard of American Colleges.

Governor Oglethorpe, the founder of Georgia, was a graduate of Oxford. He, with other English University colonists, conceived the idea of a College for this, the then youngest of the English colonies. The project of his friend, the Irish Bishop Berkeley, of Cloyne, of founding a College in the Bermudas having failed, he secured £10,000 of the Bishop's funds to aid him in his settlement of the colony. The seed sown by Oglethorpe bore fruit; and while Georgia was still a colony, provision was made for a generous system of education.

D. C. Gilman, Esq. (President of the John Hopkins' University, Baltimore), in his admirable sketch of the growth of education in the United States during the lastcentury, pays a high tribute to the nine Colonial Colleges to which we have referred. He says:—

"These nine Colleges were nurseries of virtue, intelligence, liberality and patriotism, as well as learning; so that when the revolution began, scores of the most enlightened leaders, both in council and upon the field (on both sides) were found among their graduates. The influence of academic culture may be distinctly traced in the formation of the Constitution of the United States, and in the political writings of Adams, Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, Munroe and many other leading statesmen of the period. A careful student of American politics has remarked that nothing more strikingly indicates the education given at Cambridge than the masterly manner in which different problems of law and government were handled by those who had received their instruction only from that source."[18]

Prof. Charles Sprague Smith, A.M., (of Columbia College) in his essay onThe American University, read June, 1887, thus refers to the character of these colonial colleges:—

"In New England the higher system at general education, brought over from Old England, was divided here, as there, into the two studies of the College and the Grammar School; the latter being superceded in quite recent times by the so-called Academy. The curriculum of the American (or Colonial) College was, in the main, modelled upon that of the parent country, special consideration being given to theological science, etc."—Page 13.

A recent American publication on revolutionary topics, thus deals with the question of the superior education of the British colonists who formed the first American Congress:—

"An examination of the Continental Congress, composed as it was of leading men of all the colonies, affords some light upon the topic of popular education at that period. The Congress, whose sessions extended through some ten years, comprised in all some three hundred and fifty members, of whom one-third were graduates of colleges. A recent writer in one of the most intelligent and accurate of American journals has[19]taken pains to collect and array a paragraph of important statistics upon this subject, which we have taken leave to insert here, though without verification, that, however, being hardly necessary for our present purpose."There were in the Continental Congress during its existence, 350 members, of these 118, or about one-third of the whole, were graduates from Colleges. Of these, 28 were graduates from the College of New Jersey in Princeton, 23 from Harvard, 23 from Yale, 11 from William and Mary, 8 from the University of Pennsylvania, 4 from Columbia College, 1 from Brown University and 1 from Rutger's College, and 21 were educated in foreign Universities. These 118 graduates were distributed in the Colonies as follows:—New Hampshire had 4 College graduates among her delegates; Massachusetts had 17; Rhode Island had 4 graduates; Connecticut had 18 graduates; New York out of her large delegation had but 8 graduates; New Jersey had 11 graduates; Pennsylvania had 13 graduates; Delaware had 2 graduates; Maryland had 7 graduates; Virginia had 19 graduates; North Carolina had 4 graduates; South Carolina had 7 graduates; Georgia had 5 graduates. We find that Princeton had representatives from 10 of the colonies; Yale from 6; Harvard from 5; the University of Pennsylvania from 3; William and Mary from 2; and Columbia, Brown and Rutger's from 1 each. Fifty-six delegates signed the Declaration of Independence. Of these, 28, or just one-half, were College graduates."

"There were in the Continental Congress during its existence, 350 members, of these 118, or about one-third of the whole, were graduates from Colleges. Of these, 28 were graduates from the College of New Jersey in Princeton, 23 from Harvard, 23 from Yale, 11 from William and Mary, 8 from the University of Pennsylvania, 4 from Columbia College, 1 from Brown University and 1 from Rutger's College, and 21 were educated in foreign Universities. These 118 graduates were distributed in the Colonies as follows:—New Hampshire had 4 College graduates among her delegates; Massachusetts had 17; Rhode Island had 4 graduates; Connecticut had 18 graduates; New York out of her large delegation had but 8 graduates; New Jersey had 11 graduates; Pennsylvania had 13 graduates; Delaware had 2 graduates; Maryland had 7 graduates; Virginia had 19 graduates; North Carolina had 4 graduates; South Carolina had 7 graduates; Georgia had 5 graduates. We find that Princeton had representatives from 10 of the colonies; Yale from 6; Harvard from 5; the University of Pennsylvania from 3; William and Mary from 2; and Columbia, Brown and Rutger's from 1 each. Fifty-six delegates signed the Declaration of Independence. Of these, 28, or just one-half, were College graduates."

Incidentally, and as illustrative of the influence of college-bred men in the Legislature, Mr. Adams, speaking of the great liberality of South Carolina in founding a college in that State, says:—

"But no State ever made a better investment. During the first part of this century the general accomplishments and political ability of the statesmen of South Carolina were the just pride of the State, and would have been the pride of any State. In forming this high standard of intellectual and political power the influence of the College was immeasurable."—North American Review, January, 1876, pages 215, 216.

It is gratifying to us, British Colonists, and to the descendants of the U. E. Loyalists, thus to have from so important a source, an acknowledgment so candid and so honorable to men, many of whom were the founders of Ontario and the Maritime Provinces of the Dominion. It is an historical fact of equal significance, and an element of social and political strength to us in these British provinces, to know that it was to the thoroughness and breadth of culture which the American "Revolutionary heroes" received in early days in British colonial institutions which fitted them afterwards to take so prominent and effective an intellectual part in the great struggle which took place when they were in the prime of manhood. Another gratifying reflection arises out ofthe fact that the high place which the United States has taken in later years as a great educating nation is due to her following out the traditional policy of the Colonists of ante-revolution times.

This fact is clearly brought out by Mr. Gilman in theNorth American Reviewfor January, 1876. We only quote the following remarks on this point, he says:—

"When the new constitution of Massachusetts was adopted in 1780 public education received full recognition. An article (the spirit of which was fully in accordance with the legislation of 1647 [more than 200 years before]) was adopted, andstill remains the fundamental law of the State.... The constitution of New Hampshire, as amended in 1784, transcribes very nearly the same words of that section of the constitution of Massachusetts already quoted," etc.—Pages 198, 199.

Thus Andrew Ten-Brook, Esq., in hisAmerican State Universities, says:—

"The introduction of an educational system into the New England Colonies may be deemed substantially contemporaneous with their settlement. It was of such a character, too, and so energetically prosecuted, that education suffered little if any deterioration in passing from Old to New England. It was even more on this side than the other side of the ocean.... Thus Common School instruction at least was provided for all. Higher schools, too, had an early beginning. What afterwards was Harvard College was established but six years after the settlement of Boston.... Every town [township] of fifty families was obliged to support a school, and the same general state of facts existed throughout New England. Classical schools followed in regular succession. These were modelled after the Grammar Schools of England, in which the founders of the Colleges had themselves received their first classical training.... As early as 1701, the law of Connecticut required every parent to see that he had no child or apprentice in his household who could not read the Word of God, and 'the good laws of the colony.' The system embraced a High School in every town [township] of seventy families, a Grammar School in the four chief county towns to fit pupils for college, and a College to which the general court [Legislature] made an annual appropriation of £120."—Pages 1-3.

Mr. Ten-Brook, speaking of these New England schools, which were afterwards transplanted to each of Western States, says:—

"They were the elements of that noble system out of which has grown the present one, by the natural laws of development," etc.—Page 18.

Mr. C. K. Adams, in his interesting paper on State Universities in theNorth American Reviewfor October, 1875, in speaking of the educational policy of the colonies, "pursued up to the time of the Revolution, says:—

"In general terms it may be stated that, through all the dark periods of our Colonial history, the encouragement of higher education was regarded as one of the great interests of the State. It was no doctrine of the Fathers that higher education was less entitled to the fostering care of the commonwealth than was the education offered by the Common Schools."—Page 374.

The "Free School" idea, of which we hear so much as the outgrowth of "modern American civilization and enlightenment," was due to Colonial thought and foresight. It was first broached by Jefferson, three or four years before the treaty with Great Britain was signed by which the United States became a nation. His plan was so comprehensive that we reproduce it here. In a letter to the veteran philosopher, Dr. Priestley, he thus unfolds it:—

"I drew a bill for our [Virginia] Legislature, which proposed to lay off every county into hundreds, or townships, of five or six miles square. In the centre of each of them was to be a free English School [to be supported, as his bill provided, "by taxation according to property."]

The whole Commonwealth was further laid off into ten districts, in each of which was to be a college for teaching the languages, geography, surveying, and other useful things of that grade, and then a single University for the sciences. It was received with enthusiasm (he goes on to say), but as he had proposed to make the Episcopal College of William and Mary the University, "the dissenters after a while began to apprehend some secret design," etc.—Ten-Brook's American State Universities, pages 9, 10.

A writer in theNorth American Reviewfor October, 1875, in referring to Jefferson's scheme, says:—

"The view entertained by Jefferson was by no means exceptional. Indeed, a similar spirit had pervaded the whole history of our Colonial life."—Page 379.

Thus this comprehensive scheme of public instruction for Virginia unfortunately failed; and that noble "Old Dominion" is in consequence to-day immeasurably behind even the youngest of her then New England contemporaries in the matter of public education.

As to the abiding influence of the old Colonial ideas in regard to higher education, we quote the following additional remarks from Mr. Gilman, in theNorth American Review, he says:—

"In reviewing the history of the century, it is easy to see how the colonial notions of college organization have affected ... the higher education of the country, even down to our own times. The graduates of the older colleges have migrated to the Western States, and have transplanted with them the college germs ... and every Western State can bear witness to the zeal for learning which has been manifested within its borders by enthusiastic teachers from the East."—Page 217.

Mr. Ten-Brook, in hisAmerican State Universities, also says:—

"The New England colonists left the mother country in quest of greater religious freedom. Their religious system was put first, and carried with it a school system as perfect in organization, and administered with equal vigor. This formed an active leaven, which, at a later day, was to spread to other parts.... Everywhere there was a considerable infusion of men who had received in the European universities a liberal culture, which they desired to reproduce on those shores. Early action was full of promise. Probably, at a period from just before the Revolution to the end of it, the average position of the colonies in regard to lighter education relatively as to age, and to the population and wealth, was quite as good as it is at the present time."—Pages 16, 17.

This opinion of the writer is a virtual admission that in reality higher education in the United States has not advanced in quality, though it has in quantity. To be in 1876 merely where education was "relatively" in 1776, is no advance at all, but rather retrogression. The cause of this declension, the writer thus incidentally admits:—

"Most of the colonies established, or aided, the (ante-revolution colleges named). The principle of the State support to higher learning was not merely accepted, but was the prevalent one."—Page 17.

Mr. Gilman, President of the Johns Hopkins' University, touching on the same point, says:—

"There was a civil as well as an ecclesiastical element in most of these foundations. Harvard and Yale were chartered, and, to some extent, controlled by colonial government of Massachusetts and Connecticut, and were for a long time nurtured by appropriations from the public chest....—Page 215."These institutions were colleges of an English parentage and model, not Scotch nor continental universities.... They were disciplinary in their aim, and had more regard for the general culture of large numbers, than for the advanced and special instruction of the chosen few. They were also, to a considerable extent, ecclesiastical foundations—finding the churches and ministers their constant, and sometimes their only efficient supporters. Harvard, Yale and Dartmouth were controlled by the Congregationalists; Princeton was founded by the Presbyterians; and New Brunswick, N.J. (Queen's, now Rutgers) by the Dutch Reformed; William and Mary was emphatically a child of the Church of England; and King's College (now Brown University) was under the patronage of the Baptists...."The declaration of the original supporters of these colleges indicate a desire to train up young men for service of the State, not less distinctly and emphatically than to desire to provide an educated ministry. Individual aid was also expected and invited, and the names of Harvard and Yale perpetuate the remembrance of such generous gifts."

"These institutions were colleges of an English parentage and model, not Scotch nor continental universities.... They were disciplinary in their aim, and had more regard for the general culture of large numbers, than for the advanced and special instruction of the chosen few. They were also, to a considerable extent, ecclesiastical foundations—finding the churches and ministers their constant, and sometimes their only efficient supporters. Harvard, Yale and Dartmouth were controlled by the Congregationalists; Princeton was founded by the Presbyterians; and New Brunswick, N.J. (Queen's, now Rutgers) by the Dutch Reformed; William and Mary was emphatically a child of the Church of England; and King's College (now Brown University) was under the patronage of the Baptists....

"The declaration of the original supporters of these colleges indicate a desire to train up young men for service of the State, not less distinctly and emphatically than to desire to provide an educated ministry. Individual aid was also expected and invited, and the names of Harvard and Yale perpetuate the remembrance of such generous gifts."

Then follows a eulogy upon these colonial colleges, and a tribute to the intellectual vitality of their teaching, as shown in the mental equipment and breadth of culture exhibited by men who took part in the perilous and stormy times of the American revolution. To this we have already referred. Mr. Gilman, in following up his remarks in the extract which we have just given, says:—

"Hence these nine colleges were nurseries of virtue, intelligence, liberality and patriotism, as well as of learning; so that when the revolution began, scores of enlightened leaders, both in council and in the field (and on both sides), were found among their graduates. The influence of academic culture may be distinctly traced in the formation of the Constitution of the United States, and in the political writings of Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Munroe, and many other leading statesman of the period. A careful student of American politics has remarked that nothing more strikingly indicates the influence of the education given at Harvard, 'than the masterly manner in which difficult problems of law and government were handled by those who had received their instruction only from that source.'"—Pages 215, 216.

We might pursue this branch of our subject further, were it desirable. But that is not necessary. Our object was to show that to British Colonial foresight, zeal, and self-sacrifice, was due, not only the foundation of the best colleges and universities on the continent, but the introduction and diffusion of the principle of "free and universal education for the masses of the people." This we have done on the authority of American writers themselves. We might multiply examples on the subject; but the fact is alreadysufficiently established. We should rather seek to draw lessons of instruction from the noble example of the devotion to education on the part of our British colonial progenitors, whose descendants have shed such a lustre of heroic self-sacrifice and patriotism on the history and exploits of the United Empire Loyalists of the thirteen colonies. To the Americans they have left a rich legacy from the colonial times in such universities as Harvard, Yale, Columbia and Princeton—of which the descendants of the expatriated Loyalists, no less than those of the victorious revolutionists, are so justly proud. Let us, as worthy representatives of these clear-headed and far-seeing Loyalists, bequeath to our children as noble a heritage as the fathers of the founders of this Province did to New England, and indeed to the whole Republic.

Trained in such an educational school, and animated with the educational zeal of these old colonial times, the "United Empire Loyalists" brought with them into Canada their love for education and their devotion to the sovereign.

In order to keep up the historical sequence of this Retrospect, I shall now refer to the early beginning of Educational life in Upper Canada, and then take up the thread of the narrative at the point where the educational forces—afterwards directed by the Rev. Dr. Strachan and the Rev. Dr. Ryerson—took practical form and shape. (See page 59.)

Lieutenant-General J. Graves Simcoe, the first Governor of Upper Canada, arrived here in 1792. He was a man of comprehensive views and noble impulses in regard to university education. He was educated at Eton College and partly at Merton College, Oxford, but entered the army before taking his degree. He served with distinction under Wolfe at Quebec, and during the American revolutionary war.

In April, 1795, Governor Simcoe addressed a letter to the Protestant Episcopal Bishop of Quebec.[20]In that letter Governor Simcoe uses the following striking language in describing the social condition of the people in the rural parts of Upper Canada, and the utter absence of schools and churches, as contrasted with their existence on the United States side of the lines. He said:—

"There was nothing, in my late progress, that has given my equal uneasiness with the general application of all ranks of the most loyal inhabitants of the Province, that I would obtain for them churches and ministers. They say that the rising generation (of the U. E. Loyalist settlers) is rapidly returning into barbarism. They state that the Sabbath, so wisely set apart for devotion, is literally unknown to their children, who are busily employed in searching for amusements in which they may consume the day. And it is of serious consideration that on the approach of the settlements of the United States, particularly on the St. Lawrence frontier, these people, who, by experience, have found that schools and churches are essential to their rapid establishment (as a nation), may probably allure many of our most respectable settlers to emigrate to them, while in this respect we suffer a disgraceful deficiency."

The remedy which Governor Simcoe suggested for the state of things which he so graphically described is thus set forth in the same letter to the Bishop of Quebec. It was, as will be seen, entirely general in its character:—

"Nothing has happened since I left England, in the least, to invalidate, to my own conception, the policy of the measure I then proposed. And as far as may be now in the power of His Majesty's ministers, I most earnestly hope that what remains to be effected—that is by giving the means of proper education in this Province, both in its rudiments and in its completion, that from ourselves we may raise up a loyal, and, in due progress, a learned clergy."

A few particulars as to the kind of schools which existed in Upper Canada before and after the date of this letter may be interesting. For instance, the first school opened (so far as I have been able to learn) was by the Rev. Dr. John Stuart, a ProtestantEpiscopal clergyman, and a United Empire Loyalist, who had been chaplain to the provincial volunteers, and came into Upper Canada with them as a refugee.[21]

In the year 1785 Dr. Stuart opened a select classical school at Cataraqui, (Kingston); and a Mr. Donovan taught the Garrison school there. In 1786, Mr. J. Clarke taught a school in Frederickburg, and Mr. Smith one in Ernestown. In 1789, Mr Lyons kept school in Adolphustown. In the same year, Deacon Trayes, a Baptist, opened one at Port Rowan. In 1792, Rev. Mr. Addison, an Episcopalian, opened a school at Newark (Niagara), then the seat of government. In 1794, the Rev. Mr. Burns, a Presbyterian, (father of the late Judge Burns) opened a school at the same place; and in 1796, Mr. Richard Cockrel opened an evening school in Newark; Mr. Cockrel shortly afterwards transferred his school to the Rev. Mr. Arthur and removed to Ancaster, where he opened another school. A notice in theYork Gazettein 1796 stated that "as schools were now opened, ignorance would be no longer tolerated." In 1797, Mr. James Blayney opened a school at Niagara. In 1798, Mr. Wm. Cooper opened a school in George St., little York, (Toronto). In 1800, the late Bishop Strachan opened a private school at Kingston, and in 1804, one at Cornwall. In 1802, Mr. and Mrs. Tyler opened a school near Niagara; and in the same year, Dr. Baldwin, (father of the late Hon. Robert Baldwin) opened a classical school at York, and in 1803, the first school in Prince Edward district was opened at "High Shore," Sophiasburgh; another at "Grassy Point," was taught by John James. Rev. Wm. Wright, (Presbyterian) kept the first school at Meyer's Creek, (Belleville) in 1805. He was followed by Mr. Leslie. In that year, Rev. Mr. Strachan held the first public examination of his school at Cornwall.

Back to Index Next