Faithful Intellect: Samuel S. Nelles and Victoria University 9780773572171

Citation preview

FAITHFUL INTELLECT

MCGILL-QUEEN S STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF RELIGION

Volumes in this series have been supported by the Jackman Foundation of Toronto. SERIES TWO In memory of George Rawlyk Donald Harman Akenson, Editor i Marguerite Bourgeoys and Montreal, 1640—1665 Patricia Simpson 2, Aspects of the Canadian Evangelical Experience G.A. Rawlyk, editor 3 Infinity, Faith, and Time Christian Humanism and Renaissance Literature John Spencer Hill 4 The Contribution of Presbyterianism to the Maritime provinces of Canada Charles H.H. Scobie and G.A. Rawlyk, editors 5 Labour, Love, and Prayer Female Piety in Ulster Religious Literature, 1850-1914 Andrea Ebel Brozyna 6 The Waning of the Green Catholics, the Irish, and Identity in Toronto, 1887-192.2 Mark G. McGowan 7 Religion and Nationality in Western Ukraine The Greek Catholic Church and the Ruthenian National Movement in Galicia, 1867-1900 John-Paul Himka 8 Good Citizens British Missionaries and Imperial States, 1870-1918 James G. Greenlee and Charles M. Johnson, editors 9 The Theology of the Oral Torah Revealing the Justice of God Jacob Neusner

10 Gentle Eminence A Life of George Bernard Cardinal Flahiff P. Wallace Platt 11 Culture, Religion, and Demographic Behaviour Catholics and Lutherans in Alsace, 1750-1870 Kevin McQuillan 12, Between Damnation and Starvation Priests and Merchants in Newfoundland Politics, 1745-1855 John P. Greene 13 Martin Luther, German Saviour German Evangelical Theological Factions and the Interpretation of Luther, 1917-1933 James M. Stayer 14 Modernity and the Dilemma of North American Anglican Identities, 1880-1950 William H. Katerberg 15 The Methodist Church on the Prairies, 1896-1914 George Emery 16 Christian Attitudes Towards the State of Israel Paul Charles Merkley 17 A Social History of the Cloister Daily Life in the Teaching Monasteries of the Old Regime Elizabeth Rapley 18 Households of Faith Family, Gender, and Community in Canada, 1760-1969 Nancy Christie, editor

19 Blood Ground Colonialism, Missions, and the Contest for Christianity in the Cape Colony and Britain, 1799-1853 Elizabeth Elbourne zo A History of Canadian Catholics Gallicanism, Romanism, and Canadianism Terence J. Fay zi The View from Rome Archbishop Stagni's 1915 Reports on the Ontario Bilingual Schools Question John Zucchi, translator and editor zz The Founding Moment Church, Society, and the Construction of Trinity College William Westfall Z3 The Holocaust, Israel, and Canadian Protestant Churches Haim Genizi Z4 Governing Charities Church and State in Toronto's Catholic Archdiocese, 1850-1950 Paula Maurutto

z 5 Anglicans and the Atlantic World High Churchmen, Evangelicals, and the Quebec Connection Richard W. Vaudry 2.6 Evangelicals and the Continental Divide: The Conservative Protestant Subculture in Canada and the United States Sam Reimer 2.j Christians in a Secular World The Canadian Experience Kurt Bowen z8 Anatomy of a Seance A History of Spirit Communication in Central Canada Stan McMullin Z9 With Skilful Hand The Story of King David David T. Barnard 30 Faithful Intellect Samuel S. Nelles and Victoria University Neil Semple

SERIES ONE G.A. Rawlyk, Editor 1 Small Differences Irish Catholics and Irish Protestants, 1815-1922 An International Perspective Donald Harman Akenson

2 Two Worlds The Protestant Culture of NineteenthCentury Ontario William Westfall 3 An Evangelical Mind Nathanael Burwash and the Methodist Tradition in Canada, 1839-1918 Marguerite Van Die

4 The Devotes Women and Church in Seventeenth-Century France Elizabeth Rapley 5 The Evangelical Century College and Creed in English Canada from the Great Revival to the Great Depression Michael Gauvreau 6 The German Peasants' War and Anabaptist Community of Goods James M. Stayer 7 A World Mission Canadian Protestantism and the Quest for a New International Order, 1918-1939 Robert Wright

8 Serving the Present Age Revivalism, Progressivism, and the Methodist Tradition in Canada Phyllis D. Airhart

18 Pilgrims in Lotus Land Conservative Protestantism in British Columbia, 1917-1981 Robert K. Burkinshaw

9 A Sensitive Independence Canadian Methodist Women Missionaries in Canada and the Orient, 1881-192,5 Rosemary R. Gagan

19 Through Sunshine and Shadow The Woman's Christian Temperance Union, Evangelicalism, and Reform in Ontario, 1874-1930 Sharon Cook

10 God's Peoples Covenant and Land in South Africa, Israel, and Ulster Donald Hafman Akenson

2,0 Church, College, and Clergy A History of Theological Education at Knox College, Toronto, 1844-1994 Brian J. Fraser

11 Creed and Culture The Place of English-Speaking Catholics in Canadian Society, 1750-1930 Terrence Murphy and Gerald Stortz, editors

21 The Lord's Dominion The History of Canadian Methodism Neil Semple

12. Piety and Nationalism Lay Voluntary Associations and the Creation of an Irish-Catholic Community in Toronto, 1850-1895 Brian P. Clarke

2.2 A Full-Orbed Christianity The Protestant Churches and Social Welfare in Canada, 1900-1940 Nancy Christie and Michael Gauvreau 23 Evangelism and Apostasy The Evolution and Impact of Evangelicals in Modern Mexico Kurt Bowen

13 Amazing Grace Studies in Evangelicalism in Australia, Britain, Canada, and the United States George Rawlyk and Mark A. Noll, editors

24 The Chignecto Covenanters A Regional History of Reformed Presbyterianism in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, 1827-1905 Eldon Hay

14 Children of Peace W. John Mclntyre

25 Methodists and Women's Education in Ontario, 1836-1925 Johanne M. Selles

15 A Solitary Pillar Montreal's Anglican Church and the Quiet Revolution Joan Marshall

26 Puritanism and Historical Controversy William Lamont

16 Padres in No Man's Land Canadian Chaplains and the Great War Duff Crerar 17 Christian Ethics and Political Economy in North America A Critical Analysis of U.S. and Canadian Approaches P. Travis Kroeker

Faithful Intellect Samuel S. Nelles and Victoria University NEIL SEMPLE

McGill-Queen's University Press Montreal & Kingston • London • Ithaca

© McGill-Queen's University Press 2.005 ISBN 0-7735-2759-1

Legal deposit first quarter 2005 Bibliotheque nationale du Quebec Printed in Canada on acid-free paper that is 100% ancient forest free (100% post-consumer recycled), processed chlorine free This book has been published with the help of a grant from the Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences, through the Aid to Scholarly Publications Programme, using funds provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. McGill-Queen's University Press acknowledges the support of the Canada Council for the Arts for our publishing program. We also acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Book Publishing Industry Development Program (BPIDP) for our publishing activities.

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Semple, Neil, 1949Faithful intellect: Samuel S. Nelles and Victoria University / Neil Semple. (McGill-Queen's studies in the history of religion; 30) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-7735-2759-!

i. Nelles, S.S. (Samuel Sobieski), 1823-1887. 2. Victoria University (Cobourg, Ont.) - History. 3. Education, Higher - Ontario - History - i9th century. 4. Victoria University (Cobourg, Ont.) - Presidents - Biography. 5. College presidents - Ontario - Cobourg - Biography. 6. Methodists - Ontario - Biography. 7. Cobourg (Ont.) Biography. I. Title. II. Series. LE3.T6.17144

2004

378.7i3'57'o92

02004-903563-0

This book was typeset by True to Type in 10/12 Sabon

To Mrs Laura A. (Clark) Semple (1914- ) A Pillar of Wisdom and Strength

This page intentionally left blank

Contents

Introduction

xi

Acknowledgments 1 Early Life

xix

3

2 Student Days

27

3 The Young Scholar-Preacher 4 The New Principal

85

5 Addressing the People 6 The Academic

58

114

144

7 The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith 8 Family and University Life 9 The University Question Epilogue

271

Notes

281

Index

365

204 237

175

This page intentionally left blank

Introduction

Key elements in history - whether mechanical technology, intellectual reasoning, or political, economic, and social discrimination - constantly modify culture. At the same time, one of the standard features of historical writing is that every age can be described as a culmination of the past or as a commencement of a new epoch. Such descriptions are almost inherent in the process by which historians organize and express their thoughts. It is not surprising, therefore, that in Canada the period from the 18505 to the i88os has been rightly characterized as an era of significant transition. New technology helped to define and connect the components of the Canadian nation, scientific discoveries and intellectual probing reshaped humanity's comprehension of the world, and timely systems of religion and education attempted to make sense of the available new knowledge and wisely and faithfully establish a broad and fertile social order. Still, this period built upon some twenty years of intense religious and political turmoil. The main purpose of this book is to increase our understanding of the complex intellectual and religious culture of English Canada during the half-century from the 18308 to the i88os through an appreciation of the major transformations occurring within Methodist higher education. This aim can perhaps best be achieved by focusing on the activities of Samuel Sobieski Nelles, who served as head of the Methodist Church's Victoria University from 1850 to 1887. A study of his life and career facilitates the analysis of the evolution of Christian spirituality, philosophical and scientific thought, pedagogical innovation, and institutional expansion and reorganization, as well as their placement within the shifting context of Old Ontario. Nelles manifested the essential characteristics of these movements through his positions as student, teacher, administrator, and promoter of education.

xii

Introduction

Samuel Nelles was not only an imaginative and lively witness to the metamorphosis going on around him; he was an active participant indeed, a major agent of change in Canadian society. The study of his life is especially valuable since he represented the transition from the conservative old guard to the liberal elements in church, school, and the political arena, often mingling apparently contradictory beliefs within his person. Michael Gauvreau, in The Evangelical Century: College and Creed in English Canada, accurately describes Nelles as one of the major figures in the cultural world of English Canada.1 Furthermore, Nelles was inherently level-headed and amusing, a man of intriguing intellect who faithfully attempted to serve his students, his university, his church, and his God. It is often troublesome for the present skeptical generation, with its secular biases, to appreciate the significance of a profound faith in God. Yet during the nineteenth century, no-one could conceive of a more critical foundation for happiness or advancement. Nelles never subscribed to the profane notion that modern thought and scientific inquiry were part of the "inevitable movement toward the abandonment of religious beliefs by thinking people in the modern age as they progressed toward a more credible worldview."2- He spent his entire life striving for increased faith; an optimistic belief was the core of his being. It was both intense and practical, placing the individual at the heart of a regenerating, moral society. Moreover, he never apologized for strengthening the Christian elements in society. Only a Christian was guaranteed earthly safety, real happiness, and the preservation of the soul after corporeal death. Nelles's special service involved spreading a universal expectation of achieving a mature faith and the hope of salvation to his students, and through them to the peoples of the world. Education entailed the lifelong pursuit of wisdom, and wisdom was grounded in truth. Both centred on the person of Jesus Christ and the benevolence of God through Christ the Saviour. A Christian education was founded on the assurance that all knowledge formed a unified truth in God. God was the ultimate scholar and teacher: "It is He who establishes all truth; it is He who wills that men shall know the truth; He gives us curious and reflective minds to seek that truth and grasp it and use it; He even gives us the supreme privilege of helping Him in partnership both to teach and to learn."3 Secular motives for education were secondary. At the time of Samuel's birth, Upper Canadians were reaffirming their loyalty to traditional ideals and imperial institutions while also satisfying their legitimate demand for justice in a diverse and maturing political community. Many deemed that the province must remain a citadel of respectable order and conservative British values amidst the

Introduction

xiii

chaos of the alien American wilderness.4 Higher education was useful, if not essential, in conferring authority on the sons of the local Anglican elites and thereby helping to create new generations of gentlemen who deserved to rule because of both their status and their training. They would continue to stand on guard against perverse American influences and defend the superior English Canadian social and political systems.5 However, even greater numbers of Upper Canadians could never reconcile such a social system or its philosophical undercurrents with the reality of the province. The prevailing system failed to treat the heterogeneous population logically or justly and to take into account the great commercial and political changes occurring in North America and Britain. Tory notions of order, hierarchy, and respect were increasingly out of place in Canada and were being energetically assailed by loyal liberal challengers.6 In part because of the economic and social diversity exemplified by his own extended family, Samuel Nelles could appreciate the values inherent in both traditions. Yet one of the defining principles of nineteenth-century liberalism, the separation of church and state, denied the government's legitimate obligation to provide a complete education within a moral and spiritual environment. Nelles championed a progressive liberal-conservatism that encouraged responsible individual liberty but rejected unfettered license. The welfare of society still required a responsible and moral government. In particular, he demanded an appropriately active role for the state in developing a system of universities that remained grounded in Christian virtues and was directed by Christian institutions. Nelles grew up in a tolerant and loving farm family where faith in God and adherence to the principles of evangelical religion established the parameters of behaviour. The constant quest for conversion - that is, a rebirth in Christ - and for entire sanctification complete holiness or untainted love of God and mankind while here on Earth - defined the nature of duty for the young follower of John Wesley. While not wealthy, Samuel's immediate family had by the late 18308 moved beyond the pioneer stage in the rural economy, and his extended family was well placed to take advantage of the technological innovations and commercial advances in the province. Although education was costly, a serious drain on family resources, his parents recognized that it was essential for real advancement. The best academic training was provided by private academies in Upper Canada and the northern United States. Samuel therefore became a product of the mid-nineteenth-century educational environment of these academies.7 Later he followed the exceptional course of obtaining a university degree. He eventually trained to

xiv

Introduction

become a Wesleyan Methodist preacher, but found the true fulfillment of this calling as a professor and administrator at Victoria University. Nelles began his career trusting in the traditional values and scriptural assurance so vital to effective ministerial service. However, influenced by the volatile conditions of his age and enlightened by new philosophical, theological, and scientific awareness, he modernized and liberalized both his preaching and his teaching and thereby prepared generations of scholars to face the difficult challenges of the late Victorian world.8 Nelles was essentially a moral philosopher and ethicist who tried to instill in his students a vital piety and powerful moral sense. At the same time, he helped set in motion many of the key changes in scientific and theological education in Canada, prepared his church and community for a "social gospel" and liberal theology, and stilled fears over the apparent ravages that Darwinianism might inflict on the faith and on social stability. He believed in a world where calm experimentation and unfettered inquiry guided by faith in God would solve the great riddles facing mankind. As a young man, he dreamed of becoming an adventurer, and he was adventurous, at least intellectually: tolerant of contrary or innovative opinions and never hesitant to change his mind in light of superior information or analysis. Nonetheless, Nelles preserved a natural attachment to the simpler age that Canadians were rapidly discarding. He disliked, even feared, the ultimate consequences of revolution, and was conservative enough to feel that not all change was for the best. Throughout his life he searched for spiritual absolutes and fixed standards of faith while pursuing decent answers to society's yearnings. He desperately desired the end of sinfulness and suffering in the world. A study of Samuel Nelles must of course deal extensively with his role in Victoria University. This book is therefore both a biography of the man and a history of his university during much of the nineteenth century; the story of Nelles's life and the evolution of the university whose saviour he was are inextricably intertwined. It is impossible to comprehend one without the other. Victoria University is perhaps undervalued by today's students and academics because it gave up its independence to federate with the University of Toronto. Yet it was a vital and innovative institution throughout the nineteenth century, rivaling and surpassing the University of Toronto in a myriad of fields.9 Dating the latter's antiquity to 1827 and giving it preeminence among nineteenth-century educational institutions constitutes a myth bearing little resemblance to reality.10 Nelles supported federation only because he believed it would promote a superior system of higher education that would benefit both his students and Canada's national aspirations.

Introduction

xv

Unfortunately, his abhorrence of the actual terms of federation deeply scarred his final years. Throughout Canadian history, universities have housed a vital spirituality and represented a profound source of moral imperative. Even in apparently secular or so-called godless institutions higher education has always rested on a foundation of spiritual and moral growth and ethical living. To Nelles, progress demanded a creative imagination and a critical intellect welded together by a faithful and practical Christian discipline. While education forged the powerful bonds that held a free society together, allowing humanity as a whole to advance confidently into the future, it must never chain the imagination or fetter the spirit. Experimentation in education was a hallmark of the last half of the nineteenth century. For many people, education became a kind of fervent religion of its own, empowering and helping to save the world.11 This service, however, could best proceed when right principles guided and disciplined the quest for knowledge. This volume follows essentially a chronological order, but of necessity shifts at times to a thematic approach to analyse specific topics more fully. The first three chapters assess Nelles's family life, early education, and theological training and career as a Wesley an Methodist1 z itinerant. Samuel was related to members of prominent tory elites as well as to progressive liberal professionals, all of them influential in farming, business, the professions, and politics in southwestern Ontario. He held a progressive view of society but was not afraid of conservative ideologies. Similarly, his schooling in the United States allowed him to appreciate the strengths of the new republic while ingraining in him the benefits of the British political and social systems. Nelles's education was influenced as much by the social and religious turmoil he witnessed and the political extremism engrossing Canadian society as by the formal school-based training he received. His spiritual outlook was particularly moulded by both the positive and negative revivalist ambitions of the 18308 and 18405, as well as by the doctrinal and practical divisions among ecclesiastical institutions. His romantic and idealistic predispositions were expanded by his broad educational experiences. For instance, the Transcendental, naturalistic, and religious poets and scholars deeply affected his youthful ambitions although later his mature mentality would never accept their extreme expressions in pantheism and secularism. Such influences charged his quest for spiritual and moral growth, stimulated his broad tolerance and his belief in progress, and structured his defiant sense of faithful duty. In retrospect, Nelles's early training even suggested that he had followed a divinely inspired path of service. Still, his professional life was

xvi

Introduction

an unrelenting struggle that tested his determination and responsibility. He was forced not only to challenge his own church to face the educational needs of its laity and clergy but also to fight overwhelming religious and political opposition and bigotry to foster Victoria University's survival and growth. All the while, he attempted to reform the pedagogy in universities, to meaningfully instruct the rising class of professionals, especially the Protestant clergy, and to advance the cause of scientific, rational study in a tolerant, efficient, progressive university system. Nelles took a leadership role in some of the most important debates facing the Christian churches, the scientific community, and Canadian society. He successfully prevented the challenges unleashed by Darwinian scholars and their social science associates, with their skepticism and agnosticism, from weakening the harmony and resolve of his students or his church. He improved the knowledge and refined the character of the confident generations of students dealing with the incredible transformations in Canadian culture, instructing them through his broad scholarship and his personal example to seek truth and wisdom. Nelles acted as loving husband and father in a large family while overseeing the maturing of the academic and social milieu at Victoria University. He created an environment where men and, later, women could participate as active members of a scholarly community with a clear and substantial identity and mission. On a broader level, he augmented the campaigns for reform in the public school system and demanded tolerance and reason in the debates over moral instruction and separate schools. As a senior member of the Methodist clergy and one of its more impressive preachers, he also represented his church before the Canadian public and before other national and international institutions, always attempting to advance his progressive goals to as broad an audience as possible. Beyond all these responsibilities, Nelles was constantly obliged to resolve the problems associated with the financial needs of Victoria University. He also strove tirelessly to create a viable system of higher education. He believed that just and honourable government leadership would enable both these priorities to be met. As one of the most constant promoters of university cooperation and consolidation to the end of advancing the nation, he opposed the betrayal, shortsighted policies, and lack of financial support for denominational higher education within or outside of a comprehensive federation scheme. Late in life, he mourned deeply the destructive innovations he himself had initiated. Despite his disillusionment, he had in fact both saved Victoria University in its most crucial hour and created one of the most impressive institutions of higher learning in the country. His final unselfish

Introduction

xvii

acts initiated the most dramatic institutional developments in the history of the University of Toronto and provincial higher education as a whole. Nelles would have regarded it as equally important that he helped prepare his university and Methodism in general to meet the demands of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. This book assumes that the reader possesses a fair level of knowledge about nineteenth-century English Canada, including the major political and social developments within Canadian Protestantism, to which it refers as they relate to Samuel Nelles or Victoria University. It relies most heavily on collections of personal papers, official reports, newspaper accounts, and other primary sources. The more avid reader can find further background information on the Methodist experience in Neil Semple, The Lord's Dominion: The History of Canadian Methodism. Two essential starting points are Brian McKillop's A Disciplined Intelligence: Critical Inquiry and Canadian Thought in the Victorian Era and his outstanding analysis of the ideas guiding nineteenth- and twentieth-century Ontario university education, Matters of Mind: The University in Ontario, 175* 1-15151.13 Although few sources have dealt specifically with Samuel Nelles himself, a myriad of Canadian, American, and British inquiries elaborate several of the themes in the present study. Moreover, the long career of Egerton Ryerson provides a natural setting in which to place Nelles. Understanding his dominance of education in Ontario will allow the reader to appreciate more fully the contributions of Samuel Nelles within the changing political and social context. Ryerson's influence is most fully demonstrated in the 2,8volume oeuvre of Nelles's best friend, George Hodgins's The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, as well as in Ryerson's own The Story of My Life. Hodgins used Ryerson as the prism through which to evaluate Ontario education and politics. In addition, Nathanael Burwash, The History of Victoria College and Charles Bruce Sissons, A History of Victoria University introduce important components of Nelles's labours at Victoria.14 Robert Gidney and W.P.J. Millar's Professional Gentlemen: The Professions in NineteenthCentury Ontario offers valuable insights into critical strategies behind higher education. William Westfall's assessment of intellectual and social developments during Nelles's life, Two Worlds: The Protestant Culture of Nineteenth-Century Ontario, while it does not specifically deal with universities or their leaders, conveys a deep comprehension of the strategic transitions in the province's culture. Michael Gauvreau, in The Evangelical Century and David Marshall, in Secularizing the Faith: Canadian Protestant Clergy and the Crisis of Belief, 1850-1940

xviii

Introduction

explore many of the themes affecting evangelical religion and assess the nature of Protestant faith. Further, they supply critical evaluations of the power of secular forces to alter, even overcome, the spirituality and morality inherent in the dominant religious institutions. Marguerite Van Die's intriguing study of the thought of Nathanael Burwash, An Evangelical Mind: Nathanael Burwash and the Methodist Tradition in Canada, 1839-1918, provides an analytical parallel to Nelles's own beliefs and priorities.15 Finally, other histories focusing on the evolution of particular universities form a core of instruction for the reader of university affairs in the province.16 Despite his numerous vital contributions to the educational and religious life of Ontario, Samuel Nelles was not interested in exploiting fame - or notoriety - by performing in the public sphere. He normally shunned publicity during intellectual, political, or social controversy and remained a rather quiet, unassuming scholar who willingly deferred to those he respected. His ambitions did not extend beyond faithful service as the president of Victoria University, and he was not concerned with who received the credit for advances he had sponsored as long as they accomplished some good. I hope that this biography of Samuel Sobieski Nelles will kindle even greater interest in the man and his times at Victoria University.

Acknowledgments

While writing this book, I received invaluable assistance and advice from many sources, and ask forgiveness for any unintentional omissions. Let me first acknowledge Philip Cercone and his staff at McGillQueen's University Press, whose expertise and determination have greatly improved the book. Joan McGilvray especially showed tolerance, discrimination, and skill in helping to create the final draft. Thanks as well to Olga Domjan for her meticulous work. I also wish to thank the assessors and staff at the AASP for their suggestions and advice. Even more, I would like to thank the Rev. Dr Edward Jackman for his encouragement. His generosity is surpassed only by his friendship and trust. Several others made my task easier and more enjoyable. They include but are not limited to the staff at the United Church Archives, especially Alex Thomson and Ken Wilson, as well as Lynda Haynes at Emmanuel College Library. To these excellent advisors I would quickly add Dr Goldwin French and Dr Paul Gooch, successive presidents of Victoria University in Toronto, whose generous oversight and counsel were greatly appreciated. I must also acknowledge Phyllis Airhart, Grant Bracewell, Robert Brandeis, Frank Collins, Ramsey Cook, Glenn Lucas, David Marshall, Brian McKillop, Viv Nelles, Marguerite Van Die, and Bill Westfall. Only they can truly know how much their assistance and encouragement helped bring this project to fruition. In truth, there are too many others who deserve recognition to name them all, but I should end by thanking my friends Bill Bishop, Less Holroyd, Mark Kennegiessa, and Glen Van Diesen, who have supported me through health and sickness and to whom I can scarcely express the extent of my gratitude.

xx

Acknowledgments

Finally, let me finish by thanking my mother, Laura A. Semple, and my brothers, Keith, Drew, and Mark, to whom no amount of thanks is sufficient. It is with great pleasure that I dedicate this volume to my mother, as a small tribute to her untiring service.

FAITHFUL INTELLECT

This page intentionally left blank

I

Early Life

It had been a cold, raw day, but at least the rain had stopped. Fortunately, the last of the root and field crops had been put up in the cold cellar, and the second hay cutting dried and stored away. There would likely be enough to last through the winter. The orchard had been a disappointment; still, it would yield better when the trees matured. The cattle must be seen to, thought William, and tomorrow he must make a start on cutting several more cords of firewood. All indications were that it would be a severe winter. In another month or so the ground would be sufficiently frozen to clear more forest for a larger wheat crop. Too bad no lumber mill was close by to saw the logs. For the moment, however, it was difficult to think of anything but the birth of his new son, and of course the health of his wife Mary. It was 17 October 182,3, and Mary Hardy Nelles was recovering well after giving birth to her third healthy boy in four years. She wanted to call him Samuel, perhaps because no-one else in the family had that name, and favoured Sobieski for a middle name in honour of the seventeenthcentury king of Poland. However, it was always prudent to wait until the baby had survived its first few weeks before firmly committing to a name. It was a true adage that more died young than old. Furthermore, there would likely not be an ordained Methodist itinerant preacher to baptize the infant in the area for some time. For now, the many relatives and friends in the neighbourhood had to be informed of the birth.1 Samuel Sobieski Nelles did survive his early days on Grove Lane Farm at Mount Pleasant in western Upper Canada. The village, about eight kilometres southwest of Brantford, lined both sides of the old Indian trail that became the Mount Pleasant Road, a vital link between Brantford and Lake Erie. The small community had been slow to recover from the devastation inflicted by the invading forces during the

4

Faithful Intellect

War of i8iz. But, in truth, the Americans had been more interested in ravaging the settlements of the hated Iroquois and in looting the better-established farms in the Niagara Peninsula.2 Mount Pleasant was isolated enough to be generally safe from marauders or organized military units during the conflict, and the war had been over for nearly a decade when Samuel was born. Eventually, there would be nine children in the Nelles household. For the older ones, conditions on the farm were initially quite primitive. The postwar period witnessed a marked decline in agricultural prices, a shortage of hard currency, and a severe economic recession that included massive unemployment in Britain and North America. Partially as a result, new Upper Canadian farmers had to rely on subsistence agriculture, raising all the crops and livestock needed to survive while trying to trade or sell any meagre surplus. William had succeeded in clearing only about twenty acres before Samuel's oldest brother, Alexander Hardy, was born in 1819. He was named after his maternal grandfather, who had died shortly before Alexander's birth. Circumstances were only slightly better when William Wagner was born in 182,1; most of the property remained covered by forest. During the 182,05, through determined hard work, William was able to improve his farm operations. The postwar recession had also accelerated a relatively massive immigration to Upper Canada, especially from the poorer sections of Ireland and England. When the increase in population was combined with a reformed system of land allocation in the colony, the general well-being of the region improved markedly. In particular, settlement grew rapidly in the southwestern sections of Upper Canada. The Nelles family shared the financial advances, becoming much more economically secure by the time Samuel's younger siblings began to appear. John Albert, whom everyone called Sean, arrived in 182,6, Ellen Eliza in i8z8, Abraham Robert in 1831, Henry Howard in 1833, Celeste Catherine in 1834, and finally Thomas Ransom in 1839. Typically, the births had spanned two decades, and the older children were virtually adults when the youngest were born.3 William and Mary built one of the first frame houses in the district, a comfortable one-and-a-half storey structure on the east side of Mount Pleasant Road. The house was set back from the street on Rainbow Hill overlooking Mount Pleasant Creek. From the shady verandah that was added later, the family could watch the neighbours moving along the thoroughfare, or could wonder at the business of strangers traveling up to Brantford or heading south to Simcoe and Port Dover. The rest of the house offered more private views of the farm and the magnificent surrounding countryside. From the back,

Early Life

5

the course of the creek carried the eye to the still intensely forested horizon. In 1816, William had purchased seventy-five acres from his brother Andrew, part of the large lease holdings his father had secured from the Mohawk bands on the Six Nations reserve. Five years later, he bought an additional sixty-five acres from his former militia commander, Captain Thomas Perrin, and in 182.9 completed the farm with 104 acres obtained from Absalom Shade. Such expansion demonstrated skilled management and quick adjustment to changing agricultural opportunities.4 Earlier, when the British Crown had gained control of the future Upper Canada from the French after the Seven Years' War ended in 1763, the land had been claimed by the local groups of Ojibway, the Mississaugas. The original Huron inhabitants had been eradicated by the Iroquois, who had in turn been driven south of the Great Lakes in about 1700 by French forces aiding their Ojibway allies. The latter had moved south from their traditional homeland on the Laurentian Shield during the eighteenth century, and claimed possession through right of conquest. Generally ill-informed regarding all aspects of native society, the British authorities recognized Mississauga claims and negotiated the transfer of large areas of the province to the Crown. They then ceded substantial tracts of land to United Empire Loyalists and socalled late Loyalists during and after the American Revolution. Most of the region along the Grand River was given in grant to Chief Joseph Brant and his Loyalist Six Nations bands for their unrivalled service during the war and as compensation for their territorial losses in the new American republic. The Mohawks assumed they now owned the vast territory outright - that it represented a new and permanent native homeland. Brant in turn sold or gave some of the land to friends and former comrades among the white settlers, including members of the Nelles clan. However, much of the Grand River region was gradually inundated by squatters who simply occupied and later demanded title to the land. The chiefs took the illegal settlers to court to have them removed or, at least, to force them to pay for the land they had stolen, arguing that the property could only be alienated to properly constituted native councils. In 1808, Andrew Nelles had gained a 999-year lease on 649 acres without having to compensate the Mohawks; he then sold much of the property. In a lengthy resolution by the band council in 1809, the Mohawks specifically named John Nelles, Andrew's cousin, among many others, as holding an improper lease. However, the provincial courts and government normally upheld the farmers' claims if improvements had been made to the property and denied the legitimacy of native ownership of the original grant. In 1838, the provincial

6

Faithful Intellect

Dunn Markland Hepburn Commission upheld the family's claim to these "Indian Leases" and granted a patent to William Nelles for his farm a year later.5 The story of the Nelles family is much older, however, and it supplied a rich context for Samuel's early experiences. The original Protestant Nolles or Nelle family had lived near Bremen in the Hanoverian territories of northern Germany. In 1709, some members were uprooted by the French invasion of the region, fleeing first to Britain and finally to the American colonies. Three brothers, Wilhelm, Christian, and Johannes, arrived with 3000 to 4000 other Palatine emigrants in America in 1710. They eventually anglicized their names to William, Christian, and John, and the family name became Nelles or Nellis in the new world. Wilhelm and Christian initially established homes across from New York City. They later moved to the Stone Arabia region of the Mohawk Valley, where they helped found the village of Palatine and supported the German Lutheran congregation.6 Wilhelm, who had been born in 1694, married Ana Dycherd. They had ten children, including Andreas (Andrew) in 1715 and Hendrick Wilhelm (Henry William) in 1735. The children all inherited land in the Stone Arabia region, especially in Montgomery County, and most remained in the area with their own offspring.7 Henry William Nelles served in the backwoods skirmishes of the French and Indian Wars between 1756 and 1763. Unlike his relatives, he subsequently remained loyal to Britain during the American Revolution. He and his Iroquois allies participated in destructive raids against his rebel neighbours in the Mohawk Valley. To avoid reprisals, in 1780 he moved his family across the Niagara River to more secure British territory, settling at what became Grimsby on the Forty Mile Creek. The British government granted him huge land holdings in the area in recognition of his military service and of his extensive property losses in New York State. He also received some 42.50 acres near the small village of York on the Grand River from his friend and ally Joseph Brant.8 Henry William had one daughter and seven sons: Warner and John, who settled on the Grand River lands; Robert, William, and Abraham, who remained at Grimsby; and Peter and Andrew, who probably returned to the United States. The practice of moving back and forth across the new border was common; loyalty seems not to have been an issue. Nationalism tended to be weak, and artificial boundaries apparently made little difference to the local inhabitants, especially before the depredations of the War of i8iz instilled a sense of defiant distinction in Upper Canadians. Grimsby was the home territory of the most prominent branch of the Nelles family. Robert, who had served with his father in the American Revolution, became colonel of the 4th

Early Life

7

regiment of Lincoln militia and saw distinguished action during the War of i8iz. He established extensive milling and mercantile operations at Grimsby, and was elected to the legislature as a Conservative for several terms beginning in 1801. He was appointed Justice of the Peace, and remained a leading member of the local Church of England until his death in 1842. His third son, Abraham, became a Church of England clergyman and a respected missionary to the Mohawks on the Grand River. Robert's brother William remained a member of the Niagara Peninsula's business and political elite until his death in 1853, while the Honourable Abraham Nelles held valuable local patronage positions and represented the region on the powerful Legislative Council from 1830 until 1839.9 This branch of the Nelles family represented an important component of the first generation of settlers in Ontario. As Loyalists, they had sacrificed everything for the Crown, then had confirmed their patriotism and commitment to a superior British imperial society by repelling the Americans during the wartime invasions. They were opposed to the tyranny and demagoguery demonstrated by the democratic forces in North America and Europe. Furthermore, as active members of the Church of England, they appreciated the need for respectable social and religious order and castigated the negative influences of rationalistic deism. They remained active and responsible members of their communities, combining commercial entrepreneurship and land development with government service to increase their wealth and social position. In their own eyes, they deserved to rule or at least to guide the evolution of the colony.10 While Samuel Nelles was proud of his kinship links, he was neither a member of this elite nor a subscriber to its views. He was directly descended from the eldest son of Wilhelm and Ana Nelles, Andrew, who lived near Palatine, New York, until his death in 1780. His oldest son, also Andrew, was born in 1746, and with his wife Elizabeth Wagner Nelles had nine children between 1778 and 1797. Samuel Nelles's father, William, born in 1788, was the fifth of these. In 1798, the family crossed the border to Grimsby in Upper Canada, where Andrew supervised Robert Nelles's milling operations for some time before 1805. In that year, Andrew built a log cabin on part of the large Nelles grant near Mount Pleasant. During the War of i8iz, William fought with Captain Thomas Perrin's company in the Gore militia; he continued to serve as a private after the war. His purchase of seventy-five acres of his father's property in 1816 was probably in anticipation of his marriage to Mary Hardy.11 Mary, the daughter of Alexander and Catherine Hardy, was born in July 1797 near the Juniata River in Pennsylvania, but her family

8

Faithful Intellect

emigrated to the Mount Pleasant area shortly thereafter. They were among the founding families in Brant County. Her mother's people had belonged to the extensive Palatine emigration, and her father and older uncle John were colonial Americans who moved to Upper Canada in search of better lands and superior economic opportunities, not out of any overriding sense of loyalty to the Crown. Alexander Hardy died in 1819, survived by seven children. His two daughters besides Mary were Eleanor, who married a local farmer and merchant named Abraham Cooke, and Oleda, who married R.R. Strobridge, the proprietor of a small shop in Mount Pleasant and, eventually, a substantial mercantile business in Brantford. The three had all received a substantial primary education while living on their parents' farm and later participated in their husbands' business operations. Alexander Hardy's eldest son, William, became a businessman and lawyer in Brantford. He handled most of William and Mary Nelles's legal affairs. His brother Russell married Juletta Sturgis, the daughter of another old Brant County family who were related to Alexander Nelles's future wife. The Sturgis family farmed and also operated a store in Mount Pleasant and, later, in Brantford. Another brother, "Alick," appears to have farmed in the community and to have had an interest in his brother's business as well. The youngest brother, Henry A. Hardy, received his early education at Genesee Wesleyan Seminary in upstate New York. He later studied at Victoria College at about the same time as his nephew Samuel Nelles, and they shared many university friends. Henry taught in Mount Pleasant for a short time before becoming a lawyer in Brantford.12 The large collection of uncles and aunts supplied a valuable network of practical assistance for Samuel and his siblings. Such networks were critical for success in business and the professions during this politically and economically unsettled period. They also demonstrated a more liberal political philosophy. The old tory attitudes of privilege, restraint, and ordered society conflicted with the new economic and capitalistic demands of the province. Adam Smith, not William Blackstone or Edmund Burke, provided the dominant - though not necessarily more equitable - model for the future.13 All things considered, Samuel Nelles grew up in a large, purposeful, and well-established extended family with high expectations for economic and social advancement and distinctly middle-class attitudes. Nonetheless, his home life was in most ways typical of farm families in pioneer Upper Canada. After sufficient acres were cleared, wheat became the major cash crop. His father normally sold his excess produce locally to merchants in Mount Pleasant or Brantford, including his wife's brother-in-law, R.R. Strobridge. However, the Mount Pleasant

Early Life

9

Road was often nearly impassable, except in winter, when the frozen ground could support reasonable loads on wagons and sleighs. Bulky goods were normally transported on the Grand River in season, especially after the Welland Canal linked Lake Erie and Lake Ontario in 1829. The whole of southwestern Upper Canada opened up to economically viable farming and small-scale industrial operations thanks to this bypass of Niagara Falls. Brantford in fact became an important service centre for the region, with links to Hamilton and Toronto; after the arrival of the railroad, it developed a significant industrial base.14 The promising mill sites on Mount Pleasant Creek near Grove Lane Farm had never been developed by the family, and the village remained essentially without industry until the 18405, when new residents took advantage of the technological opportunities. In 1844, Mary Nelles reported to her son William that "Uncle Russell sold a lot to a man in Montreal who is about to set up a carding and fulling machine which will be quite an addition to our end of the street."15 When completed, the Haight Mill not only brought another dedicated Methodist family to Mount Pleasant; it exemplified the new industrial development strengthening the increasingly diverse economy of the district. Samuel's father, however, was more interested in the prosperity of his mixedfarming operations. As well as the regional staple crop of wheat, the farm produced rye, oats, corn, potatoes, apples, and garden vegetables, and raised cattle, sheep, and hogs, along with the ubiquitous chickens. While the children were expected to work according to their maturing strength and growing sense of responsibility, William and Mary put little pressure on any of them to remain farmers.16 This lack of constraint was less true for Alexander. As the eldest son, he had a certain duty to remain on the farm while his brothers and sisters were young, but he also enjoyed the life. When he was mature enough, he ran the farm for his father. After he married in 1844, he purchased 100 acres two miles north of Mount Pleasant. In 1869 Alexander sold his farm and moved to Brantford, where he operated an insurance agency and loan company. He remained active in the Methodist Church and the local Liberal Party until his death in i883.17 His brothers Thomas and Abraham also took up farming. When their parents sold the farm at Mount Pleasant in 1854 and bought a smaller property near Simcoe in Norfolk County, the younger children accompanied them to the new home. Abraham, with parental assistance, purchased a farm a short distance away which he continued to operate until his death in 1913. For some time, Celeste and Thomas lived with their parents on the new home farm. Thomas, after receiving a good education, including a year at Victoria College, returned to help run the Simcoe farm, and inherited fifty acres of it when his father died in

io

Faithful Intellect

1864. In 1873, Thomas sold his acreage and became an investment broker and insurance and real estate agent in Simcoe. At the same time, he married Georgiana Biggar, a daughter of the prominent Wesleyan minister and later Brant County treasurer Hamilton Biggar. In 1884, Celeste married Dr John Clarke, a former resident of Simcoe who had moved to what is now Thunder Bay. He died three years later, and Celeste returned south to reside with her brother Henry in London.18 As for the other children, they chose paths taking them more directly into the available professions of the day. William Wagner Nelles early on showed substantial promise as a teacher. After his home training, he studied at Cazenovia Seminary, a respectable private Methodist school near Syracuse, New York. When he graduated in 1844, he opened the much-needed Mount Pleasant Academy on land owned by his aunt, Eleanor Cooke. It quickly became a local landmark, educating over seventy-five students annually. William married Hannah Cornell in 1857. Two years after obtaining his M.A. from Victoria College in 1858, he oversaw the transformation of his academy into a county grammar school, a change that permitted the government to provide substantial grants to subsidize the older male students studying classics and intending to enter university.19 William headed the school until he transferred to the Rockwood Academy near Guelph in 1861. After his wife's death ten years later, he moved to New York City, and finally settled in Hartford, Connecticut with his second wife and their only daughter. John (or Sean) also studied at Cazenovia Seminary, and was later among McGill University's first graduates in medicine. He began practising in London, Canada West in 1852. He married Anna Campbell, but she died in childbirth in 1857. Three years later, he married Amelia Hodgetts, the daughter of a Lieutenant-Colonel Hodgetts of London. Henry, seven years his junior, also settled in London, where he married Charlotte, Amelia's sister. He practised dentistry there until his death in 1908. The oldest Nelles daughter, Ellen Eliza, married Dr Uzziel Ogden, who would later serve as an alumni member of the Victoria University senate. Unfortunately, she died in childbirth in 1853, and her son survived for only a couple of months.zo Nevertheless, the Nelles family's members were generally successful, moderately wealthy, and respected in their communities. Samuel Nelles also chose not to pursue an agrarian career, but he did not see himself as a businessman, lawyer, or doctor. He was never particularly interested in making money. As a child he was devout, highly romantic, and essentially impractical, enjoying nothing better than losing himself in a famous figure's biography, a historical adventure, or a collection of poetry. He also gave expression to his vivid imagination

Early Life

11

by writing poetry. He shared his mother's interests and passions, particularly her abiding love of history. She had been strongly impressed by the fierce Christian struggles to preserve European culture from marauding invaders. She could recount the sacrifices of her own and her husband's German ancestors to preserve their religious freedom. Moreover, her chosen middle name for her third son honoured King John Sobieski of Poland, who in alliance with the Holy Roman Empire had relieved Vienna from a siege by Turkish Moslems in i68$.ZI Samuel was always proud of his middle name and felt a deep kinship with the heroic defenders of Christian civilization. Samuel found little pleasure in farm work and escaped from its drudgery whenever possible. After his chores, he often absconded into the woods with a good book. Years later, he recorded in his diary of Random Thoughts, "When I think of the joy I have in study and philosophy, I thank God for the hour when I left the plough for the school."22 In Samuel's romantic vision, nature was God's pure handiwork. He never shared most farmers' gloomy view of vast virgin forests and rocky promontories as obstacles to progress and prosperity. He appreciated a fine pastoral panorama, but to him nature was most dynamic where the haunting beauty of wild places was unspoiled by the hand of man. On his youthful walks beside Mount Pleasant Creek or over the surrounding hills he found a vital demonstration of the majesty of God. All his life he would obtain physical refreshment and mental sustenance from the natural world. Moreover, his reading often supplied an appropriate quote or poetic stanza to help plant the wonders he observed in his imagination.23 While Samuel's parents encouraged their children to experiment with occupations that suited their natures, they were careful to insist that these decisions include an active quest for personal salvation and worthy service to God. Secular ambitions might be open to question, but spiritual Christianity was beyond debate; it must remain life's guiding principle and perpetual duty. Historically, the Nelleses had been Lutherans, and the most prominent family members in Upper Canada joined the Church of England. For Mary and William Nelles, however, Protestant Christianity meant the dynamic, personal religion found in Methodism. With its new experiments in ecclesiastical organization, its openness to individuality, and, most important, its respect for the diverse, polyglot elements of Upper Canadian society, it offered welcome means for creating and integrating a new community. Holding a particular attraction for minority or dispossessed ethnic groups in the province, it became the major denomination for German, Irish, and native Canadians who felt estranged from the ethnocentric English Anglican or Scottish Presbyterian traditions.24 Its goal was to assist

12.

Faithful Intellect

individuals to find salvation and sanctification and become sin-free members of society. It opened their hearts and minds to Christ and forced them to seek a living relationship with God. Mary Nelles had a powerful conversion experience shortly after her marriage, and she always continued to "feel deeply humbled under a sense of God's unmerited goodness and consoling grace."25 William was converted shortly after his wife and shared her spiritual commitment. The children were raised with an abiding love of God and clearly recognized their religious obligations. William and Mary were careful to include Bible reading, family prayer, and all the other private means of grace in the daily life of the farm. They taught their children that Scripture supplied the one sure guide for salvation and an understanding of God's expectations for them. The Bible also established the rules of conduct and the basis of ethical behaviour essential both for moral and spiritual growth and for sinless participation in the activities of the world. These truths were confirmed and strengthened through constant, deeply felt prayer. As well as praying as a family, all members were encouraged to secure a private location from which to lay open their hearts and minds to God. Samuel found such a secluded place in the woods near his home. But, wherever he was, he prayed particularly for the resolve to fight sin, for a visitation by the Holy Spirit, and for God's constant comforting presence in his life. Ultimately, the experiences and social attitudes fostered by personal and family worship most precisely defined and established Samuel's sense of religion/6 At the same time, Methodism was never intended to be only a private religion, isolating its practitioners like cloistered recluses. Indeed, it was grandly social and joyful in design and operation. Spiritual experiences and moral truths were to be shared by the whole community through congregational worship and, more broadly, through commitment to the improvement of society at large. Samuel learned early on that religion only had meaning when it involved a practical application of Christian principles to the worldly community. He would remain committed to the advancement of Christian civilization as the prerequisite for progress. His parents also taught him that the power of Methodism rested on its ability to transfer the intimacy and energy of personal religion to its larger ecclesiastical fellowship, and through it to the world. Disciplined and doctrinally sound institutional religion was critical for earthly improvement. To be a Methodist in good standing, each member must abide by the divinely inspired prudential and providential means appointed to the connexional authorities. There were always sinful distractions waiting to lure the unsuspecting or careless to damnation.27 Mary and William Nelles strove diligently not

Early Life

13

only to have their children attend worship but also, more critically, to make sure that they wanted to attend. They were very pleased when Samuel made religion the central fact in his life. Commitment to organized religion was not easy during the early years at Mount Pleasant. The scattered population, the lack of serviceable roads, and the severe shortage of clergy, even Methodist itinerants, meant that public worship took place only infrequently. Moreover, it normally occurred in private homes, barns, or schools, sustained by the fervent will of the laity. Before 1824, the Methodists in Upper Canada fell under the jurisdiction of an Annual Conference in upstate New York, with local supervision by a presiding elder. In that year, Upper Canada was organized into the semi-autonomous Canada Conference, with only 31 itinerants and about 6150 members.28 Four years later, it gained independence as the Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada, although it retained American bishops as general superintendents. The settled parts of Upper Canada were divided into circuits with ordained preachers. The Methodists relied on voluntary contributions to pay salaries and construct church buildings. However, pioneer Upper Canadians had only limited funds. Mount Pleasant was part of the huge Dumfries circuit which had been organized in 182.3, the year of Samuel's birth, and included most of five townships. It was initially served by Edmund Stoney, an inexperienced young preacher who despite his conscientious labours claimed only 120 members at the end of the year. The following year, the young yet extremely effective minister-in-training, Robert Corson, preached at eighteen regular locations or appointments, none with a church building. Through his fiery oratory, he challenged the communities he served to seek a deeper and more fulfilling relationship with Christ. He raised the circuit membership to 2,09, only eight of whom were located in the village of Brantford. Mount Pleasant still did not receive regular preaching; settlers in the area relied on private or family worship, infrequent visits from lay preachers, and an interdenominational union Sunday school for their spiritual sustenance/9 Little improvement occurred during the late 182,08, and in fact membership declined on the Dumfries circuit between 1827 and 1829. In 1829, the Grand River mission to the local Ojibway and Mohawks joined with the Dumfries circuit because of lack of clergy. Much of the decline was a direct result of the Ryanite schism.30 Henry Ryan had served the Methodist Episcopal Church in Upper and Lower Canada continuously since 1805 and had personally kept the church functioning during the War of 1812. The senior presiding elder of the district, he possessed "zeal, enterprise, courage, system, industry and that rough and ready kind of talent which was then more effective than any

14

Faithful Intellect

other."31 He was also belligerent, insufferable, and authoritarian, and his inability to get along with his itinerant colleagues led to his demotion. He complained bitterly throughout the 182,08 about the decisions of the American General Conference and his treatment by the bishops and senior clergy in Canada. For these harangues, he was expelled from the itinerancy. After his expulsion, he organized dissatisfied members into the Canadian Wesleyan Methodist Church. This denomination initially made serious inroads into Methodist congregations, especially in the Niagara Peninsula and western parts of the province close to the Nelles home. William and Mary, however, remained loyal to the Methodist Episcopal Church. After Ryan's death in 1833, rnany dispirited Ryanites returned to their old Methodist homes; others joined the newly arrived British group, the Methodist New Connexion. Still, Ryan had disrupted the church's growth and delayed institutional consolidation.31 But the ill effects were soon reversed, and by i83z the Methodist Episcopal Church in Upper Canada claimed 15,000 members and sixty-four travelling preachers. The union with the British Wesleyans a year later did not materially expand the church, but it did remove a potentially disastrous competitor whose prestige and financial resources it brought to the aid of the local work. Difficulties with the British leadership would later temporarily disrupt this union, but in the meantime it appeared to answer a number of the Canadian connexion's pressing needs.33 Conditions at Mount Pleasant stabilized and gradually improved. A branch of the missionary society headed by several members of the extended Nelles-Hardy clan raised money to assist the natives in the area, and a "spacious meeting house" was constructed in the early 18308. As membership expanded in the region, Brantford became the head of a significantly better served and more compact circuit in 1835, with Mount Pleasant as an important preaching appointment. A year later, a large church was constructed in Brantford. Mount Pleasant was finally promoted to head its own circuit in the Brantford district in i854.34 By this time, Samuel Nelles and most of his family had moved from the community. To a significant degree, the shortage of funds for expansion among the weaker circuits during the iSzos and 18305 was caused by the demands of the missions to native peoples. Most local church members recognized the critical need to promote spiritual guidance and education among the so-called heathen inhabitants of the province. The devastation of the War of i8iz had left them economically depressed and psychologically traumatized, yet necessarily receptive to Christian initiatives. Many leaders of the Ojibway and Mohawks came to believe their old gods had forsaken them, and desperately required new spiritual and social sanctuaries.

Early Life

15

Responsible Methodists could not in good conscience leave them to worship rocks, waterfalls, or the spirits of dead animals. If they were eventually to find a prosperous future in nineteenth-century Canadian society, they needed the benefits, founded upon sound education, of both Christianity and European civilization. The major debate rested on whether they could endure as a people and whether, therefore, they should be assimilated into Protestant Canadian society. Methodists gradually accepted the view that natives could be Christianized and "civilized" before they fully integrated into European culture. Indeed, it was essential that they modernize before alcohol, disease, and unscrupulous members of "white" society combined to eradicate them totally.35 Both native and non-native observers feared that the Indian was doomed to extinction. William Wilson, a native student at Upper Canada Academy, assumed in 1838 that annihilation would be their ultimate fate. Those lordly tribes that lin'd these mighty lakes Have fled, and disappear'd like wintry flakes. Lo! On the mountain-tops their fires are out, In blithesome vales all silent is their shout; A solemn voice is heard from every shore, That now the Indian nations are no more, A remnant scarce remain to tell their wrongs, But soon will fade to live in poets' songs.36

Even if Christianity could not reverse this fate, it would at least provide comfort and hope for future happiness in heaven. Through the determined influence of William Case, one of the two Upper Canadian presiding elders, in 182.2. the Episcopal Methodist Genesee Conference sent its first missionary to the region to evangelize the nominally Anglican Mohawks along the Grant River. These groups were within a short distance of the Nelleses' Mount Pleasant homestead. Alvin Torry came mainly to minister to the natives, but also served the destitute new settlers. Edmund Stoney, who came to the Dumfries circuit the following year, was supposed to help with native work as well. The Methodist Episcopal Church listed no native members in 182,0, but was able to record 1052 in 1829, mostly among the Mississauga bands settled back from Lake Erie to Lake Ontario. This number represented about ten per cent of the entire connexion. Canadian Methodist authorities also assumed that the union with the Wesleyans would bring financial support from the British government and access to Wesleyan missionary society funds for native evangelization and education.37 The Nelles family welcomed the improving condition

16

Faithful Intellect

of the native tribes with deep gratitude to God, but realized that the process of acculturation would be long and slow. William and Mary Nelles were even more deeply concerned about the spiritual and educational improvement of their own children. They readily agreed with the Methodist authorities who maintained, "Inseparably connected with the religious instruction of your children stands their literary education. Education to the mind is what strength is to the body; it is its power to do good or evil; for 'knowledge is power'."38 The family was therefore genuinely pleased when, shortly after the formation of the independent Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada in i8z8, its clergy and laity began planning for an academy to educate the province's "non-established" youth. They proposed a nonsectarian, co-educational institution without religious tests for staff or students. While Upper Canada Academy would provide a classical elementary and high school education "where youth may be trained up in a knowledge and obedience of God, and at the same time be faithfully instructed in the various branches of human learning," no system of theology was to be taught.39 All students would be free to embrace any religious creed and attend any place of worship their parents chose; however, they would not be permitted to avoid services altogether. Moreover, the Methodist Church always recognized that the school would fulfill an essential religious function by helping to train its denominational laity and future itinerant preachers.40 Most particularly, the Methodists were seeking to create a substitute for Lieutenant-Governor Sir John Colborne's recently established Upper Canada College, with its strong Church of England flavour and access to impressive government largesse. As well as receiving aid from the governor's discretionary Casual and Territorial Funds, it was later endowed with the proceeds from the sale of 66,000 acres of Crown land in the province. Modelled on British public schools, Upper Canada College followed the pattern of elitist Episcopal private schools in the United States.41 It was designed to help bring about a society that honoured "high culture," accepted the propriety of an established church, and perpetuated a deferential, hierarchical social order. The college was distinct from the general educational structure of common schools and grammar schools in the province, and was specifically intended to prepare its students for an equally elitist university under the authority of the Church of England.41 Its promoters assumed that its alumni would later guide the political, economic, intellectual, and moral institutions of the province to the end of preserving the tory ethos. Upper Canada Academy, by contrast, was to be based on a model of social evolution whose aim was the formation of an intellectual and

Early Life

17

moral elite based on and advancing merit, rather than on birth. Ideologically, it was committed to evangelical principles fostering personal relations with God and the consequent conversion and perfection of the world. Such goals did not require church mediation - or for that matter state intrusion, not even when fully sacred in its outlook. Concepts based on the preservation of a static society rather than on the inevitability of change were increasingly dismissed as unrealistic and counterproductive. Education, while dedicated to perpetuating the best from tradition, must also develop a leadership who could manage change in order to make sure that it resulted in true progress. Upper Canada Academy represented a commitment to individualism, political egalitarianism, and equality of opportunity. These priorities appealed to the rising commercial and industrial leaders who were gradually assuming control over Upper Canada's social and economic development. They were devoted to the philosophical and moral ideals guiding the formation of capitalistic market economies and sustaining technological and material advances. Freedom of action, rather than notions of proper social responsibility, dominated their decisions.43 These ideological motives would guide Upper Canada Academy's intellectual evolution. In practice, however, the institution was never prepared to abandon totally the conservative principles that continued to buoy up social beliefs. The commercial elite also admired political stability, hated revolution, and loyally supported all the good that monarchy represented. The academy still sought government aid as a right since the state had a duty to improve national morality. Moreover, its pedagogical practices rarely conformed to the hopes presented in the abstract by school reformers.44 Notwithstanding these realities, the connexional leaders expected that Upper Canada Academy would represent a legitimate alternative to non-Methodist schools or to going abroad for a high school education. While Methodists resented the presumptions of Upper Canada College, they also feared their young people would be poisoned by radical social and political doctrines if educated in the United States. They had long been falsely accused of disloyalty and did not wish their children smeared by the same charges. They also believed that financial assistance from the government and church would allow the academy to be relatively inexpensive and therefore open to rural and small-town children lacking the wealth to obtain an alternative education.45 While the local common and the few grammar schools were less expensive and were distributed across the province, Upper Canada Academy's real competition would come from the many private elementary and secondary schools operating outside of the embryonic provincial system.

18

Faithful Intellect

Private or proprietary schools, known as academies, seminaries, or colleges, normally had two or more teachers who were better educated and more skilled at teaching than their public school colleagues. Young clergy sometimes taught at such schools before moving on to a church position. These institutions were also likely to have more supplies, including textbooks, and to be situated in healthier buildings. Since most students had to move to their school's location, private schools featured superior boarding facilities and were sometimes subsidized by the government or a church. The relatively high cost of private education made this an important consideration. Yet for some middle-class parents, assisted education smacked of charity. They preferred to bear the costs attendant on the benefits of a broader curriculum and more thorough preparation. The colleges' greatest appeal lay in their ability to inculcate discipline and moral values in their students. While girls were trained to be helpful wives and diligent mothers who could in turn train their own young children, they were also imbued with the accepted virtues of deference, thrift, cheerfulness, and hard work, as well as sexual restraint and purity. Boys were considered in greater need of strict control of their passions, natural evil, and inherent sinfulness.46 Although discipline was the common thread, each school could modify its other features to satisfy the needs of its specific clientele. In general, the private schools supplied a valid alternative to the public systems, especially for female students, until the late nineteenth century.47 In 182,9, the Methodist Episcopal Church set up a committee of five - Franklin Metcalf, John Ryerson, William Ryerson, Anson Green, and James Richardson - to find a location for the academy and to apply to the provincial Parliament for a charter. A year later, the Annual Conference selected the town of Cobourg from among several proposed communities, and the clergy began to raise an impressive subscription to build and endow the institution. Construction was to begin when £2000 was subscribed and £500 collected. George Spencer donated four acres of land at Cobourg, and by the late summer of 1831 over £3900 had been subscribed out of the estimated cost of £5000. Edward Crane was hired as architect and builder, and the cornerstone was laid on 7 June 1832,. When the Upper Canadian legislature refused to provide funds, the colonial executive, on the instruction of Lord Glenelg, the Colonial Secretary, provided an initial grant of £4100. The academy later received small annual subsidies to augment tuition fees and special donations.48 However, the opening of Upper Canada Academy was delayed for four years because of severe financial problems. In reaction to the union of 1833 between the Wesleyans and Episcopal Methodists in

Early Life

19

Upper Canada, many members withdrew and formed a new Methodist Episcopal Church in 1834. Some of these subsequently refused to pay their subscriptions for Upper Canada Academy. Others were simply too devastated by the severe economic recession of the 18305 to afford to meet their obligations. The church was forced both to delay construction and to borrow money to pay immediate bills. Many individuals took out personal loans that they could ill afford to prevent the loss of the property and the consequent embarrassment to the connexion. William Lord, the President of Conference, assured his colleagues that the British parent society would never permit the local church to be financially hurt by bad debts, even though he already knew there would be no help from that quarter. At the same time - according to the school trustees in Cobourg - he and his British Wesleyan colleague, Matthew Richey, encouraged greater expenditures than necessary.49 Egerton Ryerson went so far as to propose that the British Wesleyan Missionary Society funds assigned to native evangelization and education might be temporarily transferred to help cover Upper Canada Academy's debt. This suggestion was strongly opposed by the Wesleyan officials and only contributed to the growing friction between the two Methodist bodies.50 Ryerson was thereupon forced to travel to Britain to beg whatever funds he could. Although he met with Wesleyan officials and leading laymen across the country, he was able to raise very little, and had to take out loans to meet the academy's construction expenses. More importantly, he failed to obtain either any endowment in land or significant, ongoing government aid. He discovered that the British government no longer distributed endowments from Crown lands, while the lieutenant-governor's disposal of formerly discretionary funds had been severely curtailed as a means of placating the Reformers in the local Assembly.51 Ryerson also learned that Sir Francis Bond Head was claiming that the £4100 grant was in fact a loan. Bond Head was no friend to the Methodists, and would have been pleased to see the whole academy project fail and confidence in Methodism diminished. After months of delay and frustration and endless correspondence with the British Colonial Office, Ryerson did resolve this last issue, but the school was nearly insolvent and remained in serious financial difficulty for years to come.52While in England, Ryerson also petitioned the government for a Royal Charter for Upper Canada Academy. The original application for a provincial charter had been withdrawn in 1835 since it quickly became evident that the legislature would never grant one. The negotiations in Britain were difficult because of the questionable legal status of the Wesleyan Methodist Church, as well as the potential opposition

2.0

Faithful Intellect

in Upper Canada itself. On his departure for Britain, Ryerson had been advised not to disclose this part of his mission in order to avoid various groups mounting an effective campaign against him. From a legal point of view, the concerns of the Crown centred on three points: whether the Annual Conference was a corporate body recognized in law; whether the term "church" or "connexion" should be used in official documents; and the need to have specific individuals named as trustees. After some discussion, Annual Conference was replaced, "church" was accepted, and Ryerson arranged to have several people named as trustees. Thus, after months of detailed debate and expensive wrangling, the Royal Charter was finally signed in July and proclaimed on iz October 1836. Although Ryerson was successful to that extent, it was a financially depleted and insecure institution which finally opened under the principalship of Rev. Matthew Richey and Ryerson's own watchful tutelage.53 As a result, many Methodists, including William and Mary Nelles, looked elsewhere for an education for their sons; they were not prepared to take a chance on the untried experiment in Cobourg. On a broader level, the Nelles family also worried about the status of the Methodist Church in the province and the related matter of the supposed superiority of the Church of England. In Upper Canada, the principle of state support for churches and their auxiliary institutions bedeviled political and social relations for over a century, spinning a web that would inextricably enmesh Samuel Nelles's entire career. The salient point was the extent to which the Church of England was established - or should be established - in the province. In an attempt to fashion a loyal colony, with an eye to avoiding a repetition of the War of Independence and keeping the second British empire intact, the imperial government decided to create a landed aristocracy, an executive branch of local government that was politically and financially independent of the elected Assembly, and a quasi-established Church of England to guard social values and guide enlightenment. Upper Canada would thereby be fortified against revolutionary French and American values. The Church of England assumed that "Christian society was normally conceived as a unified entity within which religious, social and political structures could be distinguished but not separated. It was both natural and legitimate to introduce Christianity in conjunction with a whole social and economic complex and as part of the normal machinery of government."54 Other Protestant denominations by their very presence unnaturally divided the inherent unity of the colony, holding the potential for disloyalty, particularly because of the proximity of the "evil" republican model.55 Such values and sentiments

Early Life

2.1

dominated the political and social philosophies of Upper Canada during the first quarter of the nineteenth century, and indeed continued to sustain political activities far longer. Well-understood principles of peace, order, and good government were enshrined in the British North America Act in 1867 and have influenced constitutional change ever since. The ideals of balance, deference, and social responsibility have in fact become a vital undercurrent in Canada's national identity. On the most prosaic level, all governments tried to sustain colonial order by filling patronage positions with Anglicans. Patronage provided important assistance for the Anglican branches of the Nelles family and many of their associates. A more significant aspect of the program involved assigning certain rights to the Church of England. For instance, the Marriage Act of 1793 gave its clergy the exclusive right to perform marriages. While this monopoly provided a valuable source of revenue, more especially, it made concrete the superior status of Anglicanism and the suspected illegitimacy of many other denominations. For their part, Anglican clergy accepted the responsibility of guarding the imperial connection and promoting a stable community. However, they were few in number and tended to operate from the larger centres. Any role they might play in preserving the imperial dreams of eighteenth-century tories would never match government expectations or fit the social reality of the colony.56 By the end of the eighteenth century, Lutherans and Presbyterians were allowed to perform marriages, since they were established in distinct parts of the British empire. However, it was not until 1831 that Methodists, Baptists, and some other Protestant denominations gained similar powers. The Methodist Church further suffered under the invidious connotations of inferiority until it achieved the right to hold property corporately in i828. 57 In order to fortify the Church of England, the lieutenant-governor originally paid considerable amounts from the discretionary Territorial and Casual Funds to support its clergy and construct its churches. Special grants from the British government and later from the Canada Company also helped improve its financial position, especially inasmuch as it continued to grow slowly. Most significantly, however, the Church of England alone could draw on funds realized from the sale of the clergy reserves. By the terms of the Constitutional Act of 1791, which engineered Upper Canada, the Crown had declared that when townships were surveyed one-seventh of the arable land in the province had to be set aside for the support of the Protestant clergy, a term defined as ministers of the Church of England exclusively. At first these lands were rented, but they realized very little revenue since the government also provided cheap land to prospective settlers. Most

zz

Faithful Intellect

farmers preferred to improve their own property. After this policy was changed to permit the sale of the reserves, revenues gradually rose to impressive levels. By the early 18305, a large fund existed for the sole benefit of the Anglican clergy.58 As the value of the clergy reserves fund increased, political and social opposition to the Anglican monopoly also became more focused and vocal. The first assault was delivered by the Church of Scotland, which did not disagree with the rights of monopoly but rather argued that it was a co-established church in Great Britain. Its ministers therefore fit the legal description of a Protestant clergy and were entitled to equal rights in Upper Canada, including a share of the reserves fund. This principle had been partially recognized when the Presbyterian clergy had gained the right to perform marriages. The second attack came from the churches committed to voluntary principles, including the Methodists, Baptists, and some disestablishment Presbyterians. They posited that there should be a complete separation of church and state; therefore, no religious body should receive government assistance, which diminished the freedom and independence of God's servants. Abolish the reserves, they argued, and transfer the proceeds to support public education, improvements to the transportation system, or other pressing public works. The funds could greatly assist the commercial and industrial development of the province so central to real material progress. It would be a mistake, however, simply to put the revenues in the general provincial treasury, since the tory-dominated government could apply them to whatever schemes it endorsed.59 As early as 1817, the Legislative Assembly condemned the clergy reserves as an impediment to settlement on the grounds that they were held off the market until private improvement of the neighbouring lands increased their value. This policy delayed development of contiguous lands and made it more expensive to build and maintain roads across the unsettled reserves. The Assembly therefore called unsuccessfully for the immediate sale of the properties. Two years later, the Presbyterian congregation at Niagara-on-the-Lake petitioned the government for a grant from the clergy reserve funds. When the request was referred to London, the British law officers ruled in i8z3 that the Canada Act of 1791 did authorize such grants. However, LieutenantGovernor Maitland kept this information secret. Later, the Canada Committee of the British House of Commons attacked the whole notion of retaining church establishment in a religiously pluralistic province, recommending that the proceeds from the sale of clergy reserve lands should help fund education or internal improvements. Nonetheless, both local and imperial authorities, with the powerful support of the Church of England and its allies, ignored

Early Life

23

these suggestions. They argued that as immigration from Great Britain grew, the future religious composition of the colony would be transformed in favour of the Church of England; it was critical not to jeopardize its preferred status to assuage the present temporary situation. Eventually, the Church of England would have to minister to the whole region.60 With virtually unassailable allies in the House of Lords and on the local Legislative Council and friendly lieutenant-governors, attacks on Anglican prerogatives were essentially futile. Despite the authorities' best efforts, it was obvious to the unbiased observer that Upper Canada would never become uniformly Anglican. The prevailing ethos of the province was changing. Ideas of liberty, equality, and individualism were gaining stature, reinforced by a broad set of Protestant voluntarist religious principles and evangelical fears and warnings. While many still believed the province was specially blessed by God's providential protection, this divine favour arrived from an active and immanent, not a distant, transcendent deity, and carried new and broadly progressive dimensions dominated by the priorities of the dissenting denominations. The evangelicals' sense of the nearness and availability of God, together with their intensity of awareness of the moral perils of existence and "their intention to press on to perfection," brought a quite new dimension to Canadian providentialism that was especially congenial to the enterprising of town and country. That all this was available to every man and beyond the control, even the mediation, of church or state was the essence of the evangelical revolution.61

With the realization that God was prepared to get involved in every life came a vastly increased sense of responsibility placed on humanity. Every action had to be considered in light of God's plan for the world, and every human being had to work to fulfill the providential promise of civic, moral, and economic progress.62 The mindset of a special covenant relationship with God was at least partially an inheritance from seventeenth-century New England Puritanism's sense of holy mission and destiny. Upper Canada shared several attributes of early America. It too consisted of a diverse, multicultural immigrant society that had endured its own persecution and forced exodus. A providential mission justified the hardships and supplied a cohesive national purpose to the experiment in the wilderness. For many, however, Upper Canada had the advantage over the United States of a balanced constitution and a quasi-established church with authority to define the nation's destiny. Ideas of European superiority, hierarchy, and social duty both combined with and combatted Jeffersonian and Jacksonian expressions of the quest for the apparently

2.4

Faithful Intellect

democratic principles inherent in nature and essential for liberty under God's guidance. This struggle continued while Canadians were still seeking progress as a unique American nation loyal to divine moral principles.63 The revolutionary divisions in the philosophical ethos had serious implications for political and social change. Throughout the 18305, the reform-oriented members of the Assembly attacked the prerogatives of the Church of England and the power of the executive branches of government, annually introducing bills to secularize the clergy reserves. In a dispatch from Lord Goderich, the Colonial Secretary, to Sir John Colborne in 1833, the British government urged compromise. Since the revenues from the sale of the reserves far exceeded the estimated needs of the Anglican Church, Goderich considered it prudent to share the £4000 from the Territorial and Casual Funds originally budgeted to bolster the support of the Anglican clergy. He accepted Colborne's recommendation that part of the money be spent to build and endow Anglican rectories and the remainder divided among Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, and the smaller denominations in the province.64 Encouraged by the proposal, Egerton Ryerson and his Methodist supporters hoped the funds could be used to pay the debts of Upper Canada Academy. However, nothing happened on this front during the 18305. Regardless of various attempts at compromise, the rebellions of 1837 and the powerful reaction prevented any meaningful changes. Real reform appeared possible only when Charles Poulett Thomson, later Lord Sydenham, began implementing some of the suggestions made in 1839 by Lord Durham in his famous report on colonial affairs, which were designed to prevent a repetition of the rebellions by resolving several contentious issues. Sydenham arranged for the Assembly to pass legislation dividing the clergy reserves funds into two parts. The first was to be distributed to the Church of England and the Church of Scotland; the second was to be shared proportionally by the remaining Protestant denominations. When the proposed act was forwarded to England for final approval, the courts ruled that it infringed on the legitimate rights of the Church of England and that only the British government could legally deal with the matter. It was thereupon transferred to the British Parliament, which in effect put it in the hands of the Archbishop of Canterbury and his ecclesiastical colleagues in the House of Lords. This action, which temporarily moved the clergy reserves beyond colonial jurisdiction, would later return to strain social relations and muddy the political waters. Moreover, it left unresolved the issue of church establishment in the Canadas.65 These great matters were important to William and Mary Nelles and provided core subjects for debate in the community. At home, the

Early Life

2,5

stimulating political and intellectual discussions broadened the knowledge and strengthened the rhetorical skills of the imaginative young Samuel. But the Nelles family was more particularly involved with the practical questions of everyday life. The most critical issue remained the improvement of spiritual and moral health. As their children seemed to develop spiritually, both parents rejoiced at God's infinite mercy in granting such blessings. They were most pleased when presented with evidence of spiritual rebirth in Christ. Hearing that her son William had been converted while away at school, Mary wrote to him: Praise ye the Lord, let all that is within me praise His holy name ... Yes we join with you to praise the name of the Lord. Your dear father was much affected when your letter was read. I wish you to know that it is not only us that you have to rejoice with you, but the Angels in Heaven have great joy over every sinner that repenteth ... Go on dear William in the strength of the Lord.66

She expressed the hope that his resolve would remain secure, that he would never backslide to perdition. And she prayed that her other children would soon repent and experience God's infinite grace. The Nelles family missed few opportunities to expand its spiritual status. William and Mary Nelles also recognized that spiritual advances had to be complemented by the moral improvement of society in general. Samuel learned at an early age that good works and the practical application of religious principles were essential to personal growth in grace and a meaningful Christianity. Among the most pressing social reforms urged at the time was a reduction in the use of alcoholic beverages. In 1833, the Mount Pleasant Temperance Society was founded; Samuel's father was a corresponding member of the organizing committee. The Society reflected a growing movement toward total abstinence among Canadian Methodists, as well as both the improved conditions in the neighbourhood and the hope that "no intemperate or even moderate drinker will be found in this flourishing part of the Province."67 In 1834, the Brantford Mohawk bands petitioned the government to punish anyone selling or giving liquor to their members. The local temperance societies believed this to be the most encouraging sign of progress among the native population. In 1841, the government embodied the petition in legislation.68 Mary Nelles was also especially aware that her children must obtain a good education if they wished to assume leadership roles in business and the professions. She had been better educated than her husband, but he shared her belief that the pioneer world they had known was quickly disappearing in their part of the province, and the opportunities and demands of the new order could only be met by thoroughly

2,6

Faithful Intellect

qualified individuals. Both saw education as an essential preparation for secular life as well as for a mature understanding of evangelical religion. Mary instructed her children at home until they were old enough to attend private schools. Later, she saw to it that her younger children attended the local schools when they became available. She was always searching for better teachers for the community, and strongly encouraged her son William when he opened the Mount Pleasant Academy in 1844. Samuel Nelles in particular loved to learn. He combined a disciplined search for knowledge with an earnest quest for spiritual and moral growth. He dreamed of becoming a great orator, a famous poet, or a renowned preacher, and recognized that these goals could never be achieved without profound commitment and extensive training. A large rock near his home provided a high pulpit from which he practised his oratory on the respectfully attentive cattle.69 Samuel grew up during exciting times. Political, religious, and social protests had culminated in open rebellion in 1837, yet loyalty and patriotism had been deeply instilled in him since birth. Although his extended family contained both political Reformers and Conservatives, he was always taught that the ultimate goal was the advancement of society. And, despite the apparent chaos around him, young Samuel was protected by a loving family and community. He enjoyed a comfortable and happy childhood. Still, as he passed through his adolescent years, he impatiently anticipated leaving home in order to prepare for adult life. After working on the farm during the long summer of 1839, once again it was autumn. The crops were stored away, and only the regular chores and routine preparation for the cold months ahead remained. There was now time for Samuel to evaluate the new challenges he was about to face.

2

Student Days

In the fall of 1839, sixteen-year-old Samuel Sobieski Nelles prepared to leave his home at Mount Pleasant for the first time to enter regular schools and expand his formal education. We can well imagine that, before he departed, he retraced the well-worn paths across the farm and along the creek, embracing once again the treasured moments of his childhood. We can see him stopping, remembering his fervid prayers to God and the multitude of books he had quietly read in the shade of the large elm guarding the path. These memories would remain with him, continuing to shape his life in ways he could scarce imagine. While such nostalgia made him hesitate over what he was leaving behind, it could never dampen his enthusiasm to press forward with the adventures awaiting him. In the company of his parents Samuel set out to attend Lewiston Academy, across the Niagara River from Queenston. On the way, they rested overnight at "the Manor," uncle Robert Nelles's large home in Grimsby, where they had an opportunity for a short visit with their wealthy and famous relatives. Robert was the sixth-largest landowner in the Niagara district and had contributed significantly to the military defence and economic development of the area.1 It was strange yet pleasant to be the centre of attention, and especially to have a bedroom all to oneself, even if only for one night. However, Samuel was anxious to complete his journey and thought of little else until he reached his rooms at the school. The scholastic experience at Lewiston under the principalship of Rev. Reuben Close improved Samuel's basic education but, more especially, it brought him into contact with John Saxe, a respected teacher and philologist. Saxe was renowned locally as a humourist and poet. He was a kindred spirit, the perfect mentor with whom Samuel could share his own rare humorous bent and love of poetry. Nelles never

2.8

Faithful Intellect

forgot Saxe's influence.2 Nonetheless, after one year, he moved on to the Fredonia Academy in nearby Chautauqua County for another ten months of study. He again progressed scholastically but had actually outgrown the school's usefulness; indeed, it lacked sufficient stimulation to leave a lasting impression. After his term there, he returned to Mount Pleasant.3 Samuel's true education went well beyond the schools he attended. He avidly followed political and religious affairs in Upper Canada through the Christian Guardian. A highly significant development was that the unhappy marriage of the old Episcopal Methodists with the British Wesleyans forced on the Canadian church in 1833 had gradually unraveled, with the divorce finally taking place at the Annual Conference of June 1840.4 The faction led by Egerton Ryerson understood that the paramount purpose of the union had been to avoid competition and that the British church would not interfere with the autonomy of the Canadian leadership. Ryerson had his own reform political agenda, attacking the prerogatives of the so-called established churches, particularly their exclusive control of the clergy reserves funds. He and many of his supporters were also seeking government aid for Upper Canada Academy. At this time, Ryerson's belief in the separation of church and state did not extend to such auxiliary institutions as denominational schools. In practical terms, proper education was the responsibility of the state, and sound education could not be achieved without religious participation. In the meantime, Ryerson was eager to control the parliamentary grants to the British Wesleyan authorities designed to assist their missions to the native and destitute white population, as well as to manage the missionary contributions donated by Canadians to the Wesleyan cause.5 The British faction, led in Upper Canada by the former President of Conference, Joseph Stinson, and by Matthew Richey, the founding principal of Upper Canada Academy, attacked Ryerson for meddling in politics and usurping the authority of the leaders appointed from England. The British Wesleyans were politically conservative and obsequiously supported the Anglican claim to be the established church in Canada. When a compromise could not be reached and the local connexion refused to censure Ryerson, the British Wesleyan Annual Conference dissolved the union, and the two Wesleyan branches began a period of open competition in the province.6 The British organization anticipated that new Methodist immigrants to Canada would flock to its familiar banner. But the Canadian branch was much larger, better positioned to serve both the new arrivals and existing members. It substantially expanded its numbers from immigrants and through mass revivals over the following half-decade. In reality, however, both

Student Days

Z9

churches ultimately suffered during their separation and began searching for a means of honourable reconciliation.7 The Nelles family remained with the Canadian or Ryerson faction under the ministry of Rev. Thomas Bevitt. On the broader political front, Lord Sydenham had been assigned the unenviable task of bringing order to Canadian affairs and instituting many of the recommendations made by Lord Durham. In general, there was considerable support for the proposed changes, especially among commercial and mercantile groups in both Upper and Lower Canada. Even members of the original governing elites, who were steadily expanding their involvement in business, welcomed many of Durham's initiatives for improved transportation, increased trade, and crucial public works.8 His assertion that the undeveloped public lands - the clergy and educational reserves and the vast grants to Loyalists, magistrates, and government officials - were impediments to the prosperity of Upper Canada offered a reasonable argument against those tory forces still committed to perpetuating the special status of the Church of England and its auxiliary institutions. Although few people expected that uniting Upper and Lower Canada would actually succeed in overwhelming and assimilating the French Canadian nationality, it would at least offer the potential for political and social stability and permit economic improvement for the region by allowing the apparently unprogressive forces in the lower province to be outvoted.9 Samuel Nelles was not particularly committed in politics, but he shared his family's deep loyalty to the British empire and aversion to the American democratic radicalism and demagoguery that had culminated in the abortive rebellions of 1837. He blended anti-tory sentiments with a moderate liberal temperament. In spite of his youthful wish to be more radical, he could never justify the attendant Lockean philosophical understanding of human nature or the consequent effects on human relations and responsibilities.10 His views could perhaps best be described by the rather ungainly term "liberal-conservative." However, he saw little value in political labels and opposed the idea of blindly supporting a single partisan political faction. Nelles did hope that the union of the Canadas, which came into effect on 10 February 1841, would end the political and social turmoil that had resulted in the unfortunate rebellions and the equally obnoxious post-rebellion reaction. He wished that the political extremists who had done so much to destroy the harmony of the province would be removed from the political scene and more moderate forces given the chance to govern. How Durham's recommendation for the government to act in harmony with the wishes of the elected Assembly - that is, responsible government - would work out had yet to be determined.11

30

Faithful Intellect

Like most Canadians, the youthful Nelles was determined to move beyond the troubles of the past. In early October 1841 he set out for Genesee Wesleyan Seminary in Lima, New York. Located some thirty kilometres south of Rochester, Lima was a small but prosperous village on an important intersection of the main settlement route running across western New York and a regional road running south into the Finger Lakes district. Thanks to its position in the fertile Genesee region, it emerged as a service centre for distributing goods to the local farmers and overseeing the shipment of their agricultural produce. After 182.5, the Lima area became one of the most important wheatgrowing regions in the world.12 The history of this part of New York was dominated by the building of the Erie Canal from Albany to Buffalo. After its completion in 1825, the trickle of settlers moving into the western part of the state, to the Ohio and Michigan territories, and north into Upper Canada became a torrent. The city of Rochester grew from about 1500 to over 20,000 in little more than a decade and became a vital transportation and flour-milling centre.13 It served as a model for all aspiring communities in Upper Canada. One consequence of the accumulation of wealth in the region was the pressure to develop educational facilities to satisfy the diverse groups of settlers. Lima was a good distance from the Erie Canal and even from the Genesee River, which connected the region to Lake Ontario. It was, however, centrally located in the rich farming district, and its distance from potentially immoral urban influences was an advantage when a site was being chosen for a denominational collegiate. The Methodist Annual Conference opened the co-educational Genesee Wesleyan Seminary in 1832 on a hill overlooking the village and creek. It quickly rose to be the most important Methodist high school in the district, a perfect choice for Samuel when looking for further education.14 Like many other Upper Canadian young people, he found it natural to attend one of the large and relatively inexpensive Methodist academies in upstate New York.15 Dr Schuyler Seager, a devout and respected scholar, was the principal of Genesee Wesleyan, and his wife administered the ladies' department. The school had seven or eight mostly university-educated teachers and over 300 students. From the beginning, the eighteen-year-old Samuel took an active role in the clubs and social organizations, including Amphictyon and the Young Men's Literary Society. Despite the sometimes unwholesome, even childish, competition among these groups, Nelles found them a valuable means of expanding his social contacts and broadening his overall education in ways that classwork never could. In fact, they became the centre of his collegiate life, supplying an important component of the attraction of the school.16 He

Student Days

31

would always support sensible school-centred societies as a means of breaking down the isolation and loneliness of student life, even when the pranks and raucous behaviour led others to condemn them. Although initially not sure of what to expect, Samuel settled easily into the routine in Lima, comfortable with his surroundings and educational opportunities. The school divided the year into four terms of eleven weeks and probably charged between $2.50 and $4.00 a class per quarter. Living expenses in the substantial boarding facilities were also lower than those normally available in Canada West. As noted earlier, Methodist schools were not sectarian, but they provided moral as well as mental training. Classes were available in Mathematics, English, Modern Languages, and other Arts subjects, but the emphasis remained on the Latin and Greek Classics. The instruction was directed toward preparing male students for university.17 Samuel was not only diligent in his studies but also found valuable opportunities in his written assignments to practise his literary talents. For instance, in a brief paper on the mysterious phenomena of nature, he allowed his creative imagination to run wild. Typically, while enumerating the varied and complex aspects of the night, he instinctively also drew upon several familiar poets for quotations. The limits of rational discourse prevented a comprehensive explanation of God's overarching workings in the world. For young Nelles, the natural world was interpreted most faithfully by the poet. Indeed, he could not avoid being swept up in the Romantic idealism surrounding many contemporary poets' perception of nature. In a later composition, Samuel described the constant struggle between the spark of divinity in the human soul and the wicked pleasures of the world. Conscious of this battle within himself, he acknowledged that the only hope lay in God's unbounded benevolence.18 Because of his keen intellect, his introspective and questioning disposition, and his constant quest for a fuller understanding of life, Samuel was widely respected by both the faculty and his fellow students. His natural wit and engaging sense of humour made him even more popular; he rarely failed to enliven the myriad of tedious situations that arise during a school term. He became close friends with many of the young men, at least a dozen of whom he fondly recalled in later life. Several became active in the Methodist Church; others participated in the legal, political, or educational affairs of the United States and Canada. Years later, Nelles claimed that such large denominational high schools, with their well-honed, grassroots pedagogy and their diverse and spirited social environment, performed a greater Christian service than most universities.19 He drew upon these early experiences when teaching and administering his own schools.

3 2,

Faithful Intellect

During Samuel's first session at Genesee Seminary, a religious revival swept across the region. He joined many of the other older students in the spiritual awakening and was converted. The Methodist community expected that the approach of adulthood should stimulate the active search for God and spiritual safety. However, although Nelles came to recognize his sinful nature and turned to Christ for salvation, he did not have a fiery or emotional conversion experience. Unlike St Paul, who was knocked over by the force of conversion, there never was an exact moment when Christ's presence overwhelmed Nelles's whole being. His was a more subdued and thoughtful revelation, one that he prayed was sufficient to strengthen him permanently.20 Yet, like so many other young converts, he was afterwards tormented by the fear that he was unworthy and questioned the legitimacy and depth of his own conversion. Always conscious of gnawing doubt, he struggled throughout his life to resist temptation, deepen his spiritual awareness, and move beyond conversion to the higher plateau of entire sanctification. Revival was the core of the creativity and vitality of the Methodist Church, fundamental to its spiritual essence. Every service of worship, every sermon, every prayer was directed toward God's initiating a spiritual transformation in the heart and soul. Methodism had been founded in a revival and sustained its evangelical mission by reviving its own members and the world at large.21 However, the term "revival" also came to denote specific forms of mass evangelism. During the early nineteenth century, Methodists, along with members of other evangelical denominations, placed an inordinate trust in special services known as protracted or camp meetings. These revivals often replaced regular worship in the popular imagination as the basis of individual growth in grace. The influence of mass evangelism and related religious experiments would seriously alter the social and political balance in the United States and English Canada. The protracted meetings at Genesee Wesleyan were conducted by the local Methodist clergy with strong lay support, but they followed an easily recognized evangelistic pattern and program. Both the method and the message had been developed over the previous quarter-century of fervent revivals by professional evangelists and their itinerant brethren, who knew from training and experience how to work up a spiritual awakening in the community.22 The most important evangelist of the era was Charles Grandison Finney. Through his preaching and, more importantly, his published works and the leadership he supplied after 1835 in turning out evangelically trained ministers at Oberlin College, he was able to convince vast numbers of clergy and laity of the vital necessity of taking personal responsibility for their spiritual health. Finney issued a logical outline

Student Days

33

of how a revival should be managed. Despite his own Calvinistic background, he helped remodel Jonathan Edwards's theological innovations - especially in relation to atonement and the freedom of human will - blended in notions from Scottish Common Sense philosophy, and charged the brew with Wesleyan concepts of universal salvation and the possibility of entire sanctification.23 Evangelists denounced the Calvinist tenets of election and predestination while emphasizing the free agency of human beings in the quest for heaven. Methodist preachers had long since rejected Presbyterianism, but they appreciated Finney's guidance on how to encourage whole communities to seek the active work of God on their hearts and minds.24 Since the early nineteenth century, upstate New York had been inundated with people from New England and the middle and even southern states who wished to settle the interior of the continent. The intermingling of diverse groups with different Protestant perspectives encouraged a quest for a more effective ecclesiastical organization and spiritual experience in their new home.25 This search took form in the massive spiritual revivals that aided the shattering of the pre-existing denominational loyalties and invigorated evangelistic religion. In particular, mass evangelism eroded the already tenuous self-assurance of Reform Protestantism and helped secular skepticism demolish the theocratic assumptions of New England Congregationalism. Methodists, while also reassessing denominational loyalty, did not require Finney or other clerics to justify their trust in experiential religion. Like most ordinary individuals, they did not turn to Common Sense philosophy or precise theological distinctions to validate the power of God's presence in their lives. If they needed an authority, they could turn naturally to John Wesley and his revival of Christianity, which had been going on since iy39. 26 As the wildfire of religious enthusiasm burned repeatedly across the region and spread unabated into Upper Canada, it substantially broke down the Protestant institutional structures that the settlers had brought with them, or seriously altered the emphasis on evangelical principles and priorities in the existing denominations. Church members demanded a simpler, purified religion that owed little to ecclesiastical creeds or theological niceties. Reason and Tradition as authoritative buttresses of faith gave way to Scripture and Experience. What remained was a moral intensity, a clear sense of dutiful spiritual zeal, and a trust in the direct intervention of God in the daily lives of ordinary men and women. The providential corporate mission that had originally dominated the social expression of Puritanism in New England now gave expanded force to the eclectic mix of individualistic spiritual assumptions blended into the evangelical movement.27

34

Faithful Intellect

Beyond promoting conversion and sanctification, the fervent revivals also supplied energy to determined temperance and moral reform campaigns. Revivalists urged the immediate transformation of the individual, which would lead ultimately to a truly righteous world.28 They optimistically assumed that the coupling of moral and spiritual forces would inevitably bring about progress. The revival at Genesee Wesleyan contained elements of these grander concerns. Over time, such experiences led to a powerful reform commitment in political movements and social and religious institutions. All the elements of revival were equally prevalent north of Lake Ontario, especially in the Methodist Church, and had already influenced young Samuel and his family at Mount Pleasant. Whenever a camp meeting had been organized nearby - normally once a year - the more mature members of the Nelles family had actively participated. Usually the gatherings were times of spiritual and social refreshment, and the family often felt the blessing of God's presence. At one protracted meeting in the fall of 1833, sixty were converted on one Sunday alone, and forty-three joined the local Wesleyan congregation/9 Such growth in numbers and enthusiasm reflected an undeniable confidence in the future and spurred on the erection of a church building in the community. The first period of revivals had actually reached its peak about 1831, declining to its nadir during the depression of the late 18305. In the early 18405, after the depression's worst effects had begun to dissipate, a new burst of energy rekindled the smoldering embers of the evangelistic fires, spreading revivals across New York State and Canada West, even into Canada East and the Maritime region.30 The same energy that was recharging Protestantism during the first half of the nineteenth century had other countervailing manifestations, however. The assumptions surrounding the right and power of individuals to seek salvation actively also supported a new freedom to interpret scriptural revelation and participate as prophets proclaiming the will of God for the century. Many of these "sages" viewed history as the record of human decline from the ideal in the Garden of Eden. Humanity was getting worse; a dramatic, even catastrophic, intervention was needed to purge the world. The self-appointed prophets either feared that God's punishment was at hand and unavoidable or hoped that they would be the holy beneficiaries of the apocalypse, rising to heaven as saints under the dispensation of Christ's personal reign. A variety of earnest "Adventist" groups sharing a pre-millennial vision of the imminent end of the world gained considerable strength in Britain and North America during the 18305 and 18405. Their influence far exceeded their actual numbers. They believed that Christ's glorious arrival would mark the destruction of the world and the

Student Days

35

beginning of his thousand-year reign; all of humanity would be judged, and the faithful would ascend to heaven praising God while wailing sinners cascaded to an eternal fiery hell. Their essentially pessimistic views touched Canadian and American Protestantism in a number of disturbing ways.31 Adventist principles denied that humanity could improve over time. On a practical level, they enlarged the revival attack on the traditional pattern of institutional evangelical Christianity, often undermining denominational loyalties. On a personal level, the vivid images evoked by their adherents affected both young and old in their quest for salvation; fear and trepidation came to underscore the spiritual life of literally thousands of churchgoers. Specifically, Adventism forced the young and impressionable Samuel Nelles to consider more deeply the nature of his own religious beliefs. The first influential expression of pre-millennial Adventism appeared in Britain. The popular Scottish Presbyterian minister Edward Irving claimed he had received direct revelations from God and began to prophesize "in tongues" and preach Adventist doctrines. Expelled from the Church of Scotland, he organized his followers into the Catholic Apostolic Church in 1832. and soon began attracting enormous crowds of curious observers from all over the English-speaking world to his London church. The Rev. George Ryerson, Egerton's older brother, was already distressed by what he perceived as a lack of spirituality in British Wesleyanism, as well as by its attempts to dominate Methodism in Upper Canada. He not only converted to Irvingism but became a ruling "Angel" or bishop for Canada while in England on Methodist business. His conversion corresponded with the outbreak of a cholera epidemic in London in 1832, which he attributed to God smiting the evil world in anticipation of Christ's return. At the time, he wrote to Egerton, "I well know that 'the day of the Lord', which he [St. Paul] hoped and waited for is now at the very door, and I believe you will see it and possibly the Lord may intend you for one of those chosen witnesses whom he will fill with the spirit to warn and prepare the world for his coming."32 When Egerton Ryerson visited London in 1833, he attended a Catholic Apostolic Church meeting, and afterward had dinner with Irving himself. He was thoroughly impressed with Irving and by the solemnity of the highly ritualistic worship services; however, despite the Methodistic elements of Irvingism, he would never become as passionate about it as his brother nor consider abandoning the Methodist Church for this "eccentric agitation."33 Irving's disciples carried their rather cryptic message to continental Europe and North America; George Ryerson remained in charge of the Canadian church until he retired in 1872. Regardless of the condemnations printed in the Christian Guardian and other newspapers,

36

Faithful Intellect

Irvingism made serious inroads among Baptist and Methodist congregations, which were already susceptible to claims that Christ would soon arrive.34 The Nelles family opposed the new movement, but some of their neighbours did ally themselves with it. The Irvingites began to falter after the death of their charismatic leader in December 1834, and more sharply over time as the end of the world did not occur. A schismatic New Apostolic Church, centred in Germany, even disavowed the British leadership of the movement. The Catholic Apostolic Church had a very weak structure and made little provision for property management or second-generation leadership. Yet the appearance of Irvingism during this period of quickening religious sentiment, corresponding as it did with rising political and economic tensions, only dramatized the uncertainty and aggravated the divisions already present in society. In short order, other Adventist groups built more permanently on its foundations.35 Upper Canadians were also hearing the message of missionaries from the originally Adventist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, which Joseph Smith founded in 1830. Mount Pleasant itself became the focal point for its mission in 1833, and Smith preached in the area to large and appreciative audiences for nearly the entire month of October. Several Canadian Methodists became influential members of his fervent organization. Although the new religion fell on hard times in Upper Canada because of a lack of permanent local leadership, its entanglement in the radical politics of William Lyon Mackenzie, and the emigration to Missouri of many of the faithful, it still unsettled the region's spiritual life for most of the decade.36 The Methodist Church never truly understood Mormonism, but it did recognize the seriousness of the threat it posed to the stability and expansion of the Methodist revival in the country and constantly denounced the theology and morality of this "deluded and fanatical sect."37 Such eccentric experiments found too ready an audience to suit the Wesleyan authorities, inducing them to redouble their efforts to strengthen the cause in Mount Pleasant and across the province. Samuel Nelles saw that the evangelical environment was being reshaped but also appreciated that enthusiasm had to be tempered with reason. Revival required a rational structure and ideology to restrain excessive emotions and actions before it led otherwise exemplary Christians astray.38 The Adventist groups were even more influential in upstate New York when Nelles was attending Genesee Wesleyan Seminary. Economic and social insecurity compounding spiritual uncertainty made many fearful of forces beyond their personal control. These factors, coupled with the breakdown of denominational loyalty and established

Student Days

37

community relations common in a migrating society, led many to reject old-fashioned church organizations and even evangelical denominationalism itself. At least partially out of desperation, such people turned instinctively to apparently promising forms of "primitive" religion or visionary social experiments. Others, feeling that they recognized a divine hand in the movements, expressed their trust in God by joining them. In fact, the region became the fertile spawning ground for a host of apocalyptic, Utopian, and quasi-Christian experiments. These groups were not churches in the traditional sense of the term, but they did force the various existing denominations to react to their theological concepts and experiential ideologies.39 During the 18305, Edward Irving had substantial influence and Mormonism arose close by, but the most important Adventist leader in the area was William Miller. Miller had been born in Massachusetts in 1782., but his family moved to New York State in 1786. He grew up in the Baptist Church and, although he parted ways with its institutional structure as a young man, he returned to become a rather unconventional Baptist preacher in 1833. Miller was heavily influenced by the series of wild revivals sweeping across the region and by the enthusiastic quest for earthly sanctification, but he believed that revival must ultimately be based on a profound understanding of the Bible. He asserted that prophecy supplied the common thread holding the inerrant Scriptures together and claimed for himself the ability to decipher biblical revelation. He came gradually to accept contemporary pre-millennialist notions in order to demonstrate the consistency of the Bible.40 Miller warned his Baptist brethren about the impending doom awaiting the unconverted, and many ministers and laity from a variety of denominations successfully spread his message throughout the northern states and the Canadas. "Millerism's conscious pietism and evangelicalism and its profitable recourse to the popular revivalism of the day as its principal vehicle of propagation not only encouraged commitment to Adventism; it also 'interested' many professing Christians who found the Millerites' beliefs and rhetoric familiar and comfortable, but who would have been shocked had anyone called them Millerites."41 For years, Canadian Methodism suffered the loss of clergy, members, and financial contributions as a result of the Millerites' proselytizing. These Adventists often "took away a class of persons, who, so long as they are rightly directed, give force and energy to a religious community - namely the emotional and demonstrative. "4Z Such figures were especially valuable in isolated areas lacking a strong clerical presence. Even after his careful study of biblical and historical sources, Miller was usually imprecise as to the exact date of the end of the world,

38

Faithful Intellect

because of difficulties in comparing the various historical Jewish and Christian calendars. When pressed, he suggested it should occur between 21 March 1843 and 2.2, October 1844, since he reckoned that 1843 was the six-thousandth anniversary of creation. By early 1843, other physical manifestations appeared to portend a dramatic change in human affairs. Throughout the spring, a comet passing across the evening sky compounded primitive fears about the end of time.43 At least 50,000 people became convinced that the world would end during 1844, and a million more were skeptical but expectant. Large numbers of "ascension gowns" were purchased, crops were ignored, and houses were abandoned as the expectation grew. When the world did not end, the release of pent-up anxiety led to a massive anti-Adventist reaction. In Toronto, many promoters of the advent were tarred and feathered. However, most individuals simply returned quietly to their old way of life and their traditional churches, resolving not to be fooled again. A few, convinced by new leaders that the fault lay in the calculations for the date of the world's end, not in the principle, coalesced into alternative church organizations such as the Seventh-Day Adventists or the Mormons. Still others replaced Miller's Calvinistic idea that the majority of humanity would be condemned to hell with a trust that the millennium would be full of peace, happiness, and blessedness.44 While at school in the United States, Nelles witnessed the upsurge of expectation and fear associated with the Millerites and marvelled at the inroads they were making within the evangelical churches. He would spend considerable time over the following years evaluating Adventist revelations and value systems, which appeared to him to pose a serious threat to the positive expression of rational, experiential religion. On the basis of his own Bible study he ultimately rejected Adventism, concluding: "I do not believe the world is to end yet, as some teach ... I think I can see in Christianity a power to remove evil from the earth and restore Paradise ... Indeed perhaps this is one conquest of Christ over Satan, to keep his church at work until even here on Earth the victory has been won and Sin all destroyed."45 In this post-millennial vision, Christ's thousand-year reign would not begin until sin had been eradicated and the Earth had been transformed into a holy throne for God's glory. Later in life, however, Nelles assured himself that a greater understanding of the Bible was needed before definite conclusions could be drawn concerning the millennium, agreeing with Wesley: "I do not determine any of these things; they are too high for me. I only desire to creep on in the vale of humble love."46 God would unveil revelations when it was time for humanity to receive them, and they would not be disclosed to a Joseph Smith or Edward

Student Days

39

Irving alone. Nelles's overwhelming trust in a post-millennial eschatology preconditioned his religious and intellectual attitudes, and his continuing mistrust of religious enthusiasm was at least partially propelled by the extravagant claims expressed by Adventist groups. Luckily, Genesee Wesleyan offered a kind of oasis of sanity and safety in a turbulent world. From the students' perspective, even the severe damage to the school caused by a fire in early 1842 was a boon. The residents were forced to board in the town and attend lectures in makeshift accommodations. Services for the school were initially held in the town hall, but a dispute with the local library societies made this solution impossible. An unforeseen result of the loss of a permanent home was greater ease of social contact between male and female students. Evasion of the school's regulations added to the allure of a rendezvous; as Nelles later reminisced: "This fact enables me now to recall more vividly the names of some noble young women whose friendly chat in going to and from the prayers and lectures added largely to the zest of those valuable exercises."47 He also remembered with amusement that while studying Homer with Professor Hoyt he felt he gained a greater appreciation of Ulysses' exotic wanderings from the "rambles which we had with living American nymphs."48 Samuel always had a vivid imagination! Moreover, he never failed to appreciate witty conversation, particularly when it was with an intelligent woman. These experiences convinced him that co-education was healthier and more pedagogically sound, especially for young male students, than what he termed the "monastic system."49 With the completion of the spring semester of 1842, Nelles was ready to matriculate to the advanced realm of the university. After a summer of physical labour on the farm at Mount Pleasant, he journeyed to Cobourg optimistic about his future studies at Victoria College. Cobourg, located about 115 kilometres east of Toronto, had been incorporated as a police village in 1837, and officially became a town in 1850. At the time of Nelles's arrival, however, it contained mainly small, shabby wooden structures, excepting Victoria College, which dominated the local vistas. The stores were poorly supplied, and the town offered few recreational or social amenities; many of the older students complained that there was nothing to do except study and pray. From the Methodist perspective, of course, this was a high commendation, but even the local Wesleyan Church building was in need of repairs. Beginning in the 18408, the harbour was improved, more homes and substantial businesses were constructed, and the community developed into a fairly prosperous service centre and port on Lake Ontario, especially after the arrival of the railroads in the i85os.5° The college was a vital component of the critical urban infrastructure.

40

Faithful Intellect

Under Rev. Matthew Richey's guidance, Upper Canada Academy, the precursor of Victoria College, had provided a reasonably good elementary and high school education for girls and boys. During the first half of the nineteenth century, few Canadian students followed a comprehensive educational program, or even intended to matriculate. Normally, they selected individual courses over several years that served as essentially apprenticeship training for farming, business, or the professions. Girls were prepared for their main duties as wife and mother. The courses at Methodist schools tended to fall into three basic categories, although students were not constrained by these boundaries. At the most academic level, Greek, Latin, and occasionally Hebrew were augmented by Mathematics, Natural History, Natural Science, Natural and Mental Philosophy, and Christian Evidences in order to prepare scholars for university or the ordained ministry. These subjects were supplemented by Logic, Rhetoric, Geography, Modern Languages, and English Grammar to help develop confident and articulate men and women. A second group of subjects, designed for those interested in commercial or more practical occupations, included Chemistry, Geometry, Botany, Astronomy, Surveying, and Bookkeeping. Finally, there were the "ornamental" or "accomplishments" subjects, including Music, Drawing, and Painting, which when combined with English Grammar and Modern Languages furnished what many considered a proper education for young women. Although the Methodist Church argued strongly that women should be educated, during this period it assumed that the purpose of their education was to expand their effectiveness in their special sphere of home and church by making them "useful, moral, cultivated and polished."51 Girls were encouraged to take at least some of the "ornamental" subjects. However, most Methodist schools only offered them as optional extras requiring additional fees; the educational authorities were not interested in producing a class of frivolous or extravagant women. Females at Upper Canada Academy took all the academic subjects, with the exception of Hebrew, which was generally reserved for those planning to enter the ministry. Senior female students were studying at the university level. In 1840, the school had ninety-six male and seventy-six female students, and a large number of the women were noted for their superior scholarship.52 With the reorganization of Upper Canada Academy into Victoria College in 1841, the highly successful women's department was supposed to close, but it continued for another year in a separate section of the college because there were no independent facilities available. The board of governors expected to begin an equivalent academy exclusively for women in the near future and looked into raising funds

Student Days

41

and obtaining a site in Hamilton.53 Responsible Methodists reasonably expected that the government would support independent Methodist women's academies to permit the continuance of female higher education. In the meantime, in i84Z Mrs Daniel Van Norman and Miss Barnes opened the Cobourg Ladies Seminary, which emphasized the "ornamental" subjects, and Mrs Maria Hurlburt - formerly Miss Maria Boulter, who had been the last lady preceptress at Upper Canada Academy - her husband Professor Jesse Hurlburt, and her sister Miss R. Boulter established the much more academically-oriented Cobourg Ladies Academy. Both institutions were closely associated with Victoria in the minds of students; they shared literary resources, and Victoria's faculty occasionally lectured to the young women.54 Although Egerton Ryerson has been accused of hindering the public education of female students, he was in fact so heavily involved in other political issues that he rarely had time to get entangled in the internal policies of Upper Canada Academy. University education was another matter. The twin imperatives of tertiary education at this time were to train clergy and establish an elite fostering social and political stability on the one hand and advancing commercial and industrial growth and liberal capitalism on the other. Most Canadians of the day saw women as playing little or no part in either function. It would have been remarkable, therefore, if any Methodist leader had initiated coeducation at the newly created Victoria College. Except for Oberlin College in Ohio starting in 1841, no North American university admitted women. Further, it was assumed that, if and when higher education opened for female students, they would require segregated facilities in the institution or a separate university altogether. The concept of educating women could prosper only when society accepted them in the professions and was much wealthier, more cosmopolitan, and substantially committed to university education in general.55 During the 18405, Canadian Methodists instinctively selected Wesleyan University in Connecticut as the most reasonable and appropriate model to emulate; Oxford, Cambridge, and the University of London supplied legitimate alternatives if required. In 1841, Victoria College's faculty included Jesse Hurlburt, professor of Hebrew and Natural Sciences; Daniel Van Norman, professor of Greek and Latin Languages, who also taught Chemistry; William Kingston, professor of Mathematics and head of the English Department; and Mr Crowley, English assistant. As well, visiting clergy sometimes gave special lectures. With the departure of Matthew Richey in late 1839 because of his continuing association with the British wing of the Wesleyans, Professor Hurlburt essentially headed the academy and, later, the university. He had originally agreed to teach under the

42,

Faithful Intellect

verbal assurance that he would become principal. But he soon proved ineffective in maintaining order and discipline among the students. At Christmas 1841, two or three students were caught "going on a spree and doing some mischief in town"56 and had to be expelled. The other faculty members also complained that Hurlburt was a poor writer, could not communicate well verbally, and refused to deliver public lectures. The management committee asserted that he interfered in its sphere of administration and assumed prerogatives not rightly his due. At the same time, he affected an unwarranted superiority that made him unpopular in the town, and had allowed relations with the local Wesleyan congregation to deteriorate.57 The Victoria College board therefore unanimously appointed the redoubtable Egerton Ryerson as principal and professor of Moral Philosophy and Rhetoric. The Wesleyan Methodist Church added its necessary agreement by stationing him in the post. Since the iSzos, when he had defended Methodism against malicious attacks by the Church of England's John Strachan, Ryerson had been his church's most effective controversialist and one of the most recognizable provincial personalities. He brought to the principalship a considerable knowledge of college and political matters and an immense and well-deserved prestige among both Methodists and the public at large. Determined to restore order to the college's affairs, he would not countenance opposition even from its authorities, who for their part assumed his sound administrative skills and ability to raise funds would help attract a strong faculty and a larger student enrolment. Ryerson was not only a fine teacher who expected education to be moral, Christian, and practical, improving character while instilling habits of diligence, but also a sensible mentor to the impressionable young college men.58 The new principal arrived in Cobourg in early 1842., and only served for a little over two years before being drawn away to new educational challenges. During that short period, he could do little to solve the school's underlying problems. As a result, Victoria remained little more than the old Upper Canada Academy with a few senior students in attendance; the faculty was preoccupied with the collegiate department, attempting to prepare students to qualify for university. In reality, many of the instructors were poorly qualified to teach at a university level. At a minimum, Victoria required several additional professors, especially for the preparatory departments. In his first year, Ryerson taught Natural and Moral Philosophy, Christian Evidences, and English History. Each of these subjects under normal circumstances should have had its own instructor. In fact, the entire staff was overworked and underpaid, and the education received by the students needed much improvement.59

Student Days

43

As well, Victoria desperately needed better facilities and even many basic amenities normal for college life. The younger students could reside on the crowded third floor of the college, but there was no appropriate boarding space for seniors. Several students rented rooms from Robert Webster, the college steward, including his nephew George Hodgins. There was almost no scientific equipment; a special fundraising effort was made to buy beakers and flasks for simple chemistry experiments. The library, with fewer than 2,00 books, was embarrassingly inadequate and in any case was inaccessible to the students. There was little opportunity for athletics or other forms of organized recreation; no proper field was available for sporting events. However, all these concerns were trivial in comparison with the constant need for repairs to the college building itself. Every time it rained the upper floors were inundated and water cascaded down the stairs, threatening the edifice's structural integrity. Obviously, lack of money was the chief cause of the difficulties. Despite the annual government grant of £500, the tuition fees, and donations from the Wesleyan community, Victoria was running an annual deficit of nearly £400, with little prospect of improvement.60 The university found it extremely difficult even to pay the interest on its growing debt. Some senior students began classes in the autumn of 1841; others arrived after the Christmas break. In January 1842, a series of protracted meetings in Cobourg sparked a revival leading to the conversion of many of those attending Victoria. The converts were part of the same revival movement experienced at Genesee Seminary, almost directly south across Lake Ontario. George Hodgins, for instance, who had just arrived from Hamilton, was spiritually transformed, at least partially because of his deep-seated fear of dying and going to hell. His friends and former co-workers were amazed at his pious new-found social attitudes and spirituality, but some of them probably hoped and expected Hodgins would regain his senses when he left the strange college environment. However, the impact of the revival was both real and sustained. A year earlier, the local temperance society had become a Total Abstainers' Society, but it required the 1842 revival to attract serious numbers. Other reform movements also took on a greater sense of immediacy and became more broadly appealing to the entire community. The combined effects significantly altered the lifestyle of many of the students, improved the moral atmosphere of the college, and made discipline easier to enforce. Some older students, both Methodists and non-Methodists, nonetheless continued to drink, play cards, attend dances, and join in other frivolous activities without serious condemnation from their peers. Professors demanded moral discipline, training, and character formation, but

44

Faithful Intellect

the college was still a part of the raucous Cobourg community. Students were neither encouraged nor expected to remain cloistered inmates of the institution. The close proximity of young women in the female academies and the town also offered serious temptation and led to unauthorized but proper social interaction.61 None of these actions was particularly remarkable; they were all merely examples of the regular social life of the times. In a modest attempt to improve the academic facilities, Rev. Robert Corson suggested in December 1841 that students should form their own library. Clergy and college friends were encouraged to donate books, which would then be lent to those attending Victoria and the nearby private female high schools. Students would staff and administer the library and use their influence to expand the number and quality of the books. The student library, set up in March 1842, allowed scholars to extend their hours of reading and study. Inevitably, there were those who saw no merit in extra reading. Most students took three or fewer rather undemanding subjects a session. Hodgins, for instance, studied English Grammar, Latin, and the Bible. He found Latin very dull and tedious and had difficulty remembering the Bible lectures and memorizing the daily quota of verses.62 Like several of his friends, he would have been even less studious if Cobourg had offered a greater range of activities. When Samuel Nelles arrived in the autumn of 1842, he studied six subjects and stood first at the spring examinations of 1843. He scored a perfect 8 in Evidences of Religion and English History, jl/2 in Geometry and Greek, and 7 in Composition and Physiology. He won the English prize, along with the accolades of the college officials, especially Egerton Ryerson.63 During convocation in April, Nelles gave an address as part of the annual school exhibition. It was appropriately entitled "Spirit of Inquiry" and presented ideas that would govern his actions throughout his entire career. He began by asserting, "The knowledge of truth is the substance of human acquisition; the practice of truth the sum of human duty."64 Material possessions were worthless in comparison with the priceless value of appreciating what is true, and there was no more important preoccupation than living the life this understanding demanded. Truth had the power to draw human beings to the glory of God. "It is this disposition to search, this propensity to roam through the vast universe of mind and matter and spy out from her deep retreats the sacred form of Truth which we denominate emphatically by the Spirit of Inquiry."65 Nelles argued that humble inquiry after the truths of the universe and God, of nature, and in human and spiritual relations was the providential gift to mankind. It was an inalienable right that should not be

Student Days

45

abandoned no matter what forces of orthodoxy might condemn it. "Bigotry and superstition and tyranny have marshaled their thousand hosts to check her progress and put forth all their venom to quench her very existence in the human soul ... Give me the liberty to inquire above all liberties ... Then let Truth and error grapple ... Has error ever advanced by inquiry; truth ever suffered by investigation?"66 Nelles's literary training and orientation induced him to add the view that the poet was the most faithful of all enquirers, the purveyor of eternal truths: "The poet breathes the harmonies of nature, the harmonies he learns by deep research and diligent compassion of men and things. Not indeed by the slow induction of reason, but by the heavenly faculty of intuition."67 Probably familiar with the recent writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Nelles asserted that the dedicated poet unearthed truth and presented it directly to the reader's imagination with a unique power. All these beliefs would appear over and over again in Nelles's writings and public addresses. In the fall of 1843, Nelles returned to Victoria and continued to demonstrate academic excellence. Together with Oliver Springer, who would graduate in 1845 with the first Bachelor of Arts degree earned in the province, he was complimented in the press for his prowess, particularly in Ryerson's class on Mental Philosophy. He earned perfect marks in Metaphysics, jVi in Greek, Latin, and Latin Composition, and 6% or 7 in Geometry, Higher Mathematics, and Greek Composition. At the spring examinations he again addressed the college, this time on "Sympathy, its influence on Character and Happiness."68 In this paper he presented quite a mature appreciation of the individual's need for a legitimate place in a community. Nelles spoke as much for himself as for humankind in general when he claimed, "Communion with kindred spirits is essential to happiness ... intercourse with equals admits the greatest extension and the most fellowship ... Without sociability there could be no intellectual or moral progress and virtue itself would expire in the loneliness of seclusion."69 Social relations were the basis of veneration of God and human service to the world. At the same time, God admitted sympathy to the natural world in order to expand virtue. People shared many traits, including, often, an abiding sorrow and despair, but mutual sympathy and the benevolent sympathy of God bound all together in hope and joy. Nelles's powerful comprehension, in concert with his mature literary style, sound organization, and substantial analytical ability when dealing with complex spiritual and intellectual riddles, made him a model for those studying at Victoria. John Carroll would later describe him as "distinguished for his intellect and eloquence."70 Nelles combined his academic work with an active role in the student societies. He published an article entitled "The Believer's Hope"

46

Faithful Intellect

in the first issue of Philomath, the newspaper of the Philalethic Society. After only a few issues, this was replaced by The Oasis, a literary magazine from the Phoenix Association that lasted from 1843 to 1845; Nelles and his friend Hodgins were popular contributors and sometimes editors.71 Nelles had also maintained his commitment to the Wesleyan Methodist Church. After being tested on his faith and his ability to convey the gospel, he was licensed as a local preacher, travelling to the nearby circuits to assist with services. For fun, Nelles also composed simple poems for some of his female acquaintances. In November 1843, f°r instance, he wrote the following for Ellen Ellis, who would become his sister-in-law: Bright are the dreams of ardent youth And filled with forms of joy and Love Fair forms, that fondly speak of Truth And decked with radiance from above Unsought they come - a moment stay And as they linger, pass away. Like rays of light which brighten glow As sinks the dying day to rest O'er all the earth new beauty throw And gild with gold the fleecy west They briefly shine - then fading fly And leave the twilight in the sky. Then may I dare to ask, kind E. That when thy spring of life is gone And for its hour of rapturous glee Have come the calmer joys of Home If in some old and favourite strain The scenes of youth should come again. Thou wilt not then forget to blend, Howe'er unworthy of a thought The name of one far-distant friend By whom thou can'st not be forgot.72

The following Valentine's Day, Samuel composed at least two other sentimental poems for young ladies. Both efforts fretted over the end of youthful joys and lost dreams, yet hoped that friendships would endure: "For oft the fond and faithful heart / Their love will recall with a sigh."73 These poems mirrored his natural need for company and social relations and demonstrated his state of mind as he moved

Student Days

47

beyond adolescence into the serious business of adulthood. Unfortunately, they demonstrated little evidence of poetic talent. By the end of his second year at Victoria, Nelles realized he had already outgrown whatever else the college might offer. The faculty was limited in its qualifications, the school had trouble keeping those academics it possessed, and the facilities and the breadth of education were inferior to what he had come to expect in the United States. In his inaugural address in 1842., Ryerson had presented a dynamic portrait of higher education at the college, claiming that it would give greater emphasis to English and the natural sciences while preserving the best of a classical education. Moral Philosophy and Metaphysics would reign supreme, guiding and balancing the Liberal Arts education since they "distinguish man from the brute creation" and give him dominion.74 Whatever influence this model might have on Victoria in the future, there was little evidence of it during Ryerson's tenure. Faculty members were neither prepared nor qualified to initiate changes, hesitating even to revise their tattered notes. Education in the province continued to be dominated during the 18405 by the study of Greek and Latin, with History and Geography increasing the concentration by focusing on biblical and classical times. If anything, the Classics were being stressed even more than in earlier decades at the public grammar schools and private academies that fed universities. Students were not being prepared academically for a significantly different college education. Moreover, rather than Ryerson's model, the principles adopted at Victoria College appeared to be those of the far more conservative Thomas Arnold, who culminated a distinguished career at Rugby School by becoming Regius Professor of Modern History at Oxford University in 1841. Arnold opposed the separation of church and state, supported an established Church of England, and held that government had an obligation to provide moral leadership and advance Christian relations in society. With regard to higher education, he argued that, like the state, he who educates must take a higher view and pursue an end accordingly far more complicated. He must adjust the respective claims of bodily and mental exercise, of different kinds of intellectual labour; - he must consider every part of the pupil's nature, physical, intellectual and moral; regarding the cultivation of the last, however, as paramount to either of the others.75

Arnold did not support an education that created a "muscular" Christianity as much as an intelligent self-reliance that he termed "manliness," which would dispose the university graduate to moral and intellectual leadership in the world.76 During the 18405, then, few pedagogical innovations were seen at

48

Faithful Intellect

Victoria. There were too many practical internal difficulties. When Ryerson decided to leave to head the provincial education system in 1844, Nelles's worst fears were confirmed. Furthermore, various government measures proposed for re-ordering the nature of higher education in the province held little hope for a vigorous denominational university system. If Victoria survived - which was not at all certain it would take years before real improvement occurred. Nelles realized that if he really wanted a respectable degree, he would have to attend an American institution. The obvious choice was Wesleyan University in Middletown, Connecticut, which had recently granted Egerton Ryerson an honorary doctorate. He himself highly recommended the school because of its close links with Canadian Methodism; moreover, it was quickly becoming one of the best colleges in the United States. As a Methodist institution, it readily answered all of Nelles's educational criteria. Samuel returned home from Cobourg for a year, at least partially to rebuild his savings. His parents were also helping to pay for his expensive education, seeing it as the best means of providing him with part of his inheritance when he needed it most. Samuel began attending Wesleyan University in the autumn of 1845.77 Meanwhile, as he pondered his future, Nelles had to consider the implications of the revolutionary changes in the political, religious, and social fabric of the Canadas. In the election following the union of Upper and Lower Canada in 1841, a mixed Conservative/Reform ministry was formed under William Henry Draper, with Lord Sydenham actually running the government. By 1842, however, a Reform ministry controlled the Assembly. Louis-Hippolyte LaFontaine led the majority of French-speaking members from Canada East, while Robert Baldwin controlled a smaller number from Canada West. Party discipline was far from rigorous, but the ministry could normally pass routine government measures.78 University education was among the contentious issues facing the United Canadas. In 1827, John Strachan, newly appointed Anglican Archdeacon of Toronto, had obtained a Royal Charter for King's College in Toronto. He had then arranged to have the educational endowment, consisting mostly of undeveloped lands scattered across the province, placed at the exclusive disposal of King's College and its preparatory school, Upper Canada College. After years of delay, the cornerstone for King's College was finally laid on 23 April 1842, by the governor-general. The school opened to students on 8 June 1843. Strachan anticipated that the university would train Anglican clergy, cultivate the values of English gentlemen, and perpetuate sound British traditions and loyalty to the Crown while justifying a tolerant, conservative panorama for the Canadas.79 The officials at the college

Student Days

49

appeared to see much to their liking in the writings of Thomas Arnold. Although such principles were eventually abandoned, they were remarkably resilient, considering the power of more individualistic notions of the function of education. Significant opposition arose during the 18405 to the Church of England's monopoly over the ±26,000 acre university endowment, especially since King's College also received an annual grant of £1000 from the Canada Company and could rely on government largesse as required. The Church of Scotland opened its own Queen's University in Kingston in 1842 and demanded a share of the endowment funds on the same basis as it had claimed part of the clergy reserves: it was the established church in Scotland. At the same time, although many Methodists demanded the separation of church and state and therefore opposed government support for religious institutions, and the British Wesleyans moreover denounced interference with the prerogatives of the Church of England, a large faction headed by Egerton Ryerson argued that Victoria College needed and deserved a large subsidy. When an educational facility served the entire population and advanced the public good, they reasoned, it should not suffer the penalties placed on purely religious or highly sectarian institutions. The Roman Catholic Regiopolis College, erected in Kingston in 1837, also wished to receive government aid, as Catholic tertiary institutions in Canada East did.80 Freed from the political control of the old Tory oligarchy, Robert Baldwin demanded that higher education be removed from church control and vested in the hands of the state. Like most liberals around the world, he knew that state-controlled education was a fundamental precondition for all future reform. Optimistic that the time had finally arrived to topple one of the critical pillars supporting the reactionary elements in society, in October 1843 Baldwin introduced a bill to transform King's College into a non-sectarian Liberal Arts college and transfer the endowment from the control of the Church of England to a new University of Toronto.81 The funds would be shared with the satellite denominational universities - such as Queen's and Victoria - if they affiliated, moved to Toronto, and abandoned their Arts programs. They were expected to become simply theological seminaries for the training of their denominational clergy. Thomas Liddell, the principal of Queen's, had only recently arrived from Scotland and knew little of Canadian affairs, but he was favourably impressed with the proposed educational measures. He wrote to Ryerson in April and again in May 1843 attempting to gain Victoria's support for the reforms. Ryerson was too experienced with political jousting to proceed incautiously. He concurred with much

50

Faithful Intellect

that Liddell and Baldwin proposed, as long as it included a fair share of the huge educational endowment, but he would not countenance the cost to Methodist higher education of abandoning the Arts curriculum or moving to Toronto. Liddell, maintaining that he had no wish to hurt Victoria, had simply assumed "that in the erection and establishment of it [Victoria] your Body had in view chiefly the theological training of your own candidates for the ministry - and that your having near it a Literary Institution arose from necessity, not from choice - as was the case with the Presbyterians."82 He added that retaining it as an Arts college would not interfere with the overall principles of the plan, and that they would simply have to differ on the issue of locating in Toronto. The two men did consent to pressure the government separately for reform and to work together whenever possible to overcome the hostility demonstrated by the supporters of the Church of England.83 Their debate became irrelevant when in November 1843 the LaFontaine-Baldwin ministry resigned and the university bill died without a vote. What broke the government was a fundamental disagreement over the interpretation of the nature of responsible government. Governor-General Sir Charles Metcalfe considered that his executive must also have the confidence of the House of Assembly, but he did not agree that he must submit to the will of the House over his own or expressed imperial policies. The controversy came to a head when his ministers questioned Metcalfe's discretionary appointments. Their insistence on their right to make such decisions arose from their desire to reward their political friends and punish their opponents. The Reformers felt the governor-general was obliged to accept all their recommendations, even those involving blatant patronage. Metcalfe and his supporters saw the matter very differently: as the introduction of the shabby American spoils system to the end of reinforcing petty partisan politics and disloyally assaulting well-established British institutions. Metcalfe spent the year following the government's resignation attempting to organize a new political alliance that could sustain the confidence of the Assembly and run the province effectively.84 He was able to rally some support, but most influential politicians were determined to remain aloof from the whole dangerous debacle. Outside the Assembly, he courted and won the favour of Egerton Ryerson, whose moderate reform ideology, sense of loyalty, and hatred of political partisanship attracted him to Metcalfe. Ryerson would not accept a purely political post, but he agreed to become Chief Superintendent of Public Schools if Metcalfe and his allies were returned to power and his stance on responsible government was confirmed. Ryerson laboured diligently across the province to defeat his former Reform associates.85

Student Days

51

After the election in October 1844, in which Metcalfe's political supporters were returned under the weak leadership of William Henry Draper and Denis-Benjamin Viger, Ryerson formally accepted his reward and almost immediately set off on a year-long educational tour of Europe. Reform Methodists were aghast at Ryerson's actions and he never regained his former influence in the counsels of the church. At Victoria, the month before the election, Metcalfe's gift of £50 for the library was denounced as a political bribe; the holiday to mark his visit was also condemned.86 A dispute between rival student supporters of Metcalfe and Baldwin led to a brief series of "riots" as they competed in raising and tearing down American and British flags. The student pranks were compounded by an air of self-righteous importance and exaggerated by the provincial press. Some students later sent articles to newspapers variously condemning and defending Ryerson.87 Nelles, at home in Mount Pleasant during the election, missed the excitement at Victoria. Simultaneously, the Protestant community in the Canadas was in a state of turmoil. The Church of Scotland in particular was undergoing dramatic changes and was eventually torn asunder. A powerful new political force in the person of George Brown now appeared on the scene. Both Brown and the evolution of Canadian Presbyterianism would have dramatic affects on Nelles's life and work. In Scotland, the established church was facing attacks from within and without. NonPresbyterian churches opposed the favoured position of the Church of Scotland. Within the church, a large group led by Thomas Chalmers condemned the "intrusion" of landed aristocrats and their business allies in the appointment of clergy as an infringement on the spiritual rights and independence of the church by unholy secular forces. While initially supporting the close interrelationship of church and state and the rights of establishment, the reformers believed the congregation should be free to call its ministry. On 18 May 1843, Chalmers led 2.02 of the commissioners to the General Assembly out of the Church of Scotland and formed the Free Church. With them went about a third of the ministry and nearly half of the lay membership. Later the Free Church accepted the separation of church and state and the principle of voluntary support.88 In the Canadas, several Secessionist Presbyterian denominations presented a pious and enthusiastic opposition to the union of church and state and had long accepted voluntaryist principles. They spread a reform leaven among the other Calvinist bodies. The 1843 Synod of the Church of Scotland in Canada discussed the issues embroiling their Scottish brethren but did not formally vote on voluntaryism or secular intrusion. They hoped their denomination's semi-independent status

52,

Faithful Intellect

within the Presbyterian communion would save it from the old-world divisions. Already relatively weak, it feared it would lose its share of the clergy reserves funds and its control over property, especially the newly founded Queen's University, if it broke from the established Scottish mother church. However, after many visits from representatives of the reform forces in Scotland, especially Dr Robert Burns of the Free Church, and with the powerful influence of Peter and George Brown in the Banner on the side of separation, the issue was finally decided at the 1844 Synod meeting in Kingston. Because the Synod could not pass a satisfactory resolution on 3 July 1844, a large minority of twenty-three ministers who worked mostly in congregations of lowland Scottish immigrants living west of Kingston withdrew and formed the Presbyterian Church of Canada, commonly called the Free Church (as opposed to the Presbyterian Church in Connection with the Church of Scotland or Auld Kirk). The Free Church, with its evangelical energy and unfettered missionary zeal and the availability of clergy who had been forced from their parishes in Scotland, quickly expanded its operations. A much weakened Queen's University remained with the Auld Kirk, but Thomas Liddell resigned in 1846. The college could not again afford a full-time principal until 1860, when it appointed Rev. William Leitch from Scotland.89 Nelles's attitudes toward the separation of church and state were quite complicated. Unlike many of his colleagues, he was essentially pragmatic on the question. In theory, he was a staunch voluntaryist. During his public address on "Sympathy" in 1844, he noted that pity and sympathy of spirit "nerved the arm of the venerable Burns when in the unaffected earnestness of his soul, he pictured to our minds the wrongs of his injured yet devoted brethren. And we were subdued before him. Nor does Heaven look down upon a nobler spectacle than upon the uncompromising Church of Scotland resting on the Christian sympathy of the world."90 Nelles assumed that for the good of society the state must be inherently Christian, preferably Protestant. But this condition did not mean that one particular denomination should have a superior status. He applauded all attempts to end the special status of the Church of England and the Church of Scotland, which was obviously unfair to the vast majority of Canadian subjects. He asserted, "The two kingdoms must not be confounded - church and state. The Christian relies on truth alone. Christ's subjects are voluntary ... Magistrates have no right to defend Christianity, except as disciples, not as rulers."91 Yet Nelles was most affected by the state's special relationships and responsibilities in higher education. It was improper to support only

Student Days

53

King's College, because it served but a small proportion of the Canadian community. Despite the apparent inconsistency, he advocated public aid to all universities. Denominational colleges, while suitably religious in tone, differed from churches since their fundamental aim was to furnish advanced independent training, not to proselytize on behalf of one theological or ecclesiastical position. Collectively, they were open to all and, Nelles believed, they were essential for the welfare and progress of the Canadian nationality. It was both a serious evil and short-sighted renunciation of the legitimate function of the state to cut them off from government aid, the only practical solution to the colleges' crippling financial problems. Regardless of how sensible Nelles's position appeared, he was in the minority. In the summer of 1843, George Brown and his father Peter had come to Toronto from New York at the invitation of supporters of establishing a Free Church; they set up the Banner to further the cause in Canada West. Born in 1818 near Edinburgh, George was deeply imbued with laissez-faire economic liberalism and individualistic notions of liberty and justice. In 1844 he set up the Toronto Globe to give freer vent to his views and, later, to provide a vehicle for advancing his candidacy for political office. He quickly made himself the major non-elected voice in the province for Reform principles, including responsible government. His support for Baldwin's policies led him to call for a secular university and the end of funding for denominational colleges. This point of view was made easier to justify when in 1844 the Free Church created Knox College in Toronto as a purely theological seminary and the United Secessionists established the shortlived Divinity Hall in London; both schools rejected government support. Of course, Brown had other causes to promote and principles to defend, and he became one of the most significant figures in Canadian history. His sacrifices were decisive in the attainment of Canadian Confederation, and he strongly advanced the cause of western settlement and the principles of British liberalism. Nevertheless, until his death in 1880 Brown and his Toronto Globe newspaper were thorns in the side of Samuel Nelles, standing in the way of what he believed to be a truly progressive system of education in Ontario.92 In the summer of 1844, Samuel was at home beginning his year away from formal studies. He probably helped his older brother William with his newly opened Mount Pleasant Academy, and he certainly preached in the neighbourhood for the Canadian Wesleyan cause. Despite the lack of contemporary evidence regarding his position on Ryerson's support for Metcalfe, Nelles later acknowledged that Ryerson by his overarching vanity and pursuit of personal gain had lost his influence among Methodists.93 As well, he denounced both the

54

Faithful Intellect

extremism he had hoped was gone from the province and the hollow cries of loyalty from Metcalfe's supporters. Although opposed to irrational party loyalty, Nelles certainly sided with moderate reformers. In 1847, as a new election approached, he recorded privately, "That we can never be oppressed by a high-handed and imperious monarchism I think there can be no doubt ... And I think that anyone who has studied the spirit of the Age will conclude that future changes in civil polity will tend rather to increase than diminish the power of the mass."94 The best elements of democracy would increase and in turn guide the economic and moral progress of the country. Considering Canada's relations with Britain, Nelles added, I think we are likely to undergo a long series of political changes - some immediately unfavourable - but all destined ultimately to promote social progress and the firm establishment of civil liberty. As in the isle of Britain, there will be the boundary to settle between executive authority and popular claims while Religion as she has always done will stand by as a co-adjutor of both and materially modify the result of all the struggles. But truth is mighty and will at last own Canada now so rude in manners and unsettled in Government.95

A couple of weeks later, again deliberating on the questions of responsible government and tory politics, he confided, "Toryism has been ... the deadly blast that has withered the fairest prospects of our Country. And because in looking back upon the rebellion and period preceding, this truth is too palpable to be denied, we are not for this willing to let the culprit change cognomen and be called Conservatism ... Who are the present Conservatives but the old high Tories whose guilt having become greater than they could bear."96 As to the form of responsible government they adopted when in power, Nelles asserted that they used it to camouflage their desire for a monopoly of power to preserve tory principles: The few against the many, selfishness against public spirit, professed loyalty against large-hearted patriotism, exclusive ecclesiastical establishments against Gospel Religion, narrow-minded and stubborn adherence to institutions stagnant and decayed if they are old in preference to cheering social progress and evident improvements because they may happen to be new - This, these and all are Toryism.97

Nelles recognized that the old-fashioned conservative principles founded on Hobbesian philosophy and Blackstone's ideals of a balanced constitution that had been intended to guide the formation of the province were no longer uniquely acceptable in English Canada.

Student Days

55

Aristocratic pretensions, established churches, and autocratic government were being replaced by laissez-faire economics and democratic individualism. Nelles himself was neither dogmatic about any political ideology nor active in political affairs. He remained essentially moderate and pragmatic, believing in economic, social, and moral progress under God's benevolent care while optimistically trusting that justice would prevail. Still, he acknowledged that society was a vulnerable, living, interacting organism that sometimes needed the protection and nurture of an active state. Despotic demagoguery or an irrational mob could be the most oppressive of tyrants. Individuals had rights, but they must ultimately be ruled by their duty to God and their obligations to their fellow beings.98 In the late 18405, although the extreme elements on the social and political spectrum were muted, circumstances changed little with respect to the issues surrounding higher education. Baldwin and Brown steadfastly opposed financing denominational universities. At the same time, Brown's Free Church allies could commend Knox College untainted by the mere thought of filthy government lucre - while enrolling their sons in the state-financed Arts programs at the University of Toronto after 1849. Though Strachan had lost his pre-eminent influence on provincial affairs, he still defended the need for an established Church of England: the living link between church and state strengthened the noblest bonds of society at all levels and encouraged responsibility in Canadian subjects. It also restrained tyranny by morally shaping government from within and advanced human welfare, true progress, and the ultimate sovereignty of God. When the intimately interwoven fabric of such a society was cut, the result could easily be social, intellectual, and political chaos. Nevertheless, Strachan was a political realist who could adapt to new circumstances as required. Nelles, like Ryerson, agreed with the new liberal-conservatism that increasingly dominated political affairs. Both sought to preserve stability and order but demanded personal liberty and material progress." For the immediate future, however, Nelles would have to rely on others to lead the way; he was too preoccupied with obtaining his degree at Wesleyan University. Opened in 1831 under the jurisdiction of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the school required no religious tests for either students or faculty and taught only Arts and Science courses. About a fifth of its graduates entered the ministry; another quarter became teachers. By 1845, Stephen Olin had been president for four years, and under his leadership and the superior faculty he assembled, Wesleyan became the strongest Methodist university in the United States.100 Nelles strengthened his grasp of the Classics and History and

56

Faithful Intellect

deepened his appreciation of the philosophical realms of Ethics and Logic. What he most enjoyed was the opportunity to read English literature, especially poetry, and to exercise his literary imagination and modest poetic talents. At his graduation ceremonies in the summer of 1846, Samuel read a dissertation entitled "History." In it, he differentiated between the extraordinary events of the past and the meagre surviving record. "History being therefore something universal and indestructible is but faintly shadowed forth in those annals within which our notions of history are usually comprised."101 History was also a continuum, traveling on forever with only revelation hinting at its post-millennial destination. Disciplined research would help unravel the mysteries of the past and demonstrate the majesty of God's reign and the inevitable progress of the world. Nelles went on to suggest that even if an empire such as Britain's should decay and fall, its culture, language, and laws, preserved in history, would furnish a proud heritage for all future generations, empowering their quest for the infinite. During his stay at Middletown, Nelles matured spiritually and socially as well as intellectually. He strove to prepare himself for his future career. By the time he graduated, though still tormented by fears of his unworthiness, he was nearly certain that his future lay in the itinerancy. If the duties of the clergy entailed being a teacher, an evangelist, and a pastor, Nelles felt most clearly called by God to evangelize and teach the intrinsic values of Christianity. He had attempted to work out in his own mind a more comprehensive concept of God. While not fully satisfied with the results, he did appreciate the need to seek humbly after truth and to apply his intellect to practical religious goals. He recognized that true worship of God involved helping society's weaker members and that responsibility and service were at the heart of religion. Nelles prayed that he would be preserved from yielding to temptation and that he would purify and deepen his spirituality. Fortunately, he never became morbid or overly absorbed by his formidable introspection.102 Along with its other advantages, Wesleyan University furnished an unparalleled opportunity for making friends and for the casual interaction Nelles craved. He was a social being, enjoying nothing better than stimulating conversation or friendly banter. The residence where he boarded was especially useful in this regard. Collectively, the generations of students who resided there gloried in the designation "the Mystics" and enjoyed excellent academic and later professional success. Like other university students, then and now, they created an intimate bond by addressing each other by nicknames, some more appropriate than others. Nicknames helped define a community of mutual

Student Days

57

understanding, a brotherhood of shared experiences. Nelles was known as Potiphar; his best friends were Daniel Martindale (Cheops), R.C. Pitman (Wampum), and Wesley Genung (Mugs). As well as deep discussions of philosophy and literature, they shared their concerns about their futures and their hopes regarding woman friends and marriage. More often, however, they simply regaled each other with their harmless pranks, their criticisms of professors, life in Middletown, and their extracurricular adventures. Long after they left university they would continue to correspond, and in so doing relive the youthful pleasures of college life and keep on giving each other advice and encouragement.103 Nelles ended his student days prepared and eager for the approaching responsibilities of adulthood.

3 The Young Scholar-Preacher

After Samuel Nelles left the graduation ceremonies at Wesleyan University in Middletown, Connecticut, on 9 August 1846, he faced a momentous decision: What career path to follow? As on other such important occasions, he retreated to his favourite spot on the family farm at Mount Pleasant. His brothers and sisters, recognizing the seriousness behind his contemplative countenance, did not disturb him; even his parents offered only the advice to pray to God for guidance and trust his own judgment. Sitting on the large verandah, looking down the hill to the road that he must soon take toward the wider world, Samuel could not help but muse about his adolescent ambitions and his future prospects. On the clear, sunny days of late summer, in that serene pastoral setting, he could let his romantic nature take flight. Dreams of becoming a great orator, a poet, a famous reformer, or even a world traveler were hard to suppress. But Nelles ultimately saw greatness as deriving from the exercise of the imagination inherent in the rational mind; as he wrote around this time: "Thought is the great thing to make a man" and "The field of daring has been changed from the physical to the intellectual world."1 Certainly his impressive educational training could lead to no other conclusion. Nelles also believed then - and would continue to believe all his life - that hard work and shouldering one's duty were primary elements of any career. Duty should be the supreme rationale for an individual's actions, especially when it was directed by lofty principles of divinely inspired moral obligation. Answering the trumpet call of duty furnished the only meaningful accomplishment in life; it alone could satisfy the deep longing in Nelles's heart. Moreover, duty was intimately associated in his mind with the hope of future glory after death; the gates of Heaven would be opened to him if he was faithful to his earthly responsibilities. He further believed that the wildest dreams of

The Young Scholar-Preacher

59

the most romantic would be satisfied in that future state. At the same time, the memory of a profound oration on "Failures of Great Men," by his whimsical friend, Daniel Martindale of New York City, came vividly to mind. Martindale had warned his fellow graduates against shallow behaviour or seeking only earthly popularity.2- Fame was the most chimerical and ephemeral of all prizes; it was merely a shadow that vanished as quickly as it formed. Yet for the imaginative Nelles fame was the stuff of dreams. Indeed, his dreams never truly died; they merely lay dormant in the recesses of his mind. Martindale - Cheops to his closest friends at Wesleyan University had earlier tempted Nelles with the suggestion of spending the year after graduation in Europe, particularly Germany, where they could wallow in culture and history. 3 Nelles rationalized making such a grand tour as an opportunity for expanding his knowledge and deepening his experience while maturing socially and spiritually. It was easy and thoroughly enjoyable to be distracted by such a marvelous escape from reality, especially when it meant postponing difficult decisions. But this distraction only gave expression to the last cries of youth. Samuel lacked not only the resources for the trip but also a real interest in taking it, while the younger Martindale was equally enthusiastic about traveling to Mexico to open an oyster stand in Vera Cruz or simply to live there in rustic isolation. Samuel could only smile at such wonderful impracticality. He could not afford to be so adventurous or irresponsible; at twenty-two years of age, he felt it was time to settle into his adult occupation. As for Cheops, he too became more realistic and postponed his travels to enter his brother's law office. Martindale came closer to reality when he suggested that the Methodist ministry was probably in his friend's near future. He wrote to Nelles, "I know that in Canada there is no man who can preach the word with the power and beauty that my own Potiphar can." But he added, "I say can, because it hangs on the will after all, to determine the power."4 Nelles had long contemplated the ministry and had helped out on his home circuit as a preacher since obtaining his license during his student days at Victoria College. William Ryerson, the third eldest of the five brothers who served in the Methodist ministry, also urged him to take over a station on his district in the western section of the province.5 Although deeply religious, Samuel declined the offer. He worried that, because he had never attained an earnest, emotional conversion experience, his faith was not strong enough and he was unworthy. As well, working as an assistant on some isolated circuit held little appeal for the ambitious young man. He wondered with Martindale whether he really had the commitment to succeed in the itinerancy: Did he have the will?

60

Faithful Intellect

Still, all of Samuel's life seemed to point to such an occupation. If he chose to enter the ministry - which, despite his hesitation now seemed likely - only a very preliminary decision would be required at the present. The Methodist Church had wisely established a series of escalating examinations to insure that a candidate's qualifications were in place, that he was healthy and free of debt, and that he and the church were both certain of his calling. For the time being, Nelles's home circuit would have to satisfy itself that he had the appropriate "gifts and graces"; that is, his conversion experience, his call to the ministry, and his ability to perform ministerial duties were all in order. There was no doubt that the circuit would accept him on these grounds. The district superintendent would then examine his moral character and his overall efficiency,6 which could easily be done by visiting the circuits on which he had preached and interviewing his own ministers or former professors at Victoria College. Once Nelles had accepted the inevitable and settled on entering the itinerancy, he was able to enjoy the balmy days of late summer and the last of his leisure time. It would not be until the following June that the Annual Conference of the Wesleyan Methodist Connexion would officially appoint him to a circuit as a probationer. It came as a surprise, therefore, that while Samuel was visiting Toronto he received a letter from Egerton Ryerson, his former mentor at Victoria College. Still the nominal principal of the university, as well as Chief Superintendent of Schools for Canada West, Ryerson remained a force to be reckoned with in Methodist educational affairs and provincial politics. He was offering Nelles a position as professor of Classics at Victoria College. After deep meditation, Nelles replied to Ryerson on 2.1 September 1846, accepting the offer. He began by announcing that he felt himself called to the ministry and believed he should enter the preaching ranks as soon as possible. However, he agreed with Ryerson's suggestion that teaching at Victoria would give him an unequalled opportunity for serious theological study; circuit duties would certainly interfere more with study than residence at Victoria. He also pronounced himself swayed by the need to sustain the college during this difficult period in its history and by the realization that he could serve the church as well at Victoria as in any other capacity. With some irony - considering his future career - Samuel declared, "My duties there at the present time would be severe - considering the co-workers, very severe and depressing to any literary spirit or ambition that I might wish to cherish"; still, "I think I could gather resolution sufficient to discharge them for the short time I would expect to remain."7 He added that he would make up for his inexperience with diligence. However, his attitude overall was hardly enthusiastic:

The Young Scholar-Preacher

61

I am acquainted well with the number and acquirements of the present students as well as with the character of some of their Professors, in short with the entire spirit of the place, and to you, I frankly confess that I feel it, in many respects, a self-sacrifice to enter those memorable classic halls with their present inmates and their present reputation in the eyes of the country. Under your own immediate control and instruction some passed agreeable and profitable days in that institution and then I had high hopes of its future excellence; but things have changed now and I should while there be constantly reminded of the days of yore with melancholy emotions.8

Nelles was not only wise enough to recognize the disadvantages of the appointment but also sufficiently insecure to worry that he was not capable of meeting its challenges. To add to his confusion, he privately acknowledged that the offer might afford a valuable opportunity for one without any practical experience. Confiding in Martindale, he asked for his advice. The reply was most encouraging, suggesting that Nelles would make Victoria into the "Temple of the Crown" if the position was truly worthy of his talents.9 Samuel always appreciated such efforts to dissipate his innate self-doubt. Ryerson replied to Nelles's somewhat reluctant acceptance by thanking God for the grace that enabled Samuel to use his gifts and his rare educational advantages to serve the Methodist Church and the young people of Canada. He added, "It is true the present prospect is not flattering; but I look for a beneficial change, and if at the approaching Board meeting I do not see reason to hope for such a change, I will not advise you to accept of an appointment there."10 Ryerson certainly knew of Victoria's financial troubles and of the failure of most Methodists to appreciate its value to the church as a whole. He was also only too well aware of the difficulties that the acting principal, Alexander McNab, was having both with the church's political enemies and, more seriously, with its supposed friends. For a variety of reasons, the university was not prospering under McNab's care. Ryerson himself had been somewhat ostracized by college officials because of his support for Governor-General Charles Metcalfe during the election of 1844. He had not even visited the school since returning from his extended European educational tour, and contemplated resigning his largely nominal principalship.11 Along with the other members of the Victoria College board, Ryerson hoped that the contemplated appointment of Matthew Richey as principal would promote the school's standing in the province, especially among the Wesleyan lay leadership. However, Richey's appointment could not take place for at least a year and was contingent upon the as-yet-uncertain reunion of Wesleyan Methodists in Canada West. In fact, the board

62.

Faithful Intellect

would not meet to decide on possible new hirings - including that of Nelles - until late October, after John Ryerson and Anson Green had returned from Britain.12 They had been delegated to discuss the terms for Wesleyan reunion, and their recommendations would greatly influence the connexion's entire institutional future. These broader issues left Nelles in an awkward position. In the interim, he decided to accept an offer to become headmaster of Newburgh Academy for a year. He hoped to use his spare time to study for the ministry, while the salary would give him a measure of financial security and independence. The school was located in the community of Newburgh, which at the time had a population of about 300. Situated on the Napanee River some thirty-five kilometres from Kingston and twelve kilometres northeast of the village of Napanee, Newburgh owed its initial prosperity to the grist and sawmills that developed around the waterfalls during the mid-i8zos. Over the following two decades it became one of the principal communities in the region, later unsuccessfully vying with Napanee to become the government seat of Lennox and Addington County. The paucity of good agricultural land, the declining local lumber milling operations, the development of more efficient sources of power, and its location off the main railway lines and away from the Bay of Quinte combined to doom Newburgh's dreams of prominence.13 The original plan whereby Newburgh Academy was to be one of Upper Canada's first six government-supported grammar schools fell through for lack of funding. In 1839, the academy opened as a private proprietary school.14 As noted in an earlier chapter, during the first half of the nineteenth century two parallel but related systems of elementary and secondary education dominated Upper Canada: publicly administered common and grammar schools, and privately owned academies or seminaries. Both relied to varying degrees on public funding, relatively high tuition fees, and aid from religious or charitable institutions. By the early 18405, there existed a substantial network of public common schools, but only a handful of grammar schools, along with a rudimentary educational administration. However, in 1846, Egerton Ryerson initiated massive changes through the Common Schools Act and the Grammar Schools Act, both of which emerged from the recommendations he submitted following his European tour.15 The public system of primary and secondary education reflected the perceived need of middle-class Upper Canadians for a centralized, efficient means of inexpensively training their offspring to meet the challenges of an emerging commercial and industrial society. It also answered the sometimes competing needs of an economically and

The Young Scholar-Preacher

63

culturally diverse and scattered population for relevance and flexibility.16 Despite such intentions, common schools primarily served working-class children, including farmers. Intended to be universal, practical, and Christian, they strove to instill habits of diligence, honesty, discipline, and hard work. It was assumed that such an education would diminish poverty and crime, improve social relations, and help assimilate immigrants into a productive and responsible Canadian community.17 Grammar schools were significantly funded by local taxes and provided scholarly training in the higher branches of learning, for those wishing to attend university in particular. Grants were based on the population of each county until 1866, when the regulations were changed to fund according to the number of students taking Latin and Greek. A school required at least ten students studying Classics to qualify. Women did not attend university, and though some did attend grammar schools their participation was discouraged because it meant the limited funds had to be spread more thinly among eligible students.18 The core of secondary education was Mathematics and Classics, which were seen as not only promoting discipline and analytical skills but also inculcating overarching principles and causes, not merely specific facts. The study of classical languages was justified partially on the basis of continuity; they had always been taught and therefore provided a yardstick for measuring present training against past scholarship. More importantly, however, antiquity was considered to belong to the present as much as it did to the past. Greek and Latin supplied a common heritage, the essence of literature and European civilization, established a common way of thinking - indeed, of organizing thought - and provided enduring lessons for modern society.19 Although private schools had originally been organized by elites to prepare their children for university or social leadership, the evangelical impulse, energized by trust in individual authority and personal responsibility, promoted the proliferation of locally owned schools across the province. These seminaries continued to provide elementary education but, after the common school reforms, tended to concentrate on secondary education. They were much more numerous than grammar schools, offering a more convenient education for those who could afford it and, as we have seen, they normally had superior academic resources and residential facilities. Parents could trust that moral and intellectual discipline and the formation of sound character would be emphasized; moreover, they could rest assured that their daughters would be protected, educated separately from male students. In fact, the popularity of academies for females increased after the grammar school legislation of 1846 shifted many male students to the public system.10

64

Faithful Intellect

Newburgh Academy quickly became an important local landmark. It had about 100 students, most of whom lived in the two-storey boarding hall. Its first headmasters had been young Presbyterian and Anglican clergy who attempted to impart strict discipline and sound morality to the more promising youth of the surrounding townships. It was a common practice to teach school before settling into a parish or being called to take over a congregation, a pattern that Nelles was following. On arriving at Newburgh in October 1846, he was ready to assume his duties, which included the supervision of a junior instructor. Because of his training, the academy under Nelles provided superior education in Classics, but its wide-ranging studies also included Natural Philosophy, Trigonometry, Algebra, Geography, and English Grammar.21 However, both the isolated village and the school itself came as a shock after Samuel's comparatively exciting days at Wesleyan University. Even Victoria College with all its difficulties appeared substantially more promising than Newburgh. Teaching the high school curriculum demanded little of Nelles's mental capacity and left him too much time for brooding over his spiritual weakness and his generally unhappy situation. After all, school teaching, even at an academy, was hardly a substantial career for a man with a university degree and dreams of future greatness; most teachers were young, illtrained men and women searching for a quick release from poorly paid drudgery." Although Newburgh Academy was superior to its common school neighbours, it suffered from a lack of books, poor facilities, and a suffocatingly unsophisticated atmosphere, all conditions arising from its feeble financial resources. As a Model School, it qualified for some support from the education department, but not for the more substantial grants given to district grammar schools. Even if it had qualified, such grants were derived from the sale of assigned government lands in the region, and in the Midland District these were of poor quality and little value. The education department's hands were tied by both the Common Schools Act and the Grammar Schools Act. Ryerson, in conveying this information to the local superintendent of schools, stated that he was eager to help because of his confidence in and esteem for the new headmaster, Samuel Nelles/3 However, improvements in the government's financial arrangements would come too late to alleviate the difficulties Nelles faced at Newburgh Academy. As well as being bored and frustrated, Nelles became intensely lonely during his year at Newburgh. He had been separated from his family while away at school for much of his early life, but this present solitude seemed more permanent, and there were few compensations in the form of personal friends or even stimulating acquaintances. Samuel

The Young Scholar-Preacher

65

greatly enjoyed social interaction and the intellectual repartee, wit, and good humour fostered by congenial companions. In early 1847, he confided in his book of Random Thoughts: "I have always found society necessary to my happiness and when bereft of the companions of choice, I soon learn to make companions of whatever characters may be around me ... There are few who need retirement more than myself or who would less willingly sacrifice it; on the other hand there are few who would dread more to be deprived of society."14 Newburgh apparently lacked an intellectual component, or at least one to which Nelles was attracted. He corresponded with all his university friends and eagerly awaited their replies. Their letters reminded him of past adventures and pleasures, provided encouragement and advice, assessed literary and political themes, and described new activities and career developments. The correspondence stimulated Nelles's imagination and helped mitigate the dreariness and isolation of Newburgh, but it could not fully compensate for his overwhelming sense of disappointment. There were a myriad more exciting vocations and causes enticing him. Nelles also feared that, in the absence of "good friends," he would turn to the rough-and-ready companionship available in Newburgh. All lumber towns had their bad element, and Newburgh was no exception. The community's unsavoury reputation, suggested by its informal name of "Rogues' Hollow," was well-founded. Though the school and a Wesleyan Methodist church, which had been erected in 1840, acted as moderating influences, drinking, brawling, and immorality were more prevalent here than was common in the normally rambunctious pioneer society. Samuel never succumbed to such temptations, but he knew sinful thoughts were as deadly as sinful behaviour and worried about falling into evil ways. His acute insecurity and self-doubt magnified the threat to his moral and spiritual well-being: "The mind is its own place and of itself can make a Heaven of Hell or a Hell of Heaven" - thus speaks Milton's fiend and the sentiment is true ... Oh! The indescribable longing that sometimes has come over my soul - a longing which neither my library, my pen, my reveries, nor even the consolations of Religion (at least to the extent that I enjoyed it) were able to satisfy. A longing for the society of others, for some excitement external to my own mind. At such seasons I have wandered like the banished spirit, through dry places, seeking rest and finding none. But I have learned somewhat to govern that feeling. It arises from a wrong state of mind. There is nothing that can remove it but divine grace.25

Nelles recognized that he must strenuously avoid all temptation if he was to rise above the condemnation of the world. A minister of the

66

Faithful Intellect

Gospel, in particular, needed not only to be free from sin but to be seen as blameless of life. But Samuel was only human, after all, and therefore subject to human frailty. His self-denunciations were quite common among thoughtful young men of his day, for whom the devil was a powerful and ever-present reality. Inexplicably, Nelles did not seem to gain any relief from the services at the Newburgh appointment on the Napanee circuit. One of the hallmarks of Methodism was the sincere community it provided for its adherents: no-one remained a stranger after attending a Wesleyan class meeting, prayer service, or regular church gathering. Nelles would have been welcomed as a guest preacher and would certainly have attended worship regularly. But he never recorded any instances of spiritual and intellectual progress or assistance from his Methodist neighbours or other religious elements of local society. It is perhaps a reflection of his deep sense of isolation that he never appeared to look to his Methodist fellowship for spiritual sustenance or comfort. As for the local clergy, the division in the Wesleyan Church in 1840 had created a shortage of qualified people; both stationed itinerants, George Goodson and John Sanderson, had been born in Britain of Irish extraction and had only served in Canada since the year of the split. They were poorly educated, mediocre preachers at best, and unfortunately shared the church-wide difficulty of providing in-depth pastoral care and supervision for their flock.26 However, Nelles never blamed anyone but himself, instinctively turning inward to assess his personal failings and to seek where his true duty lay. His psychological distress was probably exacerbated by Samuel's failure to meet young women of marriageable age who could have provided respectable relief from his doldrums. At least, he did not mention meeting any in his writings. Samuel was in all respects a good catch. Apparently the paucity of spiritually alive, intelligent girls in the neighbourhood made his hardships even more difficult to bear, especially because he had always enjoyed such company. Ever since his days in college Nelles had in fact been looking for a future wife, a quest that seems to have been a major preoccupation of all university students. Now, at Newburgh Academy, he lectured himself with homespun wisdom: "In matrimony, follow not blind passion nor wayward and shortlived fancy. Choose a modest and virtuous woman; let her have also good sound common sense, and a healthy frame. "Z7 Obviously, marriage for material gain or other selfish earthly reasons should never even be considered. Nelles faced the additional obstacle that the Wesleyan Church normally would not permit its probationers to marry before they were ordained, which perhaps compounded the frustrations and temptations surrounding him.

The Young Scholar-Preacher

67

As much as he craved human companionship Nelles yearned for intellectual inspiration and sustenance. He loved books and was a voracious reader whenever the opportunity presented itself. At Newburgh, reading was his sole consolation. He noted, "I know not how sufficiently to esteem the blessing of literature. Now that I am separated from my former companions and surrounded by those whose habits of life unfit them for my intimate acquaintance, it is really an unspeakable privilege to commune with the great departed through their works."2-8 Nelles maintained his lifelong interest in history and, try as he might, never got over his juvenile predilection for the adventurous and romantic, all of which led him naturally to biographical and historical writings. He was also predictably fond of Milton, Shakespeare, Bunyan, and Blake, who combined spiritual and religious themes with universal secular truths. He found these writers invaluable to his own intellectual development and would later teach his students that they were essential for any educated person. Samuel also sought insights from contemporary American poets, particularly Emerson and other New England Transcendentalists, and linked his passion for poetry with its close relative, philosophy. The young Nelles saw poetry and philosophy as justifying romantic Kantian notions of appealing to the senses in order to attack mechanistic rationalism and Calvinistic Puritanism. Further, he viewed them as critically related to evangelical Christianity, permitting a greater understanding of the human heart than strictly religious sources alone could convey. Together they formed an alternate path for comprehending truth, since both spoke directly to the imagination. At the same time, Nelles believed that poetry and philosophy were most fully appreciated by truly religious and spiritually alive individuals: "I love to see Religion enkindling with love those scenes and seasons of life which are richly poetic and throwing heavenly light over those deep questionings which puzzle and engross Philosophy."29 Great care had to be taken, however, to prevent the power of religion from being lost in the enjoyment of its internal beauty. Nelles later confided that he could easily miss the efficacy and practical aspects of Christianity by amusing himself with its poetic and philosophical distractions. But he knew that the true Christian emphasized the concrete application of spiritual and moral principles in the community at large.30 When the mood struck him, Nelles also continued his old practice of composing poetry. His poems were usually on romantic or devotional themes; reflecting immature expressions of religious sentimentality, they lacked real merit. Poetry was perhaps the most respected literary form during the Victorian era. But, while age might add depth and character, it was pre-eminently the art of the young, the range of whose

68

Faithful Intellect

sensations could only be captured and recreated in verse. Nelles was rarely able to unchain his poetic imagination, dismiss conventional restraint, and allow his emotions to flow freely; too discreet and constrained to lower his guard to express his feelings publicly, he refused to permit even poetic ecstasy to govern his intellect. Still, it must have been quite disappointing for him to realize that he was not a natural or gifted poet. Though it was only second-best to Nelles, he had developed a fine prose style, a talent that encouraged him to harbour a faint desire for a literary career. Daniel Martindale remarked on what many others familiar with Nelles's writing knew: "Your polished and versatile pen will make a prosaic life seem valiant, and add luster to the achievements of the most heroic."31 Even Samuel's student essays had been well crafted. All the while, Samuel fretted that he wasted too much time reading popular novels by unworthy authors. He could not resist losing himself in apparently unedifying and worthless books as a relief from what he considered his sorry existence in Newburgh. Although they gratified his zest for adventure and appealed to his earnest sentiments, they added little to his intellectual or spiritual advancement and seemed to have no practical benefit. Reading such works was as bad as being idle and idleness was both a great folly and a mortal sin. Nelles constantly sought a disciplined work ethic. Both his study of history and his investigations into contemporary society convinced him that to be great and he earnestly wished to be great - he must labour unflinchingly. It did not matter whether the exertions were mental or physical, they had to be systematic and focused on some useful end. Industry was a solemn duty, and duty should never be avoided.31 As part of his severe self-criticism, Samuel condemned his personal indolence and sinful weaknesses. Nelles was relieved to be leaving both Newburgh and the academy itself in the early summer of 1847. But he could not overcome his apprehension about his future in the Methodist itinerancy, feeling that he had failed to grow substantially in the ways that truly mattered over the previous year. As always, his friend Martindale supported him with hearty words of encouragement: "Many are bound down to the servile labor of a pedagogic stool or to something worse ... And you my friend, in that life of active devotion to sacred duties to which God has called you, and for which he has singled you out, will find the people ever ready to cheer and to sustain you."33 He understood that Nelles needed reassurance as he approached the Annual Conference of the Wesleyan Methodist Church. Arriving in Toronto on 3 June 1847 to obtain his posting to his first circuit, Nelles was witness to the great debate over the reunion of the

The Young Scholar-Preacher

69

Wesleyan forces in the province. Seven years earlier, the Conference had dissolved in confusion and recriminations. Egerton Ryerson was, as usual, at the centre of the controversy. His involvement in reform politics and his demand for greater Canadian control of local church operations and finances had forced the British connexion to terminate the ill-advised union of 1833. Since 1840, the two sister churches had competed for members in Canada West. While the Canadian-led operations had initially expanded, both suffered from the split and recognized the advantages of reuniting. As far as Ryerson and his supporters were concerned, however, the separation had only proven that the Canadian operations could not be blackmailed into subservience to the British leadership.34 The pro-union forces required great determination to win over their colleagues. Samuel had missed much of the controversy as a result of his schooling in the United States, but he had supported his mentor Ryerson's refusal to give in to the demands of the English in 1840, and the Nelles family remained loyal to the independent Canadian wing of the church. On principle, however, Samuel believed the Protestant churches should be united and judged the Wesleyan disunion a great evil; such extreme sectarianism had no place in contemporary Christian society. By 1847, ne thoroughly agreed with the underlying assumptions of the unionists when they argued that the Protestant churches must seek oneness in Christ. The major stumbling block appeared to be personal animosity among the leaders of the various factions, and such pettiness could not be allowed to undermine Christian progress. The divisions and mutual acrimony only strengthened the skeptics and promoted the immoral forces in the world.35 The two Wesleyan branches must reunite in order to consolidate their efforts in spreading Christian salvation throughout the land. As a probationer, Nelles could not participate in the Conference debates. As a keen observer, however, he recognized that Robert Alder and John Ryerson were the most rational and effective advocates of reunion. The English Conference had sent Alder to bring order to Wesleyanism in the Maritimes and Newfoundland, and especially to unite the Wesleyans in Canada West. Nelles described Alder as "a large, strongly made man in the vigor of life. Seems to have a masculine intellect, great tact in the management of affairs, a skillful and experienced diplomatist."36 He was probably unaware that Alder's machinations had been largely responsible for the original breakup of the connexion in the province. John Ryerson, an experienced ecclesiastical politician, had negotiated the plan of reunion as the Canadian representative in London. According to Nelles, he "made a long and able speech in his presentation of report. Seems to have more influence upon the Conference

70

Faithful Intellect

floor than either of his brothers. Keeps command of his feelings, and his elocution while arguing, never becomes boisterous. Indulges occasionally in ridicule, but does not use the galling invective and fierce declamation of his brother William."37 Samuel also recorded that Egerton Ryerson was much less effective: "Dr. Ryerson made a lengthy oration on the Union question and prefaced it with a huge exordium about himself. His speech was full of sophistry and seemed to have little weight, not because they detected his sophisms, but because Dr. R. has lost his influence. No one trusts him. He has too much vanity to succeed in anything, least of all in genuine eloquence."38 Egerton Ryerson had never been able to regain the confidence of many of Canada's leading Methodists over the three years since he had campaigned for Governor-General Metcalfe. For his part, Nelles increasingly relied on his own opinions and had at least begun moving beyond the orbit of his mentor. He would always respect Ryerson's experience, decisiveness, and energy but would never follow him blindly when doing so did not accord with his own beliefs. In the debates, the anti-union forces were generally prevented from making headway by the tactics of the Ryerson brothers, who controlled the key official positions in the Conference. John Ryerson interrupted Jesse Hurlburt of Victoria College, calling him a "junior member' of the Conference who had always been a professor in the college and had "borne no part in the itinerant work."39 As for Wellington Jeffers's valuable address, William Ryerson, who presided over the meetings, determined that it was too "ranting and boisterous" to make sense. Nelles remarked: "'Old Billy' indulges so much in enthusiastic declamation himself that he cannot tolerate it in any one else."40 Other critics were equally shabbily treated. Nelles concluded that, apart from the righteousness of the cause, union was achieved as a result of the superior talent of its advocates, the deep weariness in the church at large over disunion, and the diplomatic skill of Robert Alder. With this central matter resolved, the Conference turned to reintegrating the work in the province, assigning ministers to their respective labours, and fulfilling other routine duties. The English Conference had selected Alder as the first president of the reunited church; Matthew Richey, his loyal associate, as co-delegate; and Enoch Wood as Superintendent of Missions.41 Samuel was duly received on trial on the recommendation of the Napanee Quarterly Official Board under George Goodson, his minister at Newburgh. He was stationed at Port Hope as assistant to Charles Lavell. Lavell, ordained in 1846, was only a year older than Nelles. Known for his systematic and thorough sermon preparation and his "scholarly and chaste" style, he proved an excellent model for the new

The Young Scholar-Preacher

71

probationer. As well, the Port Hope circuit was one of the best in the connexion outside of the largest cities, with excellent amenities and involving very little travel. The stationing committee, probably at Egerton Ryerson's urging, had generously given Samuel an extraordinary opportunity to expand his studies. It was a measure of the confidence of the church leaders in him that they placed him there; they clearly anticipated a significant future role for the gifted young man. Except for the long hours of physical and mental labour, Nelles found the routine during his first year as a probationer largely uneventful.41 The following June, the Conference meeting in Belleville transferred Nelles to the Toronto East circuit, at the very heart of the Methodist governing administration, stationing him as John Ryerson's junior associate. This appointment carried greater preaching and pastoral duties, particularly since Ryerson was district chairman and was also often absent on connexional business. Ordained in 1825 at the age of twenty-six, John had been the first of the five Ryerson brothers to enter the Methodist ministry. He quickly became one of its most effective administrators and trusted statesmen. His ability to compromise without losing respect, his gracious personality, and his broad tolerance combined to make him a far more effective political manager than either the arrogant Egerton or the narrowly partisan William. Until his death in 1878, John remained a wise and trusted counsellor for Nelles. Again, the posting involved little of the arduous travel or primitive living conditions common on pioneer circuits. It also placed Nelles under the scrutiny of much of the church's lay leadership, who were members of his main congregation and, even more importantly, brought him into close contact with the Wesleyan clerical elite, among them Egerton Ryerson himself; Anson Green, the head of the Wesleyan publishing operations; George Sanderson, the editor of the Christian Guardian; and Enoch Wood, Superintendent of Missions. The following year, Nelles was reappointed to the Toronto East circuit under John Ryerson, and he expanded his program of work and study.43 There was little doubt that his formal education had prepared Nelles far better than the vast majority of Canadian applicants for the ministry in any branch of the Christian church. The university Liberal Arts program was heavily theological. Natural Science involved Evidences of Christianity; Philosophy asked questions concerning the nature of God and God's relationship to man; Moral Philosophy included personal and social Christian ethics; History was primarily interested in the evolution of the biblical lands; Classics permitted a more accurate rendering of the Bible, as well as a better understanding of the affinity between the Greek and Roman commentators and Christian revelation. Together these subjects supplied a wide-ranging knowledge of

72.

Faithful Intellect

religious texts and a profound appreciation of the place of Christianity in contemporary society. However, education had never been the primary criterion for entry into the Methodist itinerancy. It was secondary to a mature conversion experience, the ongoing mission to acquire entire sanctification, and a faithful commitment to the tenets of religion. In September 1846, Egerton Ryerson had advised Nelles that reading the Bible, prayer, and private meditation were vital in the personal quest for salvation and were also the best preparation for the itinerancy.44 Nelles had been converted while attending Genesee Wesleyan Seminary, but there had been no overpowering burst of light and evident presence of God of the sort that had transformed Saul the unbeliever into St Paul the Apostle. Nelles's experience had come like the gradual dawning of a new day. His spirituality was more of the intellect than of the emotions. It was therefore less visible, and had not been subjected to the public affirmation that often helped to reinforce a young convert's commitment. Assistance from the community was always essential in retaining a sinless relationship with God, and "Personal experience, while it may well incubate in the solitude of one's own soul, is inextricably meshed with the spiritual and intellectual resources supplied in the fellowship of the church ... In short, one is initiated into a complex web of belief, emotion, and practice."45 At times, Nelles worried that he had only dreamed or rationalized his conversion, and feared that he was too given to idle speculation and the pursuit of narrow scholarly goals. While serious academic studies were significant, he knew that they should never divert him from the struggle for God's grace. Still, he could not abandon his trust in the intellect as the best means of comprehending God's revelations and preparing the soul for eternity. His collegiate and university education had emphasized that, just as the spiritual nature must dominate the animal, the rational intellect must dominate and direct the passions. Although always seeking a spiritual experience that removed all doubt, Nelles c.ould not accept that salvation was valid only when based on emotionalism or enthusiasm. His reading of Wesley commanded him to acknowledge reason and emotion as partners in conversion, with reason supervising as the senior partner. Without reason, emotion deteriorated into fanaticism, experience into a crude self-deceit.46 Along with Wesley, Nelles denounced emotional enthusiasm, because it was too often manifested in dour conduct, extreme mortification, or the assumption of miraculous powers such as prophecy. Nelles felt confirmed in his views by the eighteenth-century Scottish philosophers who claimed that through the mediation of "common sense" humankind was able to discern the will of God, using them for

The Young Scholar-Preacher

73

intellectual support for his trust in the power of individuals to control their own spiritual destiny.47 Beginning in the 18405, Canadian Protestantism was refined by the fire of a powerful evangelical revival led primarily by professional evangelists from the United States, including the Irish-born Methodist itinerant James Caughey.48 Although evangelists were successful in converting thousands of Canadians, Nelles was disturbed by their reliance on special times of blessing at camp and protracted meetings. In his view, every worship service should aim at converting and sanctifying those in attendance. In 1847, he confided in his private journal, "The rushing mighty wind and the overwhelming shower come at long intervals and before the next arrives the poor soul may be in Hell. The warmth and light of the Gospel Law descends every day."49 Nelles also feared that the revivalists' emphasis on seeking instantaneous holiness or entire sanctification, through sometimes wild and hysterical meetings, undermined the integrity and validity of the conversion experience. Spiritual rebirth was a worthy and sufficient end in itself; holiness preachers confused or lost the central message inherent in Wesley's revival. His reading of John Wesley's sermons, "Christian Perfection," "On Perfection," and "Repentance in Believers," and his Notes on the New Testament, along with Richard Watson's Theological Institutes, assured Nelles that perfection meant both holiness of the heart and holiness of life. However, holiness was not a state of total safety; it was merely a plateau on the progressive climb to Heaven. Heaven alone provided the only wholly true sanctuary. Even if the individual did not transgress openly against God, sin might well remain as an inward contamination; one could sin by commission or, more easily, by omission of righteous actions. Consequently, a sanctified individual remained subject to temptation, sin, and perdition. Moreover, his studies and his personal observations convinced Nelles that the state of holiness must be made manifest in good works and practical expressions of Christian service: "By their fruits ye shall know them." True piety was best demonstrated in daily life. Holiness involved total love of both God and humankind. A state of holiness normally occurred, therefore, as the culmination of a life of righteous service and righteous living, rather than as a second work of grace following immediately upon the initial conversion experience when the rapture of that transformation had yet to be tested. In January 1849 Nelles wrote: There is one species of religion very prevalent in our day which I cannot but think is a defective sample of Christianity. I mean religion in a fever. There are

74

Faithful Intellect

some ... who suppose there can be no true piety without a constant excitement of the sensibilities. Religion with such consists of feeling - intense, almost delirious, emotion. Calm, uniform experience is despised; reason is depreciated; obedience itself is forgotten. Worship is thought to be mere devotion and holiness to be ecstasy of the soul only. The practical part of Christianity is less sought after. Many a saint in the sanctuary is found a knave in the market, and a cynic at the fireside."50

Much to Nelles's consternation, generations of enthusiastic holiness revivalists, including James Caughey and Phoebe Palmer, would stress the immediacy of achieving entire sanctification and argue for an easier path to earthly glory. They appeared to him to cheapen conversion and diminish the need for human commitment to moral living. He regarded as even more dangerous something he himself witnessed: the misapplication of evangelical zeal to the advancement of unreasonable apocalyptical, Adventist, and spiritualist movements that attacked the very core of institutional Christianity, introducing a myriad eccentric, quasi-religious alternatives.51 Like most converts, Nelles felt his own faith wax and wane as he faced the challenges of life. It was impossible to remain in a constant state of full and permanent consecration; that condition was reserved for the biblical saints or heavenly repose. It was very common for young probationary ministers to be almost neurotically obsessed with their spiritual and moral failings, and Nelles was no exception. He ceaselessly urged himself to seek guidance from the eternal truths of Christianity. During October 1848, he often woke up in the night worrying about his death, and could find no assurance of his personal salvation. While he still cherished hope, he feared his sins were too overwhelming. Later he confided, "I find life to be a sore try. No rest. Sometimes I think I have found it, and that henceforth the bark will glide undisturbed to harbor; but alas how soon comes the storm. My very religion is now hope and now fear. The future is dark and life is all discipline and trial ... Oh God! Give me light."51 Nelles often found life cold and cheerless and was disillusioned by his own timidity and weakness. In fact, throughout much of his probation, he struggled to overcome numbing doubt and abiding grief. But at other times he was conscious of a renewal of his faith and of the glory God had promised to all people. For instance, when he was seriously ill in December 1848, he prayed deeply about death and his future state, and felt "wholly given to God."53 In May 1850, he again sensed in himself more peace and more power to do right. Yet he continued to search for a closer relationship to God and to the cross of salvation.54

The Young Scholar-Preacher

75

Egerton Ryerson had also advised Nelles in 1846 to rely on his own thinking and to trust his investigation of the Bible and the truths of Christianity, using commentaries as supplements only when necessary. Nelles appreciated the validity of these suggestions. He recognized that, under God, he must be his own ultimate guide; although others might advise, he himself had to direct his spiritual and moral training. He believed there was no more vital quality of intellect than responsible independence, and that it was especially critical for theology students. As he matured in his probationary program, he asserted his right to follow his own path, claiming, "I can no longer trust blindly in those notions imbibed from others. I will try for myself. I erect my own reason as umpire in the great trial."55 It was better, after all, to write rather than read books, to construct systems rather than timidly follow them. Nelles assumed that such independence was one of the essential principles distinguishing Protestantism from wild superstition or dogmatic Roman Catholicism. In the face of past attempts to organize and regulate religious thought, even by supposed church reformers, Nelles asserted that rigid dogma deserved no place in modern Protestantism, that strictly enforced creeds did more harm than good to vigorous spirituality. Indeed, he believed doctrinaire statements of faith to be opposed to the genius of Christian truth. Every mature and faithful intellect must work out its own belief system. Dogmas were baseless relics of a primitive age, which prevailed only when enlightened inquiry was abandoned. Since Nelles assumed that the modern church was at least equal and probably superior to its predecessors, he confidently concluded, "If our fathers have taken the liberty to make creeds, we may surely be allowed to judge them. We are bound to modify and estimate them by the Bible."56 While creeds may have been useful in systematizing traditional comprehension, they had to be continually reconfigured in conformity with modern society's greater knowledge and altered conditions. However, Nelles was not always able to sustain this confidence in his individual abilities. In this regard, he was in fact full of contradictions. Despite his bold statements, he constantly chided himself for being too easily swayed by others and relying too heavily on the narrow standards established by outworn authorities. He confessed, "I am all the time frightened by that great bugbear orthodoxy. I fear to speak lest I should speak new words. I want more courage ... It is a pity when we honour some sectarian system more than our reason and revelation from God,"57 In later years, Nelles would challenge Methodism's theological priorities and credal outlook. He trained generations of students and clergy to carry his independent inquiry even further, but as a probationer he could only condemn his own lack of intellectual initiative and resolve.

76

Faithful Intellect

His youthful self-doubt never caused Nelles to falter in his conviction that it was essential to advance autonomous evaluations of Methodism's doctrines. New knowledge and, especially, new means of understanding through disciplines such as the improved schools of philosophy were gradually expanding the world's appreciation of God's holy testament. In the future, the application of this wisdom would indeed transform all knowledge, exploding the contemporary intellectual world. Nelles realized that he had to prepare himself for all such eventualities. He recognized that "Christianity is progressive and expansive. It is a stream growing broader and deeper ... The highest mysteries of the grand scheme, how they continue to unfold in beauty and power."58 Furthermore, "Heavenly light seems ordinarily to be given to man in installments, and further advances are refused to him who improves not on that already given."59 There was an unbounded future ahead for those prepared and courageous enough to confront the challenge. Nelles worried that the Methodist Church as a whole, and in particular members of the more evangelical branches such as the Primitive Methodists and Bible Christians, failed to comprehend this basic concept. Too many Protestants were struggling to recreate some mythical golden age of ultra-spiritualistic, "primitive" Christianity. They falsely assumed that the course of human development had been a downward fall from the lost Garden of Eden, not a gradual upward trek toward the glorious future reign of Christ. Nelles detected too many obnoxious pre-millennialist and Adventist notions just below the surface of many Protestants' religion.60 When church leaders spoke of progress, they normally meant increased membership or wealth, or expansion into new territories and nations; they did not seem to characterize it as a fundamental improvement in the understanding of biblical truths or the application of these truths to the welfare of the human family. For Nelles, the growth of the human mind was marked by a greater comprehension of religious principles. Trust in providentially guided progress became an essential tenet of his own study of theology and would undergird his entire career as teacher and preacher at Victoria College. He always encouraged experimentation by faithful minds to the end of unlocking the mysteries of the natural world and God's testaments in the Bible, even when the results might initially assail the well-established spirituality and settled faith of more conservative church members. Nelles was able to focus and integrate these diverse concepts as he worked his way through the prescribed course of study for the ministry. He felt himself in comfortable and secure surroundings as he traversed the church's rather meagre academic program. The Methodist

The Young Scholar-Preacher

77

Church had developed the course in order to supply ready answers from its own theological perspective as its probationers attempted to comprehend the mysteries of Protestantism. Unlike many other young preachers, however, Nelles was not satisfied with the simple recital of past authorities. He used the enforced discipline to evolve his own theological point of view and enlarge his faith. The four-year course, which was abridged to three years for Nelles, did not so much furnish him with rules of conduct and belief as open up standards to be evaluated under the guidance of his own reason. Such analysis was neither simple nor satisfying; contradiction, doubt, and despair were more common results of his investigations than satisfaction, confirmation, or confident faith. But it was not in Nelles's nature to accept easy measures or trite solutions where his faith and, ultimately, his eternal life were at stake. The academic and theological prerequisites for the itinerancy became more substantial over time; during Nelles's probationary years, they were not very demanding. As noted earlier, the most important criteria for being accepted as a candidate for the ministry were a sound conversion and an ability to help others find salvation. Educational standards extended only to a good elementary knowledge of English grammar, arithmetic, geography, and ancient history. The candidate was also expected to exhibit a general familiarity with the Bible and the denominational Doctrines and Discipline, as well as to have read some of Wesley's sermons and part of his Notes on the New Testament. Beyond these simple requirements, authorities debated whether the church had the right to impose educational tests on those whom God called to serve, or, more signifcantly, to deny their service simply because they failed to meet artificial ecclesiastical standards.61 During his probation, the Wesleyan Methodist Church did require Nelles, along with its other new ministers, to develop an intimate acquaintance with the Bible. He examined elements such as the language and authorship of the Scriptures and analysed the definitions of biblical terminology. As well, he scrutinized specifics such as all references to the Messiah in the Old Testament, and Christ's sermons and parables and St Paul's injunctions on discipline in the New. For Nelles, as we have seen, it was vital that his deliberations go beyond the written word in order to bring life to his native spirituality. He sought to test his own beliefs against the yardstick of the Christianity expressed in the New Testament.62 Nelles recognized that the Bible furnished the basis for spiritual and moral growth and that only intensive study would unlock its mysteries. At the same time, however, he observed that many so-called Christians were not interested in its real meaning. They quoted it to disguise their superstitions or sectarian prejudice as

78

Faithful Intellect

religious principle, and by parroting its words lost its unsurpassed beauty. They recited its verses out of context and without comprehension, "like popish prayers." Nelles asserted: "It will not do to read the Bible as a charmbook - as a magical wand to banish ghosts."63 Disciplined, faithful reasoning, in conjunction with prayerful meditation, was needed to restore the Bible's full bounty; conceited and self-righteous over-familiarity had bred indifference to its vital offerings for humanity. Beyond his daily reading in the Old and New Testaments, Nelles delved extensively into the prescribed theological texts. He was particularly drawn to Thomas Home (1780-1862,), a Church of England cleric and assistant librarian at the British Museum, who had published An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures in 1818. This multi-volume work analysed the history and geography of the Bible, interpreted many of its central themes, and offered a detailed apology for Christianity. It was complemented by Commentary on the Bible by the Irish-born Methodist linguist and preacher Adam Clarke (1760-1832.). Clarke laboured from 1798 until 1825 before publishing his critical study, which immediately became the standard for Methodists in Great Britain, the United States, and Canada. However, it never fully replaced the popular five-volume A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, written by Joseph Benson (1749-1821) between 1815 and 1818. Although not as scholarly as Clarke's, Nelles found Benson's style and arguments appealing.64 Nor was the Bible the only means whereby to fathom God's revelations, which were manifested in history and in nature as well as in Scripture. Nelles, the romantic who grew up on a farm, easily recognized the abundance of God's natural mysteries all around him. Every season, every blade of wheat, every animal's birth supplied new evidence of creation and the wonders of God. While Scripture afforded a sufficient rule of faith and practice, Nelles held that it was not designed to allow the lessons presented in nature or taught by philosophy to be dispensed with. Indeed, biblical truths and intent were often most apparent in nature and best demonstrated through local understanding; when tested through reasonable spiritual experience, nature gave the clearest understanding of God's will. Nelles considered the Bible "the great holy of holies, but it is not the whole Temple. Scripture seems to me given to supply deficiency, not to become the sum total."65 Instead of a complete reliance on an inerrant Bible, this broad basis for gaining insight into the existence and power of God was later of great utility to many Methodists, including Nelles, in coming to terms with the skeptics' apparently interminable assaults on Scripture.

The Young Scholar-Preacher

79

Like most of his contemporaries, Nelles winnowed his knowledge of natural theology from the writings of the eighteenth-century Archdeacon of Carlisle, William Paley (1743-1805). In 1795, Paley wrote The Evidences of Christianity; in 1802, he followed it with Natural Theology, or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity. Both books deduced God from the recognizable design in nature. Though nature could not confirm the truths of Christianity, analogies drawn from it could supplement scriptural revelations and, taken together, amply demonstrate the existence and power of Jehovah, provide historical support for the Bible, and supply a rational theological argument for the existence of God against the skeptical atheism of the age. Nelles described Paley as a "candid" author who admitted when evidence was not available rather than dismissing legitimate questions with obfuscation or even lies.66 His works remained standard texts in Canadian seminaries for most of the nineteenth century. Nelles supplemented Paley with Bishop Joseph Butler's (1692-1752.) The Analogy of Religion, Natural and Revealed, to the Constitution and Course of Nature, originally published in 1736. Butler also looked to nature for verification of the existence of God in order to counter the arguments of the profane rationalists and deists of his day. Nelles considered his works to be proof of the value of philosophy in drawing out the significant elements of the Scriptures, and saw his use of analogy as a valuable tool of analysis. John Lee Comstock's (1789-1858) A System of Natural Philosophy also added significantly to Nelles's understanding of the relationship between philosophy and natural theology.67 Over the course of his probation, Nelles further profited from his reading of the Archbishop of Dublin, Richard Whately (1787-1863), whose insightful The Errors of Romanism Traced to their Origin in Human Nature was published in 1830. As well as revelling in Whately's stinging wit, Nelles agreed that the errors he described were inherent in all human beings, and that Protestants could easily fall into them if they were not careful. Nelles was too tolerant to dismiss Roman Catholicism out of hand. Other works of Whately's - The Elements of Logic, On Some of the Peculiarities of the Christian Religion, and Elements of Rhetoric - were equally useful in Nelles's preparation for the ministry and, later, in his teaching career. In the field of church history, Nelles relied on a translation of Johann L. Mosheim's (1694-1755) six-volume Ecclesiastical History, in conjunction with the notes provided by the great Scottish "common sense" scholar Dr Thomas Reid.68 In the area of theology, Nelles was impressed with Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847), the Scottish minister who had led the recent disruption in the Presbyterian Church. Chalmers's most important ecclesiastical

8o

Faithful Intellect

works were The Evidence and Authority of the Christian Revelation, Faith and Works Contrasted and Reconciled, and On the Power, Wisdom, and Goodness of God. Although Chalmers was a Calvinist, Nelles noted that his theology was full of life and reason. Still, he felt that Chalmers did not penetrate deeply enough into the philosophy of religion to appreciate Wesleyan concepts such as holiness. Following John Wesley's example, Nelles also began to study patristics, reading the Church Fathers in their original languages with a view to confirming the foundations of authority for Wesleyan doctrines. However, he rarely accepted even such canonical sources at face value; they had to be measured against his own reason and the expanding wisdom available to his enlightened generation.69 Central to his training was Nelles's lifelong reading of John and Charles Wesley and other important Methodist theologians and apologists. The Wesleys never wrote a systematic statement of belief on the model of John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion or the Church of Scotland's Confession of Faith; rather, they distributed their doctrines through newspapers, discourses, letters, hymns, and their published journals and sermons. The probationary course of study converged on John Wesley's Sermons, which along with his Notes on the New Testament and Notes on the Old Testament provided the essential basis of Methodist theology. These books were constantly republished and were readily available to any aspiring Methodist divine. Assorted auxiliary writings clarified specific doctrines and presented John Wesley's position on church polity and organization. Moreover, Nelles memorized many of the thousands of Charles Wesley's vivid hymns and sacred poems, which simplified complex theological themes and made Methodism more comprehensible and lively for the average church member. Beyond these benefits, Nelles could not resist the majesty and imaginative power of Charles's compositions. After the Wesleys, Nelles studied John Fletcher (1729-85), the Geneva-born former Calvinist who did much to clarify their thought. Jean de la Flechere, as he was originally known, had emigrated to England and entered the Church of England ministry, finally settling as vicar of Madeley. John Wesley considered Fletcher to be his natural successor, but he unfortunately predeceased Wesley. His series of letters, published as Checks to Antinomianism, became a critical defence of Arminianism (a doctrine opposed to Calvinism, especially with regard to predestination), answering attacks from Calvinists as to the nature of free will and refuting claims that Wesleyanism had deteriorated into a denial of original sin, as in Pelagianism. However, in the pantheon of Methodist apologists, which included Fletcher, Adam Clarke, and Joseph Benson, none ranked higher than Richard Watson

The Young Scholar-Preacher

81

(1781-1833). His sermons and essays ably explained many of the finer points of Christian doctrine and brought a higher degree of system and order to Wesleyan theology. Watson's Theological Institutes, which became compulsory reading for Methodist clergy, added authority and credibility to Nelles's emphasis on philosophy.70 Ultimately, all of Nelles's studies concentrated on achieving a more profound and faithful understanding of God. Samuel had been haunted since his earliest childhood by his inability to describe the idea of God in meaningful terms. Even late in his ministerial probation, he had still failed to discover precise language for his conception of the mysterious and elusive Supreme Being. He lamented, as well, that he had too often focused on secondary matters such as Methodist doctrine, church polity, or even minor biblical precepts, achieving only a vague notion of God. This anxiety remained real, if normally subconscious, but it exaggerated his doubts about his abilities and his choice of vocation. Nonetheless, Nelles recognized that the fundamental principle was faith in God; without it, he would never achieve peace, love, purity, liberty, joy, or spiritual power.71 We have seen that Nelles always had difficulty sustaining a pure and unequivocal faith; too many unresolved and apparently unresolvable dilemmas seemed to stand in the way. Faith assured that all God's works were good; yet reason and common sense verified that there was much evil scattered throughout creation. Furthermore, even though the thought was not pious, Nelles wondered why God allowed sin, pain, and death in the world. He was also curious about what happened to a person who went to Heaven or to Hell. And what became after death of irresponsible children, or those who had never received the blessing of Christian instruction? Such questions were interminable. Ultimately, Nelles could only rely on the goodness, mercy, and love of God and recognize that metaphysical problems were boundless. Mystery - he eventually came to accept - was a central element in the worship of God; without it, there would be no difference between mankind and the angels, or between Earth and Heaven.72 But ministerial training was not limited to dealing with theological questions or plumbing the relative depth of one's personal faith. Understanding in these areas would grow with practice throughout one's ministry. The church wanted assurance that its probationers were mature enough to handle their responsibilities before they began the difficult journey. They would be constantly barraged by temptations and, worse, by the normal problems of living on their own in the world. Methodist authorities required all probationers to examine their own thoughts and actions daily and to establish a clear agenda for improving their personal lives. Because he was somewhat over-critical

82

Faithful Intellect

of his own failings, Nelles took such duties extremely seriously and was never satisfied with the vigour of his spiritual commitment to God. His main criticisms of himself, however, emphasized his narrow intellectualism, his tendency to talk too much, and his indulgence in low or coarse conversation and companionship. Hand in hand with the avoidance of bad habits, the church's regime called for self-improvement. Samuel believed he should fill his leisure time with more positive recreations. He planned to take voice lessons and to learn to play musical instruments. He thought he should acquire an accordion as soon as he could afford one, so he could sing and play at the same time. This doubling of activity would save precious time, and, when it was too stormy to go out, he could exercise through his music. He also toyed with the idea of studying phrenology, including craniology and physiognomy, feeling it would provide intellectual activity when he was traveling, especially when observing people while walking in cities. An expert in phrenology had intrigued Samuel through an extensive examination during which he had warned him to be careful since he was prone to mental strain and exhaustion, which might well lead to a premature death. Both music and phrenology were only passing fancies, quickly replaced by other activities. Nelles was more serious, however, about the need to take better care of his health. The church recognized retirement due to poor health as perhaps the major cause of the shortage of Methodist clergy in the country. Nelles warned himself to watch his diet, practise cleanliness, and exercise by taking long walks. Walks in nature further served to calm his nerves and improve his spiritual tranquility; Samuel enjoyed their restorative value throughout his life.73 After his three years of preparation, a committee of the Toronto District of the Wesleyan Church examined Nelles on his progress in the course of study and his general fitness for the ministry. The senior clergy recognized natural ability combined with superior education, and saw in the dark complexioned, medium-sized Nelles a mental as well as a physical agility. The committee quickly recommended his ordination. Even with his older colleagues' approbation, Nelles still questioned his own qualifications and, more importantly, his spiritual state. In May 1850, he began a private journal with the confession, "This day I am afraid to pray - sinned so grievously yesterday."74 Ten days later, he confided in the same diary: Another conference year has closed. The preachers have gone to Brockville to Conference. I am to go tomorrow. Did not intend to go, but they have recommended me for ordination and I can give no good reason for declining - yet I

The Young Scholar-Preacher

83

feel reluctant. I am not fit: I am sincerely striving to attain to a holy state of heart and holy habit of life, but as yet I am miserably weak and deficient. However, I must go. I pray God to prepare me for the solemn hour. If the brethren knew my "Death-faults" would they lay hands upon me? 75

Such doubts, however, only reflected the depth of Samuel's desire to serve the community faithfully, not an inherent weakness in his calling. The Brockville Annual Conference was pleased to ordain Nelles to the ranks of its itinerancy and appoint him as junior minister on the prestigious London City circuit. A group of prominent ministers, who were upset by the general direction the church's newspaper was taking and by the apparent lack of energy of those in charge, had suggested that Nelles be nominated to succeed George Sanderson as editor of the Christian Guardian, but Sanderson was eventually re-elected unopposed to his post.76 Nelles had the wrong temperament for stirring up or actively participating in controversies as editor, but the senior church authorities recognized his potential as a leader among his generation in the connexion. With his future seemingly settled, Samuel packed up in Toronto and prepared to move to London. He really did not like cities; he felt they tended to destroy the freshness and spontaneity of life, and separated the individual from the natural sources of energy, health, morality, and spirituality. But he did feel more than a tinge of regret at being forced to sever the bonds of friendship - perhaps one in particular that was close to his hopes for future happiness - which he had established in Toronto. Moving from circuit to circuit and among the appointments on circuit was the fate of all itinerants. During a leave before commencing his new duties, he addressed the students at Daniel Van Norman's Burlington Ladies Academy in Hamilton. His talk, entitled "Home," was full of cliches and rather formal, self-evident truths; it was not a very inspiring performance. Nelles was suddenly overcome by a depressing sense of mental and physical exhaustion. For some two weeks he remained at home in Mount Pleasant to rest and recover, retreating once again to the spacious verandah to read, write, and contemplate his past decisions and his future career.77 Although he had now entered a select and respected profession with the warm congratulation of his family, friends, and ministerial colleagues, Samuel was still unnerved by deep foreboding over missed opportunities and thwarted ambitions. In 1849, he had attempted to rationalize his choice of the ministry: This is in many respects a life of privation, yet it is not without its advantages. The salary is such as necessarily to entail temperance and economy, yet with

84

Faithful Intellect

these a man may get along and then he will have more leisure for the culture of his mind and the acquisition of knowledge than falls to the lot of public or professional men generally, or even to Christian ministers in other denominations. The permanent pastor of the same congregation has but little leisure. But a traveling Wesleyan, after a few years, is able to do justice to his charge and yet have considerable time for general study. On the whole it is not a hard life to the humble, prudent man.78

Now that he was ordained and about to commence his chosen labour, he again attempted to resolve his past choices. In the serenity of his family home he confided to himself: Life is passing away with me and how differently from my earlier fancies! I begin to think now that my life will amount only to this - a plain Methodist preacher, for a few years, in Western Canada. Well let it be so. Fame is not worth much after all. My feet will leave their impress in the dust of the street as long as my name its memory in the ears of men. Fame is a shadow of a shade.79

Despite all his misgivings, Samuel Sobieski Nelles was both well educated and suitably trained. At twenty-six years of age, he was ready to fulfill his promise to serve God and help his fellow Canadians. He would soon discover that his preparations had not been in vain and that his perception of his own spiritual frailty was highly exaggerated. It was time - even if he did not yet fully appreciate it - to become what he had always wished: a teacher of Christianity who improved humanity's understanding of biblical, ethical, and spiritual truths.80 As he gathered himself to become an inspired preacher and a responsible, caring pastor, new paths were spreading out that would lead him from the meeting house to the academic corridors at Victoria University. Observers might see a well-directed, divinely inspired, even preordained plan in operation. The new opportunity would not provide peace nor end his frustrations and anxieties, but it would offer a sphere of employment particularly suited to his talents, determination, and faith.

4

The New Principal

Samuel Nelles had been born and raised on a farm. As for most rural Canadians, the rhythm of life matched the cycle of the seasons: spring planting, summer growing, autumn harvest, winter dormancy. The annual pattern gave natural order and symmetry to life's employment and even came to define life itself. As an adult, Nelles witnessed a shift in the cycle. Methodist ministers regulated their life around the calendar of Annual Conferences, where their fate was affirmed, their next circuit assigned. Their year started in June and ended the following June. For the newly ordained Nelles, this new sense of time seemed artificial, though he assumed he would become attuned to it. However, Samuel's internal clock was that of neither the farmer nor the itinerant. He had been born in October and would die in October. More importantly, autumn was the beginning of the school year and, ever since the age of sixteen, his life had been regulated by the school bell. For him, each year properly began in the fall, and he somehow felt more comfortable when the church summoned him to commence his new duties in that season. In September 1850, however, after only a few months of itinerating on the London circuit, the church removed Nelles from pastoral work and assigned him to Victoria College as professor of Classics and acting principal. Forever after, the rhythm of his life would be measured by the academic calendar. Nelles's transfer was not a promotion. His new salary was a mere £100 a year, less than he would have expected in the ministry, and it rose painfully slowly during the decade. More experienced married faculty at Victoria, such as William Kingston, received £125 plus accommodation.1 By contrast, in 1847 the Anglican Theological Institute in Cobourg had paid its principal £350 salary plus £50 to rent a house. The previous year, Rev. John McCaul, vice-president of King's College, had received a salary of £278 for his administrative duties

86

Faithful Intellect

and a further £555 as professor of Classics, while the professors of Mathematics and Divinity each received £500. The bursar was paid £400 a year, and even the annual salary of the third clerk in the bursar's office was £150, even though King's College obtained only £1211 from student fees.2 In 1854, the government raised the annual salaries of the underworked professors at the new University College in Toronto to at least £450 each; those with administrative posts received substantially more. King's and, later, University College of course drew their funds from the university endowment and did not have to rely on tuition fees, private donations, or petty and irregular government grants.3 Compounding Nelles's distress over his meagre salary was Victoria College's state of near-collapse. In his diary for 2.6 September 1850, Nelles recorded, "Came to Victoria, as Professor. Greatly tried in this thing."4 A week later, he hastily noted, "Students are coming in. No proffs but me. L. Taylor has refused to come. The chief care is likely to devolve on one little prepared for it. I am as yet hearing all the classes in the several branches. Never needed more grace."5 Although Victoria had taught about 140 students in all grades during the spring of 1849, classes had been cancelled for the summer session of 1850, and it was not certain how many of the faculty or students would return in the fall. Without at least four teachers, a hostile government might even enforce the terms of Victoria College's charter, cancelling its legal status.6 There had never been a more critical juncture in the school's short but tortured history, and, as it turned out, the church and college were fortunate to have Nelles to salvage the cause. Few other men had the necessary training and education, or the will and dedication to remain so steadfastly at the post. The problems facing Victoria were not new, and many of them would not be resolved during Nelles's lifetime. Robert Baldwin's 1843 university bill, though not enacted, had initiated a decade of nearly constant political and social turmoil over the future of higher education in Canada West. Until 1853, every subsequent government attempted to deal effectively with the public's conflicting opinions on the question. The majority, if they thought about it at all, probably concluded that universities were a waste of money and effort; after all, it appeared that higher education only sustained the traditional elites who already controlled the country and was of little value to ordinary citizens. The less spent the better. As long as universities were primarily used to train civil administrators and clergy for the established church - the avowed priorities of King's College - this attitude would prevail. Once the new commercial and industrial middle classes came to value education as necessary preliminary training

The New Principal

87

fostering economic expansion and allowing their sons to rise in power and status in the nation, and looked to the learned professions - including evangelical clergy - to serve and even lead society, the colleges gradually earned grudging support and slightly wider popular favour. But the process was slow and uneven. Many whose interest centred on preventing the waste of more money or unfair discrimination against their particular religious group in the expenditure of funds never considered universities as a serious priority.7 Among the minority who had a vested interest in a full education system or who trusted in the value of higher schooling for social, moral, and economic progress, a number of options contended for support. We saw in an earlier chapter that, under the situation existing in the early 18405, the funds from the sale of the 2z6,ooo acres of land reserved for higher education, along with other annual government grants distributed under various guises, were assigned by law to the Church of England's King's College. Vast additional acreage was also set aside to support its preparatory school, Upper Canada College. Although King's charter was quite liberal by the standards of British Anglican establishments, accepting students and faculty without subscription to the Church of England's articles of faith, all teachers were in fact members in good standing of that body and the administration and environment of the school were manifestly Anglican. Bishop John Strachan believed that the Church of England had already sufficiently compromised its special status; King's College remained one of the last bulwarks against the forces of chaos. The sanctity of organized religion and the spiritual and moral health of the nation depended on its retention of the endowment. Strachan saw attacks on its prerogatives as both illegal and indecent.8 The Church of Scotland, which had created Queen's University in Kingston, really wanted a college to train its clergy. Since King's College would not appoint a Presbyterian professor of Theology, it clearly could not be trusted to supervise higher education. Although Queen's preferred sharing the endowment as an independent institution, it cautiously supported amalgamation as a step toward dividing the funds among affiliated denominational theological colleges in Toronto. The annual grant would be only about £500, but it would augment the funds Queen's already received as part of the clergy reserves compromise and from its parent Scottish church, and further would serve as an important precedent in future financial negotiations.9 Victoria College's supporters argued that all existing church colleges should share any endowment funds. Moreover, the schools must continue to teach the entire Arts curriculum and remain in their present communities in order to accommodate the scattered provincial

88

Faithful Intellect

population. While strongly opposing the elevated status of King's College, they would never accept what to them was the absurd notion that a government could abrogate its obligation to sustain a Christian system of higher education. The existing government grants were insufficient even to cover current deficits and, because they were not guaranteed by statute, the colleges were never able to rely on their continuance without partisan political favours.10 On the other hand, most Free Church Presbyterians, Baptists, and the more evangelical Methodists opposed all government funding for church schools.11 However, they were not prepared to commit their own wealth to fund the universities sufficiently. With such contention even among Methodists, the political factions could safely ignore the potentially dangerous opposition from this quarter. After the electoral defeat of the Baldwin-Lafontaine alliance in 1844, the new Conservative government, led in Canada West by William Henry Draper, introduced its own university legislation. Draper's proposals in 1845 and again in 1846 dealt more generously with the denominational colleges, permitting them to share in the endowment if they federated in a new University of Ontario while remaining in their original localities. But the government never mustered the political will to see the bills through the Assembly. In 1847, Jonn A. Macdonald introduced legislation that would have divided the endowment between King's College and the denominational schools. Before it was dealt with, he withdrew it to call an election. Baldwin was returned to power and in 1849 finally oversaw the passing of a redesigned university bill. Under its terms, the charter and endowment of King's College were transferred to a new University of Toronto, which had no religious affiliation and did not teach theology.IZ Baldwin expected, in fact, to end all grants to denominational universities. Opponents argued that not only would a "godless university"13 result, but all higher education would be centralized in Toronto to the detriment of the dispersed population. The move would seriously reduce the opportunities for higher education, especially for the rural population. Following the passing of the Baldwin Act, the government maintained token aid of £500 a year for the denominational colleges, but they were forced to sustain themselves through voluntary donations. Without a wealthy and sympathetic church membership, Victoria College sank further into debt, as noted earlier. The response of John Strachan's Anglicans, Egerton Ryerson's Methodists, and Church of Scotland Presbyterians was to enter into an informal partnership to fight for their denominational universities. In the spring of 1850, the apparently incongruous alliance seemed to be gaining ground in its attempt to obtain favourable amendments to the Act. Rumours began

The New Principal

89

to circulate that the government might be willing to provide aid for denominational colleges that moved to Toronto, whether or not they became exclusively theological colleges. Hope quickly faded, however, when the government only permitted theological colleges in Toronto to maintain preparatory schools, as well as to supply pastoral care for their Arts students attending the University of Toronto.14 At the end of the year, Bishop Strachan obtained a charter for an Anglican Trinity College, which opened on Queen Street north of the military reserve in 1852. It never had the monopolistic credentials of the defunct King's College, but it did provide a respectable home for the Church of England. It was also much more acceptable to young Principal Nelles and his clerical colleagues. As one of many denominational schools, it joined with Victoria and Queen's in the fight for greater government aid. The Church of England also transferred its Diocesan Theological Institute from Cobourg and associated it with Trinity College.15 Only the Free Church's Toronto-based Knox College truly benefitted from the amendments of 1850. In 1851, Henry Sherwood introduced new legislation to significantly amend the Baldwin Act. He modelled his ideas about what the University of Toronto should be on London University, which had been established in i8z6 to serve the dissenting denominations that were excluded from Oxford and Cambridge. Students could attend one of a variety of scattered colleges operating under the general university umbrella. Sherwood hoped thereby to extend the benefits of higher education more widely across the province. He believed, moreover, that the denominational colleges had a natural and proper constituency and would never agree to affiliate with the secular provincial university. The Baldwin Act not only failed to support many of their legitimate rights but also seriously disadvantaged their students. Sherwood's plan called for a degree-granting University of Toronto with teaching undertaken in affiliated denominational colleges in various communities throughout the province, as well as in a non-denominational University College created from the respectably endowed Upper Canada College. The income from the interest on the endowment after the University of Toronto's annual expenses of about £4000 were paid - would be divided among the affiliated colleges.16 However, Sherwood lacked sufficient political support and withdrew the bill before second reading. Reformer Francis Hincks finally reconfigured higher education through the University Act of 18 5 3, which transformed the University of Toronto into an examining body directly controlled by the legislature. The government would hire faculty and appoint the senate to

90

Faithful Intellect

administer the university and much of provincial higher education under an appointed chancellor and vice-chancellor. All teaching would be performed in a newly created secular University College. The existing denominational colleges were offered the right to federate with the new university. Even when they joined forces, however, they would lack sufficient weight to overrule University College's power in the decision-making bodies. The senate was largely made up of elected members of the Assembly, as well as their Toronto friends and the Superintendent of Education, with the heads of the universities serving ex officio. No religious tests were required of students or staff, and no "religious observances, according to the forms of any particular Religious Denomination, [were to] be imposed."17 However, arrangements could be made to enforce moral conduct or support student attendance at worship services. Any income from the endowment not required by the University of Toronto or University College was to be divided among the various denominational schools. But, miraculously, under the budgeting formula used, there never were any excess funds. The very expensive University College building erected between 1856 and 1859, the high wages paid its professors, and the extravagant cost of operations and administration more than consumed any income from the endowment.18 The previous decade's legislative initiatives confirmed the general opposition of Reformers to denominational higher education, while suggesting at least some sympathy on the part of moderates and conservatives. As principal, Nelles really had no choice but to seek alliances among conservative politicians to protect Victoria College, but even these connections were ultimately of minimal value. The long period of political uncertainty over the future of higher education made it impossible for Victoria to develop suitable plans for its own development. During the same period, and partially as a result of the financial chaos surrounding the school's operations, Victoria was further crippled by a weak internal leadership and an inadequate faculty. As Nelles's transfer to Wesleyan University in 1844 and his later concerns about joining the staff indicated, the college retained few of its better senior students or teachers. When Egerton Ryerson departed in 1844 to assume control of the Department of Education, the church appointed its former book steward, Alexander McNab, as acting principal. Ryerson also named him as his deputy in the department while he was absent in Europe. McNab had been educated at Cazenovia Seminary in New York State and was ordained in 1836. His frail constitution made it hard to assign him to onerous circuit duties, but he appeared to be a decent choice as temporary principal. However, the appointment quickly proved to be a mistake. Even after 1847,

The New Principal

91

when Ryerson formally resigned and he was confirmed as principal, McNab could not provide the required leadership among the students and faculty or adequately represent the college before the public.19 The fault was not entirely his. McNab was always considered an interim appointment; he had agreed to resign when Matthew Richey became available. Richey was serving as co-delegate or vice-president of the Annual Conference for the first two years after the reunion of the Wesleyan Methodists in 1847. To make matters more difficult, Egerton Ryerson retained significant influence in college affairs through his membership on the board, his reputation in the church, and his position as Superintendent of Education. He was never shy about offering advice or about insisting that it be followed, and disaffected members of the Victoria community naturally sought his help. The lines of authority were also confused by contention among the college board, the management committee, the faculty, and the church administration. The embattled McNab's position was further weakened by the fact that it was known he intended to leave Methodism to join the Church of England. These factors, combined with the seemingly endless financial crisis, made it well-nigh impossible for McNab to discipline students adequately or prevent jealous faculty members from pursuing their personal interests.20 When Matthew Richey finally became available in 1849 to take over the principalship, McNab happily left to become an Anglican minister, settling in a quiet, small-town parish. As for Richey, just before he assumed his duties he was badly injured in a fall, taking over a year to convalesce. This mishap probably hastened his premature retirement from ministerial duties in 1870, but in 1849 he was able to serve as president of the Conference. Richey was pleased to be able to use the seriousness of his injury as an excuse to postpone taking over as principal; apart from Victoria's well-known problems, he had never been on good terms with Egerton Ryerson. He had opposed Ryerson's political views and ambitions for over a decade, and had helped lead the British Wesleyans out of the union of 1833 in order to destroy his influence. Richey was equally worried about interference from other members of the school's board. Although an excellent scholar and preacher, he had proven to be an ineffective administrator and was too pompous and self-important to attract widespread public support. As one of the leading figures of the British Wesleyan faction, he always retained his sense of superiority to the Canadian Wesleyan clergy and membership. Even with a free hand and generous assistance, however, Victoria would not have offered a hopeful situation/1 To replace Richey, the church appointed John Wilson as acting principal for a year; he also continued to serve as professor of Classics.

9z

Faithful Intellect

Wilson was a graduate of Trinity College, Dublin, and had originally joined the Victoria faculty in 1847 to teach the subjects offered to Nelles a year earlier. He remained a stalwart teacher at Victoria for over forty years and even after he retired in 1890 continued to assist as his strength permitted. But in the short term, he could do nothing to restore order or build confidence in the school. William Paddock, after graduating from Harvard University, had also arrived in 1847 but taught Mathematics for only a few years before moving on to a more advantageous academic post in the United States. They were joined by John Beatty, a wealthy Cobourg medical doctor, who taught Natural Science and remained a significant - though not always positive - force in college affairs for decades; Conrad Van Dusen, who served for a short period as moral governor and treasurer; and two tutors primarily involved in the collegiate department.22 By early 1850, the difficulties had multiplied to the point where it was doubtful Victoria would survive. College officials were even forced to deny the reported sale of the building.23 The same day the Baldwin Act was amended for the benefit of theological seminaries in Toronto, a simple one-clause Victoria College Act was also passed that permitted Victoria to move to Toronto. Church authorities announced that they were considering the option; in fact, the 1850 Annual Conference's pastoral address to the church membership proclaimed: After serious and mature deliberation we have contingently decided upon the transfer of our Educational Establishment to Toronto. Important reasons have influenced us in arriving at this conclusion. Through other mediums and at the earliest period, you will be duly informed of them, when, we doubt not, you will fully perceive the necessity of the contemplated transfer, and join heartily with us in promoting a movement which cannot fail to advance the best interests of Victoria College.24

Even though the move did not occur, the Methodist community was confused and distressed by the church's actions, and remained very pessimistic about the school's future. Many Wesleyans feared that Victoria might abandon its Arts program. Although it never happened, the possibility compounded the anxiety and uncertainty. With the cancellation of summer courses and Richey's continued absence, even the faculty and potential students were left in a quandary. Finally, recognizing the danger to the school and lacking the necessary time to make radical changes or to find a buyer for the Cobourg property, the church shelved all plans to move Victoria to Toronto. The Christian Guardian was enlisted to assure the public that the college would remain in operation. On Z5 September

The New Principal

93

1850, the newspaper reported: "As to the statements respecting the discontinuance of the College, or a determination to discontinue it, they are without the slightest foundation in truth - are sheer fabrications of individuals who have sought in every possible way to injure the College and assail the Body under whose auspices it has been established."25 Students were encouraged to enroll, and the formal opening was postponed for several weeks. When twenty-six-year-old Samuel Nelles arrived on the scene to replace John Wilson, it was still with the expectation that Matthew Richey might appear in 1851. To help bolster the reputation of the school and to keep an eye on the inexperienced Nelles, the church appointed Egerton Ryerson president; however, he did not involve himself in day-to-day college operations and continued to reside in Toronto. As a means of enforcing stricter discipline, the authorities also placed the religious oversight of the students in the hands of a moral governor. Nelles waited with some apprehension for the arrival of sufficient students; by late October about two dozen had arrived.26 Two years later, in his typically amusing way, he relived the scene: "Then we had but four or five at first whom Mr. V. [Van Dusen] and I detained from the States by the argument a posteriori, that is by holding onto their coat tails!"27 Although he was soon joined by other faculty members, much of the initial teaching load fell on his shoulders. In his first year, beyond administering the institution, Nelles taught Moral Science and Rhetoric, Logic, and Evidences of Religion, along with his five senior classes in Latin and Greek.28 Many others would simply have fled the scene, but not Nelles. He was deeply conscious of his own need to be of service and felt dutybound to remain at his post. He mused,"! have not sought my present position. Resisted as much as seemed meet in a Wesleyan minister, acting under his superior. Feel the importance of sustaining our literary institution as a place of preparation for young ministers. Don't know what is to be end of the matter. Must stay where I am for the present. May God guide me and keep me pure in motive."29 As he assumed responsibility, he sensed the living presence of God in his labours. Over the first winter, he noted that he liked the work, his health was improving, he was encouraged to study more diligently, and had "wonderfully improved of late in my religious view and inward peace."30 Nelles finally comprehended that his true calling lay at Victoria College, disseminating the spiritual and moral values that so dominated his own life. At the same time, he was tinged with a portion of personal ambition and self-righteousness. Closely related to the matter of attracting students was the immediate need to strengthen the faculty. On his arrival, the staff was

94

Faithful Intellect

supposed to include Lachlin Taylor as pastoral governor and professor of Moral Philosophy. However, the thirty-five-year-old Taylor had temporarily retired to his father's farm because of mental exhaustion. Conrad Van Dusen had therefore added the moral oversight of the students to his position as treasurer, while Nelles taught the philosophy courses. The energetic Van Dusen would turn out to be more of a liability than an asset.31 Since John Wilson was temporarily unavailable, a senior student, Wesley Wright, assisted with the Latin and Greek classes. Noone was appointed to teach Natural Science, but Dr John Beatty remained nearby to assist if called upon. Although Nelles started to study the basics of the field, he quickly recognized that the college required a specialist.32 William Kingston eventually returned to supervise the junior classes and help teach Mathematics. Kingston had joined the old Upper Canada Academy in 1838, but left to edit the local Reform newspaper, The Provincialist, in 1847. Reappointed at Victoria in 1850, he had been delayed in winding up his connection with the newspaper. He remained at the college until 1872, but his "peppery Irish disposition," weak academic credentials, and limited skills for teaching senior students would be sources of serious difficulties in the future.33 Somehow, Victoria survived the year, and by the spring of 1851 arrangements were underway to bring some stability to the academic operations. Since Richey had transferred his ministry to the Maritime provinces and it was certain he would never serve, the college board confirmed Nelles as permanent principal. When informed of this fact, he reacted with typical diffidence, and perhaps more than a fleeting desire to abandon the sinking ship. He wrote to Egerton Ryerson in his capacity as president of Victoria University: I speak sincerely when I say that I do not think I ought to stand as Principal of this institution. The office requires a man of greater experience and more extensive scholarly attainments. Neither do I have the bodily strength requisite to meet the toils and anxieties of such a position. I know that I have been thrust into the place by peculiar emergencies and while these emergencies last I am willing to do what I can, wishing not so much to follow my own will as to serve the Church in whatever department my brethren may assign me; but I never expected to have charge of the Establishment when I accepted connection with it; and I earnestly desire that the Board would select as soon as possible, some more competent individual to fill the responsible situation.34

Typically unsure of his ability to lead the school, especially since there appeared to be little prospect of significant improvements, Nelles resolved to do his best after his appointment and gradually gained

The New Principal

95

confidence in his own judgment and administrative skills. Deep down, he wanted the position. Nevertheless, decision-making would remain divided among the various college authorities until the end of the decade, and Nelles required all the tact and determination he could muster to gain actual as well as nominal control over college affairs. After the end of the examination period in the spring of 1851, Samuel was happily distracted by other, more personal, matters. He was now twenty-seven, ordained, and confirmed in the principalship of Methodism's premier educational institution. It was time for him to marry and raise a family. During his two-year probation on the Toronto East circuit, he had often been a guest in the Davenport household of Enoch Wood, the head of the Wesleyan missionary operations. While he had appreciated the hospitality and the valuable advice he received there, his real interest centred on Mary Bakewell Wood, Enoch's eldest daughter. Intelligent, pious, and resolute, she was one of only three children born to Enoch Wood's second wife, Caroline Merritt, to reach adulthood. Added to her natural charm and friendly personality was Mary's strong support for Samuel's spiritual, moral, and educational goals. It had been the thought of separation from her that had made the stationing on the London circuit so unappealing. Deeply in love, the couple were finally married in Toronto by Egerton Ryerson on 3 July 1851. After a brief honeymoon, the newly weds set up their own home in rooms at Victoria College. Although Nelles never purchased a house, over the years the school building served the growing family well.35 With his domestic affairs now more settled, Nelles concentrated on his administrative and teaching duties secure in the knowledge that relief from anxiety could always be found close at hand in Mary's company. From its nadir in 1850, the college slowly and haltingly grew under his careful nurture. Writing to Ryerson in late 1851, he felt comfortable enough to let loose his sense of humour. Nelles normally relied on this faculty, reinforced by his happy turn of phrase, to cope with the serious responsibilities he faced or to disarm unwary opponents. After indicating that conditions were improving with regard to the number of students, he reminded his president that the school building was in serious need of repair: "The College roof leaks very much. We may truly say that we get on swimmingly."36 During the 1851 academic year, attendance had grown to nearly 70; the following term it began at no and increased to 136. In fact, by 1854, the number of students was sufficient to initiate some long-overdue internal changes. The junior or elementary school would no longer accept children under ten years of age. This reform was consistent with what .was occurring generally in proprietary

96

Faithful Intellect

academies across the province. As common schools increased in number and quality, parents kept their young children at home to obtain their preliminary education locally. It was much cheaper than boarding them in private schools and much less intrusive on family life.37 For Victoria, it meant that less time and effort had to be expended on subduing children's raw energy while introducing the barest of rudimentary knowledge. Teachers were much happier concentrating their talents on improving the upper school component of Victoria. As part of the reforms, Victoria also divided the older students into two quite distinct groups. One consisted of those who wished to take a few courses in order to prepare for business, the professions, farming, or home life; the courses were often more practical in focus. The other group comprised those scholars who intended to matriculate into university; their courses included Classics, Mathematics, and Natural and Moral Philosophy. Enrolment in the preparatory department gradually declined over the later 18508 and the i86os, from 173 in 1857 to 71 in 1866, as Victoria increasingly focused on its university scholars. The decline accelerated when Cobourg Grammar School began to train students for college work. Under the legislation of 1866, grammar schools received funding on the basis of the number of scholars studying Classics for admission to university, which encouraged them to attract as many male students as possible. Victoria finally integrated its high school department with Cobourg Grammar School in 1867 and never reinstated a preparatory program. To assist with the costs, the college furnished the local equivalent grant needed to receive legislative funding, continuing to do so even after the grammar school was reorganized into Cobourg Collegiate in 1871. During the 18705, Cobourg Collegiate had four masters and sixty-five boys in Classics, and the college faculty assisted when required.38 It became the most important nursery for Victoria, attracting students from across the province to prepare for university. In 1854, Victoria College also established a Faculty of Medicine. Eleven years earlier, Dr John Rolph, the former rebel, had organized the Toronto School of Medicine in small premises in the city. Like other schools, this "proprietory" institution was owned by the doctors who operated it. It was in direct and often bitter competition with the politically conservative medical school at the University of Toronto. In 1853, Hincks's University Act had forbidden the University of Toronto from teaching medicine or law, ostensibly because he opposed spending public money on training professionals. After all, tailors did not expect the government to pay for their training. Nevertheless, unsuccessful attempts to organize medical and law faculties at the University of Toronto persisted during the i85os.39 Rolph and his colleagues soon

The New Principal

97

recognized the advantages of being associated with a university in the formulation of criteria and the awarding of degrees and convinced Victoria to supervise their medical school. In 1856, after a dispute with Rolph, his entire teaching staff of four withdrew and took over the name Toronto School of Medicine. Rolph established the Faculty of Medicine of Victoria College, quickly attracted a new staff, and continued training doctors in Toronto. His school developed good laboratory facilities and instituted a teaching relationship with Toronto General Hospital, located nearby.40 Medical education had traditionally emphasized practical training in a form of apprenticeship; no university or medical degree was required. Even licensing by a recognized provincial body, which commenced in 1827 and was reformed in 1865, had only a minimal effect on improving and regulating the practice of medicine. Medical training normally consisted of three years of classwork along with one concurrent year of practical training in a hospital, but outside a medical school it could entail a mere two years of lectures by a competent physician. While the lectures and the laboratory component were compulsory, there was no more effective training than the practical experience earned in a hospital.41 The i86os witnessed a significant increase in the number of doctors, which was matched by a growing awareness of the value of a medical degree in gaining public acceptance and respect. Possession of a medical degree allowed the public to differentiate between regular doctors and "irregulars" who adopted a variety of popular, non-intrusive, phrenological and hydropathic medical practices, and also helped separate the qualified from the poorly trained. Moreover, it meant that the possessor was automatically licensed.4Z After 1865, medical education was supervised by a provincial council made up of respected senior members of the profession. Students had to take at least two years of formal training in a medical school, while the schools had to hire more and better doctors to prepare the scholars. Finally, in 1869, the province established the College of Physicians and Surgeons, which set specific education requirements and licensed doctors. It also limited access to the profession in order to increase the quality of medicine, improve financial returns and social status, and eliminate "quack" practitioners.43 In reality, except for supplying some students and receiving part of the fees, Victoria College had little to do with actual medical training. The medical schools were relatively well off, charging high fees to the large number of would-be doctors and, until 1868, receiving substantial government grants. They could well afford to maintain their independence. The Faculty remained in Toronto under Rolph's personal administration until his death in 1870, when Dr William Canniff

98

Faithful Intellect

became dean. Enrolment burgeoned from 51 in 1854 to 2,23 in 1866 before declining in the face of expanding competition from other medical schools. In the latter year, the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Victoria College in Montreal was organized, but it lasted only a short time. In 1870, Victoria's Montreal and Toronto schools granted twenty-four degrees in Medicine; two years later, Morley Punshon presided over the opening of a new college facility in Toronto, which merged with the Toronto School of Medicine in 1874. The medical faculties brought Victoria prestige and a little money, while causing innumerable headaches for the college authorities, but they had little effect on daily operations.44 In 1862, Victoria College also created a Faculty of Law, which held an auxiliary relationship similar to that of Medicine until the last students graduated in 1892,. When Victoria federated with the University of Toronto, their law faculties merged. Legal education was under the jealously guarded control of the Law Society of Upper Canada, whose intent was to create a self-conscious, professional social elite. It was primarily based on an apprenticeship system augmented by selfdirected study, and while the Law Society attempted at times to introduce formal lectures and textbooks, it rejected a system based on university education and compulsory law schools on the grounds that such requirements would force students to locate in Toronto and diminish the practical element of their training. It would also eliminate the source of the cheap labour invaluable for the functioning of most law offices.45 However, conscientious lawyers were interested in standardizing the requirements for those entering the profession and systemizing the academic training in the more theoretical principles of the law. Legal History, Jurisprudence, and Civil and Canon Law, for instance, were taught in a four-year program, normally while the student continued to work in a lawyer's office. By 1864, the Victoria Faculty of Law had eleven students in Cobourg and a short-lived program in Toronto. Between 1867 and 1872., Victoria also oversaw a branch operation in Montreal associated with the radical Institut Canadien that supervised French-speaking Protestants. In 1870, it granted eight LLBS to lawyers in Montreal, but, after some further success, it closed because of competition from McGill University.46 The law faculty provided some valuable contacts with the legal profession for the Victoria community, but again had little real impact on its operations. The Law Society had not yet resolved the dichotomy between practical training through articling and academic education as a prerequisite to a call to the bar.47 Legal and medical students were not a primary concern for Nelles during the period; he was much more involved in creating a mature

The New Principal

99

intellectual and social atmosphere for the undergraduate Arts students. While studying in the United States, he had been impressed with the educational advantages conveyed by clubs and societies and had happily participated in the short-lived organizations he had found at Victoria as a student during the 18405. In 1856, Nelles supported the initiative of John Campbell, the tutor in Classics, to organize the eclectic Literary Association. With Campbell's departure in 1860, Nelles began a long term as president of the organization. Principally managed by students, the society re-established the student library, organized lectures and debates on important social and religious topics, and featured poetry readings and singing by students and friends of the college. All in all, the Literary Association served as a forum in which a wide variety of intellectual, social, and recreational activities, including many short-lived student ventures, could take place. Beginning in 1862., the Association's annual conversazione became the major social event of the year, with guests attending from all over the region. Among other benefits, it provided one of the rare occasions when male students might entertain female visitors well into the night.48 Nelles recognized that it was up to the students themselves to monitor, discipline, and sustain such organizations and, as their interests matured, he supported the development of new social and intellectual associations and amenities at the university.49 Indeed, Nelles utilized every opportunity to broaden the rather parochial views of the students. Even though many of them, including those in the high school department, were older and had spent some time in farming or business, for the most part they had rarely come in contact with the great literary publications so readily available throughout the English-speaking world. Regrettably, they had normally read little beyond the local newspapers, some popular fiction, or perhaps a few Christian tracts. Nelles tried to bring the glories of literature, philosophy, and history to all who would pay heed, especially those students who intended to enter the Christian ministry. He encouraged them to attend public lectures and moral entertainments, and especially to read widely and deeply. In selecting prizes for scholarly achievement he carefully sought out books that would broaden their horizons. For instance, in 1867 he wrote to George Hodgins, "Thus I have chosen for a young sprig of Methodist divinity the plays of the many-sided Shakespeare as a suitable antidote to the biases of sectarian crotchets."50 Great effort was required to overcome the narrowness inherent in many Methodist households. Slowly and subtly, Nelles managed to establish a vibrant intellectual environment in Cobourg, though relatively few students fully appreciated his efforts.

ioo

Faithful Intellect

In his numerous addresses to the student body, usually at the beginning and end of the year, Nelles typically emphasized the need for spiritual religion, disciplined hard work, and a perpetual quest for formal education. Individuals should appreciate that they would never have a better or freer time for study than at university, and that the more they prepared themselves while they were students the easier life's challenges would become. He admonished his students that attendance at Victoria should never be a matter of acceding to family pressure or be perceived as a heavy burden; they would never truly profit from the experience if it was only an imposed task, but should love the chance to learn. Education offered a potentially joyful experience as well as a splendid practical opportunity. For Nelles, Victoria College played a central role in fulfilling Methodism's proud heritage of advancing the quest for knowledge. Although few students would ever rival Nelles's enthusiasm for education - especially while they were at school - his energy and simple joy in learning were highly contagious, nearly impossible for even the least scholarly inmate to avoid.51 At the same time, Nelles maintained that university education was invaluable in developing and purifying the faculties and senses with which a student was born, and therefore gave a powerful impetus to morality and virtue. It was a waste of time to seek education simply to gain economic or social advantage; such selfish materialism would end in ruin if not reformed by a wholesome character. Although economic improvement was a manifestation of God's benevolence, Nelles feared that the narrow materialistic quest for wealth and status was increasingly poisoning society. The only real antidote was an effective system of education that bound spiritual and moral values to all branches of learning and molded superior character. He told his students, "We hope you will delight yourselves in Virgil and Euclid, but we yet more ardently desire that you should delight yourselves in the pure word of God."5Z Nelles worked unceasingly to foster spiritually alive and morally sound training at Victoria. It was a central tenet of Nelles's world view that education and religion functioned at their best when united, that higher education must be controlled by responsible denominational institutions which understood the true nature of learning. Just as universities provided vital guardianship for culture, church-related colleges offered the best bulwark of sanity and safety in a world apparently standing on the brink of intellectual and social chaos. Knowledge that undervalued character formation, spiritual life, and moral improvement would hasten the destruction of the world. Nelles did not seek to interfere with the quest for knowledge; rather, he wished to make sure that the undertaking was properly focused and free from unnatural restraint.

The New Principal

101

Nelles joined most leaders of his era in trusting that proper education was the foundation for both spiritual and material progress. The 18505 not only witnessed unparalleled advances in science, art, literature, and mechanical inventions but also promised spiritual and moral improvement. The railway would transport the generation to a new millennium.53 However, knowledge might be used for good or evil, depending on the will of the individual. Education was in a state of flux, and many feared it was too often used to undermine legitimate authority and threaten a stable social and political order. Under these circumstances the future was bound to dissolve into mortal strife and confusion.54 Again, for Nelles, the answer was not to restrict the search for knowledge but rather to instill a comprehensive set of values in students. A truly beneficial education could best be obtained in denominational colleges where every aspect of the social and academic environment worked to enhance character and drew students naturally to a recognition of their ethical and spiritual duties while preparing them to take their place in the modern world.55 Nelles had been brought up to believe that character was essentially immutable, since heredity determined the form and nature of the individual. But his faith in the transforming power of education made him qualify this view. He came to agree with Thomas Arnold that characteristics such as evil were partially inherited and partially formed by circumstance.56 All the forces of society worked to shape character for better or worse, and family and friends, church and school played particularly important roles. It was therefore critical for these forces to be reinforced and allied on the side of moral and spiritual progress. Moreover, since knowledge was never neutral - that is, without cultural and judgmental baggage - educators should never pretend that they could teach without inculcating preconceived values and biases. It did matter who taught Science or Mathematics or English. Nelles argued that education should always be conducted on Christian principles by Christian teachers in a Christian environment. Denominational colleges were best prepared to accomplish "the whole work of a generous and liberal culture."57 In fact, it was dangerous to allow secular institutions to shape the young. Churchmen had long asked, "What is a college without a chapel?" and answered, "An angel without wings."58 A secular university was chained to earthly values, unable to attain to the higher realms of learning. Without even realizing its failure, secular education betrayed society by stealing the very soul of learning from both its teachers and its students. At the same time, underlying these concerns was a sense that the secular or profane did not really exist. There could not be a total absence of God "unless God is not god of this world"; the purpose of the church and its institutions was "not to raise men to

102,

Faithful Intellect

heaven, but to make them fit for heaven: but this is a work done in time and in the world, and completed there."59 School could never segregate the profane from the sacred; attempts to do so only confused the young. It was also impossible to confine or compartmentalize learning. All knowledge was intimately integrated and ultimately led to a greater understanding of God: to an appreciation of God's majesty and a recognition of humanity's responsibilities. Individuals were not independent citizens of Earth with immutable or inalienable rights; they were unworthy subjects of the Almighty, with perpetual duties to perform and divine gifts to redeem. Nelles assumed that, to be of real value, education must transcend the training of the rational intellect and strengthen the emotional and sentimental faculties of the human mind in order to transform character. "Education is the broad and symmetrical culture of the whole mind, and this embraces the conscience, the affections, the imagination, and the will as well as the mere intellect. Active principles are to be inculcated, the character is to be formed, the temper to be molded, the habits to be set, the aim of life to be unfolded, in a word, the student is to be prepared for life, and if he can be prepared without religion, he may live without it."6° Discipline, duty, and obedience could only be instilled through inspired religiously oriented instruction. These ideals must precede and encompass the acquisition of factual information or the skills needed to succeed in the daily business of the world, which were of less importance. Moreover, the unity of knowledge extended across time; it linked the past with the present and led inexorably to the future in one grand continuum. Education necessarily extended the natural stability and order in the world by reminding young people of the great debt they owed their ancestors and the great principles they needed to retain. Many mid-century educators quietly assumed that their main task lay in holding fast to accepted norms and preserving the wisdom of previous ages, not in unravelling the mysteries clouding the future. "Social unity was seen to be achieved not simply by 'rational' decisions but even more by bonds of emotion and volition given direction by the 'precious codes or moral laws' handed down through the generations by the Christian tradition, 'for all true knowledge is from on high'."61 Nelles agreed that knowledge and wisdom came from God and that instruction must defend the great principles of the past, but he still assumed that loyalty to historic codes of moral or intellectual conduct did not mean abandoning mature, independent thinking or the energetic quest for a modern and progressive understanding of the divine. Education freed individuals to appreciate the contribution made by great scholarship from the past to the establishment of order, but it

The New Principal

103

should never insist on a blind attachment to a particular definition of order, to a petrified hierarchy of relationships, or to a mindless acceptance of dusty dogma simply because it was venerable. Education must promote faithful inquiry. For Nelles, the best response to both social and intellectual anarchy was "a deep and honest desire for truth. "6z Of course, he was hardly unique in holding these views, which were endorsed by faculty at all denominational colleges and even at the socalled godless University of Toronto. A strong work ethic and rational inquiry became the common currency of higher education. A fundamental element of the overall unity of all knowledge was the harmonious connection between religion and learning. According to Nelles, "Religion when dissevered from learning is apt to degenerate into superstition and fanaticism, and some form of idolatry."63 Moreover, learning required true and full religion. "Without religion it is apt to degenerate into vain jangling and idle speculation; it is apt to grow proud, shallow and unprofitable. It is apt to lose its practical character, or if practical at all, to be so only in a low material sense."64 Nelles went on to assert: "We think no greater calamity could befall this country than to have our religious teaching fall over into the hands of ignorant men, and our scientific teaching into the hands of irreligious men."65 More broadly, the great mission to evangelize the world, which remained a central component of progress in the nineteenth century, would never succeed if science was estranged from spiritual Christianity, if intellectual and religious culture were divorced. Faith and knowledge compounded into wisdom. In pleading for a proper education system, Nelles listed over and over again the reasons why Methodists should support university education, and Victoria College in particular. In the absence of financial assistance from its own church's members, how could the government realistically be expected to acknowledge and support its legitimate claims? Methodists owed it to the zeal and sacrifice of their forefathers who had valiantly struggled to raise an institution of higher learning in the wilderness. Victoria College offered the only real opportunity for young Methodists to secure advanced training in Canada at a reasonable cost while extending their Christian culture. If the school were abandoned, Methodism could justly be condemned as fearing the growth of knowledge in the world. Never was the unity of religion and learning more critical. Further, Victoria provided the best means of evangelizing the more influential classes of society while preventing the loss to the church of young people eager for sound learning. Surely, Nelles reminded fellow Methodists, education was the greatest gift at the disposal of parents, the most valuable inheritance children could receive. Higher education was essential for real material progress, but

io4

Faithful Intellect

without a religious environment shallow materialism might destroy the higher appeals of scholarship. More specifically, the Wesleyan Methodist Church required a university to provide academic preparation for its own clergy, who could not afford to fall behind as society advanced in learning or to fail to meet head-on the skeptical and immoral forces of the world. Nelles defended Victoria College against the claim that it promoted sectarianism; true, it was controlled by the Wesleyans, but its goal was to foster a catholic Christian community.66 Finally, it was the patriotic duty of Methodists to promote Victoria College, since the best way to serve the needs of Canadians was to advance an ethical Christian culture. Nelles always believed that higher education in general and Victoria College in particular were supremely important for the future greatness of the nation. "The country without intelligence must be the prey of every vice and the seat of every disaster. Without intelligence we shall be exposed to superstition, without intelligence we shall be exposed to tyranny."67 No ignorant people could remain free. Wisdom came with knowledge, and only a truly wise people could resist the sophistry of the demagogue and the blandishments of the evil forces perpetually seeking to overwhelm the individual, the community, or the nation. All patriotic citizens should help Victoria improve the moral and intellectual condition of the country. Before he was able to create the kind of institution he envisioned, Nelles was obliged to spend much of his time during the 18505 and early i86os gaining personal control over college affairs, enforcing an appropriate level of discipline on recalcitrant students and contentious faculty members. When Nelles was first appointed principal, Conrad Van Dusen had assumed the duties of both moral governor and treasurer. More than twenty years older than Nelles, the experienced itinerant brought tenacity and commitment to the appointment, along with an honest and powerful conservatism. Egerton Ryerson became president at the same time. From the outset, therefore, overlapping jurisdiction exacerbated the existing problems of college administration. Although Nelles often complained privately of Van Dusen's illconceived financial schemes and his supervision of students, he initially felt constrained by his own inexperience to defer to both of his senior colleagues. He rarely even expressed his personal views or exerted his legitimate authority over the other faculty members.68 Inevitably, frustration and lack of cooperation marked the first years of Nelles's principalship. Van Dusen transferred to native mission work within the Wesleyan Church in 1852, but his successor, Samuel Dwight Rice, attempted even more forcefully to impose his will on college affairs. Born in

The New Principal

105

Maine in 1815 but raised in New Brunswick, Rice moved to Canada West after the Wesleyan reunion in 1847. It was his assumption that he had the primary authority over student matters, as well as the right and obligation to interfere in all college concerns even when the faculty and members of the board disagreed with him. An example occurred when he attempted to impose a strict disciplinary regime to control student conduct against Nelles's better judgment and the opposition of most of the faculty. When the initiative failed, Rice was deeply hurt. He again ignored the advice of his peers when he introduced a plan to monitor the students by having them all reside in the college. A new outbuilding, which the students soon dubbed "the barn," was constructed to house a chapel and some classes. The college proper was renovated to provide more sleeping quarters; the Nelles family temporarily had to move out of its rooms. After a few years, this experiment was abandoned, but it cost the college much of the good will and financial reserves built up through its controversial "scholarship" fund (about which more later).69 Nelles hoped Rice would assume other duties, but instead his supporters had the Annual Conference appoint him moral and domestic governor in 1854. With renewed confidence, enthusiasm, and energy, he immediately began promoting a scheme to move Victoria College from Cobourg to the village of Weston, on the railway about fifteen kilometres northwest of Toronto. A group of Toronto businessmen had promised land and financial support if the move was undertaken, and prospects were good that the college could develop the adjoining lands to create a large endowment on its own. Since the medical faculty was already well-established in Toronto, the idea seemed to make sense to a number of alumni and friends of the college. In fact, it did have real merit for several reasons, the most important probably being that it would remove the gnawing doubt over the Cobourg location that had always existed. The selection of the village had originally represented a compromise among a number of equally appealing sites. By the mid-i85os, however, the railways had redefined the urban pattern in Canada West, and it was increasingly apparent that, while Cobourg was declining in relative importance, Toronto was rapidly emerging as the region's economic, social, and educational metropolis. The university authorities had many factors to consider when the Weston proposal was floated, and they seriously investigated it.7° However, when local opposition materialized in Cobourg and difficulties arose in selling the existing property and rebuilding, the already divided board hesitated. Inertia would always remain an important factor in college decision-making. At this point, the town of Cobourg arranged to buy a parcel of five acres adjacent to the campus from Dr

io6

Faithful Intellect

John Beatty and to donate it for Victoria's expansion. Over the following year, the residents also subscribed more than £1000 toward endowing the college, all in the expectation that Victoria had agreed never to transfer its operations. Egerton Ryerson, who personally favoured moving to Toronto but could see little advantage in setting up in a village, even one close to the metropolis, threatened to resign from the board if "Rice's extravagant schemes" were adopted. When all things were considered, the board decided in 18 5 6 to stay in Cobourg and accept the town's donations. Ryerson told Nelles he was glad "that you got safely and harmlessly through your recent difficulties. You cannot be more thankful than I am, if I have been able to render you personally any assistance towards their adjustment."71 Rice was furious at what he considered a personal betrayal by the board. During the ensuing imbroglio, Nelles asserted his own authority in college matters. It eventually became impossible for Rice to do anything but resign, and the stationing committee transferred him to Hamilton in 1857. In 1861, he continued his interest in education by heading the new Wesleyan Female Academy in that city. Ryerson advised Nelles to seize the opportunity of Rice's departure to lay down the conditions under which he would continue as principal, adding, "From the convictions in the mind of Mr. Wood [Nelles's father-inlaw] and other members of the Board, as to Rice's officiousness and rashness, to say the least, you will be fully sustained by the Board. A double-headed government is an impossibility."72 Much to Nelles's satisfaction, moral oversight of the students was placed in his own hands. His friend and early associate John Ryerson assumed the duties of treasurer, concentrating unsuccessfully for fourteen months on the task of resolving Victoria's financial woes. Nelles was finally in control, and his opinions carried increasing weight in the college and church councils.73 While it was relatively easy to achieve some measure of authority over student discipline and normal operations, finances were another matter entirely and provided the greatest source of anxiety for the young principal. The collection and expenditure of all money were directly controlled by the treasurer and, through him, the college board. The Wesleyan Conference appointed the financial agents who visited the congregations to solicit contributions for Victoria. There was a high degree of overlap between the influential members of the Annual Conference and the clerical members of the college board, powerful individuals who were not easily convinced to give way to younger, less experienced colleagues. They jealously guarded their vital jurisdiction, since the level of personal versus corporate liability had never been legally resolved and accounting procedures and controls

The New Principal

107

were still in their infancy. Their reputations were at stake if any funds were mishandled. Thus, Nelles was obliged to administer the college without serious influence over how its funds were raised or allocated. In 1850, shortly before Nelles's arrival, Victoria had adopted, among other fundraising schemes, the very questionable strategy of selling so-called scholarships to raise an endowment. Under the terms of the program, an individual could subscribe £25 or $100, due in five years with interest paid in advance, and gained in return the right for twenty-five years to send a student, presumably a young relative, to the college. The length of time the student could remain was never clarified. The board hoped that church adherents would be more willing to follow this scheme than simply to donate money, thereby financing the long-term operations of the school and perhaps even endowing college chairs in important subjects that could then continue independent of annual receipts. The larger the number of students, the greater the possibility of future contributions from successful alumni. The project had been suggested by Conrad Van Dusen, and he initiated an extensive advertising campaign in the Christian Guardian, followed up by traveling agents collecting subscriptions and scholarship funds across the province.74 Neither Nelles nor Egerton Ryerson believed that Van Dusen could sell enough scholarships to make the plan a success. However, when the zealous Samuel Rice succeeded Van Dusen as treasurer, he was entirely optimistic. Rice estimated that the program would bring at least 500 students to the college and raise some $50,000. In fact, over 600 subscribed to the scholarship plan.75 Apparently, even those church members and other provincial residents who felt little loyalty to Victoria recognized its advantages, and it certainly popularized the university. Rice advocated a similar scheme for financing a new women's seminary, which, he later suggested, would be able to take over the college facilities if and when Victoria moved to Weston. By the mid-i85os, however, problems with the scholarship plan began to emerge. The most significant was that the cost of educating a student far exceeded the $100 collected, so the more scholarships sold, the greater the negative effect on the financial health of the college. The scheme remained a substantial but unpredictable drain on funds until it was abandoned in i866.y6 Two other related problems also appeared. First, rather than being invested as a true endowment, the money was largely used to pay off current debts and to cover the costs of the renovations on which Rice had insisted to create a students' residence; little remained for the intended purpose. Moreover, many individuals never paid their subscriptions; over the life of the program, only about $27,000 was actually collected.

io8

Faithful Intellect

It was particularly embarrassing that one of these delinquents was Samuel Nelles's father. William Nelles died in 1865, but when Isaac Brock Aylesworth, the college agent, applied to Samuel and his brother John as executors of their father's estate, they denied any obligation to pay the subscription. While legally valid, their refusal added to Aylesworth's longstanding mistrust of the college officials and led, for the first time, to public criticism of Samuel Nelles.77 Even more serious, many of those who failed to pay their subscriptions had already taken advantage of its terms by sending family members to Victoria. Some of these individuals were trustees of the college and leading Wesleyan Methodists.78 At the Annual Conference in Montreal in 1866, shortly after the scholarship plan had finally ended, Aylesworth called for an audit of the program, and attacked the conduct of many of the college's officials, agents, and friends - including Samuel Nelles. The matter was investigated, but not to Aylesworth's satisfaction, and he continued to complain about his colleagues' conduct. William Scott, the president of Conference, dismissed Aylesworth as "a wandering slanderer."79 Deeply offended, Aylesworth continued his attacks on the financial management of the college. He denounced the receipt of funds under apparently false pretences, the absence of precise records, and Nelles's unauthorized use of money for renovations designed for his personal comfort and his drawing of supplies from the college stores. In a letter he sarcastically assaulted Nelles, professor of Ethics and Logic, asking, "And is it lubricity of memory, slipshod ethics, a low standard of religion or a sprinkling of ignorance to which such practice in logic is attributable?" 80 Nelles was highly sensitive to personal attacks and suffered a serious bout of depression as a result of Aylesworth's abusive allegations. However, the church and college authorities never countenanced any of his claims and reaffirmed their confidence in Nelles. In fact, Nelles demanded and obtained a greater role in the appointment and supervision of the college's financial agents. Perhaps ironically, Nelles's ascendancy over the college administration was only truly confirmed when he gained enough confidence to oppose his long-time senior associate, Egerton Ryerson. In 1854, Ryerson was embroiled in a disagreement with the majority of the Wesleyan ministerial leadership over the status of the class meeting and the nature of church membership. Technically, to be a member of the Methodist Church, one needed to be willing to "flee from the wrath to come"; that is, to strive for a conversion experience and attend the church's ordinances, including the weekly meeting of members in small classes. Ryerson argued that many stalwart individuals were refused membership simply because they failed to attend the class meetings.81 Since this qualification had been established when Methodism was still

The New Principal

109

a society within the Church of England, a situation that no longer applied, he wanted membership based on other criteria, including baptism. The saving power of baptism and the moral status of children were part of this complicated debate. Nelles and their mutual friend George Hodgins agreed with Ryerson. However, because the Annual Conference would not officially adopt his rather controversial position, Ryerson resigned as a minister of the church.82 Hodgins also left to join the Anglicans. Later, as an important lay member of the Anglican Synod and a representative on the senates of Trinity College and the University of Toronto, he was a useful ally to Nelles and Victoria College, his alma mater. Ryerson's bitter debate with James Spencer, the editor of the Christian Guardian, led to a serious breach with the more conservative forces in the church. Spencer, a loyal supporter of George Brown, had been a confirmed enthusiast even as a student at Victoria.83 In the long run, the disruption would seriously weaken the unanimity the church needed in the face of important political divisions over the future of the college. More immediately, as a consequence of Ryerson's resignation, he also left the presidency of Victoria, and Nelles was appointed to take his place. In 1855 the church welcomed Ryerson back into its ministerial ranks, but Nelles retained the presidency. There is no doubt that Samuel continued to look to Ryerson to lead the fight for justice for Victoria against hostile governments and to seek his guidance on general university questions, particularly those relating to the workings of the University of Toronto senate, of which they were both members. Nonetheless, as we have seen, he gradually asserted his own right to govern internal college matters. In the great controversy over University College between 1859 and 1862., which will be discussed in chapter 9, Nelles, at first hesitatingly but later with increasing vigour, became a strong controversialist on behalf of Victoria. He never resorted to personal attacks on his opponents; rather, he assailed them with what he considered incontrovertible facts, clear logic, and an overarching sense of fairness. He also demonstrated keen patriotism, proposing solutions that he felt were in the best interests of Canada. Although the struggle was effectively lost and the victors wrote history to suit their own vision of higher education, Nelles won the respect of both colleagues and opponents and grew immeasurably in selfconfidence.84 When dealing with Ryerson, Nelles routinely yielded to his mature judgment, but increasingly resisted when Ryerson attempted to meddle in college affairs. Even friends who seemed to oppose Ryerson recognized that he was often tyrannical, always arrogant, and commonly

no

Faithful Intellect

petty when he did not get his own way. While not wishing to hurt his mentor's feelings, Nelles was not prepared to abandon his hard-won prerogatives to suit Ryerson's fancies. In 1864, Ryerson was annoyed at not having been consulted on the appointment of a new department chairman and, taking the role of a long-suffering servant, wrote to Nelles: "I feel myself quite relieved of the obligation to take any further part in the Councils of a College in behalf of which I have laboured and suffered more than in behalf of any other Educational Institution in Upper Canada."85 Ryerson expected Nelles to capitulate rather than lose his support on the board; he had often used the threat of resignation in the past. Instead, Nelles wrote back that he had no intention of damaging their friendship but was neither obliged nor willing to consult Ryerson on the question. His action, Nelles claimed, "involves no discourtesy unless it be required of the President of this University to propose no measures even for consideration in the open Board until he has first advised privately with members of it."86 He later wrote to George Hodgins, Ryerson's deputy in the education department, to see whether the latter would return to the board. He had not resigned - in fact, he had been reappointed for 1865 - but was not attending the meetings. As president, Nelles could go no further in soothing Ryerson's injured pride. Knowing Hodgins had more influence with Ryerson than anyone else, he noted, "I can assure you it would be most gratifying if he were to do so, but of course it rests with himself and after the efforts I have made to remove his hard feelings I cannot consistently address him again on the subject."87 After discussing the matter with Hodgins, a somewhat chastened Ryerson eventually returned; thereafter he tended to defer to Nelles's lead in college business. At around the same time, the church authorities requested Nelles and his teaching colleagues to enforce a relatively strict code of discipline at the college. With such a wide range of students, difficulties must arise from time to time. One of the obvious challenges for the administrators was to set rules that were appropriate for quite young, immature children and simultaneously not overly stringent for students in their late teens and early twenties. To complicate matters, some students were the sons of members of the wealthy provincial elite, while others came from relatively poor farm families; some held no religious views, while others were strict Anglicans, Presbyterians, or Methodists; and many intended to enter the ministry. Few of the young scholars had been accustomed to follow a rigid timetable - or even the benign regime of the school bell. Furthermore, rebellion against parental and institutional regulation was as natural to adolescence then as now, and a major component of

The New Principal

111

the process of becoming an adult male.88 Nelles never believed that professors made adequate substitutes for parents or that their main purpose was to suppress harmless pranks or youthful exuberance. Tolerance and good judgment were required when dealing with misdemeanours and deciding how strictly to enforce the rules. A blind eye, a sense of humour, and a degree of forbearance were normally the most satisfactory means of dealing with less serious offences, in Nelles's view. Indeed, many of his disagreements with Samuel Rice hinged on their different approaches to minor infringements of college discipline. Nelles did not see the devil working in every casual student activity. The most common offences could be found in any educational institution at any period of history: water fights, late-night escapades, and minor damage to school property. Favourite tricks were to put pepper in the ventilation system and to roll large stones down the stairs. Nathanael Burwash, eventually Nelles's successor as president of Victoria, recorded that in 1853, while he was in the high school department, a prayer meeting he was attending was invaded by older students who blew out the candles and pelted the worshipers with kindling. Although not directly involved in the melee, five students were expelled over Christmas of that year on the advice of Samuel Rice. The following February, a revival in Cobourg converted all but a handful of the students and at least temporarily ended such mischief.89 In spite of the revival, a few young men were disciplined for playing cards, and older students were sometimes caught drinking, dancing, or partying at the college or in town. In the majority of cases a simple apology, payment of a small fine, or compensation for repairs sufficed. Nelles's chief concern was that students apply themselves to their studies and avoid wasting time. Nevertheless, he did expell some students who perpetrated serious offences; although more tolerant than Rice or Van Dusen, he was prepared to act forcefully when necessary. In 1868, two members of the college, McCartney and German, were involved in a brawl in which McCartney drew a knife. Most of the other students wanted him arrested. Nelles was deeply distressed by the episode, suffering several sleepless nights. However, after investigating the affair and allowing tempers to calm down, he finally decided to have McCartney bound over to keep the peace and expelled.90 Although Victoria's critics enjoyed exaggerating any difficulties, serious infractions were quite rare; when they did occur they tended to be blown out of proportion in the public press. Most misconduct during Nelles's long career was quickly and quietly settled within the college. The few public cases tended to involve apparent attempts to undermine the authority of the faculty or college board. For instance, in late 1856 Nelles hired a new science professor,

ii2

Faithful Intellect

George Whitlock, whom he had known from his student days in Lima, New York. Whitlock had studied in Paris and brought a brilliant mind and a rare enthusiasm to his teaching. However, Dr John Beatty, who also taught Science, was offended by the appointment and resigned. Nelles took the opportunity to replace him with the German-trained Dr Elijah Harris, who could teach German and French as well as Science. Though Beatty had been a thorn in Nelles's side, he had support from the Cobourg community where he practised medicine, and was popular among the students. Many of them blamed Samuel Rice for Beatty's departure and burned him in effigy. Despite his own disputes with Rice, Nelles expelled three of the students because they refused to apologize. Two of them, named Smith and Bull, threatened to enroll at University College, where they claimed to have been encouraged to apply. Nelles wrote to President John McCaul about the harm such an invitation would do to student discipline. McCaul replied that no encouragement had been offered and the two would not be admitted. The following term, the students apologized and returned to Victoria.91 In early 1867, the junior class rebelled at the conduct of William Kingston, claiming that he was unfair and a poor teacher and that his son had received the answers to the examination questions for a scholarship. The students petitioned to have him removed. A bitter and strident Kingston asserted unjustly that Nelles was behind the protest because he appeared to take the complaints seriously. Nelles convinced the students to withdraw their petition on the condition that they could present their case to the college board at its spring meeting. The chairman of the board, Wellington Jeffers, passionately opposed the presence of students at the meeting, but his fears were dismissed, the issue was discussed, and the opinions of both junior and senior classes were carefully considered. While nothing could be proved, Kingston was transferred from teaching Science to the junior students and assigned to teach senior Mathematics, a field in which he had experience and for which the college had difficulty finding instructors. Although concern was expressed at the uncomfortable position in which Kingston was placed, Nelles believed that he had been justly treated and that the settlement effectively resolved a number of prickly issues.92 In the event, Kingston could not be dealt with quite so simply; another three years were needed to work out the details satisfactorily. In 1870, Nelles recorded in his private journal: "Prof. Kingston's case finally disposed of, he getting a retiring allowance of $350.00 a year for three years, with free house for same period."93 It was not until 1872 that Kingston actually left - not fully of his own accord - and with the assistance of influential Methodist politicians gained employment in the federal civil service.

The New Principal

113

All these disputes, settled without serious damage to Victoria's reputation or disruption to college life, demonstrated Nelles's approach to educational discipline and to students in general. Nelles both liked and respected students and, while he would not be blackmailed or intimidated and was clearly in charge, was not afraid to take their side even against his own faculty or board when justice demanded it. He established reasonable standards and expected them to be followed. Never did he become a distant administrator dealing with students as adversaries or as problems to be solved. His style was, whenever possible, to keep everyone informed about what was happening. Indeed, Nelles would quite ofen invite several scholars to dinner to quietly discuss current issues and keep himself up to date on student affairs. His broad smile and keen sense of humour were deftly applied to disarm students, faculty, and board members alike. In turn, most of the students liked and respected their principal, recognizing him as the head of a true scholarly community who was deeply concerned about their welfare. Nelles increasingly demonstrated both tolerance and skill in navigating the dangerous social, religious, and political shoals waiting to capsize Victoria College. While internal administration and discipline required a substantial amount of time, Nelles never let them overwhelm what he believed were his primary duties as teacher and preacher. He made time nearly every day for a wide range of books and tracts on philosophy, including ethics and logic. He also diligently read many of the British scholarly journals. As well, he explored the grand fields of literature, science, and history and, of course, kept abreast of the issues facing theology. Nelles never failed to read part of the Bible daily. During periods of leisure or on long journeys, he particularly enjoyed reading novels by Charles Dickens or modern poetry. His wide-ranging interests let him bring to his preaching and lectures a broad perspective and extensive knowledge of current political, literary, and scholarly affairs. By the i86os, Nelles had established himself as a model head of a university and laid the foundations for a distinguished - indeed, unparalleled - academic career in Canada.

5

Addressing the People

When Samuel Nelles first assumed his responsibilities at Victoria College, he understood that he must improve his lecturing and preaching. His natural reticence, introspection, and commitment to detailed and complicated exposition, he knew, often crippled his effectiveness. Most audiences expected a mature orator and an expressive preacher and hoped for a lively performer at the rostrum. An entertaining production did not diminish the importance of the content, especially given that speeches and sermons normally lasted well over an hour. In his lectures, Nelles had not only to communicate specific knowledge but also to impart to his students an abiding enthusiasm for learning. In his position as principal, he was called upon to address numerous assemblies of concerned but wary church members, at least in part to convince them of the economic and spiritual benefits of higher education and, more particularly, of the financial needs of Victoria University. Nelles firmly believed that the Wesleyan ministry must be better educated in order to fulfill its expanding role in society and acquire a rational and respectable means of communicating its moral and spiritual message. In his promotion of this ideal Nelles himself served as the best illustration of what education could mean for the church. He therefore had to demonstrate both through his presentation and his actual message how education would answer the present and future requirements of Methodism; moreover, he needed to communicate these same advantages to not only church adherents but also the broader Canadian community. Victoria could not succeed without the support of the entire church and at least the tolerant respect of the remainder of the population. During the 18408, Alexander McNab had failed partially because of his poor communication skills. It did not take long for Nelles to surpass all expectations in this regard.

Addressing the People

115

Samuel believed that he was providentially called to improve the moral and spiritual life of his students, his community, and his country. His fundamental goal was always to help bring Canadians to a point where they could achieve personal conversion and begin to live sanctified lives. When this victory was won, the health and progress of the nation would be assured. Canada was only as good and great as its citizens, and they were only good and great to the extent that they lived truly Christian lives. The country and the church alike needed the benefits that Nelles could deliver through Victoria. Despite being very well read by the standards of his time, particularly in the fields of philosophy and ethics, Nelles was not a systematic theologian. He borrowed his theology from those authorities who most closely approached his own views, views that had evolved over years of contemplation and meditation. Ever since his student days, his attitudes tended to be quite liberal, often out of step with the standard doctrines of his church. As Nelles matured and came to trust his own abilities and beliefs, therefore, he presented some quite extraordinary points of view. He was not thorough enough to be considered a member of any embryonic Liberal School of Theology, yet his intellectual framework and underlying assumptions certainly qualified him for membership. He would later be represented in those ranks by generations of liberal theological scholars he helped to prepare. In his tolerance and openness he fostered a freedom of inquiry that made it possible for future clergy and laity to participate in the intellectual and social debates over religion and science. Nelles placed Victoria College in the vanguard of ecclesiastical institutions attempting to reconcile the sociological and theological implications of Darwinian science with traditional biblical beliefs, and opened the doors to the development of the social gospel and a morally relevant religion in Canada. His leadership eased the transformation of the Methodist ministry from an enthusiastic revivalistic voice in the wilderness to a pastorate committed to serving the broad range of social and spiritual needs of an increasingly urbane and sophisticated society. Nelles blended a powerful philosophical, literary, and poetic bent with an abiding spirituality and idealism that naturally shaped his addresses, whether lectures or sermons. His youthful desire to be a great orator, along with his clerical and pedagogical training, supplied the discipline and skill demanded for popular public speaking. In addition, his retentive memory enabled him to recall detailed information or a line of poetry when the occasion demanded. His brief career in the itinerancy had afforded some practice in communicating but had also revealed areas needing refinement. Nelles was systematic in his approach and carefully used his opportunities to evaluate various techniques. What he learned during his first few years of employment

116

Faithful Intellect

permanently sculpted his oratorical style. He gradually earned the respect of his audiences, whether they comprised illiterate pioneers or learned scholars. His colleagues unhesitatingly acknowledged the dexterity, merit, and validity of his preaching, noting that "through his sermons and writings there runs a rich vein of brilliant thought and liberal idea, and his metaphors and analogies are always striking and beautiful."1 Never bombastic, "his sermons were marked by unusual felicity of expression, earnestness and depth of thought."2 In 1866, Rev. Hugh Johnston visited Victoria College to ask Nelles for advice on the best way for a preacher to prepare himself for the pulpit. Johnston exemplified the new generation of scholarly preachers who looked to Nelles for means of avoiding the malformed preaching of earlier days. He recognized that Nelles was in the vanguard leading Wesley an Methodism out of its narrowly revivalistic "heroic" age into a new enlightened and relevant role in contemporary society.3 Over the previous twenty years, Nelles had taken advantage of every opportunity to study the process and felt confident about the advice he gave. He explained to Johnston that effectiveness rested on a combination of "premeditation and composition."4 What he meant was that the preacher must ponder his subject intensively, learn all he could about it, then consciously work out the details of his sermon. With a fixed plan, the sermon gained order, symmetry, and purpose. At least its skeleton, and perhaps even the whole work, should be written out in order to optimize accuracy, language, and style, but it should never simply be read. Nelles further believed that if the preacher pretended his audience was present while preparing his sermon, he would be inspired to clarify expression, empowering the entire labour. When facing the real congregation later he would simply have to re-enact the scene. The additional stimulation the audience naturally provided would only enhance the existing power of the address.5 Nelles generally opposed extemporaneous preaching unless the message had been well-considered and rehearsed. Many itinerants relied on the inspiration of the Spirit to provide them with their message and invigorate their preaching. As they mounted the pulpit, they prayed for wisdom and earnestness. Indeed, this intervention by the Holy Spirit was considered an essential criterion for vital evangelism. The approach worked for some preachers, especially under pioneer circumstances, when the sermon might be interrupted or redirected by zealous shouting or wild exclamations of joy or pain. A minister had to follow as much as lead when an empowered laity assumed the right to direct the flow of the proceedings. As the nature and decorum of worship changed, and especially as a desire for respectability emerged and the level of education of the

Addressing the People

117

members rose, such supposedly inspired sermons more often appeared to be disorganized, irrational harangues that confused rather than uplifted the congregation. By the 18505, the minister who relied on the Holy Spirit to animate his words seemed merely lazy or ill-prepared; his presentations, artificial and contrived. However, it would take until the late i86os for William Morley Punshon's eloquent sermons, with their rich literary and classical allusions, to become the primary model for Canadian Methodists. Punshon was one of the great British preachers of the era. In 1868 he began a five-year term as president of the Wesleyan Church in Canada, but his renown drew audiences from all the Protestant denominations. Nelles's similarly polished style also gained widespread acceptance.6 From his earliest years, Nelles had followed his own advice when preparing a sermon. He began by taking great care in selecting the biblical text, making sure that it was used in context in order to maximize its instructional quality. He then established the appropriate theme to be explored. He knew that a good sermon was limited to a single central idea. After suitable meditation, he worked out the broad outline of his topic, developed its subordinate aspects, and integrated the details he wished to emphasize. Finally, he expanded the work until it was fully refined. Once he fixed its organization, he did not alter it without careful thought, and never under the anxiety of delivering it. Nelles never read his sermons, but saw to it that he had their outline and sense firmly committed to memory.7 He believed the true orator contemplated his theme until he not only understood it but felt it deeply. Nelles's sermons tended to be exegetical, theological, and well-reasoned. They also contained a fine poetic sense that appealed to the emotions. However, his academic nature generally qualified his arguments; he lacked the absolute confidence of the born evangelist who was able to proclaim without reservation. Later in his career, when preoccupied by administration and teaching, Nelles relied on outlines rather than full texts, but the meditation and crafted composition remained.8 When it came to the actual delivery of a sermon, Nelles readily accepted the advice and example of more experienced colleagues. In 1846, Egerton Ryerson had warned him against following the current craze of mimicking popular evangelists. The older man had witnessed many young preachers either failing in the attempt or finding their later careers hobbled by the practice. Copying might improve the appearance of early sermons, but it frequently inhibited the development of a personal style based on sound reading and training.9 Nonetheless, Nelles did appreciate particular techniques that he observed personally. After listening to the effective preaching of William Ryerson, he

n8

Faithful Intellect

attempted to emulate his "measured slowness of delivery"10 to add force and drama to his own sermons. However, he was careful not to speak too slowly or to become monotonous. Nelles also tried to be "very simple, very direct, very candid, very sincere"11 and to avoid overwhelming his audience with either grand and melodramatic or overly intellectual phrases. After hearing a sermon by John Gemley, the Wesleyan minister on the Port Hope circuit, Nelles criticized the author for being undisciplined and confused in both his organization and presentation, with an inflated and pompous style. Even in general addresses to an intelligent audience Nelles tried to find terms that implied moral distinctions but were not encumbered by theological cant. For instance, he used "crime" not "sin," "virtue" instead of "piety." He also felt strongly that it was better to "lament over sinners than to threaten them."12 Sermons should persuade, not scold. Cringing, frightened worshippers were ill-conditioned to explore their own sinful nature or recognize their hope in Christ. Nelles rarely trusted raw enthusiasm or excessive emotion in either minister or congregation. "What is taken for true feeling is often a counterfeit, and so also the methods of seeking to produce liveliness of emotion are unnatural and non-christian." Instead, he encouraged the proper channelling of earnest sentiments to the appropriate ends: "Religion lies much in the affections: in gratitude, reverence, contrition, humility, all the charities."13 Congregations could and should be deeply moved without showy exhibitionism. Nelles perceived that many artless Methodist preachers feared that, without strong passions, formality would set in, the church's evangelical power would be lost, and Christianity itself would become self-effacing and timid. The resulting dry, uninspired sermons would emphasize bland notions of moral living at the expense of true spirituality and limit the scope of the battle for salvation. These assumptions held a wide currency; in 1864, for instance, the Wesleyan Annual Conference, bowing to the conservative old guard, exhorted, "We urge upon you also the cultivation of fervid zeal ... Do not fear the cry of 'fanatic' or 'enthusiast'... Beloved brethren! shrink not if need be from the accusation of enthusiasm."14 For Nelles, ill-conceived, unrestrained emotionalism posed a substantially greater threat. Despite the conservative support for enthusiasm, he was able to advance his style of preaching through his growing influence over the younger itinerants. At the same time, the church membership gradually became disenchanted with old-fashioned, superficial preaching, agreeing with Nelles that such sermons easily devolved into coarse harangues that encouraged raucous, intemperate behaviour. They created great heat but little light; natural piety

Addressing the People

119

was scorched rather than nurtured, and the opportunity for spiritual growth was lost. The members, once they calmed down, fell back into their moribund torpor and failed to apply Christian lessons to their daily circumstances. Samuel believed that even the genuine emotion which the occasion naturally aroused in the minister should be understated and directed; when the worshippers witnessed his restraint over his legitimate feelings, they would presently come to appreciate the depth of his sentiments and respond to his sincerity. Thorough preparation and accurate presentation would convey sufficient power to sweep away all obstacles to salvation. Nelles appreciated that a minister's best thoughts might arise on the spur of the moment because of the fertility of his mind and the energy generated by the service, but these ideas could be turned to advantage only because the sermon was concrete, rational, and totally comprehended by the speaker.15 Nelles always kept his mind active as he spoke and never merely rambled on to fill time. Nelles was aware that, regardless of all his preparation, at times it was in vain and his preaching failed. He chided himself about the need to be more conversational and natural in delivery; his love of language sometimes made him excessively loquacious. Like most ministers, he also recognized that the bothersome difficulties common in the daily grind of the itinerant's labours hurt his performance. Although his first sermons were exemplary in creation, he recorded in his diary for 2,6 May 1850: "Preached twice - and felt wretched in the morning. Gave them a desultory harangue on religious culture. It is now near midnight and my mind is looking about for a new text."16 Later that summer, he noted "Preached three times on Sunday, once to 6 hearers ... Returned five miles and preached in the evening. No one came but three women, men at harvest. Schoolhouse locked and we gave it up for the time. Slept in a filthy bed, could not sleep ... It is wonderful how ignorant and lazy some people are! I feel like preaching on this often."17 At the same time, Nelles believed that he, like most Methodist clergy, relied rather too heavily on sermons and in so doing neglected the pastoral care vital to augmenting and crystallizing their instructional benefits. Nelles realized early on that, no matter how the minister approached the pulpit, his fundamental obligation was to "get into his heart of hearts an abiding and overwhelming love of God and love of souls."18 Then he must preach God's omnipotence and teach sinners to cherish God in order "to cleanse the depravity from the human heart." The primary themes for the Christian preacher were repentance, faith, justification, and sanctification. Although these might appear obvious priorities for Wesleyan itinerants, Nelles believed that many of his evangelical colleagues - not to mention those of other persuasions -

i2,o

Faithful Intellect

failed to appreciate their true importance. Few clergy were fully determined to induce their congregations to constantly seek these ends; instead, they preached on secondary matters such as public morality or good conduct. To transform sinners, a preacher must penetrate to the core of their being and reach the kernel of salvation, termed "prevenient grace" by John Wesley, present there since the Fall of Man.19 Without both a sincere commitment to bringing sinners to God's service and a pure direction in his work, a minister could have no permanent success; indeed, he deserved none. Nelles strove mightily during his career to inculcate these sacred truths in the students who intended to enter the Christian ministry. Preparing for his own first sermon as a probationer, Nelles reminded himself, "Amid the rush of the multitude and the whirl of life ... we ought to keep our minds fixed upon those things which must endure forever. Passing through those things that are seen and temporal to those that are unseen and eternal."20 When his opportunity arose on 2,7 June 1847 in Port Hope, he took his text from Acts 10:29: "Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?" His well-disciplined and articulate sermon outlined his expectations and hopes and disclosed the central focus of his lifelong mission; he was there to "feed the congregation upon the bread of eternal life."21 He was not sent to entertain or amuse, or even to impress with rhetorical displays; his duty demanded that he convert sinners and strengthen the faith of those already justified by God. Nelles's sermons always emphasized the vital need for personal salvation. The most urgent and fundamental question individuals could ask themselves was, What must I do to be saved? For Nelles, salvation meant achieving freedom from the consequences of sin. His first sermon to Victoria College students inquired, "Does your faith change your life? ... Does it set you free from the guilt and defilement of sin?"12 He knew that "salvation is not dependent on native talent, nor secular learning, but on the measure of our fidelity to grace given."23 Thus, the great principle for Nelles was faith in God; it led to all other positive aspects of human existence. Unlike Calvin's notions of the elect and predestination, which emphasized individuals' lack of real influence over their salvation, Wesley's revolution suggested that salvation was universally available. God promised it as freely given to all who whole-heartedly sought it through Jesus Christ. Christ came into the world to redeem humanity from the misery of sin and its eternal, deadly consequences. Nelles, moved by a terrible anxiety over humanity's ultimate fate, preached:

Addressing the People

121

If a man be seeking wisdom, the sooner he finds his way to Christ the better, for Christ is the wisdom of God and man; if a man be seeking virtue, the sooner he finds his way to Christ the better, for virtue can enter no human soul until he touches the hem of the Saviour's garment; if a man be seeking rest, the sooner he finds his way to Christ the better, for the soul of man wanders like Noah's dove until it finds rest in the breast of Emmanuel.14

Although Nelles acknowledged that the salvation experience could be either dramatic and instantaneous or subtle and gradual, he never relinquished the conviction that many of the flamboyant manifestations of piety he witnessed were superficial and pretentious. Some people seemed to need popular applause for the apparently extraordinary depth of their experience. Nelles always mistrusted hollow enthusiasm manifested at the expense of rationality and effectiveness; for him, it lacked the purity to command human actions. In fact, he saw in it a devilish perversion of the real workings of God's grace. Assumed zeal, liberality, and religious sympathies were probably employed only to advance one's own reputation or to serve some demon. Such spiritual vanity required God's power to cast out the devil and restore the wayward individual.25 However, in these denunciations, Nelles simultaneously betrayed a mistrust of his own calm, rational conversion experience; only in his last years did he finally accept that he had been fully consecrated to God. Throughout his preaching, Nelles linked salvation to duty and to applied Christianity. The core of the Scriptures and the central theme of evangelical Christianity was the union of heavenly grace and earthly justice. Religious duty meant not only constantly pursuing permanent spiritual safety through sinlessness, but also and especially living morally and applying Christian brotherhood, philanthropy, and charity to members of society here on Earth. For example, Nelles preached: "Behold here the message we need - the common brotherhood of men and the claims of the poor, the feeble, the outcast! ... Let us remember that this also is the work of every disciple of Christ."2-6 He went on to warn, "There have been some misguided enthusiasts who dreaming of faith without works have 'turned the grace of our God into lasciviousness'; but the plain instructions of the Bible teach us to distinguish the genuine doctrine of faith from so gross a perversion."27 Genuine conversion automatically and naturally led to moral living and attempts to improve the world. Personal morality could never be achieved without full spirituality, and spirituality contained moral duties. Here again, Nelles was revealing some fundamental tenets of his liberal theology.

12,2

Faithful Intellect

It was a short step from Wesley's faith and works combined as essential Christian elements to a trust in the Scriptures as a document demanding the primacy of social regeneration. Nelles held that "Moral Science is more comprehensive than Christian Theology. The object of Christianity is to restore health to man's moral nature. If man had not fallen, Christianity would not have been needed; but a science of morals there would have been, for the principles of morals are universal and common to all intelligence."28 In some ways he agreed with the controversial British moralist John R. Seeley's Ecce Homo: A Survey of the Life and Work of Jesus Christ. Seeley emphasized the human attributes of Jesus over the divine virtues and powers of Christ and argued that Christian morality replaced Jewish legal prohibitions with positive commands. It was no longer sufficient to refrain from evil; one must do good. Instead of the "Thou shalt not" injunctions of Old Testament law, the disciple of Christ was told to love his neighbour, sell his goods to feed the poor, and utilize his talents, not fearfully bury them. After 1850, North American Methodists were increasingly "nourished by a postmillennialist creed that celebrated conscience, obedience to a higher law, and a strong sense of social responsibility."29 They must act to end injustice. Christianity transcended the limits of the nation, creating a catholic community where private and public interests merged and all members had to abandon their isolated, pietistic worship. A glorious and triumphant future on Earth could gradually evolve through sustained moral action.30 When this goal was realized, "there arises before us the image of a commonwealth in which a universal enthusiasm not only takes the place of law, but by converting into a motive what was before but a passive restraint, enlarges the compass of morality and calls into existence a number of positive obligations which under the dominion of law had not been acknowledged."31 This ideal world created by moral progress represented the ultimate merging of the sacred with the so-called temporal, and was the true Millennium. Nevertheless, Seeley and his supporters could easily go too far. Without a doubt, the genuine disciple of Jesus was a practical Christian, but Nelles understood that simple morality was insufficient. To have saving value, good works must come from a transformed heart; in Nelles's words, "Virtue is hollow without holiness."32 The tenderness, warmth, and especially the power of spiritual religion were all required before the world could be totally restored. Conversion and entire sanctification were intertwined, but genuine holiness was possible only through a growth in grace that was clearly manifested through good works. Holiness, according to Nelles's reading of Wesley, did not rely on subscription to a sectarian creed, on a particular ecclesiastical system, or

Addressing the People

123

on decent behaviour. Rather, it was an inward spiritual condition in which all human faculties and actions were in harmony with God's law. It was an unreserved love of God and love of humanity.33 The Christian church had been established and perpetuated in order to bring the whole world into a condition of holiness or, as Seeley saw it, into an "absolute harmony of inward desire and outward obligation."34 Nelles preached that Christianity was progressively gaining in its struggle to achieve this condition, making holiness the ultimate test of membership in the Christian commonwealth. Nelles had many opportunities, apart from his work at Victoria, both to articulate his Christian priorities and to put into practice his theories of rhetoric and homiletics. As one of the few Methodist church leaders without circuit responsibilities, he was expected to fill neighbouring pulpits when a minister was ill or temporarily absent. He was kept especially busy during the college's Christmas and summer breaks. He was also a popular guest preacher at congregational anniversaries and on special occasions such as the opening of new Sunday schools and parsonages or the dedication of new churches. As his reputation and status grew, he was even invited to preach at Presbyterian and Baptist worship services and at civic ceremonies. Like all clergy who held prominent office, he was a frequent preacher during the church's various district and Conference meetings. While these occasions rarely allowed for doctrinally innovative or analytical sermons or addresses, they did give him valuable opportunities to demonstrate his style and delivery. Nelles represented the church before 1874 as a fraternal delegate to the Wesleyan operations in Atlantic Canada, at the 1864 and 1884 General Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States, and at the 1873 Annual Conference of the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Britain. At such gatherings he delivered the message prepared by his own church courts, which supplied information on the progress of Methodism in Canada. The foreign churches were particularly interested in the union movement within the Canadian Methodist family since it was beyond their own practical experience. Nelles was pleased to tell the story because he was deeply committed to the unity of Methodism as a prelude to broader Christian cooperation. Because the American and British churches had little knowledge of Canadian economic, social, political, or religious life, Nelles also took it upon himself to explain in general terms the Canadian situation and how it affected their denomination. The talks therefore left little room for his personal concerns, although he always emphasized the progress at Victoria College.35 As he became more comfortable with making speeches, his natural humour increasingly shone through. Noting the lack of

124

Faithful Intellect

information on Canada in the United States, for instance, he pointed out the Dominion's unlimited potential; it had scriptural, even millennial, boundaries: "from sea to sea, from the rivers to the ends of the earth." This status was confirmed, Nelles announced, by the fact that the Garden of Eden, which the president of Boston University had recently located at the North Pole, was therefore in Canada.36 Nelles sometimes used his various platforms to lecture his audiences on the needs and opportunities facing Canada, as well as the failure of Canadians to appreciate God's gracious benevolence toward them. He was never chauvinistic; indeed, his sense of nationalism was normally private and restrained. For example, he stayed up alone on 30 June 1867 to celebrate the birth of the Dominion of Canada at midnight, then went off to attend a political rally the next day. He saw Confederation not only as a means of resolving old political, economic, and military weaknesses, but more clearly as the foundation for a new nationality.37 Nelles was always ready to advocate a patriotic love of country. Typically, for his day, he saw Canada's future greatness securely within a British imperial framework, especially when under threat from the United States. In spite of only occasionally visiting Britain and having German ancestors, he always felt at home in England. Nelles believed that the British Empire supplied an unsurpassed unity of ideals, force of law, and spirit of morality and that its political, social, and religious institutions were unrivalled.38 Yet he also agreeably discussed Canada's future with friends such as the controversial liberal nationalist historian Goldwin Smith, who advocated annexation to the United States. Regardless of the economic advantages presented by such a union, Nelles feared the excesses and violence of American republicanism. Presented with the alternative of Queen Victoria or a politician such as John A. Macdonald or George Brown as head of state, the choice was easy.39 Nelles was convinced that Canada's greatness was centred within its own borders and based on its natural resources and its people. His abiding faith in Canada was forged by his vision of the land. Through the gifts of nature, God had already ordained a glorious future for the country and, with its millions of fertile acres, the great Northwest would undoubtedly help produce a superior society. Canada must ultimately rise above its dependent status, refusing a colonial relationship with either the United States or Britain. While Queen Victoria's imperial world embodied the greatest civilization the world had yet known, Canada must emerge as a nation within its mild embrace. It must shun partisan British policies and narrow secular ambitions; its duty lay in moral, progressive leadership. According to Nelles, by fulfilling its divine destiny, Canada would gain national immortality until the Millennium became a reality.40

Addressing the People

iZ5

At least in part because of this vision, Nelles strongly advocated the cause of Methodist missions, which fulfilled both Wesley's pledge to make the whole world his parish and the nineteenth-century evangelical creed of embracing all of humanity with Christian arms in order to bring love, hope, and peace to the Earth. He frequently addressed the public on the need to support missions and bring about their extension throughout Canada and the rest of the world. Nelles served on the national executive of the Wesleyan Missionary Society during the i86os and later sat on its advisory consultation and finance committee. His father-in-law, Enoch Wood, was the Superintendent of Missions from 1847 to 1868 and Secretary of the reorganized Missionary Society until 1878. Every year, Wood designated a selection of church leaders to join with working missionaries in touring the entire connexion and rallying financial and moral support for missions. Members of the delegation would travel to at least the most prominent circuits in each district to explain what the church was doing, where the work was progressing well, and where the needs were greatest. The tours also provided a first-hand opportunity for the national leadership to learn about the local social, religious, and economic situation.41 Nelles was pleased to participate in this effort, since it allowed him to assist those heroic individuals who were directly spreading Christ's message and advancing the Christian cause around the globe. The work for missions roused his adventurous nature; it was as close as he ever came to satisfying his childhood ambition to be intrepid and gallant. Most committed Canadian Methodists believed they had an inherent obligation to supply missionaries wherever settlement occurred. As Canada received new immigrants, particularly nonProtestants or those without proper ecclesiastical links, it was regarded as essential that they be evangelized by Methodist preachers. Nelles asserted that Canada's future greatness depended upon Christianity spreading faster than national population growth, and naturally assumed that it would best be developed by the inculcation of pure Methodist ideals. The technological advances of the nineteenth century would be meaningless unless they were coupled with personal salvation and moral progress.4Z While some Canadian Methodists argued that the church's main duty was to its white subjects, Nelles felt that the aboriginal population had a special claim on its missionary resources. From his youth, he had been particularly interested in the missions to native peoples, first in central Canada and later in the regions west of the Great Lakes. Living near Brantford, Samuel had come into direct contact with the bands that had fought in the American Revolution and the War of 1812. The tales of their valiant battles and bold sacrifices represented

iz6

Faithful Intellect

shared experiences with many of Samuel's white neighbours, and the thrilling victories of the aboriginal warriors were common lore in his parents' home. This living history had early stimulated his vivid imagination. It was very difficult for Nelles to associate their past greatness with the squalid state of their moribund community during his childhood; they desperately needed a new and more powerful spiritual vision. The Methodist Church had commenced native missions at about the time of Samuel's birth, and by the end of the 18305 most of the bands were receiving at least limited evangelization by either Methodists or Anglicans. Bigoted and short-sighted government policies had complicated the issues and magnified the problems, but the Wesleyans continued with their programs of evangelism and education. Schooling for the young went well beyond the ideals of conversion to Christianity and was considered the only effective means of introducing the native population to the benefits of European civilization. In an attempt to supply more efficient and meaningful training than day schools allowed, the church also established a co-educational manual labour residential school at Alderville in 1847 and opened the more permanent Mount Elgin Wesley an Methodist O jib way Industrial School on the Muncey reserve near London in 1850. Earlier, Egerton Ryerson and Joseph Stinson had investigated similar schools in the United States, and the institutions were well received by most of the European and native population in Canada. Many chiefs wanted residential schools on their own reserves.43 When serving on the London circuit during the summer of 1850, Nelles had personally witnessed the initial work of Samuel Rose at Muncey and recorded in his journal, "They teach them Science and Agriculture. I like this union of manual and literary pursuits. It seems to me to be to be the true system. Some of the Indian boys look bright and active. Mr. Rose says they are as clever as whites. But he thinks the Indian Race will wither more and more until they all go."44 The majority of civil and church leaders agreed that extinction was the ultimate fate of the native population. Nelles became deeply anxious at the thought of a whole people on the verge of vanishing from the Earth and could never bring himself to accept such a pessimistic future. The new opportunities for native improvement impressed him and convinced him that education would surely reverse the process of decline. As the century progressed and Nelles became increasingly liberal in his theological understanding, he emphasized the social and moral needs of the native population. While conservatives stressed personal conversion and preparation for Heaven, liberals tended to see social justice, education, and ethical humanitarianism as appropriate goals in

Addressing the People

izy

themselves.45 Nelles encouraged natives, along with foreign converts, to study at Victoria. When preaching on behalf of native missions or services to nonChristians throughout the world, Nelles strove to instill in his audiences both the compelling need to convert facing the church and the right and obligation of Canadian Methodists to lead in the crusade. He viewed Christian expansion as totally natural and proper: "It is of the nature of the Gospel to spread ... it spreads by the decree of Heaven, it spreads by the intercession of the Redeemer, it spreads by the power of the Holy Spirit, it spreads by the irresistible sweep of God's far designing providence."46 It was both cruel and abusive not to present the benefits of Christian civilization to every person on the planet. Nelles used the growth of the British Empire and the spread of European civilization to illustrate the superiority of Christianity. Why else would God grant such powers to Western Europe and North America, with all their faults and evils, if not to spread true religion? He did not consider it either improper or destructive to advocate the benefits of technology, medical science, and economic prosperity for all peoples; indeed, it would have been sinful to withhold them. Moreover, missions were accompanied by scientific discoveries; by art, literature, and philosophy; by the diffusion of wealth; and, indeed, by all the advantages of western civilization.47 Nelles announced the good news that the Christian nations were gradually binding together the great forces of society in order to spread the gospel across the Earth. To my mind, those peoples' world seems to lie paralysed, helpless and suppliant at our feet. They must decrease, we must increase. Ultimately they must receive the transforming influence of our ideas, our laws, our literature, our commerce, our Bible, our religion ... The time shall yet come when an unbroken anthem shall ascend from the wide world. It shall follow the sun in its course through the heavens ... One song shall employ all nations and earth redeemed.48

He optimistically assured his audiences that it was merely a matter of time before false religion fell before the march of truth. Even though the world was as yet unconverted, there was no need to despair. God's eternal word would conquer; Christ would eventually reign over a redeemed humanity. The triumphant Millennium was a certainty. Although Nelles assumed that non-Christian peoples lacked an advanced culture and civilization, he never considered them racially or intellectually inferior or incapable of improvement. One of his arguments for missions hinged on his belief in the unity of the human race.

12.8

Faithful Intellect

The Bible and science together confirmed to Nelles's satisfaction that everyone originally descended from the same stock.49 Because of this inherent relationship, sin and moral destitution existed everywhere, and everyone required the same gospel of salvation and the same redeeming love from Christ in order to transform their sinful natures. Everyone also had the power to receive Christianity's benefits. Human diversity was not an insurmountable obstacle to God's saving grace. Nelles was confident that, when the world united in Christian belief, it would enjoy universal brotherhood and eternal peace. To evangelize and convert the world's peoples required only a firm and holy commitment from the Christian churches. Nelles felt that it was absolutely critical for the non-Christian world that the church succeed in this task; it was equally vital for Christianity at home.50 For the present, Canadians were too uncaring and disunited, too unscriptural and unspiritual. Mission work would reinvigorate the spirit of love and philanthropy. Nelles assumed that the evangelization of the world would help purify Canada and enkindle a robust and tenacious spirituality. By accepting their legitimate duties, Methodists would buttress their own virtue and actualize their quest for earthly sanctification. Many of Nelles's most promising students heard the call and spent their lives spreading his vision of a humane, progressive Christianity throughout the world.51 Nelles felt most at liberty when addressing fellow teachers or school administrators, especially when discussing the requirements of education. They immediately recognized his terms of reference, shared his beliefs on schooling, and usually agreed with his proposals and with his enthusiasm about the advances that education could bring to the nation. Nelles became an active member of the Ontario Education Association when it was established in 1861 and collaborated on improvements to public education in the province. The Association was particularly committed to promoting the status and improving the salaries of teachers and encouraged the expansion of women into the profession, allowing female members to participate in its councils.52 John McCaul of University College was the first president of the Association; Nelles finally accepted the presidency in 1869 and again in 1870. In his initial presidential address, he presented a "highly learned and progressive exposition of the beauty, dignity, and value" of teaching;53 in his second, he assured his audience that, through education, "it is possible to have nations without paupers, without heathen, without brothels, without tyrants and without wars."54 Education led naturally to economic, political, and moral advancement. Later, he reminded teachers that history transmitted the labours and sufferings of previous ages to the following generations while demonstrating the

Addressing the People

129

progress God had initiated. It was perfectly normal for the young to succeed the old and to be enriched by the past, but they should never be "trammeled by its bonds."55 Even after Victoria gave up its junior department in 1867, Nelles remained intimately involved in the evolution of pedagogy. He maintained that it was impossible to divorce preparatory training from later studies, and that the main reason for the leadership of German universities was the superior German secondary school system.56 In 1871 the Ontario government undertook to reform secondary education by creating collegiates, partially to replace the traditional grammar schools in preparing students for university. The grammar schools were renamed and reconfigured as high schools. It was felt that the funding of grammar schools on the basis of attendance had encouraged unqualified enrolment to the end of swelling the grants. Premier Sandfield Macdonald had joined others in asserting that these schools should not educate girls, in part because doing so interfered with private seminaries.57 However, less conservative politicians encouraged females to attend and to study Classics; no regulation forbad it, and they should be counted in grant applications. By 1866, in fact, male and female attendance was about equal. However, the total grant was a fixed amount, and some schools were disadvantaged when the numbers were "diluted" by female students.58 Under the revisions of 1871, a grammar school or public high school required sixty male students studying Classics in order to become a collegiate and so qualify for the annual grant of $750. Tuition was higher than at the other secondary schools, but graduates were more likely to qualify for university admission.59 The requirement to study Greek and Latin was finally abolished in 1885. Women attended collegiates in increasing numbers for a superior education and as a springboard for university admission, once permitted. Both collegiates and other high schools were criticized, however, for overemphasizing the narrow goal of entering university to the detriment of preparing students to serve the needs of the local community. Another typical complaint was that students lacked the commitment and practical skills required for mundane activity.60 Nelles worked closely with Egerton Ryerson and George Hodgins to promote advances in a variety of educational projects. In 1874, he was elected to the newly reorganized Council of Public Instruction. In addition to Nelles, the Council comprised Daniel Wilson and Goldwin Smith from the University of Toronto; Roman Catholic Bishop Joseph Lynch; Albert Carman, president of Albert University and soon to be bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church; Samuel Wood, a member of the provincial legislature; and Egerton Ryerson, Chief Superintendent

130

Faithful Intellect

of Education. The Council's mandate was to supervise the educational system of Ontario and recommend changes. It examined and approved texts, handled complaints related to students, dealt with legal or judicial decisions, and oversaw teacher certification and pensions, along with a host of other administrative details. Nelles was re-elected in 1875, but after serving for a second year did not again seek election because of the pressure of university affairs and the responsibilities of family life.61 However, Nelles remained a respected speaker on pedagogical matters at annual convocations and special ceremonies at both public and private academies, and his printed speeches were well received and influential in educational circles. In 1879 he eloquently extolled the teaching profession, asserting that it was the humble teacher in a lonely school who prepared the patriot and the statesman for service to the nation: "Let the marble monument proclaim in every land the glory of the statesman, but let the people tread lightly, too, upon the green sod that wraps the grave of the village schoolmaster."62 And to those who dismissed education and pure research as impractical or esoteric, he proclaimed: "To such minds these things may seem cold and distant as the clouds, but the distant clouds that seem to go drifting coldly and idly by, will in due time fall in refreshing floods to quicken the growing harvest and swell the autumn fruit." 63 As always, his addresses were full of literary and classical allusions and were finely crafted to suit his audience. Throughout his career, Nelles also served on numerous committees and boards, and was particularly useful at meetings with government officials and political leaders. He did not often get his own way directly but subtly influenced decisions. He was liked and trusted even by his political opponents, who appreciated his rigorous preparation and reasonable presentations. Nelles's advice was widely sought on questions related to high school curriculum, pedagogical innovation, or internal school operations. He counselled instructors on specific changes needed in their programs, helped set matriculation standards, and aided in teacher training.64 It is noteworthy that a significant proportion of the better educated teachers, and an even higher proportion of school principals, had been his undergraduates at Victoria College. Although extremely busy with pressing church and college matters, Nelles also reluctantly became involved with the immensely complicated and controversial issues of moral instruction and the place of the Bible in the education system. Moreover, as a recognized leader in the field of education, he was drawn into the wrangle over separate schools. Nelles had hoped to avoid controversy in the public forum at least until greater tolerance and good will existed in the province; the

Addressing the People

131

issues were too emotionally charged for calm and rational debate or equitable resolution. However, Nelles could not ignore them; he felt they involved the very essence of the Canadian nationality and the future of the country. They could potentially tear the nation apart. Nelles understood that he could have only a limited personal influence on events but saw it as his duty to help ease social and religious tensions wherever possible and advance the promise of elementary and secondary education. From its inception, the public school system was guided by broadly Christian principles and taught by at least nominally Christian teachers, and utilized recognizably Christian texts. It was a widely held view that moral instruction always guided the formation of good character and helped direct knowledge into wisdom.65 The education of the mind and the spirit was a child's right, an undeniable obligation of parents and of the state through its education system. Moral training and prayer should be non-sectarian and fair; in fact, however, it was not the formal introduction of creeds, catechisms, or religious literature but the precepts and example of teachers that most fundamentally moulded students' character.66 Moreover, according to Nelles, a Christian environment was invaluable at university to complete the formation of profound, tolerant, exemplary Protestants. At the beginning of Nelles's career, the Ryerson administration continued to guarantee the right of schools to offer voluntary religious exercises and instruction. They could be led by clergy and were not to interfere with classes; further, no students should be forced to participate against the wishes of their parents. The day opened and closed with prayer and Bible reading; general religious and moral instruction could take place after classes finished.67 The lessons inculcated "the principles of piety, justice, and a sacred regard to truth, love to their country, humanity and universal benevolence, sobriety, industry, frugality, chastity, moderation and temperance, and those other virtues which are the ornament of society and on which a free constitution of government is founded."68 Nothing could be presented that contravened any church's doctrinal standards, but if sufficient Roman Catholics believed the religious instruction to be prejudicial, they could open their own separate school. Separate schools have come to mean tax-supported Roman Catholic educational institutions controlled by the church hierarchy and directed by priests and nuns. When the concept first appeared, however, tax-supported separate schools were advocated for the Church of England and other Protestant denominations, as well as for Jews and Blacks. Protestants assumed that church-run schools would provide "a moral pathway through a materialistic world."69 Most people agreed

132.

Faithful Intellect

that, since Canada was a Christian nation, its children's education should have a strong religious component. It was also widely acknowledged that many parents failed to provide sufficient Christian nurture at home; the churches and schools needed to form a partnership to counteract this deficiency. Some Protestants went further and claimed that the province needed active protection from anti-religious elements and perverse Roman Catholic influences: Protestantism must expand.70 Originally, the common school system envisioned by Egerton Ryerson had no Protestant or Catholic separate school component, but he did not object to its existence as long as it did not interfere with the overall effectiveness of the public schools. Provision for separate Catholic schools had been in existence since the provinces were united in 1841.71 Ryerson was more strongly opposed to godless studies and the sectarian divisions that were already too deeply ingrained in the province. Sectarianism confounded the universal Christian purposes of education and led the nation into confusion and chaos. Nelles agreed, and advanced Victoria as a model of non-sectarian Christian training. Nonetheless, politicians refused to spend taxes on denominational elementary or high schools. When the Tache Act was rammed through the Assembly by Roman Catholic votes from Canada East in 1855, the Protestant churches effectively lost their last chance for state aid.72 It was more difficult to oppose Catholic claims for separate education, since the united Canadas included a powerful Protestant minority in Canada East with a substantial parallel separate school system to protect its educational interests. Justice demanded equal treatment for Catholic minorities in Canada West. Moreover, the 18508 witnessed a new aggressiveness from the papacy in the face of rising liberalism in Europe and America. In Ontario, this ultramontanism was expressed by the appointment of Bishop Armand de Charbonnel and his subsequent selection of Jean Marie Bruyere to lead the fight for Catholic separate schools. Roman Catholic educators argued that, while a godless school was anathema, "an education made up of an amalgamation of discordant creeds is equivalent to a godless education."73 Protestant trustees, texts, teachers, Bible selections, and fellow students were obvious threats to the integrity of the faith of Catholic children. Despite efforts to make the religious exercises and readings as tolerant as possible, the province's education system was inherently biased against Catholicism. For the Catholic hierarchy, especially Charbonnel, a separate system was an absolute necessity. Given the alliance between politicians from Canada East and English-speaking Catholics from Canada West, a broad separate system was inevitable. While not fully acceptable to Charbonnel, the Tache Act made it easier to set up schools, exempted supporters from common school taxes, and gave

Addressing the People

133

separate schools a proportional share of the education grant.74 However, these changes only exacerbated the decade-long wrangles. In 1863, after substantial public debate, the Assembly again modified separate school administration; priests could be elected as trustees and the church could control the curriculum.75 Ryerson reluctantly agreed to the latest modifications on the basis that the Catholic Church had promised that these were its final demands and moreover that they supplied a safety valve relieving pressure on the public system. He successfully countered the calls for a distinct administration under a Catholic deputy superintendent of education. The education department also instituted a number of minor reforms to alleviate Roman Catholic fears and restructured the moral instruction in schools for the majority of Catholics who remained in the public system. Except for the unsuccessful alterations suggested by Bell's 1865 separate school bill, no significant changes occurred for the next twenty years.76 In 1871, Ryerson published a pamphlet that he considered suitable for both Catholics and Protestants, First Lessons in Christian Morals; for Canadian Families and Schools. Bishop Lynch did not oppose it, but it was never widely adopted by the province's schools.77 Of course, some Protestants continued to demand financial aid for their own denominational institutions. When all their efforts had failed, they attacked the idea of two competing systems. Under the existing economic conditions, they argued, the scattered rural population would be unable to raise sufficient tax revenue to support either system effectively. Since the public schools were required to accept all qualified students who wished to attend, the public system would soon be over-strained and bankrupt. There were also those who held that Roman Catholic education was bigoted, authoritarian, and poor in quality, or that biblical truth and righteousness had given way in separate schools to dogma and moral laxity. There were enough sensational and lurid stories in circulation about convent education, mostly from the United States, to worry some Protestant and Catholic parents.78 By the late 18705, Catholic educators were renewing their denunciation of the separate school system but blamed the government for its inadequacies. They demanded more funds to bolster the schools and better training in a separate normal school for their teachers. Both systems would be equal if treated equally.79 But the ultimate solution to the separate school dilemma would have to wait for a more tolerant time. Nelles took little part in easing these tensions. His main interest lay in retaining character formation as the priority for public education. Like Thomas Arnold at Rugby, Nelles believed that proper education

134

Faithful Intellect

improved students' intellectual, physical, and moral faculties, the most important being the last of these. Since the Bible was not studied enough in private households, educators insisted that it have a prominent place in the schools; in its absence, education might deteriorate into profane indifference to religion, skepticism, or other errors, especially if the teacher was not wary of such influences. Meanwhile, some supporters of Bible study in school promised that "a Protestant nation, whose children know the Bible, have little to fear from Popery. But ignorance of Scripture truths and Scripture morals leaves an otherwise educated people an easy prey to Infidelity and Popery."80 Even many tolerant church leaders believed that "to assert, as we do, that our schools should be Protestant and Christian, is simply to claim that in their everyday education our children should be taught the doctrines and duties laid down in God's Revealed Will as the foundation of their character and conduct."81 Ryerson had opposed using the Bible in the classroom as a replacement for a religious textbook, fearing also that sectarian bigotry would increase if teachers or trustees selected or commented on Bible readings. The province therefore adopted the scriptural excerpts chosen by the Irish National Education Commission and approved by the Catholic and Anglican archbishops of Dublin.82 Ryerson assumed that, given their approval, no-one in Ontario could legitimately complain on theological grounds. But the various compromises failed to forestall the spread of separate schools or the related controversy. Nelles tried unsuccessfully to stay clear of the constant bickering over the place of the Bible in the public schools. After Ryerson retired and education came under direct Cabinet control, Premier Oliver Mowat appointed Adam Crooks as the first Minister of Education. Crooks was a strongly partisan Liberal who attempted to court the favour of both Catholics and Protestants. He sought Protestant support by introducing new instructions regarding the use of the Bible in the classroom. In 1877, among other changes, he replaced the prohibition against teachers discussing Bible readings with the following: "Such explanations only shall be given as are needed for a proper understanding of what is read."83 The new regulation opened the floodgates to virtually unrestricted biblical interpretation and discussion by teachers and clergy in the schools. It appeared that Crooks was forcing Catholics who wished to avoid Protestant influences in education to enroll their children in the separate system. To gain Catholic support, the government ordered municipal authorities to collect separate school taxes from all Catholic ratepayers, a measure that markedly increased the revenue for these schools and made them more financially viable.84

Addressing the People

135

At the same time, some Protestants were worried about instructors who belonged to other denominations or who might harbour irreligious beliefs explaining the Bible to their children.85 Nelles hated sectarianism and opposed developments in education that upset the fine equilibrium among religious groups. He complained to Hodgins: "I fear we are now unmoored from the safe position in which the 'Venerable Chief so wisely left us. And both political parties will be enslaved to the devils of sectarianism and ungodliness. These demons need to be held in chains until cast out by the power of a widely diffused Christian sentiment."86 Hodgins agreed that Ryerson had been proven right and that, since education had become a government ministry, partisan politics more than ever dominated the educational agenda. Nelles hoped that if Hodgins, as Deputy Minister, were given more authority over daily operations, and if moderate educators presented a united front, it might be possible to quiet the controversies instituted by the increasingly unstable Crooks. In 1882, Nelles joined a delegation of Protestant leaders - which he termed the "Bible squad" - for a meeting with Premier Mowat to discuss these issues. He found it difficult to keep the delegation united in its recommendations. Moreover, he did not want to lead the criticism of Crooks personally because, as he explained to his friend, it might be dismissed as mere partisan rhetoric coming from "a tory like me."87 In an article in the Toronto Mail in late 1883, Nelles argued that the provincial public schools were being hurt by Mowat's insistence on introducing narrow Protestant and Roman Catholic precepts in the place of broad Christian principles. Although Crooks's innovations were largely rescinded, Protestants continued to fight for biblical interpretation in the schools, reminding the authorities that moral instruction was a legal obligation. Catholics, meanwhile, strove even more tenaciously to control the education of their children.88 In 1885 the Department of Education published a new eight-volume series of Bible readings for elementary schools, which it hoped would satisfy the various factions. However, the debate over religious instruction would continue for at least a century without essential agreement.89 Despite his non-sectarian views, Nelles was concerned about the dangerous influence that the Catholic hierarchy was apparently gaining over the public curriculum. For example, in 1882 Archbishop Lynch was temporarily successful in having Sir Walter Scott's epic poem Marmion removed from the schools on the basis that it presented a false, negative, and malicious portrait of the Catholic Church. First published in 1808, the poem was a fictional account of a Lord Marmion's participation in the battle of Flodden Field in 1513 where King James IV was killed and his Scottish army destroyed. Nelles

136

Faithful Intellect

attacked Lynch's position in a temperate, well-written article in the Canadian Methodist Magazine. He supported the use of the poem, even though he agreed that the Catholic Church was defamed to the extent that Scott unfortunately presented an accurate portrayal of the historic church. Rather than rewriting history, as Lynch was attempting, the authorities should retain Marmion not only as a witness to the positive changes Catholicism had undergone since that time but also as a warning against the errors Christianity - both Catholic and Protestant - was still prone to make. Nelles believed it was vital for students to have the freedom to learn from the poem.90 In spite of Nelles's attempts to keep the issue from aggravating tensions in the province, the threat of Roman Catholic interference became a partisan cause in the ensuing elections. The influence of organizations such as the Orange Order outdistanced the rising power of ultramontane Irish Catholics in Ontario.91 Nelles reacted to the issues just discussed only when forced to do so by specific circumstances, and strove whenever possible to diminish denominational differences and cool religious tempers. In his addresses and sermons, and indeed through his entire life, Nelles emphasized broad catholicity and tolerance in all aspects of religion. He expected Methodism to expand its perspectives and values accordingly. Although he trusted that appreciation of the benefits of unity and charitable forbearance was growing, he recognized that much labour remained. At the same time, he saw no immediate need for formal interdenominational ecclesiastical union, although he did watch with interest the Church of England's initiatives for union discussions among the Canadian Protestant denominations during the i88os. The major barrier to unity was that the Anglicans wanted everyone else to rejoin their church.92 Still, Nelles did support Protestant cooperation and the movement toward a universal Christianity in which everyone was at home.93 Nelles instinctively mistrusted conformity and standard creeds or socalled orthodox beliefs. Christianity had been seriously injured by such manifestations of sectarian prejudice in the past. According to Nelles, "Sectarianism would imprison the divine presence in its own narrow thought. It would reduce all music to a monotone; it would banish the rainbow from the sky; it would make an unbroken flat of earth's hills and dales."94 The physical and spiritual expansion of religion had suffered as a result. Nelles proceeded to define true catholicity as "the unity of love amidst much variety. It is sympathy with others who may yet be in many points unlike ourselves. It is the disposition to discern and admire the power of truth and the presence of goodness in those who have come up through other paths of life than our own, and who

Addressing the People

137

view the landscape of things with other eyes and from a different standpoint."95 True unity was based on Christian love, peace, and faith; a catholic spirit meant charity, sympathy, goodness, and beauty. The whole world must embrace these principles. In accentuating the universal themes that united rather than divided Christians, Nelles recognized the defects of all the churches but simultaneously appreciated their strengths. He found the Church of England lacking in fervour, too exclusive and imperious in its relations with other denominations, and sometimes overly involved in secular ambitions. However, it offered a beneficial sense of order and a superior liturgy. The Church of Scotland likewise lacked emotional commitment, and was unjustifiably dogmatic in its creed and narrow in its theological perspective. Wesley himself could never abide its reliance on predestination or election and announced that Calvinism served as the devil's agent, keeping mankind from salvation.96 Yet Presbyterians sustained a strong and disciplined piety and were normally dutiful and profound Christians. Baptists, too, through their fervid evangelical spirituality, had much to offer the Christian community, despite their stubborn adherence to adult baptism and seemingly unimportant forms such as the immersion of new members. All in all, what united the various Protestant denominations was significantly stronger than what kept them at odds.97 As for Methodists, Nelles acknowledged that they nourished a passionate and ardent piety but wondered whether they were actually as righteous as they should be, considering their proud historic claim to superior sanctity. Were Methodists better than their neighbours in their daily lives? Nelles was deeply conscious that, regardless of their supposed emphasis on sanctification, their dedication to practical religion was too often shallow and uninspired. Moreover, Methodists seemed to discount the priority placed by Calvinists on an educated and wellinformed community. Their piety was therefore in danger of existing at the expense of enlightenment. Wesley had maintained that Methodism allowed the greatest latitude in secondary theological belief; having accepted its few essential Christian tenets, members could follow a range of alternate paths. But Nelles felt that the modern connexion had become narrow and dogmatic, that "the tendency of the Church has generally been to bigotry, exclusiveness and superstition."98 When addressing the Canadian public Nelles always promoted the view that, in order to attain its full majesty and power, Methodism needed to build on the sure base of rational thought and intellectual experience and rely less on enthusiastic feeling. Long before, Wesley had warned his followers: "You were in danger of having more sail than ballast, more liveliness of imagination than solid wisdom."99

138

Faithful Intellect

Unlike most Canadian Protestants of the period, Nelles included in his catholicity a guarded respect for elements of Roman Catholicism. He recognized that many Catholics were profoundly spiritual Christians. After reading several leading tracts, he was impressed with the tolerance and sagacity of some of their religious beliefs and was convinced they had much to offer the Christian world. John Wesley had himself turned to Roman Catholic theologians for the basis of much of his evangelical message. Indeed, their pre-Reformation writings had furnished the theological underpinnings of all churches. Many of their more modern writings also demonstrated great strengths. Too much corruption remained in the Catholic communion, but Nelles ventured to hypothesize that the struggle between Protestantism and Catholicism was God's own intent; it forced both groups to be vigilant against errors while remaining open to improvement. The ultimate result would be a fuller comprehension of fundamental Christian principles, greater mutual affection, and an increase in the essential unity among the family of churches.100 His broad tolerance did not totally exempt Nelles from the religious prejudices of his time. He strongly condemned the arbitrary authority of the pope, especially after the promulgation of the doctrine of papal infallibility. He also opposed what he characterized as the church's conformity of thought, singularity of practice, and orthodoxy of creed. Furthermore, he mistrusted its unbridled lust for secular power and its intolerance toward liberal democratic elements of society. These fears were heightened by the rising influence of a belligerent ultramontane faction among the Roman Catholic clergy in Canada and by the increasingly influential Anglo-Catholic Tractarian movement.101 It seemed to Nelles as if Canadian Catholics were always testing their ability to control public policy, and he worried about Catholic interference, even though, like most Methodists, he assumed that such influence was just and proper for Protestants. However, the greatest danger Nelles saw in Roman Catholicism remained what it had always been: it denied freedom in the personal quest for salvation. The church interposed the priest between the individual and the Bible and, more importantly, restrained the individual from directly seeking God. In opposing such seemingly unnatural barriers Nelles remembered the lessons of Archbishop Watley's The Errors of Romanism Traced to their Origin in Human Nature.102- Since everyone was capable of being misled, everyone needed to be alert to the dangers. Unfortunately, Nelles could not contemplate these ideas for very long before being drawn back to the theological modernization needed in his own communion. He was both catholic in his views and liberal in his theological understanding. It would be wrong to characterize

Addressing the People

139

him as a systematic member of any theological school but, like his American contemporary Horace Bushnell, he helped prepare the emerging urbane, middle-class church for the widespread acceptance of a broadly liberal theological agenda.103 Although he generally sought backing for his views in John Wesley and other leading Methodist divines, he was highly selective in his choice of sources. Wesley, in particular, could be used to justify a great diversity of opinions. When such experts conflicted, Nelles relied on his own rational sense of what was right. Nelles's beliefs frequently got him into difficulties with his more conservative colleagues, but he remained faithful to his own conscience. For example, he had no doubt that all peoples would be better off if they became Christians, yet he was willing to admit that other belief systems, even those held by so-called heathens, might have substantial value. He felt that one should always respect sincere beliefs. Nor did he assume that all non-Christians were hell-bound simply because they did not follow Christ. John Wesley had asserted, "No man has a right to sentence the whole heathen world to perdition," and Nelles added, "Oh we profanely pry into the secrets of Heaven when we take upon ourselves to say who shall be saved and who lost."104 For Nelles, sin was a wilful, voluntary transgression against the known laws of God. If the heathen were unaware of these laws, they could not in fairness be blamed for not keeping them. They could only be expected to live up to the light they had been given. Given little, little should be demanded. A loving God would never condemn them to eternal punishment in Hell.105 Nelles never felt comfortable with the idea of eternal punishment for anyone. He concurred with John Wesley's dictum, "If we must believe in eternal perdition, let us strive like the redeemer to reduce it to the minimum."106 He was pleased to find an ally in John Fletcher, whose Portrait of St. Paul contained a more tolerant approach to the question of the future condition of "heathen, Socinians, deists, Jews" than that of most orthodox Methodists in Nelles's day. Indeed, Nelles complained of having been censured for views that were no broader than those espoused by Fletcher or Wesley.107 This criticism had occurred mostly during the i86os, when Isaac Aylesworth had led an attack on him in a dispute over the financial management of Victoria College. Nelles had ably defended himself, and declared that attempts to denounce him as a heretic merely demonstrated the old scourge of trying to deprive clergy of their right to private judgment and liberty of conscience.108 Nevertheless, his critics were correct about his highly unorthodox theological views. For most of his life Nelles felt deeply troubled about the future condition of those who died, especially those condemned to eternal

140

Faithful Intellect

damnation. There was no doubt that Hell was the ordained punishment for sin; the Bible was clear on the point. But was this punishment eternal? In keeping with his understanding of God's nature, Nelles wondered whether a benevolent deity had a better plan for the condemned. How could the blessed souls who had been saved on Earth enjoy heaven while so many perished in Hell? At the very least, there must be the possibility of ameliorating the punishment. Nelles asked, Will no liberative evolution ever transpire in the government of the damned? Will there be no divine method of good in the madness of that nether empire? Will those missions of lost spirits always live to present the universe with a living demonstration of Jehovah's character? Will their perdition proclaim his glory - their wail of woe go forth as an eternal anthem of unwilling praise?109

Nelles was far from being alone in posing such questions; the debate over the length of punishment after death deeply divided the international theological community, with much of the discussion centred on the various translations of the texts referring to Hell and punishment. However, most modern notions of Hell owed more to Dante and other literary figures than to anything described in Scripture. Trusting in humanity, liberal theologians tended to base their more generous position on the divine nature and the constitution of spiritual beings. In addition, they were concerned with the necessary outcome of character rather than with anything arbitrary or imposed by a legalistic God. It was simply not in God's nature to be so vindictive and rigid. Nelles found Calvinistic notions of the few predestined elect in Heaven particularly obnoxious, since it implied that Hell was crowded with the other countless millions. He felt sure that the miserable victims of divine wrath would eventually gain a reprieve, and wondered whether there were not degrees of salvation or perhaps a continuing process of redemption, so that a large proportion of lost souls would eventually achieve Heaven through God's eternal mercy.110 Although Nelles possessed no proof of such divine benevolence and merely offered it as a possibility, these dangerous attitudes, when carried to their logical conclusion, undermined the whole structure of Christian theology. If salvation could be postponed to some unlimited future and therefore was not necessary to attain on Earth, what need was there to avoid sin? More fundamentally, why had Christ died for humanity? During the i86os and 18705, most Protestant churches were disrupted by similar questions. Much of the Canadian Presbyterian leadership, for instance, was scandalized by the preaching on future redemption by the Rev. Daniel James Macdonnell of St Andrew's Presbyterian Church in Toronto. He was tried by the church courts and

Addressing the People

141

only saved himself because of his immense prestige and popularity and his agreement to downplay his more controversial opinions in public.111 Nelles never went as far as Macdonnell in his addresses and sermons, but similar sentiments did undergird other equally controversial views. For example, he toyed with the idea that, since there were different levels of sinners, God sent some of the dead to a separate place where they could be instructed and allowed to grow in grace. He was also receptive to the idea that, rather than suffering eternal pain, the dead simply slept. For Nelles, absence from the presence of God was itself a sufficient punishment. And he was for a time intrigued with the suggestion by Bishop Whatley, picked up by the Millerites, that God totally annihilated the sinner's soul. This action would preclude any possibility of future redemption, since the soul would simply cease to exist in any future state. None of these ideas could ever be proven, of course, but Nelles thought they might have some merit and were worthy of scholarly consideration.1" Nelles took a stronger stance on the future state of irresponsible children who died. In a powerful sermon entitled, "The Church of the Living God," which he preached on numerous occasions, Nelles asserted: I do not know who first invented the doctrine of infant damnation, but he might have been in better business. There are no babes in hell - not one, not one. Heaven resounds continually with young hosannas. To every mother here or elsewhere who has lost her dear ones by death, I boldly and gladly preach the gospel of exceeding joy. He who suffered little children to come unto him here, does not repel them there; he who carried them in his bosom here, carries them in his bosom there. There each departed infant spirit grows and rejoices in the cloudless light, each one a seraph now, a cherub now, decked with its unfading crown, adorned with its spotless robe, sweeping its golden lyre, and outrivaling the angels in the sweetness and fullness of its ecstatic strains.113

After contemplating the lives of his own children and blending these reflections with his broad appreciation of a generous and loving God, Nelles concluded that the very young freely shared an honoured mortal condition and held a special status in the world. Individuals were born in a state of safety and it was only later, when they matured and came to understand the difference between right and wrong, that God would punish them for the sins they committed. Nelles could not help but trust that all dying infants were lifted to Heaven under Christ's special warrant and power. Here, his theological understanding and personal observation merged: there were no infants suffering in Hell.

142.

Faithful Intellect

Nelles believed in a deity who would never condemn anyone to eternal destruction simply because of the Original Sin of Adam and Eve. Sin was the rational rejection of God, a determined act committed by someone who knew what he or she was doing. There had been a debate in Protestant circles for many years regarding the inherent innocence or natural depravity of children. Thomas Arnold had argued that innocence was a sham and tantamount to an absurd denial of Original Sin.114 Nelles stood firmly on the side of innocence. The issue gained prominence during the 18705 and early i88os, when Nelles was joined by a number of leading Canadian Methodists who maintained that, since infants were not able to make a responsible decision, they could not wilfully break God's laws and therefore could not be condemned to Hell. Henry Flesher Bland and Alexander Sutherland brought the issue before the public through their sermons and pamphlets. Since the controversy related indirectly to the basis of church membership and therefore to the status of class meetings in the Methodist Church, Egerton Ryerson quietly lent his support."5 He had resigned from the ministry over the matter in 1854 but felt he was now too old to rejoin the struggle. The theologically traditional Nathanael Burwash, Nelles's colleague at Victoria, led the opposition to these radical notions regarding children.116 Nelles went even further and asked, If infants were born in a sinless state, were raised in "the nurture and admonition of the Lord," and never sinned as they matured, was a conversion experience truly necessary? If this ideal condition could be achieved, children would never have to face the horror and distress of sinful behaviour or the consequent separation from God. It was obviously better to prevent sin through education and supervision than to transform confirmed sinners. What a wonderful world would result if by these means sin was gradually eliminated from all humanity! Many liberal theologians based this hope on a belief in the redemptive power of education, which would ameliorate moral and social evils. Their emphasis on a "social gospel" highlighting the humanity of Jesus and his role as a social critic determined to improve mankind's condition on Earth grew at least partially out of these fundamental assumptions regarding God and salvation. The world could ultimately evolve into a paradise worthy to be the seat of God's rule."7 While pleasing to contemplate, however, the implications of such views could potentially devastate the evangelical churches by distracting them from the quest for the conversion of all humanity. Here was the beginning of the debate over personal versus social religion. Nelles knew that he did not have the answers to most of these theological questions, but firmly believed that, as God progressively

Addressing the People

143

unfolded the mysteries of Heaven and Earth, they would eventually become clear. Although he wondered why the Bible was silent on so many vital questions, he held that one had to have faith and rely on God's omnipotent wisdom. To Nelles, God was immanent in the world, actively and powerfully directing its daily workings, not standing aloof and transcendent. God had no need of miraculous intervention to overcome natural laws placed in machine-like operation to guide humanity. In his preaching and lecturing, Nelles stressed God's powerful commitment to the welfare of the world and intimate knowledge of mankind's true requirements.118 Given such attitudes, Nelles preached a quiet, optimistic message urging the abiding quest for salvation. Because of his scholarly preparation, he instinctively emphasized the essential moral and practical components of evangelical Protestantism. Both habit and personality designed Nelles's addresses to instruct, to induce his listeners to think through the various issues and opinions for themselves. All his public speaking reflected a deep comprehension, an expanding and sensible independence, and a cautious confidence in the value of his own views and theological pronouncements - elements that in combination reinforced his instruction of the nation's youth.

6

The Academic

Samuel Nelles rarely considered himself a dynamic or earnest spokesman, or really anything beyond a rather shy and reticent witness for his church. Fairness and accuracy were more important to him than fervour and cant. In fact, Nelles was a learned and wise educator. He had come to recognize that teaching the young was as vital to the health and progress of the Christian church and to the nation he loved as preaching to a congregation, that it was as legitimate a part of his ministerial duty. The classroom supplied an expansive tabernacle. From Nelles's perspective, the same purpose was served whether preaching, lecturing, or writing. All were vehicles for expressing the search for truth, designed to inspire spiritual and moral growth and manifest the supremacy of Christianity over decaying worldliness. After all, "the ultimate function of human reason [is] to seek to know the mind and will of God."1 Victoria College had been established to expand a dutifully moral society, and Nelles's message always returned to personal salvation and sanctification, no matter what specific subject he was teaching or what audience he was addressing. The breadth of his reading and his skill in presenting complex concepts to his students, particularly those intending to enter the itinerancy, did much to advance the Methodist connexion into the intellectual and scientific life of the late nineteenth century. Nelles attracted and influenced a broader and slightly more eclectic audience through his writings. Although literary endeavours were not a prominent part of his career, he did publish some articles in literary, scientific, and educational journals; a number of his sermons, addresses, and public lectures were also printed. These works clearly demonstrated his expansive knowledge, his literary and scholastic talents, and his facility at placing vital theological and philosophical ideas in a meaningful context for a diverse lay audience. These merits were

The Academic

145

especially evident in his mature articles, "Christianity - Ideal and Actual" and "Whittier - The Quaker Poet."2 However, most of his writings were intended to gain support for Methodist higher education and advance the cause of moral and spiritual leadership by promoting Victoria College. They found their way into the country's religious and secular newspapers, along with his many letters on controversial educational matters. Nelles had neither the time nor the inclination to write a book on ethics or any of the other subjects he taught. He was primarily a teacher, not a practising philosopher enlarging the human understanding of the great questions of the age. Nelles's real influence was found in the contributions of the generations of scholars he prepared for service. Nelles was a great favourite with his students. He was also widely liked and respected by fellow clergy in all the Protestant denominations and even in the Roman Catholic Church. He was witty without being harsh or unfairly sarcastic, always ready with a pointed quip or pun to break the tension and ease discussion of serious issues. On occasion, he was known to interrupt the tedium of Annual Conference proceedings with an appropriately humorous comment. Unlike many of his colleagues, he was not afraid to resort to humour or to bring his apparently happy disposition to bear on closing any chasm that might have opened among members of the college, within the clerical communities, or in dealings with the town. In 1854, for a bit of fun, he published a parody of Hamlet's soliloquy entitled, "To Shave or Not to Shave" in the local Cobourg newspaper.3 His students reveled in the laugh as much as he did. Nelles was never pompous or stuffy, enjoyed meeting informally with students and associates, and was a gifted conversationalist. Seemingly innocent actions often struck him as odd or funny, and he rarely resisted the temptation to make the most of an opportunity for merriment. But he never sought to gain a cheap laugh or to lower the level of discussion merely to obtain public applause. Nelles was known by all to be extremely generous, always willing to help confidentially with personal or professional problems. At the same time, it did not take long to recognize his brilliance and his deep commitment both to excellence in education in general and to Victoria College in particular. Himself the consummate scholar, he made serious demands on those under his care but was always fair and open. William Henry Hincks, a former student, remembered Nelles kindly: As I look back, the dark eyes, scintillating activity of mind and heart, flash their laughter into mine. It is the swarthy face and lovable intimacy of Chancellor Nelles. His memorable lecture covered the ground of Christian Philosophy, Ethics, Metaphysics and Logic. He was a most humorous punster, and

146

Faithful Intellect

while we were often laughing at one of his swift puns, he as often struck home to our reason with a helpful ethical truth. He was a laughing philosophe. He lifted Emmanuel Kant's metaphysics out of the realm of the metaphysical into that of present day practical guidance and Christian duty. He lectured with a long pointer, which he grasped with both hands, and his brilliant dark eyes of merriment and swift comment, gave mental point to his wooden pointer. But he himself was never wooden. And throughout each lecture, as he beamed at us, there was the glow of personal friendship for his students.4

The better one came to know Nelles, the more one appreciated his tolerant spirit, his abhorrence of petty sectarian partisanship, and his Christian sympathy. The Presbyterian authorities at Queen's University recognized these characteristics, as well as his help in battling for justice from the government, when they presented Nelles with an honourary Doctor of Divinity degree in i86o.5 Victoria College also honoured him with an LL.D. in 1873. Nelles was equally pleased with the silver tea service from his students marking the tenth anniversary of his principalship in 1860. The accompanying testimonial commended his rebuilding of Victoria over the decade, his abiding interest in his students' welfare, and his genuine kindness in fulfilling his onerous duties. And when injustice and monopoly would deprive our University of its rights your voice and your pen had been efficiently employed in exposing the wrong, and directing the public mind to a just and honourable decision. In your efforts to establish our University, and thus to promote and extend higher education with its great advantages and blessings to our Country, we feel confident that you had been influenced by the highest principles of philanthropy and patriotism.6

The speech went on to praise his humane Christianity. The accolades in all their forms were especially welcome since they provided public proof that his strenuous labours had been appreciated, and furthermore came at a time when self-doubt was again dominating his private thoughts. Nelles's carefree demeanour masked an internal anguish that often threatened to take control. Moreover, he had broken his leg in a serious accident in early 1860, and his immobility was, he feared, preventing him from defending Victoria in the battles with the University of Toronto and the government to the best of his ability. In his teaching, Nelles always sought the most effective means of communicating knowledge. Although he and his colleagues still trusted in student recitation of memorized lines to make sure that information was learned - even if it was not understood - he experimented with the newly popular technique of lecturing on a particular book or academic

The Academic

147

topic. In 1866, he "resolved to teach more by lectures, or rather by prelectures, i.e. lectures on the text-book ... The lectures give interest and remove obscurities; the text-book affords something definite and thorough for the student's research in his own room."7 Nelles assumed that lecturing would keep the teacher more lively and innovative. As the years went by, he increasingly relied on lectures rather than the tutorial style of teaching and became an extremely able lecturer. His innovations quickly spread to the younger members of the Victoria faculty, especially in the philosophical and science courses. Mathematics and Classics seemed less suitable for this new pedagogical methodology, and academics such as William Kingston found lecturing difficult and less effective. At the same time, the language courses increasingly concentrated on literature rather than on the mechanics of grammar, vocabulary, or oral skills, especially in the senior years. However, innovation came slowly.8 Nelles also continued to practise a modified traditional Socratic method of instruction. He would work through a particular text, often page by page, asking questions of particular students and developing a discussion around the answers. The discussion was then expanded by further inquiry regarding the views of related authors whom the students had been obliged to read. This seminar method was attractive, since most of the courses had few students and formal lectures could not deal as faithfully with individual student interests or needs.9 When working properly, it forced the whole class to understand an everwidening body of topical literature. The students could not simply memorize professors' lectures while hiding from deeper analysis; at the same time, teachers could not rely on reciting tired, dated notes. Although Nelles had the background required for this pedagogical approach, the students themselves often lacked the knowledge or commitment to make it work. At Victoria, students were examined during classes and more formally at the end of each session. They were also required to write a number of essays. The tests were usually oral. Such testing during regular classes allowed students to demonstrate their powers of impromptu speaking but kept their deficiencies quasi-confidential. The oral examinations at the end of the term were open to the public and supervised by visiting experts. Their public nature prevented favouritism and demonstrated the level of scholarly competence to other educators, provincial authorities, and even to the friendly though sometimes skeptical - public. Thus, public testing served as an advertisement for the university and its more outstanding students. The results were published in the provincial newspapers for similar reasons. Another advantage of open testing was that it helped break down the

148

Faithful Intellect

inevitable barriers between town and college. In August 1867, the faculty agreed that in the future all students would take written examinations.10 Nelles believed that allowing them to write out their answers in a controlled setting under time constraints and without the pressure of public display gave a truer evaluation of what they understood. In particular, he felt the more analytical subjects were better tested through essay answers, while linguistic knowledge, for instance, was probably better demonstrated orally.11 As conditions became more settled after his first year at Victoria, Nelles gave up teaching Classics and concentrated on Ethics, Natural and Moral Philosophy, Logic, and Rhetoric; at times, Epistemology, Apologetics, Metaphysics, and Evidences of Religion were added to his load. After 1870 he also taught Homiletics to theology students.12- Although his teaching covered a wide range of subjects, in fact, during the nineteenth century they all represented one vast interrelated body of knowledge. They focused on the same end, used many of the same authors and texts, and were intended to provide a comprehensive intellectual experience. Nelles characterized them as fingers on the same hand which, when moved in unison, provided significant intellectual power to the individual.13 Indeed, the entire curriculum as initially taught at the college delineated an integrated and carefully elaborated program serving all the traditional needs of the university student. Victoria was not alone in this effort. Most college authorities at the mid-century hoped to create a well-balanced, classically based program of study that would improve character and infuse their students with the broad sweep of culture. Here they meant "culture" in the sense advanced by Matthew Arnold, involving the love of perfection and moved by the passion for both pure knowledge and moral and social good. Nelles valued Matthew Arnold's contribution on the matter, and blended it with the views of his father Thomas, who emphasized that education must be morally and socially based and - despite his staunch conservatism more progressive than was accepted by most of his contemporaries.14 Nelles therefore assumed that any breach in the curriculum violated the unity and wholeness of knowledge, undermining the transmission of morally based, civilized culture and imperiling the achievement of genuine wisdom. Removing any of the key components weakened the whole structure, lowered college standards, and limited the quality of education. It was with this concern in mind that Nelles attacked the repeated changes to the curriculum at University College in the University of Toronto. The Arts program had been under review since the implementation of the University Act of 1853. At least three careless amendments, Nelles asserted, had destroyed any legitimate claim that it was modelled on the University of London.15

The Academic

149

According to Nelles, the integrity of education was shattered by the ill-conceived use of options. Most critically, the displacement of Greek and Latin was a serious error. In 1849, the new president of Harvard University had joined a chorus of American educators in denouncing this practice.16 Nelles claimed that the education offered at University College by the late 18505 bore no comparison to that in any decent university. The one undeniable advantage of a provincial university, with its huge endowment, was its power to elevate education standards in the province. Nelles argued, however, that it actually lowered them by allowing options before students were well-grounded in core material. Specialists at University College need not take courses outside of their major if they had satisfied the previous year's requirements, and the training in Mathematics or Classics or Languages could be pared down to such a bare minimum that the subsequent degree was, in Nelles's opinion, seriously flawed. Classics or Mathematics could be ignored after first year by Honour students and after second year by Pass students. Professor (later, Dean) James Beaven sought to remedy this deficiency by emphasizing Greek and Latin philosophers in his classes and examinations. Options had never been designed to allow students to avoid difficult subjects. In attacking the inappropriate use of options, Nelles had advised Egerton Ryerson, "It is capital to show ... the great monopoly is as unsound intellectually as religiously. That having claimed an exclusive use of the endowment to bring the standard down. That while sneering at us, they have adopted a system of which we would be ashamed."17 Both Queen's and Victoria slowly developed options, but they declined to follow Toronto's "shameful" example. Nelles declared: "The more carefully one analyses the nature, working and effects of these numerous Options and Exemptions, the more strongly must he feel that the Course is a collection of miscellaneous Lectures and Exercises, rather than a systematic and symmetrical and disciplinary training of the mind."18 Scholarship naturally declined under such abysmal conditions. Moreover, Nelles saw the move to options by University College as indirectly threatening the already difficult task of creating a unified curriculum for the Protestant and Catholic high schools and colleges. While the increasingly aggressive Roman Catholic hierarchy would probably accept a common program in Classics and Mathematics, consensus would be virtually impossible in Metaphysics, History, or Ethics without a high degree of mutual trust.19 With the notoriously antiCatholic George Brown promoting University College, the less controversial the curricular changes the better for inter-church relations and the political and social harmony of the country.

150

Faithful Intellect

Yet Nelles did appreciate the value of options in subjects such as Modern Languages and the diverging and multiplying disciplines within Science. Modern experimental science could not succeed through a reliance on casual, unanalytical generalizations. Nelles recognized that training should be more practical and should integrate the expanding knowledge now available/0 Options permitted greater specialization which, in turn, led to more detailed and effective learning. He agreed that intellectual and spiritual development was not contingent upon the transmission of any specific information and always held that it should never be stultified by blind acceptance of ancient concepts or received wisdom. As Nelles matured, his confidence in the integrity of the canon of human knowledge declined/1 Furthermore, he understood that forcing students to take a huge variety of subjects led to mental distraction, superficiality, and overwork. He felt that the young had too little time for contemplation and intellectual enjoyment. They needed to narrow and deepen their scholastic efforts, since knowledge gained by dabbling in a large number of subjects was quickly forgotten and had little long-term benefit. After all, the purpose of education was to gain wisdom. Options were valuable, then, as long as they did not distort or corrupt university education. Nelles's even-handed, insightful solution was specialization under professors trained in quite narrowly defined fields, in conjunction with core subjects and a balanced, cultured curriculum.22 The question of options and exemptions was part of a much broader controversy over the quality of education at the University of Toronto, as well as, of course, its exclusive use of the endowment. It was closely associated with the general unwillingness of the university to support the appointment of external examiners to test its students. Since this was the common practice of the day, many members of the University of Toronto senate, especially the heads of Queen's, Trinity, and Victoria, felt that it should be followed at University College. Nelles initially wanted Ryerson to represent Victoria as an examiner, but agreed to examine in the field of Mental and Moral Philosophy since it was an important means of substantiating the college's respectable qualifications and status in the eyes of the academic community and the public at large.23 In fact, over the opposition of Daniel Wilson and his Toronto associates, Nelles was eventually appointed an examiner for all colleges along with James Beaven and, after 1871, George Paxton Young. Moreover, because the tests were administered at the same time as the Wesleyan Annual Conference, James Patton, the sympathetic vice-chancellor, changed their timing in 1861 to facilitate Nelles's participation. Nelles worked well with these men and was at least their intellectual equal. The position of examiner further confirmed him in the higher echelons of academia in the province.24

The Academic

151

As Nelles expanded his own intellectual horizons, he became more sophisticated in his approach to the subjects he taught. However, in methodology he remained a confirmed follower of Francis Bacon. A reading of Bacon's Advancement of Learning and Essays merely verified for Nelles an approach that seemed to be present in the very air of the university. His use of the inductive method had influenced generations of scholars in unravelling the mysteries of nature and God. Nelles loudly proclaimed that Bacon had turned "the tide of Philosophy from idle theory to useful experiment; to look through the dim shades of opinions into the deep realities of nature; to unlock new and untold treasures of knowledge for the enjoyment of admiring posterity."Z5 Knowledge was gained through the careful consideration of all concrete evidence, not by means of random observations propping up wild hypotheses. A creative imagination could be a dangerous substitute for diligent and determined investigation, especially since the apparent chaos undermining established knowledge necessitated a trustworthy, standardized methodology permitting a balanced evaluation of new information and reinforcing intellectual and social harmony.16 The scholar needed to evaluate all evidence conscientiously before drawing any substantive conclusions. Canadian academics generally trusted in both the Baconian method and in knowledge developed by generations of scholars following its strictures. In Toronto, Daniel Wilson pronounced it essential, while William Dawson, the renowned Nova Scotia geologist who became principal of McGill University in 1855, denounced any attempt to discredit it.27 Nelles's apparently instinctive dislike of John Stuart Mill probably resulted from Mill's attack on Baconianism and his intellectual justification of a deductive methodology. In his 1843 treatise A System of Logic, Ratiocinactive and Inductive, which was in reality a defence of new methods of scientific investigation and the associated principles of legitimate evidence, Mill held that scientists, "while practising a rigorous inductive method, may also devise explanatory generalizations, or hypotheses, from which particular consequences can be deducted and then tested against the facts."28 Other stridently discordant but increasingly compelling voices from philosophers and practising scientists joined Mill in endorsing a role for rational deduction in scientific experimentation. During the last half of the nineteenth century, scientists increasingly rejected the hitherto uncontested reliance on Baconian methodology, thereby assailing fundamental notions of social and intellectual order. Their approach, as much as the new theories they proclaimed, helped to destroy the faith of their generation in the inherited wisdom of the ages.

152.

Faithful Intellect

While personally confident in the basics of his approach to philosophy and religion, Nelles was never content merely to repeat the standard dogma presented by earlier authorities. In his sincere effort to provide his students with the best understanding available, over the years he continually introduced new concepts and information and modified or even contradicted his earlier teaching. His pedagogical aproach was quite unusual at a time when many academics followed the same yellowing notes throughout their careers. Nelles constantly forced his students to question long-established assumptions and reappraise their own beliefs. He reminded them that authoritative scholarship was constantly being overturned: "Dr. Reid has done great service to modern philosophy; and yet what is it? He has overthrown the ideal theory. Is it not a melancholy thought that this boasted labour of modern metaphysics is but the demolition of another metaphysical structure ... One man is glorified by demonstrating that his predecessor had been glorified in vain."*9 Students must learn to trust their own diligence and intelligence to discover the truth God was gradually unfolding. As noted earlier, because of his early training Nelles was initially most critically influenced by the Scottish "Common Sense" epistemology of Dugald Stewart and Thomas Reid, who proclaimed that "moral truths could be intuited by people simply by appealing to 'common sense', the data of their own consciousness."30 Intuition was a sound basis for rational inquiry. Nelles preferred the more descriptive term "natural sense" for describing the ability of rational individuals to decide moral and spiritual questions through their own instinctive intellect. The approach was doubly satisfactory because it not only followed the empirical methodology advocated by Bacon and refined by Isaac Newton but also bolstered the absolute morality of the Bible.31 Common sense raised the individual above the traditional restraints of social authorities, honoured reason in interpreting divine will, and, properly used, would lead to a universally valid theological understanding.32 Nelles agreed that "with its ability to reconcile reason with revelation, empirically known truths with eternal realities, the Common Sense school provided an especially workable basis for education in denominational colleges."33 The dominant philosophical school in North America by the i85os,34 the Common Sense approach was quickly appropriated by disparate groups who used it to promote their own social and intellectual agendas. Each asserted that its interpretation was valid since everyone had the ability to know God's will. Thus, Common Sense could be used equally to bolster the most conservative social order and a traditional curriculum in universities and to justify any radical social

The Academic

153

adventure and progressive educational philosophy. A corrupted version of Common Sense philosophy entertained by many urban, middle-class Protestants held that God had ordained the solid bourgeois value system embodied in "modesty in women, rectitude in men, and thrift, sobriety, and hard work in both."35 The more entrenched the methodology became in late nineteenth-century society, the more it lost its scholarly rigour and its value as an analytical discipline. Nonetheless, though always cautious of dogmatically accepted approaches, Nelles did follow his peers in utilizing it, especially during his early teaching. In his courses he used books such as the ten-volume collected works of Dugald Stewart edited by William Hamilton, McCosh's edition of Stewart's Active and Moral Powers and Moral Philosophy, and Reid's Powers of the Human Mind and Intellectual Powers of Man. However, he often found it easier and more profitable to assign texts on specialized questions by their intellectual associates, such as Richard Whately's Intuitive Morals, Future State, and Thoughts from the Writings of Archbishop Whately or Sir William Hamilton's Lectures on Metaphysics and Logic. Nelles could apply these works to whatever philosophical questions he and his students were studying. As well, The Scottish Philosophy by James McCosh, a leading Common Sense exponent and president of Princeton University, was especially useful in elaborating the basic tenets for inexperienced students. Nelles also lectured extensively from other Scottish intellectuals in the field, including the moralist and economist Adam Smith.36 Nelles additionally recognized the value of certain French philosophers who had been influenced by Stewart and Reid as well as by German Idealist philosophy. Prominent among them were Victor Cousin and Theodore Jouffroy. Nelles taught from Cousin's The True, the Beautiful and the Good, at least partially because of its fine literary style, together with his Introduction to the History of Philosophy and Elements of Psychology. Like most of his contemporaries, Nelles assumed that Cousin never doubted the existence and power of the divine and recognized divinity in all matter and all true moral force. Quoting Cousin, "Measure your progress in Philosophy by your tender veneration for the Gospel of Christ," Nelles remarked that there was great hope for Roman Catholic France with such native writers.37 Cousin appealed to cultured Christians whose faith had been shaken by the philosophes and eighteenth-century skepticism and materialism, particularly those who were seeking a faith without undue supernaturalism. His fear was that skepticism was being manipulated to return humanity to the sway of irrational religion. Cousin actually discerned that the vulgar members of society were content with the Christianity of an outworn past; nevertheless, he trusted that religion would ultimately progress to a higher philosophical form.38

154

Faithful Intellect

Nelles used Jouffroy's Introduction to Ethics when teaching Moral Philosophy, describing his system as based on a liberal spirit and "close and careful study of the facts and tendencies of human nature."39 Both these scholars are better understood as overly optimistic progressive Idealists who transmitted a refined Hegelianism to the North American literary and academic elites.40 But Nelles did not limit himself, also assigning Pascal's Pensees, De Gerando's Du Perfectionnement Moral, Montaigne's Essays, and La Rochefoucauld's Reflections. Although Nelles read both French and German, in addition to Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, he preferred to tackle the more difficult texts in English translation. Nelles integrated this material with what he considered the better elements of German philosophy. He was particularly influenced by Immanuel Kant, lecturing from his Metaphysics of Ethics and Theory of Ethics during the late 18705. He found A Critique of Pure Reason valuable for its comparison of deductive versus inductive scientific methodology and for its naturalistic transcendentalism. He also enjoyed Heine's Religion and Philosophy in Germany and Schwegler's History of Philosophy. Nelles probably came to Georg Hegel late in his career, and used only selections that tended to. support his existing views. It is not clear whether he ever actually understood Hegelian idealism, though he may have adopted some of its tenets from Cousin. He described Hegel's Lectures on the Philosophy of History as a "mixture of sense and fancy,"41 but did agree that the study of history was as legitimate as looking to nature to find manifestations of God's presence and power. Like Hegel, Nelles always assumed that reason, not chance as the early Epicureans maintained, governed history. However, he was wary of Hegel's actual sense of history, his alienation of philosophy from theology, and his justification of the secular state's deciding what was good for its citizens.42 Of course, Nelles had also read Aristotle, Plato, the Epicureans, and the Stoics. Samuel applied what he found useful to the specific subjects he taught. In order to supply a basic discipline undergirding all the subjects, he introduced his students to logic. While some scholars assumed that logic was the central element of philosophy, Nelles was not so certain. He told new students they should trust him that it was important but determine for themselves how deeply they should pursue the topic.43 Nelles approached logic partially as a branch of psychology concerned with the phenomena of the mind. For his knowledge of psychology he relied on, among other works, Bascom's Comparative Psychology and Sciences of Mind, Laurens Hickok's Rational Psychology, Cousin's Elements of Psychology, and Munsell's Psychology. But he never appeared comfortable with the discipline's attempts to relate the

The Academic

155

physical attributes and functioning of the mind to the supremacy of reason or the laws and expressions of logic. Nor was Nelles overly impressed with the physiological studies of the brain and the central nervous system stemming from advances in the field of anatomy and practical surgical improvements or, more particularly, with the implications of this research for the workings of conscience and the mental faculties governing thought. In his view, like so much of the science of the day, it required far more corroboration before any substantive conclusions could be validated. On a more limited level, Nelles was able to assure his students that logic scientifically outlined the laws governing inference and consecutive thought; it organized the rules of right thinking, demonstrated the fallacies inherent in wrong thinking, and taught how the rules were to be put into practice. Logic was related to thought as grammar was to language: it made thought and therefore its expression universally understandable.44 In so doing, logic provided a lens for observing and comprehending both the natural and the intellectual world. Nelles taught that an appreciation of logic allowed one to discover and communicate truth; it was a prerequisite for analysing the arguments used by philosophers, scientists, or theologians. He viewed logic as essential for a career in the law, politics, medicine, or commerce.45 It would never replace natural sense or allow all to reason equally, and it could not displace diligent research in the quest for knowledge, but it was a valuable, even fundamental, mental discipline, the foundation of meticulous reasoning. Logic improved one's ability to discover ideas, assess their nature, and discriminate intellectually. A knowledge of logic supplied a key to eloquent and effective communication. According to Pascal, it even established a sound foundation for ethical conduct and Christian morality.46 Nelles expected that comprehending the principles of logic would prepare students to investigate moral, political, and religious affairs with more precision and confidence. Nelles generally assigned Sir William Hamilton's Lecture on Metaphysics and Logic, Francis Bowen's Logic, and Richard Whately's Logic and Elements of Logic and scrutinized them closely in his lectures. In 1870, he edited William Hamilton's lectures on logic into Chapters in Logic to make them more accessible for his students and the broader community of Methodist clergy. A reviewer claimed that it was difficult to find a better source "to stimulate thought, strengthen the judgment and unveil wrong habits of thinking and reasoning."47 Nelles would begin the study of a text such as Bowen by setting out the basic definitions and principles of logic. He would then introduce such topics as the differences between primary (intuitive) and secondary (comparative) knowledge, deductive versus inductive reasoning, pure

156

Faithful Intellect

logic versus concrete logic, and the need for classifications to be based on reason. Also discussed were Aristotle's analysis of syllogisms and doctrine of predicables, John Stuart Mill's attack on the assumed classifications, William Hamilton's views on ambiguities in language and concrete logic, Edmund Burke's thoughts on individualizing concepts, and Immanuel Kant's approach to representation. In all Nelles's teaching of logic, the memorization of facts or definitions remained subsidiary to the primary goal of investigating and interpretating the expanding universe of knowledge.48 Nelles followed a similar approach when dealing with the other texts on logic named above, and introduced new works when he felt they had something to offer. He always had to explain their major elements in his lectures, since students did not have access to such books unless they could borrow them from family or friends. Victoria's library did not possess them and, in any event, the students did not have access to it. Since these authorities often criticized each other, they forced students to make informed judgments on their own. Nelles also drew elements from ethics and other philosophical considerations in order to clarify the meanings of particular terms or ideas and encouraged his students to apply their knowledge of logic when studying in related fields. He perennially advocated the practical application of knowledge and the most precise explanation of difficult concepts. The essential priority was that his students use logic as a tool when reasoning through questions directly associated with their own religious health.49 Despite the importance he assigned to logic, Nelles felt it was probably not required when studying poetry; indeed, it was superseded altogether by the poetic imagination. For Nelles, the mysterious creative process of the poet appeared to represent a special gift from God that could not be adequately explained by normal philosophical considerations. He agreed with Horace Bushnell, the great American preacher, in following the ideas of Samuel Coleridge and Immanuel Kant to the effect that imagination was in itself a mode of perception and discernment complementing the thought processes involved in the logic of reason. He also subscribed to Ralph Waldo Emerson's assertion in "The Poet" that a true poet intuitively communicates the universal essence, the truth and beauty of creation.50 Although Nelles gave up writing poetry, it still provided intellectual stimulation and spiritual peace. Consequently, he carefully studied literary critics such as Matthew Arnold to improve his comprehension of its fundamental nature. In early 1867, Nelles accidentally discovered the poems of John Greenleaf Whittier. After fifteen years of contemplation, he finally published an article on Whittier, which not only considered the literary

The Academic

157

status of his poetry but also placed it in the context of Common Sense philosophy and natural theology. He discussed how the poet helped society understand the workings of God by enhancing the moral and spiritual components of emotion and rational thought, and described Whittier as "pre-eminently a moral and religious poet ... finding food for faith, hope, charity in all life's scenes and events."51 Nelles was impressed with both Whittier's emphasis on the positive elements in mankind's moral nature and his striving for social reform. His attacks on slavery, for instance, assumed that it was evil and forced individuals to assess their own Christian beliefs. Whittier expressed optimism that slavery would soon pass away, but his real effectiveness lay in removing the question from petty politics and enshrining freedom as a moral duty. His work also demonstrated that, in dealing with the most apparently trivial elements of nature, the great intellectual and social truths could be elaborated and the divine presence honoured. Nelles highly recommended Whittier for the many spiritually pessimistic and morally confused young people he encountered in Canada.51 Despite his interest in poetry, Nelles's academic duties largely confined him to other scholarly pursuits. He occasionally taught Epistemology, the area of philosophy investigating the nature, grounds, and limits of human knowledge. During the nineteenth century, a fundamental disagreement arose over the extent to which humans could unravel the mysteries of nature and revelation, creating dire divisions among scientists and theologians. Did subjects beyond human understanding exist? More critically, were there intellectual enterprises that individuals should not pursue? Ever since his student days, Nelles had been torn by such questions, and moved cautiously back and forth depending on circumstances. Essentially, however, his belief in a benevolent God led him to place his emphasis somewhat differently. He acknowledged that as long as humans were corrupt their reasoning would be faulty, and trusted ultimately in an all-abiding, earnest faith. But he never accepted boundaries to the areas where investigation could properly occur or limits to the pursuit of knowledge. God had ordained that, in the fullness of time, all necessary knowledge would be unfolded to faithful inquiry. Although Nelles recognized that epistemology was an inexact science dealing with variable conditions and had no exhaustive precepts, he found it helped in understanding how the mental faculties functioned to acquire and apply knowledge. It was therefore valuable in expanding the sense of spiritual life and moral duty.5 ^ Nelles expected the study of metaphysics to lead his students in the same vital direction. For example, using Francis Bowen's edition of William Hamilton's Metaphysics, he lectured on the need to search

158

Faithful Intellect

diligently for the truth in this study of first principles. He also assessed utility, deciding it was an overrated element of metaphysics. In 1866 he used James McCosh's Intuitions of the Mind as his primary text but was familiar with others, including Ferrier's Institutes of Metaphysics, Artistotle's Metaphysics, Mansel's Metaphysics, and Maurice's Moral and Metaphysical Philosophy. Dividing metaphysics into its two component branches of psychology and ontology, he discussed its scope in Locke, Hegel, and St Augustine. From his own personal investigations, he advised his students, "Settle your religious principles as you may, it is possible at any time to unsettle them by going a little deeper and making a more protracted scrutiny into the basis of belief. Certain doctrines lying on the surface may still remain the same, but the remote causes recede from point to point, ad infinitum. Great is the gulf of metaphysics."54 Metaphysics as a subject was constantly being refined. Since it covered the realms of being and knowing, it suggested a means of comprehending the existence of God and so supplied a vital basis for all theology. However, Nelles, the committed evangelical minister, warned his students that there would always remain much that mankind would never discover; "if it were not so, the creature would be one with the Creator - man would despise his God. Mystery is one pillar of the Temple in which we worship Jehovah ... Let no man think so highly of himself, or so meanly of his Maker, as to be ashamed to say often - I don't know."55 After all, faith was the cornerstone of wisdom; the best scholar accepted some things on faith. Knowing that life was limited and that all must eventually face God, the wise person remained constantly faithful. Still, Nelles never believed that human beings must therefore curb imagination or fetter inquiry. As texts for his courses on Evidences of Religion, Nelles used Joseph Butler's The Analogy of Religion, to the Constitution and Course of Nature, edited by Joseph Angus, and the 1859 edition of William Paley's A View of the Evidences of Christianity in three parts with Annotations by Richard Whatley. Both Paley and Butler had searched nature and biblical texts and compared them with other sources of knowledge on early Christianity in order to help prove the existence of God. For Butler, Scripture confirmed what he and others were able to observe in nature, with much less labour.56 However, the whole combined field of Evidences and Apologetics was undergoing revolutionary change as the increasingly important secular sciences questioned fundamental aspects of traditionally recognized scriptural and natural proofs. The late nineteenth century witnessed a steep decline in the study of Apologetics and Evidences of Religion that would have repercussions for all inquiries related to Christian principles.57 Nelles

The Academic

159

insisted on adducing more diverse sources in order to acquaint his students with the best available information. In his examinations, he might ask for a comparison of Paley with David Hume's views in his Philosophical Works or for a discussion of the objections to the use of biblical and philosophical evidence regarding the nature of God. Always uneasy when teaching from scholarly works purporting to prove God's presence or to provide apologies for Christianity, Nelles remarked to his clerical colleagues: "A religion that needs an Apology deserves none" and "The wonder is that we have not killed Christianity by our interpretations of it and our Apologies for it."58 Nelles introduced other experts as modest refinements to the scholarship in the field and publicly stated that the Bible was the indisputable word of God. Privately, however, he was disturbed by claims about its infallibility. It simply held too many internal contradictions and illogical statements to be totally inerrant. Even as a young man he had proclaimed himself willing to give up any view of the Scriptures if it were clearly opposed to reason.59 As a follower of John Wesley, Nelles recognized that the Bible was not the only authority upon which Christianity was built. Indeed, contemporary scholars were engaged in a debate over the bases of authority for Methodists, some asserting that it was founded on the four pillars of Scripture, tradition, experience, and reason. Methodists in the early nineteenth century relied rather more on Scripture and experience; Nelles was in the forefront of those trying to reintroduce tradition and reason. Christianity was anchored in the Bible, especially as that source presented Christ; it was explained by the early church fathers and others who had proven their spiritual worth over time; it was experienced in the heart; and it was sustained by reason. Faith without reason led to fanaticism. After reading John Locke's The Reasonableness of Religion, Nelles appreciated how vital reason was to the Wesleyan quadrilateral of authorities. Moreover, according to Locke and Wesley, ideas were not innate; rather, they were formed on the basis of evidence gathered by the senses. Wesley had added spiritual senses to Locke's physical senses in discussing the effort to understand the existence and attributes of God through personal experience. Since Nelles did not have to rely solely on Scripture, he was less distracted by attacks on the core evidences of religion, and told his students to approach the topic logically.60 Closely associated with Metaphysics and Evidences of Religion was Natural Philosophy, which Nelles sometimes taught. It attempted to account for the unifying principles governing the natural world and thereby prove the existence of eternal design and the necessity of a Designer in nature. Nelles's principal text was Paley's

160

Faithful Intellect

Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, Collected from the Appearances of Nature, originally published in 1802. This book was utilized in most Protestant colleges during the first seventy-five years of the nineteenth century. Paley argued that there was design in nature, using the analogy of a divine clockmaker who had created a universal clock following predetermined laws.61 For Paley, "nature and human nature were a congeries of happy contrivances demonstrating the wisdom, justice and benevolence of the Creator to his fortunate people."62 Butler had supported the idea that, since the natural universe was the creation of God's mind, it provided useful insights into the being and attributes of God and the relations of God to his creatures, including mankind. However, since nature alone could not prove the truth of Christianity, analogies from nature must be confirmed by scriptural revelation. The reverse was also true; nature confirmed the meaning and elaborated the understanding of biblical truths.63 Nelles also gained further insight, particularly on narrower aspects of Natural Philosophy and Natural Theology, from Thomas Chalmers's Natural Theology, Canon Barry's What is Natural Theology?, Wollaston's Religion of Nature, Lord Brougham's Natural Theology, Horace Bushell's Nature and the Supernatural, and Bascom's Natural Theology. He attempted, with only indifferent success, to meld the quite diverse arguments from these sources into a substantial system. He anticipated that, as the laws of Natural Philosophy became better understood, a more refined appreciation of God's works and God's intentions for mankind as presented in creation would emerge.64 As always, God would unravel these mysteries as their comprehension was needed and their consequences recognized. It was God's intent that humanity discover divine truths through examination of the real world. As a young cleric, Nelles had written, "The Bible is the Rule of faith and practice ... The Bible is sufficient for what its author designed; but that He never designed it to dispense with the lessons of Nature and philosophy must be very evident to serious reflection. I consider nature of great value in the interpretation of Scripture and Scripture the great lamp of philosophy."65 To penetrate these mysteries, students must follow sound inductive research methods in fields broadly including botany, physics, chemistry, zoology, and geology. Notwithstanding the decline in philosophical explanations of natural phenomena, Nelles was initially content with the comforting ability of Paley and Butler to relate their eighteenth-century understanding of nature to the basic theological questions still facing society. Both men had supplied acceptable principles for refuting the speculative empiricism apparently overtaking scientific inquiry. At root, however,

The Academic

161

the scholarly breach between natural science and theology was rapidly widening. In i8yz, William Dawson complained, "Instead of studying facts in order to arrive at general principles, we shall return to the mediaeval plan of setting up dogmas based on authority only, or on metaphysical considerations of the most flimsy character, and forcibly twisting nature into conformity with their requirements."66 Butler relied on drawing analogies between nature and scriptural revelation to demonstrate what he understood of the metaphysical world. Nelles agreed that "those truths that are wrapped up in Scripture are to be unfolded and illustrated by Reason and Nature. And it is indeed only by tracing the analogies between these different revelations that we arrive at some views of the Truth."67 Philosophers and scientists alike commonly used the method in their work. For instance, in the i86os, John Tyndall examined conditions on Earth and claimed they were analogous to major phenomena elsewhere that could not themselves be properly investigated. The assumption allowed him to explain how light travelled between the Sun and the Earth. He used the same approach to justify the creative role of imagination in speculation about the universe, arguing that proven facts cast a glow beyond their narrow realm that allowed the imaginative mind - such as he possessed - to penetrate the darkness of the unknown and extrapolate a broader reality.68 Although Nelles accepted analogy as a worthy means of explanation, he distrusted the wild leaps of imagination that Tyndall seemed to favour. Nor did he appreciate Tyndall's smug assumption that scientists would soon explain all of God's mysteries and unlock all knowledge through their own intellectual power. Nelles would only be satisfied with faithful inquiry that acknowledged God's control of nature and revelation and involved exhaustive experimentation and critical evaluation of the known world. He hoped that some day Victoria University would develop a thoroughgoing scientific program but realized that it would require professors who were trained in the modern natural and theoretical sciences and who had the specialized facilities for demonstrating the attributes of natural phenomena. At present, the cost of such education was substantially beyond Victoria's resources. At the same time, Nelles was becoming increasingly worried by what he had come to consider the exaggerated implications of traditional Natural Philosophy. Originally, he had been deeply inspired by Paley and Butler and stated, "The boundless variety of Nature is but a mighty commentary on the Wisdom and Power of Him who framed her undeviating laws."69 By the i86os, however, he was having second thoughts. He had not fully resolved in his mind the question of the extent to which individuals could fathom God's plan through reason

i6z

Faithful Intellect

and the examination of nature; moreover, he feared the drift to pantheism in the approach to nature that he witnessed in Paley and even more clearly in the American Transcendentalists or Romantic Idealists such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Orestes Brownson, and Henry David Thoreau. To them, nature appeared capable of controlling its own destiny without any need for an omnipotent deity. Together with the Idealism they learned from Cousin they borrowed his justification of a limited, archaic God.70 Nelles considered Bushnell's Nature and the Supernatural, which he read in 1863, to be a timely rebalancing of the apparent overemphasis on naturalism. Later he drew additional support from Hegel, who also downplayed the significance of the evidence found in the natural world for comprehending God's plan.71 As a believer throughout his adult life in an immanent rather than a transcendent God, Nelles disliked the supposition seemingly inherent in Natural Philosophy, as well as in much of nineteenth-century science, that stressed immutable laws at the expense of an active role for God. Much of this debate among scientists, philosophers, and theologians oddly enough centred on miracles, or suspension of the laws of nature by God to the end of injecting divine influence into the world. As he formulated his own beliefs, Nelles had asserted in 1854: Some are fond of dwelling upon what they term special providences; for in these interpositions they are reminded of the divine power and presence. And yet after all is not the Author of nature as truly present in the general providence as in the special? The mistake lies not in recognizing the Creator in signal and supernatural events, but in not recognizing Him in the daily and common order of the universe. Here is a common ground where the philosopher and the Christian may meet, and the poet with them. The divine energy is immanent, abidingly present in all his works. Were he to withdraw his energy for one moment, "Chaos would come again." The philosopher loves to contemplate the special interposition; but the philosopher and Christian should both learn that God is everywhere.72

Nelles later reminded himself that God was the Jehovah of the Old Testament who intervened continually and was concerned about human welfare down to the minutest detail. Despite Paley's assertion to the contrary, God did not need miracles to overcome some mysterious set of self-imposed laws governing nature.73 Much of Nelles's theological liberalism relied upon his perception of an omnipotent and ubiquitous deity and an active Jesus Christ striving to reform human affairs. As a result, Nelles disagreed with James Mozley, who presented in his Eight Lectures on Miracles of 1865 an elaborate defence of the existence of miracles. But he also dismissed John Tyndall, who led a

The Academic

163

scientific assault on Mozley. Tyndall claimed that miracles were merely the rationale offered by primitive peoples when they failed to discern the cause of phenomena; as mankind became more civilized and sophisticated, science would explain away apparent breaches of natural law.74 For Nelles, miracles were possible but unnecessary. He informed his students that the implications of Natural Philosophy must be carefully restrained by a rational appreciation of Christian belief. Rational examination was equally central to Nelles's classes on Ethics and Moral Philosophy. These core subjects were also closest to his heart, since they gave substance to the spiritual and practical elements of religion. Under whatever title it was offered, the broad field of Moral Philosophy was the pivotal course in most universities. It supplied an explicit explanation of the unity of God's revelations, both in Scripture and in natural creation, and thereby forcefully and imaginatively bound the entire college curriculum together.75 Nelles taught ethics and the philosophy of morality as a single broad subject, interrelating texts and topics. In his view, the study led to a grander appreciation of the human make-up, helped in forming moral judgments, and trained the mind in its relation to the metaphysical. It awakened all the most noble sentiments, clarified the relationship between religion and morality, and saved Christianity from falling into superstition or fanaticism. Moreover, it helped enrich human culture and develop positive precepts regarding duty to oneself, to other individuals, to the state, and broadly to society as a whole. At the same time, it allowed one to recognize and combat the moral errors, biases, and bigotry of the day. Perhaps most satisfying, ethics functioned without adopting the perilous temptations of secularism.76 Nelles taught that society's comprehension of the real extent of ethics was progressively expanding. While many moral truths were well established, others were as yet unsettled or even hotly disputed. To illustrate the different levels of popular acceptance, he offered as examples the changing attitudes toward slavery or polygamy or the use of war to settle disputes. These issues were not difficul for his students to fathom, at least to their own general satisfaction. But when Nelles asked whether one religion had an ethical right to impose itself on another, the wise answer was not so obvious. While most Methodists probably assumed that Christians had the divinely inspired duty to convert Moslems or Hindus, did they in turn have the right to convert Christians? Drawing even more closely on his students' experience, he asked: Did Protestants have the right to impose their faith on Catholics and vice versa?77 The study of Ethics forced the young scholars to evaluate the foundations of their own biases as they seriously examined critical issues they all faced. Since wisdom was best demonstrated by

164

Faithful Intellect

the proper application of knowledge, Nelles exhorted every student first to determine what was right, then to implement it. As he grew older, Nelles became less confident that natural or common sense was sufficient to determine what was right and good, but during the 18505 and early i86os, as we have seen, he generally followed the Scottish school of philosophy, using principally the works of Stewart, Reid, Hamilton, Whately, Butler, and Adam Smith in his teaching. According to Stewart, the source of morality lay instinctively in the human mind. Paley agreed that human beings possessed an inherent moral sense that allowed them to perceive right and wrong.78 Paley's value, however, lay in his ability to relate complicated concepts to common situations. He offered instruction on the duties connected with oaths, vows, contracts, and property, and went on to discuss the duties of children to their parents and of individuals to their neighbours and, most significantly, to God. It was essential for individuals motivated by the search for happiness to consider virtuous living in order to secure future happiness in eternal life; selfish earthly pleasures were no substitute for personal and social morality.79 Nelles broadly divided the sources on ethics by the motivation behind individual actions. To some scholars, mankind had a selfish nature dominated by self-love or self-interest, and therefore prone to evil. Others assumed that mankind's nature was generally unselfish or benevolent, interested primarily in the social good. Still others, Nelles found, came down somewhere in the middle, positing that humanity could be driven by other motivations, including the presumed utility of their actions. He placed in the first group the Epicureans, Hobbes, Locke, Paley, Austin, and Bain. Among those emphasizing benevolence, he put Plato, the Stoics, Kant, Butler, and Stewart. Nelles considered Jeremy Bentham and, at times, John Stuart Mill to be utilitarian, but rarely dealt with their rationale except to disparage it. He feared that the secular skepticism inherent in the emphasis on utility would cripple morality and reduce mankind again to brutishness. Nelles agreed with Butler that, at best, utility might be one basis for action, but not the only one. An act might be right because it was useful, but normally there were other, more immediate or critical, determining factors.80 It was typical of Nelles's teaching methods that in 1864 he introduced his students to the nature of and relations among various desires, as explained in Stewart's Active and Moral Powers. He began with an explanation of Adam Smith's theory on the desire of esteem, then evaluated it through Stewart. Nelles followed this critique with a comparison of the desire for fame and the desire of duty and sought to elaborate how the desire for power emerged. He differentiated between

The Academic

165

Reid and Stewart on the classification of the principle of emulation, and between Reid and Butler - with Aristotle thrown in - on the difference between emulation and envy. Nelles then discussed the basic affections, which he contrasted as benevolent / malevolent, and asked his students what Bacon thought of their origin. Among other topics, the course also assessed resentment, Paley's view of pleasure, Whewell's criticism of Paley, the difference between self-love and selfishness, and Jouffroy's views on the origins of self-love.81 During this period, Nelles most often relied on the works of Joseph Butler. He agreed with Butler's assertion that the chief mark of a person was self-direction founded upon a systematic and rational nature. Like Butler, Nelles viewed the impulsive principles and fiery passions as strictly subordinate.8z Butler also maintained that individuals had various distinct mental faculties, including a moral faculty, which led them to act either in the interest of self-love or social love. What he was attempting to accomplish in his writings was to discover the essence of virtue and establish a theoretical structure of ethics.83 Butler held that individual morality was based on a disciplined moral nature, which in turn formed the foundation for moral government. He accepted that people had instincts for good or evil; which was followed depended upon human nature. Butler suggested that "benevolence is not more unfriendly to self-love than any other particular affection";84 in fact, benevolence and self-love were not really opposites. Since they were directed at different objects for satisfaction, there was no inherent conflict of interest between the two sentiments.85 In this he disagreed with Hobbes, who declared that the individual was dominated by love of self, a condition derived from Original Sin. Writing during the anarchy of the English Revolution, Hobbes quite understandably had claimed that virtue was the creature of the state, and happiness depended upon public security and the rule of law. The state was necessary and good because it protected human society from its own excesses.86 Furthermore, for Butler, benevolence was the essence of human nature. Proof was visible in the disposition to sociability, friendship, compassion, and affection. Benevolence favoured personal satisfaction, inherent in both self-love and social love. Human nature tended to both public and private good. The Golden Rule naturally advanced happiness in rational beings since it related love of self to love of others.87 In the late nineteenth century, Herbert Spencer picked up some of these views, assuring his public that benevolence was a necessary component of self-love. As humankind evolved, benevolence assumed a higher priority in directing action.88 Butler also equated benevolence with virtue and virtue and happiness blended together. Virtue was self-

166

Faithful Intellect

direction based on reason, the fulfillment of the best conceptions of human nature and destiny. It was accompanied by a simple, universal sense of obligation. An individual intuited a perception of obligation and believed in the supremacy of conscience over other principles. Virtue, then, was readily demonstrable by the subordination of all other faculties to conscience. Hence, one was good when one acted conscientiously. The quest for virtue was an essential component of duty; for Nelles, duty was the critical element of conscientious selfawareness. Nelles characterized Butler as positing that "the true account of man is that he possesses a variety of active principles, working each in their own way, seeking each their own end, but all combining to one common result, namely the good of both the individual and society."89 Nelles argued that an individual could not be satisfied with less than the public good. Another influence on Nelles's thought was the renowned political economist and moral philosopher Adam Smith. Although political economy dealt essentially with the production and distribution of wealth, Nelles was most intrigued by its relationship to religion and morals and introduced his students to Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiment and Wealth of Nations, published in 1759 and 1776 respectively. These volumes had an immense influence on the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Theodore Jouffroy declared, "No one has better described than Smith the supreme sway of the moral motive over the appetites and instincts, and all the faculties of our nature."90 Smith believed that humanity functioned by the principle of self-love, but competition among various self-interests led to the ultimate good of society. He was able to explain concepts such as patriotism that were in the general interest of society on a similar basis. Because of the social nature of humanity, the selfish desire for esteem or power was often made manifest by commanding imaginative, patriotic elements such as common language, culture, and political system.91 Even when making selfish use of these elements, the individual advanced the broad interests of the nation. Whether those interests were themselves good or bad was another, unresolved, issue. According to Smith and his disciples, economic self-interest acted to generate national and even world-wide benefits. The individual labouring to achieve personal wealth and power created jobs, developed technological innovations, increased efficiency, improved the standard of living for workers, and, through competition, lowered prices for goods or services. To maximize success, the entrepreneur also became imbued with the moral attributes of diligence, frugality, and temperance. The wealth and - some might claim - the happiness of all members of society were thereby expanded. Smith delineated such central concepts as the economic principles of supply and demand, the fundamental

The Academic

167

relationship between producers and consumers, and the importance of the money economy and divisions of labour, but was most influential in justifying a shift in the role of the state and the nature of economic competition. According to Smith's analysis, government should quit interfering with the natural economic order.91 It followed that the state did not have to exert itself in order to protect its citizens from anarchy; freeing social and economic institutions to serve individual needs, and hence the social good, would improve the whole basis of political interaction. A corollary to Smith's economic principles was that the public good would be enhanced because the wealthy were encouraged to be charitable. Although the recipient of charity who was unwilling to offer labour in exchange was designated a beggar, benevolence was considered an appropriate aspect of self-interest, a foil to selfishness in the accumulation of wealth. The aforegoing briefly summarizes Smith's justification for laissezfaire economics and politics. His ideas provided a substantial underpinning for many of the new university courses being developed in the late nineteenth century, including Sociology, Political Science, and Economics. Ultimately, they helped establish suitable criteria for advanced social reform and the implementation of a liberal, even radical, social gospel.93 Still, Nelles could never deny that evil existed in the world, whether or not it emanated from Original Sin. The state could not abrogate its duty to protect and reform the individual. He therefore protested the removal of government aid to higher education and encouraged a broader alliance of the churches and the state - which was, ironically, also intended to improve society and emphasize a socially relevant gospel. Nelles never totally replaced the above-named sources for his Ethics course, but he did turn to what he saw as more reliable authorities, or at least to texts that were easier for students to follow. For example, in 1867 ne taught from Jouffroy's Introduction to Ethics and Whewell's Elements of Morality, supplementing them with Wayland's Moral Science. Nelles considered Whewell to be "sound, clear, concise, full, detailed and entirely Christian in principles and tone."94 By contrast, he judged Stewart to be unsuitable, and described Butler as a giant but not appropriate for his students since he presented only fragments of great concepts and was too simplistic in his analysis of the active principles of human nature. Furthermore, he dismissed Paley's ethical works as unsound. Nelles concluded there was no great moral philosopher writing in the English language; one needed to look to continental Europe for profound works in the field. It is understandable, then, that he encouraged his students to do graduate study in Germany. Unlike many

168

Faithful Intellect

academics and clerical colleagues, Nelles did not fear German scholarship. In 1878 he informed George Hodgins that he was lecturing three times a week in Ethics and was using the works of "that wonderful German" Immanuel Kant.95 He boasted that, unlike the great essayist and historian Thomas Macaulay, he understood Kant. This shift away from the Common Sense school was mirrored at the University of Toronto, where George Paxton Young replaced James Beaven in 1871. Earlier, Young had in fact abandoned the Presbyterian ministry at least in part because of the influence of the Scottish school of philosophy in the Free Church. Similarly, John Watson replaced Common Sense with German Idealism after 1872. at Queen's University.96 During the 18708 and i88os, Nelles also made use of the writings of Wuttke, Plato, Aristotle, Schwegler, and Bascom, introducing his students to multitudes of scholarly works. His substitution of texts reflected a gradual shift in emphasis in Nelles's Ethics and Moral Philosophy lectures. As a young academic he had assumed that morality antedated all organized religion and that moral philosophy was universal and distinct from Christianity.97 On tests related to Whately's ethics, for instance, he asked for proof from Scripture that there was an essential goodness anterior to the divine command and that an independent moral faculty existed in human beings. God commanded that morality be a fundamental duty, but morality was not simply drawn from the will of God. The student was forced to go beyond Christian understanding and approach the subject critically to discover the links between philosophy and the ultimate goals of personal salvation and holy living.98 However, as he matured, Nelles expanded and tightened the connections between abstract morality and essential Christian practice. In 1859 he wrote, "The harmony of all thought and the guidance of all toil, must come from the eternal that is religion."99 Later he augmented Butler's conviction that passion was subordinate to rational impulses and that moral and natural laws were essentially identical by informing his students that they did not live randomly, in obedience to mere impulse, but by the will of God. The study of morals clarified the laws of duty under which they were bound. All moral and spiritual teaching started from the same point and worked to the same end: "For a Christian at least, there is no ethics but Christian ethics, no virtue but what springs from faith; no perfect rule but scripture, no perfect pattern but Christ."100 Nelles held that morality divorced from religion was at best partial and defective. Moreover, morality was based on the individual will to do good or evil; it must be a conscious preference. Guilt implied a voluntary disobedience to known laws and duty; those ignorant of the law were not

The Academic

169

culpable.101 This view of morality underlay Nelles's beliefs that irresponsible infants could not sin or be condemned to Hell at death and that God would not condemn the so-called heathen world, which was unaware of Christian duty. Nelles used Butler's third sermon to elaborate the idea that individuals must strive to act as moral agents by following their best convictions. He also found much in Jouffroy's essays to advance the position that the "struggle of life is between desires and conscience. The supremacy of the latter is true victory and the chief good. The sway of conscience must, however, be made a kind of passion and this raised to take in the will of God. Viewed as the kind of divine law, it assumes the character of religion. " I0i He came to believe that the unity of spirituality with moral purity in the individual was the core of religion. Nelles continued to emphasize the inherent relationship between morality and religion while still recognizing their distinctiveness. Religious character rested on the ethical, while ethical character rested on itself. Religion was founded on morality, Nelles argued; one should worship God not simply because of divine creative power but because God was a just, pure, and holy being. Both the existence of the deity and the reasonableness of loving God were proven through the psychological appreciation of ethics. In the face of the commonly held assumption that personal interest was the basis of conduct, Nelles maintained that personal happiness was not a sufficient reason for action; conscience transcended sensation. Morality required religion, since God was the ultimate source of moral conduct, and morals involved duty to God as well as duty to mankind. Indeed, the two were inseparable.103 The mid-i86os witnessed a major intellectual reassessment on Nelles's part, as he linked ethics more directly to an essential trust in God as the fountain of morality. He recorded in his diary: Think of giving a new turn to my ethical lectures and of adopting more largely the religious aspect of ethics, notwithstanding the objections forcibly urged against the so-called theological school of morals. True the divine will may not be the ultimate ground of obligations, but it is nevertheless ultimate enough for all practical purposes and is within one single step of the ultimate principle. "Why should we obey the will of God?" Answer, "Because it is the will of God," that is because it is the will of an all-wise, benevolent, and powerful being, whose will must be perfect law. We may say divine law for divine will if we choose, which is the same as to say infinite reason and infinite power, and infinite goodness all combined in a living eternal Spirit, who made and upholds all things. All other grounds of obligation are comprehended and personified in God. The advantages of this mode of stating the grounds of duty are that it

i yo

Faithful Intellect

unites morality and religion, and this gives to ethics a new soul and power. Morality of itself as divorced from religion will never renovate the heart, nor the world. We must have the warmth and tenderness of religion. Sentiment and faith, and hope and reason are all combined in religion ... It may be well to consider ethics aside from its religious aspects, but we should beware of trusting such ethics as the means of forming life and character.104

Nelles knew that he should teach his students to appreciate the various intellectual components of the field of Moral Philosophy, but that it was much more critical to inspire them to live moral and ethical lives. Since a large proportion of his Arts students intended to enter the ministry, it was essential that they feel deeply the intimacy between God and morality. This goal was more vital than taking sides in any debate over the sources of ethical principles. Nelles bluntly informed his students that they must spend thirty minutes every day reviewing their moral progress, honestly scrutinizing their faults and foibles. They must also apportion enough time each day to fulfill their moral duties.105 While Ethics and Moral Philosophy remained his major pedagogical preoccupations, in 1871 Nelles finally brought it about that the college offered formal courses in theology. A year later he organized a department under the resourceful Nathanael Burwash, and a year after that transformed it into a full Faculty of Theology with Burwash as dean. In spite of his already heavy teaching load in the Arts program, Nelles added Homiletics, the science of preaching, to his courses on Ethics and Evidences of Religion in the new faculty. He had, in fact, anticipated this new responsibility both by teaching a course on Rhetoric and by providing advice on preaching in Saturday lectures beginning in 1868. Even earlier, he had helped clergy with their preaching on a more informal basis. Nelles, who had studied the greatest preachers of history and particularly of his own day, believed there was no better skill or more valuable occupation. When listening to a sermon, his critical nature inclined him to analyse it for content, style, organization, and presentation - a distraction that led him to berate himself for failing to appreciate the saving benefits of the preacher's message.106 Nelles's library contained extensive collections of sermons. His tastes were extremely eclectic and catholic: along with the obvious works by Wesley and other important Methodist divines, he accumulated sermons by Joseph Butler, Thomas Chalmers, John Henry Newman, Sydney Smith, Cardinal Manning, Horace Bushnell, William Morley Punshon, Dean Stanley, Theodore Parker, Henry Ward Beecher, and lesser-known individuals. For teaching purposes he supplemented these

The Academic

171

works with books discussing rhetorical methods.107 Nelles insisted that his theology students always remember the lessons of rhetoric and the principles of logic when preparing sermons and preaching to their congregations. His collections of sermons were, of course, primarily used for their theological and philosophical content, but they demonstrated the best elements of homiletics as well. Furthermore, to shed even more light on the art of preaching, Nelles introduced historical, biographical, and philosophical works by authorities ranging from Thucydides, Homer, Demosthenes, Plato, Virgil, and Cicero to Gibbon, Burke, Macaulay, Parkman, Goldwin Smith, and Carlyle, and even Canadians such as John Carroll, William Henry Withrow, and Egerton Ryerson. Study of this vast variety of sources would assist the student in grasping the mysterious components of successful preaching. Nelles additionally recommended many of the great literary works for their imagery and their ability to penetrate directly to the emotional faculties. He continued to feel that poets most clearly recognized the complex and beautiful aspects of life, interpreted them through their imagination, and taught others to appreciate them. The poet was the preacher's ally in explaining God's wisdom and enhancing mankind's understanding of the essentials of divine revelation.108 Most of Nelles's advice to young preachers was rather obvious and reflected useful counsel that he himself had received in the past or characteristics that had proven beneficial for successful preachers. Students must read widely, be well versed in the specific subject of the sermon, and have the outline, structure, and themes clearly in mind. As noted earlier, Nelles opposed ill-planned, extemporaneous preaching. Along with its other shortcomings, "extemporaneous speech is not the best discipline for brevity,"109 which was a mark of good preaching since it forced the exclusion of trivial asides and demanded a clear focus. Further, Nelles stressed the benefits of variety and of avoiding dullness, which, he suggested, came from "the mechanical and dogmatic assertion of traditional commonplaces."110 Preachers could expect little success unless they were natural and direct, as opposed to artificial, contrived, or imitative. They must address the heart, the mind, and the conscience; demonstrate sympathy for their audience; and be faithful to Christ. Nelles assured his students that without being spiritually alive themselves, they would fail to win the approval of their congregations; more importantly, they would never convince sinners to seek salvation. Worshippers came to church to find God, not to listen to a clever sermon or witness amusing theatrics. For Nelles, sermons should have a practical application leading to a significant moral end. He agreed with Henry Ward

172,

Faithful Intellect

Beecher that the world offered no platform for good superior to the Christian pulpit. In 1875 Nelles published a systematic summary of his approach to homiletics entitled "On Preaching" in the Canadian Methodist Magazine. It outlined the qualities a preacher should strive to achieve in his sermons, told church members what they had the right to expect, and advocated a more scholarly and respectable preaching style. A sermon was the systematic arrangement of biblical values for the inculcation of moral and religious truth. In the words of Phillips Brooks, "Preaching is the communication of truth by man to men. It has in it two essential elements, truth and personality."111 Nelles always instructed his students to preach only the gospel and avoid obscure or overly fine doctrinal points: "The seeds of divine truth must be warmed, moistened, and softened in the heart of the preacher, and given to the hearer as living germs, not as old, dry limbs wrenched from theology books."112 The earnest preacher transcended the academic theologian to reach the loftier heights of the prophet. His sermon would "still be the sword of truth, but it will glow, and gleam, and glance as a sword of flame."113 Nelles added: "It is the work of the preacher under the influence of the Holy Ghost, whose power the Bible alone reveals, to have these solemn truths live again in himself, till when he utters them it shall be so that he shall be forgotten, and the people will be compelled to say - God hath spoken."114 Nelles worried about how the inexperienced preacher would deal with the rising tide of skepticism and dangerous scientific theories. He supported faithful inquiry but realized that much of what passed for new wisdom was corroding popular faith. The promoters of such views should only be faced by equally skilled, dedicated, and knowledgeable preachers; the unwitting or unwary merely advertised the views they sought to denounce. "The next worst thing to putting Darwin or Spencer to preach would be to put men in the pulpit to preach against them, especially men who know little about them."115 Public attacks on Tyndall, Huxley, or Spencer frequently gained them popular sympathy and promoted the sale of their writings while the church gained nothing. If a minister did undertake the battle, he must be fair, moderate, and truthful; moreover, he needed to comprehend what he opposed and therefore required a thorough scientific training. Nelles also argued that it was better to avoid a denunciation of controversial statements, which often contained at least a grain of truth that could be used to bolster weak points in Christian apologetics. He never feared knowledge from any valid source. Necessarily, however, "Through the pulpit must shine not the dazzling brilliance of science, but the softer glory of the Son of God."116

The Academic

173

Nelles opposed excessive enthusiasm in sermonizing; fiery oratory must not overwhelm the message of salvation. Under the inspiration provided by emotion, the preacher could misrepresent or confuse biblical doctrine and thereby undermine saving faith. The head must be addressed as well as the heart. Moreover, it was easy for young ministers to become intoxicated by the sound of their own voices or by the fame brought to them by pompous language, wild gestures, and weeping audiences. Spurious rhetoric, Nelles declared, should never be confused with the forceful and burning eloquence of the truly noble preacher. He thoroughly appreciated the commanding charm of voice and action in Whitefield; or the inscrutable spell and arrowy words of Spurgeon; or the marvelous wealth of thought, fancy, feeling, language and illustration - in a word, the infinite felicities of speech remarkable in Beecher; or the classic and chiseled finish, the happy wedlock of truth and beauty, the "apples of gold in pictures of silver," in the unrivalled elocution of William Morley Punshon.117

Punshon served as a particularly sage and vivid example for Canadian Methodists, preaching throughout the nation and across the United States between 1868 and 1873 as president of the Wesleyan Conference. Upon his arrival, he deeply impressed the Victoria community with his baccalaureate sermon to the graduating class. He often repeated his lecture "Daniel in Babylon" or "Macaulay" to packed and appreciative meetings. Whole villages, regardless of ecclesiastical affiliation, turned out to hear him.118 Punshon embodied the finest qualities of an orator; Nelles modelled both his Homiletics course and his own sermons on his preaching. Few of Nelles's productions have survived, in either manuscript or printed form, but the Canadian Methodist Magazine did publish part of his 1878 sermon to the Theological Union at Victoria College, "The Place of Theology Among the Sciences," and in 1888 posthumously printed "Eternal Life."119 They offer important glimpses into his style and the themes that preoccupied him as an academic and a noted preacher. Nelles took sincere pride in his teaching, recognizing that for him it was the best means of fulfilling his clerical duties. He also came to appreciate that there was no better occupation than studying the great works of theology, history, philosophy, and literature, then distributing that knowledge to bright young college students. God had clearly called him to this service. His liberal and catholic attitudes, passionate involvement on behalf of his college and church, and adept pedagogical style combined to make him a model academic, university administrator, and Christian leader. Nelles never lost his passion for learning,

174

Faithful Intellect

particularly in areas that developed proper character and moral sense. His teaching always focused on producing profoundly Christian authorities for the country and the world. Victoria University supplied an ideal environment for Nelles to meet his educational and religious responsibilities. Its students were among the brightest and most resolute scholars in the country, deeply involved with the vital academic and social questions of the age. Nelles reserved a particular affection for them and always felt most at ease in their presence. Under his leadership, Victoria melded within its halls an earnest and faithful mission to spread knowledge with an inspired determination to develop spiritual salvation and moral purity. Nelles was personally restrained and self-critical, yet he was also highly romantic, deeply sympathetic toward human weakness in others, and profoundly committed to the educational welfare of Canada. He appreciated that the opportunity to learn and to teach was the gift of God and strove to serve God by turning knowledge into wisdom.

7 The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

In June 1866, Samuel Nelles once again recorded a profound sense of personal frustration and weariness with the world. However, these feelings were always tempered by his abiding confidence in the future. "Deeply oppressed with a sense of unspeakable dimness and vanity of human life. The Gospel throws some light, but still we see through a glass darkly. Yet I hold on by the three great props of the soul: faith, hope and charity. Let me have faith in God."1 Even though the way appeared clouded and God's revelations were at best poorly comprehended, he prayed for stronger trust and laboured for greater enlightenment. Twenty-one years later, Nelles requested that his tombstone be inscribed with the phrase from I Corinthians 13:12,, "Now we see through a glass, darkly." The words had come back to him shortly before his untimely death as he discussed with George Hodgins the "new theology" then entering educated church circles. Despite being again in a state of mental depression and physical exhaustion, Nelles perceived the emphasis of the verse as having shifted and become more subdued. The prism transmitting God remained opaque, the future imperfectly outlined, earthly knowledge at best partial, but Nelles felt he was progressing in his comprehension of the key elements of life and was now better able to see through the "glass" to the future. As he died, his physician remarked that finally all was revealed to him.1 His faith had sustained him. Throughout his life, Nelles had participated in the deepening conflict between traditional Christian belief and what he considered to be mere speculative rationalism. The broad range of scientific theories and discoveries, especially the work stemming from Darwin's pronouncements on the evolution of life, propelled a fundamental upheaval of society's religious core and forced Nelles to re-evaluate elements of his own beliefs. He meditated, "Some future age will find rest, but to us

176

Faithful Intellect

belong the throes of mental conflict. What can be more anarchical and contradictory than the present state of the so called Protestant world?" 3 He longed for the pure and simple faith of his childhood but recognized he could never recover the past. Still, he trusted that a substantially better assurance would emerge: "What is to be the end of all is known to God. The transition will ere long pass away, and the quiet, settled faith will return."4 As society became increasingly torn by discordant forces intent on dissolving the bonds of religion and knowledge, Nelles assured Canadian Methodists, "The winds of skepticism are blowing, but God will carry humanity forward toward higher and happier ideals."5 Nonetheless, he never entirely resolved his own perplexities or found the peace he so desperately sought. Since at least mid-century, Nelles's personal perspectives - and indeed those of the whole of society - had been unnerved by new knowledge and its application to Christian belief. Various schools of science and philosophy were competing to explode traditional assumptions governing human relations. Writing to George Hodgins in 1878, Nelles revealed his frustrations and expectations: "I fear the rent in the Christian world is getting deeper and wider, but God will bring all round again in due time. I think I can see signs of preparation for a glorious revival and spread of Christianity. 'He shall not fail nor be discouraged.' But at times the great problems oppress me. Still John Ryerson's last counsel was good - 'Cling to the old Religion'. "6Regardless of the momentary comfort in Ryerson's conservative advice, Nelles never truly contemplated a return to such uncritical and potentially repressive Christianity. Methodism had to face the harsh winds of change and confront the threats to experiential religion if it hoped to re-establish spiritual certainty. Science was only one component of the social malaise, compounding rather than initiating the upheaval in the world.7 Nelles was always aware of the broader aspects of the intellectual turmoil and counselled his students about the assaults on political, economic, and social order. The implications of Karl Marx's economic analysis posed as real a threat to social harmony as the political revolutions that marked contemporary history. The Utopian communists and socialists, too, were in their own quieter vocabulary demanding the overthrow of society. Even overdue reforms .endangered the old order. The power of labour could only be realized by destroying the power of capital. By the late nineteenth century, anarchists and nihilists overtly condemned even the notion of order, using terror to implement their ideas. They assassinated European royalty and American presidents because the institutions they represented embodied long-held concepts of natural authority.

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

177

Less violent but equally revolutionary, European and American philosophers and social theorists attacked and helped overturn the traditional foundations of human relations. Thomas Malthus and John Stuart Mill, for instance, actively denied the motive of benevolence and self-sacrifice in human and divine conduct. Mill supported a SaintSimonian social evolution but, like Jeremy Bentham, assumed that mankind was motivated primarily by a quest for pleasure exhibited most clearly in utilitarianism.8 Through his imaginative study of human demographics, Malthus had announced that, while population was increasing in a geometric ratio, food production was only expanding in an arithmetic ratio. In his apocalyptic scenario, it would not be long before the world could no longer feed its people. According to Malthus, natural laws set limits on what humanity could achieve. As well as attacking the divine institution of marriage to the end of restraining population growth, he seemed to deny mankind's responsibility for poverty and oppression, claiming that God had not provided the Earth with sufficient resources to satisfy human needs. With God and organized religion under assault from every quarter, little remained to restrain the lovers of chaos.9 Still, Nelles defiantly held that the Christian world could never truly advance as long as modern knowledge and religion were estranged. He maintained that "religion is the only adequate guide and the only true culture of the intellect. Science without religion is without final aim or spiritual repose."10 In 1869, the Wesleyan Church echoed his views and condemned "the fascinations and seductions of worldly society, the insidious encroachments of a worldly spirit and worldly principles, the haste and eagerness to be right, and the consequent speculations and modes of trade and merchandise, and the ever restless hopes and anxieties induced; add to these the rationalistic, infidel, and erratic principles everywhere expounded."11 Nelles remained true to his quest for a "quiet, settled faith." In the i88os he advised his students not to be alarmed by the intellectual unrest and doubt over religion that were challenging the world. There is throughout Europe and America a general loosening of the old landmarks, an apparent crumbling of old creeds, a feverish running up and down, hither and thither, as with people in a mob, when no one knows whither the crowd is moving, or what is the thing being done. This shifting and perplexity shows itself in a hundred different ways; in literature, in politics, in education schemes, in Biblical criticism, in ecclesiastical organizations, in a political Conservatism that stoops to conquer by flirting with democracy, and in a democracy that descends to communism, socialism, nihilism, diabolism ... Oscar Wilde creating a popular furor with his yellow flowers and knee breeches may

178

Faithful Intellect

perhaps be taken as a kind of symptomatic efflorescence of the same order of things, if indeed the phrase order of things can be employed in relation to the froth and foam that floats upon a stream.12

Nelles recognized that the age was especially traumatic for the young, who lacked secure foundations. He counselled them to test the old values and retain only those that remained valid. He knew how difficult it was to find lucid and definitive answers for the myriad questions facing the age, particularly in the vast arena of Science. But the solutions would not be found among the dry and dusty dogmas of the past. Curiosity must be satisfied. Imagination and investigation could not be placed in hibernation, nor could the genie be returned to the bottle. Perplexity was a natural feature of life, a fact that should challenge, not discourage: We cannot altogether see whither we are drifting. What matter? Even the old Hebrew prophets did not altogether see that. And yet they heralded the dawn of a brighter day, although then, as now and always, many false prophets have gone out into the world, and it is our duty still to try the spirits whether they be of God. Every age is building wiser than it knows. We cannot see whither we are drifting, and with good reason, since we are not drifting at all, but only sailing with God over the infinite seas. We must have faith in God ... But if science be true, or if Christianity be true, and especially if both be true, there can be no drifting except as a form of law and order. There is not science of chaos, or of the fortuitous. All the discoveries of science are discoveries of law, and tend more and more to show us that the universe of things is not chaos, but kosmos, which being translated means beautiful order.13

Nelles understood that the new knowledge affected all social relations. No element of nineteenth-century life was immune. The danger was real, yet the appropriate response was to press forward actively and devoutly in the pursuit of greater knowledge and more profound wisdom. God had promised that all would eventually be resolved for the best. The Protestant churches especially must utilize all appropriate information to transform and modernize themselves in order to preserve Canadians from skepticism and evil. In a long article, Nelles outlined the attributes of the ideal church, assuring his readers that it would ultimately appear. His forward-looking vision reflected his belief in the integrity and unity of intellectual questioning and devout faith. To clear away the accretions of a darker age, to correct our mistaken valuation of trifles, to ignore our unimportant Church differences, to relax a little the

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

179

binding rigour of our limitary definitions, to bring the light of fresh and unbiased study upon the inspired Word, to reach out the hand of loving, Christ-like sympathy to perishing sinners, to recognize the occasional good thoughts and the common hunger for God even in heathen minds, to press the supernatural facts and cardinal truths of the gospel upon the conscience and heart, these may indicate, in a rough general way, the best direction for the Church's present effort, and in this direction she is moving. The pulpit, the lecture room, the press, and even the discoveries of science, will severally and jointly contribute, and will, in God's great providence, usher in that Ideal Church, to which the Church of to-day will be, "As moonlight unto sunlight, and as water unto wine."14

Nelles worked tirelessly to achieve this ideal, striving to invigorate his own understanding and Methodism's ability to comprehend and deal effectively with the theological and scientific knowledge engulfing nineteenth-century society. The need for personal salvation and unyielding faith in God were absolutes, beyond inquiry, but less critical matters must be freely evaluated and harmonized with the unfolding wisdom of the age. For Nelles, the compatibility of religion and science was undeniable; it was mankind's duty to make this relationship manifest and thereby eliminate the threats posed by secularism, nihilism, and skepticism to the orderly development of the world. Failure would mean the reign of chaos. Nelles unreservedly adopted this task for Victoria College. The goal was faith, but faith depended upon knowledge. Faith served as a vital anchor, yet "though anchors may give a feeling of security they are not conducive to movement and a vessel at anchor may fail to weather a storm."15 Ultimately, full knowledge never contradicted faith. Although he never completed his work, Nelles appreciated the value of searching for the truth and announcing the truth that was Jesus Christ - the truth that would make mankind free. The simple faith that Nelles remembered from his youth had in fact been subject to nearly constant questioning since at least the late eighteenth century. The vast and continuous expansion of scientific information and its application to everyday life were forever altering the foundations on which society rested. In Canada, early scientific investigation had been carried out by dedicated, conscientious amateurs. The countryside often appeared crowded with enthusiastic men and women gathering everything from butterflies to fossils. Their collecting culminated in the assembling and categorizing of massive numbers of unique biological, botanical, and geological specimens, which were then integrated with the products of similar research around the world. Naturalists from various religious, political, and social traditions,

i8o

Faithful Intellect

operating under the same precise Baconian discipline, thereby systematically enlarged the body of scientific knowledge.16 This information gave Canadians such as Samuel Nelles a fuller appreciation of both the nation's economic potential and God's unbounded benevolence. Pure science combined with technological innovation and dynamic entrepreneurialism to develop the nation's wealth for the benefit of its citizens. During the second quarter of the century, a host of historical and scientific societies sprang up to foster greater cooperation among individuals interested in scientific investigation and to help make sure that proper standards were maintained. They reflected the increasingly professional nature of the inquiry.17 Attendant on this explosion of information was a proliferation of scientific studies leading to shocking new theories. Geological studies destroyed any pre-existing consensus over the age of the planet or the length of time life had existed on it. The belief that the world had been created in seven solar days now appeared as incredible as the notion that the sun revolved around the Earth.18 Hugh Miller's Footprints of the Creator and Testimony of the Rocks popularized the study of geology, extended the time line of human existence, and promoted the idea that change was gradual over long periods of time. Charles Lyell in his Principles of Geology advanced most conclusively the theory of uniformitarianism against the assumption of catastrophic change, as exemplified by Noah's flood.19 Archaeology and paleontology also conspired to extend the antiquity of man, while discoveries in biology, botany, and zoology suggested an infinitely more complex natural world than anyone had previously contemplated - and even impugned humanity's supremacy over nature. Although scientists such as Miller, Louis Agassiz, Lyell, or his Canadian protege William Dawson engaged in serious disagreements over the interpretation of evidence, they all worked within the same respected scientific system. The parameters and nature of scientific debate had significantly broadened since the sanctified pronouncements of Bishop James Ussher.20 Equally unsettling for Canadian society, popular secular scholars now claimed the same inherent authority in asserting their beliefs that had once been reserved to the theologian or the prophet. Religious elites bound by an overarching faith in God who resided in the essentially safe precincts of the church no longer held a monopoly on knowledge or wisdom. The book of Genesis could no longer be used to interpret nature; rather, scientific studies would eventually use nature to assail Genesis/1 No-one in the present day would unquestioningly accept the denunciations by ill-informed and bigoted church officials of a Galileo or Copernicus. Sir Isaac Newton's discovery of the laws of gravity did not undermine faith because he placed them within the

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

181

context of a divinely governed universe. Thus, his work led to a better understanding of divine creation and the perfect nature of God.22 But, asked the Christian, were there no limits to the outlandish assertions of science? A science that countenanced no appeal to ecclesiastical sanctions or failed even to appear to tolerate religious sentiments contributed heavily to the decline in the status of clergy and respect for their opinions.23 At one time, a minister's warning had been sufficient. Now, no-one accepted untested assertions purely on faith; concrete proof was demanded. Without faith for an answer, the church had to defend its legitimacy with the same instruments as the scientist and rational scholar. Here was the real threat to social order and to intellectual and religious contentment posed by secularization. Nelles never denied the critical importance of impartial scrutiny, but rested his beliefs ultimately on faith. Let science prove as much as it could; faith would balance and sustain the truth. Despite the virulent assaults on the fundamentals of order, for most of the first six decades of the century science and religion had marched at least along parallel paths, if not always in step. Nelles argued that, where harmony appeared impossible, mankind had simply not yet unravelled God's meaning. New science too often relied on contradictory or inconclusive evidence. With theory denouncing theory and science in a state of flux, Nelles advised the church and the Canadian public not to be overly distracted by the discussions, and certainly not to be diverted from a trust in devout learning.24 When Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859, the debate became decidedly more complicated and intense. Darwin did not invent the idea of evolution. Jean Baptiste Lamarck had proposed two generations before that species evolved by reacting to their environment and were transmuted through the inheriting of new traits by offspring.2* But, through the mechanism of natural selection, Darwin provided evolution with a magnificently simple and logical means of operation. His theory refuted the biblical account in which all living things had originated at once as part of a single divine creative act. Rather, their almost infinite variety had developed as they adapted to their particular environments over immense epochs. The species that survived were those best able to obtain food and reproduce in the face of a generally hostile nature. In 1871, Darwin carried his argument to its logical conclusion in The Descent of Man by including humanity in his panorama of the natural realm. Mankind was no longer a unique and superior creature made in the image of God to whom the world had been given. Humans were subject to the same forces and driven by the same appetites as all other animals.

18 2.

Faithful Intellect

Although to the general public, including Nelles, Darwin appeared to remain a sincere Christian, he felt that his personal religious beliefs were nobody's business. In fact, he suffered from long bouts of doubt, skepticism, and agnosticism.2-6 After the publication of The Descent of Man, he retreated to his laboratory to avoid further controversy, taking refuge in his preferred occupation of detailed writing and experimentation. Over the following decade, he published articles on a number of disparate topics: "The Formation of Vegetable Mould Through the Action of Earthworms," "The Movements and Habits of Climbing Plants," and "The Different Forms of Flowers on Plants of the Same Species," among others.27 Darwin strictly avoided any involvement in the uproar over the theological and sociological implications of his hypotheses, but he never apologized for his basic premises or the methodology on which they were based. Darwin's disciples were quick to apply his analysis to a wide array of natural phenomena, and indeed to all substantial areas of human development. Scholars such as John Tyndall, Herbert Spencer, Thomas Huxley, and John Stuart Mill attacked traditional assumptions inherent in natural history, philosophy, and theology, along with the cornerstones of science. Mill had placed his confidence in a liberated individualism freed from old social and intellectual restraints. Huxley whom William Dawson, principal of McGill University, characterized as a decent naturalist until spoiled by Darwinian theories and methods - found in Darwin a superb rationale for the incongruity of science and theology. He welcomed the break between science and theology as a "triumph for the free spirit of rational and scientific inquiry by which alone humankind might save itself from enslavement to a cruel and indifferent universe."28 Huxley's new faith was founded on full-blown Darwinianism. Spencer's ethical principles relied on the evolution of lower into higher animals, culminating in humans. Unnecessary traits were repressed and replaced by qualities required in a complex social habitation. Through the development of sympathy, altruism gradually superseded egoism. Tyndall, the active scientist, accepted natural selection but admitted he did not know whether God or some other force initiated the process. John Fiske and other American scholars rapidly introduced Darwinian values to North American audiences.29 These thinkers were met head-on by others who refused to accept their scientific and therefore their philosophical or theological conclusions. Even many academics who sympathized with Darwin's theories agreed that he had not proven natural selection was the only process at work; much more research was required to fill in the gaps and add substance to his claims. Darwin's opponents rebutted the theory of transmutation by claiming that species were fixed at the time of their

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

183

creation; attacked gradual evolutionary transformation, which discounted catastrophic change; denied any relationship between animal and human development; and assailed the profound social implications of his ideas.30 However, over the 18705 and i88os, Darwin's most renowned scientific adversaries gradually died off or lost a receptive scholarly audience. Louis Agassis, Darwin's chief antagonist in the United States, remained influential among church or popular audiences but by the time of his death in 1873 was described more "as a superannuated oracle than as an argumentative force to be reckoned with."31 With Charles Lyell's death two years later, William Dawson remained the last prominent North American defender of the old order. Still, science was never the exclusive preserve of the professional. Everyone claimed a right to participate in the scientific debate at the least, and certainly in its theological and philosophical implications. Over time, all the moral and spiritual questions, philosophical debates, and theological studies became for Nelles inextricably bound to scientific discoveries, and especially to the application of scientific methods to the study of history and the Bible. Darwin and his disciples therefore presented a potentially overwhelming assault on the simple faith of his youth inasmuch as they attacked theological consensus and promoted irreligion and intellectual confusion.32 In particular, they challenged the version of creation given in Genesis, denied that the Bible was the inspired and authoritative word of God, and questioned mankind's entire relationship with God. If human beings had never resided in the Garden of Eden and had therefore never fallen from the state of grace, was there still need for a Redeemer? Indeed, was there such a thing as sin? Equally fundamental, what was God's role in creation, and did God still function in human progress? Ultimately, was there a God? Even having the temerity to pose such questions shook the very foundations of Christian security and drastically unsettled the comfortable faith of Canadians. The new and radical scientific theories were breaking the chains of society's spiritual and intellectual anchors, wrenching normality, and casting aside honoured authorities. The great ship of society was adrift, and the winds of secularism and skepticism were blowing it onto the rocks of anarchy and chaos. Nelles's response was neither to adopt the radical notions nor to be stampeded into a reactionary attempt to buttress orthodoxy. He denounced the new scientific theories on the basis not only that they were unproven and therefore subject to further investigation, but also that they were founded on poor scientific methodology. Darwinists began with the hypothesis of evolution through natural selection, then looked for supporting evidence. They had never actually discovered one species evolving into another form. Traditional academics,

184

Faithful Intellect

including Nelles, denied the validity of their deductive approach because it supplanted careful observation with abstract speculation.33 In a 1869 discussion on "The Antiquity of Man," the Christian Guardian professed to feel no sympathy for scientists who complained about being criticized for their seemingly poor methodology: "The professors of geology frequently have themselves to blame for this treatment, in consequence of their hasty generalization from a too narrow induction of facts."34 A decade later, Victoria College's student magazine, Acta Victoriana, pointed out in an examination of the same topic that some scholars believed mankind to be 6,000 years old, while others mentioned 2,0,000 or even 2,00,000 years. There was no authoritative proof for any timespan, and the article sarcastically attacked the whole notion. "Having declared themselves descendants of the ape, what more natural, than that they should make their own relationship as distant as they may."35 Nelles did not like such silly criticism, since it offered no valid arguments and fostered mindless bigotry and a retreat from experimentation; however, he did agree that many scientists needed an improved methodology. Nelles, who never personally did any scientific research, still considered training in the inductive method to be an excellent mental discipline for subjects far removed from natural science, and unhesitatingly advocated the Baconian approach for unravelling the mysteries of nature and the laws by which God administered the universe even after many progressive scientists had abandoned it. He felt it was essential in the quest for universal principles, whether they supported or contradicted traditional assumptions and orthodox belief.36 Another factor in the controversy was the widespread belief that there were limits to human understanding, and therefore limits to legitimate inquiry. Religion relied on God's mysteries remaining mysterious. If mankind resolved all the great questions of nature and the divine, there would be no difference between God and humanity, and no need for a foundation of faith. Many Christians held that, "Wherever we encounter genuine religion it appeals to revelation as the only process by which the way in which man can have dealings with God is made known; for the divine is the realm of the mysterious, completely concealed from profane knowledge."37 The problems facing society were caused by those who ignored these limits, introducing skepticism and unbelief into the world. On the other hand, Nelles worried that those who feared new scholarship effectively retreated into a universe that antedated modern science and philosophy, grasping the Bible as a drowning sailor clutched floating debris. While he agreed that mankind could never comprehend

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

185

all the mysteries of God or nature while here on Earth - one could only "see through the glass, darkly" - he also insisted that it was essential to penetrate into all facets of existence to unlock the knowledge and wisdom that God was progressively unfolding. Methodism had a proud heritage of questioning religious anomalies and social foibles; it should never shun whatever light was shed by learning.38 As we have seen, it was obvious to Nelles that faith in God must be absolute. Civilization could depend on no other principle. Yet, in his view, even Protestant ministers had too often replaced pure, rational faith with a comfortable trust in doctrines and creeds simply because they were orthodox or were clothed in the respectable garb of antiquity. It was not a sin to doubt the old ecclesiastical standards by which one had been raised. Methodists expected Muslims or Roman Catholics or heathens to abandon their false beliefs, so why should Protestants fear a devout examination of their own authorities? Nelles agreed with Kant, "What is exempt from criticism falls under suspicion," and with Pascal, "Superstition is the death of piety."39 The contemporary church was better than its predecessors; it would continue to advance as long as it did not fear to integrate new knowledge or cultivate a purer spiritual and moral life.40 Proper experimentation had long been the hallmark of Protestantism. "The Bible itself appeals to reason and bases its claim to man's acceptance, reverence, and love, on the fact that it is in accord with reason ... It was the human mind endeavoring to test all things that scattered the darkness of the middle ages, and the right of man to use his reason has been at the foundation of all the advancement of a religious nature since then."41 Ultimate progress depended on abandoning what proved useless and assimilating what faithful testing proved valuable. God never disapproved of mankind asking sensitive questions. George Grant, principal of Queen's University, expressed agreement with Nelles in 1881: "Like you, just because I have faith in the great spiritual truths of Revelation and in the supernatural facts on which Christianity is based, I demand, i. Freedom to investigate and to think for myself. 2.. A clearing away from the fair face of truth the dust and grime of centuries, that all may behold and be entranced by the surprising beauty of her countenance."41 For Nelles, informed individual conscience was the surest guide to truth. Everyone needed to search for the good and honour truth. Still, religion had the right to expect investigation that included the use of the emotional and spiritual senses; not everything was revealed by purely rational scientific inquiry alone. Much of the trauma associated with the new science derived from its application to the Bible. Like most of his contemporaries, Nelles assumed that the Bible was the inspired word of God and the main font

186

Faithful Intellect

of revelation, and moreover recounted the sacred history of antiquity. The one sure source of doctrine and morality, it supplied everything necessary for redemption and eternal life. Many feared that these benefits would be compromised by the adoption of the new methodology. The critical approach to Scripture took both "lower" and "higher" forms. Lower, or textual, criticism involved detailed analysis of the texts to ascertain the correct meaning of the language. Improved translations more accurately representing the content of the Old and New Testaments might resolve discrepancies between the Bible and evolutionary theory. Generations of scholars had accepted the legitimacy of such criticism since it did not assail the inspiration, authority, or unity of the Scriptures. Nelles's associate Nathanael Burwash preached, "The grammar, poetry, rhetoric, belong to the age in which they were written, but do not undermine the inspiration which watered the words with the spirit of life."43 Nelles himself always maintained that language could only imprecisely represent the mind and workings of God; careful reflection and prudent correction were therefore both necessary and good. However, higher criticism and its cousin historical criticism were troublesome inasmuch as they assumed that,the Bible should be examined in the same way as any historical or literary text. In these approaches, the authors, nature, and authority of Scripture were assessed without reference to Christian doctrine or the final arbitration of faith. In the past, a certain amount of such criticism had been exercised without controversy, normally within the cloistered confines of a seminary or university where it could offend few of the uninformed. Wesley, for instance, had dismissed the idea that Moses wrote the Pentateuch on the grounds that it described his own death. In 1860, at the same time that Darwin's influence was starting to spread, J.W. Parker edited Essays and Reviews, a collection of articles from some of the most advanced British liberal theologians, including C.W. Goodwin, "On the Mosaic Cosmogony"; Benjamin Jowett, "On the Interpretation of Scripture"; and Baden Powell, "On the Study of the Evidence of Christianity."44 In restrained and simple language, these scholars called for a new approach to the Bible: better methodology, less partisan and partial interpretations, and more daring probing. The volume, which went through at least nine editions in a year and continued to be reprinted for generations, forced biblical scholars and theologians to take scriptural criticism seriously. Though Nelles was theologically a moderate liberal, he concluded that these apparently reasonable and friendly critics, who were claiming to improve scriptural understanding and religious practice, were more dangerous to Christianity than any of their rationalist predecessors.

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

187

At about the same time, Bishop John William Colenso of Natal published St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans: newly translated and explained, following it with The Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua Critically Examined. These works gave a liberal interpretation of eternal punishment and other vital theological concepts. More radical by far, they rejected the traditional authorship and historical accuracy of the Old Testament. The Church of England excommunicated Colenso and tried unsuccessfully to expel him from his episcopal seat.45 The controversy quickly became the focus of popular debate on both sides of the Atlantic. Nelles's viewpoint was that it was vital for all analysis to begin with the assumption of inerrancy and proceed cautiously and devoutly. Most modern biblical criticism did neither; instead, it gave broad license and even respectability to ill-conceived, skeptical investigation. By suggesting that the Bible was full of allegory and legend designed to suit a primitive society, that the Old Testament did not point to the New, and that its chronology and information were faulty, higher criticism seemed to demonstrate contempt for organized religion and promote the heretical destruction of faith.46 Students at Victoria College were divided on the issue but agreed with their professors in being upset by the methodology used by many of the critics: Encouraged by the voice of her silly jabbering, they plunge into the bottomless abyss of theology as into a warm bath, launch out into the open expanse of the universe as into their flower gardens, and stand forth to explain the infinitely unexplainable, as if they were giving their children a few simple lessons in elementary arithmetic; all the while looking as if they could explain greater problems than the infinities and eternities if required. The name we shall give to this universally used science is Conjecture, or, in common parlance, Guessing.47

Nelles was less than sympathetic to deductive methodology, but his reliance on free inquiry made him more tolerant of the efforts to get at the roots of the Bible than many of his colleagues and students. Nelles did not fear proper biblical criticism. If theology wished to retain its claim of being a science, it could not avoid the test of reason. True religion could withstand any legitimate investigation; free and earnest study only bettered Christianity. Fundamentally, it did not matter who wrote the Pentateuch or what was the chronology of the prophets. It was more important that biblical critics were peeling away the layers of debris which had for too long concealed the real meaning of Scripture. Their substantial insights demonstrated the complexity and profundity of the Bible and allowed the church to

188

Faithful Intellect

make its message more profound. Nelles appreciated any authentic insights, and applauded the debunking of myths and false orthodoxy. He inscribed in his diary: "Let the dead boughs fall away, / Fresher shall the living grow."48 And he warned, "The agreement of millions in an exposition of faith may be but the unanimity of ignorance or custom, and the venerableness of a system may be but the antiquity of error."49 He also noted that "Lot's unhappy wife turned into a pillar of salt as an eternal warning to those who seek their Ideal behind them" and that Pascal had reminded the faithful that it was the excommunicated who ultimately saved the church.50 As always, the key was properly grounded inquiry. Nelles also regarded historical criticism as valid because it applied a reasonable means of analysing literature and history to the world's most important text. He explained to his students the difference between narrative and critical history and how the critical approach emerged from philosophical concepts of doubt and unbelief. As a result, it risked being improperly confused with skepticism and secularism when applied to Scripture. Nelles explored with his classes what historical truth was and how the approach helped scholars unravel it. He cited numerous authorities, including Locke, Butler, and Tillotson, who acknowledged that reason was the foundation of all certainty and could therefore be applied in judging the credibility of anything proposed as divine revelation. However, Nelles never fully appreciated that, in essence, historical criticism was defined by the same assumptions that marked the new sciences. "The acceptance of biological constraints on a history of Christian beginnings means that these beginnings cannot be explained as a consequence of any claimed revelatory or miraculous event."51 Still, nearly all scholars evaluating Scripture assumed it was historically reliable unless specific evidence proved otherwise. Moreover, the burden of proof always rested with those challenging the statements presented in the Bible. Historical criticism was most controversial when focused on the Old Testament. When applied to the New Testament, it actually appeared to provide a clearer portrait of the life and works of Christ and other biblical figures, and so allowed the lessons of the past to illuminate the power of God in human achievements. Nelles encouraged his students to study literature, philosophy, and history not only to meet the educated community on an equal footing but more especially to appreciate human development and God's commitment to mankind. The understanding gained from knowing a Hamlet, for instance, allowed a fuller comprehension of the infinitely more complex character of Christ. Historical criticism furthermore lifted Jesus out of the dimness of the text, proclaiming him the central fact of all existence. By truly

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

189

knowing biblical history and culture, mankind could apply the lessons of the past to the universal problems faced by the present, clarify the meaning of freedom and morality, and move one step closer to achieving a longed-for quiet, settled faith.52 Although Nelles himself did not participate in higher criticism and sometimes opposed its precise conclusions, he supported the right to analyse the Scriptures and encouraged his colleagues and students in their critical endeavours. For example, Victoria College student J.W. Annis argued in 1885, "The story of the temptation and the fall is not a literal description, but a pictorial presentation of great spiritual truths revealed to us in a concrete setting. We need carefully to distinguish between the truth and the form in which it is conveyed."53 He added that God would not place a temptation like the apple before innocent children, then punish them for eternity when they ate it. The story simply conveyed the truth that the fruits of sin were death. Scripture was as difficult for scholars to unravel as present-day science. Church officials, including Nelles, had asked society to wait until science had resolved all anomalies and proven its claims but, declared Henry Ward Beecher in 1886, the study of biblical revelation had been equally obscure, contentious, and contradictory: How is the record of the Book any more stable and intelligible than the record of the rock? The whole Christian world for two thousand years, since the completion of the canons, has been divided up like the end of a broom into infinite splinters, quarreling with each other as to what the Book did say and what it did mean. Why then should man turn and say that scientific men are unsettled in their notions?54

Nelles prayed that science and religion would return to harmonious unity; for him it was an essential precondition to a renewed and progressive - as well as a settled - faith. However, the debate over the theological implications of Darwinism essentially divided the religious community. Most conservatives held the view that it presented a critical assault on Christianity and denounced it on every point. By the end of the century, they had formed themselves into new evangelical organizations combining fundamentalism, pentecostalism, and holiness, and claimed they were blending the purist forms of Christian belief into a powerful new religious movement. For these groups, a renewed interest in the mechanism of mass evangelism accommodated a modified version of Calvinism to the end of rejecting the newly dominant Liberal Theology.55 Other conservatives moved in an entirely different direction; the freedom provided by Darwinism turned them to science and secularism

190

Faithful Intellect

though they still rejected Liberal Theology. For example, T.H. Huxley, writing in 1892,, announced: The doctrine of predestination; of original sin; of the innate depravity of man and the evil fate of the greater part of the race; of the primacy of Satan in the world; of the essential vileness of matter; of a malevolent Demiurgus subordinate to a benevolent Almighty, who has only lately revealed himself; faulty as they are, appear to me to be vastly nearer the truth than the 'liberal' popular illusions that babies are all born good and that the example of a corrupt society is responsible for their failure to remain so; that it is given to everybody to reach the ethical ideal if he only try; that all partial evil is universal good; and other optimistic fragments, such as that which represents 'Providence' under the guise of paternal philanthropist, and bids us believe that everything will come right at last.56

There was little room amidst such hardened beliefs for a liberal emphasis on the social gospel or social reform. Liberals and moderates among Calvinists and Methodists probably did not have a profound comprehension of Darwinism. Like Nelles, they attempted to transform its ideas to make them more palatable; evolution became simply another term for human progress, and the social and ethical implications were similarly muted. Nelles asserted: Darwinism being in the air, therefore we must breathe it, more or less, either as a new principle of life, or a newly engendered poison ... Darwin is like a big stone thrown into the pool of speculative thought, and great is the rippling of the waters and the alarm of the fishes. Galileo, Copernicus, and others, have all been great disturbers in their day, but this man Darwin has outdone them all; and yet he lived to be crowned with the highest laurels of a famous Christian university, and his dust was borne at last to mingle with that of England's most illustrious dead within the walls of Westminster Abbey.57

Nelles assumed that all his students were duty bound to recognize what Darwin and his disciples represented, and to denounce what was wrong in their ideas and proclaim what proved right. His responsibility was to prepare them for the task. The process was gradual, but by the i88os Nelles and many of his students agreed that the concept of evolution had some merit. Further, whether it was true or not, it contained nothing that undermined essential Christianity.58 There could be no truth that disparaged valid religion, and no more important truth than the need to be drawn constantly to Christ and to labour for the betterment of humankind. New insights must serve these ends. When dealing with questions such as

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

191

creation, moderate theologians, exemplified by Nathanael Burwash, argued: "All parties in the present controversy have, we think, read the document [Genesis] too much in the light of a literal supernatural history of creation. It presents itself to us rather as a Divinely inspired meditation upon the origin of the universe, grasping by instinctive sympathy with nature, great natural truths, and so grouping and presenting them in poetic form as to teach the great fundamental principles of religion."59 Moreover, evolution by no means dispensed with the need for a Creator: "The question seems to be, is nature an automatic machine, or a machine that is set in motion and kept in motion by the direct power of the will of the Deity; or is it an organism whose life is god ... For our part we think that any of these three theories is not derogatory to the Divine Being."60 Indeed, some authorities claimed that biblical and evolutionary change corresponded. God was the author of progress, and working by means of evolution merely demonstrated divine power.61 God remained both immanent and transcendent. At the same time, Nelles and his associates transformed the sense of evolution from a pessimistic acceptance of a mindless and ruthless nature into an optimistic trust in providential progress. They replaced survival of the fittest and its secular translation, "Might makes right," with survival of the best; from this perspective evolution had a spiritual and moral as well as a physical dimension.62 In time, humanity would advance beyond the animal instincts that impelled the savage and sinful. Burwash claimed religion could be seen "in the persistent survival of the great moral forces of the universe as the eternal fittest of things."63 Darwinism was not the enemy of religion. "The Scriptures reveal to us the moral evolution of the race ... Men talk of evolution belittling man. To me it magnifies him ... We are what we are by the grace of God working through evolution."64 Nelles was once again gratified by his possession of a keen poetic understanding. Poetry stimulated the senses to explore the role of morality in the natural setting. Since the environment played such a critical part in the evolutionary process, if humans improved all their surroundings, they could actually foster the overall advancement of mankind. Thus, rather than remaining passive recipients of the outcomes determined by an arbitrary nature, they could actively influence the future. The realization of this power had an immense effect on the drive for reform over the following century. Humans could look forward to a glorious future at the point at which, through evolution, they finally fulfilled the holy potential promised when created in God's image. The harmonizing of Darwinism with Christianity was a protracted, uneven, and arduous struggle. Early on, Nelles had believed that an

192.

Faithful Intellect

informed clergy was the only agency on which society could rely to achieve the truth, whatever it might turn out to be. It was his duty to see to it that the Methodist ministry was sufficiently prepared through higher education in general and modern theological studies in particular to meet the ongoing challenge. Although Victoria differed from purely theological seminaries, the founders had assumed that it would meet both the literary and the theological requirements of the Methodist clergy. Even without courses in denominational theology, which Ryerson had argued would allow the government to denounce the school as sectarian, the Arts program was heavily weighted with core subjects for aspiring itinerants. As early as 1842, the Wesleyan Church had permitted probationary ministers to attend college as part of their clerical training.65 However, few followed this plan; either the church needed them on the circuit or they lacked the resources to attend. It was in the hope of implementing a more systematic education for its candidates that in 1853 the church set up a fund to assist potential clergy attending Victoria College. At the same time, the great revival that swept central Canada in 1852 and 1853 brought a significant influx of pious young men to college who intended to enter the itinerancy.66 Nelles was in the vanguard of Methodists who recognized the changing pattern of ministry required by the Protestant denominations. The function of the itinerancy was gradually shifting away from constructing a spiritually vital community among the scattered farms and pioneer centres. The need for closer pastoral supervision and wise counsel to meet the threats posed by material and intellectual change in concert with the competition from other respectable Protestant bodies and from an aggressive Roman Catholicism transformed the enthusiastic revivalism that had long characterized Methodism's mission. Nelles believed that Methodism would not retain the rising generation of upwardly mobile, educated, influential commercial and industrial leaders by means of its tradition of shallow, emotional church worship. The increasingly urbane nature of English Canada, with its improved communications and travel, was forcing the circuit rider to dismount.67 In addition, the expectation was growing in the towns and cities that civic and religious life must be intimately interwoven. More than ever, business and community leaders identified themselves with moral rectitude. They relied as heavily on church membership as on financial acumen for status in the community. From at least the 18508 on, they insisted on constructing substantial, even monumental, churches to reflect their growing Christian sense and to house their respectable and thoughtful worship services. The congregations expected their clergy to

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

193

be educated and intellectually superior, able to convey a Christian message that answered the seemingly more complex spiritual and moral needs of the times. Ministers also had to be able to supervise the rapidly expanding secondary ecclesiastical organizations, such as Sunday schools and missionary societies.68 Changing the cherished attitudes held by more conservative Methodists was a long, slow process. They often blamed the apparent decline in spirituality and the spread of materialism, secularism, and atheism on the altered demands placed on the clergy; in particular, on the emphasis on education. For instance, Thomas Crompton, a leading spokesman for the Canadian Primitive Methodist Church, declaimed in 1856: "We believe that if ever the time comes when intellectual and literary talents are sought as the almost exclusive qualifications for the Christian ministry ... it will be woe to the true glory and life of the Church."69 Nearly ten years later, the Primitive Methodists' Christian Journal suggested that the only real answer to skepticism and atheism was "intuitive faith"; later still, the revivalist Wesley Johnston declared that traditional spiritual religion was in serious decline because "theology is reduced to the level of an exact science. The atonement is regarded as an evolution of necessity. Growth in grace is but a series of mental processes, and a godly life only the blossom of moral emotion ... We are intellectualists; we measure God's thought by our thought, and we limit the operations of the Deity to the measure of human imagination."70 Under such conditions, evangelical religion itself was in immense danger. John Petty's answer in Religious Experience was to call for greater enlightenment through deeper personal spiritual experience. "More theoretical knowledge, even a better acquaintance with the Bible, and far more expansive and harmonious views of the gospel system, may be realized without a corresponding growth in grace."71 Petty argued that before piety could mature, one must first understand human weakness, the justice and mercy of God, the saving character of Christ, and the operations of the Holy Spirit in the human heart. The Observer claimed in 1873 tna1: the church did not need men steeped in the science of theology but preachers recast by the Holy Spirit who could force sinners to their knees while "the shouts of liberated souls go up as incense before God."72 A decade later, the Canada Christian Advocate was still warning of the dangers of scholasticism and intellectualism: "Make the pulpit luminous with the light of heaven and the source of fire to the sensibilities ... Let the higher criticism, and Huxley, Darwin, Spencer and Mill bury their own dead. A gospel, faithfully preached, will take care of itself, as it has always done."73 It added, "Obedience to God's commands, acceptance of Christ's teachings, personal faith, personal loyalty, personal prayers, personal yearnings and

194

Faithful Intellect

struggles to become good and true, and disinterested and irreproachable, these are the living evidences of Christianity."74 Such statements by the more conservative voices in Methodism represented only a small fraction of the opposition to a highly educated itinerancy. While Nelles and his colleagues eventually overcame this attitude, the debate over a divinely selected, experience-based clergy versus a professionalized ministry continued to unsettle church councils. Many Methodists feared that too much education would lessen the spontaneity of preaching and spoil the minister's ability to convey Christ's redeeming message by encouraging him to introduce trivial and largely irrelevant theological distinctions. Even worse, time spent at school might pervert morality through study of the rationalist, secular sources too readily available there.75 Struggling against what he regarded as antiquated and parochial attitudes, Nelles gradually convinced a majority of Methodists that an educated ministry was essential for the church if it was to remain relevant to Canadian society and, more important, serve God and mankind effectively.76 He never advocated anything that would weaken the essentials of Christianity and expected spirituality and learning to continue interwoven. As noted earlier, Nelles was profoundly convinced that true wisdom could only be achieved through greater knowledge, and that if new discoveries - whether in science, philosophy, or any other field of endeavour - were valid, they would automatically promote the inherent unity of all knowledge and a better appreciation of God's mysteries. In short, they would enlarge and buttress faith in God. Without the background and ability to inquire after the truth, humans could never hope to comprehend themselves, the world, or God. Nelles saw several weaknesses in the ministry needing immediate repair. First, the basic education of those intending to enter the itinerancy had to be improved. Many of the older clergy felt embarrassed by their lack of formal education, and the younger itinerants often had difficulty dealing with their growing responsibilities.77 Even during the 18705 and later, when the Wesleyans expected at least a high school education, then the equivalent of two years of college work, the minimal standards were frequently ignored.78 They did not want to jeopardize union with the generally more evangelical Methodist bodies by rigorously enforcing scholastic standards. Methodist ministers such as Henry Bland and Charles Eby joined Nelles during the same period in lamenting the lack of culture among even the younger clergy. Eby, who had taken time to train in Germany before returning to graduate from Victoria College in 1871 and then spent most of his career in Japan, wanted a full university education

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

195

as a minimum requirement for entering the ministry. He warned that itinerants must be capable of dealing with sophisticated society, in Canada itself and particularly overseas in mission work in Japan. Ignorant zealots were no competition for the learned scholars defending eastern mysticism. Modern missionaries had to educate and heal as well as simply evangelize. In any event, a less demanding standard was a betrayal of John and Charles Wesley, who had founded Methodism in the rich literary environment of Oxford.79 A host of better-educated clergy who had been trained under Nelles's watchful tutelage joined him in working to convince the church membership that education in a broad range of fields, including literature, philosophy, and science, was an absolute prerequisite for effective ministry. Acta Victoriana repeatedly urged students and especially young probationers to acquire wide knowledge, and Nelles effectively mobilized the Christian Guardian and the other Methodist journals to promote the same message.80 During Nelles's career, Canadian higher education developed well beyond a coarse amalgamation of British and American principles and practices. Indeed, the major British universities differed amongst themselves, reflecting their distinct Scottish, Irish, and English traditions and priorities. Innovations from continental Europe had also affected these schools to varying degrees, transferring perhaps more easily to colleges in the United States. Neither ideas nor pedagogical systems could be confined; they flew unhindered around the world with the speed of the printed word. They entered helter-skelter into Canadian universities, where they were in turn shaped by the Canadian intellectual experience. Nelles was less fearful than most of his Anglican and Presbyterian colleagues of these apparently alien ideas and equally valued Canadians who had been trained at home, in Germany, or in the United States.81 While Toronto's Trinity College turned almost exclusively to Cambridge and Oxford or to its Irish outpost, Trinity Dublin, for faculty to transform its students into gentlemen and Queen's University could rarely see past the proud Scottish academies, Victoria more easily employed Canadian faculty or Americans and continental Europeans with special expertise. Nelles frequently sent recently appointed Canadians over to Europe to expand their expertise, especially those in the sciences, foreign languages, Classics, and Theology. In 1857, Nelles had hired Elijah Harris and George Whitlock, who had been educated in Germany and France and who introduced the newest continental influences into their teaching. Unfortunately, they did not remain long at the college. After graduating from Victoria in 1862, and being appointed to the faculty in 1866, Alfred Reynar was sent to Europe to

196

Faithful Intellect

improve his qualifications. At the same time, Nelles sent Nathanael Burwash to Yale for a term to improve his basic knowledge of Natural Science. This pattern of hiring and training continued as long as Nelles was in charge of Victoria University and resources permitted.82 He often solicited funds from wealthy lay Methodists to pay for these sessions abroad. During the 18705, Nelles both expanded the traditional courses available to Arts students and potential ministers and promoted the detailed study of the sciences for all. He agreed at least partially with Herbert Spencer's assertion that studying and revering science resulted in better parents, church-goers, citizens, and students of all branches of culture.83 In 1873, Nelles hired the German Eugene Haanel as Chair of Natural Science. Haanel had come to the United States a decade earlier, married a college-educated American wife, converted to Methodism, and become an active local preacher. He initially taught Greek and Latin, French and German, and Natural Science at several small American colleges. After serving on Michigan's geological survey, he returned to Germany for further scientific studies, specializing in the magnetism of the Earth as part of a broader series of courses in physics and chemistry and earning a Ph.D. from the University of Breslau. When appointed at Victoria he was twenty-eight, spoke English fluently, and was considered by his American colleagues to be a pure and noble gentleman who inspired great enthusiasm and commitment to scholarship in his students.84 Haanel quickly attracted many of the best young scholars at Victoria to the study of science. William Hincks remembered him: He was so human and inspiring. He was a vibrant, human dynamo as he unfolded in his classroom the wonders of geology, astronomy, inorganic chemistry, and blow-pipe analysis ... He was a born dramatist and his lectures imparted personality to atoms, molecules and crystals till we could see them in our minds as present vital realities in intelligently guided action pervading all nature. He did more to bring my mind into touch with the spiritual principle in nature than all the didactic theology I have read or listened to ... His lectures were conveyed to my mind as an overwhelming drama which brought my reason and emotion to sense the present reality of a Creative God still at work in his workshop of this vast universe.85

Haanel also had a fine sense of humour and enjoyed participating in college social activities. As was his custom, Nelles gave Haanel as much freedom as possible in pursuing his teaching responsibilities. In 1876, under Haanel's direction, the cornerstone was laid for Faraday Hall, the first building in Canada specifically designed for teaching

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

197

science. It measured forty-six by one hundred feet and rose three storeys, with a tower for astronomical observations. Over twenty-five thousand dollars was raised to pay for the structure, with much of it subscribed by residents of Cobourg. At its opening in 1878, Dean of Theology Nathanael Burwash noted that it was designed as much for clergy as for scientists.86 Although the science facilities and equipment were vastly improved through Haanel's careful purchases, he simply did not have time to satisfy the students' demands for better access to the equipment and more stimulating and elaborate experiments. He was single-handedly giving courses in mineralogy, meteorology, geology, physics, chemistry, zoology, biology, astronomy, and botany.87 In 1883, Nelles was finally able to meet the pressing need for more faculty, using the interest from an annuity donated by a prominent graduate from Hamilton, Dennis Moore, to pay the salary of Arthur P. Coleman as professor of Natural History and Geology. Coleman had graduated from Victoria in 1876 and taught at Cobourg Collegiate for four years before earning a Ph.D. from Breslau University. Because of public concern about the irreligion associated with German universities, Nelles went out of his way to proclaim Coleman's safeness. A vitally important component of his duties was "to inculcate high principles of action, to mould the character, and to foster the love of moral and religious excellence. The best, if not indeed the only adequate foundation for such excellence, is to be found in a reverential regard for Holy Scripture, and a hearty acceptance of the Gospel of Christ."88 Coleman would blend science with piety and reverence. Haanel and Coleman not only taught the sciences, they also undertook significant research of their own. They believed it was critical for their teaching to conduct experiments and expand the borders of knowledge in some small way. After some delay, the telescope that Haanel had purchased for his Astronomy classes was installed in Faraday Hall; it was shortly credited with making several important sightings. In 1883, the Royal Society of Canada published Haanel's chemical research as "Hydriodic Acid as a Blowpipe Reagent." Acta Victoriana bragged that Haanel's work was the most important advancement in the field in a century. His discovery allowed scientists to distinguish metals by the colour they exhibited when heated. The experiments brought fame to both Haanel and Victoria and stimulated further interest in research among its students. Haanel's article was illustrated with lithographs taken from watercolours painted by Coleman.89 As for Coleman, he went on to become famous for his geological studies and work on glaciers. When his academic position disappeared thanks to university federation, he joined the University of

198

Faithful Intellect

Toronto's School of Practical Science. Haanel left Victoria in 1889 in anticipation of federation and, after a decade at Syracuse University, served as Superintendent of Mines in Ottawa where, among other contributions, he improved the process for smelting minerals.90 Modern scientific study strengthened the standards among the students in the faculties of Arts and Science and also alleviated many of the anxieties about science among the young clergy. They could combine the rational search for earthly knowledge with the traditional Methodist trust in experimental or experiential religion; Methodism was a religion of the heart as well as the mind.91 Nelles paralleled the expanded studies in the natural sciences by advancing more detailed and profound theological training beginning in the early 18708. There had historically been two versions of the program leading to the Methodist ministry: the probationer either could study while serving on a circuit or take two years of theologically oriented Arts courses at Victoria in combination with circuit duties. The quality of theological work under both options was normally poor. Most candidates had neither the educational background nor the inclination for specialized training. Moreover, even while studying at college they were obliged to serve the neighbouring circuits, whose heavy demands limited their scholastic activities. As a result, the church often forgave educational failure, allowing probationers to retake or even bypass courses and accepting ridiculously low passing grades.92 Beginning in the i86os, Nelles laboured to add a third option of purely theological study in a specialized Faculty of Theology at Victoria. As always, the limiting factor was money. But Nelles refused all suggestions that meant weakening the Arts and Sciences, including a proposal by Lachlin Taylor in 1871 to concentrate on theology in new facilities in Toronto.93 In 1866, Nelles had hired Nathanael Burwash to teach science temporarily in anticipation of his heading a theology program. Burwash had been a promising student at Victoria who graduated as valedictorian in 1859. Entering the ministry in 1861, he was ordained in 1864 and served the Hamilton circuit until appointed to Victoria. Burwash earned a B.D. from Garrett Biblical Institute at Northwestern University in 1871 and five years later received an honorary STD from the same institution.94 Meanwhile, the financial picture at Victoria appeared to be improving. In 1867, the college was able to announce that it was finally free of debt. However, a year later, the Ontario government withdrew all financial aid, and hopes for a separate faculty faded again. Nelles participated in various campaigns to raise money from the Methodist membership for a permanent endowment, but this was a slow process. In order to assist new clergy, Nelles and Burwash gave free private lectures from 1868 until 1870, and

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

199

Nelles continued to press the church authorities for a proper theology program.95 The Annual Conference decided on a different strategy. While agreeing that theology should be taught, the church preferred establishing independent schools in Montreal and Toronto. George Douglas, a Scottish convert from Presbyterianism who had served most of the prominent Methodist circuits in Quebec and was known for his eloquent preaching and scholarly approach to religion, used his influence to have the church establish the Wesleyan Theological Institute under his direction in Montreal. The leadership agreed with him that it was essential for Methodism to be strongly anchored in Canada's largest and most important city. Furthermore, Douglas had been able to secure a significant endowment for the project from prominent Montreal Methodist businessmen; David Torrance, James Ferrier, and other lay leaders endowed the institute with over $50,000. In 1878, it loosely affiliated with Victoria College and also developed a valuable alliance with McGill University.96 At the suggestion of Egerton Ryerson and Wellington Jeffers, the church decided to open another freestanding theological institute in Toronto. There was, in fact, substantial opposition from central and western Ontario to committing more resources to Cobourg. In 1868, Adelaide Street Wesleyan Church began erecting the monumental Wesleyan Metropolitan Church in McGill Square at Queen and Church Streets. Most church authorities wanted it to house the theological school and hoped to secure William Morley Punshon, the newly arrived president of Conference, to preside there. Ryerson had never been impressed with the qualifications of the young Nathanael Burwash or with his ability to supervise the training of the itinerancy. Punshon also agreed that Toronto was a better location. John Macdonald, the "merchant prince" of Toronto and a leading Wesleyan benefactor, promised a substantial sum for the institute if located in Toronto.97 Nevertheless, Nelles, with the assistance of Edward Hartley Dewart, who had replaced Jeffers as editor of the Christian Guardian in 1870, as well as many Victoria alumni, was able to convince his ecclesiastical colleagues that theological education should be combined with the college's Arts program in Cobourg.98 Nelles was refusing once again to be intimidated by Ryerson. As for Punshon, he only wanted what was best for the church. In late 1871 he gave an introductory series of lectures to Victoria students in order to popularize the new theological studies. As one of the most respected leaders in the Methodist world, his support guaranteed a broad acceptance of the curriculum and the very concept of affiliation with an Arts college.

zoo

Faithful Intellect

Still, raising funds to pay for a theological chair had to be resolved. The Wesleyan Theological Institute had monopolized whatever money was available in Quebec, and benefactors were hard to find in the rest of the country. John Macdonald, for instance, told Nelles: Rev'd Dr Ryerson called yesterday after you had left the office and in the course of conversation referred to the need of a "Theological Chair for Ontario." I do not think the end will be best served by the advocacy of two chairs simultaneously and while personally in no way committed, I must, upon reflection ask you not to count on me at present. I may say this to you that my preferences are not sectional, but are those only which will be for the General Good of our work and I may say further that I will not connect myself with any scheme without duly and fully considering the claims of Cobourg."

Despite his disclaimer, Macdonald remained convinced that the theological faculty should be established in Toronto; in fact, he wanted the entire college moved there as soon as possible. Fortuitously, the wealthy Jackson family, who had earlier befriended Burwash when he ministered on their Hamilton circuit, came to the rescue. In July 1872. Edward Jackson's estate left $10,000 to be paid in two installments, with interest available from the beginning of that school term, to help create a theological chair at Victoria. Two years later, his wife Lydia notified Nelles, "You will have received this day from the Executors of the estate of my late husband a legacy of ten thousand dollars, to aid in the establishing of a chair in Theology ... I would ask your acceptance of the enclosed cheque being a further sum of ten thousand dollars to be applied to the same endowment."100 At her death, she left another $10,000 to the college for a total endowment of $30,000. The interest allowed Nelles to cover the cost of appointing Burwash to teach theology in 1870 and also to form a department in i87z and a faculty the following year. On 25 April 1873, Burwash formally resigned from teaching Science in order to devote his time to building up the Faculty of Theology. Because the endowment had to be used exclusively for theological education, only Burwash and a tutor could be paid from it; the other members of the faculty, including Nelles, drew their salaries from their Arts appointments.101 Financial resources remained scarce. Nelles approved of Burwash's preaching and theology and trusted his common sense and judgment. He came to rely on the younger man's assistance in both church and university matters and gave him wide discretionary powers in the new faculty. Beginning in its first year, Burwash and Nelles radically altered the regulations governing the Bachelor of Divinity degree, especially in requiring candidates to have

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

zoi

at least two years of college as a prerequisite. In 1874, the faculty graduated its first class of three students. Burwash introduced the inductive method to the systematic theology of the Old and New Testament and made the course of study rather less dogmatic and more biblical than before. He emphasized modern exegesis over the metaphysics that had dominated earlier studies, and even applied the new knowledge available from historical, higher, and lower criticism to help students reach a better understanding of the Bible. Nelles encouraged and promoted all these alterations.102 While Burwash was modern - indeed, advanced - by the standards of the 18705, he was hardly radical, or even as liberal as Nelles in his theology. He was generally unwilling to analyse the Scriptures deeply, and his biblical criticisms led to conservative, uncontroversial conclusions. Despite trusting that the broad truths of Scripture were only clarified by devout science, Burwash always considered the Bible the inspired word of God. "Personal experience from those who have tested the word of God in their own lives provides sufficient proof of its inspiration. Its power is manifest in the results it has achieved in history."103 Moreover, he never really changed his ideas; by the twentieth century, biblical scholars respected him but also considered him a relic of a bygone age. Burwash did at least encourage his students not to fear modernity, and eventually introduced innovations such as the study of comparative religions, psychology, and sociology for probationary ministers.104 Nelles was pleased to leave day-to-day theological education to his lieutenant, but he did not abdicate his broader responsibilities to the faculty. When he hired Arthur Coleman, he also employed George C. Workman to assist with Metaphysics and Theology. Workman had preceded Coleman as valedictorian at Victoria in 1875 and was ordained in 1878. An excellent scholar, in 1884 he was sent to study in Leipzig for five years by Nelles, who appreciated his independent research into the books of the Old Testament. Writing to Nelles in 1886, Workman discussed his critique of Jeremiah and, two weeks before Nelles's death in 1887, informed him that the study had been highly commended by "the greatest Old-Testament scholar in the world," who called it a "science-furthering work."105 When Workman returned to Victoria with a Ph.D. in 1889, Burwash also praised his work on Jeremiah. However, Workman initiated a storm of controversy when he suggested that the prophets had not been principally concerned with forecasting the advent of the Messiah. Burwash contradicted his interpretation by demonstrating the shifting nature of the prophets' conception of the Christ, and subsequently placed Edward Riehm's Messianic Prophecy and Payne Smith's Prophecy, a

2.O2.

Faithful Intellect

Preparation for Christ on the college curriculum.106 Much of the problem arose from Workman's irritating personality, but when he knew him earlier, Nelles was disposed to support his wide-ranging research. Beyond the classroom, theology students organized the Jackson Society in 1874 f°r "tne cultivation of Rhetoric and Elocution and the investigation of Sacred and Secular Science, with a view to efficiency in the Christian ministry."107 Nelles encouraged its members to undertake personal research and experimentation rather than simply repeat the opinions of others, in order to become "independent thinkers, sound reasoners, and trustworthy leaders of our future church and ministry."108 His expectation was that specialized training within a broad Christian culture would produce a generation of ecclesiastical leaders who were not afraid of new ideas. The Jackson Society also established a small theological library to encourage wider reading and awarded prizes for exceptional work. In 1877, Nelles helped create a Theological Union centred at Victoria, with branches in all the conferences of the Methodist Church of Canada. Its major purpose was to present a forum for advanced research and study for preachers and theology students from all levels of training. An annual sermon and lecture series was given by Victoria faculty or influential visiting clergy. Francis Houston Wallace delivered four addresses on the "History of Preaching" in 1885, Charles Eby discussed the qualifications necessary for foreign missionaries in 1886, and Eratus Badgley lectured during convocation week in 1887 on "Faith vs. Knowledge."109 In 1890, Workman gave his controversial lecture on messianic prophecy before the same organization. Students were able to qualify for a fellowship by writing a "thesis" for the Theological Union, and the Annual Conferences offered a reading course with a FTL diploma for those who passed. In some ways, the Theolog ical Union was a precursor to graduate work in theology, but its standards were extremely low, with the quality of work often inferior to that performed in college. Nonetheless, over the years the various initiatives of Nelles and Burwash combined to form a substantial foundation for modern theological education for the Methodist Church. While Nelles had not achieved his goal of a settled religion that resonated with a quiet, confident faith, he felt assured that all his hopes would soon be realized. Beginning in the late 18705, he took only a paternal interest in the Faculty of Theology. He was content to allow Burwash to manage its operations, assured that the principles he had initiated would be upheld. Nelles, of course, continued instructing in both Arts and Theology, but he was also heavily preoccupied with the twin issues of financial support for Victoria and the proposed

The Quest for a Quiet, Settled Faith

2.03

university federation. As well, he was often called upon to fulfill the role of a senior statesman in the church, to represent Methodism on special occasions, and to protect the interests of Protestantism in the country. What little time and energy remained Nelles committed to the extracurricular needs of his students - and, most importantly, to his growing family.

8

Family and University Life

One evening after supper in February 1867, Samuel Nelles sat in his classroom at the college preparing new lectures. He was distracted by a student playing the violin somewhere in the rooms above. Nelles stopped working while the melodious sounds echoed through the silent corridors and filled the abandoned rooms. As he listened, he was gently transported above the cares of college, church, and state. His thoughts drifted away to the higher joys of life and the wondrous nature of God. Remembering the music later that night, he recorded in his diary, "How it melts the soul with the love of children and - Eternity!"1 Surely such fleeting moments provided sufficient justification for becoming an educator. Some decades later, William Henry Hincks, who had attended Victoria as an older student, remembered Nelles's vibrant personal commitment to his students. "Toward the end of my all too short attendance at college, I took ill with a low fever. Chancellor Nelles came himself to my room, with a bottle of temperance wine, and his stimulating comradeship ... inspired me with personal love for himself and for a sound Christian philosophy of human life."2 Nelles understood that students' lives involved more than listening to lectures or sage advice; they must also enjoy the periods of contemplation and the social opportunities Victoria offered. As husband and father, Nelles was even more deeply committed to the spiritual, social, and intellectual health of his family. In 1851, he and his twenty-year-old bride, Mary Wood, took up rooms in Victoria College. For almost all of Samuel's professional life, the college was not only his place of work but also his family's residence. The children grew up in the shadow of Victoria, mingling with the students and professors and shaped by the sights and sounds, friendships and travails of the college community. They enjoyed privileged access to the splendid educational and social opportunities of the school. However, they were

Family and University Life

2,05

also subjected to severe pressures to succeed and to conform to proper standards of conduct. It was not easy being the children of a Methodist minister who was also the president of the church's premier educational institution. For good or ill, the lives of the Nelles family were inextricably interwoven with the welfare of the university. These arrangements meant that the entire family had little privacy and was constantly at the beck and call of all members of the college. Samuel and Mary were obliged to suffer through the sleepless nights and disruptions of the interminable pranks that were so much a part of student life. Although Nelles could not allow his students to see it, he was often amused by their simple antics, and he was for the most part lenient in dealing with misconduct. It was also nearly impossible for him to escape the daily pressures of university affairs. On the simplest level, he was expected to see to it that the janitor was carrying out his duties, the buildings were heated, the mess from the water fight was cleaned up, the college cows were cared for, and the carpenters and painters were progressing with the seemingly constant repairs.3 Added to such ongoing activities were the crises that occurred with disturbing regularity, and the exacting social, political, and academic duties of the president. It was only through his dedication, tolerance, and sense of humour that Nelles survived. These qualities were combined with determination, sympathy, and patience in Mary Nelles. College life must have been particularly difficult for her. In 1860, when the students honoured Samuel Nelles with a testimonial and tea service, they also remembered Mary, "who by the constant exemplifications of the holiest and most lovely principles which adorn Woman's nature, has cast a charm over our College days, and removed much of that gloomy intellectualism so apt to associate itself with a Student's life."4 She was lauded for her maternal qualities and her religious principles alike. Over the years, she automatically became a kind of surrogate mother to hundreds of homesick boys and young men. This role was especially demanding when Victoria maintained its junior department, but even the oldest students looked to her at times for sympathy and counsel. Mary was later eulogized for her love and care of generations of students: "Many a time the lonely student was made glad by her call to the President's tea-table, and in the hours of sickness he was sure to receive the motherly care of the President's wife, and to be comforted and helped by her thoughtfulness and gracious words and deeds."5 The alumni, when reflecting on their college years, rejoiced as much in the name of Mary Nelles as in any of their professors or the intellectual influences they had encountered. As the president's wife, Mary was expected to host college functions and to receive faculty and alumni, often with little warning, as well as

^o6

Faithful Intellect

to be ready to entertain visiting dignitaries from the church or the world of politics. In general, she was required to manage a household schedule flexible enough to accommodate late meetings or sudden crises and not to become overly distressed by the uncertainty. She had been partially prepared for this kind of life in her parents' busy household; her father was the superintendent of Wesleyan mission operations and an influential official in the national church. But now she alone was in charge and responsible for all the details. Remarkably, she rarely complained or invoked complaints from others - a real accomplishment in the highly competitive and not always charitable academic world. Early married life must have seemed leisurely after Mary began having children of her own. The first child, Mary Elleda, was born in 1856; four more siblings joined the family over the following nineteen years. Carrie Eliza arrived in 1859, Frederick Ernest in 1861, Louise Florence in 1868, and Harold Wood in 1875. One other child died at birth. The wide distribution of their births was somewhat unusual and might reflect miscarriages. Occasionally Enoch Wood, at his wife's urging, would ask Samuel to send Mary and the younger children for a visit to Toronto, where she could have rest and quiet. Her parents were naturally concerned about her physical condition.6 When Mary gave birth to Louise, her mother came to Cobourg and spent a month looking after Samuel and the children while she recuperated.7 Like most households, the family suffered through measles and other common childhood diseases, but it was spared severe illnesses for the most part. As a result of the widely spaced births, there were always young children scrambling through the apartment and the college rooms or across the campus. Fortunately for Mary, the older girls eventually helped care for the newer arrivals. The children were part of the extended Wood, Nelles, and Hardy clans, and had other relations spread across the province besides. As often as possible, Mary took the younger children to visit her parents in suburban Toronto or close relations in Simcoe, Brantford, and London. Except during the extended summer holidays, when the family vacationed together, Mary normally left the older ones in Samuel's care.8 They tended to run wild under his tolerant supervision. Naturally, the children were also heavily influenced and at least partially raised by the students at Victoria. Early on 24 January 1868, for instance, the residents illuminated the college to celebrate the birth of Louise. Samuel was deeply moved by this kind tribute. As his children grew older, they found playmates and friends among the scholars.9 Regardless of all the assistance, Mary was entirely in charge of caring for the children, looking after their physical and spiritual needs as

Family and University Life

2.07

well as supervising their training and early education. The home was principally her domain, and she suffered little interference from anyone. Nevertheless, when the children reached the age of responsibility, Samuel spent as much time as possible with them and shared the parental duties. He was still the patriarch, with broad authority in the home. Like all diligent Methodist fathers, he led the daily household worship, established codes of behaviour, and meted out appropriate punishment when necessary. He endeavoured to guide his children on the right path to adulthood and was particularly pleased that he was seldom called upon to administer punishment. Samuel loved children and gloried in their simple innocence. When he sold his horse, he recorded in his diary, "Poor Carrie came and whispered to me, 'Tell them not to whip her.' How sweet the heart of a child!"10 On another occasion, after the college cow gave birth, Samuel was bemused at the youngsters' questions: "The children exceedingly anxious to know whence the stranger migrated to reach these blissful shores of animal existence."11 There was something remarkable and holy in the lives of the young. As a good father, Samuel often took his sons and daughters on long walks along the lakeshore or into the woods and shared with them his love of nature. He enjoyed excursions with his daughters to pick mint and flowers or simply to revel in the magic of pristine nature in spring and summer. Samuel felt spiritually and physically strengthened by such occasions. He strove to impart his wonder at the majesty of God's works and his romantic attachment to the fabulous scenes they witnessed.12 Samuel also led the family in croquet matches and other innocent recreations, and during the winter took the children skating on the college rink or sleighing across the open fields. The whole family particularly enjoyed travelling by cutter to visit neighbours and relatives. When he was required to go to Port Hope or to Methodist churches in the nearby countryside, Samuel and Mary would take Fred, Elleda, or Carrie along, sharing the tea meeting, anniversary service, or simply the pleasure of the trip together.13 When Fred was five years old, his father bought him a Newfoundland pup named Hero. With Fred in tow, Hero would race through the local orchards, chase the livestock, or explore the widening limits of their natural domain. Fred and his chums often went skinny-dipping at secret spots along Cobourg's excellent beaches and, when he got older, boating on Lake Ontario. Fred developed into a good athlete who enjoyed playing on the informal sports teams competing on summer evenings.14 Elleda and Carrie were just as active, but they were more circumspect and dignified in their conduct - at least while they were in sight of adults. As they matured, they had to restrain their boisterous

20 8

Faithful Intellect

behaviour and take over more of the household chores, including assisting with the care of Louise and Harold. This apprenticeship helped prepare them for their expected roles in life. In the evening, the whole family would gather around the piano, which was always a central feature of the household. Samuel arranged with local teachers for piano lessons for the girls when they reached ten or eleven. Elleda and Fred were particularly noted for their singing, but music was important to the entire family. Besides entertaining each other at home, they attended the concerts and recitals sponsored by the local Protestant congregations. If their parents were busy, the older children attended on their own. Students also entertained the community by holding numerous musical and theatrical evenings at the college. By the late 18705, the various university societies were organizing quite elaborate social evenings, and Brookhurst Female Academy and Cobourg Collegiate also contributed to the town's liveliness. Fortunately, Cobourg was a centre of some culture despite its relatively small size, located as it was on the major railway line between Montreal and Chicago and with its improved harbour welcoming many visitors from across the lake during the warmer months. With Victoria College and other important educational institutions, as well as a well-educated and generally prosperous citizenry, the town attracted sophisticated entertainers to perform. Recitals by travelling musicians, such as the inspiring chorus of black Jubilee Singers from Fiske University or the internationally renowned violinist Eduard Remenyi, occurred regularly at Cobourg's impressive Victoria Opera House. Remenyi was especially successful; led by Dr Haanel, the students marched to the opera house and, after a wildly enthusiastic response to his performance, drew his cab around town before returning him to his hotel.15 They immediately began planning a return performance, which took place in February 1882.. Providing a welcome interlude in the routine of farm and small-town life, such activities were sincerely appreciated by faculty and students alike. Without a doubt, however, attending church on Sunday remained the central preoccupation of the Nelles family's weekly activities. Normally, they would walk together to King Street Methodist Church or to the college church on Division Street, where they would listen intently to the long sermon and vibrant exhortations to seek Christ. Because Cobourg was an important Methodist stronghold, the stationing committee assigned a respected and eloquent preacher to the circuit, one who could also participate in college affairs. If Samuel thought the sermon had particular merit, the members of the family would discuss it during the afternoon while they relaxed at home. As one would expect, what the children most enjoyed was singing the rich,

Family and University Life

ZO9

robust hymns that were so fundamental a part of Methodist worship. After the service, the children attended either Sunday school or class meeting, depending on their age. Samuel liked helping them with their Sunday school lessons or explaining some Bible text. Occasionally, the family visited other nearby Methodist or Presbyterian churches to share in their worship. The rest of the day was committed to Bible class, prayer meetings, or quiet contemplation, reading, and study. Samuel often used what spare time remained to catch up on his correspondence or prepare lectures. It was especially vital that both parents and children grow in grace and strengthen their spiritual and moral discipline. Although Samuel was never impressed with dramatic revivals or enthusiastic conversion experiences, and even less with the easy way to salvation promised by the holiness evangelists, it is still remarkable that no record seems to have survived in his diaries or correspondence of the conversion of any of his children. It is even more surprising given that personal conversion and a mature realization of entire sanctification were the central goals of a Christian's life. Despite being private matters, these critical events were most often announced publicly, since the whole religious community shared a deep sympathy, an abiding concern, and even a vested interest in the spiritual welfare of all its members. For the most part, there was nothing extraordinary about the family's weekly activities; rather, they represented a common way of life for a contented, small-town, middle-class Methodist family during the third quarter of the nineteenth century. Mary and Samuel never appeared to have had any exceptional difficulties with their children when they were young. As they grew older, they merged easily into the student community in Cobourg and at Victoria College. After early education at home, the children - as expected - became among the best students attending elementary school and Cobourg Collegiate. The close proximity of the collegiate to Victoria meant that they often shared facilities and staff and cooperated in social activities and athletic contests. In spite of the college students' sense of superiority, not to mention the pranks and sarcastic criticisms directed at their younger associates, a warm, healthy working relationship existed between the two institutions. This affinity made the climb up the academic ladder into college life easier. A large proportion of Victoria's students had graduated from the collegiate, even though many had come to Cobourg from other districts to gain their secondary education. But school life was not quite so straightforward for Samuel and Mary's eldest daughters, Elleda and Carrie. Victoria College did not accept female students until the late iSyos, and even then very few ventured into the strange male bastion as undergraduates. Elleda was

2.io

Faithful Intellect

therefore unable to participate as a full member of the university by formally attending classes. However, she did join in various social activities; she and a Miss MacNachtan "were the most attractive items on the programme" when they sang a duet at the entertainment organized by the Literary Association in February i879.16 Two months later, Elleda married a former graduate, Kenneth Dingwall, at her parents' residence in the college. The ceremony was performed by her grandfather, the venerable Enoch Wood, on 3 April 1879. Dingwall had enrolled at Victoria in 1868, but he had transferred to the University of Toronto because the cancellation of government grants that year threatened the college's survival. However, he did not like the education or the student life in Toronto and returned to Victoria the following year. Nelles noted in his journal, "The return of Dingwall has done much to raise our institution in the estimation of our students."17 He graduated as college valedictorian in 1872 and went on to practise law in Hamilton. Acta Victoriana congratulated the couple, noting: "There wasn't a cheerier face or a readier hand than Miss Nelles to be met in Cobourg, and it will be a long time before her absence will be unnoticed and her place be filled."18 The student body also published a letter wishing the best for the popular couple. But Elleda's happiness was to be short-lived. Dingwall had never been strong physically, and in the fall of 1883 Nelles notified Superintendent Albert Carman that he was forced to absent himself from the General Conference negotiating church union "on account of illness of my sonin-law who is about starting with his family for California, hoping thus to save his life."19 Dingwall's recovery was only temporary; he died on 18 December 1885. Elleda and her daughter Edna later returned to live with her mother and eventually with her sister Louise in Toronto. She never remarried. Carrie, too, was a welcome guest participant at college social functions, but she was more reticent than her siblings. As she approached adulthood she occasionally suffered from severe emotional trauma. Samuel and Mary protected her from outside pressures as well as they could but at times they felt helpless. In 1882, Samuel confided to George Hodgins: I am in the midst of deep domestic anxiety. My daughter Carrie is very low with some kind of nervous depression. It has been coming on for several months, and has now become so serious that we had to get Dr. Workman yesterday from Toronto. He has undertaken to send us down an experienced nurse. She takes no food now whatever, and has taken almost none for six weeks. I have had to withdraw my engagements at Montreal Conference and remain here with Mrs. Nelles. I can do nothing else just now ... Last night she sang for Dr. Workman

Family and University Life

zn

two stanzas of Jesu, Lover of my Soul. It sounded so touching to hear her sing the lines when we could not get her to say anything else but wandering words, such as, "It will be all right, Pa," repeated over and over again/0

Under Workman's care, Carrie seemed fully recovered by October 1883, when she enrolled at Victoria. However, she did not continue at college long, and never graduated. She remained single and at home with her parents until they died. Then she moved to the home of her younger sister Louise and her lawyer brother-in-law James Russell Starr. For much of the early i88os, worry over his children's welfare was a serious drain on Samuel's own mental and physical strength. Fred's easy success was a vital source of relief and joy for both his parents. His athletic abilities, theatrical talents, and extroverted personality made him immediately popular at college. He never suffered any adverse effect from being the president's son. At his graduation in 1881 he was humorously described as "Fred Earnest Nelles, Son of the President; splendid singer; addicted to puns; height 5' n"; in weight 150; age 2,0; in politics Conservative; in matrimony, wants to marry everybody; advises students to shun 'prairie chicken'; tobacco makes him sick; believes in Classics; will study law."21 Remembering him many years later, his contemporaries wrote: "Fred Nelles grew up in the old college halls and even before he entered Victoria in 1877, he was a son of the college, knowing everyone, known by everyone, ready for all sorts of sports."22 A smile immediately came to anyone recalling his contribution to life at university. The younger children, Louise and Harold, really belonged to a different generation. By the time Louise was ready to enter university, her widowed mother had moved to i Sultan Street, near the new Victoria University at Queen's Park, Toronto. Louise first enrolled at University College but later transferred to Victoria, where she served as president of the Women's Literary Society and contributed extensively to Acta Victoriana on literary topics and women's issues. On graduating in Modern Languages in 1897, she remained active in Toronto literary circles and college alumnae affairs.23 Harold, rather than attend college, initially went into business as a commercial traveller. Later he worked as a local manufacturer's agent in the Merson-Nelles Company in Toronto. After he married Marnie White, he accepted a position with Richardson and Company in Montreal. Finally Harold joined the staff of the Bronfman distillery empire in Montreal, serving as a grain buyer until he was ninety-six years old.24 From the late 18705, life also changed dramatically for the young men at Victoria. They began to promote an identity as a unique and significant collectivity, expending great effort on improving their own

2,12,

Faithful Intellect

scholarly opportunities. Much of the advance was realized through their own associations and clubs. The broadening scope of academic opportunity for the student body of nearly 300 was matched by increasingly diverse recreational and social activities. Nelles understood the worth of these groups but also knew that students had to be prepared to commit the time and energy to running them. When he had been a student, organizations had only lasted as long as a few enthusiastic leaders were willing to keep them alive. In 1857, as noted earlier, Victoria's intellectual and social life was marked by the formation of the Literary Association. Nelles helped by serving as honorary president for several years, but the club was directed and financed by the students themselves. Nelles also agreed to authorize more associations when the scholars were prepared to accept the added responsibilities.15 He knew that the lessons learned by participation were as important for future success as any knowledge garnered in the classroom. For years the Literary Association served as an umbrella for all the various social and intellectual activities run by students. Even after other organizations were formed to meet more specialized needs, it still supplied outstanding leadership and served as an excellent supplement to all the academic subjects.26 It was particularly useful in cultivating the young scholars' rhetorical and literary talents, organizing monthly entertainments that sometimes took the form of debates on important current questions, including "Home Rule for Ireland" and "Moral Duty." Addresses and orations by members or noted visitors on such topics as "Science as a Civilizing Power" were discussed and critically assessed by the audience. Musical evenings and poetry reading broadened the fare. The Literary Association also oversaw a library and reading room, valuable assets since students were generally excluded from the small college library. In 1883, the society established a science museum containing cabinets of specimens, including an Egyptian mummy purchased in 1871 and the vast quantities of native artifacts deposited at Victoria by alumni who had become Methodist missionaries. These exhibits were later transferred to the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto/7 As the number and variety of student clubs expanded, they assumed many of the Literary Association's functions. A select committee of students, faculty, and alumni took over the direction of the spring conversazione, which had taken place annually since 1862.. The committee invited guests such as the prominent lawyer John Maclaren or the Honourable George Ross, Minister of Education, to act as chairman. The affair took place during convocation week at the Victoria Opera House. Acta Victoriana described it in 1883:

Family and University Life

2.13

In the evening, the youth and beauty of the town of Cobourg and adjacent towns gathered in the large Victoria Opera House. The programme consisted of songs alternated with music by an Italian orchestra. The vocal part of the programme was admirably sustained by Miss Hillary; Messrs Doward, Nelles [Fred], and the Glee Club ... The gay throng broke up in the small hours of the morning, and in a few minutes past one, of all the silks and satins, dress-coats and gowns, not one remained.18

The college Glee Club was featured at many social evenings; Fred Nelles was for years a widely acclaimed member. After graduation, he and several friends rented halls in the surrounding communities to hold concerts and perform plays.29 The Literary Association also published Acta Victoriana. This monthly journal, published from October to May, started life in the fall of 1878 and has continued in a variety of formats ever since.30 Currently it is an independent semi-annual literary magazine featuring poetry, short stories, and artwork. It has always been run by an editorial committee of students and recent alumni without external supervision. Designed to serve all student societies, at times it had a bitter relationship with the journal established by the Science Association. In Nelles's day Acta contained literary pieces, general college news, editorials on important issues facing the university, humourous anecdotes, and discussions of interest to the students and alumni. Moreover, it supplied publicity for Victoria while awakening a wider interest in university work among the Canadian public. It also helped bind college alumni to their alma mater; the editors recognized their value in promoting the college. Acta formed a bridge with other universities in Canada and provided information on American post-secondary institutions. At the same time, it took its independence seriously and was surprisingly critical of flaws in the academic or social life or the administration of the college. Acta Victoriana helped define the characteristics of the modern university student. Its first editor was Thomas Campbell; Arthur Coleman, who was teaching at Cobourg Collegiate, was associate editor. Clifford Sifton, later founder of the Winnipeg Free Press and Minister of the Interior in Wilfrid Laurier's Cabinet, acted as business manager.31 While the magazine ably discussed many vital matters, both faculty and students most enjoyed its humour. Acta specialized in reporting the farcical situations that arose at college and never tired of lampooning the pompous or mocking the outlandish. President Nelles was notorious for his puns, and Acta took its cue from him. The editors recognized that the humour was juvenile but enjoyed it anyway. For

214

Faithful Intellect

instance, they were pleased to announce that "Dr. Nelles has begun to mend his ways, and to take steps towards perfection by having his front steps remodeled." Later, Acta informed its readers, "It is unnecessary for the president to request the students to read part of Ferrier in a curse (c) ory way." Again, at the Literary Association's December meeting, a student proposed a toast to the ladies: "If there were no ladies, there would be an absolute stag-nation."32 Acta also took delight in mocking the theologues. It expressed suspicion about a theology student's "common sense" when he asked his professor to sell his assigned textbook and about another who did not recognize when Nelles was not making a pun.33 Of course, the first-year students were the standard targets for good-natured abuse. Their rustic language, appearance, or manners and apparent lack of sophistication supplied an endless source of amusement. At the beginning of the 1880 academic year, the magazine reported: "It would require a tremendous stretch of imagination to make Fred [Nelles] look like a professor; yet one of the Freshies innocently asked his permission to go downtown between his examinations. Fred said he might go. Indulgent boy!"34 But neither the senior students nor the faculty were immune to Acta's jesting; the same issue remarked: "The Freshmen look care worn and weary lately. An unexplainable, indefinable 'feeling of sadness and longing' drives them hither and thither throughout the town. Prof. Reynar makes puns! They can stand the President, but if the whole faculty start at it, they will have to leave, that's all." A month later Acta teased, "Something has got into our Professors. They attend prayers with the most scrupulous regularity. One of the seniors thinks they must have been frightened into making a promise during some thunderstorm."35 In 1881, the editors made gentle sport of students who were required to repeat failed examinations: "A larger number of boys than usual came back a few weeks earlier to have a nice quiet time with their Cobourg friends. Now boys, don't get your mad up we did not say supple-men-tarry."36 Humour also underlay many of the reports on newsworthy events at the college. Over the years, one of the principal sources of student discontent was the wooden outbuilding originally used as a chapel and then as a science laboratory, known sarcastically as "the barn." The editors of Acta could barely restrain their joy when it burned down in the spring of 1884. The financial loss would be met by insurance, so it was not a great calamity for the college, and the students hoped that some of the money would be used to improve athletic facilities. Acta announced: "Woe to the gushers, the 'old Barn' has fallen! The great barn that for years stood in all its native ugliness upon the campus ...

Family and University Life

215

is now gone to that bourne from which no barn returns."37 The editors later noted that some wit had put up a cartoon showing President Nelles and the Dean of Arts, Alfred Reynar, inadvertently knocking over a lantern while playing cards in "the barn." Nelles enjoyed the puns and even the harmless barrages when they were aimed at himself and did not offend other members of the college. In 1874 two new organizations came into existence that mirrored the growing specialization at Victoria. Theology students established the Jackson Society, named in honour of Edward and Lydia Jackson of Hamilton, with membership open to all local clergy and anyone at the university intending to enter the ministry. Before merging with the Literary Association it helped improve the homiletic and literary skills of young preachers and broadened their educational experience. At the same time, some of the ablest students organized the Science Association, also known as the V.P. Society, to advance inquiry at Victoria. The group in many ways paralleled the numerous literary and scientific societies being formed throughout Canada by professional scholars, whose discussions covered the whole spectrum of contemporary issues.38 The Science Association limited membership to fifteen promising first- or second-year students. Because of his belief in the tremendous value of science for all students, Nelles often chaired its monthly meetings and gave it pride of place in rooms at the university. The association supplemented its regular schedule of essays and debates by students and faculty with guest lectures from members of the community and prominent North American scientists. For instance, the popular Arthur Coleman gave an address on "The Physical and Chemical Composition of the Sun." In 1883,tne Science Association began publishing the V.P. Journal, containing articles by college members and valuable excerpts from other scientific magazines. The publication demonstrated the practical application of experimentation to current professions and reported on modern findings in all branches of science. Its greatest interest, however, centred on the relationship of evolution and science with religion. After two years the association changed its name to Kosmos but continued its schedule of eight issues from July to May.39 Although the Faculty of Science and the Faculty of Arts had an overlapping enrolment, a disturbing rivalry was rapidly causing friction at Victoria. The highly select nature of membership in the V.P. Society gave offence to non-members and fostered ideas of superiority among members that were reinforced by the belief that science was more valuable than any other field of study. The name V.P. itself was rarely explained to the uninitiated - deliberately so, to convey an element of exclusive secrecy. It stood for Victoria Pyramid, and a pyramid was

zi6

Faithful Intellect

displayed on the pin worn by members. Nelles appreciated the interest in science but worried about the negative overtones inherent in the club's exclusiveness. However, with everything else that was going on in his family and college affairs, he could find neither the time nor the energy to resolve the division among his students, ultimately leaving it to Nathanael Burwash, Eugene Haanel, and Arthur Coleman to work out a solution.40 Under pressure from the faculty, the V.P. Society decided to sever its relations with the college. In December 1886 it transferred Kosmos to the more broadly based Natural Science Association. This society, formed in 1878, did not immediately continue to publish Kosmos, because of uncertainty over science at Victoria in light of university federation. The next spring, the editor of Acta offered his own biased assessment: The V.P. Society having ceased to be a college society, has handed over its organ Kosmos to the new secret science society. This society has decided not to continue the publication of the journal for the present. We admire the wisdom of the decision. Founded in rivalry, it kept open old sores, which otherwise might in a measure have healed. That it ever had a true mission to perform, we sincerely doubt. While a credit to the university, it was not truly a student newspaper.41

The Natural Science Association was open to any student enrolled in at least one science subject and tended to rely more on student and faculty contributions. Its debates ranged from "Spontaneous Creation" to the functions of bacteria.42 However, as the Acta report suggested, the Natural Science Association also quickly came to consider itself superior to other university organizations and to adopt special elements to distinguish its members. Because it dealt with more than natural science, it adopted as a new name Naiei soteria aletheia (Salvation dwells in truth) Society.43 Despite its flaws, the new society was supported by many of the best students and did its part to popularize the modern sciences. It also gave proof of the growing stature achieved by Victoria in these new fields. However, it failed to survive the move to Toronto in 1891, since science ceased to be taught as a college subject. Both paralleling and competing with the global interest in science, authorities in Europe and North America were gathering social, religious, and intellectual forces to evangelize and ultimately convert the world to Christianity. In the words of Alexander Sutherland, the head of Methodist mission operations in Canada, "Christian missions do not belong to the category of experiments, expedients or voluntary benevolence. Their foundation is the revealed will of God ... The

Family and University Life

2.17

missionary enterprise is not a mere aspect or phase of Christianity; it is Christianity itself."44 An integral component of this spiritual and moral commitment was the fostering of organizations that harnessed the significant numbers of well-educated, energetic young people to a variety of good causes. Many university students were already searching for meaningful ways of utilizing their talents and passions for the benefit of the world. The commitment to missionary work, including social and moral reform, came to dominate the lives of thousands of young men and women in the decades from the 18705 to the Great War. Victoria's students naturally wished to lead in the lively new international evangelical movements and fervently desired to participate in voluntary denominational and inter-denominational associations.45 They could thereby fulfill their Christian duty while proving their distinctive worth as college students and Canadians. In 1880 a representative of the international YMCA arrived from Princeton to set up a branch at Victoria. Although Acta originally reflected irritation at having another organization on campus, even questioning its religious nature, the Young Men's Christian Association quickly became a popular and effective college society.46 With its local, national, and international meetings and its focus on improving the lives of young people throughout the world, it provided a progressive and stimulating environment for students at Victoria. Nelles had laboured throughout his life to instill faithful dedication to evangelical programs aimed at moral, spiritual, and intellectual improvement, and he encouraged members of the Victoria community to accept responsible positions in the YMCA and, later, the YWCA. The Dominion Council of the YMCA held a successful convention at Victoria during the summer of 1881. Two students and two members of the faculty represented Victoria, and Nathanael Burwash was elected president for Canada.47 In 1885, the YMCA was joined on campus by the new Inter-collegiate Missionary Alliance, which organized public meetings with popular guest speakers and hoped to concentrate the Protestant evangelical energy so prevalent at colleges on the goals of missions. Nelles cooperated whenever possible to strengthen students' resolve to participate in mission work. Over the following decades, a surprising array of mission-oriented societies carried on this tradition at Victoria, including the Methodist Missionary and Woman's Missionary Society; the denominational Epworth League and Young People's Forward Movement for Missions; and the non-denominational Student Volunteer Movement and its successor, the Student Christian Movement. Added to these were more localized work in Settlement projects and city missions.48 Critical for the church, much of the commitment to mission causes continued even after the students completed college. They

2.18

Faithful Intellect

joined new men's and women's organizations and revitalized traditional societies to the end of furthering the drive for world-wide evangelization.49 At the same time, students from Victoria led the transformation of the nature of Methodist missions both abroad and at home. The old conservative focus on conversion was, by the end of the century, redirected to supplying educational and medical facilities. Preparing human beings for heaven was critical, but it was also essential to help improve their earthly condition. A free, healthy, educated individual made a superior candidate for Christianity and was better able to appreciate the Christian message of personal salvation. Where needed, missions also promoted social justice and ethical humanitarianism. These liberal principles were well within the intellectual framework that Nelles had inspired in his students. They challenged the church to address the oppressive political, economic, and social abuses of urban industrial Canada as it entered the twentieth century.50 Although these organizations and activities held honoured places at Victoria, most students preferred sports and recreation. Athletics helped to improve physical health and therefore served as a valuable auxiliary to scholastic work. At the same time, sports provided an excellent outlet for excess energy and pent-up frustrations. Almost by osmosis, they also advanced personal pride and self-awareness, instilled loyalty to Victoria, and created a shared comradeship among participants and with spectators. Whenever alumni gathered together they embellished the old sports stories until few remembered or cared about the actual details. Good athletes such as Alex Langford quickly became legends, worthy contests became struggles of Homeric proportions, and the enjoyment of the occasions grew accordingly. After the college moved to the city, these memories and the continuing athletic competitions helped keep alive the spirit of independence at Victoria, limiting its assimilation into the University of Toronto. College sports relied heavily on the best Greek and Roman model of individual struggle against fate and the fickle gods. Determination, honour, and fortitude were the only armour in this uneven contest. But the most noble were not always victorious, and justice did not always prevail. Sports taught students to accept victory as graciously as defeat and always to abide by the prescribed code of conduct. Cheating was a personal betrayal; it accomplished nothing since all competitions were in reality struggles with oneself.51 Notions of sportsmanship and fair play were readily transferred to other activities and supplied excellent precepts for life. Sports therefore improved character by ingraining social and moral discipline. They also provided essential opportunities for inexperienced and unsure youths to measure their relative prowess and

Family and University Life

219

physical and mental progress in a safe, controlled environment.52 Thus, athletics prepared the young for their later occupations and socialized them into the world at large. Darwinism had provided sufficient proof that life involved constant struggle and the fit were more likely to succeed. Skills were honed by competition. "A sense of proportion between the exertions of the body and mind was essential to the shaping of a triumph or a life."53 Sports at Victoria during the i88os emphasized "manliness," not muscular development. Like Arnold's Rugby school, Victoria encouraged athletic participation because it advanced not only physical but more especially intellectual, emotional, and moral growth. The novels of Sir Walter Scott illustrated the desired attributes of the scholarathlete: indefatigable chivalry, daring, and courage. After all, it was moral, mental, and emotional determination - the ability to overcome adversity, face discomfort, and challenge fear and pain - that would ultimately evangelize the world and expand the British Empire. Society held deeply ingrained notions of ideal manliness, assuming that a true man - one who was sober, hard-working, and respectable - was inherently incapable of acting unmanly.54 Brute force and an obsessive preoccupation with physical masculinity were of little value in overcoming life's meaningful challenges. As Goldwin Smith declared, "It is difficult to believe that the abnormal and temporary development of muscles can really be conducive, as regular exercise and exhilarating pastimes are, to the normal and permanent health required to sustain intellectual labour in after-life."55 It would take at least another generation before worries over the apparent feminization of society and religion induced authorities to advance ideas of "muscular" Christianity. In the twentieth century, numerous organizations, including the Boy Scouts and the YMCA, attempted to emulate adventurers such as Theodore Roosevelt who physically attacked raw nature. The perceived need for masculine strength to defend the empire in case of war and the fear that the British race had become too dissipated to do so, added a patriotic note to physical exercise and athletic competition.56 These militaristic goals had little influence in the i88os. During this era, the favourite team sport at Victoria was rugby, which displayed the manly skills and promoted teamwork and cooperation. On several occasions, Victoria hosted tournaments involving teams from the leading schools in Ontario and Quebec. In 1879, for instance, Knox, Trinity, and University Colleges and Toronto and Trinity Medical Schools came to Cobourg to test their skills against one another. Such contests helped forge bonds among Ontario's post-secondary institutions and enhanced the self-identification of college students as a distinct group.57 Victoria also competed in matches against teams from eastern

220

Faithful Intellect

Ontario. The growth of towns and cities combined with improved transportation to create better opportunities for competition; however, care was needed to make sure that evils associated with professionalization, including gambling and corruption, did not ruin the sports.58 Given the relatively small and changing student body, skilled teams were not always possible at Victoria. After a low point in 1880, student leaders reorganized the rugby team and instituted a demanding regime of practices and training sessions. It was typical of the greater codification and standardization of all sports during the late nineteenth century that the team replaced the Dominion Association rules with the Rugby Union rules and helped organize the Intercollegiate Football Association as the new governing body for Canada. Beginning in 1881, Victoria sponsored an annual tournament open to all college teams in the country to which, two years later, the faculty donated a silver cup for the champions.59 Led by Samuel Nelles, Alfred Reynar, and Eugene Haanel, the faculty also threw their support behind the students' demand for a rugby field on campus; the team had to play its home games at the Cobourg Agricultural Grounds. Finally, in the summer of 1884, when the debris was cleared away, a proper field was laid out on the land formerly occupied by the "old barn."60 Along with rugby, other warm weather team sports such as lacrosse, cricket, and baseball were played intermittently at Victoria, and track and field remained popular. For students, the benefits of organized sports as ancillary to mental and moral development were basically irrelevant; they participated simply because it was fun. The favourite intramural sport was handball, or alley ball as it was known to members of the Victoria community. Spirited contests pitted "year" teams against each other. In 1880, Acta sarcastically reported that, when the sophomores defeated the seniors, the older students were afraid to show their faces on campus.61 The alley was actually a low wooden platform facing a high wall. Unfortunately, it deteriorated quickly during the winter months, forcing students to constantly urge the administration to repair their only real athletic facility. As part of the general improvement of the grounds during the summer of 1884, the authorities laid out a new alley on the edge of the campus large enough to allow four pairs of combatants to play simultaneously. Errant balls had to be retrieved surreptitiously from the adjoining orchard; the farmer was too experienced with raids on his apples to suffer intruders gladly.62 A long-time source of vociferous student complaints was the lack of a proper gymnasium for the winter months. In 1880, a determined corps of scholars took up the cause. It was well known that successful American colleges relied on superior athletic facilities to attract

Family and University Life

221

students and financial support from alumni. Furthermore, no-one doubted their health benefits; the educational press was full of articles arguing that bodily health was essential for proper mental training and that developing strong lungs and promoting regular athletic programs were critical components of the modern university curriculum.63 A graduate wrote in Acta: "I think if anyone should be indicted it should be your respected President and professors, for no one knows better than they, that a sound mind in a sound body is an axiom that embodies the two essential principles of a perfect education."64 Most students readily agreed that Victoria did not provide sufficiently for vital physical development. College officials blamed a lack of funds, a tactic used whenever they did not wish to pursue a particular course of action.65 The Board of Regents refused to consider the construction of a gymnasium even after the students had secured impressive subscriptions from friends of the college, alumni, and the town of Cobourg at large. The organizers hoped that some of the profits from the second Remenyi concert, planned for the fall of 1881, could also be assigned to this project and proposed that an assessment be added to future student fees to pay off any remaining cost. By April 1881, the Toronto architectural firm of Langley, Langley and Burke had prepared plans for quite an elaborate building.66 The drawings were displayed in Cobourg and printed in the Canadian Illustrated News. After the students left in the spring, the board, apparently over Nelles's objections, refused to allow its property to be used for athletic purposes. By the opening of classes in the fall the scheme was dead. The students bitterly denounced their betrayal by the board and threatened that, since their alumni allies were gradually expanding their influence in college affairs, "a little more publicity in the transactions of this modern StarChamber, and a little of the new blood [of alumni] which has proved so beneficial an infusion in the Senate, would be accepted as improvements by all interested in the welfare of the university."67 In retrospect, what with Victoria moving to Toronto, it was wise not to invest in expensive athletic facilities in Cobourg - but it was parsimony, not clairvoyance, that guided the board's decision. Students were not limited to participating in structured athletic, social, or intellectual programs. In fact, most of them remained mere spectators. Walks in the countryside, cooling off by the lake, informal athletic matches, simple conversation, or visits to the shops in town supplied welcome breaks from college routine. During the winter, the scholars added skating carnivals to the casual recreation at the ice rink: a convenient yet respectable rendezvous for young "Romeo and Juliets."68 After Victoria admitted women, the skating rink was one of the few meeting places where the sexes could freely mingle. Young women

2.22.

Faithful Intellect

from Brookhurst College and the collegiate, as well as from town and the local farms, also enjoyed the chance to socialize with the college men under mild community supervision. In addition, most students shared the joy of sleigh riding through the countryside, and short visits to Port Hope or Belleville could be accomplished without undue disruption to the academic routine. Some recreations, such as card playing or drinking, were frowned upon, though they still occurred. "Old" cider was a particular favourite on festive occasions, and students indulged in wine for celebrations as well as for its medicinal and sacramental value. Liquor sometimes slipped into extracurricular activities, but beer, the temperance drink, was more common; both were normally reserved for school breaks. The writers for Acta encouraged the senior students to learn how to dance, recognizing the advantage of such social skills in later life. They noted - without the same approval - the popularity of smoking, especially among new students. Smoking cigars seems to have been a rite of passage from adolescence and rigid parental supervision to quasi-independence. Non-Methodists were more likely to smoke, but even theology students participated. The pipe was favoured by ministers in training.69 It was really not until a generation or two later, after the move to Toronto, that a more puritanical attitude came to dominate life at Victoria. The denunciation of these activities reflected the attitude of Nelles's successor Nathanael Burwash in concert with the rising influence of the social gospel movement, with its fear of the inherent evil of urbanization and industrialization. It was exaggerated by the growing number of female students. Women were assumed to be moral, and men were expected to be civilized by - and in - their presence.70 Male students were also convinced by their elders that they should follow a high standard of moral conduct as an example to the Canadian society they would soon be called upon to lead. During the last quarter of the nineteenth century, students across North America gradually came to see themselves as a unique and creditable segment of society. A subtle aggressiveness attended their pursuit of respectable independent status, in both their college and the wider community. This attitude was derived in part from their expanding numbers and their expectations of future economic and social prominence. Another factor was their new tendency to remain at college for a full four-year term; formerly, students had usually taken only a few courses over several years while continuing to participate in the work force. The particular status of being a college student was further promoted by the school newspapers and the popular press. Moreover, in Canada, provincial high school programs became the normal preparation for college, guaranteeing that university students would be

Family and University Life

223

about the same mature age and shared a somewhat uniform preliminary education. When high school and university students still attended Victoria together, Samuel Nelles might insist on apologies from anyone who complained about the chapel being too cold or other structural flaws, though this reaction may have been the result of his sleepless nights or concerns over the loss of government grants.71 Later, as university identity became more concrete, such disciplinary demands would have been ignored by the students, and would likely not have been made at all over minor breaches of civility. For instance, in 1880 criticism of the poor ventilation in the college led to efforts at improvement. Still, at a time when adult status was conferred by the wider community on married or economically independent individuals, college attendance postponed such recognition.72 Yet the students were not children, and they refused to be trivialized or bound by arbitrary regulation. They felt capable of making responsible decisions related to their own personal and educational welfare. Nelles encouraged such self-awareness by acknowledging their collective status and supporting their initiatives whenever they seemed reasonable. However, students did not always wait on Nelles's approval. They maintained a critical interest in college decisions, especially those related to academic affairs or the curriculum. In a letter to Acta in 1879, W.S. Ellis declared: The president in his opening remarks warned the students not to quarrel with the curriculum. Now the students have a perfect right to quarrel with the curriculum if they want to. They come here and pay their money for an education, and they have a right to the best education they can procure for their money. If they think an advantageous change can be made, by whose authority are they forbidden to try to obtain the alteration?73

On the same topic, Acta noted in 1883: "During the past four years many radical but beneficial changes have been made in our curriculum, and we suppose that this year other changes will take place. Perhaps the students should not try to interfere with the decisions of the Faculty, but since they are affected by that, we think that their opinions should be accepted and considered for what they are worth."74 These were not the cries of radicals seeking to undermine authority but rather the reasoned comments of members of a cohesive academic community. Many of their sensible suggestions were, in fact, adopted by the college. Victoria students enrolled in one of two streams of courses. Most followed a general Pass program that encouraged a "well balanced and

224

Faithful Intellect

varied culture ... not with a view of stimulating extraordinary proficiency in particular departments."75 The rest took an Honours curriculum, which promised greater specialization and more intensive study. By the i88os, both faculty and students recognized that the Pass program conferred a satisfactory, balanced education that was at least equal to any at a Canadian university. The major fear was that too many electives might jeopardize the best elements of a liberal education.76 However, the Honours programs, first introduced in 1863, were in need of serious reform before they could inculcate comprehensive knowledge. Only English allowed optional Honours courses in all four years to broaden the training beyond core material. The Elements of Natural Science courses were available in every year, and compulsory in most. However, Modern Languages were not taught until late in the students' careers, and Classics and Mathematics had only limited offerings after second year. Indeed, Honours and Pass students encountered essentially the same material, with little opportunity for concentration. Honours students were required to do extra work and maintain higher grades in their specialty, but the only additional demand on them was to write special tests for medals and awards. They could fail Pass courses without affecting their standing in the Honours program and could shift specialties on a whim or to conceal scholastic weakness without academic penalty. Graduating Honours students emerged without a thorough knowledge in any field.77 Most universities in North America were increasingly downplaying a reliance on theological or even religious conformity. They fostered a broad liberal culture to undergird their new trust in religious pluralism and, in many cases, their acceptance of the primacy of secular goals. This change in attitude was reflected in the concentration on science, the social sciences, and modern languages, as opposed to the classics, mathematics, and moral philosophy. In all fields, there was a move to simultaneously broaden the base of studies and focus on highly specialized topics.78 Education became more practical in its orientation, and often more directed toward specific career options. Greater use of laboratories and modern scientific methodology improved students' analytical skills and, by extension, their preparation for teaching or for occupations such as surveying, mining, navigation, and engineering. Graduate studies also became more important and tended to take an experimental research orientation. During the 18705, the American Ph.D. degree began to emerge as the premier testament to both specific knowledge and skill in modern research techniques.79 During the early i88os, following deep discussions among Victoria alumni, faculty, and students, significant reforms were implemented in the curriculum. They were intended principally to improve the

Family and University Life

ZZ5

Honours programs: more systematic study, appropriate options in all disciplines for all four years, and greater opportunity for specialization in order to focus academic labours. Henceforth there would be five distinct Honours programs: Classics, Mathematics, Metaphysics, Modern Languages, and Natural Sciences. Students could choose to take, for example, Classics or Modern Languages options in third and fourth year. German was made compulsory in second year, while French was required in both first and second year. Logic was moved to third year; Geology to fourth. To acknowledge both the greater equality of subjects and the increased workload in each specialty, gold and silver medals were presented to the best scholars in each Honours discipline.80 The changes made in the combined English/History department were indicative of the increased academic demands and opportunities placed before the students. In November 1884, the V.P. Journal compared the current English and History curriculum with that of five years earlier. The commentator assumed that the two subjects were inseparable, properly set apart in a department of their own. In 1879, the four-year English curriculum had covered Rhetoric, Composition, and Literature. The latter involved selections from Bacon, Addison, Chaucer, Spencer, Pope, and Wordsworth. The English canon also included Shakespeare's Hamlet and Merchant of Venice, with Honours specialists writing four essays during their careers. This schedule was not very onerous, even when examinations for medals and scholarships were added. Honours students also studied - over two years - Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, the first volume of Macaulay's History, and Guizot's History of Civilization. In 1884, the English courses still extended over four years and History over two. Although the study of English literature was normally placed in a historical context, the History courses were expanded to include Macaulay's History, Moleworth's History of England, Smith's Old and New Testament History, and Taswell-Langmead's Constitutional History. Gibbon was now used in association with the Classics department. A detailed history of the Holy Land was compulsory material for theology students. English still covered Rhetoric and Composition, but more emphasis was placed on essay writing. It was the Literature component that saw the most significant expansion, with selections from Milton, Johnston, and Bacon's Essays, two works from Trench, Cowper, Burns, or Shelley; The Ancient Mariner, In Memoriam, Scott's Lay of the Minstrel, Evangeline, Wordsworth's Odes, Book I of The Faerie Queen, Annus Mirabilis, Chaucer's Prologue and Knight's Tale, Aeropagitica, Comus, II Pensoroso, and Stedman's Victorian Poets. Shakespeare was now represented by Hamlet,

2,2.6

Faithful Intellect

The Merchant of Venice, King Lear, The Tempest, Macbeth, and As You Like It. These wide-ranging works acquainted the students with the best English authors and introduced them to the most important literary themes in order to deepen their scholarly understanding. The V.P. Journal commented that "Victoria is awakening to the fact that the mother tongue can influence and improve her sons as well as the dead tongues."81 In fact, English was receiving greater emphasis at all universities, and its teaching in the high schools meant that this growth would continue. The dream of a broad and liberal education to which Egerton Ryerson had given voice so long ago in his inaugural address at the opening of Victoria College might finally be coming to fruition. But the college needed more and better-prepared faculty members to teach the new range of courses. The Classics department wanted reforms as well. At the same time, it was under assault from those who resented its traditionally superior status. However, Latin and Greek were originally compulsory only for the first two years; with little opportunity for more specialized work in later years. The scholars argued that the professors should not be teaching simple grammar to theology students who lacked basic Greek, when it was available at Cobourg Collegiate. In 1882, the college senate agreed, and freed up the time for more senior-level courses. Although students of Classics were frustrated by the ongoing attacks on the status of their discipline by the elevation of Modern Languages and the explosion of courses in Natural Sciences, Acta noted: The dead languages have displayed a vitality which has astonished their opponents. In some cases they were made optional, and it was said that when placed on equal terms with other subjects they would be neglected. Experience has proved that such is not the case ... We regard the recent changes in the calendar of our University as reasonable concessions to the tastes of those who desire a wider field of choice, but we should object most strenuously to any further alterations which would have the effect of diminishing the amount of Classics prescribed.82-

Greek and Latin were intrinsically valuable as wellsprings of the fundamental ideas upon which Western civilization was constructed. They were also vital for comprehending English and other European languages. More especially, the age needed the intellectual and spiritual inspiration inherent in all Greek writings from the Iliad to the New Testament.83 Students concentrating in Modern Languages or Natural Sciences similarly wished to see their objections addressed during this period of

Family and University Life

2.2,7

reform. Along with the opportunity to study French and German early in their academic training, Modern Languages specialists wanted more detailed courses. They further proposed that emphasis should be placed on modern speaking and writing rather than on ancient usages.84 An example of Victoria's growing flexibility and commitment to innovation could be seen in 1886 when it began teaching Japanese to assist future missionaries, because a Japanese national was studying theology at the college. As for the science students, they felt their courses should concentrate on personal experimentation instead of second-hand learning from lectures and a textbook. Some even suggested abandoning texts altogether. It was also proposed that scientific principles should be applied to other fields of intellectual endeavour. Despite Victoria's early leadership in scientific studies in Canada, improvements to the Natural Sciences program remained imperative: more faculty and more money were needed. Students in other specialties naturally objected that science was already over-emphasized, observing that, to earn a B.A., it was not necessary to be correct in English expression or to have read the great authors, but it was compulsory to understand the motion of a pendulum. 85 The value of John Stuart Mill and his associates may have been a matter of debate in Nelles's Philosophy seminar, but utilitarianism and materialistic science dominated much of the university pedagogy and many views of progress during the i88os. All subjects were forced to submit themselves to the tests of progressiveness and utility. For some faculty and students, options were valuable only insofar as they added to the knowledge needed in future occupations. For this reason, political science, psychology, sociology, and many other specialized fields of study were recommended for inclusion in the Arts curriculum. The sciences now claimed pre-eminence and, at least partly because of their practical improvement of life, "have been elevated to the vacant throne formerly occupied by Classics and Philosophy."86 Even most Literature students agreed that "the test of utility is not an unfair test to which to bring the study of Literature, or any other study or pursuit. Unfairness often lies, however, in the false measure of utility that some professed lovers of the useful would apply ... Intellectual culture, social and domestic affection, and even moral excellence are neglected and sometimes bartered for what they call really useful."87 Rather than encouraging proper character formation, a truly useful education "aims to develop a vigor and versatility of thought, a justness and delicacy of taste, and a purity and nobleness of feeling: there is no more useful instrument of education in this high aim than the study of literature."88 Understanding education in these terms meant

2±8

Faithful Intellect

that the classics, philosophy, metaphysics, and history remained critical for the future world. According to Hegel, History proved its utility by supplying vital insights into the progress of mankind. At Victoria, its study was deemed essential in understanding the unity and gradual elevation of humanity and the relationship of God to the world. Nelles hoped all his students would obtain a sound, balanced education that still recognized the link between secular culture and spiritual enlightenment in meeting the challenges facing society.89 In the course of the reforms of the early i88os, students also made more mundane recommendations to improve their academic experience. For example, they suggested that all exam questions should be printed, rather than dictated during the testing period. They also recommended that results should be posted, on the assumption that publicizing grades would discourage laziness and demonstrate the actual standards achieved to the broader community. Another suggestion was that shorthand should be taught in first year, to improve the quality of note-taking. Some students unsuccessfully opposed the new regulation forbidding admission to examinations to anyone who had not attended eighty per cent of the lectures; others asserted that medals should be assigned on the basis of coursework, not the results of special examinations. In addition, there was general agreement that the published curriculum "is about as useful a guide to our studies as Ayer's Almanac is to the weather."90 More serious complaints concerned the restrictions on the use of the college library and scientific apparatus. When Faraday Hall opened in 1878 and space was rationalized in the main college building, five rooms on the third floor were converted into a library and reading room. In response to a student petition, the faculty warily agreed to allow use of the facilities on certain conditions: a deposit of ten dollars, an annual fee of two dollars, and restrictions on the actual use of the books. The students denounced these conditions as excessive. In 1880, despite some extraordinary comments that students did not have time to use the library, there were calls to improve its quality and provide easier access.91 However, no reforms were implemented. In 1886, Acta again admonished the university authorities about the great disability under which students were suffering: "When you contrast the library of your Alma Mater with that of the Kingston Penitentiary, and are in doubt to which to give the preference, and when you find that it is almost as difficult to get into the Victoria Library as to escape from the Kingston Penitentiary ... "92 The issue of full student access to the university libraries was not finally resolved for another century. Students eventually had slightly better success gaining access to the telescope that Professor Haanel had purchased in Europe. It remained

Family and University Life

2x9

in storage for over five years despite the science students' annual call to make the instrument available. In i88z, Acta asked, not for the first time: "Is there a telescope, and if so when, where, and how is it to be mounted?"93 At the end of that year it was finally placed in the tower erected for it in Faraday Hall, because the Canadian government had selected Victoria as an observation point for witnessing the longanticipated transit of Venus. (These observations were combined with others from the international scientific community to ascertain the distance between the Earth and the Sun.) Over the years, the telescope made other key sightings and became an important tool for teaching astronomy in Cobourg and Toronto. The federal government also designated Faraday Hall as an official meteorological station, sending Victoria equipment for recording the weather.94 The students were appreciative, but felt the university should have utilized its scientific equipment long before the government initiative. Involvement in academic and intellectual concerns demonstrated the healthy maturation of university undergraduates in general. However, the students did not always want to be adults, at least not all the time. With the increased workload and greater expectations for high marks came a sense that something important was being lost in college life. Many alumni bewailed the emergence of overly serious students who seemed only to study and attend classes: The good old days of easy work and social song are becoming hallowed with the memories of time; they have gone never to return, destined to be surrounded with still greater mystery and fond remembrance. The roving rollicking student, now following the bounding football, now mingling in the gay and social circle, now rousing the slumbering town with boisterous song is going, and in his place we see the determined, practical, energetic plodder coming on, driven by increasing work, lured on by tempting flashy medals and decaying honours ... We all desire a thorough, practical education, but how the value of such a training is increased when embellished and rounded off by social training, grace of manner, dignity of bearing, generosity of spirit, and cheerfulness of disposition!95

The college years constituted an unparalleled interval when a desire for frivolity and unrestricted social comradeship could be indulged and many of the serious elements of adulthood postponed. This prolonged adolescence permitted the students to be somewhat irresponsible while engaging in their quest for a romantic life mission. Select customs, dress, and internally recognized codes of language and behaviour marked this stage of life and exemplified the status and mutual bonds linking all undergraduates. Although often contrived

230

Faithful Intellect

and artificial, they became vital means of distinguishing the university man or woman. The most immediately recognizable way to display distinctiveness and respectability was to wear the cap and gown. This custom was first introduced at Victoria College in the late 18508 among the medical students in Toronto and gradually spread to the undergraduates in Cobourg.96 However, it never gained universal acceptance, even by the faculty. Many students argued, rather frivolously, that the gown was inconvenient: it impeded free movement, it was not warm enough for winter use, it frightened animals when the wearer was walking in town, and it attracted the attention of strangers. A more important issue was the expense; if the authorities insisted that a gown be worn, they should supply one at low cost. Furthermore, there were many Methodists who opposed the growing tendency to wear the Geneva gown and other distinguishing clerical garb in the pulpit to demonstrate the status and respectability of the clergy. The opposition was easily transferred to a university costume that sought to raise the academic above the rest of the community. Supporters of the gown, meanwhile, felt that dignifying scholastics was a laudable goal.97 The i88os were also a period when insignia, awards, and songs were introduced to rally enthusiasm and nurture college spirit. A prize was given for the best song written for the conversazione; "Ode to Victoria," sung to "Rule Britannia," and, later, "Victoria Alma Mater," were prize-winners. In 1884, several of the songs previously introduced were collected and distributed to the student body.98 Eventually, Victoria University would select "On the Old Ontario Strand" as its official song, but this did not occur while Samuel Nelles still lived. Moreover, for a time the various classes adorned themselves with rings or pins to signify their year of graduation, and various years wore different colours on special occasions to set themselves apart. The most prestigious insignia, however, was the Senior Stick, a small walking cane presented for a combination of academic and social leadership to a student entering fourth year. Because the old cane was worn out and "would form a very interesting addition to the department of antiquities," a new ebony and gold Senior Stick was purchased for twenty dollars in 1880." The classes also celebrated the end of term by holding formal dinners in town. This practice was carried further by the Alumni Association, which sponsored reunions during spring convocation week. Originally proposed by William Beatty, the lumber magnate who founded the town of Parry Sound on Georgian Bay, the alumni dinners were expected to increase loyalty and encourage financial contributions to Victoria.100 While all these elements were useful in framing college life, no feature defined Victoria College more profoundly than the annual "Bob,"

Family and University Life

231

which was described as "the personality, the individuality, the very ego of the college."101 Started in 1874 as a combination of initiation and celebration, it was also an opportunity to collect money for Robert "Bob" Beare, the popular college janitor, as thanks for his many favours. Normally held in the late fall, the Bob good-naturedly mocked the first-year students while welcoming them to Victoria and simultaneously served as a coming-of-age for the sophomores, who entertained the college community. Their "review" satirized the foibles of the faculty, clergy, and well-known members of the Board of Regents, who sensibly absented themselves. Although the Bob was a venue for berating uncouth or inappropriate behaviour by some freshmen, it was never intended to debase or humiliate; such conduct was considered "unmanly, disreputable and barbaric."102 The Bob was, in short, a unifying and bonding ceremony in which the customs and mysteries of college life were shared and enlivened. A typical Bob took place on the evening of Wednesday, 6 December i88z, when hundreds of lights illuminated the front of the college to welcome the students and guests. Taking its theme from Oscar Wilde's North American tour, the evening was hosted by "Mr. Aesthete," who appeared dressed in a slate-coloured velvet suit trimmed with lace, sunflowers, and lilacs. He wore black stockings, kid slippers, and a golden wig; his glasses hung on a slender blue ribbon. After an evening of songs and skits by absurdly costumed sophomores, the purse was presented to Robert Beare. He replied "by a neat speech in which he touched upon the innocent evils of the sophomores, the wisdom, honour and nobility of the seniors, the mighty heights attained by the graduates, and his profound respect for all. He added that the return of the students after the long summer vacation was to him and the professors like a refreshing shower to the parched soil."103 The women students, who did not attend, forwarded a sarcastic address thanking the assembly for allowing them to supply refreshments. The cookies and cider were quickly consumed, and everyone retired about midnight. After a short rest, the students were roused to serenade the town of Cobourg for the remainder of the night. The exercise and shouting, it appears, allowed them to work off the influence of the cider.IQ4 Samuel Nelles was personally amused by such occasions, though he kept a discreet distance. His son Fred had been an eager participant during his second year. But some of the faculty and most of the college board and local clergy objected to the rowdy behaviour, the disrespectful satirizing, and the general assault on authority. In an effort to have the event cancelled, some professors punished the tired students by enforcing compulsory attendance at classes on the day after

232.

Faithful Intellect

the festivities. However, because the Bob raised much-needed support for Robert Beare and his large family and so quickly became a major event in the college year for students and alumni alike, it was impossible to eradicate. It continued every year until 1887 when, because of Nelles's untimely death, the students at first postponed and later cancelled it.105 The following year, it returned as spectacular as ever. As their numbers grew and their presence within the academic and social community gained acceptance, women played an increasingly central role in the Bob. Another function of the event, then, was to break down gender-based separation in the college. The Bob survived the move to Toronto, helping to perpetuate a distinct identity for Victoria in its new surroundings. Robert Beare transferred along with the university and added continuity and familiarity to college life until his death in 1910. The graduates placed a large clock dedicated to his memory in the foyer of the Birge-Carnegie Library when it opened in 1911. Nathanael Burwash penned a remarkable tribute to Beare in his history of Victoria College. "Forty years the college janitor, the shrewdest, most tactful, most popular man who ever filled such an office, potentially a millionaire or a colonial premier, but practically the loyal, loving servant of Victoria."106 To this day the Bob remains a prized feature of Victoria's social life and the basis of fond reminiscences among alumni. Participants are drawn from all years, and their presence has helped bind the students to each other and to Victoria despite the vast growth and diversity of the student body. Without a doubt, the admission of women to Ontario's universities was the greatest innovation in college affairs. Since Methodists had long been leaders in women's education, the presence of female students at Victoria was not nearly as controversial as at several other Canadian universities. As early as 1852, prominent Wesleyans writing in the Christian Guardian had argued, "While the necessity of providing colleges and universities, endowed with ample funds, for the education of young men is being felt, we see no reason why similar or suitable institutions for females ... should not be entitled to their proper share of consideration."107 Canadian Wesley ans hoped that, when the government assumed its duty to support higher education properly, a university would open to serve women. Episcopal Methodists were even more convinced of the benefits of female higher education; their Albert College, which opened in 1857, was the only Ontario university that did not formally exclude women.108 The Canada Christian Advocate in 1871 assured its readers: "Woman's mind is as capable of the development of the native vigor as man's."109 Females deserved equal access to higher education. The church opened Alexandra College for women as a partner to Albert College.

Family and University Life

233

By the iSyos, Canadian society was bombarded by support for women's higher education, especially in the areas of literary and scientific studies. Mary Electa Adams and her colleagues had for many years denounced the finishing-school approach to female education, which emphasized "accomplishments" subjects such as painting and playing the piano. William Henry Withrow, in the first issue of the Canadian Methodist Magazine, claimed that an educated womanhood was "an augury of brightest promise for the future of our country."110 He also denounced the "accomplishments" subjects, declaring: "No one was more injured by this mistaken training than woman herself. Her noblest powers were dwarfed, her range of thought was narrowed, and she was shut out from the intellectual enjoyments that ennoble and dignify our nature."111 Victoria's student press likewise condemned the finishing schools on the basis that they supplied only a shallow and spurious education. The real question was not whether young women should have access to higher education, but whether that education should be coeducational or in separate facilities. Many old-guard academics, including Goldwin Smith and Daniel Wilson at the University of Toronto, opposed coeducation on the grounds that women would be physically and intellectually ruined by the mental strain of competing with men or would lose their femininity in the contest.112 Even some women were ambivalent, advocating the advantages of all-female education on the basis that equality was impossible in the male-dominated institutions; women would be better served by separate schools where they could excel without distraction. The growing number of British and American women's colleges embodied this model.113 On the other hand, there were male and female voices alike that united in supporting coeducation and dismissing the underlying concerns over possible immorality. Joint education was deemed more economical since it eliminated duplication of facilities; it provided great incentive for both sexes to study; moreover, men and women would influence each other to act morally. After all, women trained in coeducational high schools were as moral as those trained separately. Nevertheless, even after the admission of women at McGill and Queen's, segregated education remained the norm for several years."4 Perhaps surprisingly, much of the most avid support for proper female education appeared in Acta Victoriana and the V.P. Journal. While some students remained skeptical or even opposed, most of the school's journalists were far more liberal and eagerly welcomed women to Victoria. They also did their best to eliminate any vestiges of prejudice that remained. Noting the opposition at the University of Toronto, Acta assured the women of Ontario: "Those who really

234

Faithful Intellect

want co-education will find equal facilities and advantages and fair competition at Victoria without being subjected to the annoyances and inconveniences experienced by lady undergraduates of the socalled Provincial University.""5 In 1882,, the University of Toronto refused admission to the first female student to apply. An increasingly out-of-touch President Daniel Wilson held the view that coeducation would damage the harmony of domestic life by weakening women's ability to manage their special sphere of activity. He wanted women to wait until a separate college was available and thereby preserve their precious qualities. Although he believed the rejected student would later thank him, she instead enrolled at Queen's."6 Even after the provincial legislature ordered the University of Toronto to admit women in 1884, Wilson delayed, arguing the absence of proper facilities. Victoria acknowledged that it, too, needed improved facilities and courses for both men and women, but nevertheless provided advanced and practical study in the Arts and Sciences. Acta added: "A proud day will it be for our land when the young ladies flock to our universities as earnest students, for then shall we all be able to look forward to mightier advancement in every sphere of life."117 In a comprehensive and remarkably progressive article in Kosmos in 1886, D.C. McHenry, principal of Cobourg Collegiate and a member of the Victoria University senate, stressed the need for intellectual training for women. He noted and dismissed the argument that women should only be prepared to assume a responsible role in their own fixed sphere of home and church. You know fair well that a true life must be an active life; that a worthy career must be a useful one. So that no fine theories as to your place in life will ever prevent you from securing such a liberal and general culture as will fit you for any place you may be called to occupy. That is, you know very well that woman has no one sphere in life fixed by nature; but that a wise Providence has ordered that, endowed with powers of varied application, she prepare, in ways both general and special, for entering upon any one of the many occupations of life.118

In the modern age, women could not always remain at home even if they wished to; they must therefore prepare for entering the work force at a responsible level. McHenry attacked the discrimination women faced, including legal disabilities over suffrage and property rights. He further argued that, if qualified, they should be free to enter any of the professions as equals - and moreover, "women, like men, should be paid in proportion to the intrinsic value of the work done, not based on gender.""9

Family and University Life

235

Samuel Nelles always supported education for women but in his early years was far from progressive in his views. He assumed there were medical and intellectual limits to what a woman could learn. In 1866, for example, he spoke at the Wesleyan Female Academy in Hamilton. "I laid much stress on proper selection of studies! Cautioned against Latin and Trigonometry for girls, except in rare cases. Miss Adams, the Principal, seemed to feel annoyed at this, and remarked upon it to me privately. "I2° Nelles was talking to young teenage girls and was surprised by Adams's reaction to what he felt was only common wisdom. Nonetheless, as he thought more deeply about the matter, he significantly altered his views. He and Mary Adams were at least in partial accord while she ran Brookhurst College. In 1877, Victoria and Brookhurst jointly granted a Mistress of English Literature (MEL) degree to Mary Clossen. Adams hoped to transform Brookhurst into an independent women's university but closed it in 1880 because of financial problems arising when women began attending Victoria. Her nephew, Arthur Coleman, also helped Nelles abandon his immature ideas on women's education. Equally instrumental were the impressive reports from Mount Allison University in New Brunswick, where women had shown significant academic ability, earning degrees since 1875. IZI In 1877, Victoria College admitted Barbara Foote of Elora, Ontario into first year, and five other women joined the student body at other levels. In 1879, a Miss Shenick began taking undergraduate courses in the sciences, and in the fall of 1880 Nellie Greenwood moved from Cobourg Collegiate to study science at Victoria. Her graduation in the spring of 1884 marked a new era in female higher education. In fact, Greenwood received her degree along with Professor Haanel's wife, who had studied for several years in the United States before her marriage.liz Moreover, Augusta Stowe had graduated in Medicine in 1883. Acta noted the occasion: "As a rule the conferring of degrees is a monotonous process, but this year it was exceptionally interesting. Miss Augusta Stowe, the first lady in Canada who had taken a degree was received with long continuous applause. When the hood was donned the Senate arose and gave three lusty cheers for the satisfactory solution of the question of co-education."123 The number of women gradually increased, particularly in the science courses. Two enrolled in 1882 and two more in 1883, including Carrie Nelles. By the following October, Victoria had two alumnae and six females attending classes: four undergraduates, one graduate student, and one specialist. In the October 1885 issue of Acta Victoriana, a new woman writer dedicated "this department of Acta to our sister students throughout the world."124 Four years later, the Modern

236

Faithful Intellect

Language Club was fully coeducational, with Margaret Addison as its first president. Women were still deeply disadvantaged and certainly unable to participate fully in university affairs, but new generations of female undergraduates were eager to advance the cause. It was not surprising that Louise Nelles was a concerned witness to the student strike at University College in 1895.125 F°r Samuel Nelles, the main problem was finding the resources to keep Victoria progressing for both male and female students. This battle had shaped his career since his arrival in Cobourg, but during the i88os it overwhelmed both his time and his declining health.

9 The University Question

From his arrival at Victoria College as principal, Samuel Nelles was deeply concerned with his university's place in Canadian higher education. Even though he was constantly embroiled in the minutiae of college life, he never stopped advancing what he sincerely held to be a priority: a truly national and inclusive Christian university system for Ontario. And he never doubted that a prosperous Victoria was a fundamental component of this system. His greatest obstacle always remained the lack of a sizable and secure financial base. As early as 1851 he complained, "Instead of sending that noble endowment abroad in various streams to invigorate and sustain the several denominational Seminaries of the Province, it is decided to hoard it all up in a cistern in Toronto."1 Nelles dutifully struggled on two fronts to remedy the problem: he sought more voluntary contributions from Methodists and other friends, and he lobbied for reasonable legislative grants as a share of the elusive endowment always seemed to be lurking just out of reach. Most Methodists were initially rather hesitant about extending financial support to higher education. Education did not resonate with the same appeal as evangelistic and missionary needs. Nelles faced a daunting task in changing this well-entrenched attitude. Even the more sympathetic church members, in response to the revolutionary changes initiated by Baldwin's 1849 University Act, simply urged greater voluntary and government support. During the 18505, however, Nelles was rightly skeptical about government action. Canadian politics as a whole was undisciplined, stalemated by petty partisanship, and ill-prepared for statesmanlike conduct. Although long-term planning was difficult under the volatile political conditions, the Wesleyan Church gradually recognized its obligation to supply more resources to the college. After Victoria confirmed that it would stay in Cobourg for the

2.38

Faithful Intellect

immediate future, the Wesley an Annual Conference of 1852 pledged $9,000 "from our scanty subsistence, "z looking to its clerical and lay members to fulfill the promise. In 1854, the union of the Wesleyan connexions in the two Canadas raised expectations that more money would come to the college, especially from Montreal businessmen.3 This hope was never realized. Over the following decades, the church and the college initiated several quite elaborate schemes to increase support. On occasion, Nelles was told to anticipate money from the endowment but noted: "No one has yet discovered the precise time when our share of the endowment plum is to fall. They say there is 'a good time coming' - I only wish they could fix the date."4 With the passing of Francis Hincks's University Act of 1853, most people assumed that the parameters of higher education had finally been set. The law was apparently designed to reverse the denial of support for denominational schools. It also made the secular University of Toronto, modelled on London University in its structure and curriculum, responsible for examining students and granting scholarships, awards, and degrees. A new University College was to perform all of the Arts teaching. While these two institutions shared first call upon the huge endowment from the sale of lands, the denominational colleges expected that their minor claims on the largesse of the state would finally be recognized. Hincks hoped that the outlying colleges would continue to serve the educational needs of the scattered Canadian population in their own communities; by affiliating, they could share any surplus endowment funds. The University of Toronto was administered by a governmentappointed senate made up of members of the Legislative Assembly and their friends, the president of University College, the heads of the major denominational colleges, and the Superintendent of Education. It was headed ceremonially by an appointed chancellor and practically by a vice-chancellor elected by the senate itself; it did not have a president. The Toronto contingent could normally out-vote the combined forces representing the other universities; moreover, it was difficult for the officials from outlying schools to attend meetings regularly. Since the University of Toronto authorities and their legislative allies determined what constituted legitimate expenses and whether there was a surplus, it was not surprising that no funds were ever available to be shared. Consequently, there was no substantial reason for Victoria to affiliate or even involve itself in the detailed administration of educational affairs.5 The college therefore continued to rely on voluntary contributions and also to petition the legislature for grants. Furthermore, it now had to compete for faculty and students with University College, which had

The University Question

239

comparatively unlimited resources, paying more than twice the salary to faculty and covering most students' tuition by means of scholarships. In 1854, as Victoria altered its curriculum and general administration to conform to the terms of the new legislation, it petitioned the government for an increase in aid beyond the token £500 [$2,000]. It asked for at least £1,000 and the following year sought £2,000 to assist with renovations and repairs to its building. These sums were in addition to any potential income from endowment surpluses. Although the college received some encouraging signals, the grant was only raised to £750 and was never made a binding obligation on the state. In 1856, both Queen's and Victoria again received the £750 grant, with an additional £250 for their medical faculties, but even this level was insufficient to pay down the accumulated debt. The constant pleas for excess endowment money and a larger annual government grant were met with silence.6 To help, the Wesleyan Church appointed itinerants such as William Poole, John Carroll, and Samuel Rose as agents to solicit funds from the circuits. Still, over the period there were sufficient calls by influential legislators for the distribution of funds among the denominational schools to encourage Egerton Ryerson, who recommended basing the disbursement on full-time enrolment. Nelles agreed with Ryerson's plan but saw little hope of real benefits for Victoria, recognizing partisanship and local patronage behind the apparent search for justice. Moreover, there was always the spectre of the Roman Catholic hierarchy haunting any interest in a broader distribution of funds. Nelles confided to Ryerson, "See how readily and how freely they have disbursed to the petty popish seminaries of Lower Canada, many of which seem to exist only in fancy and nearly all appear to exist for ecclesiastical rather than scientific ends."7 Regardless, from the 18508 onward many community leaders were pressing the government to assist the new church-related colleges being established throughout the province. The Church of England received a charter for Trinity College in 1851 and a year later opened its new building on Queen Street in Toronto. Founded and directed by Bishop Strachan, it offered education in both Arts and Theology, and also ran a medical school. After the division of the Anglican diocese of Toronto in 1857, Bishop Benjamin Cronyn founded Huron College in London in 1863 under the principalship of Rev. Isaac Hellmuth to promote evangelical Anglicanism. George Brown, through his Globe newspaper, denigrated it as another sectarian institution. However, the college charter had been drawn up by Edward Blake, Bishop Cronyn's son-in-law, and the school was ably supported by Adam Crooks, who married Mrs Hellmuth's sister. With the help of such powerful Liberal allies, in 1878

24°

Faithful Intellect

Huron College was transformed into the University of Western Ontario, over the opposition of the University of Toronto. Low Church Anglicans also opened the purely theological Wycliffe College in Toronto in 1877, which affiliated with the University of Toronto in 1885 and finally joined the federation in i89o.8 For their part, the Free Church Presbyterians loosely aligned their theological school, Knox College, with University College in 1855. In fact, since most of its students took their Arts training there, Knox was the only school that consistently supported University College's claims. Even after the various branches of Presbyterianism united into the national Presbyterian Church in Canada in 1875, Knox retained its Free Church predilections. It never developed cordial relations with Queen's University or attempted to gain financial support for its sister Presbyterian school. Knox finally obtained the right to grant degrees in theology in 1881, officially affiliated with the University of Toronto in 1885 - at the same time as Wycliffe - and likewise federated with the university in 1890.9 In 1854 the Episcopal Methodists constructed Belleville Seminary as their own Arts college. Overlooking the lake near Belleville's harbour, it finally opened in 1857 and was ably directed by Albert Carman until 1875. Beginning in 1862, it affiliated with the University of Toronto, but in 1866 it achieved full independent university status as Albert College. With the union of the mainstream Methodist denominations into the Methodist Church in 1884, Albert was no longer needed as a university. In the same year it amalgamated with Victoria College to form Victoria University, returning to its original status as a private secondary school.10 The Roman Catholic Church was at least equally active in advancing its own institutions of higher learning. In 1852, Bishop Charbonnel and the Basilian Fathers had St Michael's College chartered; it opened two years later on the eastern fringe of Queen's Park. Charbonnel and Joseph Lynch, his successor as bishop in 1859, created a network of hospitals, schools, and colleges to serve the expanding Catholic population in the province. Assumption College, established in 1855 in Sandwich [Windsor], and St Jerome's College, founded in 1865 in Berlin [Kitchener], provided higher education for Catholics in the western part of the province, complementing the older Regiopolis College in Kingston and Bytown College (later Ottawa University) in the capital. Despite the avowed objectives of the Reform parties, it is evident that the popularity of church-controlled education actually grew during the last half of the nineteenth century.11 Nevertheless, it was in a state of obliviousness to the financial plight of all the denominational

The University Question

2.41

colleges that Vice-Chancellor John Langton, President John McCaul, and Professor Daniel Wilson laid the foundation stone for University College in Queen's Park on 4 October 1856. Over the years, these three men would work in concert to thwart Nelles's efforts to create a mature provincial system of Christian higher education. McCaul was an Anglican minister who in 1839, at the age of thirtytwo, had come to Canada as principal of Upper Canada College. He then served as head of King's College and the University of Toronto until 1853, when he began a twenty-seven-year term as president of University College. Educated in Classics at Trinity College, Dublin, in the course of his career McCaul promoted various literary and musical organizations. Daniel Wilson early described him as "a clever, lively, humorous Irishman ... a shrewd fellow and a good scholar very wellfitted for his post."12 Gradually, however, Wilson developed a disdain bordering on hatred for McCaul.13 In 1853 McCaul helped in the selection of four professors for the planned college, including Daniel Wilson to teach English and History. Wilson was born in Edinburgh in 1816, working as an engraver, ethnologist, and antiquarian before arriving in Toronto to take up his academic duties. Although he never earned a degree, he had the support of powerful political allies in both Britain and Canada. Wilson ever after denounced political influence in academic appointments. His scientific contributions were rapidly superseded by Darwinian revelations and his literary works were of minor scholarly interest. Wilson became the major defender of the university against the denominational colleges and in 1880 replaced McCaul as president of University College. Although opposing both the admission of women and the federation schemes, after the reorganization of the University of Toronto he attained its presidency in 1890, dying two years later.14 John Langton was an English-born Anglican businessman who immigrated to the Peterborough area in 1833 at the age of twenty-five. In 1855, during his first term as a moderate Conservative member of the Assembly, he accepted the chairmanship of the Board of Audit. A year later, he began a four-year term as vice-chancellor of the University of Toronto and remained a senior civil servant until his death in 1894. Privately, he criticized the management of the university by McCaul and Wilson.15 Before the construction of University College, the University of Toronto had been removed from King's College and had rented space in the unused Parliament buildings when the government was absent. However, it had to look elsewhere for space when Parliament was in session in Toronto. Using a broad interpretation of the right to spend the interest from the endowment on repairs and renovations, it decided to direct a large proportion of the capital to the construction of a new

242-

Faithful Intellect

home. In an elaborate - and not totally ethical - scheme to outflank the demands of the denominational colleges and maintain their monopolistic control over the funding for higher education, the University of Toronto authorities violated at least the spirit of the 1853 act by constructing the lavish University College. John A. Macdonald noted sarcastically that not even the Methodists could steal the endowment if it were locked up in brick and mortar.16 The vice-chancellor, though aware of the financial malfeasance, agreed that it prevented any of the denominational colleges from "plundering" the funds. By the time he and his associates were finished, there would be little left to plunder.17 As noted in an earlier chapter, the total university endowment had originally been set at about 2,2,6,000 acres of land scattered throughout Upper Canada, plus 150 acres in Queen's Park. Upper Canada College, which was administered by the university after 1853, had its own endowment of 63,800 acres and land in Toronto. By the late 18505, some 2,07,500 acres of university lands had been sold for $1,358,903; the remaining 18,500 acres had an estimated value of $167,049. There was an unpaid balance of approximately $300,000 due on previously sold lands. Much of Upper Canada College's land had also been alienated and the money spent. In fact, this high school was annually spending more than the combined expenditures of Victoria, Queen's, Trinity, Regiopolis, and McGill universities. In 1855, the government of John A. Macdonald appropriated by order-in-council £75,000 [$300,000] for the new University College building and an additional £2,0,000 for a library and museum.18 The prominent Toronto architect Frederick Cumberland oversaw the planning and construction of the edifice. The actual costs of $356,000 for the college and $65,600 for outbuildings were considered within the appropriate range. By comparison, forty years later, Victoria University in Queen's Park was built for about $200,000, raised from voluntary gifts. John Langton not only authorized the expenditures for University College but, as provincial auditor, also approved the final accounts. The college opened on 4 October 1859/9 As the grand edifice rose in Toronto, authorities representing Victoria and Queen's questioned both its legitimacy and the overall efficiency of the provincial university. Nelles went beyond negative critiques, however, to advance broad arguments for denominational higher education. He approved of a national university but warned, "There will be no national university in this country that does not meet the views of the great religious bodies of this country."20 He did not feel that the University of Toronto appreciated the requirements of both secular and denominational education. When the chancellorship of the university came open in 1856, Nelles supported Ryerson as the

The University Question

243

best and most logical choice for solving its shortcomings but recognized that he would never be appointed because of partisan opposition from Toronto educators and politicians. Nelles never stopped advocating a college education that was taught by religious men in a religious environment under the supervision of a church. He informed George Brown and his Reform colleagues, "It is well to clamour for a 'National Education', but for a Christian Nation, there is no scheme of collegiate education less national than the one now in existence."" University College particularly failed in this regard. Nelles later reiterated these views during a government inquiry. First, Canadians preferred church-related colleges; second, the denominational colleges would survive; third, the failure to include them when distributing funds must be a source of constant irritation and discontent preventing the University of Toronto from ever becoming a truly superior institution." Nelles had few problems with the desire of some people to study in a secular, politically controlled environment, but felt they neither needed nor deserved the benefit of the entire endowment. The existing conditions would either confine the country's youth into the narrow file presented by University College or drive them to seek their education abroad. It was a national shame, a travesty of justice, to grant Victoria and Queen's only £750 a year while University College received some £16,000, with £6,000 more given to its preparatory school, Upper Canada College. "We ask if this is a wise and equitable distribution of the public money? Is it in proportion to the work done, or the number of students and pupils attending the other colleges? Is it a proof of the superior economy of the secular, or non-denominational, plan?" a 3 It was true that the churches benefitted from influencing higher education - but so did the country as a whole. To refuse aid simply because it helped the churches meant weakening religion and ultimately undercutting the core values of society. Moreover, since the church colleges were going to endure, "If the poverty of the Denominational Colleges renders them 'petty' - as their enemies choose to style them - then to leave them poor will be to stamp that pettiness on the minds of hundreds and thousands of the educated men of the country."24 Meagre annual grants forced the colleges to interfere continually in the political process merely to perpetuate their survival. It was more practical and sensible to supply substantial permanent aid so they could concentrate on improving their services. Nelles specifically denounced the notion that Victoria did not deserve aid because it was a sectarian institution. He proudly reminded Canadians that Victoria held no religious tests, taught no theology,

244

Faithful Intellect

accepted all students who met its academic standards, and had never forced anyone to conform to Methodist religious forms or practices. The college had further demonstrated its liberal character by having been the first institution to challenge the Church of England's sectarian monopoly over higher education. Claims that Victoria's denominational supervision actually made it more exclusive than institutions with religious tests were ridiculous; the British Crown, in granting the college charter, did not believe such nonsense. The Victoria College board consisted of twelve lay and twelve clerical appointees made by the church and five senior government members appointed by Parliament. It reported annually on its staff, students, finances, and curriculum. No government member had ever officially complained that Victoria was sectarian/5 Nelles expressed astonishment over assertions that Victoria was narrowly sectarian because it provided an Arts education for its prospective clergy. It did provide this type of preliminary education, but University College supplied the same training for students intending to enter Knox College. Free Church, United Presbyterian, and Congregational ministers therefore got their preliminary education without cost to their churches, while Methodist probationers paid tuition at Victoria. Nelles also denied George Brown's false contentions that support for denominational colleges meant aid for church-run elementary and high schools and also contributed to the elaboration, of the separate school system. Ryerson himself had constantly differentiated between government-administered education at the lower level and church-related higher education; there was no link to separate schools. Brown only introduced these contentious but unrelated issues to rouse anti-Catholic sentiments and muddy the overall debate. In general, Nelles argued that education at Victoria was less sectarian or bigoted than in institutions whose studies ignored religion/6 During the late 18505, Egerton Ryerson remained the public face and major defender of the denominational cause. Through a series of open letters published in late 1858 and early 1859, he forced the province to at least consider the claims of the church colleges and the fiscal mismanagement in Toronto. Even many people who disliked Methodism wondered at the need for so elaborate a college building and at the extraordinary cost of university administration. Nelles assured Ryerson that Brown and his "editorial bullies" at the Globe had finally heard the truth and that his letters were having a marked influence on some powerful individuals but, "As for Scotchmen, it is not easy to correct them except by a dose of some other clannish poison."27 The response from the University of Toronto forces was immediate and predictable. Unable to refute Ryerson's statements, they attacked

The University Question

2.45

his character, purporting that he wrote the letters for the profits from their sale and that he was partisan and malicious because his unbounded ambitions had been thwarted. They also had the government appoint sixteen new, more friendly, members to the university senate to weaken the denominational opposition on that body.28 Despite such tirades and manipulations, the Methodist leaders would not be deterred. The 1859 Annual Conference formally condemned the University of Toronto and sought allies in the Church of Scotland and Church of England to push for a thorough investigation of the situation. Afterwards, Nelles somewhat overconfidently assured Ryerson, "Our resolutions have evidently touched on a delicate spot. And if we succeed in our effort we shall have to fight a battle. I think our best policy will be to contend rather for a modification of the Toronto University than its destruction."29 Two days later Nelles wrote to the Globe defending denominational education against denunciations made by an anonymous "Member of the University of Toronto" - evidently Daniel Wilson. Ryerson in turn complimented Nelles on his article. They went on to plot a strategy of guest editorials by Ryerson in the Christian Guardian to present Victoria's claims and short-circuit any negative publicity from Brown or his Toronto cronies. Nelles wanted the public to know that he supported a provincial university with affiliated colleges - if financial guarantees were in place. However, if "a liberal spirit is not shown we shall then have to keep our distinct status as a University and fight it through."30 He also elaborated his arguments in more letters to the Globe. Trusting that times would improve, he wrote to Ryerson: "It is evident that our fat friends in the university are stirred up by those resolutions. I am glad we have found the right point of attack. Perhaps they may now think of capitulation and put a new construction of that clause in the University Act which speaks of 'surplus' money and the use that may be made of it."31 Because of his tepid support for government aid to church colleges and his personal animosity toward Ryerson, James Spencer would not use his position as editor of the Christian Guardian to promote the cause. At least partly as a result, Nelles wrote Spencer a series of public letters clarifying his position and denouncing the opposition in the Globe and the Leader. He denied Brown's claim that he was trying to defame the character of the professors at University College; the preposterous idea was only one of many false notions Brown was airing to deflect public opinion. Langton, Wilson, Brown, and their associates were not easily deterred, however, and even mounted a vicious personal attack on Nelles. Surprised, Nelles said he had never realized that he was well-known enough to be worthy of such public abuse. George Hodgins described the anonymous newspaper accounts, evidently by

2.^6

Faithful Intellect

John Langton, as "very low, vulgar, and scurrilous," but Ryerson concluded, "The bitterness with which you are assailed shows that they deeply feel the blows you have inflicted upon them."32 Throughout the summer of 1859, Nelles and Ryerson continued to assail the University of Toronto's conception of a proper system of higher education. They would never be convinced that one school centred in Toronto and monopolizing resources would ever satisfy provincial needs. According to Nelles, the University Act of 1853 had not contemplated such a result and, in fact, Victoria's opponents were the real enemies of a provincial university. He was trying to rescue the system from the usurpation of the Toronto institution. In his own response to the virulent attacks by the secular Toronto press, Ryerson advocated a central university in Toronto with outlying colleges throughout the province, all partially financed from the existing endowment on the basis of the number of full-time undergraduates enrolled. The unscrupulous and illegal raid on the endowment funds to build University College was not only detrimental to the denominational colleges but also seriously compromised the future of the entire educational system.33 The accounts presented by the bursar of the university to the legislature showed that, between 1855 and 1859, undergraduate enrolment fluctuated between 37 and 80, while total salaries over the period rose from $39,600 to $52,300 a year for the fifteen faculty and the numerous administrators. The bursar's annual office expenses themselves totaled an additional $37,000, with nearly $5,000 a year for incidentals and stationery. Over the same five years, nearly $800,000 had been spent on the university and Upper Canada College and several hundreds of thousands more reserved to sustain the operations. Neither Nelles nor Ryerson questioned the integrity of the bursar or other university staff, who after all were bound by the decisions of their superiors. Nor did they dispute the professors' salaries, as Langton had claimed; indeed, Nelles believed all college faculty deserved improved benefits. It was, however, of at least passing interest that according to the official accounts, while the faculty at University College received $28,52.0 in salaries plus another $4,000 in student fees, Trinity's staff was paid $6,640, Queen's total college expenses were $9,104, and Victoria's were $6,000. Moreover, who would not object strenuously to a system where professors and salaried officials in the university senate who drew on the endowment also helped manage the funds? Ryerson further pointed out that, ironically, by monopolizing the endowment, the university had failed to cultivate the habit of voluntary contributions, which was one of the Free Church principles undergirding the separation of church and state.34

The University Question

2.47

Finally, on 2,0 November 1859, the Wesleyan Church galvanized the government into opening a comprehensive investigation of the University of Toronto. Loud public clamour was forcing the members of the legislature to interest themselves in university affairs in order to ward off complaints from their constituents. The detailed and well-documented memorial drawn up by Egerton Ryerson was passed in the name of the entire church and was officially supported by Queen's University and the Presbyterian Church of Canada. Trinity College also joined in the denominational assault on the so-called provincial university. Malcolm Cameron, an independent Reform politician who had represented Clear Grit interests in Hincks's Cabinet and was no friend of George Brown, introduced the memorial in the legislature; it was seconded by a Victoria ally, David Roblin. The memorial asked the government to review the financial affairs of the University of Toronto, including the construction of University College, since the 1853 act had never authorized such an expenditure. It also questioned the denial of surplus money to other colleges, along with the strategy that prevented a surplus from existing. The government should therefore scrutinize the functioning of the university senate, especially the control exercised by its Toronto-based members.35 The memorial additionally called for an inspection of the curriculum, the apparently lowered academic standards, and the procedures for examining students and awarding prizes and scholarships. It concluded with a reminder to the government that the University of Toronto offered no provisions for safeguarding the moral and spiritual welfare of its students.36 The government responded by striking a committee to investigate the allegations, chaired by Malcolm Cameron, with John A. Macdonald and George Brown as members. The University of Toronto was defended by John Langton and Daniel Wilson, while Brown supported its interests on the committee and in his newspaper. The denominational colleges were represented by John Cook, the principal of Queen's, Nelles, and Ryerson. Brown insinuated that they were complaining only because they could not manipulate the endowment funds for their own selfish purposes. For good measure, the university claimed it had little influence over the government, which jealously controlled its appointments, administration, and expenditures. The committee received hundreds of pages of evidence on the university's administration and finances, academic standards, and faculty relations. The related issues dominated the press for months.37 The defenders of denominational education also attacked the monopoly wielded by University College over the awards and scholarships originally established for the benefit of all university students in

2.48

Faithful Intellect

the province. In 1854, with only twenty-eight Arts undergraduates, it received sixty scholarships worth £30 each. The following year its thirty-six students received seventy scholarships, while Queen's and Victoria received none.38 Daniel Wilson and John Langton claimed that the scholarships went to University College students because of their superior qualifications and attainments. However, many scholarships were restricted to those who matriculated from Upper Canada College, wished to study for a degree from the University of Toronto, or had already taken courses at University College. Despite its boasts of superiority and with all its resources, the University of Toronto graduated just eleven Arts students in 1860. A furious Nelles wrote, "They make my blood boil down to the toe of my broken leg."39 Over the years, many Toronto graduates had never attended classes as regular students. In 1859, by comparison, with sixty full-time undergraduates, Victoria graduated seven; in 1860, fourteen; in 1861, ten; in 1862,, ten; and in 1863, twenty from among its seventy-four students.40 Notwithstanding the valuable contributions to the investigating committee made by Nelles and Cook, the much-anticipated contest was between the titans: Brown and Ryerson. Intelligent, experienced, and committed, neither ever retreated a step - or rose above insults or personal abuse. Brown, however, operated from a position of greater strength in that he both controlled the Toronto Globe and sat on the committee. The one allowed him to badger and insult Ryerson; the other, all of that - and also to report only what he wanted from Ryerson's evidence. Moreover, many other newspapers merely reprinted reports in the Globe. For instance, knowing that Ryerson's doctorate was honorary, Brown sarcastically asked him where he had earned his degrees, then proceeded to demean his qualifications and belittle his motives.41 In doing so he ignored the facts that Daniel Wilson had no earned degrees and that most doctorates in those days were honorary. He thereupon assured the public that the petty denominational forces had been overwhelmed; their immoral schemes, unmasked and defeated. But Anson Green - who as president of the Wesley an Conference was equally biased on the other side - had followed the proceedings carefully and wrote to Ryerson: "You had a hard battle with Brown, but I do not see that he has gained much. His reference to your collegiate education is disgraceful to him and will give you a good chance to baste him."41 Opinion was mixed, to say the least, as to which side was more convincing. Ryerson later recounted his perspective to George Hodgins: I finished my defence yesterday in the presence of a densely crowded room consisting of a large number of Legislative Councillors and members of the

The University Question

249

Assembly, several of whom I was told were in tears when I closed and cheered me heartily when I sat down ... Malcolm Cameron said he never saw in all his long days a man so thoroughly whipped and one who felt himself so as Dr. Wilson ... I have been told that Attorney General Macdonald is completely shaken, and that he said to Mr. Roblin the whole system at Toronto was rotten and the foundation would have to be reconstructed. All agree as to the extravagance and defects of the system, and the unquestionable claims of denominational colleges.43

Having done his best to challenge the misstatements, Ryerson felt certain he had convinced several parliamentarians and much of the public, and even made inroads among thoughtful Free Church clergy. Langton's continuing harangue about the denominational colleges deserving nothing was to be regarded as either puerile or despotic.44 Nevertheless, when all the furor subsided, no concrete reforms were undertaken. Macdonald and Brown had already agreed between them that funds should not be distributed to the denominational colleges; it was too late to alter the wasteful construction of University College; and most of the other matters were best left to the universities themselves to address.45 No politician wanted to test the strength of the sentiments behind the separation of church and state. Macdonald also recognized that, with the weak party discipline and the political stalemate in the Assembly, there were too many University of Toronto supporters to pass the committee's report condemning the university; indeed, the dissenting report presented by the Hon. William Cayley probably had a better chance. Rather than risk such a result, the government typically chose to delay and then not to receive any report from the committee.46 After cooperating in the hearings, Nelles and his colleagues continued to work together to drum up support for their cause. At a huge public meeting held in Kingston, both Ryerson and Nelles presented widely applauded speeches. William Pollard, a Kingston friend, informed Ryerson that even the Roman Catholics were delighted by the liberality of the speeches and that they were to be published in several journals.47 Nelles told Ryerson, "You should impress on the Government that they should not break up without giving us a 'material guarantee'. They will have a sore fight with the Grits in Upper Canada at the next election and our people will want something more than a mere promise before they will support them."48 The Wesleyans reacted as strongly as they ever had on any issue; in June, the authorities published a broadsheet entitled, "Address of the Wesleyan Conference with a view to Elect Candidates in favour of University Reform and the equal Rights of Colleges according to their Works." However, it was

250

Faithful Intellect

well known that the Wesleyan Church lacked the ability to deliver the vote of its membership, and major opposition remained among Methodists to the entire suggestion of government aid. The church's Annual Conference could only recommend that its clergy and laity should help meet the needs of Victoria College.49 In hopes of defusing the controversy, on 2.3 November 1861 the government appointed an independent commission comprised of the recently elected Anglican vice-chancellor of the University of Toronto, James Patton; Dr John Beatty of Victoria College; and John Paton, representing Queen's University. Nelles and Ryerson were pleased with all three commissioners.50 After receiving numerous submissions and reviewing the pertinent evidence, the commission delivered its report in early 1862. Going beyond commenting on past actions, it outlined "a scheme by which the obvious defects of the present university system in Upper Canada could be remedied, the intentions of the Act of 18 5 3 be carried into harmonious operation, and the causes of higher education be placed on a permanent and satisfactory basis."51 The commission felt the University of Toronto had not been authorized by the act to construct a new home for University College, and, in any case, the actual building was too grandiose and generally ill-conceived. "Comfort and utility have, it is feared, been less studied than appearance and decoration."52- But it was obviously too late to undo the vain and intemperate actions of the Toronto authorities. Still, as the commission recognized, the other problems remained. First and foremost, there were no real limits on how much university officials could draw from the endowment, and "so long as the University and University College have no inducements to practise economy, there will, from the nature of things, be large expenditure without corresponding results."53 The expenses of the bursar's office in particular were extravagant, while the president and his officials had been spending not only the the endowment's interest but also its capital. Old habits of lavish and unrestrained squandering were difficult to curb without determined and effective government sanctions. The University of Toronto had become accustomed to the notion that its resources were unlimited, but unless it made significant changes, it would run out of permanent reserves. Furthermore, in the absence of fair dealing and any tangible benefits, the outlying colleges would never affiliate, and the whole system of higher education would continue to be marked by petty rivalries and inefficient competition. The commission therefore recommended the transformation of the University of Toronto into a new University of Upper Canada modelled on the state college of New York. It would be administered by a more representative senate, which would meet at various sites across the

The University Question

z$i

province to encourage broader participation and reduce the influence of its Toronto members. Beyond directly supervising the bursar's office, it would oversee admission standards, the curriculum, examinations, and qualifications for scholarships and awards. The university itself would no longer grant degrees; that authority would be retained by all the colleges that affiliated, including the secular University College, which would be renamed King's College to avoid confusion. Although all affiliates would be equal in status, the reconstituted King's College would receive the lion's share of the provincial endowment; while every college would be guaranteed a substantial share, probably on the order of $8,000 a year, King's would get at least $28,000 annually.54 When the commission's report was leaked to the public, the supporters of the University of Toronto organized a campaign to frustrate the measures and ruin the commissioners' reputations. George Brown used the Globe to berate Ryerson, while anonymous commentators, who were readily recognized as Daniel Wilson and his colleagues at University College, attempted to belittle the commission's work and confuse the issues. A typical report in the Globe charged: The chief result of the inquiry seems to us to be the establishment, almost beyond question, that Messieurs James Patton of Toronto, John Beatty, of Cobourg, M.D., and John Paton of Kingston, are the most impudent men that the Province contains. The only doubt that remains on our mind, arises from the question whether Messieurs Patton, Beatty and Paton are really the authors of the report bearing their name, or whether they have not been used as the plastic tools of Dr. Egerton Ryerson, whose hand may, we fancy, be traced in many of its pages.55

Attempts were made to stack the senate with new members who would vote down the report and remove Vice-chancellor Patton from office. A mass student rally was organized at St Lawrence Hall and memorials were obtained from Knox and University College, all demanding that no changes be implemented in the university system and no raids be permitted on the endowment. Premier Sandfield Macdonald, however, informed Ryerson and Nelles that the senate had no such authority; the commission's report would have to go to the legislature for study. Moreover, the death in April of the chancellor, Judge O'Connor, meant that no senate business could be undertaken until the government appointed a successor.56 Meanwhile, the Methodist leadership enthusiastically endorsed the report. Ryerson and Nelles began coordinating plans with parties from Queen's to draw up legislation to implement its resolutions. Hodgins, who had been called to the bar in 1860, greatly assisted with

252.

Faithful Intellect

the wording of the bill. The kernel of a great national university and the best elements of religion-based training were solidly embedded in its terms. Did the churchmen and politicians have the foresight and wisdom to nurture them? Discussions were also underway with Provost George Whitaker and Bishop Strachan to guarantee Trinity College's active participation in the proposed university system. Hodgins, now a leading lay member of the Anglican Synod, had already defended Nelles's friendship for Trinity. However, divisions between High Church and evangelical Anglicans were undermining the Church of England's role in resolving the problems facing denominational higher education. Many Anglicans preferred to support the University of Toronto rather than see what they considered High Church ritual entrenched at Trinity College.57 In addition, Nelles suggested opening a dialogue with Bishop Lynch and other Catholic leaders, who had been quietly watching the controversy, with an eye to involving them in implementing the recommendations. Knowing the bitter feud between Brown and the Roman Catholic hierarchy, Nelles suggested to Ryerson - probably only playfully, to cause mischief - that he should recommend Vicar-General Walsh or Bishop Lynch as the replacement for Chancellor O'Connor. "If the Grits are so non-sectarian," he wrote, "why not a Roman Catholic. You will hardly think me sincere, but surely I am merely carrying out our opponents [sic] principles."58 The exercise would at least demonstrate the hypocrisy of the University of Toronto clique. More immediately, Queen's wanted Ryerson to publish a rejoinder to the Globe article by Daniel Wilson attacking support for denominational higher education, and to continue to pressure the government for meaningful reform. Although somewhat chastened by the public exposure of its internal operations and by the rebukes delivered even by its allies, the university actually lost nothing and never retreated on any front. It would be slightly more accommodating in minor matters, but only for as long as absolutely necessary. Indeed, it strengthened its resolve to resist challenges to its monopoly position. The only measurable gain by the denominational colleges was an increase in annual grants beginning in 1861. The strain of the affair temporarily weakened Ryerson's health and left him depressed. He was not even able to attend the Annual Conference in June and, in any case, felt his presence would only undermine the church's appeals for contributions and larger government grants. Less tangible but still of value was the contribution of the four-year-long controversy in clarifying the issues and establishing the terms for future negotiations. During the same period, Nelles rose to a position of public prominence as a respected leader of the Methodist

The University Question

253

cause, gradually coming to replace Ryerson as the embodiment of Methodist higher education.59 The public debate soon subsided and, as Sandfield Macdonald, the new premier, and his cousin John A. Macdonald hoped, the issue sank out of public view for the next four or five years. The mid-i86os were devoted to quelling the political instability resulting from the form of government imposed on the Canadas. In addition, economic difficulties merged with external threats from the United States to keep the whole country on constant nervous alert. To deal with the national emergencies, George Brown, John A. Macdonald, and George Etienne Cartier, the Conservative Party leader from Quebec, temporarily set aside their personal animosities and political differences in bringing about the confederation of the principal British North American colonies into the Dominion of Canada. Nelles saw this new political reality as offering outstanding opportunities for patriotic service, especially, but not exclusively, in the field of education.60 In 1867, Nelles was able to announce that, thanks to rigid economy, improved contributions, and larger government grants, Victoria College was finally out of debt. During the first session of the new Ontario Legislature, which had inherited jurisdiction over education, Sandfield Macdonald's government provided $7,500 for each of the major church colleges. Prospects seemed to be improving on all sides. Yet Nelles confided to Hodgins: "I wish more and more every day that we had but one university. There is no use striving to carry on such institutions without vast resources. We would have none too much if all combined."61 Federalism offered a working model for university consolidation. But conditions changed quickly; almost immediately, Nelles was forced to arm himself for battle with the Ontario government. Sir John A. Macdonald urged Ryerson in January 1868 not to put off organizing a concerted effort by all the colleges to obtain their annual grants, and perhaps make them a statutory claim upon the state.62 However, Sandfield Macdonald refused to place the grants in the budget estimates. Instead, he announced in February that, after 1868, the provincial legislature would end all aid to denominational colleges. Nelles and Ryerson arranged several strategy meetings with the heads of the various colleges during the spring and summer. William Snodgrass and John McKerras from Queen's joined Nelles and Ryerson in drawing up resolutions to both the provincial and federal governments. They also undertook a campaign in the press for public support. Their proposals reopened all the old wounds surrounding the interpretation of the 1853 University Act. Suggestions for dealing with the government's about-face included suing it for the losses sustained by the maladministration of the endowment; establishing a University of

254

Faithful Intellect

Ontario, with broad denominational affiliation, to oversee higher education; and creating a new federated university that excluded University College. Various less ambitious schemes for gaining access to the endowment were also floated. Conversely, some individuals contended that if the public truly desired a secular system, then all government funding should be discontinued and the University of Toronto allowed to compete for voluntary donations on the same terms as the other schools. In short, they advocated funding all or none - a harbinger of future debates.63 Roman Catholic Bishop Lynch and Chancellor J.H. Cameron of Trinity College were consulted, but neither felt the time was right for action. Nelles did find a new ally in Albert Carman, the president of Albert College, who had finally convinced much of the Methodist Episcopal Church leadership that government funds were essential and that accepting them was not a sin. E.J. Horan, the principal of Regiopolis College, also contributed his influence to the fight to regain government aid.64 For the ever-idealistic Nelles, however, the priority was always what was best for the country. In a telling letter to Ryerson during the heat of the controversy, he mused: I have thought frequently of your remark about raising the public mind, and feel more and more that we must take broad grounds and cultivate patriotic sentiments. We must be prepared to sacrifice all narrow sectarian interests to the general good and press others to do the same. On this basis we will be strong and even if we fail will deserve to succeed. I love the College and Methodism but not more than I do our common Country and truly say I do not care one fig for sectarianism when not subservient to the public weal.65

Despite a bitter struggle, in the end, the denominational schools could do nothing. On 3 December 1868, the legislature voted almost unanimously to end their financial aid. The decision has never been reversed.66 Afterwards, the universities essentially went their own ways. Queen's, for example, believed it must preserve itself and stop wasting so much effort on ineffective cooperative action aimed at changing the mind of the government. Principal Snodgrass wrote to Nelles: It is felt that a crisis has come in the history of this Institution and that radical changes are scarcely avoidable ... There is amongst us hardly a dissent from the conviction that it is useless to attempt by agitation or otherwise to obtain a reversal of the determination of the Legislature to give no assistance to any institution having a denominational character and connection ... I fail to see any course upon which the Colleges can now unite, and must therefore

The University Question

Z55

proceed in future on the ground that it is the duty of each to set itself in order after its own fashion and with its best endeavours to fulfill its own mission.67

However, Snodgrass did express appreciation for Nelles's role in the dispute, adding, "We have been fighting side by side in the same righteous cause. We shall cherish the same deep sympathies which a common struggle begets in the hearts of companions in arms, and as we pursue our respective ways the associations of the past will keep alive within us a fraternal interest for the future."68 Queen's followed Victoria's example, turning to its own members in the Church of Scotland to raise a private endowment of $100,000.69 In June 1868, the Wesley an Methodist Conference had added its voice to the call for university reform and government funding, but it also asked its members to place the college beyond financial distress. The $100,000 requested covered new expenses as well, including "special provision for the general and theological training of candidates for the Christian ministry."70 In the past, church authorities had been very careful to insist that Victoria College did not specifically prepare Methodist clergy. Now they recognized not only the absolute need for such training but also the reality that it would not affect government aid. At an inaugural meeting of the friends of the college at Cobourg that November, $12,700 was subscribed, including $1,000 from Egerton Ryerson, $2,000 from Senator John Macdonald, and $3,000 from Morley Punshon.71 A considerable part of Punshon's presidential duties involved traversing the country and encouraging contributions to the Victoria endowment. He still felt Victoria should move to Toronto but saw that under the circumstances the benefits of such action were extremely doubtful. An endowment was essential to make the college "independent of the intrigues or fickleness of politics altogether."72 Punshon's tireless and popular public speaking significantly increased the monies raised, as well as the profile of the university. Over the next decade, most of Nelles's dealings beyond the classroom centred on augmenting the endowment, encouraging the establishment of scholarships for students, and trying to enhance the college facilities and faculty. At the Annual Conference in 1869, Victoria put its case simply: "If we are persuaded that the principle embraced in the union of 'knowledge' and 'vital piety' is worth contending for, then will we do all that we can to maintain it, by placing Victoria College out of the reach of the embarrassments which so often grow out of political combinations."73 Overall, the campaign was successful even though economic distress often meant that subscriptions were delayed or could not be redeemed at all. A source of annoyance for Nelles was having

2.56

Faithful Intellect

to deal with the agents assigned by the church to raise money, who were - to be generous - poor bookkeepers, constantly complaining about their lazy fellow agents, the difficulty of the work, and the lack of official church appreciation. Victoria College, unfortunately, had an insatiable appetite for money. In 1878, shortly after completing a special fundraising effort to pay for Faraday Hall, Nelles started a new campaign to raise another $2,00,000 for the endowment. He also requested $20,000 annually from the Methodist Church's Education Fund.74 Although university reform remained in the public forum, little of real consequence occurred regarding the denominational colleges during the 18yos. In 1873, Adam Crooks became provincial secretary and treasurer in Oliver Mowat's government. He introduced the University Amendment Act, which basically replaced the heads of the unaffiliated colleges on the senate with university alumni in order - it was claimed - to make that body more representative.75 Nelles, however, recognized that the measure was an attempt to punish the denominational Arts colleges and argued that a comprehensive university with outlying colleges would be good for the province. Although Mowat seemed agreeable, he would make no firm commitments. Moreover, while the church schools agreed in principle with many of Crooks's proposals, he offered them no financial inducements. In 1875, Goldwin Smith advised Nelles somewhat wistfully that the Globe was losing influence, especially among educated young men, but the outlying colleges still needed independent members of the legislature to press for university reform.76 After Egerton Ryerson retired in 1876, Mowat reorganized his position to make it a Cabinet responsibility and appointed Crooks as the first Minister of Education. Daniel Wilson, who seemed to dislike everyone, remarked, "Crooks takes no advice and gets everything into a muddle."77 Regardless, Crooks had helped Isaac Hellmuth develop Huron College in London, then in 1878 oversaw its transformation into the University of Western Ontario. The church colleges hoped that, with proper handling, they might still take advantage of the apparently altered situation and gain long-overdue improvements in higher education. Opportune shifts of editorial opinion at the Globe also suggested the time was ripe for concerted action. Nelles was quick to encourage Hodgins to use his influence among friends in Toronto to widen the breach between the Globe and the university. The desired reforms would be much easier to obtain if the Globe supported them, but "Crooks and Mowat can't be expected to go ahead of the Globe in such a measure. Outlying Colleges won't come in except for an

The University Question

257

endowment and Endowment won't go down with the country if Globe be against it. The thing is to take such a measure as will not seem to compromise the Reform Party on the point of sectarian aid."78 In a postscript, Nelles added sardonically, "I spoke of Brown in my note. This may seem like ploughing with the enemy's heifer but if we are to succeed we must plough with any heifer or any asses." Nonetheless, as usual, no improvements appeared. During most of the decade, Crooks was busy with establishing institutions offering education in more practical fields. A School of Forestry and a School of Practical Science, independent of the university, opened in Toronto. In 1874, the Ontario School of Agriculture was founded in Guelph to the end of making agricultural education more systematic and scholarly. Five years later it changed its name to the Ontario Agricultural College and hired a Victoria graduate, James Mills, as principal. In that year it had 169 students; its first class graduated with BSA (Bachelor of Science in Agriculture) degrees in 1888. The college's mission was to introduce scientific innovations to farmers in the province at little or no cost.79 Victoria College and Queen's University supported all these initiatives and wished to participate in producing qualified scientists and professionals in the new fields. As the decade closed, however, the denominational colleges received little encouragement in this or any direction. Nelles and George Monro Grant, since 1877 the principal of Queen's University, were still urging calm, candid discussion of reform. Neither, however, feared a comparison of his school's standards with those of the University of Toronto. The new decade was not far advanced before the political landscape was dramatically transformed. In early 1880, a disgruntled, drunken employee mortally wounded George Brown, the sixty-one-year-old architect of anti-denominational political action. Even though the principle of separation of church and state was by now deeply entrenched in society, the most virulent opponent of Nelles's dream of a Christian university system was gone.80 Three years later, calls for government funding for university education were renewed, but this time from an unexpected source. As Nelles had predicted, the University of Toronto's extravagant expenditures had nearly depleted its endowment. In early 1883, Vice-Chancellor William Mulock began quietly testing the waters with regard to refinancing the university. Shortly thereafter, Chancellor Edward Blake, the most powerful federal Liberal in Ontario, also suggested it might be a propitious time for new discussions on the future of the Ontario universities. The vastly increased needs of the sciences and the new social sciences could only be met by a quite different level of financial support.81

258

Faithful Intellect

Daniel Wilson was furious. Appointed president of University College in 1880, he stubbornly resisted any interference with his management of affairs. Wilson mistrusted Mulock, believing both he and Blake were too anxious to bow to Methodist political strength; if they were not restrained, they would freely abandon the cherished monopolistic prerogatives of his university. Wilson further resented the recent developments because he feared they augured a return to the acrimonious debates of the i86os. Now in his seventies and contemplating retirement - if he could obtain a good pension - he was still fighting the battles of his earlier days. He saw the "Jesuit" Egerton Ryerson behind every Methodist plan - even though Ryerson was dead - and the machinations of Bishop Strachan - also long dead - and King's College behind Trinity's aspirations. Wilson was blinded by an imperiousness that was perhaps inspired by his inferior formal education and intellectual dilettantism. He never truly appreciated the fine quality of Canadian institutions or scholarship. Without serious academic credentials himself, he also disliked the aristocratic pretensions of an Oxford or a Cambridge. Cocooned from financial reality for thirty years, he failed to recognize that the university now needed substantial state aid.82 For once, the denominational colleges could play the waiting game, knowing the University of Toronto must come to them for support in its appeal to the government. In 1881, George Grant had notified Nelles: I have written to Morris to tell him that we would not look at affiliation with Toronto University as at present constituted even though pecuniary inducements were offered. I quite agree with you that important as money may be, there are other considerations even more important. My own attitude is that while I have no faith in our locals hatching a scheme that you or I would accept, I do not wish to appear before the public as opposing University Consolidation, for I believe a good scheme could be hatched, were our Educational authorities in Toronto wise, generous and acquainted with the subject.83

Grant felt it was no insult to be called a church institution; Oxford and Cambridge had church affiliations, and American denominational colleges had raised huge private endowments. As for Nelles, in 1883 he was busy helping to raise monuments to the memory of Egerton Ryerson. The great man had died on 19 February 1882. in Toronto, at seventy-nine years of age. Nelles assisted Hodgins with editing Ryerson's letters and writings into The Story of My Life. He disliked the tedious nature of the work, remarking to his friend that he was not a born proofreader: "This often have I told my

The University Question

159

wife that I was intended for an auctioneer, as this calling gives one a good opening for puns."84 Also in honour of his mentor, Nelles had by the summer of 1883 collected nearly $28,000 for a Ryerson Chair at Victoria. However, as the debate grew, Nelles and Hodgins had to give attention to the university question. Meanwhile, George Ross replaced Crooks as Minister of Education and Hodgins became his deputy. Crooks's declining mental health caused his total collapse in 1883; he entered a Connecticut mental hospital where he died in December 1885.^ As the cry from the university for government assistance grew louder, Nelles worked assiduously to unite the denominational colleges into common action. He reported his strategy to Hodgins: My own efforts have been chiefly directed to securing unanimous action on the part of the three universities and our own Church especially. And now this matter is virtually effected. The Editor of the Guardian is out good and strong. Dr. Sutherland, Dr. Rice, our commission and yesterday our Senate at its meeting here ... I have received a letter of compromise from Mulock but not such as we can accept. Our present work is to resist their demand for aid, and then they may once more be willing to fall back on the scheme of 1 860-61 or some similar one. Grant is a strong ally ... Mowat is not going to give them the cash, and if Meredith tries his hand he will fail ... I am posting Sutherland for our leader (with Dewart) in this battle for I regard it as a last final struggle for justice and a truly national system.86

It was essential to remain adamant that no money be given to the University of Toronto unless the denominational schools received equitable support as well. Nelles used the argument from 1868 that, unless all schools received proportional aid, none should receive any. In order to block the quick and quiet action Mulock had wished, Nelles and his associates called for a government commission to study the whole university question. Mowat, however, was not prepared either to set up such a commission or to provide special grants for the University of Toronto. Hodgins took the opportunity to outline the colleges' position in the normally hostile Toronto newspaper The Week, edited by the Presbyterian Charles G.D. Roberts. According to Hodgins, it was unjust to tax supporters of the denominational colleges in order to assist their relatively recent rival University College. If the province granted new aid, the denominational colleges had a prior and therefore more legitimate claim to assistance; there was no rational reason to exclude them.87 Although Daniel Wilson did not appreciate the point, the colleges were no longer discussing sharing the university endowment: it was

z6o

Faithful Intellect

new money that was in question. Charles Body, an Englishman who had been appointed provost of Trinity College in 1881, jointed Grant and Nelles in resisting University College's demands. Together they suggested it should seek voluntary donations from its wealthy alumni and friends, or draw upon other funds it administered, such as Upper Canada College's endowment. The newer universities were equally frustrated by the lack of government support and thought a small taste of humility would do University College no harm; they also opposed Toronto's recent financial requests. Furthermore, there was no great public support for taxes to assist the University of Toronto, though many expected that a generous federation proposal might be received more favourably.88 Of course, Nelles did not want University College to lose government funding; rather, he wanted all the other universities to win a share. Over the same period, Methodist leaders were completing plans for a general union into the national Methodist Church, which was finally consummated on i June 1884. The issue of state aid to colleges remained a contentious outstanding matter. As part of the process of union, the United General Conference of 1883 established an Education Commission that advocated linking the church's education facilities in a loose affiliation and amalgamating its two Ontario universities, Albert and Victoria College, into Victoria University. Meanwhile, some Methodists proposed that all their colleges across the country should federate into a great independent national institution. The Methodist Church operated Mount Allison University in Sackville, the Wesleyan Theological Institute in Montreal, Victoria University, and at least seven collegiate schools, and in addition held charters for two universities in Manitoba. The plan called for each college to serve its own community, but for all to be linked for the purpose of granting degrees under Victoria, following a model based on the University of London or perhaps Oxford. This grand institution would be able to guarantee high-quality Methodist education from sea to sea.89 The enhanced status of such an educational powerhouse clearly warranted a location in one of the significant urban centres, such as Hamilton or Toronto. The Education Commission began exploring the possibilities, also taking into consideration the proposals regarding the federation of the Ontario universities when the government finally presented them in early 1885. It was a common opinion among Methodists outside of Cobourg that it was a waste of money to keep rehabilitating the college buildings there. James Mills, principal of Brantford Collegiate and later head of the Ontario Agricultural College, informed Nelles that some benefactors described Cobourg as a "frog pond" that would always limit Victoria's ability to flourish. In

The University Question

261

Toronto the Methodist university could attract the benevolence of prosperous Canadians. As proof, in 1883 William Gooderham, heir to a substantial family fortune, offered land in Toronto on which to construct a new university. As far as Nelles was concerned, it was at least another decent option.90 However, if Victoria was to remain independent, he preferred moving to Hamilton, where it would not be made so immediately vulnerable by its proximity to the provincial university. Nelles warned Bishop Albert Carman, who would soon become General Superintendent of the Methodist Church, "Mr. Gooderham's eleven acres [in the Davenport hills near present-day Casa Loma] and $2.0,000 do not in my judgment serve to counterbalance the risks and necessities arising from close juxtaposition and competition with Toronto University."91 This competition might be insurmountable if the other colleges federated in Toronto. Nelles had often predicted that, in the future, Canada would need viable and effective colleges scattered throughout the country to serve a diverse student clientele. He also remained convinced that, unless larger issues were at stake, a small-town setting was superior because it was cheaper, healthier, and morally safer. He cautioned that higher education must always be steeped in the best elements of Christian religion. Nelles reminded Ross that he favoured independent schools; he could, however, appreciate the public preference for federation. At the same time, he acknowledged to Hodgins: Of course, I would prefer our independent university, if we had financial means of development, and other grounds of hope for resisting the Government Monopoly and retaining our students, etc., but under all the circumstances and in view of what we have always professed on the subject of 'Consolidation,' I think our best hopes now lie in that direction. Our present debt is over $40,000, and new buildings or greatly improved ones are a necessity. We can say stubbornly that we will just stay here and struggle along on the old lines, but one thing is beyond our control, viz. the retention and increase of students with a huge monopoly working against us, and great improvements in other denominational colleges. We have set up a claim to State Aid, but such aid is not likely to come to us except through some scheme of Consolidation.91

Nelles was quick to add that if suitable terms could not be obtained he was quite satisfied to remain in Cobourg. Seeing that serious negotiations were required, Ross arranged a "frank and confidential" meeting of the heads of the institutes of higher learning for 2,4 July 1884. Representatives from the University of Toronto, Victoria, Trinity, Queen's, St. Michael's, Knox, Wycliffe, Congregational College, Woodstock, and Toronto Baptist College were

2,62,

Faithful Intellect

invited. The discussions were meant to be comprehensive and inclusive. Wilson gradually took an interest, but remained determined not to "share" any money with the denominational colleges and assumed that federation would lower the standards at the University of Toronto. Mulock was more encouraging, even offering to transfer the University College building to the University of Toronto and, since the outlying universities would have to do the same, constructing additional facilities for the college. No-one, however, was willing to adopt his suggestion without more definite terms.93 Nelles arrived at the meetings with fully developed proposals as the basis of negotiations. He hoped his preparedness would foster precision and save time. He also intended the plans to be used for future reference; too often, apparent government promises were later dismissed as mere misunderstandings. Nelles wanted everything recorded. His opening statement reiterated that the best system had well-funded colleges scattered throughout the province; however, given the relatively small, dispersed population, consolidation in Toronto was likely the most popular and workable system. The existing Ontario colleges were still doing good work; they must continue independent operation unless the government offered a fair plan for a federal union into a provincial university. Nelles proposed the restructuring of the University of Toronto into a teaching institution with its own faculty appointed and paid by the government. It would offer courses distinct from the colleges' in the experimental sciences, graduate studies, and the professions - the fastest-growing and most expensive educational operations.94 The revamped institution would be housed in the building now used by University College, and should probably be called the University of Ontario. It would set curriculum, administer examinations, and confer degrees, except in theology; its senate would include an equitable number from the federating colleges. These would continue to instruct in the traditional subjects. University College would be renamed so as not to imply any special status within the university, and it would construct a new home as quickly as possible. It would retain the bulk of the government funds. The new university staff would be drawn on the basis of merit from the federating colleges, all graduates would have equal standing, fees would be the same, and the denominational colleges would hold their degree-granting rights in abeyance, except in theology. The government would buy the property of the colleges that were obliged to move and assist financially with new construction in Toronto. The major stumbling block was University College's abhorrence for the prospect of losing its building. The government could never justify

The University Question

263

another such monumental structure, and the college had no tradition of raising private support. Another problem was the government's unwillingness to buy the old college properties or assist with new construction in Toronto. Wilson fuelled the flames by insisting that the university faculty must be drawn first from University College, letting the teaching staffs of the other schools fend for themselves, and moreover that the university professoriate and the newly affiliated Faculty of Medicine should operate under his direct presidential control.95 When the government finally announced its own proposals in January 1885, it was not prepared to offer the colleges any compensation for property abandoned outside of Toronto or aid for land or buildings in the city. Except for University College, none of the Toronto schools had received aid for their buildings.96 After exhaustive negotiations, most of the colleges decided not to proceed with federation. Queen's University was too deeply rooted in the Presbyterian soil of eastern Ontario and English Quebec, drawing its students and financial aid from this region. Its friends could hardly be expected to supply the estimated $1,000,000 needed to move Queen's to a location in Toronto. Moreover, its authorities firmly believed the region needed its own university and that Ontario could support more than the provincial university. Other factors in the decision were Queen's dislike for the Free Church presumptions of both Knox and University College and its pride in its independent links to the Scottish universities and its own contributions to higher education in Canada. Under the dynamic leadership of George Grant, Queen's felt it could meet future challenges aloof from controversy. With its loyal alumni, it was prepared to struggle to overcome its financial straits.97 Given the Church of England's earlier dealings with the government over King's College, Trinity was especially wary of protecting its prerogatives within the University of Toronto. Any financial arrangements had to cover the possibility of the federation breaking apart in the future and the colleges once again being in competition with the University of Toronto. Trinity saw the proposals as heavily favouring University College, whereas the colleges should be equal. It also wanted for itself, and all colleges, the right to select faculty to teach theologyrelated Arts subjects such as Biblical Greek, Metaphysics, Moral Philosophy, and Ethics. Furthermore, the chairman of the university professoriate should be appointed by the government and not automatically be the president of University College, as Wilson demanded. Trinity was distracted at the time by difficulties with socalled evangelicals within the Anglican fold. The evolution of Huron College and Wycliffe College interfered with Trinity's natural constituency and foreshadowed continuing ecclesiastical disputes. Without

2.64

Faithful Intellect

government concessions, in 1886 it too voted against federation. Wycliffe and Knox, however, had affiliated in 1885, since their status in the university was not dramatically altered.98 St. Michael's already had a relationship with the university and was undecided about whether its future lay in being a theological school or a full university. In the meantime, it decided to maintain only a nominal relationship with the University of Toronto. The Baptists had two colleges for men in the province, one in Toronto and one in Woodstock. The church shared with other evangelical denominations a deep rural versus urban division over the best location for its institutions of higher learning, but powerful business interests advocated the cause of respectable university education at Toronto Baptist College. Woodstock College transferred its theological division to Toronto in 1879 and received the right to confer Arts degrees in 1885. Baptists were among the strongest opponents of state aid and therefore offered little prospect of assisting Victoria in its negotiations. Moreover, without solid guarantees that religious values would be advanced in the University of Toronto, they would not federate. In 1887, Toronto Baptist College was renamed and rechartered as McMaster University. William McMaster, the founder and president of the Canadian Bank of Commerce and various insurance and trust companies, was its principal benefactor. Adding to significant earlier gifts, in 1887 he announced that he was endowing the school with the bulk of his estate of $900,000. He died on 2,2. September of that year. McMaster University was therefore more financially secure than the entire University of Toronto, and could smile benignly at the notion of federation from McMaster Hall on Bloor Street at Taddle Creek." Thus, by 1886, comprehensive university federation was a myth. What remained was the unequal union of Victoria University and the University of Toronto. Daniel Wilson rightly judged this so-called federation to be merely a means of allowing Victoria to escape Cobourg. Characteristically, he maintained that neither the government nor his university should finance the move.100 As the other universities shunned federation, opposition also mounted among Victoria's students and alumni, as well as within the town of Cobourg. Its citizens had given land and money in the 18505 and 18708 to relieve the college of the need to move to Toronto; it not only expected a degree of loyalty but also assumed that the college was legally bound to stay. The departure of the school would be a major economic disaster for Cobourg; the town felt that the college should at least be obliged to pay a significant penalty. In 1885 the town formally objected to the possible move, and in the summer of 1886 it offered 2,0 acres adjoining the college as an inducement to stay. Later it obtained an injunction temporarily preventing the transfer.

The University Question

265

Other opponents of the move noted that financial problems had always been a part of Victoria's history; they were no worse then than on previous occasions. If the government supplied a little money it would not be necessary to move. Although Victoria had accumulated debt of about $50,000, some predicted that, as the number and the wealth of Methodists expanded, Victoria's financial health would improve accordingly. Others doubted whether the college could raise the extraordinary amounts needed to rebuild and operate in Toronto or any other large centre, declaring that federation would be an unprecedented disaster threatening Victoria's very existence.101 Many loyal college friends also feared that the move to Toronto would irreparably damage Victoria's distinctive spiritual and moral culture: a possibility of considerable significance for Nelles. This contingent agreed, "The causes that called forth the existence of the various denominational colleges are well known, and it is hardly likely that when they are firmly established on a sound basis they will be willing to resign their charters at the call of a few weak-minded enthusiasts."102 They refused to accept that it was more patriotic or in the best interests of higher education for Victoria to abandon its great calling as an independent university. In federating, the college would take a retrograde step, sinking into an inferior and humiliating condition. At the very least, Victoria would lose prestige in the eyes of the country and the church. Even worse, evil city influences could overtake the college students, turning them away from true religion. Some opponents compared federation to an ecumenical movement that required the church to abandon the right to ordain its clergy. Judge Rose called it treason; his fellow alumnus and colleague John Maclaren, Victoria's lawyer, was only slightly more restrained in denouncing the scheme.103 Throughout the years of negotiations, Nelles was in a very delicate position. He did not want to support federation at any cost, as Harley Dewart appeared to advocate; nor did he dare to aid the opponents of federation who offered no real alternative. He would only settle for "a satisfactory system of higher education for the Province of Ontario, and an honourable and effective relation to that system on the part of the Methodist Church."104 He could readily accept an equitable federation but feared antagonizing supporters in case the project failed. It was essential for Victoria to negotiate with a united voice. Despite private assurances from Oliver Mowat, George Ross, and William H. Howland, deliberations never produced any concrete amendments. On 9 January 1885, Nelles laid the government's plan before the college board, which accepted federation in principle but refused to enter into the arrangement unless Nelles's request for compensation for lost facilities in Cobourg and assistance with rebuilding was accepted.

z66

Faithful Intellect

For the next year and a half, Nelles continued to bargain, but gradually recognized that Ross and Mowat were determined not to make any meaningful concessions. With such limited prospects for better terms, he informed Hodgins: Methodism is strong enough to do as she has ever done, flight her way on without sacrifice of principle against all comers ... No power on earth can destroy Victoria College or run it into feebleness and discredit if the Methodist people are willing to subscribe the necessary funds for making it strong, and if not, why then she cannot fairly hold her own on any plan. The first question with me is endowment and buildings. Give us those and any plan will work, otherwise no plan.105

However, with the notable exception of the wealthy Massey family, few prominent Methodists seemed willing to fund operations in Cobourg. Despite his bravado, by 1886 Nelles lacked the health or the energy to lead the crusade himself. Moreover, he found it impossible to hold Methodists together in the struggle. In a private note in the spring of that year, Premier Mowat warned Nelles that he hoped Victoria's conditions "will not be deemed essential."106 In turn, Nelles confided to friends: What I most fear now is not a real good federation, nor the entire rejection of the scheme, but some partial and illusory but still plausible measure that will land us where all our Toronto University men and even the members of the Government say we would do wisely to stand as a Theology School a la Knox. Mr. Mowat told Dean that several Arts Colleges doing same work would be a "great waste of men and means."107

There was now no doubt in Nelles's mind that the government and the University of Toronto would be only as generous as they were forced to be. During the summer of 1886, Nelles went to England, partly to study the system at Oxford and Cambridge but mostly to restore his health. He relied on Nathanael Burwash to protect both Victoria's interests and his own reputation in his absence.108 Nelles was aware that many of the Methodist leaders in university affairs were frustrated by his decision to neither support nor oppose federation, seeing him as timid and indecisive. He was in great danger of being pushed off the tightrope he was walking. Unlike Dewart, Nelles did not trust the university to do the right thing after agreements had been signed. The combination of failing health and the inability to obtain any

The University Question

267

concessions beyond the right to lease a site in Queen's Park deeply disillusioned Nelles on the whole federation business. The original vision of one provincial university encompassing all the major denominational colleges had been a mirage. It now appeared that only Victoria would sacrifice its independence for the benefit of the provincial system. Nelles began to believe that the safest - if not the best - course was to remain alone in Cobourg. His major fear was a split among Methodists if he tried to move the university to Hamilton or Toronto. Finally, in May 1886, Victoria's Board of Regents evaluated the complicated ramifications of the question but, in the end, it simply passed the matter on to its governing body, the General Conference of the Methodist Church, without a decision.109 The quadrennial General Conference met for three weeks in September 1886 at Metropolitan Methodist Church in Toronto. It discussed in minute detail the terms and implications of the various proposals. As always, however, the fundamental issues remained financial. The church saw only four options open to it. The first was to remain in Cobourg and raise about $300,000 to rehabilitate the facilities. The problems of long-term financial support for the college would have to be dealt with later. The second was to move to Hamilton, at a cost of about $600,000. But that city and its wealthy citizens were only prepared to guarantee minimal support. Another consideration was the fear that moving that far westward would effectively abandon students in eastern Ontario to Queen's or McGill. The third option was to move to Toronto but remain independent, at a cost of about $700,000. It was possible that Trinity might later cooperate in establishing shared facilities for scientific or graduate studies. Nelles suggested that the college might obtain land near Senator John Macdonald's estate on Avenue Road south of St Clair. From there, it could keep its options open. The fourth alternative was the most practical and popular: raise about $450,000 to construct and endow a new college in Queen's Park, close to St Michael's and University Colleges, and federate with the University of Toronto.110 The faculty of Victoria College and many of the alumni who were members of General Conference followed Nelles's lead and voted against federation. Burwash personally favoured the move to a federated status in Toronto but agreed the terms were unsatisfactory and remained loyal to his president and friend. In the end, Nelles could not bring himself to give up Victoria University for the meagre scraps offered by the government. He firmly believed that federation would be a failure and was preparing to launch a new campaign to finance an independent university, all the while blaming the government for its shortsighted policies. The vote of the clergy split about evenly, but with

268

Faithful Intellect

the strong support for federation among lay members, General Conference voted 138 to 113 to federate with the University of Toronto on the condition that the money to build in Queen's Park must be raised by private subscriptions before any formal agreement was signed or implemented. The wealthiest members of the church were divided on the issue, but a majority agreed that it was better to invest in a future in Toronto. However, whether they would subscribe sufficient funds remained to be seen. As Nelles had feared, "the scheme as a sort of general abstraction has got deep hold of the popular mind, and hence there is great danger of its being recklessly voted for by those who do not see all the necessities of the case."111 Publicly, Nelles accepted the decision without complaint. He even expressed the hope that, now that the matter was finally settled, he could return to his first priority of educating the nation's Methodist youth under the new opportunities life in Toronto would provide. Necessarily, he kept busy trying to acquire land in the city, protecting the interests of his faculty and students, and maintaining the college while it remained in Cobourg. Meanwhile, not only did he urge everyone to work to make federation successful, he even travelled around the province as opportunity presented itself to popularize the move and raise funds for the new facilities in Toronto. For popular consumption, he always placed federation in the best possible light, and did all that was appropriate to get the related legislation through Parliament in 1887, though it would not be proclaimed until all conditions had been met. Nelles also took pains to denounce any attempts to label either supporters or opponents of federation as disloyal to the church and college. He remained convinced that the essential was to maintain unity and commitment among Methodists in order to protect moral higher education. Nelles moved quickly over the winter of 1886 to forestall two dangerous courses of action. First, he thwarted Dewart's efforts to begin construction in Toronto before the necessary funds were received. Arguing that it was better to get an early start, Dewart in fact feared that a backlash might overturn the church's decision at the time of the final Conference vote in 1890. Nelles was understandably apprehensive about further burdening his university if the funds did not materialize. His other victory was to counter an attempt to outflank the decision of General Conference; he would not allow negative conditions to be placed on donations by individuals. Subscriptions were a common practice: the total promised was paid in installments or at some future date. But Nelles would not accept monies donated on condition of establishing new facilities in Hamilton or renewing those in Cobourg. Making a donation did not confer the right to contravene the

The University Question

269

expressed decision of the highest church court. All funds must be used as General Conference stipulated.1" Privately, however, Nelles was heartbroken and depressed. For a time he could not even bring himself to express his true feelings. In the summer of 1887, he finally poured out his sentiments to George Hodgins. Denouncing federation as a "miserable abortion," he confided: It would be a great boon to me if Dr. Dewart or any other extremist would say something to make me believe in this wretched one-horse conglomeration. But turn it over and over as I may I can only view it as one huge blunder and misfortune - the great mistake and disgrace in the history of American Methodism - a superfluity of weakness and humiliation, that will stain our history for all time to come. The saddest thought of all is that I am myself chiefly to blame for getting the Church into this tangle and distress ... But all these deep private convictions I have been holding and must continue to hold 'in abeyance' (like our charter) from respect for Conference authority - though I respect Conference judgment not one iota.113

To counteract any possible negative influence from Nelles, supporters of federation had circulated charges that he was too fearful to accept the necessary changes and that his reluctance grew from concern that the move to Toronto would jeopardize the value of his property in Cobourg. Nelles owned no such property. He felt betrayed by individuals whom he had long considered his friends and whom he saw as having no idea where the best interests of the college truly lay. He had struggled to preserve and strengthen Victoria for thirty-seven years, and all his work now appeared in vain. Exhausted, Nelles turned to old friendships for consolation. He recognized that one of his idiosyncrasies was "the propensity to brood and brood over the sad and inexplicable enigmas of this our mortal life, and wondering how it will be when 'Heaven's morning breaks and earth's vain shadows flee'."114 But he did not remain distraught for long, and his trust in God's plan for the future was undiminished. He continued in the same letter to Hodgins: "How strange that such melancholy meditations should be followed, as often in my case, by an exuberance of fun and nonsense as extreme as the former sadness!" He believed it was the natural swing of the pendulum needed to sustain equilibrium. Nelles candidly assessed his own personality: "I am often accused of levity, would to God I did not know from long years of experience what a necessity for my mental health those seasons of lightness are."115 He reassured his friend, "The onus on me is pretty heavy these days, but I get to be less anxious every day of my life. So often have I found good to come out of apparent evil. My heart is at

2.70

Faithful Intellect

rest, my head and hands are as busy as they can well be. I hope you and I will be spared to live on together as venerable representatives of the olden times." He closed by praying, "May Providence give us all wisdom, and especially a modicum of grace and common sense patriotism." Il6 As Nelles resumed his round of duties in Cobourg, his health seemed briefly to improve and his spirits to soar. He had always been invigorated by the new cycle of life he associated with fresh autumn weather and the rebirth of scholarly activity on the campus. As Robert Beare so eloquently said several years earlier, the return of the students was like a refreshing shower to the parched soil. Nelles confidently trusted that with God's help he could face whatever the future held for him and his university. But as he began the new term and prepared to celebrate his sixty-fourth birthday, fever and fatigue overcame him. He was forced to retreat to his bed. It soon became apparent that he also had to make his final earthly arrangements. Still, he was content to place his life and his immortal soul in the hands of the Almighty. The end came suddenly. On 17 October 1887, his birthday, Samuel Nelles quietly passed away in his family's apartment at Victoria University. His last thoughts were of his school and especially his students. Nelles's death precipitated a tremendous outpouring of respect and affection from Methodist Church members, Victoria alumni, and indeed the province as a whole. While many had from time to time disagreed with his policies, he was perhaps unique in his generation for having developed no abiding enemies. The response to his passing did much to heal the divisions among Methodists over university federation. It was also a major impetus to properly endowing the new operations in Toronto. Nelles never lost faith in the search for truth or in the guidance of a just and benevolent God. He knew the work at Victoria would continue and humbly hoped he had done his best as a trusted steward of Methodism's educational resources. Ultimately, Nelles won few triumphs in his dealings with the entrenched political establishment, but he still built a distinguished university in the face of powerful competing interests. This achievement was perhaps all he could reasonably expect. His most lasting satisfaction remained the generations of students he had educated to serve their church, their nation, and their God wisely and faithfully.

Epilogue

At 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 19 October 1887, two days after his death, a solemn gathering readied itself outside of Samuel Nelles's apartments at Victoria University. All the businesses in town had closed as a sign of respect. Rev. Dr William Williams, the presiding clergyman, completed a brief service for the family before taking his place at the head of the assembly and beginning the short procession to Division Street Methodist Church. It was a fittingly grey and somber day, but not too cold or otherwise uncomfortable. Samuel's wife, children, and brothers and sisters, as well as members of the Wood family, took their seats in church. Victoria's students, faculty, and officials, along with many prominent Cobourg citizens, swelled the pews. The universities were represented by President Daniel Wilson from Toronto, Provost C.WE. Body from Trinity, Professors James Williamson and John B. Mowat from Queen's - since George Grant was ill - Principal James Mills from the Ontario Agricultural College, and Dr William Shaw from Montreal Wesleyan Theological College. Joining them were the heads of the Methodist men's and women's academies, members of the medical faculties in Montreal and Toronto, and numerous principals of high schools, including D.C. McHenry of Cobourg Collegiate.1 Deputy Minister of Education George Hodgins appeared both in his official capacity and as Samuel's closest friend. Also present were the two Methodist general superintendents, the presidents of the Montreal and Bay of Quinte Conferences, Alexander Sutherland on behalf of the Missionary Society, John Potts, the head of the Methodist Education Society, and as many clergy as could absent themselves from their duties. Only an accident on the Great Western Railway limited the attendance from the farther regions of Ontario. Judge Oliver Springer, the first person to have earned a Bachelor of Arts in the province, Victoria College's first graduate, and a former classmate of Nelles, was

2 7 2-

Faithful Intellect

there. So too were members of every succeeding academic year. Nelles had been associated with all the graduates throughout the history of the university.2 It is by the presence of hundreds of his former students from all over Canada that Nelles would have been most gratified. Generations of Victoria's scholars, who had perhaps not really thought about their college for years, openly wept, not only for their president, teacher, and friend, but for the mentor of their youth. They recognized in Nelles's death the final closure of their own free, happy youthful days. He had always been there, stalwart and unalterable in their memory, the venerable voice of authority and wisdom defining their transformation from child to adult. After mourning his departure, they quickly began celebrating his life, laughing again at his silly puns and their adolescent attempts to emulate him. They recalled the poetry Nelles had quoted to inspire them as students and repeated the lines they too had memorized. Then they relived the exalted triumphs and imagined tragedies of those long-gone moments and reminisced over missing comrades. They owed Samuel Nelles for much beyond the humane and Christian education and the moral and spiritual guidance he had faithfully furnished them through his classroom and his personal example. While ill with what his doctors had misdiagnosed as typhoid fever, Nelles had selected his friend Alfred Reynar, the registrar at Victoria, to present the eulogy. Albert Carman, the chairman of the Board of Regents and senior general superintendent, also delivered a moving address. John A. Williams, the junior general superintendent, offered prayers, and the congregation joined in the hearty hymns "There is a Fountain Filled With Blood" and "Rock of Ages." The assembly then reformed into a procession and moved slowly to Union Cemetery, where the service was completed at the gravesite. Nelles had asked that his tombstone bear the epitaph, "Now we see through a glass, darkly." Like St Paul, he had been enabled to see much, but many more of God's mysteries had remained to be disclosed. Humble and faithful inquiry would in due time reveal all the knowledge that God ordained for mankind, and self-discipline and contemplation would lead humanity to achieve wisdom. Nelles prayed that this wisdom would redeem and empower all who sought it. In any event, he was content. Shortly before his death he had written to John Potts, his former student and present colleague in the Education Society: "During these hours of sickness, God has taken away the burden of anxiety and apprehension which I have so long borne. My feelings have been very intense, and as such unfavorable to tranquility of mind. I am now able, and shall be in the future, to leave all in the Hands of God with entire trustfulness and resignation. I am very grateful to God

Epilogue

273

for the light and consolation which he has granted me."3 At long last, Nelles had come as close as humanly possible in his long quest for a quiet, resolute, unambiguous faith. During the weeks following his death, tributes flooded across the pages of the religious, educational, and secular newspapers. Memorial services were held at most universities and in Methodist churches throughout the Dominion. In Ottawa and Winnipeg, the largest Methodist churches were needed to hold all those who wished to pay their respects. In early November, Rev. Dr William Ormiston, one of Victoria's first graduates, returned from the Dutch Reformed Church of New York City to lead services in Cobourg for those who had been unable to attend the funeral. Mass meetings at Knox, McGill, and Trinity passed resolutions conveying regret and sympathy to Victoria. Despite the past battles, the tributes from Trinity were particularly heartfelt. Nelles had recently completed a series of lectures there, and Provost Body had hoped he would be able to return many times once Victoria moved to Toronto. All the schools recognized that higher education in Canada had lost a sympathetic father and a stalwart friend. The Cobourg World noted that, two weeks before his death, Nelles had visited his doctor and announced that he was very ill. "That declaration was the confession of a man whose mental activity and anxiety had at last worn out his physical strength and made vulnerable to disease a once powerful constitution."4 While it was true that he was worn out by university affairs, Nelles's health had, in fact, been gradually declining for many years; he was therefore unable to fight off even the relatively mild bout of fever that struck him down. The Cobourg World also reported: "Dr. Nelles assisted in framing the original University federation scheme, but when he saw the retreat of other colleges, and was convinced that under new conditions which he never assented to, confederation meant the demolition and annihilation of the University he had spent a lifetime in cherishing and nurturing, he withdrew his support and voted against the scheme of the destructionalists."5 With the death of its president, Cobourg recognized the virtual end of any possibility of the Methodist Church changing its mind and keeping Victoria in town. The impending loss of the university brought out an inappropriate bitterness in the local press. Most others, however, were content to set controversy aside and demonstrate their respect for the man. Everyone remembered Nelles's love of nature, his sound advice on a myriad topics, and his lack of affectation or guile. All gloried in his true affection for his students. In a revolutionary age, Nelles was a faithful intellect representing a calm yet determined scholarship. He inspired students to advance but would

274

Faithful Intellect

not permit them to forget who they were or that their true power and inspiration came from God. Tolerance and openness marked all of Nelles's educational and religious principles. He also knew who he was, and that service was the central element of his life. He was deeply proud of his many contributions and long service to the Methodist Church as its humble servant in the field of higher education. Two years before his death, Nelles had congratulated Hodgins on his appointment to the American Education Association in New Orleans; from his new position, he would be better able to promote the broad interests of Victoria University. Nelles had also quipped that Victoria could "boast of having as a President the oldest one, i.e. the President of longest standing on this Continent, so far as I am aware ... An old fool is no better than a young one, but an old College President ought to be somebody for if he were not at least a pretty fair sort of tactician he would surely have been ousted either by rebellions of 'the boys' or jealous rivals."6 Everyone who was old enough to remember knew full well that without Nelles's outstanding leadership over the previous thirty-seven years, Victoria University would never have survived. Many respected colleagues memorialized Nelles as one of the most eloquent, pious, and spiritual preachers of his day. His depth of meaning and illuminating passion enlightened all who sat before his pulpit. Never bombastic or falsely emotional, he engulfed his audience with classical and poetic descriptions that wonderfully portrayed the august will of God and the essential elements of human responsibility. His listeners only regretted that he had not found more opportunity to preach. Yet they also recognized that his true pulpit was in the classroom. As an educator, Nelles had bridged the widening gap between the traditional and modern systems of higher education and rationalized pedagogical innovation. He had helped to establish practical principles guiding and sustaining the broad field of professional education. Law, medicine, and theology especifically benefitted from his influence, but the newer professions also owed him much. Perhaps most important, Nelles had moderated and focused the scholarly debates over the function of science and its impact on evangelical faith during that era of transition from a pre-Darwinian to a post-Darwinian world. He had at least delayed and diminished the negative influence of skepticism and its allied forces on the one hand and fundamentalism with its retreat from experimental biblical investigation on the other. Further, his influence led directly to the rise of concrete studies in the new disciplines associated with the social and experimental sciences. Always at heart an adventurer, Nelles had been instrumental in inducing his students - like himself - to make the intellect the purest source of heroic adventure. Literature was all the map

Epilogue

275

he required to unearth the most valuable treasures. He would undoubtedly have been a great companion for travels in Europe - but would have hated sitting on a beach in Vera Cruz with Daniel Martindale selling oysters. In paying tribute to Nelles, the more discriminating commentators dwelt long on his complex character. They knew that his levity did not by any means indicate a lack of deep piety or spiritual commitment. Alfred Reynar reminded the mourners, "In his intercourse with others, he was marked by a surface sparkle of wit. They did not always discern the depths of thought and seriousness that lay beneath."7 Rev. Hugh Pedley of the Congregational Church remarked that those who knew Nelles best understood that his heart was full of sadness. From Kingston, Principal George Grant gave this insightful assessment: Dr. Nelles was indeed popular with a large circle; a man with a sunny nature could not help being that. He was sensitive to impressions, of a marvelously quick wit, and of catholic sympathies. But I venture to say, that few of the many who liked, admired or even loved him, appreciated the fullness of his power or the width of his intellectual and spiritual range. In many things we can all seek to imitate him, notably in his genial temper, and never was that more displayed than in the last two or three years, when he was broken in health and surrounded by difficulties and worries of all kinds, in his open mindedness, his freedom from partisanship, political or theological, and his singular fairness to systems of thought other than his own.8

Even his opponents expressed admiration. After returning to Toronto from Nelles's funeral, Daniel Wilson - who liked few of his own associates and respected fewer - noted in his journal: "Of Dr. Nelles my recollections are pleasant, as of one with whom I had been brought repeatedly into conflict and controversy in reference to University matters, but with whom nevertheless all my personal intercourse continued to be genial and friendly."9 Oliver Mowat went beyond his formal duty on such occasions to pay an appreciative tribute to Nelles's unparalleled contribution to higher education. Over time, as individuals had a chance to collect and measure their thoughts and bring them into better relief, Nelles's greatness and inspiring influence attained an even more substantial stature. But Victoria University did not have the luxury of grieving for very long; too much remained unfinished. The administration met to settle the details surrounding Nelles's death, paying his medical and funeral costs and arranging to buy his library in order to provide a small pension for his wife. The university also permitted the family to remain in the college apartments until the institution moved to Toronto. With

2.j6

Faithful Intellect

those of her children who remained at home, Mary Nelles eventually settled in the first house she ever owned, at i Sultan Street near the new Victoria University. She continued to participate in college social life as her strength permitted. Mary died on 2, August 1903 and was buried beside her husband in Union Cemetery in Cobourg.10 A decade after Nelles's death, Nathanael Burwash oversaw the establishment of a Samuel Nelles Chair at Victoria University and encouraged the alumni to donate $50,000 to endow it. During the same period, the university had raised funds to have marble busts made of Samuel Nelles and Egerton Ryerson. The sculptures were completed by the noted Toronto artist Frederick Dunbar and unveiled in the Victoria chapel on 15 November 1901. Nelles lacked the broad features and dominating presence of his colleague. He was noted for his compactness, wiry black hair - and increasing baldness. An equally black full beard framed his thin face. His rather sharp features were only partially softened by his mildly bulbous nose. He had never been handsome or particularly distinguished in appearance and, as he grew older, his looks had not mellowed. Yet all who knew Nelles were transfixed by his sparkling dark eyes, which seemed to pierce the deepest recesses of the heart and soul. However, his amused but sympathetic and friendly gaze was rarely judgmental; rather, it invited the opening up of the most private fears, hopes, and dreams.11 While the senate rearranged teaching responsibilities to cover Nelles's loss, the Board of Regents appointed the dean of theology, Nathanael Burwash, as the new president and chancellor. Although Alexander Burns and Alexander Sutherland were both suggested for the posts, Burwash was the obvious choice. He had been born in 1839 near the village of St Andrews in Lower Canada to a Loyalist Methodist family that had moved to Baltimore near Cobourg in 1844. He had attended Victoria College during the 18505, joining the faculty in 1866. Burwash had helped administer the university for some time and had played a leading role in the church courts on behalf of higher education. Almost from his appointment, Nelles had considered Burwash his most trusted confidant and had been impressed with his younger colleague's spirituality, faith, judgment, and ability to accomplish much with few resources. Although he lacked Nelles's broad tolerance and culture and his ability to delegate authority, Burwash would bring fresh energy and determination to the moral, spiritual, and scholarly priorities Nelles had always championed. Burwash also understood the intricacies of federation with the University of Toronto; he had a clear vision of the future of Methodist higher education and could apply his substantial experience to protect Victoria's interests in the new and not always hospitable urban environment. In short,

Epilogue

xjj

Burwash was the best man for the job. The wider Methodist community agreed that this was no time to experiment with a less experienced candidate.12Burwash's first task was to mobilize the university, restoring its normal academic and social activities after Nelles's passing. He was able to re-establish equilibrium with remarkable rapidity, thanks to an experienced faculty, well-established routines, and a mature student body. From 1886 to 1890 the university had an enrolment of 439 students in the Arts, 123 in the Faculty of Theology, and 38 individuals studying law; 97 graduated in Arts and eight in Theology. The fouryear period saw an increase over the previous four, an unexpected result which clearly demonstrated that Victoria had not lost favour simply because of its anticipated new relationship in Toronto.13 A further substantial increase in undergraduate enrolment in the Arts once the move had been made, however, surprised many Victoria alumni, senior politicians, and University of Toronto officials. President James Loudon, for instance, had assumed that Arts education would quickly gravitate to University College, while Victoria would retreat to theological training. It was really not until the new University of Toronto Act of 1906 and the appointment of Robert Falconer as president that Victoria could slightly relax its vigilance when dealing with the university. Under the guise of efficiency, ending the semi-autonomous status of the denominational colleges remained a remarkably consistent theme of the twentieth-century University of Toronto administration. Along with other representatives from General Conference, Burwash struggled to gather the money needed for federation. Typically, the church assigned specific quotas to the Annual Conferences to raise locally. Burwash also worked to find a suitable site in Toronto, have plans drawn up, and prepare as much as possible for eventual construction in Queen's Park. He was able to obtain a five-acre site south of the present Charles Street, facing St Mary's Street and bordering Queen's Park. The land is still leased for one dollar a year. If Victoria University ever withdrew from federation, it could continue to rent at the same rate or purchase the property at an evaluation based on educational use in 1887. But actual construction and the move to Toronto could not begin until sufficient funds were subscribed to prevent any future financial embarrassment. With the receipt of enough money and this worry removed, the Board of Regents met on 21 May 1890 to confirm the transfer. The meeting was interrupted, however, when the town of Cobourg served the board with an injunction from the High Court of Justice preventing all further proceedings. The legal arguments continued all summer and into the fall. The injunction was finally lifted after Victoria paid

2.78

Faithful Intellect

the town for the five acres it had purchased for the college in 1857 and returned some of the subscriptions for Faraday Hall made in 1874 and 1875. These costs totalled $19,000. The Victoria University senate also had to convene legally and transfer its degree-granting rights to the federated University of Toronto.14 With all these roadblocks cleared, the lieutenant-governor proclaimed into law on 23 November 1890 the provincial legislation initially passed in 1887. From April 1891 until October 1892, the citizens of Toronto watched with interest the rise of a new monument to higher education on the northeastern flank of Queen's Park. When the final tally was taken in 1894, 5,109 individuals had promised $512,000 to the project, although only a little over $400,000 was actually received because of the harsh economic conditions of the period. Of these individuals, thirty gave amounts ranging from $1,000 to $30,000, for a total of about $150,000. By far the largest gift came from William Gooderham. He originally subscribed $30,000, but after his death in 1889 his estate provided $75,000 for the endowment and an additional $125,000 for the building. His contribution effectively covered the lion's share of the construction costs. Classes started on their appointed day, and the chapel was dedicated by Albert Carman on Sunday, 21 October 1892. Two days later, at the formal opening of the new building, Hart Massey, who had originally opposed the shift to Toronto, presented the university with a cheque for $40,000 to establish a Chair of English Bible and Homiletics.15 Such generosity from the rising Canadian industrial and financial elite would mark the fundraising campaigns during the first forty years in Toronto. The plans originally called for the university to have a large main building, with residences and a chapel housed in a separate building to the east. But in order to save money during the economic depression, the authorities quickly decided to postpone the construction of the residences until some unspecified future date. The architect, William Storm - who ironically had assisted Frederick Cumberland during the 18505 with the plans for University College - supplied the blueprints and drawings and oversaw the beginning of the new Victoria. On 15 June 1891, Mrs George Cox, the wife of the wealthy financier who served as bursar, laid the cornerstone in the presence of some three thousand visitors, including Premier Oliver Mowat and Minister of Education George Ross.16 After Storm died in August 1892, his associate Edmund Burke completed the edifice. The final cost of constructing and furnishing it was about $222,000. The four-storey building was in the Romanesque Revival style popularized across North America by Henry Richardson. Its grand portico entrance faced south down the hill toward Lake Ontario and overlooked the new Parliament

Epilogue

279

buildings across the park. With a suggestion of minarets, the edifice hinted at the great Islamic mosques of the Middle East that had so intrigued the early crusaders. The red sandstone came from the Credit Valley west of Toronto, and the white limestone was brought in from Ohio. The rough texture suggested a return to Romantic Naturalism in architectural style. It also provided an appropriate canvas for the carved plants, animals, and human faces that adorn the building. Above the main portico Burwash had the words, "The Truth Shall Make You Free," from John 8:3 z, carved deeply into the stone. Against the background of continuing theological controversy, Burwash wanted it well understood that the college would remain faithful to Nelles's quest for knowledge and wisdom, wherever it might be found. The truth was the person of Christ, and only through Christ could true freedom exist. Truth was also a precious virtue that could too easily be lost if bigotry, anti-intellectualism, or narrow sectarianism gained a foothold. As long as scholars pursued knowledge and truth with diligence and integrity, society would be under no threat. Indeed, the nation and the world would be the ultimate beneficiaries. The inscription encapsulated Nelles's lifelong vision and aptly represented the oral and spiritual culture central to Victoria University. The battle was now in other hands, but they had been well prepared for the task. Alexander Burns, who had known Nelles since 1855, assured George Hodgins that Nelles was not really dead: his voice was still speaking strongly to the critical issues of the day. "He never affected hearts more than now. He never had a greater influence in Canada than he has today ... his truest monument Victoria College shall not be marred or destroyed while word or act can prevent it."17

This page intentionally left blank

Notes

ABBREVIATIONS

CG CHR CMHS CMM DCB MC MCC MEC OH WMC

Christian Guardian Canadian Historical Review Canadian Methodist Historical Society Canadian Methodist Magazine Dictionary of Canadian Biography Methodist Church Methodist Church of Canada Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada Ontario History Wesleyan Methodist Church in Canada

Unless otherwise indicated, all primary sources are located at the United Church/Victoria University Archives in Toronto. When multiple references are cited in a single note, the first refers to any direct quote, if present. Other citations relate to information included in the paragraph, help substantiate the claims made, or deal with the broader historical debate opened by the reference. INTRODUCTION

i Michael Gauvreau, The Evangelical Century: College and Creed in English Canada from the Great Revival to the Great Depression (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1991), 10. 2. Timothy Larsen, "The Regaining of Faith: Reconversions among Popular Radicals in Mid-Victorian England," Church History, 70 (2001), 527. 3 Stephen F. Bayne, "God Is The Teacher," in Edmund Fuller (ed.), The Christian Idea of Education (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957), 2-55-

2.82.

Notes to pages xiii-xv

4 Sydney Wise, "Upper Canada and the Conservative Tradition," in Brian McKillop and Paul Romney (eds), Sydney Wise, God's Peculiar Peoples (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1993), 169-84. 5 Brian McKillop, Matters of Mind: The University in Ontario, 1791-1951 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), 3-7, 9-10; William Westfall, Two Worlds: The Protestant Culture of Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1989), 19-49; Judson D. Purdy, "John Strachan's Educational Policies, 1815-1841," OH, 64 (March 1972.), 45-64; Curtis Fahey, In His Name: The Anglican Experience in Upper Canada, 1791-1854 (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1991), 1-36. 6 Nancy Christie, "'In these Times of Democratic Rage and Delusion': Popular Religion and the Challenge to the Established Order, 1760-1815," in George Rawlyk (ed.), The Canadian Protestant Experience (Burlington: Welch, 1990); Gerald Craig, Upper Canada: The Formative Years, 1784-1841 (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1963). 7 Robert Gidney and W.PJ. Millar, Inventing Secondary Education: The Rise of the High School in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1990). 8 David Marshall, Secularizing the Faith: Canadian Protestant Clergy and the Crisis of Belief, 1850-1940 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992), 49-71. 9 George Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism in Canada, 2 vol. (Toronto: Methodist Book and Publishing House, 1881, 1903), 1:538-45; 2:332-7; CG, 16 May 1888, 313. 10 W. Stewart Wallace, A History of the University of Toronto, 1827-1927 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1927); George Hodgins, The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, 28 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1894-1910), 14:234, 238-44; ibid., 15:98-305. 11 Rousas John Rushdooney, The Messianic Character of American Education (Nutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1963). 12 To avoid possible confusion, it should be noted from the outset that Samuel Nelles was born into the Methodist Episcopal Church, but grew to maturity in the Wesleyan Methodist Church in Canada. This church was centred in what became Ontario and had mission operations in the western regions beyond the Great Lakes. In 1854 it merged with the Wesleyan connexion in the future Province of Quebec; in 1874 the Wesleyans in central Canada united with those in the Atlantic region. In the same year, the small Methodist New Church of Canada joined the Wesleyans to form the Methodist Church of Canada. A decade later the other members of the old-line Canadian Methodist family of churches - the Bible Christian Church, the Primitive Methodist Church, and the Methodist Episcopal Church, which had reorganized in 1834 - united with the

Notes to pages xv~3

13

14

15

16

283

Methodist Church of Canada to form the Methodist Church. This union created the largest Protestant denomination in Canada, serving the territory from Newfoundland to British Columbia, as well as Bermuda, with missions in Japan and, later, China. Neil Semple, The Lord's Dominion: The History of Canadian Methodism (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 5-7. Brian McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence: Critical Inquiry and Canadian Thought in the Victorian Era (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1979). Hodgins (ed.), The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada; Egerton Ryerson, The Story of My Life, edited by George Hodgins (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1883); Nathanael Burwash, The History of Victoria College (Toronto: Victoria University Press, 192.7); Charles Bruce Sissons, A History of Victoria University (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952.). Robert Gidney and W.P.J. Millar, Professional Gentlemen: The Professions in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994); Marguerite Van Die, An Evangelical Mind: Nathanael Burwash and the Methodist Tradition in Canada, 1839-1918 (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1989). W. Stewart Wallace, A History of the University of Toronto, 1827 to 15*27 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 192,7); Martin Friedland, The University of Toronto, A History (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2,002); Hilda Neatby, Queen's University, Volume I, 1841-1917: And Not to yield, edited by Frederick Gibson and Roger Graham (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1978); Charles M. Johnston, McMaster University. Volume I: The Toronto Years (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976); Waldo Smith, Albert College, 1857-7957 (Belleville: [1957]); John Gwynne-Timothy, Western's First Century (London: University of Western Ontario Press, 1978); John Reid, Mount Allison University: A History to 1963, 2 vol. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1984); n.a., Jubilee Volume of Wycliffe College, 1877-1927-1937 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1937); Alexander Ross and Terry Crowley, The College on the Hill: A New History of the Ontario Agricultural College, 1874-1999 (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1999). CHAPTER ONE

i R. Robert Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 1798 (Ridgeway: Log Cabin Publishing, 1993), 47, 69; Matthew Richey Papers, Matthew Richey to Augusta Richey (daughter), 20 February 1836; Neil Semple, The Lord's Dominion: The History of Canadian Methodism(Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 60-1.

284

Notes to pages 5-7

2 Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 38, 47; Carl Benn, The Iroquois and the War of 1812 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998). 3 Samuel S. Nelles Biographical file; Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 42-4; Edward M. Chadwick, Ontario Families, z vol. (Lambertville: Hunterdon Press, [1894] 1983), 2:169-72; J. David Wood, "Population Change on an Agricultural Frontier: Upper Canada, 1796 to 1841," in Roger Hall, William Westfall, and Laurel MacDowell (eds), Patterns of the Past: Interpreting Ontario's History (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1988), 55-75. 4 Samuel Nelles Papers, Box 2,, file 28, "Nelles Brant Pioneer"; ibid., Box 2, file 27, copy of letter, Mary Hardy Nelles to William Wagner Nelles, 25 January 1844; ibid., Box 2, files 26-28, Nelles family genealogical information; Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 14, 35, 38-9. 5 Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 35; Sidney L. Harring, White Man's Law: Native People in Nineteenth-Century Canadian Jurisprudence (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998), 42; Paul Romney, Mr. Attorney: The Attorney General in Court, Cabinet and Legislature, 1791-1899 (Toronto: The Osgoode Society, 1986), 29-31. 6 Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 3-6; Nelles Papers, Box 2, files 26-28; Chadwick, 2:169-72. 7 Robert Mutrie, Willem Nolles: Ancestor of the Nelles and Nellis Families of North America (Toronto: Ontario Genealogical Society, 1996), 2-5. 8 Mutrie, Willem Nolles, 2-5, 15-18; Samuel Nelles Biographical file; Chadwick, Ontarian Families, 2:154; "Robert Nelles," DCB, 7:650-2. 9 Nelles Papers, Box 2, files 26-28; Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 2; Mutrie, Willem Nolles, 15-17; Chadwick, Ontarian Families, 2:154-68; "Robert Nelles", DCB, 7:650-2; "Abraham Nelles," DCB, 11:639-40. 10 Terry Cook, "John Beverley Robinson and the Conservative Blueprint for the Upper-Canadian Community," OH, 64 (1972); William Westfall, Creating a Protestant Ontario: The Anglican Church and the Secular State (Leeds: University of Leeds Press, 1983). For an important assessment of the use of the law to manipulate and empower the Tory vision for Upper Canada and the extra-legal measures the Reformers were obliged to consider, see: Peter Oliver, "Power, Politics and the Law: The Place of the Judiciary in the Historiography of Upper Canada", in Elaine Baker and Jim Phillips (eds), Essays in the History of Canadian Law, Volume VIII, in Honour of R.C.B. Risk (Toronto: The Osgoode Society, 1999), 443-69; Barry Wright, "The Gourlay Affair; Seditious Libel and the Sedition Act in Upper Canada, 1818-19," in F. Murray Greenwood and Barry Wright (eds), Canadian State Trials, Volume I: Law, Politics, and Security Measures, 1608-1837 (Toronto: The Osgoode Society, 1996), 487-504; Paul Romney, "Upper Canada in the 18205: Criminal

Notes to pages 7-9

11

12

13

14

2.85

Prosecution and the Case of Francis Collins," in Canadian State Trials, Volume I, 505-21. Mutrie, Willem Nolles, 5-6; Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 5-14, 35; Chadwick, Ontarian Families, 2:169-72; Nelles Papers, Box 2, file 27, especially Margaret Smyth to Margaret Ray, 10 April 1962, with excerpt of letter, Elizabeth Nelles to Robert Nelles, [1801-1804]; W.S. Smyth and William Reddy, The First Fifty Years of Cazenovia Seminary, 1825-1875 (New York: Methodist Book Room, 1877), 564. Samuel Nelles's cousin was Arthur Sturgis Hardy, who was a member of Oliver Mowat's Cabinet and succeeded him as premier. (Ontario Archives), Arthur Sturgis Hardy Family Papers, Box i, file 3; "Arthur Sturgis Hardy," DCB, 13:442-4; CG, 22 May 1844, 122; Charles Bruce Sissons, A History of Victoria University (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952), 65; Nelles Papers, "Diary," 2 July 1866; ibid., William Hardy to Samuel Nelles, 22 November 1872; John George Hodgins Papers, Henry Hardy to George Hodgins, 21 September 1844; Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 35. David G. Burley, A Particular Condition in Life: Self-employment and Social Mobility in Mid-Victorian Brantford, Ontario (Kingston: McGillQueen's University Press, 1994), 44, 54, 160, 234-9; William Westfall, Two Worlds: The Protestant Culture of Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1989), 21-52; Romney, Mr. Attorney, 20-2, 318-24. Burley, A Particular Condition, 6-12, 235. Burley provides a useful definition of the middle class as being independent enough to be selfemployed. He also assumes that honest and responsible character and the recognition of the potential of the individual are important auxiliary factors. See also: David G. Burley, '"Good for all he would ask': Credit and Debt in the Transition to Industrial Capitalism," Histoire sociable/Social History, 20 (May 1987), 79-99. Burley's definition, however, opens the question of the status of junior versus senior members of the commercial classes. Is a clerk a member of the middle class? In a society with essentially two classes, workers and proprietors, is a blacksmith middle- or working-class? Also, the professionals - lawyers, engineers, architects, not to mention the clergy - do not neatly fit his definition. These questions, among others, were at the methodological root of Michael Katz's study of nineteenth-century Hamilton. It was also quite normal for individuals during the nineteenth century to move from one occupation to another and back again with great rapidity. A farmer became a merchant, sold insurance, and returned to farming as circumstances required. Still, an aspiration to be middle-class - with the attendant acceptance of hard work, discipline, and morality, along with a trust in education and capitalistic ideology - while still

2.86

15

16 17 18

19

20

21 22 23

24

Notes to pages 9-11 fuzzy, perhaps provides as good a portrait of the middle class as any other schema. The Nelles family certainly had these characteristics. See: Paul E. Johnson, The Shopkeeper's Millennium: Society and Revivals in Rochester, New York, 1815-1837 (New York: Hill & Wang, 1978). Nelles Papers, Box 2, file 27, copy of letter, Mary Nelles to William W. Nelles, 25 January 1844; Marguerite Van Die, "'The Marks of a Genuine Revival': Religion, Social Change, Gender, and Community in Mid-Victorian Brantford, Ontario," CHR, 79 (September 1998), 52.4-8. Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 39; WMC, Missionary Society Reports, 1847-48, 55; ibid., 1848-49, 24. Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 47-9. Ibid., 47, 39, 50-63; George Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism in Canada, 2 vol. (Toronto: Methodist Book and Publishing House, 1881, 1903), 1:67; Nelles Papers, Box 2, file 27, Margaret Smyth to Frederick Gullen, 31 December 1960; Chadwick, Ontarian Families, 2:169-72; Hardy Family Papers, Box i, file 3. Robert Gidney and WPJ. Millar, "From Voluntarism to State Schooling: The Creation of the Public School System in Ontario," CHR, 66 (1985), 458-63; Bruce Curtis, Building the Educational State: Canada West, 1836-1871 (London: Althouse Press, 1988). Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 47, 64-5, 83, 104; Smyth and Reddy, First Fifty Years, 564; Chadwick, Ontarian Families, 2:169-72; Nelles Papers, copy of letter, Mary Nelles to William W. Nelles, 25 January 1844; ibid., William Hardy to Samuel Nelles, 22 November 1872; Nathanael Burwash, The History of Victoria College (Toronto: Victoria University Press, 1927), 191, 254. "John III Sobieski," Encyclopaedia Britannica, 10:238-9. Nelles Papers, Box 2, file 31, "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 24 October 1848, 7; "Samuel Sobieski Nelles," CMM, 27 (1888), 527-8. Nelles Papers, Box 14, file 301, "Scrapbook on Life of Samuel Nelles, prepared by John George Hodgins,"; Robert Maitland, "A Forest Ramble with Dr. Nelles," Methodist Magazine, n.d., 143; Allan Smith, "Farms, Forests and Cities: The Image of the Land and the Rise of the Metropolis in Ontario, 1860-1914," in David Keane and Colin Read (eds), Old Ontario: Essays in Honour of J.M.S. Careless (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1990), 71-94. Most of the Loyalist German-speaking settlers who attended the early Lutheran churches along the St Lawrence River turned to Methodism when they could not obtain proper Lutheran clergy. The Methodistic Evangelical United Brethren Church's original components served German-speaking citizens in southwestern Ontario. In its early years, the Methodist Episcopal Church was heavily Irish, with nearly a third of its clergy of Irish extraction. No other Protestant denomination attracted

Notes to pages 11-14

25 26

27

28

29

30

31

32

^7

first-generation native converts in Upper Canada in numbers approaching the Methodists, and a large proportion of Afro-American immigrants also attached themselves to Methodist churches. Nelles Papers, copy of letter, Mary Nelles to William W. Nelles, 25 January 1844; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 59-65. MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1830, 38; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1835, 103; George Burns, Prayers Adapted for Public Worship, the Domestic Altar (St John: Cameron & Seeds, 1829); Thomas Webster, History of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada (Hamilton: Canada Christian Advocate Office, 1870), 57. N.P. Goldhawk, "The Methodist People in the Early Victorian Age: Spirituality and Worship," in Rupert Davies et al. (eds), A History of the Methodist Church in Great Britain, 4 vol. (London: Epworth Press, 1965-1988), 2:140; David L. Watson, "The Origin and Significance of the Early Methodist Class Meeting," (Ph.D., Duke University, 1978); Henry Williams, The Constitution and Polity of Wesleyan Methodism (London: Wesleyan Book Room, 1882); MEC, Doctrines and Discipline (1829), 37-8, 81-3; Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, On Speech, III," 16. Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism, 1:31; MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1824, 2. Membership in the Methodist connexions entailed formal responsibilities. There was about a i : 4 ratio between members and those who were simply Methodist adherents or attended worship services regularly. Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism, 1:200-1; John Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 5 vol. (Toronto: Samuel Rose, 1867-1877), 3:14-6; John Carroll, "Father Corson": or the Old Style Canadian Itinerant (Toronto: Samuel Rose, 1879), 27-34; MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1830, 37; William Alcott, The Sunday School as it Should Be (London: 1867); Wesleyan Sunday School Magazine. MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1827, 15; ibid., 1828, 18; ibid., 1829, 25. The number of members on the Dumfries Circuit fell from 202 to 177 to 132. Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 3:265; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 71-6. Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 1:225-6, 285-8, 2:127, 312-15; Nathan Hatch, The Democratization of American Christianity (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989). MEC, Proceedings of the Canadian Conference in the Case of Henry Ryan (Kingston: S. Miles, 1829); Egerton Ryerson Papers, William Case to John Ryerson, 17 November 1828; ibid., John Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, 2 January 1829; ibid., William Smith to William Ryerson, 2 March 1829; ibid., John Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, 14 June 1829; Arthur Kewley, "The Trial of Henry Ryan," unpub., United Church Archives;

288

33

34

35

36 37

38

Notes to pages 14-16 Gordon Schroeder, "Henry Ryan: Arrogant Demogogue or Canadian Churchman," unpub., 1977, United Church Archives; "Henry Ryan," DCB, 6:670-6. Wesleyan Missionary Society Correspondence (Br.), Robert Alder to George Morley, 2.3 November 182.6; ibid., Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Upper Canada to Missionary Secretaries, 14 October 1831; ibid., Joseph Stinson to Robert Alder, 21 April 1834; Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism, 1:31-2, 177, 258; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 76-92; Elizabeth Cooper, "Religion, Politics and Money: The Methodist Union of 1832-1833," OH, 81 (1989); MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1832, 47; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1833, 56-68. CG, 8 June 1836, 106; ibid., n May 1836, 106; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1854, 252. At the anniversary missionary meeting in Mount Pleasant, June 1836, Abraham Cooke was in the chair and served as campaign treasurer. Henry A. Hardy was secretary of the meeting. Collections were raised by Mrs Cooke and Mrs Strobridge for the missionary committee, which included William Sturgis and Morris Hardy. John W. Grant, Moon of Wintertime: Missionaries and Indians of Canada in Encounter since 1534 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1984), 76-7; Peter Jones, History of the Ojibway Indians (London: Bennett, 1861), 30; Conrad Van Dusen, The Indian Chief (London: Nichols, 1867), i; George Playter, The History of Methodism in Canada (Toronto: Anson Green, 1862), 389-91; Alvin Torry, The Autobiography of Alvin lorry (Auburn: Moses Press, 1865); Robert Young, The Character and Overthrow of Idolatry (Halifax: Cunnabell, 1830); Elizabeth Graham, Medicine Man to Missionary: Missionaries as Agents of Change among the Indians of Southern Ontario, 1784-1867 (Toronto: Peter Martin, 1975), 80-2; Donald Smith, Sacred Feathers: The Rev. Peter Jones (Kahkewaquonaby) and the Mississauga Indians (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1987). CG, 23 May 1838; lines 35-42, quoted in Penny Petrone (ed.), First People, First Voices (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1983), 86-7. "William Case," DCB, 8:132-4; CG, 4 November 1835, 206; Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism, 1:31; MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1829, 25, records 1052 native members; Wesleyan Missionary Society (Br.), Correspondence, Peter Jones to Adam Townley, 20 July 1831; Anthony Hall, "The Red Man's Burden: Land, Law and the Lord in the Indian Affairs of Upper Canada, 1791-1858," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1984), 84. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1835, 104-5; Richard Allen, "Providence to Progress: The Migration of an Idea in English-Canadian

Notes to pages 16-18

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

289

Thought," in William Westfall (ed.), Religion/Culture, Comparative Canadian Studies, j (1985), 38. MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1830, 38; Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to James Stephenson, 15 April 1836; ibid., "Memorandum," 28 June 1836; CG, 7 May 1834, 102.; John W. Grant, A Profusion of Spires: Religion in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988), 90. MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1830, 34-5; Ryerson Papers, Jesse Hurlburt to Egerton Ryerson, 25 September 1840; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 1-2; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 1-66. Sissons, History of Victoria University, 2-3; Gerald Craig, Upper Canada: The Formative Years, 1784-1841 (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1963), 184-5. James McLachlan, American Boarding Schools: A Historical Study (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1970), 19-21; Paul W. Bennett, '"Little Worlds': The Forging of the Social Identities of Ontario's Protestant School Communities and Institutions, 1850-1930," (Ed.D., University of Toronto, 1990), 2; Judson D. Purdy, "John Strachan's Educational Policies, 1815-1841," OH, 66 (March 1972), 45-62. John Webster Grant, "Religion and the Quest for a National Identity: The Background in Canadian History," in Peter Slater (ed.), Religion and Culture in Canada (Waterloo: Corporation for Studies in Religion, 1977), 13-14; Brian McKillop, Matters of Mind; the University in Ontario, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), viii; Bennett, "Little Worlds," 9-10. Egerton Ryerson, "Report on a System of Public Elementary Instruction," in George Hodgins (ed.), The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, 28 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1894-1910), 6:142; Curtis, Building the Educational State, 102-3; William Wylie, "Instruments of Commerce and Authority: The Civil Courts in Upper Canada 1789-1812," in David Flaherty (ed.), Essays in the History of Canadian Law, Volume II (Toronto: The Osgoode Society, 1983), 4; Allen, "Providence to Progress," 35; Romney, Mr. Attorney, 62-82, 188-92. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1837, 172-3; Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Lord Glenelg, 13 February 1836; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Lord Glenelg, 8 March 1838. Susan Houston and Alison Prentice, Schooling and Scholars in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988), 42-3; Neil Semple, "'The Nurture and Admonition of the Lord': Nineteenth-Century Canadian Methodism's Response to 'Childhood'," Histoire sociale/Social History, 14 (May 1981), 159-64. Robert Gidney and W.P.J. Millar, "From Voluntarism to State Schooling," 447-59-

Z90

Notes to pages 18-20

48 MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1830, 34-5; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1837, 17£-3; Sissons, History of Victoria University, z~3, 8-9, 14, 2,0; CG, 7 May 1834, 102.. 49 Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Lord Glenelg, 23 February 1836; ibid., William Lord to Egerton Ryerson, 31 May 1836; ibid., John Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, z January 1837; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Ephraim Evans, i February 1837; ibid., John Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, ii August 1837; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Robert Alder, 25 November 1837; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 16-17; McKillop, Matters of Mind, iz-i4. 50 Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to James Stephen (Colonial Office), zi July 1836; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Sir George Grey (Colonial Office), zi July 1836; ibid., Sir George Grey to Egerton Ryerson, z8 July 1836; Joseph Stinson and Matthew Richey, A Plain Statement of Facts connected with the union and separation of the British and Canadian Conferences (Toronto: R. Stanton, 1840). 51 Ryerson Papers, William Lord to Egerton Ryerson, Z4 November 1835; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Edward Ellice, 6 February 1836; ibid., James Stephen to Egerton Ryerson, iz July 1836; (National Archives), RG i £5, Despatch 32, George Grey (for Lord Glenelg) to F.B. Head, z March 1836. 5Z CG, Z7 December 1837, 31; Ryerson Papers, Lord Glenelg to Sir Francis Bond Head, 15 April 1836; ibid., William Lord to Egerton Ryerson, 31 May 1836; ibid., William Lord to Egerton Ryerson, 19 May 1837; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Robert Alder, Z5 November 1837; ibid., J. Joseph to Egerton Ryerson, 30 January 1838; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Chief Justice John Beverley Robinson, 15 February 1838; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Lord Glenelg, 8 March 1838; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to James Stephen, 9 March 1838. 53 Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Legislative Council, 14 March 1835; ibid., Ephraim Evans to Egerton Ryerson, 17 November 1835; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Lord Glenelg, 13 February 1836; ibid., James Stephen to Egerton Ryerson, 18 March 1836; ibid., James Stephen to Egerton Ryerson, 13 April 1836; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to James Stephen, 15 April 1836; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Lord Glenelg, 16 April 1836; ibid., R.M. Rolfe to Egerton Ryerson, 17 May 1836; ibid., James Stephen to Egerton Ryerson, iz July 1836; Wesleyan Missionary Society (Br.), Correspondence, Joseph Stinson to Robert Alder, z6 August 1836. 54 Grant, "Religion and the Quest for a National Identity," 10. 55 'A member of the Episcopal Church,' An Address to the Ministers and Congregations of the Presbyterian and Independent Persuasions in the United States of America (1790), 54-7; Roger O'Toole, "Society, the Sacred and the Secular: Sociological Observations on the Changing Role

Notes to pages 20-4

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

291

of Religion in Canadian Culture," in Westfall (ed.), Religion/Culture, Comparative Canadian Studies, 7 (1985), 102,. Curtis Fahey, In His Name: The Anglican Experience in Upper Canada, 779^-1854 (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1991), xiv, 7-9; Grant, A Profusion of Spires, 85-8; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 5. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conferences, 1824-1845, appendix, 399-402; Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to James Stephen, 15 April 1836; Romney, Mr. Attorney, 63; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 77, 88, 121. Fahey, In His Name, 63-4; John Moir, Church and State in Canada West: Three Studies in the Relation of Denominationalism and Nationalism, 1841-1867 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1959), 67, 164-5. Fahey, In His Name, 74; Egerton Ryerson, The Story of My Life, ed. George Hodgins (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1883), 95-106; Adam Townley, Ten Letters on the Church and Church Establishments (Toronto: Commercial Herald, 1839); Thomas McCrie, On Church Establishments (Glasgow: Ogle, 1832); Alan Wilson, The Clergy Reserves in Upper Canada: A Canadian Mortmain (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1968). Fahey, In His Name, 75; John Moir, Enduring Witness: A History of the Presbyterian Church in Canada (Toronto: Presbyterian Publications, i975)> 87-91. Allen, "Providence to Progress," 36. On the persistence of older traditions, see: Graeme Patterson, "Early Compact Groups in the Politics of York," in David Keane and Colin Read (eds), Old Ontario: Essays in Honour of J.M.S. Careless, 174-91. Goldwin French, "The Evangelical Creed in Canada," in William L. Morton (ed.), The Shield of Achilles: Aspects of Canada in the Victorian Age (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1968), 15-35; Sydney F. Wise, "God's Peculiar People," in The Shield of Achilles, 36-61. Russell B. Nye, This Almost Chosen People: Essays in The History of American Ideas (Toronto: Macmillan, 1966), 166-7, 188-94; Perry Miller, The Errand into the Wilderness (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1956); David Noble, Historians against History (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1965), 3-36. Fahey, In His Name, 76; Grant, A Profusion of Spires, 87-99; Ryerson Papers, copy of dispatch, Lord Goderich to Lieutenant Governor, 6 April 1833; ibid., William Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, 14 June 1836; ibid., John Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, 2 January 1837; CG, 18 February 1835, 60. Egerton Ryerson, The Clergy Reserve Question: As a Matter of History, a Question of Law, and a Subject of Legislation (Toronto: J.H. Lawrence, 1839); Romney, Mr. Attorney, 166-7, *%7'-> Fahey, In His Name, 174-5; Moir, Enduring Witness, 91-2.

292.

Notes to pages 25-9

66 Nelles Papers, copy of letter, Mary Nelles to William W. Nelles, 25 January 1844; "Samuel Sobieski Nelles," CMM, 27 (1888), 527. 67 CG, 21 March 1832, 74. 68 Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 155; CG, 7 May 1834, 102; ibid., 2 March 1842, 75; Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 4:64-73. 69 Nelles Papers, "Diary," 2 July 1866. C H A P T E R TWO

1 Samuel Nelles Papers, Box 14, file 301, "Scrapbook on Life of Samuel Nelles, prepared by George Hodgins"; "Robert Nelles," DCB, 7:650-2. 2 "Death of Dr. Nelles," CMM, 26 (1887), 470; Robert Maitland, "A Forest Ramble with Dr. Nelles," Methodist Magazine, n.d., 143; "Obituary of Samuel Nelles" by A.H. Reynar, Cobourg World, 19 October 1887; John Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 5 vol. (Toronto: Samuel Rose, 1867-1877), 5:13. 3 MC, Minutes of Bay of Quinte Conference, 1888, 12-14. 4 WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1840, 233, 239-41; John Moir, "Egerton Ryerson, the Christian Guardian and Upper-Canadian Politics, 1829-1840," CMHS, Papers, 10 (1983), 18-31; Wesleyan Missionary Society (Br.), Correspondence, Missionary Society, Extract of Minutes, n May 1831; ibid., Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Upper Canada to Missionary Secretaries, 14 October 1831; Goldwin French, Parsons and Politics: the Role of the Wesleyan Methodists in Upper Canada and the Maritimes from 1780 to 1855 (Toronto: Ryerson Press, 1962), 134, 171-91. 5 Documents Relating to the Recent Determination of the British Wesleyan Conference to Dissolve Official Union with the Provincial Conference of Upper Canada (London: Mason, 1841); Neil Semple, The Lord's Dominion: The History of Canadian Methodism (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 92-6. 6 Joseph Stinson and Matthew Richey, A Plain Statement of Facts connected with the union and separation of the British and Canadian Conferences (Toronto: R. Stanton, 1840); WMC, Minutes of Special Conference, October 1840, 245-60. 7 Egerton Ryerson, The Story of My Life, edited by George Flodgins, (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1883), 395-6; Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 4:407-8, 431-3, 478-85; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 97. 8 Gerald Craig (ed.), Lord Durham's Report (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1963); Donald Creighton, The Empire of the St. Lawrence (Toronto: Macmillan, 1956), 321-48; Graeme Patterson, "Early Compact Groups in the Politics of York," in David Keane and Colin Read (eds),

Notes to pages 29-32

9

10 11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

21

293

Old Ontario: Essays in Honour of J.M.S. Careless (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1990), 174-91. Craig (ed.), Lord Durham's Report, 73-4, 116-19, 170-1; Creighton, Empire of the St. Lawrence, 355-85; Janet Ajzenstat, The Political Thought of Lord Durham (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1988), 73-100. Thomas P. Peardon (ed.), John Locke, The Second Treatise of Government (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 195z), xiii. J.M.S. Careless, The Union of the Canadas, 1841-1857 (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1967), 1-19; Gerald Craig, Upper Canada: The Formative Years, 1784-1841 (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1963), Z 57~75; Craig (ed.), Lord Durham's Report, 52-8; J.M.S. Careless (ed.), The Pre-Confederation Premiers: Ontario Government Leaders, 1841-1867 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1980); Ajzenstat, Political Thought of Lord Durham, 42-72,. Paul E. Johnson, The Shopkeeper's Millennium: Society and Revivals in Rochester, New York, 1815-1837 (New York: Hill & Wang, 1978), 18. Ibid., 16-17; Blake McKelvey, "Flour Milling at Rochester," Rochester History, 33 (July 1971), 4-10. "Western New York Conference," Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 2:2542. W.S. Smyth and William Reddy, The First Fifty Years of Cazenovia Seminary, 1825-1875 (New York: Methodist Book Room, 1877). Nelles Papers, Box 4, file 51, Essays, n.d., "Autobiographical Sketch of School Days at Genesee Wesleyan Seminary." Smyth and Reddy, The First Fifty Years of Cazenovia Seminary, 15-19. Nelles Papers, Box 4, file 42, "School Essays and Poems," 1-5. Ibid., "Autobiographical Sketch of School Days." Ibid., Box 14, file 296, "Rev. Dr. Ormiston, 'Blessed are the Dead,' Eulogy on the late Chancellor Nelles," 6-7; ibid., Box 3, file 31, "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 15 January 1849, 144. The conflict between emotional conversion, often using mass evangelism, and "respectable" conversions is explored in David Sokol, "Portrayals of Childhood and Race in Sunday School Conversion Narratives, 1827-1852," Methodist History, 40 (2001), 3-16. John Wigger, Taking Heaven By Storm: Methodism and the Rise of Popular Christianity in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 173-90, sees Methodism being transformed into a respectable institution as early as 1816. The transformation occurred in Canada some forty years later. MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1824, i; MEC (re-organized), Minutes of Annual Conference, 1839, 5; Richard Carwardine, Transatlantic Revivalism: Popular Evangelicalism in Britain and America, 1790-1865

294

22

23

24

25

Notes to pages 3 2-3 (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1978), 10; William Arthur, May We Hope for a Great Revival (Toronto: Wesleyan Book Room, 1867); William Arthur, The Tongue of Fire; or The True Power of Christianity (Toronto: G.R. Sanderson, 1867); Neil Semple, "The Quest for the Kingdom: Aspects of Protestant Revivalism in Nineteenth-Century Ontario," in Keane and Read (eds), Old Ontario, 95-117. Arthur Kewley, "Mass Evangelism in Upper Canada before 1830," 2, vol. (Th.D., Victoria University, 1960); George Rawlyk, The Canada Fire: Radical Evangelicalism in British North America, 1775-1812 (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1994), 102-23, 143-61. Charles Grandison Finney, Lectures on Revivals of Religion (Halifax: 1848, [Boston: 1835]); William McLoughlin (ed.), The American Evangelicals, 1800-1900, An Anthology (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1968), 1-2, 6; Keith Hardman, Charles Grandison Finney, 1792-1875: Revivalist and Reformer (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1987). Finney went further than other Calvinist divines in stressing the role of the human will in achieving salvation. Finney, Lectures on Revivals, 2-3. William McLoughlin, Revivals, Awakenings and Reform: An Essay on Religion and Social Change, 1607-1977 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), 98, 101, 115; William McLoughlin, Modern Revivalism, Charles G. Finney to Billy Graham (New York: Ronald Press, 1959); Jerald C. Brauer, "Conversion: From Puritanism to Revivalism," Journal of Religion, 58 (1978), 227-43. After discussing eighteenth-century revivalism, especially Jonathan Edwards's influence on New England Protestantism, Timothy Smith considers the rising importance of holiness within revivalism: "By grafting onto Covenant theology the doctrine of the moral nature of divine government, which required the consent of the human will to all that God provided or demanded; by locating depravity not in our natures, as Jonathan Edwards, but in our dispositions - our selfish wills - and by adopting Samuel Hopkins' idea that disinterested benevolence, or unselfish love toward God and other humans, was the sum of the Christian's duty, [Nathaniel] Taylor and [Lyman] Beecher transformed Calvinist dogma into a practical Arminianism, without having to jettison Calvinist verbiage." Timothy L. Smith, "Holiness and Radicalism in Nineteenth-Century America," in Theodore Runyon (ed.), Sanctification and Liberation (Nashville: Parthenon Press, 1977), 118. While the transformation of Calvinist ideology and experience can be traced to New England, a significant injection of competing and complementing Arminian spirituality and social mission originated in the Delmarva Peninsula (Delaware, Maryland and Virginia), as well as the Methodist strongholds in Pennsylvania and New York. Kirk Mariner, "William Penn Chandler and Revivalism in the East," Methodist History,

Notes to page 33

295

25 (1987), 135-46; Kimberly B. Long, "Methodist Worship and the Delmarva Peninsula, 1800-1850," Methodist History, 40 (2002), 85-98. 26 Whitney Cross, The Burned-over District: The Social and Intellectual History of Enthusiastic Religion in Western New York, 1800-1850 ([Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1950] New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1965), 173-7, 185-6, 198; Johnson, The Shopkeeper's Millennium, 5-6. Generations of American historians concerned with revivals, including William McLoughlin, have emphasized the New England "New School" reformed Calvinistic background to evangelicalism. There has also been significant interest in the major split between "New School" and "Old School" Presbyterianism in 1837, and especially the influence of abolitionism on this disunity. See Moses N. Moore, "Black Presbyterian Clergy and the Schism of 1837," Union Seminary Quarterly Review, U.S.Q.R., 54 (2000). Other studies have divided their attention between Calvinist evangelicals who always maintained split loyalties to revivalism, and other more Arminian groups who, while trusting in the inherent qualities of John Wesley's revival, maintained a variety of attitudes toward its particular North American mass evangelistic manifestations. For instance, one can compare historians whose primary interest lies in finding the roots of pentecostalism, fundamentalism, or holiness and who concentrate on the Calvinist tradition from Scotland or New England, with those interested in Wesleyanism and the Arminian denominations involved in revivalism. See, for instance: John Kent, "Methodism and Social Change in Britain," in Theodore Runyon (ed.), Sanctification and Liberation, 83-101; John Welsh, "Methodism and the Origin of EnglishSpeaking Evangelicalism," in David Bebbington, Mark Noll, and George Rawlyk (eds), Evangelicalism: Comparative Studies of Popular Protestantism in North America, the British Isles and Beyond, 1770-1990 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994); Garth Resell, "Charles G. Finney: His Place in the Stream of American Evangelicalism," in Leonard Sweet (ed.), The Evangelical Tradition in America (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1984), 131-47; James Gordon, Evangelical Spirituality: From the Lesleys to John Mott (London: SPCK, 1991). In general, the supposedly universal traits often associated with revivalism described by Nathan Hatch in The Democratization of American Christianity, such as political democracy, the expansion of the laissezfaire market economy, and the abolitionist movement, were unique to the northern United States. Leonard Sweet presents a fine overview of the historiography of evangelicalism in "The Evangelical Tradition in America," in Sweet (ed.), The Evangelical Tradition in America, 1-86. Canadian revivalism did not lead to a desire for American political democracy or abolitionism. It adapted precisely to the expectations and needs of the Canadian people. Two important articles have supplied a

2,96

27

28

29

30

Notes to pages 33-4

compelling history of the philosophical and theological underpinnings of the Calvinist movements in Canada: Michael Gauvreau, "The Empire of Evangelicalism: Varieties of Common Sense in Scotland, Canada and the United States"; Marguerite Van Die, "'The Double Vision: Evangelical Piety as Derivative and Indigenous in Victorian English Canada," in Bebbington, Noll, and Rawlyk (eds), Evangelicalism. The essentially evangelical history of Canada has been examined by Nancy Christie, Michael Gauvreau, and Phyllis Airhart in George Rawlyk (ed.), The Canadian Protestant Experience, 1760-1990 and Rawlyk (ed.), Aspects of the Canadian Evangelical Experience. They are perhaps less convincing when assessing the transformation of revival to suit the changing needs of latenineteenth-century Protestant society or the different effects of revival on the internal divisions within the Methodist movement or Baptist and Presbyterian groups. Methodists were not Calvinists, and rarely required theological rationalizations or philosophical defences. They had John Wesley, Richard Watson, and John Fletcher if they needed intellectual support, but they knew deep in their own hearts that they could legitimately experience religion for themselves. Later, the transformation of mass evangelism and the shift of revival from the core to the periphery of Methodist practice had little to do with the changing philosophical fashions. See: Semple, "The Quest for the Kingdom" and Randall Balmer, "From Frontier Phenomenon to Victorian Institution: The Methodist Camp Meeting in Ocean Grove, New Jersey," Methodist History, 24 (1987). The main Methodist denominations normally rejected fundamentalism, pentecostalism, and anti-modernism as contrary to the progressive spirit of evangelicalism, and only rarely endorsed the American version of the easy road to holiness promoted by Phoebe Palmer. McLoughlin (ed.), The American Evangelicals, 2-3; Johnson, The Shopkeeper's Millennium, 6; Russell Richey, "From Quarterly to Camp Meeting: A Reconsideration of Early American Methodism," Methodist History, 2.8 (1985); Perry Miller, The Errand into the Wilderness (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1956). Johnson, The Shopkeeper's Millennium, 6, 55-60, 79-94; Timothy L. Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform in Mid-Nineteenth-Century America (Nashville: Abingdon Press, [1957] 1980); Nancy Hardesty, "The Wesleyan Movement and Women's Liberation," in Runyon (ed.), Sanctification and Liberation. MEC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1824, 4; ibid., 1830, 35-6; CG, 5 December 1829, 22; ibid., 9 April 1831, 86; ibid., 18 September 1833; ibid., 2 October 1833, 186; ibid., n March 1835, 70; ibid., 13 June 1838, 127; ibid., 6 March 1839, 69. Johnson, The Shopkeeper's Millennium, 3-4, 95-135; Cross, The Burned-over District, 210-12, Nancy Hardesty, Women Called to

Notes to pages 34-7

31

32

33 34

35

36 37

38

39

2,97

Witness: Evangelical Feminism in the Nineteenth Century (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1984); Ernest R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism: British and American Millenarianism, 1800-1930 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), 42-5; William Harvard, Defence of Protracted Meetings (London: John Mason, 1841). William Westfall, Two Worlds: The Protestant Culture of NineteenthCentury Ontario (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1989), 166-77; Douglas Morgan, "Adventism, Apocalyptic, and the Cause of Liberty," Church History, 67 (1998), 52-82; "Advent," Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 1:52-5; Ruth A. Doan, The Miller Heresy, Millennialism, and American Culture (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987), 13-15, 93, 114; Ruth Doan, "Perfectionism in the Adventist Tradition," Wesley an/Holiness Consultation, 1988; Kenneth Brown, "John Wesley Post or Premillennialist?", Methodist History, 28 (1989). Egerton Ryerson Papers, George Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, 29 March 1832; ibid., George Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, 6 April 1832; James D. Bratt, "The Reorientation of American Protestantism, 1835-1845," Church History, 67 (1998), 52-82; Plato E. Shaw, The Catholic Apostolic Church: A Historical Study (New York: King's Crown Press, 1946), 48, 110-29. Ryerson Papers, "Proceedings at Mr. Irving's Chapel," 4 June 1833. CG, 15 May 1833, 107; ibid., 19 November 1834, 6; ibid., 26 November 1834, 10; ibid., 3 December 1834, 14; ibid., 10 December 1834, 19; ibid., 21 January 1835, 42; ibid., 7 September 1836, 173-5; ibid., 19 October 1836, 197; 'Old Paths,' Seven Letters on Irvingism (Kingston: Herald Press, 1837). Shaw, The Catholic Apostolic Church, 55; CG, 12 February 1834, 56; ibid., 7 January 1835, 34; ibid., 21 January 1835, 42; ibid., 25 February 1835, 62; ibid., 28 September 1836, 186; Wesleyan Missionary Society, Correspondence, Joseph Stinson to Robert Alder, 26 August 1836. Darren Ferry, "The Politicization of Religious Dissent: Mormonism in Upper Canada, 1833-1843," OH, 89 (1997), 285-301. CG, 27 July 1836, 151; ibid., 3 December 1834, 15; ibid., 18 May 1836, in; ibid., 29 November 1837, 13; ibid., 13 December 1837, 21; ibid., 20 December 1837, 26. Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-1849," 70-2, 105; Louis Billington, "The Millerite Adventists in Great Britain," in Ronald Numbers and Jonathan Butler (eds), The Disappointed: Millerism and Millenarianism in the Nineteenth Century (Nashville: University of Tennessee Press, 1993), 59William Westfall, "The End of the World: An Account of Time and Culture in Nineteenth-Century Protestant Ontario," Religion/Culture, Comparative Canadian Studies, 7 (1985), 78-9; Sandeen, The Roots of

298

40

41

42

43

44

45 46 47 48 49 50

Notes to pages 37-40 Fundamentalism, 47-50; Cross, The Burned-over District, 198; Hardesty, Women Called to Witness, 35-6, 52. M. Ellsworth Olsen, A History of the Origin and Progress of Seventh Day Adventists (Washington: Review and Herald Publishing, 1925 [reprinted 1972]), 107-65; William Miller, Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ About the Year 1843 (Troy: Gates, 1838); Sylvester Bliss, Memoirs of William Miller (Boston: Joshua Himes, 1853 [reprinted 1971]); Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism, 22-42. David R. Lowe, "Millerites: A Shadow Portrait," in Numbers and Butler (eds), The Disappointed, 4; Ruth A. Doan, "Millerism and Evangelical Culture," in ibid., 118-9. Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 4:380-1, 396, 410; CG, 5 April 1843, 93-4; ibid., ii October 1843, 201; ibid., 7 February 1844, 62; J.I. Little, "The Mental World of Ralph Merry: Popular Religion in the Lower Canadian-New England Borderland, 1798-1863," CHR, 83 (2002), 353-5. Cross, The Burned-over District, 287-97; Charles Goodwin, "The Terrors of the Thunderstorm: Medieval Popular Cosmology and Methodist Revival," Methodist History, 39 (2001), 99-102; CG, 7 August 1844, 166. Klaus Hansen, Mormonism and the American Experience (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981), i-io, 45-68; Leonard Arrington and Davis Bitton, The Mormon Experience: A History of the Latter-Day Saints (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, [1979] 1992), 3-43; Cross, The Burned-over District, 287, 308; Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism, 55-8; Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 4:396; CG, 6 November 1844, 9-10; Olsen, History of Seventh-Day Adventists, 143-7, I49:> 154-65; Booton Herndon, The Seventh Day: The Story of the Seventhday Adventists (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960), 43-59; An Israelite, Review of the Doctrines and Prophetical Chronology of Mr. William Miller (Toronto: Christian Guardian, 1844), 3-4, 60-1. Nelles Papers, Box 3, file 29, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 107. Ibid., Box 14, file 284, "Wesleyana Notebook," 6; quoting Wesley's Works, 12:408; Doan, The Miller Heresy, 13-14. Nelles Papers, "Autobiographical Sketch of Student Days." Ibid., "Autobiographical Sketch of Student Days." Ibid., "Private Journal," 7 December 1852. Historical Atlas of Northumberland and Durham Counties ([H. Beldon, 1878] Belleville: Mika Press, 1972), vii; George Hodgins Papers, George Hodgins to Richard Shea, 5 January 1842; Cobourg Star, 19 October 1842, 2.

51 Charles Bruce Sissons, A History of Victoria University (Toronto: Univer-

Notes to pages 40-3

52

53 54

55

56

57

58

59 60

2,99

sity of Toronto Press, 1952.), 27-30; Victoria College, Calendar, 1841; CG 12 March 1884, 81; Robert Gidney and W.P.J. Millar, Inventing Secondary Education: The Rise of the High School in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1990), 15-18; Johanna M. Selles, Methodists and Women's Education in Ontario, 1836-1925 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 30-49. CG, 29 April 1840, 106; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 62. An advertisement in the Christian Guardian, 27 July 1836, 151, notes that Music, Drawing, and French require additional fees. The costs of the main academic courses range from 15 shillings to i pound, ten shillings per course per quarter. Board costs 4 pounds 6 shillings per session. CG, 3 November 1841, 6; ibid., 16 February 1842, 66; ibid., 27 April 1842, 106; ibid., 18 May 1842, 118. Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 243; Bert Den Boggende, "'Alone in the Province': The Cobourg Ladies Seminary - Burlington Ladies Academy, 1842-1851," OH, 90 (1998); CG, 31 August 1842, 180; ibid., 28 December 1842, 40; ibid., 7 June 1843, 131; ibid., 13 October 1852, 2; ibid., 30 November 1853, 30; Cobourg Star, 28 December 1842, i; Acta Victoriana, 20 (December 1896), 136. Female day students could only take the "higher branches of learning" at the academy. Marni de Pencier, "Ideas of the English-Speaking Universities in Canada to 1870," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1977), 172-3; Selles, Methodists and Women's Education, j, 26, 37-8; Brian McKillop, Matters of Mind, The University in Ontario, 1791-1951 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), 124-46; Paula J. LaPierre, "The First Generation: The Experience of Women University Students in Central Canada,"(Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1993), 27-9, 41; Bert Den Boggende, "'The Vassar of the Dominions': The Wesleyan College and the Project of a Women's University, 1861-1897," OH, 85 (1993), 95-118. Hodgins Papers, George Hodgins to Richard Shea, 5 January 1842; Victoria College, Calendar, 1841; Ryerson Papers, Jesse Hurlburt to Egerton Ryerson, 25 September 1840. Ryerson Papers, Daniel Van Norman and William Kingston to Egerton Ryerson, 31 March 1841; ibid., William S. Conger to Egerton Ryerson, 10 November 1841. Ibid., Egerton Ryerson, draft report, 29 November 1841; Egerton Ryerson, Explanatory and Practical Observations ... at Victoria College (Toronto: 1841), 9-11. Ryerson left on a tour of Europe in October 1844. Sissons, History of Victoria University, 69-70; CG, 26 October 1842, 2. Hodgins Papers, William Clegg to George Hodgins, 14 May 1843; Ryerson Papers, Jesse Hurlburt to Egerton Ryerson, 25 September 1840, complained about "the rough and insufferable treatment of the students,"

300

61

62

63 64 65 66 67

68

69 70 71

72 73 74

Notes to pages 43-7 especially in the boarding hall; ibid., Jesse Hurlburt to Egerton Ryerson, 24 October 1840; ibid., Daniel Van Norman to Egerton Ryerson, Z3 March 1842; ibid., Daniel Van Norman, William Kingston, and Jesse Hurlburt to Egerton Ryerson, 9 June 1842.; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Governor General, 10 September 1842. Hodgins Papers, George Hodgins to Richard Shea, 5 January 1842; ibid., George Hodgins to Richard Brethour, 2,4 January 1842; ibid., George Hodgins to Richard Shea, iz February 1842; ibid., William Clegg to George Hodgins, 14 May 1843; CG, 2,4 March 1841, 86; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 60-1. Ryerson Papers, William Kingston to Egerton Ryerson, 15 December 1841; Hodgins Papers, George Hodgins to Richard Shea, 26 March 1842; ibid., George Hodgins to Richard Shea, 5 January 1842. CG, 3 May 1843, no; ibid., 24 May 1843. Nelles Papers, Box 8, file 162, Address, "Spirit of Inquiry," i. Ibid., i. Ibid., 9. Ibid., 7; Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Nature" and "The Transcendental," in Alfred Ferguson (ed.), The Collected Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, 5 vol. (Cambridge MA: Belknap Press, 1971); Emerson Marks, "Victor Cousin and Emerson," in Myron Simon and Thornton Parsons (eds), Transcendentalism and Its Legacy (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1966); Russell Nye, This Almost Chosen People (Toronto: Macmillan, 1966), 267-8. Nelles Papers, Box 4, file 43, "Sympathy, Its Influence on Character & Happiness," CG, 22 May 1844, 122; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 71. Nelles Papers, "Sympathy, Its Influence on Character & Happiness." Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 5:13. Sissons, History of Victoria University, 48-50; Nelles Papers, "Scrapbook on Life of Samuel Nelles, prepared by George Hodgins," "Reminiscences of Samuel Nelles," 13 February 1888; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 21 September 1846. Nelles Papers, "School Essays and Poems," i November 1843, 6-7. Ibid., 14 February 1844, 10. Proceedings at the Ceremony of Laying the Foundation Stone, April 23, 1842, and at the Opening of the University, June 8, 1843 (Toronto: H. Rowsell, 1843), ^o; Egerton Ryerson, Inaugural Address on the Nature and Advantages of an English and Liberal Education (Toronto: Guardian Office, 1842); McKillop, Matters of Mind, 14-15. "Education can have no higher object than the creation of happiness by means of the formation of character. This is the great object of the Deity himself." Journal of Education for Upper Canada, i (August, 1848), 243.

Notes to pages 47-50

301

75 Thomas Arnold, Introductory Lectures on Modern History, with the Inaugural Lecture (London: Fellowes, 3rd ed., 1845), 38; T.W. Bamford (ed.), Thomas Arnold on Education (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), 163-4, 226-7; Egerton Ryerson, "The Social Advancement of Canada," Journal of Education for Upper Canada, 2 (November 1849), 183, justifies Classics from an address of James Sparks as president of Harvard University. Bradley Longfield, "From Evangelicalism to Liberalism: Public Midwestern Universities in Nineteenth-Century America," in George Marsden (ed.), The Secularization of the Academy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.), 47-8; CG, 22 February 1882, 60. 76 Thomas Arnold, The Miscellaneous Works of Thomas Arnold, D.D. (London: [B. Fellowes, 1845] Gregg Press, 1971), 363-71; Egerton Ryerson, "Report on a System of Public Elementary Instruction, 1846," in George Hodgins (ed.), The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, 28 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1894-1910), 6:141-2. 77 Sissons, History of Victoria University, 48, 53-8; John Moir, Enduring Witness, A History of the Presbyterian Church in Canada (Toronto: Presbyterian Publications, 1975), 98-9; Paul Axelrod, The Promise of Schooling: Education in Canada, 1800-1914 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997), 32. 78 "Robert Baldwin," DCB,8:45-59; J.M.S. Careless, "Robert Baldwin," in Careless (ed.), The I^re-Confederation Premiers, 117-24. 79 Proceedings at the Ceremony of Laying the Foundation Stone, title page; CG, 13 April 1842, 99; Careless, Union of the Canadas, 41-57; Paul Axelrod, "Higher Education in Canada and the United States: Exploring the Roots of Difference," Historical Studies in Education 7 (1995), 145-54; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 5; Judson Purdy, "The English Public School Tradition in Nineteenth-Century Ontario," in Fred Armstrong et al. (eds), Aspects of Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974), 237-8. Nancy Christie, "'In These Times of Democratic Rage and Delusion': Popular Religion and the Challenge to the Established Order, 1760-1815," in George Rawlyk (ed.), The Canadian Protestant Experience (Burlington, VT: Welch, 1990), 9-47, outlines the strong democratic forces at work. 80 Curtis Fahey, In His Name: The Anglican Experience in Upper Canada, 1791-1854 (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1991), 67-8, 173-4; Moir, Enduring Witness, 98-9; Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to James Hopkirk (Secretary to Governor General), 8 February 1843; ibid., John Roblin to Egerton Ryerson, 17 October 1843; CG > J 7 May 1837, in; Journal of Education for Upper Canada, 2 (March 1849), 47. 81 Careless, Union of the Canadas, 81-2, 93; CG, 18 October 1843, 206; ibid., i November 1843, 6; ibid., 15 November 1843, 14. 82 Ryerson Papers, Thomas Liddell to Egerton Ryerson, 12 June 1843; ibid.,

302

83 84

85

86

87 88

89

90 91

92

Notes to pages 50-3

Thomas Liddell to Egerton Ryerson, 21 April 1843; ibid., Thomas Liddell to Egerton Ryerson, 16 May 1843; Hilda Neatby, Queen's University, Volume I, 1841-1917: And Not to Yield, edited by Frederick Gibson and Roger Graham (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1978). Ryerson Papers, Thomas Liddell to Egerton Ryerson, 3 November 1843; ibid., Thomas Liddell to Egerton Ryerson, 15 November 1843. Careless, Union of the Canadas, 79-89; Egerton Ryerson, The Story of My Life, edited by George Hodgins (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1883), 319-41. Ryerson declared it was not a matter of partisanship, but law. If the people chose to assume imperial prerogatives, then Canada had separated from the empire. Egerton Ryerson, Sir Charles Metcalfe Defended Against the Attacks of His Late Counsellors (Toronto: British Colonist, 1844), 10-11; Egerton Ryerson, The New Canadian Dominion: Dangers and Duties of the People in Regard to Their Government (Toronto: Lovell & Gibson, 1867); Careless, Union of the Canadas,90-5. CG, 2 October 1844, 199; ibid., 18 December 1844, 345 Hodgins Papers, Henry A. Hardy to George Hodgins, 21 September 1844. On 12 September 1843, Metcalfe had visited Victoria College; in honour of his visit, the day was designated Victoria Day and became an annual holiday. On the first anniversary of Victoria Day, a fracas erupted over Ryerson's support for Metcalfe. Nathanael Burwash, The History of Victoria College (Toronto: Victoria University Press, 1927), 122. Hodgins Papers, Henry A. Hardy to George Hodgins, i October 1844; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 64-6. Stewart Brown, "Religion and the Rise of Liberalism: The First Disestablishment Campaign in Scotland, 1829-1843," Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 48 (October 1997), 682-6; Richard Vaudry, The Free Church in Victorian Canada, 1844-1861 (Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1989), xiii, 1-13. Vaudry, The Free Church, 14-37; Moir, Enduring Witness, 80-1, 101-6; Henry Esson, A Plain and Popular Exposition on the Principles of Voluntaryism (Toronto: Clelland, 1849). Nelles Papers, "Sympathy, Its Influence on Character and Happiness," 1844,9. Ibid., "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 24 October 1848, 8; ibid., Box 14, file 285, Review of "Essays on Church and State by Rev. Baptist Noel", March 1849. J.M.S. Careless, Brown of the Globe: Volume One, The Voice of Upper Canada, 1818-1859 (Toronto: Macmillan, 1959), i-io, 17-25, 33-43, 60; Brian Fraser, Church, College, and Clergy: A History of Theological Education at Knox College, Toronto, 1844-1994 (Montreal: McGillQueen's University Press, 1995), 18-42.

Notes to pages 53-9

303

93 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 61; ibid., Box 2, file 28, "Notes re Nelles Family," n.d.; Smyth and Reddy, The First Fifty Years, 564. 94 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 5 April 1847, 41. 95 Ibid., 42. 96 Ibid., 22 April 1847, 58. 97 Ibid., 59-60. 98 Ibid., "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 24 October 1848, 8; Sydney Wise, "Upper Canada and the Conservative Tradition," in Brian McKillop and Paul Romney (eds); Sydney Wise, God's Peculiar Peoples (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1993), 169-84; Peardon (ed.), John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, vii-xxii, 16-30, 44-54; Westfall, Two Worlds, 198-9. For examples of the kind of influence that Sir William Blackstone had on Canadian law, see various articles in David Flaherty (ed.), Essays in the History of Canadian Law, Volume I, 31-2, 108, 113, 215, 250, 253, 281-2, 293, and Volume II, 7, 15, 66, 94, 99, 112, 114, 116, 310, 334, 338. 99 Terry Cook, "John Beverley Robinson and the Conservative Blueprint for the Upper-Canadian Community," OH, 64 (June 1972), 93; Sydney Wise, "God's Peculiar Peoples," in W.L. Morton (ed.), The Shield of Achilles: Aspects of Canada in the Victorian Age (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1968), 36-61; Egerton Ryerson, "Obligations of Educated Men," Journal of Education for Upper Canada, i (January 1848), 166; Axelrod, "Higher Education in Canada and the United States," 155. 100 "Wesleyan University," Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 2:2528-9; ibid., "Wilbur Fisk," 1:847-8; ibid., "Nathan Bangs," 1:213-14; ibid., "Stephen Olin," 2:1811-12. 101 Nelles Papers, Box 4, file 54, "History," n.d.; ibid., Box 14, file 294, Graduation Programme, Wesleyan University, 9 August 1846, 2. 102 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 2, 9; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 22 June 1847, 66. 103 Ibid., Correspondence, Cheops (Daniel Martindale) to Potiphar (Samuel Nelles), 19 April 1846; ibid., Daniel Martindale to Samuel Nelles, 25 October 1846; ibid., Daniel Martindale to Samuel Nelles, 31 December 1846; ibid., Daniel Martindale to Samuel Nelles, 24 March 1847; ibid., R.C. Pitman to Samuel Nelles (Wampum to Potifer), 12 February 1882. CHAPTER THREE

1 Samuel Nelles Papers, Box 3, file 29, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," i, 7,372 Ibid., Box 14, file 294, Graduation Programme, Wesleyan University,

304

3 4

5

6 7 8 9 10

11 12

13 14 15

16

Notes to pages 59-63 Middletown, Connecticut, 9 August 1846, 3; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 5; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," April 1847, 36. Ibid., Daniel Martindale to Samuel Nelles, 19 April 1846. Ibid., Daniel Martindale to Samuel Nelles, 19 April 1846. Following common college practice, most of Nelles's university friends had nicknames. Martindale was "Cheops," the pharaoh who built the first pyramids; Nelles was "Potiphar" - variously spelled - the Egyptian priest or high official who bought Joseph on his arrival in Egypt. See: Genesis 41:50-1; A Dictionary of the Bible, 5 vol. (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1903), 1:162; 5:23-4. The selection of Nelles's nickname has never been explained. Egerton Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 21 September 1846; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1846, 5. For information on John, George, William, and Egerton Ryerson, see the Dictionary of Canadian Biography, volumes n and 12. Edwy Ryerson resigned soon after entering the Wesleyan ministry and faded from history. The secondeldest Ryerson brother, Samuel, did not enter the ministry but remained as a farmer on his father's extensive land holdings in southwestern Upper Canada. Neil Semple, The Lord's Dominion: The History of Canadian Methodism (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 255. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 21 September 1846. Ibid., 21 September 1846, 2. Nelles Papers, Daniel Martindale to Samuel Nelles, 25 October 1846. Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 28 September 1846; ibid., S.S. Junkin to Egerton Ryerson, 17 April 1846; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to John Ryerson, 3 April 1844. Ibid., Egerton Ryerson to S.S. Junkin, 18 April 1846; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 97. Ryerson Papers, John Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, 15 September 1846; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 26 March 1847; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 92-8, 247-50. Florence E. Carter, Place Names of Ontario, 2 vol. (London: Phelps, 1984), 2:1181. R.E. Fluke, Story of the Old Newburgh Academy, 1839-1965 (Belleville: Mika, 1977), 22-33. Robert Gidney and W.P.J. Millar, "From Voluntarism to State Schooling: The Creation of the Public School System in Ontario," CHR, 66 (December 1985), 445-6; Albert Fiorino, "The Philosophical Roots of Egerton Ryerson's Ideas of Education," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1975). Gidney and Millar, "From Voluntarism to State Schooling," 443-4, 455-68; William Westfall, Two Worlds: The Protestant Culture of Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press,

Notes to pages 63-4

305

1989), 7; Alison Prentice, The School Promoters: Education and Social Class in Mid-Nineteenth-Century Upper Canada (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1977); Marta Danylewycz and Alison Prentice, "Teachers, Gender, and Bureaucratizing the School System in Nineteenth-Century Montreal and Toronto," History of Education Quarterly, 24 (Spring 1984), 75-7; Philip Corrigan and Bruce Curtis, "Education, Inspection, and State Formation: A Preliminary Study," Canadian Historical Association, Historical Papers, (1985), 156-71; Bruce Curtis, The Government by Choice Men?: Inspection, Education and State Formation in Canada West (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992.); Susan Houston and Alison Prentice, Schooling and Scholars in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988), 311. 17 Egerton Ryerson, "Report on a System of Public Elementary Instruction," 1846, in George Hodgins (ed.), The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, 28 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1894-1910), 6:142, 146-7; Bruce Curtis, Building the Educational State: Canada West, 1836-1871 (London: Althouse Press, 1988), 102-3. 18 Marion Royce, "Arguments over the Education of Girls - Their Admission to Grammar Schools in Ontario," OH, 67 (March 1975), 1-2; Ian Davey, "Trends in Female School Attendance in Mid-Nineteenth Century Ontario," Histoire Sociale/Social History, 8 (November 1975), 246-7. 19 Paul Axelrod, The Promise of Schooling: Education in Canada, 1800-1914 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997), 60. In T.W. Bamford (ed.), Thomas Arnold on Education (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), 226-7, Axelrod charts Rugby's weekly schedule during the 18305. Out of 28% hours, 17% were dedicated to Classics, with 3% more for Greek and Roman History and Geography. Rugby School served as an important model for Canadian private and public education. 20 James McLachlan, American Boarding Schools: A Historical Study (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1970), 106, 136; Houston and Prentice, Schooling and Scholars, 40-2; Paul Bennett, "'Little Worlds': The Forging of the Social Identities of Ontario's Protestant School Communities and Institutions, 1850-1930," (Ed.D., University of Toronto: 1990), 2-9. 21 Journal of Education for Upper Canada, z (May 1849), 71; Fluke, Old Newburge Academy, 22-33. 22 Teachers in the public system earned between £15 and £40 per year during the 18405, with the approximately 20 per cent who were female at the bottom of the scale. Most saw teaching as a short-term vocation before marriage, the professions, business, or farming. See: Alexander McNab, "Report of the (Acting) Chief Superintendent of Education, 1844," in George Hodgins (ed.), Historical Education Papers and Documents of Ontario, 6 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1911-1912), 5:16; ibid.,

306

23

24 25

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

35

36 37 38 39 40

Notes to pages 64-70

Egerton Ryerson, "Report of the Chief Superintendent of Education, 1846," 5:12., 27; Journal of Education for Upper Canada, z (September 1849), 143; J. Donald Wilson, "The Teacher in Early Ontario," in Fred Armstrong et al. (eds), Aspects of Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974), 22.3-7; Houston and Prentice, Schooling and Scholars, 62-71; E. Jane Errington, Wives and Mothers, Schoolmistresses and Scullery Maids: Working Women in Upper Canada, 1790-1840 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1995), 219. Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to John Strachan (superintendent of Common schools, Midland District), 24 February 1847 (copy included with letter to Samuel Nelles, 26 March 1847). Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 24. Ibid., 18 April 1847, 51; ibid., 21 April 1847, 57; Fluke, Old Newburgh Academy, 27-9; n.a., Newburgh United Church, Newburgh, Ontario, 125th Anniversary, 1858-1983 (1983), 12. John Sanderson Biographical file; George Goodson Biographical file; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1846, 7, 14. Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 5 April 1847, 45-6; ibid., Daniel Martindale to Samuel Nelles, 6 August 1847. Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 24. Ibid., 17-18; "Death of Dr. Nelles," CMM, 26 (1887), 470-1. Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, On Speech," July 1849, 21. Ibid., Daniel Martindale to Samuel Nelles, 24 March 1847. Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 18 May 1848, 101; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 36. Ibid., Daniel Martindale to Samuel Nelles, 24 March 1847. For more details on the split and reunion of Wesley an Methodism in Canada West, see: Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 5-7, 71-99; Documents Relating to the Recent Determination of the British Wesleyan Conference to Dissolve Official Union with the Provincial Conference of Upper Canada (London: Mason, 1841); John Moir, "Notes of Discord, Strains of Harmony: the Separation and Reunion of the Canadian and British Wesleyan Methodists, 1840-1847," CMHS, Papers, 4 (1984). WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1847, 35; Robert Alder, Wesleyan Missions: their progress and their aims enforced, (1842); D.S. Adams, An Appeal to all Christians for Christian Union and a Return to One Lord. Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," June 1847, 61. Ibid., June 1847, 61. Ibid., 61. Ibid., 62. Ibid., 62. William Ryerson ran for the Assembly as a Reformer, and had been most adamant about Egerton's apparent betrayal in 1844. John was as conservative as Egerton, but more circumspect and diplomatic.

Notes to pages 70-4

307

41 WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1847, 26, 41-52. 42 Charles Lavell Biographical file; Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 26 March 1847; John Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 5 vol. (Toronto: Samuel Rose, 1867-77), 5 : I 343 WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1848, 58; ibid., 1849, 85; John Ryerson Biographical file. 44 Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 28 September 1846. 45 William Abraham, "Conversion and Knowledge of God," CMHS, Papers, 13 (2001), 122-35. 46 Nelles Papers, Box 3, file 31, "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 2 January 1849, 112; ibid., 24 October 1848, 3; ibid., 29 October 1848, 20; Mary Ryder, "Avoiding the Many-Headed Monster: Wesley and Johnston on Enthusiasm," Methodist History 23 (1985): 214-22; Curtis, Building the Educational State, 102. 47 John Wesley, "A Letter to the Author of The Enthusiasm of Methodists," in Gerald Cragg (ed.), The Appeals to Men of Reason and Religion, vol. n: The Works of John Wesley (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975), 361-429; Michael Gauvreau, "The Empire of Evangelicalism: Varieties of Common Sense in Scotland, Canada and the United States," in David Bebbington, Mark Noll, and George Rawlyk (eds), Evangelicalism: Comparative Studies of Popular Protestantism, 1770-1990 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994). 48 Neil Semple, "The Quest for the Kingdom: Aspects of Protestant Revivalism in Nineteenth-Century Ontario," in David Keane and Colin Read (eds), Old Ontario: Essays in Honour of J.M.S. Careless (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1990); Charles Jones, Perfectionist Persuasion: The Holiness Movement and American Methodism (Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1974); James Caughey, Earnest Christianity Illustrated, edited by Daniel Wise (Toronto: G.R. Sanderson, 3rd ed., 1857). 49 Nelles Papers, Box 12, file 252, "Private Journal" (Port Hope, 1847). 50 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 15 January 1849, 144. 51 Ibid., 13 January 1849, 132; ibid., Sermons, "Not in Word but Power," 30 December 1848; ibid., "Religious Meditations," 1849-1850, n.p.; ibid., "Religious Meditations," 12 April 1850, i; Thomas Langford, "John Wesley's Doctrine of Sanctification," UCA, Bulletin, 29 (1983), 63-73; "Christian Perfection," Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 1:489; Phoebe Palmer, The Way of Holiness (Toronto: Wesleyan Book Room, 1855); Phoebe Palmer, Faith and Its Effects (Toronto: G.R. Sanderson, 1855); Phoebe Palmer, Present to My Christian Friends (Toronto: G.R. Sanderson, 1856); Charles E. White, "The Beauty of Holiness: The Career and Influence of Phoebe Palmer," Methodist History, 25 (1987); Melvin Dieter, The Holiness Revival of the Nineteenth

308

Notes to pages 74-7

Century (Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1980); Peter Bush, "A Symbiotic Relationship: Phoebe and Walter Palmer and Canadian Methodism, 1853-1858," CMHS, Papers, 13 (2,001); Peter Bush, "James Caughey, Phoebe and Walter Palmer and the Methodist Revival Experience in Canada West, 1850-1858," (M.A., Queen's University, 1985). 52 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 25 October 1848, 9; ibid., Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 2.8 October 1848, 16; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 18 April 1847, 51; ibid., "Private Journal," 25 May 1850; ibid., "Private Journal," 4 July 1850; ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 25 September 1849, 66. 53 Ibid., "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 12 December 1848, 102.

54 Ibid., "Private Journal," 30 May 1850. 55 Ibid., "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 28 November 1848, 94; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 126; ibid., "Religious Meditations," 1850, last page; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 10 October 1849, 71; Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 28 September 1846. 56 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 117; ibid., "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 18 November 1848, 56; ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 25 July 1849, 6. 57 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 19 July 1849, i. 58 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 74-5. 59 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850-54," u March 1850; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 104-6. 60 Westfall, Two Worlds, 177-90; John Hoover, "The Primitive Methodist Church in Canada, 1829-1884," (M.A., University of Western Ontario, 1970); Albert Burnside, "The Bible Christians in Canada, 1832-1884," (Th.D., Toronto Graduate School of Theological Studies, 1969); William Luke, The Bible Christians: Their Origin, Constitution, Doctrines and History (London: Bible Christian Book Room, 1878). These patterns of belief expanded in the early twentieth century and blended with groups opposing liberal theology, the social gospel, and the respectable intellectualism of Calvinism to bolster a new fundamentalism. 61 Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 254-7; John Davison, An Address Delivered at the Ordination of Seven Ministers (Toronto: Maclear, 1857); Dale Johnston, "The Methodist Quest for an Educated Ministry," Church History, 51 (1982). Hesitance over an educated clergy was especially strong among the more conservative offshoots of British Wesleyanism, which in the early nineteenth century opposed clerical control and strong ecclesiastical institutions. 62 Nelles Papers, "Religious Meditations," November 1849, 10; ibid., Box 14, files 266-267.

Notes to pages 78-81

309

63 Ibid., "Addresses," 13 October 1848; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 7; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49", 104, 106; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 132; ibid., "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 17 January 1849, 152. 64 Thomas H. Home, An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures (London: Cadell, 1818); Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Bible (London: Conference Office, 1825). Clarke also wrote The Doctrine of Salvation by Faith (Geneva: James Bogert, 1828). Joseph Benson, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, 5 vol. (London: 1815-1818); Benson, An Apology for the People Called Methodists (London: G. Story, 1801); Benson, The Life of the Rev. John W. de la Flechere (John Fletcher] (London: Wesleyan Book Room, 1804). 65 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 25 October 1848, 12-13; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," no; ibid., "Random Thoughts," 14 February 1849, 35, 36. 66 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 130; William Paley, The Evidences of Christianity (London: Ward, Lock, 1795); Paley, Natural Theology, or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity (London: W. Mason, 1802). Paley also wrote The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy (London: R. Faulder, 1785); M.L. Clarke, Paley, Evidences for the Man (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974), 89-101. 67 Joseph Butler, The Analogy of Religion, Natural and Revealed to the Constitution and Course of Nature (London: 1736). Butler was Bishop of Durham. Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 25 October 1848, 14; John Lee Comstock, A System of Natural Philosophy (New York: Robinson, Pratt, 83rd ed., 1838). 68 Richard Whately, The Errors of Romanism Traced to their Origin in Human Nature (Dublin: 1830); Whately, The Elements of Logic (1825); Whately, On Some of the Peculiarities of the Christian Religion (1825); Whately, The Elements of Rhetoric (1828); Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 134; Johann L. Mosheim, Ecclesiastical History (London: Cadell, new edition, 1811). 69 Nelles Papers, "Religious Meditations," "Views of Chalmers," n.p.; Thomas Chalmers, Faith and Works Contrasted and Reconciled (Glasgow: A. & J. Duncan, 1816); Thomas Chalmers, The Evidence and Authority of the Christian Revelation (Edinburgh: Wm. Blackwood, 4th ed., 1817); Thomas Chalmers, On the Power, Wisdom and Goodness of God (Philadelphia: Lea & Blanchard, 1833); Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 158-9; Albert Outler, "John Wesley's Interests in the Early Fathers of the Church," UCA, Bulletin, 29 (1983), 5-i770 John Fletcher, Checks to Antinomianism (London: 1771-1775); Richard Watson, Theological Institutes: or, A View of the Evidences, Doctrines,

3io

71 7Z 73

74 75 76 77 78 79 80

Notes to pages 81-7

Morals, and Institutions of Christianity (London: 182.3-2,9); Richard Watson, The Life of the Rev. John Wesley (London: 1831). Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts," 1849, 35; ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 26; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 2. Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850-54,"; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 3, 4, 9; ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 3. Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 25 March 1848; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 30 March 1848; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 3 April 1848. Ibid., "Private Journal, 1850-1863," 25 May 1850, i; Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 5:13. Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," 4 June 1850. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1850, 112,, 115; Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to George Hodgins, 9 June 1850. Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," 4 July 1850. Ibid., "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 17 May 1849, 162. Ibid., "Private Journal," 4 July 1850. Ibid., "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 17 January 1849, 176. CHAPTER FOUR

1 George Hodgins (ed.), The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, 28 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1894-1910), 10:84; Janet Scarfe, "Letters and Affection: The Recruitment and Responsibilities of Academics in English-Speaking Universities in British North America in the Mid-Nineteenth Century," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1982), 97-100; John Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 5 vol. (Toronto: Samuel Rose, 1867-1877), 5:68. 2 Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 6:128; Judson D. Purdy, "John Strachan and the Diocesan Theological Institute at Cobourg, 1842-1852," OH, 65 (June 1973), 122. 3 Journal of Education for Upper Canada, 7 (May 1854), 81. 4 Samuel Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," 26 September 1850. 5 Ibid., 2 October 1850. 6 Journal of Education for Upper Canada, 2 (March 1849), 46; Charles Bruce Sissons, A History of Victoria University (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952,), 88-9; Nathanael Burwash, The History of Victoria College (Toronto: Victoria University Press, 192,7), 157. 7 Egerton Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to James Hopkirk, 8 February 1843; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 12 April 1854; Brian McKillop, Matters of Mind: The University in Ontario, 1791-1951 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), xviii-xix, 9-21. 8 Curtis Fahey, In His Name: The Anglican Experience in Upper Canada,

Notes to pages 87-91

9

10

11

12

13

14 15 16

17

18

19

311

1791-1854 (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1991), 67-73; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 5-6, 21. Egerton Ryerson Papers, Thomas Liddell to Egerton Ryerson, 21 April 1843; ibid., Thomas Liddell to Egerton Ryerson, 16 May 1843; ibid., Thomas Liddell to Egerton Ryerson, 12 June 1843; ibid., Thomas Liddell to Egerton Ryerson, 3 November 1843; ibid., Thomas Liddell to Egerton Ryerson, 15 November 1843; John Moir, Enduring Witness, A History of the Presbyterian Church in Canada (Toronto: Presbyterian Publications, 1975), 97-100, 110-17; Hilda Neatby, Queen's University, vol. I, 1841-1917: And Not to Yield, edited by Frederick W. Gibson and Roger Graham (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1978), 13-61. Ryerson Papers, John Roblin to Egerton Ryerson, 17 October 1843; ibid., Anson Green to Egerton Ryerson, 27 December 1843; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 50-7. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 12 April 1854; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 6 January 1862; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 21 April 1854; Moir, Enduring Witness, 108-9; Canada Christian Advocate, 23 November 1847, 2; ibid., 4 July 1855, 2; ibid., 5 September 1855, 2; ibid., 20 July 1859, 2. CG, i January 1845, 4 2 > ibid., 15 January 1845, 51; ibid., 22 January 1845, 54; ibid., 25 September 1850, 394; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 117-21, 507-19. Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 10:71; Fahey, In His Name, 181-4; William Westfall, Two Worlds: The Protestant Culture of Nineteenth Century Ontario (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1989), 6. Ryerson Papers, George Hodgins to Egerton Ryerson, 20 January 1851; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 22-4. Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 10:71; Westfall, Two Worlds, 113. Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 10:72-5; 9:221-6. Sherwood was one of the last links with the old Tory elites that had administered the province for nearly half a century. Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 10:117-29; David John Ayre, "Universities and the Legislature: Political Aspects of the Ontario University Question, 1868-1906," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1981), 4. The University of London was again the model for Hincks's university. CG, 6 October 1852, 206; ibid., 27 October 1852, 10; William H. Poole, Extravagant Expenditure in Toronto of the Upper Canada University Endowment (Toronto: Guardian Office, 1860); McKillop, Matters of Mind, 28-9; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 170-6; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 91-3. Sissons, History of Victoria University, 68-72; George Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism in Canada, 2 vol. (Toronto: Methodist Book

312,

2,0

zi

zz

Z3

Z4 25 z6 Z7 z8 Z9 30 31 3z

33

34 35 36 37

Notes to pages 91-6

Room, 1881, 1903), i:izz; Ryerson Papers, S.S. Junkin to Egerton Ryerson, 17 April 1846. Ryerson Papers, John Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, 24 June 1845; ibid., John Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, 15 September 1846; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Stephen Olin, September 1846; ibid., John Wilson to Egerton Ryerson, 5 January 1850; Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism, 1:130. Matthew Richey Biographical file; "Matthew Richey," DCB, 11:733-5; Neil Semple, The Lord's Dominion: The History of Canadian Methodism (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 91-7. Ryerson Papers, John Ryerson to Egerton Ryerson, n August 1837; ibid., Daniel Van Norman to Egerton Ryerson, z May 1845; ibid., John Wilson to Egerton Ryerson, 5 January 1850; Nelles Papers, John Beatty to Samuel Nelles, 4 July 1859; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 2.4-7, 76, 8z-4, 196. CG, 16 January 1850, Z5z; ibid., 15 May 1850, 319; Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to The Provincialist, zz January 1850; ibid., George Hodgins to Egerton Ryerson, 6 June 1850; George Hodgins to Egerton Ryerson, 8 July 1850. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1850, iz8; CG, 19 June 1850, 340; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 85. CG, zj September 1850, 394; ibid., z8 August 1850, 378. Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," Z5 October 1850; CG, i September 1852, 186. Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," Z9 November 1852'. Ibid., "Private Journal," z October 1850; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 86-8. Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," z October 1850. Ibid., 30 May 1851; 25 October 1850. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1850, 117; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, zz November 1851. CG, i September 1852, 186; Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," 30 May 1851; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 17 June 1851; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 89. Sissons, History of Victoria University, z8, 89; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 48, 130, 241-2; Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," March 1867. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 17 June 1851. Ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 17 June 1851; CG, 9 July 1851; "Samuel Nelles," DCS, 11:640; "Enoch Wood," DCB, 11:935-6. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, zz November 1851. George Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 18 January 1853; CG, zo October 1852, 6; ibid., 25 January 1854, 6z; ibid., 3 May 1854, 116; Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism, 1:539; Ryerson Papers,

Notes to pages 96-8

38

39

40 41 42

43 44

313

Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 6 April 1852; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 12 April 1854; ibid., George Hodgins to Egerton Ryerson, 26 September 1857; Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," 29 November 1852; "Reports of the Chief Superintendent of Education," 1842-1861, in George Hodgins (ed.), Historical Education Papers and Documents of Ontario, 6 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1911-1912), vol. 5; Bruce Curtis, Building the Educational State: Canada West, 1836-1871 (London: Althouse Press, 1988). Edwin C. Guillet, In the Cause of Education: Centennial History of the Ontario Educational Association (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1960), 54; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 16 October 1867; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 8 January 1868; Nelles Papers, Charles Lavell to Samuel Nelles, n January 1867; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Donald Sutherland, 12 April 1867; ibid., N.W. Powell to Samuel Nelles, 15 June 1867; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1868, 89; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 98; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 231-3. Nelles Papers, George Hodgins to Samuel Nelles, 25 August 1854; CG, 25 October 1854, 10; Terrie Romano, "Professional Identity and the Nineteenth Century Ontario Medical Profession," Histoire sociale/Social History, 28 (May 1995), 86-7. For valuable discussions of the nature of professional middle-class students and practitioners, see: David Keane, "Rediscovering Ontario University Students of the Mid-Nineteenth Century," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1981); R.D. Gidney and W.P.J. Millar, Professional Gentlemen: The Professions in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994); Letters on the Management of Toronto University and the Proposed Re-establishment of Departments of Law and Medicine (Toronto: Wesleyan Book Room, 1856), 5-6, 21. Sissons, History of Victoria University, 98, 102; "John Rolph," DCB, 9:683-9. McKillop, Matters of Mind, 59-62; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 190-1, 226-7, 2-49~5°Romano, "Professional Identity," 82, 90-1; Sam Shortt (ed.), Medicine in Canadian Society: Historical Perspectives (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1981). Gidney and Millar, Professional Gentlemen, 153-4, I 58; Romano, "Professional Identity," 92-3. Sissons, History of Victoria University, 124-5, I 4 2 5 Journal of Education for Ontario, 23 (June 1870), 84; ibid., 23 (September 1870), 140; ibid., 25 (November 1872), 174; CG, 14 August 1872, 260; ibid., 30 April 1873, 140; ibid., 23 June 1875, 196; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 8 January 1868.

314

Notes to pages 98-101

45 Elaine Baker, "Legal Education in Upper Canada, 1785-1889: The Law Society as Educator," in David Flaherty (ed.), Essays in the History of Canadian Law, Volume II (Toronto: The Osgoode Society, 1983), 49-142.; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 124; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 227-8, 236; Gidney and Millar, Professional Gentlemen, 164-77. 46 Journal of Education for Ontario, 23 (June 1870), 94; Nelles Papers, J.S. Perkins to Samuel Nelles, 27 February 1872; Stanley Frost, McGill University, 2 vol. (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1980, 1984). 47 McKillop, Matters of Mind, 65-72; Patrick Bode, Sir John Beverley Robinson: Bone and Sinew of Compact (Toronto: The Osgoode Society, 1984). 48 Sissons, History of Victoria University, 102-3, 126; Ryerson Papers, Nathanael Burwash to Egerton Ryerson, n November 1858. 49 Nelles Papers, "Diary," 24 December 1866. For student activities, see: Acta Victoriana, An Index, 1878-1990 (Victoria University Library, 1990). 50 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 6 April 1867. 51 Nelles Papers, Addresses, "Importance of Religion to Education," November 1851; ibid., "Planning One's Education," 28 October 1853; ibid., "Love of Learning and Love of Goodness," winter session, 1854; ibid., "Religion and Learning," November 1857. 52 Ibid., "Love of Learning and Love of Goodness," November 1854; Rousas Rushdooney, The Messianic Character of American Education (Nutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1963), 21, 28. 5 3 Lawrence Fallis, "The Idea of Progress in the Province of Canada: A Study in the History of Ideas," in W.L. Morton (ed.), The Shield of Achilles: Aspects of Canada in the Victorian Age (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1968), 170; Thomas C. Keefer, Philosophy of Railroads, edited by H.V. Nelles (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1972), ix-ixii; Rushdooney, The Messianic Character, 26. 54 Brian McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence: Critical Inquiry and Canadian Thought in the Victorian Era (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1979), 5-6. Baconian science promoted progress while defending a conservative social order. Suzanne Zeller, "'Merchants of Light': The Culture of Science in Daniel Wilson's Ontario," in Marinell Ash, Thinking with Both Hands: Sir Daniel "Wilson in the Old World and the New, edited by Elizabeth Hulse (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999), 116. 55 Nelles Papers, Addresses, "Importance of Religion to Education," November 1851. 56 Ibid., Lecture, "Formation of Character," 18 February 1854; T.W. Bamford

Notes to pages 101-6

57 58 59 60 61 62

63 64 65 66

67 68

69

70

71

72

315

(ed.), Thomas Arnold on Education (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), 9. Ibid., "Importance of Religion to Education," 1851. David Newsome, Godliness and Good Learning (London: John Murray, 1961), i. Thomas Arnold, Introductory Lectures on Modern History, with the Inaugural Lecture (London: B. Fellowes, 3rd ed., 1845), 55. Nelles Papers, "Importance of Religion to Education," 1851. McKillop, Matters of Mind, 84-5, 94-7. Nelles Papers, "Love of Learning and Love of Goodness," November 1854; ibid., Lectures, "Dangers of Students: Mere Intellectualism," 8 March 1868; McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence, 60. Nelles Papers, "Importance of Religion to Education," 1851. Ibid. Ibid.; Nelles Papers, Addresses, "Christian Education," n.d. Ibid., Addresses, "Reasons for Sustaining Victoria College," 21 November 1856; ibid., Addresses, "Taught of God," n.d.; Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Francis Hincks, 22 July 1852; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1852, 195-7; ibid., 1856, 356. Nelles Papers, Addresses, "Patriotism," n.d.; ibid., "Importance of Religion to Education," 1851. Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism, 1:147; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 149-65; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 22 November 1851; "Conrad Van Dusen," DCB, 10:692-3. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 9 August 1852; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 12 April 1854; Nelles Papers, George Hodgins to Samuel Nelles, 25 August 1854; CG, 30 November 1853, 30; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 185-7; "Samuel Dwight Rice," DCB, 11:729-30. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 8 May 1856; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 14 June 1856; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 7 November 1856; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 21 May 1857; Hodgins Papers, George Hodgins to unknown, n.d. [1856]. For the nature and importance of a metropolis, see: J.M.S. Careless, "Frontierism, Metropolitanism and Canadian History," in Carl Berger (ed.), Approaches to Canadian History (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967), 79. Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 8 November 1856; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 7 November 1856; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1857, 416-17. Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 8 November 1856; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1857, 390; Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism, 1:129.

316

Notes to pages 106-10

73 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, i December 1857; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1857, 395. 74 CG, 9 January 1850, 2.48; ibid., 20 March 1850, 2.89; ibid., 15 May 1850, 319; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1852,, 197. 75 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 2.2, November 1851; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 15 December 1851; CG, 30 November 1853, 30; Journal of Education for Upper Canada, 7 (June 1854), 105. 76 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, i December 1857; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 90-1; Nelles Papers, "Diary," i May 1866. 77 Nelles Papers, Isaac B. Aylesworth to Samuel Nelles, 14 March 1866. 78 Ibid., Isaac B. Aylesworth to Samuel Nelles, December 1868. 79 Ibid., "Diary," 20 June 1866; ibid., Isaac B. Aylesworth to Samuel Nelles, December 1868. 80 Ibid., Isaac B. Aylesworth to Samuel Nelles, December 1868; ibid., "Daily Diary," 30 January 1867; ibid., "Daily Diary," 14 May 1868; ibid., "Diary," 2,2, June 1866. 81 Henry Williams, The Constitution and Polity of Wesleyan Methodism (London: Wesleyan Book Room 2nd ed., 1882); William Morley Punshon, Tabor; or the Class Meeting (Toronto: George Sanderson, 1855); "Class Meeting," in Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 1:518-20; Edward Barrass, Class Meetings, their origin and advantages (1865); Henry F. Bland, Universal Childhood Drawn to Christ (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1882); John Borland, Dialogue Between Two Methodists (Toronto: J. Dough, 1856). 82 Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Anson Green, 7 June 1854; Neil Semple, "The Nurture and Admonition of the Lord': Nineteenth-Century Canadian Methodism's Response to 'Childhood'," Histoire sociale/Social History, 14, (1981): 157-75. 83 CG, 31 January 1855, 66; ibid., 18 July 1855, Z62~3; ibid., 22 August 1855, 174; ibid., 26 September 1855, 204; Carroll, Case and His Contemporaries, 4:158; (Ontario Archives) John George Hodgins Papers, John A. Macdonald to Egerton Ryerson, 21 June 1860. 84 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 20 June 1859; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 25 June 1859; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 28 December 1859; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 16 January 1868; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 22 June 1859; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 2 July 1859; ibid., Daniel Wilson to Samuel Nelles, 22 September 1880; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 10 November 1856; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 14:205-14. 85 Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 13 July 1864.

Notes to pages ii o-i 6

317

86 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 25 July 1864. 87 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 10 July 1865. See, for example: Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 11 December 1868. 88 John Tosh, A Man's Place: Masculinity and the Middle-Class Home in Victorian England (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1999), IO2-IO.

89 Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," 7 December 1852; CG, October 20, 1852, 6; ibid., i February 1854, 66; Marguerite Van Die, An Evangelical Mind: Nathanael Burwash and the Methodist Tradition in Canada, 1839-1918 (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1989), 51-2; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 179-81; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 96-7. 90 Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 12 March 1868; ibid., 13 March 1868; ibid., 28 March 1868. 91 Ibid., Correspondence, John McCaul to Samuel Nelles, 5 November 1856; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 10 November 1856; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 183-4. 92 Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 5 March 1867; ibid., 6 March 1867; ibid., 15 March 1867; ibid., 23 March 1867; ibid., 29 March 1867; ibid., 2 May 1867; ibid., 3 May 1867; ibid., 6 May 1867; ibid., 23 May 1867. 93 Ibid., "Private Record," May 1870; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 18, 140; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 241. CHAPTER FIVE

1 Samuel Nelles Biographical file, Cobourg World, 20 October 1887; David Marshall, Secularizing the Faith: Canadian Protestant Clergy and the Crisis of Belief, 1850-1940 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992), 49-71. 2 Samuel Nelles Papers, "Obituary," The Mail, 19 October 1887; ibid., William Ormiston, "Blessed are the Dead," 2; Hugh Pedley, "In Memoriam," Acta Victoriana, 10 (October 1887), 19. 3 Neil Semple, "The Impact of Urbanization on the Methodist Church in Central Canada, 1854-1884," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1979), 2-5, 128-43; George Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism in Canada, 2 vol. (Toronto: Methodist Book and Publishing House, 1881, 1903), 2:195; Hugh Johnston, Shall We or Shall We Not? (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1886); Hugh Johnston, A Merchant Prince: The Life of the Honourable John Macdonald (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1893). 4 Nelles Papers "Diary," 4 January 1866. 5 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 12; ibid., Sermons, "For the

318

6

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15

16

17 18

Notes to pages 116-19

Redemption of their Soul is Precious;" ibid., Sermons, "Sin and Folly of Delay," Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 115; Journal of Education for Ontario, zi (May 1868), 79; Frederic Macdonald, The Life of Wm. Morley Punshon (New York: Phillips & Hunt, 1887), 288-339; Hugh Johnston Papers, William Morley Punshon to Hugh Johnston; William Morley Punshon, "The Ministerial Commission: A Sermon," in Sermons Preached in Toronto during the session of the Wesleyan Conference, i8jo (Toronto: Wesleyan Book Room), 1870. Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 26-30, 37. Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 2.6- Samuel S. Nelles, "Eternal Life," CMM, 13 (1881), 561-5. Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 28 September 1846. Ibid., Box 3, file 30, "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 15. Ibid., 37. Ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 18; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 37; ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 5 March 1848. Ibid., "Diary," 26 December 1866. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1864, 95; William Arthur, May We Hope for a Great Revival (Toronto: Wesleyan Book Room, 1867); J. Wesley Johnston, "Tongues of Fire," in Johnston, The Baptism of Fire and other Sermons (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1888), 28; James Spencer, "The Chief Corner-Stone," in Spencer, Sermons by the Reverend James Spencer (Toronto: Anson Green, 1864), 91. In the obituary notice published in WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1864, 7, James Spencer was remembered, not necessarily with approval, as a "champion of the older way." Neil Semple, "The Quest for the Kingdom: Aspects of Protestant Revivalism in Nineteenth-Century Ontario," in David Keane and Colin Read (eds), Old Ontario: Essays in Honour of J.M.S. Careless (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1990), 95-117. Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 26-30, 134; ibid., Box 5, file 65, "Progressive Piety," 20 October 1848; CG, 24 September 1873, 305; John Wesley, The Nature of Enthusiasm: A Sermon on Acts 26:24 (London: 1755); Mary Ryder, "Avoiding the 'Many-Headed Monster': Wesley and Johnston on Enthusiasm," Methodist History, 23 (1985). Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," 26 May 1850; ibid., 4 July 1850; ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 37; ibid., "Random Thoughts and Mental Records," 29 January 1849, 188. Ibid., "Private Journal," 24 July 1850; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 115. Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 6, 13; ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 15; Sermon, 27 June 1847; ibid., "Random Thoughts," "Plan of Salvation," 23 December 1850.

Notes to pages 12.0-2.

319

19 Ibid., Box 14, file 2,84, "Wesleyana," citing Wesley Works, 12:423; Rupert Davies, "Justification, Sanctification and the Liberation of the Person," in Theodore Runyon (ed.), Sanctification and Liberation (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1981), 67-8; Thomas Langford, "John Wesley's Doctrine of Justification by Faith," UCA, Bulletin, Z9 (1983), 47-62; William Cannon, "Salvation in the Theology of John Wesley," UCA, Bulletin, 27 (1978), 44-6; John Wesley, "Salvation by Faith, Sermon #i," in Rupert Davies et al. (eds), A History of the Methodist Church in Great Britain, 4 vol. (London: Epworth Press, 1965-1988), 4:20-3; Alden Aikens, "Christian Perfection in Central-Canadian Methodism, 1828-1884," (Ph.D., McGill University, 1987); Alden Aikens, "Christian Perfection in Four Representative Canadian Methodists," CMHS, Papers, 9 (1993). 20 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 65; ibid., Sermons, Romans 12:1. 21 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 1-5. 22 Ibid., Sermons, Cobourg, 5 October 1850; ibid., "Religious Meditations," 21 September 1849, i; ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," "Saved," i September 1849; ibid., "Random Thoughts," "Plan of Salvation," 23 December 1850; ibid., "Religious Meditations," "Salvation;" ibid., Address, "Have Faith in God," September 1856; ibid., "Religion," 10 March 1859. 23 Ibid., "Religious Meditations," September 21, 1849, i; ibid., "Religious Meditations," "Luke 24:21, The Redemption of Israel;" ibid., Sermons, "For the Redemption of their Soul is Precious;" ibid., Address, "Baccalaureate Sermon," "Luke 11:42," May 1887. 24 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850-54," "Christ is All;" ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," August 1849, 26. 25 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850, 1858," "Spiritual Vanity," 23 December 1850; ibid., Sermons, 16 November 1850; ibid., "Private Journal," 11 August 1863. 26 Ibid., "Religious Meditations," "Luke 4:18-19," 30 December 1865; ibid., "Practicality," 4 July 1865; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850, 1858," "Evangelical Scheme," April 1858; ibid., Essay, "The Deity, as seen in his works;" ibid., Sermons, "John 3:17, Duty of Attending to the Poor," 28 January 1849; ibid., Sermons, "Not in Word but Power," 30 December 1848. 27 Ibid., Sermons, "Romans 12:1"; John Fletcher, Checks to Antinomianism (London: 1771-1775). 28 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 134; ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech, III," 20; Albert Outler (ed.),John Wesley (New York: Oxford University Press, 1964), 9-10; John Wesley, "Plain Account of Christian Perfection," in Davies et al. (eds), A History of the Methodist Church in Great Britain, 4:137.

320

Notes to pages 122-4

29 Richard Carwardine, "Methodists, Politics, and the Coming of the American Civil War," Church History, 69 (September 2000), 608. 30 William Westfall, "The End of the World: An Account of Time and Culture in Nineteenth-Century Protestant Ontario," Religion/Culture, Comparative Canadian Studies, 7 (1985), 82; Lawrence Fallis, "The Idea of Progress in the Province of Canada: A Study in the History of Ideas," in William L. Morton (ed.), The Shield of Achilles: Aspects of Canada in the Victorian Age (Toronto: McClelland 8t Stewart, 1968), 173-4; Carl Berger, The Sense of Power: Studies in the Ideas of Canadian Imperialism, 1867-1914 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970), 109-15. 31 John R. Seeley, Ecce Homo: A Survey of the Life and Work of Jesus Christ (Boston: Roberts, 1866), 106, 139-55, 2O1- This edition was an American reprint, and included a rebuttal to criticisms of the original text. "Ecce homo" was normally translated as "behold the man" and derived from Pilate's presentation of Jesus to the mob before he condemned him to crucifixion. The phrase was commonly used in describing the portraits of Christ that emerged principally during the early Christian era. The general view of Jesus was the suffering Saviour, as opposed to the ascendant Lord, which became more popular later. William Gladstone, among others, also wrote on Christ in this context; Nelles discussed the book with his colleagues. Nelles Papers, W.S. Griffin to Samuel Nelles, 21 September 1867; ibid., "Diary," 10 December 1866; ibid., "Essay on Farrar's Free Thought," 6 December 1869. 32 Nelles Papers, Box 9, file 220, "Moral and Religious Lectures," Questions on Butler and Stewart, 1864; William Abraham, "Conversion and Knowledge of God," CMHS, Papers 13 (2001). 33 Nelles Papers, Sermons, "But seek ye first the Kingdom of God," 6 August 1866; ibid., "Diary," 27 May 1866; "Christian Perfection," Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 1:489; Langford, "John Wesley's Doctrine of Justification," 63-73; The Canada Presbyterian, 28 May 1880, 469; Charles White, "The Beauty of Holiness: The Career and Influence of Phoebe Palmer," Methodist History, 25 (1987). 34 Seeley, 344; Nelles Papers, Sermons, "The Church of the Living God." 35 WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1873, 154-7. 3 6 Nelles Papers, Address to General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church (USA), Daily Christian Advocate, 20 May 1884. 37 Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," i July 1867; ibid., Address, "Patriotism," n.d. 38 Ibid., Address, "Patriotism," n.d. 39 Elizabeth Wallace, Goldwin Smith: Victorian Liberal (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1957), 252-80; Nelles Papers, Address, "How Canadians Should Think of Canada," January 1878; Ian Grant, "Erastus Wiman: A Continentalist Replies to Canadian Imperialism," CHR, 53 (March 1972), 1-20.

Notes to pages 114-7

32-1

40 Nelles Papers, "How Canadians Should Think of Canada," January 1878; ibid., Address to General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church (USA), Daily Christian Advocate, 2.0 May 1884. 41 WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1873, 8-9; ibid., 1874, 8-9; MC, Minutes of Bay of Quinte Conference, 1888, 13; Enoch Wood Biographical file; Nelles Papers, Missionary Address, Kingston, 4 February 1866; ibid., Missionary Address, Peterborough, 12 February 1866. 42. Nelles Papers, Missionary Address, 3 January 1856; MEC, Missionary Society Reports, 1814-1832; WMC, Missionary Society Reports, 1833-1873; John Macdonald, "The Maintenance of Home Missions among the most degraded population," in Proceedings of the Ecumenical Methodist Conference, London, 1881 (Hamilton: G. Stone, 1882). 43 Wesleyan Missionary Society (Br.), Correspondence, James Evans to Missionary Secretaries, 1836; Henry Baldwin, Minutes of the General Council of Indian Chiefs and Principal Men, Orillia, 1846 (Montreal: Canada Gazette, 1846); John W. Grant, "The Hunters Hunted: Methodists of Three Countries in Pursuit of the Indians of Canada," CMHS, Papers, 4 (1984), i; Donald Smith, Sacred Feathers, The Reverend Peter Jones (Kabkewaquonaby) and the Mississauga Indians (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1987); Peter MacLeod, "The Anishinabeg Point of View: The History of the Great Lakes Region to 1800 in Nineteenth-Century Mississauga, Odawa and Ojibway Historiography," CHR, 73 (June 1992.), 194-210; Tony Hall, "The Red Man's Burden: Land, Law and the Lord in the Indian Affairs of Upper Canada, 1791-1858," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1984); Hope MacLean, "The Hidden Agenda: Methodist Attitudes to the Ojibwa and the Development of Indian Schooling in Upper Canada, 1821-1860," (M.A., OISE, 1978); Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Robert Alder, 27 November 1837. Ryerson reported to Alder: "I have also accompanied Mr. Stinson to render him what assistance I could in examining Manual Labour Schools, with a view to the establishment of one for the benefit of our Indian youth - an object of very great importance both to the religious and civil interests of our aboriginal fellow countrymen." WMC, Missionary Society Reports, 1847-1848, xxi-xxiv; ibid., 1849-1850, ix-x; WMC, Board of Missions, Enoch Wood Letterbook, Enoch Wood to George Jacques, 21 November 1872, 317. 44 Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," 24 July 1850; WMC, Missionary Society Reports, 1850-1851, xi-xii. 45 MCC, Journal of the Second General Conference, 1878, 165-9; William Hutchison, "Modernism and Missions: The Liberal Search for an Exportable Christianity, 1875-1935," in J.K. Fairbank (ed.), The Missionary Enterprise in China and America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1974), 111-12; Paul Varg, "Motives in Protestant Missions,

322

46 47 48 49 50

51 52

53 54 55 56 57

58

59

60 61

Notes to pages 127-30 1890-1917," Church History, 23 (1954), 68-70; William Magney, "The Methodist Church and the National Gospel, 1884-1914," UCA, The Bulletin, 20 (1968); Marilyn Barber, "Nationalism, Nativism and the Social Gospel," in Richard Allen (ed.), The Social Gospel in Canada (Ottawa: National Museum of Man, 1975), 190. Nelles Papers, Sermons, "Church of the Living God," n. Ibid. Ibid., Sermons, "Christmas, 1865"; ibid., Sermons, "Luke 24:21." Ibid., Sermons, "Acts 17:26, All of One Blood," n.d. [early 18505]. Ibid., Missionary Address, "Evangelizing the World," 31 December 1855; MC, Board of Missions, Sutherland Letterbooks, K., 516, Alexander Sutherland to Richard Woodsworth, 19 February 1885. Nelles Papers, Missionary Address, "Conversion of the World," n.d.; Charles Eby Biographical file; John Maclean Biographical file. Edwin C. Guillet, In the Cause of Education: Centennial History of the Ontario Educational Association (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1960), 27, 45-9; Alison Prentice, "The Feminization of Teaching in British North America and Canada, 1845-1875," Histoire sociale/Social History, 8 (May 1975), 9-10; Chad Gaffield, "Children, Schooling, and Family Reproduction in Nineteenth-Century Ontario," CHR, 72 (June 1991). Samuel Nelles, "The Teacher's Work in the University and Public School," Canada Educational Monthly, i (1879), 2,06-10. Guillet, In the Cause of Education, 48-50. Ibid., 52. Journal of Education for Ontario, 24 (July 1871), no. Robert Gidney and Doug Lawr, "Egerton Ryerson and the Origins of the Ontario Secondary School," CHR, 60 (December 1979), 442-65; Marion Royce, "Arguments over the Education of Girls: Their Admission to Grammar Schools in Ontario," OH, 67 (March 1975), 1-2, 5-6, 13; Journal of Education for Ontario, 21 (January 1868), 18-19. Journal of Education for Ontario, 21 (August 1868), 113-14; Guillet, In the Cause of Education, 45; George Hodgins (ed.), The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, 28 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1894-1910), 20:237-47. J. Anthony Ketchum, "The Most Perfect System': Official Policy in the First Century of Ontario's Government Secondary Schools and Its Impact on Students between 1871 and 1910," (Ed.D., University of Toronto, 1979), 70, 97Ibid., 72-80; James Porter, "The Public Schools of Ontario," The Canadian Monthly and National Review, i (June 1872), 483-96. Journal of Education for Ontario, 27 (October 1874), 146; ibid., 28 (February 1875), 29; ibid., 28 (December 1875), 178.

Notes to pages 130-2

3x3

62 Samuel Nelles, "The Teacher's Work in the University and Public School," Canada Educational Monthly and School Chronicle, i (1879), 209. 63 Ibid., 208. Nelles believed in universal education, but not in many of the impractical experiments suggested by Progressive reformers. See: Lawrence Cremin, The Transformation of the School: Progressivism in American Education, 1876-1957 (New York: Vintage Books, [1961] 1964). 64 Nelles Papers, Address, Hamilton Wesleyan Female College, 27 June 1866; ibid., Address, Teacher's Association, August 1869; ibid., Address to Cobourg Collegiate, 12 December 1879; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 March 1879; ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 12 October 1882. 65 Journal of Education for Upper Canada, i (August 1848), 243; ibid., 2 (June 1849), 83; John Wilson, "Religious Instruction in the Public Schools," Canada Educational Monthly, 3 (1881), 332. 66 Journal of Education for Upper Canada, 7 (October 1854), 167; ibid., 7 (December 1854), 193; Marni de Pencier, "Ideas of English-Speaking Universities in Canada to 1920," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1977), 329-30. 67 Egerton Ryerson, "Report on a System of Elementary Education, 1846," in Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 6:141-2, 146-7; ibid., 25:158; CG, 16 March 1853, T 95 The Canada Presbyterian, 16 September 1881, 584. 68 journal of Education for Upper Canada, 5 (October 1852), 145; George Hodgins, The Establishment of Schools and Colleges in Ontario, 1792-1970, 2 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1910), 2:145. 69 Paul Bennett, "'Little Worlds': The Forging of the Social Identities of Ontario's Protestant School Communities and Institutions, 1850-1930," (Ed.D., University of Toronto, 1990), 10; John Strachan, A Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Toronto (Toronto: 1841), 25; George Hodgins, The Legislation and History of Separate Schools in Upper Canada, from 1841 (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1897), 57, 148; Canada Christian Advocate, 2 July 1862, 2; (OA) George Hodgins Papers, John Strachan to Egerton Ryerson, 23 June 1857. 70 Journal of Education for Upper Canada, 5 (October 1852), 146-7; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1851, 166; ibid., 1855, 315; Christian Journal, 22 December 1865; Canada Christian Advocate, 25 June 1862, i; ibid., 2 July 1862, 2; ibid., 3 September 1873, i; ibid., 10 September 1873, I ? British American Presbyterian, 14 May 1875, 4. 71 Hodgins, History of Separate Schools, 15-19. 72 John Moir, Church and State in Canada West, 1841-1867 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1959), 143-6, 160.

32.4

Notes to pages 132-4

73 Hodgins Papers, unsigned, Brief for Council of Public Instruction, 23 January 1856; Jean Marie Bruyere, Controversy between Dr. Ryerson, Chief Superintendent of Education for Upper Canada, and Rev. J.M. Bruyere (Toronto: Leader & Patriot, 1857); Charles Paisley Papers, Diary, 30 August 1867, n; Moir, Church and State, 144-6; J.M.S. Careless, The Union of the Canadas: 1841-1857 (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1967), 34-5, 51, 103, 176, 182-3. 74 Moir, Church and State, 160-1; "Armand de Charbonnel," DCB, 12,: 184; Hodgins, History of Separate Schools, 19, 37, 58. 75 The 1863 Roman Catholic Separate School "Finality" Act was the most significant legislation related to separate schools. Hodgins, History of Separate Schools, 160-2,; Canada Christian Advocate, 13 August 1862, 2; ibid., 13 February 1884; British American Presbyterian, 2 April 1875, 4; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 7 March 1863; CG, 8 April 1885, 217. 76 "Report of the Chief Superintendent of Education, 1863," in George Hodgins (ed.), Historical Educational Papers and Documents of Ontario, 6 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1911-1912), 6:16-19; Moir, Church and State, 180; Guillet, In the Cause of Education, 72; Hodgins, History of Separate Schools, 197-9. Most Roman Catholic children continued to study in the public system. In 1863, there were only 120 separate but 4100 public schools. Within a decade, however, 15,000 of the estimated 70,000 Catholics attended separate schools, while other estimates in 1865 place the numbers at 17,000 of 60,000 students. In 1875, there were 726 Catholic teachers, with 516 in the public system and 210 in the separate schools. 77 Ryerson Papers, George Hodgins to Egerton Ryerson, 4 November 1871; The Canada Presbyterian, 30 December 1881, 824; British American Presbyterian, 2 April 1875, 4> ibid., 14 May 1875, 4. 78 James R. Miller, "Anti-Catholic Thought in Victorian Canada," CHR, 66 (December 1985), 485-90; Hodgins, History of Separate Schools, 148. 79 Thomas O'Hagan, "Catholic Education in Ontario," Canada Educational Monthly and School Chronicle, i (1879), 149-52. 80 British American Presbyterian, 2 April 1875, 4? Goldwin Smith, "The Moral Element in Common Schools," quoted in Guillet, In the Cause of Education, 65; CG, 26 April 1882, 132; Canada Christian Advocate, 14 January 1857, 2; ibid., 3 September 1873, i; ibid., 10 September 1873, i; The Canada Presbyterian, 10 October 1883, 652; Thomas Arnold, Introductory Lectures on Modern History, with the Inaugural Lecture (London: Fellowes, 3rd ed., 1845), 38. 81 British American Presbyterian, 14 May 1875, 4; Canada Christian Advocate, 13 August 1862, 2; ibid., 2 July 1862, 2; Robert Wilson, The Papal Supremacy Examined, Ninth Lecture before the Protestant Alliance (Halifax: Wesley an Conference, 1859), 4-7.

Notes to pages 134-6

325

82 Journal of Education for Upper Canada, 5 (October 1852.), 145; CG, 16 March 1853, 19; ibid., 15 February 1882, 52; ibid., 22 February 1882, 60; ibid., 25 October 1882, 343; The Canada Presbyterian, 16 September 1881, 584. 83 The Canada Presbyterian, 15 February 1888, 117; "John Joseph Lynch" (Archbishop), DCS, 11:535-8. 84 Nelles Papers, George Hodgins to Samuel Nelles, 22 March 1879; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 March 1879. 85 The Canada Presbyterian, 16 November 1877, 40"1? ibid., 16 November 1877, 34; Christian Journal, 12 January 1883, 2; CG, 26 April 1882, 132. 86 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 March 1879. 87 Ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 30 October 1882; ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 20 October 1882. 88 Toronto Mail, 22 December 1883; CG, i November 1882, 348. 89 CG, 8 April 1885, 217; The Canada Presbyterian, 30 December 1881, 824; ibid., 23 November 1887, 765; ibid., 15 February 1888, 117; James Middlemiss, Christian Instruction in the Public Schools of Ontario (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1901); Report of the Royal Commission on Education in Ontario (Hope Commission) (Toronto: King's Printer, 1950), 123-32, 478-536, 803-94. 90 Samuel Nelles, "'Marmion' and the Minister of Education," CMM, 16 (1882), 463; ibid., Lilian Dexter, "Scott's Marmion," CMM, 28 (1888), 1-14; CG, 18 October 1882, 332. 91 Miller, "Anti-Catholic Thought in Victorian Canada," 474-94; J.R. Miller, "'As a Politician He is a Great Enigma': The Social and Political Ideas of D'Alton McCarthy," CHR, 58 (December 1977), 399-422; J.R. Miller, "'Equal Rights for All': The E.R.A. and the Ontario Election of 1890," OH, 65 (1973); Sean G. Conway, "Upper Canada Orangeism in the Nineteenth Century: Aspects of a Pattern of Disruption," (M.A., Queen's University, 1977); Jacques Monet, "French-Canadian Nationalism and the Challenge of Ultramontanism," Canadian Historical Association, Historical Papers, (1966); Roy Dalton, The Jesuits' Estates Question, 1760-1888 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1968). 92 Nelles Papers, Essays, "Catholicity," 20 January 1857; ibid., Address to the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church (USA), Daily Christian Advocate, 20 May 1884; The First Canadian Christian Conference (Toronto: Willard Press, 1878); MC, Journal of General Conference, 1890, 172-4; Anglican/United Church Union Papers, Box i, files 1-4; Wm Morley Punshon, Address to General Conference, Methodist Episcopal Church, 1868, in Macdonald, The Life of Morley Punshon, 303. 93 Nelles Papers, "How Canadians Should Think of Canada," January 1878.

32.6

Notes to pages 136-9

94 Ibid., Essays, "Catholicity," 20 January 1857; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850, 1858," ii April 1858; Sermons, "Ephesians 4:3, Endeavoring to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace," 2.8 January 1867; ibid., "Random Thoughts & Mental Records," 17 January 1849; ibid., Sermons, "Full Personal Persuasion," 18 March 1849. 95 Ibid., Essays, "Catholicity," 20 January 1857. 96 Wesleyan Methodist Church (Br.), Minutes of Annual Conference, 1765, 50. 97 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 3 February 1848, 69-72, 107; ibid., "Wesleyana," citing Works, 6:186. 98 Nelles Papers, "Diary," 21 February 1866; ibid., i November 1866; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 115; ibid., "Wesleyana," citing Journal, 26 August 1789. 99 Ibid., "Wesleyana," "Ballast," citing Works, 12:415. 100 Ibid., "Wesleyana," 25, citing Works, 6:186; ibid., "Religious Meditations," 26 June 1870; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850, 1858," 11 April 1858; Mark Massa, "The Catholic Wesley: A Revisionist Prolegomenon," Methodist History, 22 (1983); William Cannon, "John Wesley and the Catholic Tradition," CMHS, Papers, 2 (1980); Edward Jackman, "The Interaction Between John Wesley and the Roman Catholic Church," CMHS, Papers, 9 (1993). 101 Brian Clarke, Pietism and Nationalism: Lay Voluntary Associations and the Creation of an Irish-Catholic Community in Toronto, 1850-1895 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1993), 3, 43, 50, 70, 81, 98-100, 219, 255; John W. Grant, A Profusion of Spires: Religion in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988), 119-21, 125-8, 136, 146-7, 202-3; William Westfall, Two Worlds: The Protestant Culture of Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press), 1989, 120-1; CG, 24 September 1854, 196. 102 Richard Whately, The Errors of Romanism Traced to their Origin in Human Nature (Dublin: 1830). Bishop Whately had been responsible for the Bible readings supplied to the elementary schools in the 18505. 103 Paul S. Wilson, A Concise History of Preaching (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1992.), 138-43; William R. Hutchison, "Introduction," in Hutchison (ed.), American Protestant Thought: The Liberal Era (New York: Harper & Row, 1968), 1-2; Henry Ward Beecher, "The Study of Human Nature," in American Protestant Thought, 38; Kenneth Cauthen, The Impact of American Religious Liberalism (New York: Harper & Row, 1962), 51-7. 104 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 107; ibid., "Diary," 21 February 1866. 105 Ibid., "Wesleyana," citing Works, 12:386; ibid., citing Works, 12:400;

Notes to pages 139-42

106 107 108 109 no

in

112

113

114 115

116

117

327

ibid., "Diary," zi February 1866; ibid., Sermons, "Church of the Living 'God;" ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," "Future State," 28 July 1849; "Original Sin," Encyclopedia of World Methodism, 2:1822-5. Nelles Papers, "Diary," 21 February 1866. -Ibid. Ibid., "Wesleyana," citing Notes on the New Testament, I Corinthians 11:18; ibid., "Diary," 20 June 1866. Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850, 1858," "On Hell"; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 3. Ibid., "Diary," June 24, 1866; ibid., Sermons, "Church of the Living God"; Andrew Cory Courtice, "Future Punishment," in Acta Victoriana, 8 (January 1885), 12-14. "Daniel James Macdonnell," DCB, XII:6i5-i9; British American Presbyterian, 12 November 1875, i, 4-5; ibid., 5 May 1876, i; ibid., 12 May 1876, i; ibid., 23 June 1876, 4; Joseph McLelland, "The Macdonnell Heresy Trial," Canadian Journal of Theology, 4 (October 1958), 273-84. Nelles Papers, "Diary," 15 November 1866; David Lowe, "Millerites: A Shadow Portrait," in Ronald Numbers and Jonathan Butler (eds), The Disappointed: Millerism and Millenarianism in the Nineteenth Century (Nashville: University of Tennessee Press, 1993), 2. Nelles Papers, Sermons, "Church of the Living God;" ibid., "Random Thoughts, On Speech," 28 July 1848; Joseph Kett, "Adolescence and Youth in Nineteenth-Century America," in Theodore Rabb and R. Rotberg (eds), The Family in History (New York: M.I.T. Press, 1971). T.W. Bamford (ed.), Thomas Arnold on Education (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), 9. Henry Flesher Bland, Universal Childhood Drawn to Christ (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1882); Alexander Sutherland, The Moral Status of Children (Toronto: Bell & Co., 1876); Egerton Ryerson, Scriptural Rights of the Members of Christ's Visible Church (Toronto: Brewer & McPhail, 1854); Isaac B. Aylesworth, "God's Eternal Purpose," in David Rogers (ed.), Sermons by Ministers of the Guelph Conference (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1886); Edward Hartley Dewart, The Children of the Church (Toronto: Guardian Office, 1861); Jeremiah Chapman, The Class Meeting (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1882). Nathanael Burwash, The Relation of Children to The Fall, The Atonement and The Church (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1882); Nathanael Burwash Papers, Box 12, file 175, "Moral Status of Children," 1878; John G. Marshall, Scriptural Answer to a Pamphlet by Alexander Sutherland, on the Moral Status of Children (Halifax: Nova Scotia Printing, 1877); CG, 5 July 1882, 214. James Lawson, "Is Sin Necessary," CMM, 3 (1876), 163; Neil Semple,

328

Notes to pages 142-8

'"The Nurture and Admonition of the Lord': Nineteenth-Century Canadian Methodism's Response to 'Childhood'," Histoire sociale/Social History, 14 (1981), 157-75118 Nelles Papers, Address, "God's Care over the World," 10 July 1859; ibid., "Providential Care," n.d.; Jaroslav Pelikan (ed.), Twentieth Century Theology in the Making; Vol. II: The Theological Dialogues (London: Fontana Books, 1970), 46-55; Richard Allen, "The Background of the Social Gospel in Canada," in Allen (ed.), The Social Gospel in Canada (Ottawa: National Museum of Man, 1975); Richard Allen, "Salem Bland: The Young Preacher," UCA The Bulletin, 26 (1977); see also: Ramsay Cook, The Regenerators: Social Criticism in Late Victorian English Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985). CHAPTER SIX

1 Brian McKillop, Matters of Mind: The University in Ontario, 1791-1951 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), 102. 2 Samuel Nelles, "Christianity - Ideal and Actual," CMM, 14 (1881); Samuel Nelles, "Whittier - The Quaker Poet," CMM, 16(1882); Samuel Nelles Papers, Sermons, "Eternal Life," 12 December 1881, printed in CMM, 27 (1888), 561-5.

3 Nelles Papers, Box 14, file 287, "Soliloquy in a Barber's Shop," 22 February 1854; "Samuel Sobieski Nelles," CMM, 12 (1880), 483-4. 4 William Henry Hincks Papers, Memoirs, 25.5 Charles Bruce Sissons, A History of Victoria University (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952), 107-21. 6 George Hodgins (ed.), The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, 28 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1894-1910), 16:46-7. The tea service is now in the possession of Victoria University. Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 14 May 1860; Egerton Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, n June 1860. 7 Nelles Papers, "Diary," 20 December 1866. 8 Nathanael Burwash, The History of Victoria College (Toronto: Victoria University Press, 1927), 420; Janet Scarfe, "Letters and Affection: The Recruitment and Responsibilities of Academics in English-Speaking Universities in British North America in the Mid-Nineteenth Century," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1982), 50-2. 9 Scarfe, "Letters and Affection," 315-16; Nelles Papers, "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864; ibid., Lectures, "Questions in Ethics," August, 1865; ibid., Notebook on Ethical Lectures, August, 1866; ibid., Notebook on Lectures, 1867-1877. 10 Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 26 August 1867; ibid., Box 9, file 223, "Examination Questions on Whately's Morals and Evidence."

Notes to pages 148-50

329

11 Ibid., "Diary," 20 December 1866. 12 Sissons, History of Victoria University, 88-9, 143; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 152. 13 McKillop, Matters of Mind, 103-11; see Nelles Papers, Lecture Notes, Boxes 9-11. 14 George Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 6 April 1867; Proceedings at the Laying of the Foundation Stone, and the Opening of the University (Toronto: H. Rowsell, 1843), 55-60; "Object of Education," Journal of Education for Upper Canada, i (August 1848), 243; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 103, 219; Brian McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence: Critical Inquiry and Canadian Thought in the Victorian Era (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1979), 60. 15 Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, i April 1854; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 14:238. 16 Journal Of Education for Upper Canada, 2 (November 1849), 183; Goldwin Smith, "University Questions in England," Canada Educational Monthly, i (November 1879), 543-4. 17 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 9 June 1860; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, n June 1860; John Irving, "The Development of Philosophy in Central Canada from 1850 to 1900," CHR, 31 (1950), 257.

18 Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 14:241-2; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 10 August 1859; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 18 January 18 61; Nelles Papers, John Bredin to Samuel Nelles, 14 April 1860. 19 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 18 February 1862. 20 Nelles Papers, Sermons, "O, that they were wise," December 1850; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 108. 21 Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 18 February 1867; ibid., 2 May 1867. 22 Ibid., Box ii, file 250, "Need for Specialization," n.d.; ibid., "Daily Diary," 2 May 1867; ibid., Sermons, "O that they were wise," December 1850. 23 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 18 March 1854; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, i April 1854. 24 Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 17 January 1861; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 19 January 1861; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 18 January 1861; Irving, "The Development of Philosophy," 252-8. The Anglican James Beaven had held the chair of Divinity at King's College; he had originally joined University College to teach Natural Theology and Natural History. The highly respected George Paxton Young taught Moral and Mental Philosophy at University College after 1871. Neither of these men possessed the scope of knowledge of Samuel Nelles, at least according to George Hodgins, who knew them well.

h

Notes 151-3

25 Nelles Papers, Addresses, "Spirit of Inquiry," 20 April 1843. 26 Suzanne Zeller, "'Merchants of Light': The Culture of Science in Daniel Wilson's Ontario," in Marinell Ash, Thinking with Both Hands: Sir Daniel Wilson in the Old World and the New, edited by Elizabeth Hulse (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999), 124. Nelles worried about the use of creative imagination by scientists such as John Tyndall in Fragments of Science for Unscientific People (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1871), 125-67. 27 Zeller, "Merchants of Light," 116; Susan Sheets-Pyenson, John William Dawson: Faith, Hope and Science (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 130-1; "John William Dawson," DCS, 12:230-7. 28 James Moore, The Post-Darwinian Controversies (London: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 194. 29 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1850-1854," 21 November 1850. 30 McKillop, Matters of Mind, 104; McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence, 46, 49, 70-7; Michael Gauvreau, The Evangelical Century: College and Creed in English Canada from the Great Revival to the Great Depression (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1991); Michael Gauvreau, "The Empire of Evangelicalism: Varieties of Common Sense in Scotland, Canada and the United States," in Mark Noll, David Bebbington, and George Rawlyk (eds), Evangelicalism: Comparative Studies of Popular Protestantism, 1770-1990 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), 219-52. 31 Nelles Papers, "Notebook on Lectures," October 1867; Gauvreau, "The Empire of Evangelicalism," 226; James Turner, "Secularization and Sacralization: Speculations on Some Religious Origins of the Secular Humanities Curriculum, 1850-1890," in George Marsden (ed.), The Secularization of the Academy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 76. 32 Gauvreau, "The Empire of Evangelicalism," 226. 33 John G. Reid, "Beyond the Democratic Intellect: The Scottish Example and University Reform in Canada's Maritime Provinces, 1870-1933," in Paul Axelrod and John Reid (eds), Youth, University and Canadian Society: Essays in the Social History of Higher Education (Montreal: McGillQueen's University Press, 1989), 277. 34 Gauvreau, "The Empire of Evangelicalism," 224; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 187-8. 35 Robert Wiebe, The Search for Order, 1877-1920 (New York: Hill & Wang, 1967), 4; Turner, "Secularization and Sacralization," 75. 36 Nelles Papers, "Catalogue of the Library of Samuel Nelles." Victoria University bought the library after Nelles's death. 37 Ibid., "Random Thoughts," 13 December 1859; McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence, 44, 57, 79-83.

Notes to pages 153-8

331

38 Emerson Marks, "Victor Cousin and Emerson," in Myron Simon and Thornton Parsons (eds), Transcendentalism and Its Legacy (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1966), 65-70. 39 Nelles Papers, "Lectures on Ethics," August 1865. 40 Marks, "Victor Cousin and Emerson," 64-6. 41 Georg Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of History (London: Bell & Daldy, 1872), title page, Nelles's copy; Nelles Papers, Box n, file 241, Lecture Notes, Ethics (Kant), 1878; McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence, 172-3. 42 Hegel, Philosophy of History, iv, vi-vii, xiii, 30, 56. 43 Nelles Papers, "Lectures on Logic," November 1866. 44 Ibid., "Lectures on Logic," 1863-1865. 45 Nelles Papers, "Lectures on Logic," 1863-1865; ibid., "On the Need of Special Instruction Respecting Duty," 1864; ibid., "Lectures on Logic," November 1866. 46 Ibid., Box 10, file 230, "Lectures on Logic," November 1866. 47 CG, 27 April 1880, 66, cited in McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence, 55-6. 48 Nelles Papers, Box 9, file 219, "Lectures on Logic," 1863-1865; ibid., Box 10, file 230, "Lectures on Logic," November 1866; ibid., Box 10, file 231, "Notebook of Lectures, Logic," 1873. 49 Ibid., "Catalogue of the Library of Samuel Nelles." Nelles supplemented assigned texts with books such as Day's Logical Praxis, Bain's Logic, Deductive and Inductive, Bayes's Port Royal Logic, Taylor's Logic in Theology and other essays, Fowler's Deductive Logic, Bacon's Essays, with annotations by Whately, Locke's Conduct of the Understanding, as well as Kant's principal works. 50 Nelles Papers, "Lectures on Logic," 1863-1865; Paul Wilson, A Concise History of Preaching (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1992), 146; Ralph Waldo Emerson, "The Poet," in George Sampson (ed.), The Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, 5 vol. (London: G. Bell, 1919), 1:199-201. 51 Samuel Nelles, "Whittier - the Quaker Poet," CMM, 16 (1882), 124; Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 10 April 1867; ibid., 13 April 1867. 52 Nelles, "Whittier - the Quaker Poet," 121-36; Nelles Papers, R.C. Pitman to Samuel Nelles, 8 October 1882. 53 Nelles Papers, "John Bascom and Epistemology," 22 May 1880; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850-1854," "The Great Danger," n.d. 54 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850-1854," 1850; ibid., "Notebook of Lectures, Hamilton's Metaphysics," 1867; ibid., "Diary," i September 1866; ibid., "Lectures on Metaphysics," 1877-1878. 55 Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-1849," 132; ibid., "Notebook of Lectures, Metaphysics," 1867, 1869-1870; William Norton, Bishop Butler: Moralist and Divine (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1940), 260.

332-

Notes to pages 15 8-9

56 Nelles Papers, "Lectures on Paley's Evidences," 1872-1873; Joseph Butler, The Analogy of Religion, to the Constitution and Course of Nature; also Fifteen Sermons on Subjects Chiefly Ethical, edited by Joseph Angus (London: Religious Tract Society, n.d.), 215; (London: Henry Bone, 1855), "Of the Particular Evidence for Christianity," 275-308, "Of Nature to Religion," 308-20. 57 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 16 November 1878. Nelles refers to Merivale's Conversion of the Roman Empire as an impressive treatment of Christian Evidences. George Marsden, "The Soul of the American University: A Historical Overview," in Marsden (ed.), The Secularization of the Academy, 14; M.L. Clarke, Paley, Evidences for the Man (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974), 113. 58 Nelles Papers, Box 4, file 49, "Essay on Farrar's Free Thought," for Cobourg Ministerial Association, 6 December 1869. 59 Ibid., "Random Thoughts and Mental Record," 25 October 1848, 15; ibid., "Daily Diary," n April 1867. 60 Neil Semple, The Lord's Dominion: The History of Canadian Methodism (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 16-18, 53-4; Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 6 February 1867; Lovett Weems, The Gospel According to Wesley (Nashville: Discipleship Resources, 1982); Paul Bassett, "North American Methodist Biblical Scholarship and the Authority of Scripture," Bicentennial Consultation on Wesley an Theology, Emory University, 1983; William J. Abraham, "What's Right and What's Wrong with the Quadrilateral?" CMHS, Papers, 13 (2001), 136-50; William J. Abraham, "Conversion and Knowledge of God," CMHS, Papers, 13 (2001), 122-35; William J. Abraham, "The Wesleyan Quadrilateral," Bicentennial Consultation on Wesleyan Theology, Emory University, 1983; Mark Mealey, "John Wesley's Use of the Idea of Scriptural Senses in His Definition of Faith and the New Birth," CMHS, Papers, 13 (2001), 151-75; Bruce Birch, "Biblical Theology: Issues in the Authority and Hermeneutics," Bicentennial Consultation on Wesleyan Theology, Emory University, 1983; Peder Borgen, "Biblical Authority and the Authenticity of the Church in Relationship to Auxiliary Keys such as Reason, Experience and Social Contexts," Epworth Review, 8 (1981); Ted Campbell, "The 'Wesleyan Quadrilateral': The Story of a Modern Methodist Myth," Methodist History, 29 (1991); Allan Coppedge, "John Wesley and the Issue of Authority in Theological Pluralism," in Michael Peterson (ed.), Spectrum of Thought (Wilmore: Asbury Publishing Co., 1982); Gerald Cragg (ed.), John Wesley, The Appeals to Men of Reason and Religion, vol. n: The Works of John Wesley (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975), 55-7. Here Wesley writes: "And seeing our ideas are not innate, but must all originally come from our senses, it is certainly necessary that you have senses capable of discerning objects of this kind - not those

Notes to pages 159-62

61

62

63 64 65 66

67 68 69

70

333

only which are called 'natural senses' ... but spiritual senses, exercised to discern spiritual good and evil ... that you have a new class of senses opened in the soul .. to be 'the evidence of things not seen' ... to discern spiritual objects, and to furnish you with ideas of what the outward 'eye hath not seen neither the ear heard'." Carl Berger, Science, God and Nature in Victorian Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1983), 32; McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence, 59-91; H.C. Porter, "A Harvard Unitarian in Victorian Cambridge," The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 53 (2002), 528-33. John Durant, "Darwinism and Divinity: A Century of Debate," in Durant (ed.), Darwinism and Divinity: Essays on Evolution and Religious Belief (New York: Blackwell Press, 1985), 14. Clarke, Paley, 89-94; Norton, Bishop Butler, 259. Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts," 24 August 1849; ibid., "Catalogue of the Library of Samuel Nelles." Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts and Mental Record," 25 October 1848, 12-14. Ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," 130, 134; John William Dawson, "Introduction of Genera and Species in Geological Time," The Canadian Monthly and National Review, 2 (July-December 1872), 154, quoted in Sheets-Pyenson, John William Dawson, 131. Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts and Mental Record," 25 October 1848, 13. Tyndall, Fragments of Science, 2-5, 139; CG, 28 October 1874, 3 3 8Nelles Papers, Box 4, file 41, "The Deity as seen in His Works," 30 March 1842; Russell Nye, This Almost Chosen People: Essays in the History of American Ideas (Toronto: Macmillan, 1966), 256-304. Kenneth Burke, "I, Eye, Ay - Emerson's Early Essay 'Nature': Thoughts on the Machinery of Transcendence," in Simon and Parsons (eds), Transcendentalism and Its Legacy, 3-24; Marks, "Victor Cousin and Emerson," 68-70; Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Nature," in Alfred Ferguson (ed.), The Collected Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, 5 vol. (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1971); Emerson, "The Transcendental," in Ferguson (ed.), The Collected Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1:206-7: "It is wellknown to most of my audience, that the Idealism of the present day acquired the name of Transcendental, from the use of that term by Immanuel Kant, of Konigsberg, who replied to the skeptical philosophy of Locke, which insisted that there was nothing in the intellect which was not previously in the experience of the senses, by showing that there was a very important class of ideas, or imperative forms, which did not come by experience, but through which experience was acquired; that these were intuitions of the mind itself; and he denominated them Transcendental forms." According to Perry Miller, Emerson and his fellow

334

71

72

73 74

75 76 77 78

79 80

81 82 83 84 85 86

87 88

Notes to pages 162-5 transcendentalists believed that "this Over-Soul [beyond God], this dread universal essence, which is beauty, love, wisdom, and power all in one, is present in Nature and throughout Nature." Perry Miller, The Errand into the Wilderness (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1956), 185-7. Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," u August 1863; Hegel, Philosophy of History, 56; James Simpson, The Spiritual Interpretation of Nature (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1912.), 3-5. Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1850-1854," "God in Nature," 13 January 1854; Borden P. Bowne, "The Immanence of God," in Thomas Langford, Wesleyan Theology: A Sourcebook (Durham, NC: Labyrinth Press, 1984). Clarke, Paley, 100-1. Tyndall, Fragments of Science, 39-68; Nelles Papers, Box 7, file 148, "Providential Care," n.d.; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850-1854," "God in Nature," 13 January 1854. Reid, "Beyond the Democratic Intellect," 2.77-8; Turner, "Secularization and Sacralization," 75. Nelles Papers, "Ethical Lectures," 1867. Ibid., "Ethical Lectures," 1867; ibid., Sermons, "O, that they were wise," December 1850. Gauvreau, "The Empire of Evangelicalism," 225-6; Clarke, Paley, 59-60; H.A. Nicholson, "Man's Place in Nature," The Canadian Monthly and National Review, i (January-June 1872), 43-5. Clarke, Paley, 57-8, 62; William Paley, Moral and Political Philosophy, in The Works of William Paley (Philadelphia: Crissy, 1850), 27-108. Nelles Papers, "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864; ibid., Box 9, file 221, "Lecture on Ethics," n January 1865; ibid., Box 10, file 231, "Notebook on Lectures, Butler," 25 October 1867. Ibid., "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864; ibid., "Daily Diary," 28 August 1867. Ibid., "Lectures on Ethics," n January 1865; ibid., "Butler's Sermons," April 1865; ibid., "Notebook on Butler's Sermons," October 1866. Norton, Bishop Butler, i. Butler, The Analogy of Religion, 349. In the 1855 edition, see Sermon XI, "On the Love of Neighbour," 361-5. Norton, Bishop Butler, 71. Nelles Papers, "Notebook on Lectures," October 1867; ibid., "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864; ibid., "Notebook on Ethical Lectures," 1867-1868; ibid., "Notebook on Butler's Sermons," October 1866. Ibid., Box 9, file 223, "Butler's Sermons," April 1865. Herbert Spencer, The Principles of Ethics, 2 vol. (New York: Appleton, 1898), i:vii, 75-6.

Notes to pages 166-71

335

89 Nelles Papers, "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864; ibid., "Lectures on Ethics," 1865; ibid., "Notebook on Lectures, Butler," October 1867. 90 Ibid., Box 9, file £2.4, "Questions on Adam Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments," 1865; ibid., Box 9, file 223, "Questions on Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations," 1865; ibid., Box n, file 246, "Lectures on Political Economy." 91 Ibid., "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864. 92 Ibid., "Questions on Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations," 1865; ibid., "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864. 93 Gauvreau, "The Empire of Evangelicalism," 225; Bradley Longfield, "From Evangelicalism to Liberalism: Public Midwestern Universities in Nineteenth-Century America," in Marsden (ed.), The Secularization of the Academy, 58-9; Spencer, Principles of Ethics, i:vii; Nelles Papers, "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864. 94 Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 30 November 1867; ibid., 14 December 1867; ibid., "Notebook on Butler's Sermons," October 1866; ibid., "Daily Diary," November 1867. 95 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 16 November 1878; Nelles Papers, Box n, file 2.41, Lecture Notes, Ethics (Kant), 1878. 96 Irving, "Development of Philosophy," 259-87; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 156, 188-93. 97 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-1849," 134. 98 Ibid., Box 9, file 223, "Butler's Sermons," 1865. 99 Ibid., "Random Thoughts," 13 December 1859; Gauvreau, "The Empire of Evangelicalism," 241. 100 Nelles Papers, "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864; ibid., "Daily Diary," 28 March 1867. 101 Ibid., "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864; ibid., Box 9, file 227, "Notebook on Ethical Lectures," 1867. 102 Ibid., "Diary," 15 December 1866. 103 Ibid., "Moral and Religious Lectures," 1864; ibid., Box 9, file 222, "Relation of Morality and Religion," 28 January 1865. 104 Ibid., "Diary," 27 May 1866; ibid., Box 10, file 232, "Notebook on Lectures, Ethics," 1875-1876. 105 Ibid., "Lecture on Ethics," January 1865. 106 Sissons, History of Victoria University, 143; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 254-62; Nelles Papers, Box 10, file 235, "Lectures on Homiletics," 1873; ibid., "Diary," 4 January 1866. 107 Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," n August 1863. Nelles also secured compilations of sermons by various authors, including Scotch Sermons, The American Pulpit of the Day, The German Pulpit, The Methodist Pulpit, and Great Sermons of Great Preachers. Treatises on rhetoric and

336

108 109

no

in

112 113 114 115 116

117

118

Notes to pages 171-3 oratory included Rhetoric Made Easy, Phelp's English Style in Public Discourse, McQueen's Oratory Touchstone, and Whately's Rhetoric; texts on the principles of preaching included Mahaffy's Decay of Modern Preaching, Vinet's Homiletics, and Mullois's Clergy and the Pulpit. Nelles Papers, "Catalogue of the Library of Samuel Nelles." Samuel Nelles, "Whittier - the Quaker Poet," 1x1-3. Nelles, "On Preaching," CMM, i (1875), 4°~6; Nelles Papers, Box 4, file 48, "On Brevity," 19 November 1858; ibid., "Saturday Lectures to Young Ministers," 1868; ibid., "Homiletics," 2 April 1872. Nevertheless, the more conservative connexional leaders complained about Nelles's style of preaching and his increasing success in transforming the pulpit. For example, Bible Christian Observer, z July 1873; ibid., 3 September 1873. Clarence Macartney, Six Kings of the American Pulpit (Freeport, NY: [Books for Libraries Press, 1942,] American Tract Society, 1971), 108; Henry Ward Beecher, Lectures on Preaching (London: T. Nelson, 1872); Wilson, 140; Nelles Papers, "Saturday Lectures to Young Ministers," 1868. Phillips Brooks, Lectures on Preaching (London: Allenson, 1877), 5. Nelles's advice on homiletics was increasingly reinforced by other Methodist authorities. For instance, CG, i March i88z, 68; ibid., 16 August 1882, 261; ibid., 13 September 1882, 294; ibid., 25 October 1882, 337; ibid., 8 November 1882, 356; ibid., 27 December 1882, 412. Samuel Nelles, "On Preaching," CMM, i (1875), 4 J > 3 8Ibid., 41. Acta Victoriana, 8 (April 1885), n; Robert Boyd, The Lives and Labours of Moody and Sankey (Toronto: A.H. Hovey, 1876). Samuel Nelles, "Baccalaureate Sermon, Luke 11:42," Acta Victoriana, 10 (May 1887), 13-14; Nelles Papers, "New and Old," April 1881. Acta Victoriana 8 (April 1885), 9; Nelles, "On Preaching," CMM, i (1875), 45-6; Samuel Nelles, "Christianity - Ideal and Actual," CMM, 14(1881), 398. Nelles, "On Preaching," 43-4; A.P. Lowery, "The Church and the Perfection of Beauty," in Sermons Preached in Toronto during the session of the Wesleyan Conference, i8jo (Toronto: Wesleyan Book Room, 1870), 73-5; CG, 20 December 1876, 401. William Morley Punshon, "The Ministerial Commission: A Sermon," in Sermons Preached in Toronto during the session of the Wesleyan Conference, 1870, 3-22; Frederic Macdonald, The Life of William Morley Punshon (New York: Phillips & Hunt, 1887), 292-389; Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 13 May 1868; CG, 24 February 1869, 31; ibid., 3 March 1869, 35; ibid., 17 March 1869, 42; ibid., i December 1869, 191;

Notes to pages 173-8

337

ibid., 13 June 1877, 188; Hugh Johnston Papers, William Motley Punshon to Hugh Johnston, 8 October 1868. 119 Samuel Nelles, "Eternal Life," CMM, 27 (1888), 561-5; Samuel Nelles, "The Place of Theology Among the Sciences," CMM, 8 (1878), 368-70. CHAPTER SEVEN

1 Samuel Nelles Papers, "Diary," 22 June 1866; ibid., "Diary," 12 January 1866; ibid., "Diary," 15 April 1866; ibid., Box 14, file 271, "Religious Meditations, 1865-1871," 4 July 1869. 2 Samuel Nelles Biographical file, "Samuel S. Nelles," 13 February 1888; George Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 15 June 1887; Nathanael Burwash, The History of Victoria College (Toronto: Victoria University Press, 1927), 266; The Canada Presbyterian, 28 May 1880, 468; ibid., 13 October 1886, 664; Edward Burwash, The New Theology (New Westminster: Theological Union, 1909). 3 Nelles Papers, "Religious Meditations, 1865-1871," 15 September 1867. 4 Ibid., "Diary," n December 1866. 5 Samuel Nelles, "The Place of Theology Among the Sciences," CMM, 8 (1878), 370; Nelles Papers, R.C. Pitman to Samuel Nelles, 15 May 1883. 6 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 16 November 1878. 7 Brian McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence: Critical Inquiry and Canadian Thought in the Victorian Era (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1979), 6. 8 Samuel Nelles, "Religious University Education," Canada Educational Monthly, (May-June 1883), 200-4; Jonn M. Robson, The Improvement of Mankind: The Social and Political Thought of John Stuart Mill (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1968), 273-4, 276; V.P. Journal, i (October 1883), 33. 9 John Durant, "Darwinism and Divinity: A Century of Debate," in Durant (ed.), Darwinism and Divinity: Essays on Evolution and Religious Belief (New York: Blackwell, 1985), 14; Marguerite Van Die, An Evangelical Mind: Nathanael Burwash and Methodist Tradition in Canada, 1839-1918 (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1989), 57. Darwin utilized Malthus to support his idea of competition for food among members of species. John H. Brooke, "The Relations Between Darwin's Science and His Religion," in Durant (ed.), Darwinism and Divinity, 46-7. 10 Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1859," 13 December 1859, 13; ibid., Sermons, "On Methodism," 10 July 1854; ibid., "Importance of Religion to Education," November 1851. 11 WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1869, 123. 12 Nelles Papers, Box 11, file 247, "Latest Advices," n.d. [i88os], 4.

338

Notes to pages 178-81

13 Ibid., 5-6. It may not be totally coincidental that the name of Victoria College's science magazine was changed to Kosmos in 1885, about the same time as this advice was given. 14 Nelles, "Christianity - Ideal and Actual," CMM, 14 (1881), 405. 15 Leonard Elliott-Binns, English Thought, 1860-1900 (London: Longmans, 1956), 17. Nathanael Burwash would have the words, "The Truth Shall Make You Free," from John 8:32., inscribed over the front door to the new Victoria College building in Toronto. These words reflected perhaps even more the beliefs of Samuel Nelles. 16 Carl Berger, Science, God and Nature in Victorian Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1983); Susan Sheets-Pyenson, John William Dawson: Faith, Hope and Science (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996); Durant, "Darwinism and Divinity," 14-15. 17 Berger, Science, God and Nature, 76; Laurence Fallis, "The Idea of Progress in the Province of Canada: A Study in the History of Ideas," in William L. Morton (ed.), The Shield of Achilles: Aspects of Canada in the Victorian Age (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1968), 170-4; Suzanne Zeller, Land of Promise, Promised Land: The Culture of Victorian Science in Canada (Canadian Historical Association, Historical Booklet #56, 1996); Suzanne Zeller, Inventing Canada: Early Victorian Science and the Idea of a Transcontinental Nation (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987); Peter Bowler, "The Early Development of Scientific Societies in Canada," in Alexandra Oleson and Sanborn Brown (eds), The Pursuit of Knowledge in the Early American Republic (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976), 326-30. 18 Acta Victoriana, i (January 1879), 3; Kosmos, 4 (June 1886), 85; ibid., 146; Nelles Papers, Sermons, "In the Beginning God Created the Heavens and the Earth," 1865. 19 Hugh Miller, Foot-Prints of the Creator (London: 1847); Hugh Miller, Testimony of the Rocks (Edinburgh: 1857); Charles Lyell, Principles of Geology (New York: Appleton, [1830-1833] 1868); Richard Allen, "Providence to Progress: The Migration of an Idea in English-Canadian Thought," in William Westfall (ed.), Religion/Culture, Comparative Canadian Studies, 7 (1985), 38-40; Sheets-Pyenson, John William Dawson, 38, 42-52, ioo, 141. 20 Bishop James Ussher (1581-1656): Archbishop of Armagh and noted biblical scholar. Elaborated the age of the Earth from 4004 B.C. His chronology was accepted universally for generations. See Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol. 22, 907. 21 James Moore, "Geologists and Interpreters of Genesis in the Nineteenth Century," in David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers (eds), God and Nature: Historical Essays on the Encounter between Christianity and Science (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986), 326. 22 John Dillenberger, Protestant Thought and Natural Science (New York:

Notes to pages 181-4

23

24

25

26

27 28

29

30 31 32

33

339

Doubleday, 1960), 118-25; James Turner, "Secularization and Sacralization: Speculations on Some Religious Origins of the Secular Humanities Curriculum, 1850-1890," in George Marsden (ed.), The Secularization of the Academy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.), 76. V.P. Journal, i (November 1883), 60; ibid., 2 (June 1885), 552; Nathanael Burwash Papers, Sermons, "All Scripture is given by the Inspiration of God," 24 July 1881. CG, 19 September 1855, 199; Nelles Papers, Addresses, "Importance of Religion to Education," November, 1851; ibid., "Methodist Education," 3 June 1880; Jon Roberts, Darwinism and the Divine in America (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1988), 18-20; David Livingstone, Darwin's Forgotten Defenders (Grand Rapids: Eerdman's Press, 1987), 6-13; Ronald Numbers, Darwinism Comes to America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 1-3. James Moore, The Post-Darwinian Controversies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 142. Herbert Spencer also claimed his evolutionary ethics had predated the application of Darwinian evolution to the subject. Herbert Spencer, The Principles of Ethics, 2 vol. (New York: Appleton, 1898), i:vii. Kitty Ferguson, The Fire in the Equation: Science, Religion and the Search for God (Grand Rapids: Eerdman's Press, 1994); Victor Fiddes, Science and the Gospel (Edinburgh: Scottish Academies Press, 1987), 54; Moore, Post-Darwinian Controversies, 346; Brooke, "Relations between Darwin's Science and His Religion," 40. Moore, Post-Darwinian Controversies, 140; "Darwin on Earthworms," V.P. Journal, 2 (September 1884), 141. Durant, "Darwin and Divinity," 3; Moore, Post-Darwinian Controversies, 215, 346; Sheets-Pyenson, John William Dawson, 126, 130; CG, 4 October 1876, 317. Spencer, Principles of Ethics, i:vi, 46, 187, 215-16; John Tyndall, Fragments of Science for Unscientific People (London: Longman, Green, 3rd ed., 1871), 95-106; John Fiske, Darwinism and other Essays (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1890); John Fiske, The Idea of God as Affected by Modern Knowledge (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1886); John Fiske, Excursions of an Evolutionist (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1883). Numbers, Darwin Comes to America, 24-39; Moore, Post-Darwinian Controversies, 193-216; CG, 15 February 1882, 49. Moore, Post-Darwinian Controversies, 141; Sheets-Pyenson, John William Dawson, 127-9. Samuel Nelles, "On Preaching," CMM, i (1875), 45; Alexander Sutherland, "Shall Our Higher Education be Christian or Infidel?" V.P. Journal, 2 (September 1884), 109; Burwash Papers, Sermons, "All Scripture is given by the Inspiration of God," 24 July 1881. McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence, 117; Nelles Papers, "Religious

340

34 35 36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Notes to pages 184-7

Meditations, 1865-1871," 25 July 1869; Acta Victoriana, 8 (February 1885), 14-18; Sheets-Pyenson, John William Dawson, 130-1. CG, 24 February 1869, 30. Acta Victoriana, i (January 1879), 3. Nelles Papers, Box 14, file 271, "Religious Meditations," 25 July 1869; Acta Victoriana, i (October 1878), 6; ibid., 8 (February 1885), 14-18; CMM, 6 (1877), 302-10. Jaroslav Pelikan (ed.), Twentieth-Century Theology in the Making, II, The Theological Dialogues: Issues and Resources (New York: Fontana Books, 1970), 56; John Burwash, "The Limits of Religious Thought," in Samuel Phillips (ed.), The Methodist Pulpit (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1884); Nelles Papers, "Random Thoughts, 1846-1849," 132. Nelles Papers, Box 8, file 180, "Religion and Learning," November 1857; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1850-54," n March 1850; Canada Christian Advocate, "Limitation of Science," 31 October 1877, i. V.P. Journal, 2 (September 1884), 140; Nelles Papers, "Religious Meditations, 1865-71," 14 April 1868; ibid., 26 January 1870; ibid., Box 6, file 119, "New and Old," April 1881; ibid., Box 8, file 210, Addresses, fragment, n.d. Nelles Papers, Sermons, "The Church of the Living God," [1865]; ibid., "Random Thoughts, 1846-49," "Christianity a Germ," 1846; ibid., "New and Old," April 1881. V^P. Journal, 2 (September 1884), 134-5; Nelles Papers, "Speech to General Conference, 1878;" Samuel Nelles, "Convocation Address, 1883," Canada Educational Monthly, (May-June 1883), 203. Nelles Papers, George Grant to Samuel Nelles, 23 September 1881; John Burroughs, "Science and Theology," in Kosmos, 4 (December 1886), 296; Acta Victoriana, 8 (April 1885), 9. Burwash Papers, "All Scripture is given by the Inspiration of God," 24 July 1881; "Development," V.P. Journal, i (December 1883), 112; John S. Evans, Christian Predestination: or the Predetermined Providential Appointment, of them that love God, to suffer with Jesus, That with Him They may be Glorified. Being an exposition of Romans Vllkzy, 3 o (Quebec: Middleton & Dawson, 1862). Essays and Reviews (London: Q.W. Parker, 1860], 9th ed., 1861); Pietro Corsi, Science and Religion, Baden Powell and the Anglican Debate (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988); Moore, Post-Darwinian Controversies, 305; Elliott-Binns, English Thought, 26. John William Colenso, St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans (New York: Appleton & Co., [1861] 1863); John William Colenso, The Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua Critically Examined (London: Longman, Green 1862); Nelles Papers, "Essay on Farrar's Free Thought," 6 December 1869; Charles Freshman, The Pentateuch: Its Genuineness and Authenticity

Notes to pages 187-90

46

47 48 49

50 51 52

53 54 55

56

341

Proved ... Against... Bishop Colenso (Toronto: Anson Green, 1863). Among other works, Colenso also created a Zulu/English dictionary. His liberal attitudes toward such native practices as polygamy added to his difficulties with church authorities. He was deposed from the diocese of Natal in 1863, but on appeal to the Privy Council the decision of the church was reversed. Colenso remained excommunicated and in ecclesiastical isolation but in possession of the bishopric of Natal until his death in 1883. Nathanael Burwash, "Gladstone and Huxley on Genesis," Kosmos, 4 (June 1886), 82-5; Neil Semple, The Lord's Dominion: The History of Canadian Methodism (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 262-75. V.P. Journal, i (February 1884), zo4. Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," January 1867; John Burroughs, "Science and Theology," in Kosmos, 4 (December 1886), 294. Nelles, "Christianity - Ideal and Actual," CMM, 14 (1881), 399; Alexander Sutherland, "Shall Our Higher Education be Christian or Infidel," 109. Samuel Nelles, "Christianity - Ideal and Actual," part 2, CMM, 15 (1882), 139, 142; ibid., part i, 14 (1881), 404. Luther H. Martin, "History, Historiography and Christian Origins," Studies in Religion, 19 (2000), 71, 74. Nelles Papers, "Farrar's Critical History of Free Thought," honours men, 1869-70, 46-50; ibid., Box 10, file 232, "Notebook of Lectures," 71; V.P. Journal, z (August 1884), 243; Goldwin Smith, "On Some Supposed Consequences of Historical Progress," CMM, 29 (1889), 31, 141. J-W. Annis, "Theistic Evolution," in V.P. Journal, 2 (June 1885), 556. H.W. Beecher, "The Two Revelations," in Kosmos, 4 (June 1886), 146. Moore, Post-Darwinian Controversies, 302-5; Alden Aikens, "The Legacy of John Wesley in The Church of the Nazarene in Canada," CMHS, Papers, 9 (1993), 5-2-5; Phyllis Airhart, "Ordering a New Nation and Reordering Protestantism, 1867-1914," in George Rawlyk (ed.), The Canadian Protestant Experience, 1760-1990 (Burlington: Welch, 1990); Marguerite Van Die, "A March to Victory and Triumph in Praise of 'the Beauty of Holiness': Laity and the Evangelical Impulse in Canadian Methodism, 1800-1884," in George Rawlyk (ed.), Aspects of the Canadian Evangelical Experience (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, I 997)j 73-89; George Rawlyk, "Protestant Colleges in Canada: Past and Future," in Marsden (ed.), The Secularization of the Academy, 282-3; George Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture: The Shaping of Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism, 1870-1925 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1980). T.H. Huxley, "An Apologetic Irenicon," Fortnightly Review 52 (November

3 4 2-

57

58

59 60

61

62

63

64 65

66

67

68

Notes to pages 190-3

1892), 569, quoted in Moore, Post-Darwinian Controversies, 349Nelles Papers, Box n, file 247, "Latest Advices," [i88os]. This advice was undated, but it was from 1882 or 1883, since Darwin died in 1882. Nelles cites two respected Christian scholars, Galileo and Copernicus, whom the church originally sanctioned as disturbers of religion. Samuel Nelles, "The Place of Theology Among the Sciences," CMM, 8 (1878), 370; C.H. Paisley, "Illustrations of the Harmony between Scripture and Science," CMM, 21 (1885), 443-5; Nelles Papers, "Latest Advices," [i88os]; "Development," V.P. Journal, i (December 1883), 112; Burwash, "Gladstone and Huxley on Genesis," V.P. Journal, 81-5; Beecher, "The Two Revelations," V.P. Journal, 145-6; James Elliott, "Liberal Education," Kosmos, 4 (March 1886), 30. Burwash, "Gladstone and Huxley on Genesis," 86. Acta Victoriana, 8 (March 1885), n; CG, 3 March 1869, 38; "The Origins of Life," Kosmos, 3 (August 1885), 64-8; Leonard Bacon, "The Theistic Corollary of Evolution," Kosmos, 3 (October 1885), 152-4. Nelles Papers, Sermons, "In the Beginning God Created the Heavens and the Earth," n.d.; Nelles, "Christianity - Ideal and Actual," part i, CMM, 14(1881), 401; "The Heavens Illustrating the Attributes of God," V.P. Journal, 2 (March 1885), 419; Burwash, "Gladstone and Huxley on Genesis," 84-5. Numbers, Darwinism Comes to America, 23; Spencer, The Principles of Ethics, 1:187-216, 307; H.A. Nicholson, "Man's Place in Nature," Canadian Monthly and National Review, i (January-June, 1872), 43-5. Burwash Papers, "The Church and the Nation," August 1884; Robert J. Taylor, "The Darwinian Revolution: The Response of Four Canadian Scholars," (Ph.D., McMaster University, 1976), 231. Annis, "Theistic Evolution," 558. John Carroll, Case and His Cotemporaries, 5 vol. (Toronto: Samuel Rose, 1867-77), 4 : 394? Burwash, History of Victoria College, 59; CG, 12 October 1842, 202. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1850, 136; ibid., 1854, 259, 277; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 180-1; Burwash Papers, ms Autobiography, ch. i, 10. Russell E. Richey, "Evolving Patterns of Methodist Ministry," Methodist History, 22 (October 1983), 26-7; Neil Semple, "The Impact of Urbanization on the Methodist Church in Central Canada, 1854-1884," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1979), 128-68; Burwash Papers, ms Autobiography, ch. 7, 63. Marguerite Van Die, "'The Marks of a Genuine Revival': Religion, Social Change, Gender, and Community in Mid-Victorian Brantford, Ontario," CHR, 79 (1998), 539; Semple, "The Impact of Urbanization on the

Notes to pages 193-6

69

70 71

72 73 74 75

76 77 78

79

80

81

82

343

Methodist Church," 44-127; Macdonald, The Life of William Morley Punshon, 2,96, 323-6. Thomas Crompton, The Herald of Zion (Hamilton: Thomas Crompton, 1856), 22; Thomas Crompton, Intellectual and Spiritual Progress, Subservient to Ministerial Success (Hamilton: Conference Office, 1856); Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 254; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1864,95. Christian journal., i November 1865, i; James Wesley Johnston, The Baptism of Fire and other Sermons (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1888), 46. John Petty, Religious Experience: its commencement, progress and consummation (London: A. Heylin, 1856), 65; James Spencer, "The Chief Corner-Stone," in Spencer, Sermons by the Rev. James Spencer (Toronto: Anson Green, 1864), 91. (Bible Christian) Observer, 9 March 1873; ibid., 17 February 1873. Canada Christian Advocate, 19 April 1884, i. Ibid., 19 April 1884, i; ibid., 30 January 1884, i. Charles Stewart Papers, Charles Stewart to Arthur Morton, 4 February 1867; ibid., Charles Stewart to Arthur Morton, 3 September 1868; Dale Johnson, "The Methodist Quest for an Educated Ministry," Church History, 51 (1982). CG, 9 January 1850, 248; ibid., 24 September 1873, 3°5Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 254-6; George Ferguson Papers, Journal, 67; Acta Victoriana, i (October 1878), 6. MC, Journal of the United General Conference, 1883, 109; MC, Journal of General Conference, 1886, 172; MCC, Journal of General Conference, 1874, 54, 150-5; ibid., 1878, 238-46; ibid., 1882, 198. Charles Eby, Methodism and the Missionary Problem (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1886), 33-6; Henry Flesher Bland Papers, Diary, 18 May 1879; MCC, Minutes of London Conference, 1878, 82. "Intellectual Training for Ministry," Acta Victoriana, i (October 1878), 6; James Elliott, "Liberal Education," Kosmos, 4 (March 1886), 25-31; CG, 8 July 1874, 2IZ ; ibid., 10 February 1875, 45. Brian McKillop, Matters of Mind: The University in Ontario, 1791-1951 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), 88-9, 104; Brian McKillop, A Disciplined Intelligence: Critical Inquiry and Canadian Thought in the Victorian Era (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1979); Janet Scarfe, "Letters and Affection: The Recruitment and Responsibilities of Academics in English-Speaking Universities in British North America in the mid-Nineteenth Century," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1982), 138-9; Hilda Neatby, Queen's University, Volume i, 1841-1917: And Not to yield, edited by Frederick Gibson and Roger Graham (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1978), 68-9, 83, 151. Scarfe, "Letters and Affection," 34, 136, 150-5; Nelles Papers, Alfred

344

83 84

85 86 87 88

89 90 91

92 93 94 95

96

97

98

Notes to pages 196-9 Reynar to Samuel Nelles, 17 November 1866; Charles B. Sissons, A History of Victoria University (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952.), 99-100; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 183-4; Brian Fraser, Church, College and Clergy: A History of Theological Education at Knox College (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1995), 2.3-8. J.M. Heffron, "Science and the Challenge of Public Education," History of Education Quarterly, 35 (Summer 1995), 181. Nelles Papers, B.F. Cocker to Samuel Nelles, 18 June 1873; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 145-6; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 239William Henry Hincks Papers, Memoirs, 23. CMM, 4 (1876), 91; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 241; Burwash Papers, "Address at Opening of Faraday Hall," 1878. Acta Victoriana, i (January, 1879), 6; CG, 12 February 1879, 52. Sissons, History of Victoria University, 150, i9±; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 237; CG, 31 May 1882, 172; Samuel Nelles, "Installation of Professor Coleman at Victoria University," CMM, 17 (1883), 278. Acta Victoriana, 7 (March 1884), 10. Sissons, History of Victoria University, 196-7; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 402. "Some Thoughts on Science," Acta Victoriana, 8 (February 1885), 14-18; Gerald Cragg (ed.), John Wesley, Earnest Appeals to Men of Reason and Religion in The Appeals to Men of Reason and Religion, vol. n The Works of John Wesley, n (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975), intro. 24-7; Theodore Runyon, "Wesley and 'Right Reason'," CMHS, Papers, 7 (1989), 60-2. Bland Papers, Diary, 18 May 1870, 9; Nelles Papers, "Diary," 8 January 1867. Nelles Papers, "Diary," July 25, 1866; ibid., "Private Record," 10 May 1871; V.P. Journal, i (November 1883), 60. Acta Victoriana, 46 (February-March 192.3), 243; Nathanael Burwash Biographical file; Van Die, An Evangelical Mind, 96. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1867, 94-5; ibid., 1868, 116; ibid., 1869, 98; MCC, Minutes of London Conference, 1876, 76; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 237. George Douglas, Discourses and Addresses (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1894), xiii; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 258-9; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 145. Nelles Papers, "Diary," i April 1868; Burwash Papers, Box 28, file 635, ms "Faculty of Theology," 1-6; ibid., Box 28, file 620, ms Autobiography, 4. CG, 29 June 1870, 99; Nelles Papers, "Private Record," June 1871; ibid., 23 November 1871.

Notes to pages 2.00-2

345

99 Nelles Papers, John Macdonald to Samuel Nelles, 3 July 1872,. 100 Ibid., Lydia Ann Jackson to Samuel Nelles, 8 June 1874; ibid., Lachlin Taylor to Samuel Nelles, 29 July 1872. 101 Burwash Papers, Nathanael Burwash to Victoria College Board, 25 April 1873; Nelles Papers, Rose, Macdonald, and Bennett, "Opinion re Jackson Bequest," 17 July 1876. 102 Acta Victoriana, 46 (February-March 1923), 248; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1873, II5~I9i Nelles Papers, "New and Old," April 1881; Van Die, An Evangelical Mind, 106-8. 103 Burwash Papers, Sermons, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God," 24 July 1881; Michael Gauvreau, The Evangelical Century: College and Creed in English Canada from the Great Revival to the Great Depression (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1991), 172; Michael Gauvreau, "Baconism, Darwinism, Fundamentalism: A Transatlantic Crisis of Faith," in Journal of Religious History, 13 (1985). 104 Acta Victoriana, 45 (February-March 1923), 248; J.W. Falconer and W.G. Watson, A Brief History of Pine Hill Divinity Hall and the Theological Department of Mount Allison University (Halifax: 1946); Morton Paterson, "The Mind of a Methodist: The Personalist Theology of George J. Blewett in its Historical Context," UCA, The Bulletin, 27 (1978), 5-4i105 Nelles Papers, George Workman to Samuel Nelles, 4 February 1886; ibid., George Workman to Samuel Nelles, 3 October 1887; George Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism in Canada, z vol. (Toronto: Methodist Book Room, 1881, 1903), 1:556; 2:308. 106 Burwash Papers, Lecture, "Messianic Prophecy," n.d.; ibid., Box 12, file 177, "The Messiah's Kingdom," Isaiah 42:4, claims that the prophet Isaiah proclaimed not only the Messiah's coming but also his appointment as judge over the post-millennial Earth; ibid., Box 16, file 424, address of welcome on return of George Workman to Victoria University; Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 269-70; Van Die, An Evangelical Mind, 90, 102, 104, 105; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 193; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 408-9; George Workman, "Messianic Prophecy," Canadian Methodist Quarterly, 2 (1890); George Workman, The Old Testament Vindicated (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1897); George Workman, Jesus the Man and Christ the Spirit (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1928). 107 Acta Victoriana, 46 (February-March 1923), 249. 108 Ibid., i (October 1878), 6. 109 Ibid., 8 (March 1885), i; ibid., 10 (May 1887), 14; CG, 15 March 1882, 85; ibid., 9 April 1884, 119; Eby, Methodism and the Missionary Problem.

346

Notes to pages 204-10 CHAPTER EIGHT

1 Samuel Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 5 February 1867. 2 William Henry Hincks Papers, Memoirs, 25. Temperance wine was a low alcohol wine mixture often used as a medicine to help patients sleep. 3 Nelles Papers, "Private Journal," 7 December 1852; ibid., "Private Record," iz October 1867; ibid., "Private Record," 26 May 1868; ibid., "Daily Diary," 7 March 1867; ibid., "Daily Diary," 19 January 1868; ibid., "Daily Diary," i August 1868. 4 J. George Hodgins (ed.), The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, 28 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1894-1910), 16:47. 5 Acta Victoriana, 27 (October 1903), 49. 6 R. Robert Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: a New Canadian, 1798 (Ridgeway: Log Cabin Publishing, 1993), 78-9; George Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 June 1865; Nelles Papers, Enoch Wood to Samuel Nelles, u July 1883. 7 Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 7 April 1867; ibid., 21 April 1867; ibid., 22 January 1868; ibid., 24 January 1868; ibid., 18 February 1868. 8 Ibid., "Daily Diary," 28 June 1867; ibid., 17 July 1867; ibid., 8 December 1867; ibid., Correspondence, W.A. Hardy to Samuel Nelles, 22 November 1872. 9 Ibid., "Daily Diary," 24 January 1868. Samuel wrote to George Hodgins that he was going to name the baby Victoria in honour, first, of the queen and, second, of the college. Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 28 February 1868. The baby was actually named Louise. 10 Nelles Papers, "Diary," 17 April 1867; ibid., 25 May 1868; John Lanceley, Domestic Sanctuary (Hamilton: Spectator, 1878); John Laing, The Family; God's Appointed Institution (Dundas: J. Somerville, 1878); John Tosh, A Man's Place: Masculinity and the Middle-Class Home in Victorian England (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999), 1-3, 50. u Nelles Papers, "Diary," 15 November 1866. 12 Ibid., "Daily Diary," 13 April 1867; ibid., i August 1868; ibid., 28 August 1868; ibid., 30 June 1867. 13 Ibid., "Diary," 9 January 1866; ibid., "Daily Diary," 17 April 1867; ibid,, 18 April 1867; ibid., 30 January 1867; ibid., 8 February 1867. 14 Ibid., "Daily Diary," i April 1867; ibid., 30 May 1868; ibid., 5 February 1868. 15 Acta Victoriana, 3 (December 1880), 4; ibid., 4 (October 1881), 4. Eduard Remenyi was perhaps best remembered for his 1853 tour of Germany with his friend, the twenty-two-year-old Johannes Brahms. 16 Ibid., i (March 1879), 9. 17 Nelles Papers, "Private Record," November 1869.

Notes to pages 210-15

347

18 Acta Victoriana, i (April 1879), 7; Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 78. 19 Albert Carman Papers, Samuel Nelles to Albert Carman, 16 September 1883. 20 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 5 June 1882; Acta Victoriana, 6 (October 1883), 4; CG, 28 May 1879, 172. 21 Acta Victoriana, 3 (May 1881), 32. 22 Ibid., "Obituary of Fred Nelles," 30 (May 1907), 493. 23 Johanna M. Selles, Methodists and Women's Education in Ontario, 1836-1925 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 176; Nelles Papers, Enoch Wood to Samuel Nelles, n July 1883; Acta Victoriana, 20 (January 1897); ibid., 20 (May 1897); Sara Burke, "New Women and Old Romans: Co-education at the University of Toronto, 1884-95," CHR, 80 (1999), 219-41. 24 Mutrie, Andrew Nelles: A New Canadian, 78-9. 25 Charles B. Sissons, A History of Victoria University (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952), 152; Nelles Papers, "Inaugural Address to Literary Association," October, 1860; ibid., "Diary," 24 December 1866; Nathanael Burwash Papers, Box 19, file 487, "An Essay on Beauty," presented to Literary Association, 1859. 26 Acta Victoriana, 2 (November 1879), 8. 27 Ibid., 3 (October 1880), n; ibid., 3 (December 1880), 8; ibid., 4 (February 1881), 4; ibid., 6 (November 1883), 4; Nelles Papers, "Private Record," 9 May 1871. 28 Acta Victoriana, 5 (May 1883), 9; ibid., 6 (May 1884), n. 29 Hincks Papers, Memoirs, 31; Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 7 March 1867. 30 Acta Victoriana, i (October 1878), i; ibid., 6 (October 1883), 7; see: Acta Victoriana Index, Victoria University Library, Toronto; George Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism in Canada, 2 vol. (Toronto: Methodist Publishing House, 1881, 1903), 1:547. 31 Acta Victoriana, Prospectus, May 1878. 32 Acta Victoriana, 2 (November 1879), 9; ibid., 5 (October 1882), 7; ibid., 3 (November 1880), 10; ibid., 3 (December 1880), 8. 33 Ibid., 3 (November 1880), 10. 34 Ibid., 3 (October 1880), 9. 35 Ibid., 3 (November 1880), 10; ibid., 4 (October 1881), 7. 36 Ibid., 4 (October 1881), 4. 37 Ibid., 6 (May 1884), 12. 38 Sissons, History of Victoria University, 151-2; Peter Bowler, "The Early Development of Scientific Societies in Canada," in Alexandra Oleson and Sanborn Brown (eds), The Pursuit of Knowledge in the Early American Republic (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976), 326-30.

348

Notes to pages 215-19

39 V.P. Journal, i (October 1883), 18; Acta Victoriana, 5 (May 1883), 7; Kosmos, 3 (July 1885), 45; ibid., 4 (June 1886), 8. 40 CG, 16 April 1884, 12.6; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 151, 200-1.

41 42 43 44 45

46

47 48

49

50

51

52

Acta Victoriana, 9 (March 1887), 3; Kosmos, 4 (December 1886), 303. Acta Victoriana, 2, (November 1879), 10. Acta Victoriana, 9 (March 1887), 3; ibid., 3 (May 1881), 8. Alexander Sutherland, The Methodist Church and Missions (Toronto: Department of Missionary Literature, 1906), 253. Carman Papers, Mrs Carman's Addresses, "Mission Work and Women," 1886, 1-2; Rosemary Gagan, "The Methodist Background of the Canadian WMS Missionaries," CMHS, Papers, 7 (1989), 115-36; Frederick C. Stephenson Biographical file. CG, 2 April 1879, 108; ibid., 4 March 1874, 68; ibid., 8 December 1880, 389; Acta Victoriana, 3 (November 1880), 10; David MacLeod, "A Live Vaccine: The YMCA and Male Adolescence in the United States and Canada, 1870-1920," Histoire sociale/Social History, n (May 1978). Acta Victoriana, 4 (October 1881), 9. CG, ii April 1883, 117; Acta Victoriana, 7 (November 1884), 9; ibid., 7 (March 1885), 3; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 200, 250, 263; Rosemary Gagan, A Sensitive Independence: Canadian Methodist Women Missionaries in Canada and the Orient, 1881-1925 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1992); MC, Board of Home Missions, Frederick Stephenson Papers, Annual Reports ofYPFM, 1902-1925. John Thomas, "Caesar's Household: The Methodist Social Union and Toronto Church Work, 1892-1926," unpub., 1984; John Thomas, "Servants of the Church: Canadian Methodist Deaconess Work, 1890-1926," CHR, 65 (September 1984), 371-95; Phyllis Airhart, Serving the Present Age: Revivalism, Progressivism, and the Methodist Tradition in Canada (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1992); Margaret Prang, Newton Wesley Rowell: Ontario Nationalist (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1975), 68-9. William Hutchinson, "Modernism and Missions: The Liberal Search for an Exportable Christianity, 1875-1935," in J.K. Fairbank (ed.), The Missionary Enterprise in China and America (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974), 111-12; MC, Journal of General Conference, 1902, 101-3; MC, Missionary Society Reports, 1904-05, xxxi-xxxv. Bartlett Giamatti, The University and the Public Interest (New York: Atheneum Press, 1981), 77; Colin Howell, "A Manly Sport: Baseball and the Social Construction of Masculinity," in Joy Parr and Mark Rosenfeld (eds), Gender and History in Canada (Toronto: Copp Clark, 1996), 189. Giamatti, The University, 78; Howell, "A Manly Sport," 190-1; Bruce

Notes to pages 219-21

53 54

55

56

57

58

59

60 61 62 63

349

Kidd, "Ontario and the Ambition of Canadian Sport," OH, 90 (Autumn 1998), 157-70. Giamatti, The University, 78. Thomas Arnold, The Miscellaneous Works of Thomas Arnold (London: [B. Fellowes, 1845] Gregg Press, 1971), 376; Frederic Macdonald, The Life of William Morley Punshon (New York: Phillips & Hunt, 1887), 294; Sandy Ramos, "'A Most Detestable Crime': Gender Identities and Sexual Violence in the District of Montreal, 1803-1843," Journal of the Canadian Historical Association, 12 (2001), 41-2, 48. Goldwin Smith, "University Questions in England," Canada Educational Monthly, i (1879), 551; Howell, "A Manly Sport," 187-9; Greg Gillespie, "Sport and 'Masculinities' in Early Nineteenth-Century Ontario: A British Traveler's Image," in Ann Hall (ed.), Sport in Canadian Society (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1991), 113-26. Kevin Wamsley, "The Public Importance of Men and The Importance of Public Men," in Philip White and Kevin Young (eds), Sport and Gender in Canada (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999); Brian McKillop, "'Marching as to War': Elements of Undergraduate Culture, 1880-1914," in Paul Axelrod and John Reid (eds), Youth, University and Canadian Society: Essays in the Social History of Higher Education (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1989), 78; Varda Burstyn, The Rites of Men: Manhood, Politics and the Culture of Sport (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999). Acta Victoriana, z (November 1879), 10; ibid., 3 (October 1880), 9; ibid., 3 (April 1881), 4; ibid., 4 (December 1882), 4-5; Nelles Papers, E.S. Horning to Samuel Nelles, 26 October 1882. Smith, "University Questions," 550-1; Colin Howell, "Baseball, Class and Community in the Maritime Provinces, 1870-1910," Histoire sociale/Social History, 22 (November 1989), 266, 271-9; Sydney Wise, "Sport and Class Values in Old Ontario and Quebec," in W.H. Reick and Roger Graham (eds), His Own Man: Essays in Honour of Arthur Reginald Marsden Lower (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1974); Richard Gruneau, Class, Sports and Social Development (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1983), 108-17. Acta Victoriana, 4 (October 1881), 9; ibid., 6 (November 1883), 3; Bernard Mergen (ed.), Cultural Dimension of Play, Games and Sport (Champagne, IL: Human Kinetics Publishing, 1986), 167. Acta Victoriana, 3 (December 1880), 6; ibid., 6 (November 1883), 4; 7 (October 1884), 3. Ibid., 3 (November 1880), 10; ibid., 3 (October 1880), 10; ibid., 6 (November 1883), 4. Ibid., 3 (November 1880), 5; ibid., 7 (October 1884), 3, 10. George Romanes, "Recreation from an Educational Point of View,"

35°

64 65 66

67 68 69 70 71

72 73 74 75 76 77 78

79

Notes to pages 22,1-4

Canada Educational Monthly, i (1879), 425; T.W. Mills, "Exertion and Over-exertion," Canada Educational Monthly, i (1879), 245-9; T.W. Mills, "The Lungs as they Concern Education," Canada Educational Monthly, i (1879), 152-6; Smith, "University Questions," 541. Acta Victoriana, 3 (December 1880), 6. Ibid., 3 (January 1881), 6. CG, 9 March 1881, 77. The cost of the gymnasium was estimated at $1500. Acta Victoriana, 3 (December 1880), 4; ibid., 3 (January 1881), 5; ibid., 3 (April 1881), 4. Acta Victoriana, 4 (October 1881), 6-7; MCC, Journal of General Conference, 1878, 228. Acta Victoriana, 5 (December 1882), 5; Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 9 January 1866. Acta Victoriana, 3 (October 1880), 10; ibid., 8 (October 1885), 8; ibid., 5 (December 1882), 7. Ibid., 7 (December 1884), 3; Burke, "New Women and Old Romans," 219-41. Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 29 January, 1868; ibid., "Private Record," 12 October 1867; ibid., 18 February 1868; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 14 May 1868. Acta Victoriana, 3 (November 1880), 5; Tosh, A Man's Place, 108-10. Acta Victoriana, 2 (October 1879), 6. Ibid., 5 (March 1883), 6; ibid., 5 (May 1883), 8. Nathanael Burwash, The History of Victoria College (Toronto: Victoria University Press, 1927), 231. Acta Victoriana, i (October 1878), 3; ibid., 3 (November 1880), 5-6; ibid., (November 1886), 10. Burwash, History of Victoria College, 230; Acta Victoriana, 2 (November 1879), 6; ibid., 5 (March 1883), 6. George Marsden, "The Soul of the American University: A Historical Overview," in Marsden (ed.), The Secularization of the Academy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 14-15; Bradley Longfield, "From Evangelicalism to Liberalism: Public Midwestern Universities in Nineteenth-Century America," in Marsden (ed.), The Secularization of the Academy, 47-8. James Turner, "Secularization and Sacralization: Speculations on Some Religious Origins of the Secular Humanities Curriculum, 1850-1890," in Marsden (ed.), The Secularization of the Academy, 79-82; George Smith, "Federation and Fullness: A History of the Early Years of Federation at the University of Toronto," (Ed.D., University of Toronto, 1997), 213-14; Paul Axelrod, "Higher Education in Canada and the United States: Exploring the Roots of Difference," Historical Studies in Education, 7 (1995), 144-5; Keith Walden, "Hazes, Hustles, Scraps and Stunts:

Notes to pages 2x4-31

80

81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89

90

91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102

351

Initiations at the University of Toronto, 1880-1925," in Axelrod and Reid (eds), Youth, University and Canadian Society, 95. CG, 29 June 1881, 206; Acta Victoriana, 3 (November 1880), 5-6; ibid., 3 (May 1881), 7. In 1883, the alumni placed members on the Board of Regents and the president became an ex officio member; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 252. \^P. Journal, 2 (November 1884), 200-1; Acta Victoriana, 3 (November 1880), 9; Turner, "Secularization and Sacralization," 85-7. Acta Victoriana, 4 (November 1881), 6; CG, 22 April 1885, 248. Acta Victoriana, 4 (November 1881), 6. Ibid., 5 (March 1881), 6. Kosmos, 4 (June 1886), 6; Acta Victoriana, 9 (November 1886), 6; ibid., 5 (January 1883), 13. Acta Victoriana, 4 (November 1881), 6; ibid., 3 (March 1881), 6; ibid., 5 (January 1883), 13. Ibid., 2 (October 1879), 3. Ibid., 2 (October 1879), 3. Ibid., 7 (May 1885), 15; Georg Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of History, translated by J. Sibree (London: Bell & Daldy, 1872); Brian McKillop, Matters of Mind: The University in Ontario, 1791-1951 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), 101-18. Acta Victoriana, 3 (October 1880), 9-10; ibid., 5 (October 1882), 7; ibid., 2 (November 1879), 6-7; ibid., 5 (March 1883), 6; Nelles Papers, James Mills to Samuel Nelles, 3 January 1878; Smith, "University Questions," 547. Acta Victoriana, 6 (November 1883), 45 ibid., 7 (November 1884), 4; ibid., 8 (October 1885), 7; ibid., i (October 1878), 4. Ibid., 9 (October 1886), 4. Ibid., 4 (May 1882), 7; ibid., 3 (December 1880), 4. Ibid., 5 (December 1882), 4; CG, 4 September 1872, 281. Acta Victoriana, 5 (March 1883), 4. Egerton Ryerson Papers, George Hodgins to Egerton Ryerson, 26 September 1857. Acta Victoriana, 3 (May 1881), 10; ibid., 6 (October 1883), 3. Ibid., 4 (May 1882), 7. Ibid., 3 (October 1880), 9; ibid., 3 (December 1880), 8; Sissons, History of Victoria University, 154. Acta Victoriana, 3 (April 1881), 6; ibid., 3 (October 1880), 9; Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 2 February 1867. Acta Victoriana, 10 (January 1888), 9; ibid., 7 (December 1884), 13; ibid., 8 (February 1886), 18. Hincks Papers, Memoirs, 23; Acta Victoriana, 4 (December 1881), 4; ibid., i (October 1878), i. This same concern not to humiliate was not

352.

103 104 105 106 107

108 109 no

in

112

113

114

115 116

Notes to pages 2,31-4 equally present at the University of Toronto a generation later, according to Keith Walden, "Hazes, Hustles, Scraps and Stunts," 99-100. Acta Victoriana, 5 (December 1882), 7. Ibid., 3 (October 1880), 10; Jean O'Grady, Margaret Addison: A Biography (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2,001), 38. Ibid., 3 (December 1880), 8; ibid., i (October 1878), 9. Burwash, History of Victoria College, 423. CG, 13 October 1852, 2; ibid., 27 April 1842, 106; ibid., n January 1854, 54; ibid., 3 May 1854, 116; ibid., 20 September 1854, 197; Hodgins Papers, George Hodgins in a postscript to an unknown correspondent, 1856, wrote that Victoria College was contemplating moving to Weston, eight or nine miles from downtown Toronto, and was selling the Cobourg property for a new Methodist university for women. Wesleyan Sunday School Magazine, 3 (June 1859), 182; Selles, Methodists and Woman's Education in Ontario, 1836-1925. John Grant, A Profusion of Spires: Religion in Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988), 154. Canada Christian Advocate, 5 July 1871, 2; ibid., 23 February 1876, i; ibid., 30 November 1876, 2. CMM, i (1875), 21; ibid., 9 (1879), 399-408; Bible Christian Magazine, 62 (1883), 464-7; Canada Christian Advocate, 16 August 1876, 2; ibid., 6 December 1876, 2; Elsie Pomeroy, "Mary Electa Adams: A Pioneer Educator," OH, 41 (1949), 107-117. CMM, i (1875), 21-2; V.P. Journal, 2 (June 1885), 539. Still, some promoters of women's higher education felt music and art were valuable additions to proper training, Canada Christian Advocate, 2 August 1876, 2. Smith, "University Questions," 550-1; Paula J.S. LaPierre, "The First Generation: The experience of Women University Students in Central Canada," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1993), 33-4, 103-8. Bert Den Boggende, "'The Vassar of the Dominions': The Wesleyan College and the Project of a Women's University, 1861-1897," OH, 85 ( I 993)j 95~ II 8; O'Grady, Margaret Addison, 211; "Mary Electa Adams," DCB, 12:9-10. Canada Christian Advocate, 19 July 1876, i; John Millar, "The Coeducation of the Sexes," Canada Educational Monthly, i (1879), 288-94; Margaret Gillett, We Walked Very Warily: A History of Women at McGill (Montreal: Eden Women's Press, 1981), n, 78; Lynn Marks and Chad Gaffield, "Women at Queen's University, 1895-1905: A 'Little Sphere' All Their Own," OH, 58 (1986), 331-2. Acta Victoriana, 3 (April 1881), 6; ibid., 4 (April 1882), 9; V.P. Journal, 2 (November 1884), 194; ibid., 2 (June 1885), 539-40. Burke, "New Women and Old Romans," 224; CG, 22 February 1882,

Notes to pages 2,34-8

117 118 119

120 121

122

123

124 125

353

57; ibid., 2.8 July 1886, 467; Benjamin F. Austin (ed.), Woman; Her Character, Culture and Calling (Brantford: The Book and Bible House, 1890). Acta Victoriana, 7 (December 1884), 3. D.C. McHenry, "Woman's Work and Woman's Culture," Kosmos, 4 (September 1886), 190-2.02.; ibid., 4 (December 1886), 308. Kosmos, 4 (September 1886), 2,00; ibid., 4 (December 1886), 308; Lori Chambers, Married Women and Property Law in Victorian Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997); Constance Backhouse, Petticoats and Prejudice: Women and Law in Nineteenth-Century Canada (Toronto: The Osgoode Society, 1991). Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 27 June 1866. V.P. Journal, 2, (May 1884), 340; MCC, journal of General Conference, 1878, 233; Selles, Methodists and Women's Education, 109, 161-7, 213; Gillett, We Walked Very Warily, u; O'Grady, Margaret Addison, 34-5, 43-4, 47-8; John G. Reid, "The Education of Women at Mount Allison, 1854-1914," Acadiensis, 12 (1983); John G. Reid, Mount Allison University: A History to 1963, 2 vol. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1984); Raymond Archibald, Historical Notes on the Education of Women at Mount Allison University, 1854-1954 (Sackville, NB: Mount Allison University 1954). Acta Victoriana, 6 (October 1883), 4; ibid., 3 (October 1880), 10; V.P. Journal, z (May 1884), 341; ibid., 3 (June 1885), 539-40; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 256-7. Acta Victoriana, 5 (May 1883), 8; Sara Burke, "'Being Unlike Man': Challenges to Co-education at the University of Toronto, 1884-1909," OH, 93 (2001), 11-32. Acta Victoriana, 8 (October 1885), 21; ibid., 5 (October 1882), 5; ibid., 6 (October 1883), 4. O'Grady, Margaret Addison, 38-9; Burke, "New Women and Old Romans," 219-25. CHAPTER N I N E

1 Samuel Nelles Papers, Addresses, "Importance of Religion to Education," 27 October 1851. 2 WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1852, 194, 197-9; Neil Semple, The Lord's Dominion: The History of Canadian Methodism (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1996), 254-5; Nathanael Burwash Papers, Richard Baxter to Nathanael Burwash, 22 March 1875. 3 Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 5-7, 179-85. 4 George Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 11 January 1853; Egerton Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Francis Hincks, 22

354

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 14

Notes to pages 238-41

July 1852; J.M.S. Careless, The Union of the Canadas, 1841-1857 (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1967), 166-84. George Hodgins (ed.), The Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada, 28 vol. (Toronto: Cameron, 1894-1910), 10:72-5, 116-29; David John Ayre, "Universities and the Legislature: Political Aspects of the Ontario University Question, 1868-1906," (Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1981), 4. Ryerson Papers, Anson Green to Egerton Ryerson, 17 March 1855; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 2 May 1855; ibid., Box 15, file 305, "Report of the Financial Committee," 24 October 1860; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 11:112-14; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1856, 356. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 3 May 1855; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 8 May 1856; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 2 May 1855; ibid., George Hodgins to Samuel Nelles, 7 December 1855. John Gwynn-Timothy, Western's First Century (London: University of Western Ontario Press, 1978), 2-3, 63-6; Brian McKillop, Matters of Mind: The University in Ontario, 1791-1951 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), 31-40; William Westfall, Two Worlds: The Protestant Culture of Nineteenth-Century Ontario (Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1989), 106-7, 112-13; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 10:70-1; n.a., Jubilee Volume of Wy cliffe College, 1877-1927-1937 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1937). Brian Eraser, Church, College and Clergy: A History of Theological Education at Knox College, 1844-1994 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1995), 18-42; George Smith, "Federation and Fullness: A History of the Early Years of Federation at the University of Toronto," (Ed.D., University of Toronto, 1997), 226. CG, 15 November 1854, 2; Waldo Smith, Albert College, 1857-1957 (Belleville: n.d. [1957]); MC, Journal of the United General Conference, 1883, 205-7. McKillop, Matters of Mind, 32-40; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 11:114, 2,2,8-9; "Armand Francois Charbonnel," DCB, 12:182-5; "John Joseph Lynch," DCB, 11:53 5~8; Journal of Education for Upper Canada, 2 (March 1849), 47. Daniel Wilson Papers, Journal, 7; "John McCaul," DCB, 11:540-1; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 28. McCaul had earlier defended King's College against the move to take over its charter. John McCaul, The University Question Considered (Toronto: Rowsell, 1845). John Langton, Early Days in Upper Canada: The Letters of John Langton, edited by W.A. Langton (Toronto: Macmillan, 1926), 290. "Daniel Wilson," DCB, 12:1109-14; Suzanne Zeller, "'Merchants of

Notes to pages 241-6

15 16

17 18

19 20 21 22 23 24 25

26

27

28

29 30

31 32

355

Light': The Culture of Science in Daniel Wilson's Ontario, 1853-1892,," in Marinell Ash, Thinking With Both Hands: Sir Daniel Wilson in the Old World and the New, edited by Elizabeth Hulse (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999), 12.3; Charles B. Sissons, A History of Victoria University (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952.), no. "John Langton," DCB, 12:527-8; Langton, Early Days, 284-9. Douglas Richardson, A Not Unsightly Building: University College and Its History (Toronto: Mosaic Press, 1990), 3-5; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 28. Langton, Early Days, 284-9. Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 10:125-6, 15:310, 17:60-2, 18:1-5; William H. Poole, Extravagant Expenditure in Toronto of the Upper Canada Endowment (Toronto: Christian Guardian, 1860). McKillop, Matters of Mind, 28-9; Richardson, A Not Unsightly Building, 3-5; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 15:309-10. Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 10 November 1856; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 14:209. Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 14:209; Nelles Papers, Addresses, "Religion and Learning," November 1857. Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 15:304. Ibid., 14:210. Ibid., 15:303-4. N.a., University Question: Being a Report of the Public Meeting Held at the Kingston Conference in Reference to the University Question and Victoria College (Toronto: Anson Green, 1860). Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 28 December 1859; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 15:301-4; Letters on the Management of Toronto University and ... Re-establishment of Law and Medicine (Toronto: Wesleyan Book Room, 1856), 8. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 15 February 1859; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 9 February 1859; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, n February 1859. Journal of Education for Upper Canada, 12 (February 1859), 30; John Langton, University Question: The Statements of John Langton and Professor Daniel Wilson, with Notes and Extracts (Toronto: Rowsell & Ellis, 1860). Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 20 June 1859. Ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 25 June 1859; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 22 June 1859; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 23 July 1859. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 25 June 1859; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 2 July 1859. Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 2 August 1859; ibid.,

356

33 34

35

36 37

38

39 40

41

Notes to pages 2,46-8

Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 9 August 1859; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 10 August 1859. Spencer had opposed Ryerson over the class meeting as a test of church membership, and differed from more liberal Methodists about the direction the church was following, especially with regard to enthusiastic mass evangelism. In 1860, he was replaced as editor of the Christian Guardian, and even John A. Macdonald remarked to Ryerson: "By the way, I am truly glad to learn that Spencer has been ousted from the Editorial Chair. I always heard he was against you and that he played Brown's game as much as he dared to do." (Ontario Archives), John George Hodgins Papers, John A. Macdonald to Egerton Ryerson, 21 June 1860. Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 9 August 1859; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 10 August 1859. Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 14:2,19-20; 15:97-9; Poole, Extravagant Expenditure, 2,; Langton, Early Days, 2,78; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 27-8; Ryerson Papers, David Buchan to Egerton Ryerson, 9 August 1859; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to David Buchan, 12 August 1859. Wesleyan Conference Committee, Wesleyan Methodist Memorial on the Question of Liberal Education in Upper Canada Explained and Defended (Toronto: Guardian Press, 1860); "Malcolm Cameron," DCB, 10:124-9; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1860, 72; Egerton Ryerson, The Story of My Life, edited by George Hodgins (Toronto: Wm Briggs, 1883), 519-34. Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 14:205-6; Wesleyan Memorial on the Question of Liberal Education. John Langton, "Petition to the Honourable Legislative Council by the Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and Senate of the University of Toronto, 16 March 1860," and related documents, in Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 15:98-310; Langton, University Question. Albert Carman Papers, Robert Burns to Albert Carman, 7 July 1860; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 14:234, 238-44; Egerton Ryerson, Dr. Ryerson's Reply to the Recent Pamphlet of Mr. Langton and Dr. Wilson, on the University Question in Five Letters to the Hon. M. Cameron (Toronto: Guardian Press, 1861); Letters on the Management of Toronto University, 121. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, n June 1860. Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 14 May 1860; WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1859, 75; George Cornish, Cyclopaedia of Methodism in Canada, 2 vol. (Toronto: Methodist Book and Publishing House, 1881, 1903), 1:538-40. Ryerson Papers, George Hodgins to Egerton Ryerson, 30 April 1860; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 6 April 1860; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 15:98-305.

Notes to pages ±48-52

357

42. Ryerson Papers, Anson Green to Egerton Ryerson, 21 April 1860. 43 Hodgins Papers, Egerton Ryerson to George Hodgins, 27 April 1860. 44 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, n.d. [1860]; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 28 July 1860; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to George Hodgins, 16 April 1861. 45 Nelles Papers, John Bredin to Samuel Nelles, 14 April 1860. 46 Ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 14 May 1860; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 19 January 1861; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 7 March 1861; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 15:306-14. 47 Ryerson Papers, William Lavell to Egerton Ryerson, 16 February 1861; ibid., William Lavell to Egerton Ryerson, 22 February 1861; ibid., William Leitch to Egerton Ryerson, 24 February 1861; ibid., William Pollard to Egerton Ryerson, 12 March 1861; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 27 March 1861; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 26 March 1861. 48 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 27 March 1861; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 14 June 1861; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 18 January 1861; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to George Hodgins, 8 June 1861. 49 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, u June 1859; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 6 January 1862; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 10 May 1863. 50 Ryerson Papers, Egerton Ryerson to George Hodgins, 8 June 1861. 51 "Report of the Commissioners on the University of Toronto," in Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 17:59. 52 Ibid., 17:62. 53 Ibid., 17:71, 62-5; Langton, Early Days, 279, 284-9. 54 Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 17:65-75. 55 The Toronto Globe, 20 January 1863. 56 Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 6 December 1862; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 7 March 1863; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 21 May 1863; Ryerson Papers, James Patton to Egerton Ryerson, 5 March 1863. 57 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 7 July 1862; Nelles Papers, George Hodgins to Samuel Nelles, 8 July 1862; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 9 June 1860; ibid., Alexander Campbell to Egerton Ryerson, 24 January 1863; Nathanael Burwash, The History of Victoria College (Toronto: Victoria University Press, 1927), 113-14; Curtis Fahey, In His Name: The Anglican Experience in Upper Canada, 1791-1854 (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1991), 239-75. 58 Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 30 April 1863; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 18 February 1862; Wesleyan

358

59

60

61

62 63

64

65 66 67 68 69 70 71

72

73

Notes to pages 2.52-5

Conference Committee, University Reform Defended: In Reply to Six Editorials of the Globe and Leader (Toronto: Guardian Press, 1863). Ryerson Papers, William Leitch to Egerton Ryerson, 31 January 1863; Nelles Papers, Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, 5 June 1863; ibid., Egerton Ryerson to Samuel Nelles, June 1863; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 27-32; "Students' Address to Nelles," Spring 1860, in Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 16:46-8; Ryerson, The Story of My Life, 519-34; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 208-9. McKillop, Matters of Mind, 32; Bruce Hodgins, John Sandfield Macdonald, 1812-1872 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1971), 23-39, 89-101; Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," i July 1867. Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 6 April 1867; (University of Toronto Archives), Edward Blake Papers, Box 2, file n, 1868; CG, 21 February 1866, 30. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 16 January 1868; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 18 January 1868. J.K. Edwards (ed.), "The College Question": being the debate in The Legislative Assembly of Ontario on December 2, 1868, on "The Outlying Colleges" and Sectarian Grants (Toronto: Daily Telegraph, 1869); Journal of Education for Ontario, 21 (January 1868), 15-16; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 20:208-25; Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 4 April 1868; ibid., 7-9 April 1868; ibid., 14 April 1868; ibid., 26-27 May 1868. MEC, Minutes of Niagara Conference, 1868, 20; MEC, Minutes of Bay of Quinte Conference, 1868, 68-9; Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 20:211, 214-17. Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, 14 May 1868. Hodgins (ed.), Documentary History, 21:33; Blake Papers, Box 2, file u, 1868; Toronto Globe, 4 December 1868. Nelles Papers, William Snodgrass to Samuel Nelles, 19 December 1868. Ibid., William Snodgrass to Samuel Nelles, 19 December 1868. CG, 14 April 1869, 58. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1868, 81, 87-91; CG, 24 June 1868; ibid., 21 February 1866, 30. Nelles Papers, "Daily Diary," 4 April 1868; ibid., 26 May 1868; ibid., 5 December 1868; ibid., 9 December 1868; ibid., n December 1868; ibid., Box 15, file 306, "Friends of Victoria University Meeting," 10 November 1868. Frederic Macdonald, The Life of William Morley Punshon (New York: Phillips & Hunt, 1887), 299; CG, 24 February 1869, 31; ibid., 3 March 1869, 35; ibid., 17 March 1869, 42; Ryerson Papers, Samuel Nelles to Egerton Ryerson, n December 1868. WMC, Minutes of Annual Conference, 1869, 130.

Notes to pages 2,56-9

359

74 Nelles Papers, Box 8, file 186, "Educational Speech," Montreal, 1878. For more proof of the difficulties associated with fundraising efforts, see the whole series of letters in the Nelles Papers from Joshua H. Johnson, Samuel Rose, I.E. Aylesworth, and others to Nelles. For instance, Nelles Papers, James Mills to Samuel Nelles, 9 May 1874; ibid., James Mills to Samuel Nelles, 2.2. May 1874; ibid., Joshua H. Johnson to Samuel Nelles, 15 September 1876; ibid., Joshua H. Johnson to Samuel Nelles, 27 November 1877; ibid., Samuel Rose to Samuel Nelles, 17 April 1879; ibid., Samuel Rose to Samuel Nelles, 20 October 1879. 75 Ayre, "Universities and the Legislature," 45-6; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 252. 76 "Adam Crooks," DCB, 11:220-3; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 21 January 1873; Nelles Papers, Adam Crooks to Samuel Nelles, 27 January 1873; ibid., James Mills to Samuel Nelles, 7 October 1874; ibid., Goldwin Smith to Samuel Nelles, 10 April 1875; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Assistant Provincial Secretary, 2 October 1876. 77 Wilson Papers, Journal, 51. 78 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 9 December 1876; ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 29 December 1879. 79 A.J. Madill, History of Agricultural Education in Ontario (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1937); Alexander Ross and Terry Crowley, The College on the Hill: A New History of the Ontario Agricultural College, 1874-1999 (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1999); Edward E. Stewart, "The Role of the Provincial Government in the Development of the Universities in Ontario, 1791-1964," (Ed.D., University of Toronto, 1970), 191-5; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 169-71. 80 J.M.S. Careless, Brown of the Globe, Vol. Two: Statesman of Confederation (Toronto: The Macmillan Co., 1963), 366-73; "George Brown," DCB, 10:91-103. 81 Joseph Schull, Edward Blake: Leader and Exile, 1881-1912 (Toronto: The Macmillan Co., 1976), 179-81; Hodgins Papers, Donald Sutherland to George Hodgins, 22 January 1884; ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 October 1884; George Smith, "Federation and Fullness," 214. 82 Wilson Papers, Journal, 71, 76-7, 93; Nelles Papers, Daniel Wilson to Samuel Nelles, 19 March 1881; ibid., Daniel Wilson to Samuel Nelles, 26 December 1883; Averill and Keith, "Daniel Wilson and the University of Toronto," 172-7. 83 Nelles Papers, George Grant to Samuel Nelles, 2 February 1881; McKillop, Matters of Mind, 50-1. 84 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 14 February 1883. 85 "Adam Crooks," DCB, 11:223; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 16 July 1883.

360

Notes to pages 259-63

86 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, n.d. [1883]; ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 7 January 1884; ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 9 January 1884; Nelles Papers, Samuel Nelles to E. Hartley Dewart, 4 January 1884; "President Nelles on the University Question," CMM, 18 (1883), 180-1. 87 The Week (Toronto), 27 December 1883, 51-2.; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, [December] 1883; ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 8 January 1884; Albert Carman Papers, Samuel Nelles to Albert Carman, 5 January 1883. 88 Acta Victoriana, 7 (January 1885), 5; Wilson Papers, Journal, 93; "George Whitaker," DCB, 11:917; Donald Sutherland Papers, Samuel Nelles to Donald Sutherland, 8 November 1883; V.P. Journal, i (November 1883), 52. 89 Nelles Papers, John J. Maclaren to Samuel Nelles, 5 October 1883; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 15 January 1884; John Lathern, "A Denominational University and Educational Administration," CMM, 8 (1878), 164; E. Harley Dewart, "The University Question and Methodist Education," CMM, 21 (1885), 539-40; MC, Journal of the First United General Conference, 1883, 205-9; Alfred G. Bedford, The University of Winnipeg: A History of the Founding Colleges. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976); Semple, The Lord's Dominion, 179-210. 90 Nelles Papers, James Mills to Samuel Nelles, 16 May 1873; ibid., George Hodgins to Samuel Nelles, 16 July 1883. 91 Carman Papers, Samuel Nelles to Albert Carman, 16 September 1883; Nelles Papers, John Maclaren to Samuel Nelles, 5 October 1883; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, July 1884; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 10 July 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 22 July 1886; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 October 1884. 92 Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, [December] 1883; Nelles Papers, Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 22 July 1886; Samuel Nelles, "Higher Education in Canada," CMM, 18 (1884), 44. 93 Nelles Papers, George Ross, Circular to Heads of Universities, 8 July 1884; ibid., Daniel Wilson to Samuel Nelles, 26 December 1883; Wilson Papers, Journal, 77; Averill and Keith, "Daniel Wilson and the University of Toronto," 172-7; Dewart, "The University Question and Methodist Education," 534. 94 Nelles Papers, "Memorandum for the Hon. G.W. Ross, Minister of Education, Re University Question," 24 July 1884. 95 Nelles Papers, "Memorandum for the Hon. G.W. Ross"; ibid., Samuel Nelles to William Mulock, 28 November 1884; Hodgins Papers, Donald Sutherland to George Hodgins, 22 January 1884; Burwash Papers, Box

Notes to pages 2.63-7

96 97

98

99

100 101

102 103 104 105 106 107

108

109

3^i

32, file i, Nathanael Burwash to George Ross, Minister of Education, 26 July 1884. The final agreement included placing all university professors under the direct chairmanship of the president of University Col lege, signifying the special status that college retained under federation. Burwash, History of Victoria College, 42.5-6. MC, Journal of General Council, 1886, 196. Hilda Neatby, Queen's University, Volume I, 1841-1917, And Not to Yield, edited by Frederick Gibson and Roger Graham (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1978); MC, Journal of General Conference, 1886, 210-13. MC, Journal of General Conference, 1886, 207-10; Smith, "Federation and Fullness," 219, 226; Stewart, "The Role of the Provincial Government," 196; Fraser, Church, College and Clergy, 67-90. "William McMaster," DCB, 11:574-7; Charles M. Johnston, McMaster University. Volume i: The Toronto Years (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976), 1-69; Smith, "Federation and Fullness," 283. Wilson Papers, Journal, 101. Nelles Papers, W.H. Floyd (Cobourg Town Clerk) to Samuel Nelles, 18 February 1885; ibid., John Maclaren to Samuel Nelles, 5 October 1883; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 10 July 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 26 September 1887; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 13 July 1886; CG, 16 March 1881, 85; Acta Victoriana 7 (April 1884), 7; ibid., 8 (March 1885), 5-7; ibid., 9 (February 1886), 6-7; MC, Journal of General Conference, 1886, 202. Acta Victoriana, 7 (January 1885), 5; CMM, 20 (1884), 461. CMM, 10 (1879), 182-3; ibid., 21 (1885), 182; Maclaren Papers, John Maclaren to Benjamin Austin, 24 June 1884. Acta Victoriana, 8 (May 1885), 14. Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 May 1885; Nelles Papers, Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 30 September 1886. MC, Journal of General Conference, 1886, 196; Nelles Papers, Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 3 May 1886. Ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 15 July 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 22 July 1886; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 October 1884. Burwash Papers, Samuel Nelles to Nathanael Burwash, 27 May 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Nathanael Burwash, 2 July 1886; Nelles Papers, Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 10 July 1886. Nelles Papers, Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 3 May 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 5 May 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 17 May 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to Nathanael Burwash, 27 May 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 22 July 1886; Carman Papers, Samuel Nelles to Albert Carman, 27 January

362

no

in

112

113 114 115

116

Notes to pages 267-75 1886; ibid., James Mills to Albert Carman, 18 May 1886; MC, Journal of General Conference, 1886, 200. MC, Journal of General Conference, 1886, 60-1, 197-9; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 October 1884; Nelles Papers, Samuel Nelles to Nathanael Burwash, 2 July 1886; Burwash Papers, Nathanael Burwash to W.H. Pollard, (Hamilton Board of Trade), 31 July 1886. Nelles Papers, Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 22 July 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 5 May 1886; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 October 1884; MC, Journal of General Conference, 1886, 60-1. Nelles Papers, Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 30 September 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 6 October 1886; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 29 June 1887; ibid., Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 28 September 1887; Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 15 June 1887; ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 24 June 1887; ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 26 July 1887. Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 15 June 1887; ibid., Alexander Burns to George Hodgins, 2 December 1888. Ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 15 June 1887. Ibid., Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 15 June 1887; Nelles Papers, R.C. Pitman to Samuel Nelles, 15 May 1883; ibid., R.C. Pitman to Samuel Nelles, 31 December 1883; ibid., R.C. Pitman to Samuel Nelles, 14 January 1884; ibid., R.C. Pitman to Samuel Nelles, 28 February 1884; ibid.', Samuel Nelles to R.C. Pitman, June 13, 1884. Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 25 November 1884. EPILOGUE

1 Samuel Nelles Papers, newspaper clippings file, by George Hodgins, obituary notices; Samuel Nelles Biographical file. 2 Nelles Papers, newspaper clippings file, obituary notices. 3 Samuel Nelles [per M.B. Nelles] to John Potts, 13 October 1887, in CG, 26 October 1887, 678; Acta Victoriana, n (October 1887), 15-18. 4 Cobourg World, 20 October 1887. 5 Ibid. 6 George Hodgins Papers, Samuel Nelles to George Hodgins, 6 February 1885. 7 Acta Victoriana, n (October 1887), 15-18; CMM, 26 (1887), 470; MC, Minutes of Bay of Quinte Conference, 1888, 14. 8 Nelles Papers, newspaper clippings file, George Grant, in British Whig (Kingston), n.d.

Notes to pages 2,75-9

363

9 Daniel Wilson Papers, Journal, 20 October 1887, 126; Acta Victoriana, 46 (192.3), 251. 10 Acta Victoriana, 27 (October 1903), 49. 11 Nathanael Burwash Papers, address to alumni re endowment for Nelles Chair, [1897]; Nelles Papers, Box 14, file 297, Invitation to Unveiling Bust of Samuel Nelles, 15 November 1901. 12 Marguerite Van Die, An Evangelical Mind: Nathanael Burwash and the Methodist Tradition in Canada, 1839-1918 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1989); Charles Bruce Sissons, A History of Victoria University (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952), 181-90; Nathanael Burwash, The History of Victoria College (Toronto: Victoria University Press, 1927), 397-401. 13 MC, Journal of General Conference, 1890, 210-16; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 410. 14 Ibid., 1890, 213-16; Nathanael Burwash Papers, Henry Hough to Nathanael Burwash, 22 October 1890. 15 Sissons, History of Victoria University, 205-10; MC, Journal of General Conference, 1894, I 4 2 ~53; "William Gooderham," DCB, 11:360-1. 16 Nathanael Burwash, "The Present Aspects of University Federation," CMM, 26 (1887), 468-9; Nelles Papers, Samuel Nelles to John Maclaren, 29 June 1887; Burwash, History of Victoria College, 402-9. 17 Hodgins Papers, Alexander Burns to George Hodgins, 2 December 1888; Burwash Papers, Address to Students, 1892; Van Die, An Evangelical Mind, 128-30.

This page intentionally left blank

a

accomplishments subjects. See education, for women Acta Victoriana, zi3-i5 Adams, Mary Electa, 233-5 Adventism, 34-9 Agassiz, Louis. See Darwinism Albert College (Belleville Seminary), 232, 240 alcohol. See temperance Alderville. See missions, native Alexandra College, Belleville, 232 Arminianism. See Fletcher, John Arnold, Matthew, 148 Arnold, Thomas, 148 assistance, government. See university endowment Assumption College. See Roman Catholic Church and higher education Aylesworth, Isaac Brock, 108 Baconianism, 151 Baldwin Act. See University Act of 1849 Baldwin, Robert. See University bill of 1843; University Act of 1849

Banner, The, 53 "barn," the, 105, 21415 Barnes, Miss. See Cobourg Ladies Seminary Beare, Robert. See Victoria College, the "Bob" Beatty, John. See Victoria College, faculty Beaven, James. See options Belleville Seminary. See Albert College Bible, the: Book of Genesis, 180; importance to Nelles family, 12; Nelles's study of, 77—8; in schools, 130, 134-5; and science, 185-8 Bible Christian Church. See Methodism, evangelical branches Biblical criticism, 18 5-9 "Bob," the. See Victoria College, the "Bob" Boulter, Miss R. See Cobourg Ladies Academy Brant, Chief Joseph. See First Nations Brantford, 14 Brown, George, 51, 52; and The Banner, 53; death, 257 Burwash, Nathanael, in,

196, 200-2; as principal, 276-7 Butler, Joseph, 79 Calvinism, 294 camp meeting. See revival Canadian Wesleyan Methodist Church. See Ryan, Henry cap and gown. See Victoria College, college spirit Case, William. See missions, native Catholic Apostolic Church. See Irving, Edward Chalmers, Thomas, 79-80 Charbonnel, Armand Francois, 132. See also Roman Catholic Church and higher education Church of England, 20-3, 48-9. See also King's College; Upper Canada College Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints. See Mormons Church of Scotland, 49, 51. See also Queen's University Clarke, Adam, 78 Clarke, Celeste (Nelles). See Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, family

366 Clarke, John. See Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, family Classics, 47, 63. See also Victoria College, curriculum clergy reserves, 2.1-4, 49 Clossen, Mary, 2.35. See also education, for women Cobourg, family life in, 208 Cobourg Ladies Academy, 4i Cobourg Ladies Seminary, 4i co-education. See education, for women Colenso, John William, 340-1 common schools, 62-3, 132. conversion experience. See Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, conversion conversions, mass, 73 Corson, Robert, 13 Council of Public Instruction, 12,9-30 Cronyn, Benjamin. See University of Western Ontario Crooks, Adam, 134 curriculum. See Victoria College, curriculum Darwinism, 175-6, 181-4, 190-1 Dawson, William. See geology denominational education. See education, denominational Dingwall, Kenneth. See Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, family Division Street Methodist Church. See Cobourg, family life in dogmatism, 75 Draper, William Henry. See university endowment

Index Dumfries circuit, 13-14 Durham, Lord, 24, 29 Ecce Homo, 122, 320^1 Education, 86-7; Christian, 100-2, 131, 243; clergy reserves, 21—4, 49; denominational, 130-4, 324n76; higher, 100-4, r95~6; practical, 224-5, Z57i f°r women, 39-41, 63, 128, 232-6. See also university endowment election of 1844, 51-2 Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 67,333-4070 emotionalism. See Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, preaching Episcopal Methodists, 240. See also Belleville Seminary Epistemology, 157 Ethics, 163-6. See also philosophy, moral Evidences of Religion, 158-9 Faraday Hall, 196—7 federation. See university question female education. See education, for women. Finney, Charles Grandison, 32-3 First Lessons in Christian Morals, 133 First Nations, 5, 25. See also missions, native Fletcher, John, 80 Free Church. See Presbyterian Church of Canada Gemley, John, 118 Genessee Wesleyan Seminary, 30, 39; Nelles's activities at, 30 Genung, Wesley (Mugs). See Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, friends

geology, 180. See also sciences, new Globe, the Toronto, 53 Goderich, Lord, 24 Goodson, George, 66 grammar schools, 62-3, 129 Grant, George Munro, 185, 258 grants, government. See university endowment Haanel, Eugene, 196-8 Hincks, Francis, 89. See also University Act of 1853 Hincks, William Henry: on Eugene Haanel, 196; on Nelles, 145 Hodgins, George, 109-10; conversion, 43 Homiletics. See Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, preaching honours program. See Victoria College, curriculum Hurlburt, Jesse, 41-2 Hurlburt, Maria. See Cobourg Ladies Academy Huron College. See University of Western Ontario Huron First Nation. See First Nations Huxley, Thomas (T.H.), 182, 190 Institut Canadien, 98 Iroquois Confederacy. See First Nations Irving, Edward, 3 5-6 itinerancy: educational requirements for, 76-7, 114, 198; weaknesses in, 194 Jackson, Edward, 200 Jackson Society, 202, 215 Johnston, Hugh, 116

Index Jubilee Singers. See Cobourg, family life in King Street Methodist Church. See Cobourg, family life in King's College, Toronto, 48-9, 87; share of endowment, 251. See also Church of England Kingston, William, 112 Knox College, 53, 55; and University College, 240. See also Presbyterian Church of Canada Kosmos. See Science Association

Langton, John, 2.40, 241 Lavell, Charles, 70 Lewiston Academy, 27 liberal theology. See theology, liberal Liddell, Thomas, 49-50, 5^ Lima, New York. See Genessee Wesleyan Seminary logic, 154-6 Lord, William, 19 Lyell, Charles. See geology Lynch, John Joseph, 135-6 Macdonald, John, 199-200 Macdonald, John Alexander. See university endowment Macdonnell, Daniel James, 140 Malthus, Thomas, 177 Martindale, Daniel (Cheops), 57, 59, 68 McCaul, John, 241 Marx, Karl. See social upheaval McHenry, D. C.: on education for women, 234 McMaster University (Toronto Baptist College), 264

McNab, Alexander, 61, 90-1, 114 Metaphysics, 157-8 Metcalfe, Charles Theophilus, 50 Methodism, 12-16, 282-3; evangelical branches, 76. See also revival Methodists: character of, 137; Conservative, 193-4; nations of origin, z86~7nz4; support of Victoria College, 103-4 middle class, 285-6^:4 Mill, John Stuart, 151. See also social upheaval millennialism. See Adventism Miller, Hugh. See geology Miller, William, 37-8. See also Adventism missions: native, 14-16, 125-7, 32in43; Nelles on, 127-8; overseas, 216; and social justice, 218. See al,so Victoria College, missionary societies at Mississauga First Nation. See First Nations Mohawk First Nation. See First Nations moral science. See philosophy, moral Mormonism, 36 Mount Elgin Wesleyan Methodist Ojibway Industrial School (Muncey). See missions, native Mount Pleasant. See Dumfries circuit Mount Pleasant Temperance Society. See temperance "Mystics," the, 56 Naiei soteria aletheia Society. See Natural Science Association

367 Napanee. See Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, appointment at Newburgh native peoples. See First Nations natural philosophy. See philosophy, natural natural selection. See Darwinism Natural Science Association, 216 nature, n, 45, 78-9. See also Emerson, Ralph Waldo; sciences, new Nelles, Mary Bakewell Wood, 204-7, Z75~6 Nelles, Samuel Sobieski: ancestors, 5-8; appearance, 145, 276; appointment at Newburgh, 62-6; attitude toward university federation, 266-9; calling, 56-8, 93; character, 26, 67, 81-3, 269, 273-5; children, 206-11, 213, 235; conversion, 32, 72—3; death, 270; epitaph, 175, 272; faith, 74, 81, 185; as father, 207-8; friends, 57, 304; health, 82, 175, 252, 273; honours given to, 146; library, 170-1; marriage, belief about, 66; marriage, to Mary Bakewell Wood, 95, 204-5; oratory, 100, 115—16, 249; poetry, 46, 67; politics, 29, 54-5, 124; preaching, 59-60, 115-21, 274; preaching, advice on, 170-3; as principal, 93, 113; published writings, 45-6, 144-5; punishment, belief about, 139-43; self-doubt, 59, 72-4, 94-5; sense of humour, 95, 145; "Spirit of Inquiry," 44;

Index

368 stationed on Port Hope circuit, 71; studies, 27-8, 30-1, 39, 44-5, 71- 2; teaching, 60-1, 64, 145-8, 151-9, 163-74. See also Hodgins, George; Martindale, Daniel Newburgh Academy. See Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, appointment at Newburgh

Presbyterian Church of Canada (Free Church), 51-2,. See also Knox College Primitive Methodist Church. See Methodism, evangelical branches private schools, 16, 18, 62-3 Provincialist, The, 94 Psychology, 154 Punshon, William Morley,

Oasis, the, 46 Ojibway First Nation. See First Nations Ontario Education Association, 12,8 options, 149-50. See also Victoria College, curriculum original sin. See sin, original ornamental subjects. See education, for women orthodoxy, 75

Puritanism, 23

173

Paley, William. See Ecce Homo Patristics, 80 patronage positions for clergy, 21 pedagogy, 129-30. See also Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, teaching Philomath, 46 philosophy: common sense, 152-3; French and German, 153-4; moral, 122, 163-70; natural, 159-60 Pitman, R. C. (Wampum). See Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, friends poetry, 31, 191. See also Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, poetry; Whittier, John Greenleaf Potiphar (Samuel Nelles), 57. See also Nelles, Samuel Sobieski, friends

Queen's University, 49, 87. See also Church of Scotland redemption, future. See Macdonnell, Daniel James Regiopolis College. See Roman Catholic Church and higher education Remenyi, Eduard. See Cobourg, family life in residential schools. See missions, native Responsible Government, 5° revival, 32-4, 43, 73, Z95~6nz6 Rhetoric. See Victoria College, curriculum Rice, Samuel Dwight, 104, 112 Richey, Matthew, 91 Rochester, New York, 30 Roman Catholic Church and higher education, 49, 1 3 3-6> MO Roman Catholicism, Nelles's view on, 138 rugby. See Victoria College, sport Ryan, Henry, 13-14 Ryerson, Egerton: advice to Alexander McNab, 90; anti-union reforms, 28, 69; appointment as principal of Victoria

College, 42; battle with George Brown, 248-9; in Britain, 19-20; death, 258; depression, 252; and Edward Irving, 35; favoured by Sir Charles Metcalfe, 50-1; opposed by Nelles, 108-10; plan for disbursement, 239; struggle for endowment, 244-6; teaching offer to Nelles, 60; tension with Samuel Dwight Rice, 106; vanity, 70 Ryerson, George, 35 Ryerson, John, 62, 69-71 St Jerome's College, Kitchener, 240 St Michael's College, Toronto, 240 sanctification, 73, 122-3 Sanderson, John, 66 Saxe, John, 27 Science Association, 215-16 sciences, new, 172, 175—6; Nelles's advancement of, 274-5; Nelles's response to, 183-5. $ee ak° Darwinism; geology sectarianism, 69, 133-7; as precluding endowment, 243-4 secularization, 51 Sherwood, Henry, amendments to Baldwin Act, 89 sin, 139-43; and children, 141-4; original, 142 Six Nations. See First Nations Smith, Adam, 166-7 social upheaval, 176-9 Spencer, James, 109 Strachan, John, 48, 55; and Trinity College, 89, 239 Sydenham, Lord, 24, 29 Taylor, Lachlan. See Victoria College, faculty

Index temperance, 25, 34 Theological Union, 202 theology, 77, 170; liberal, 115, 190; natural, 78-9. See also philosophy, natural Toronto Baptist College. See McMaster University Transcendentalism. See Emerson, Ralph Waldo Trinity College, Toronto, 89, 239; and University of Toronto, 263 Tyndall, John, 161 University Act of 1849 (Baldwin Act), 88-9, 237-8 University Act of 1853 (Hincks Act), 89-90, 96, 238 University Amendment Act of 1873, ^S 6 University bill of 1843, 49, 86 University College, 89-90; Arts curriculum, 238-9; expenses, 90, 250; monopoly on scholarships, 247-8; options, 149 university endowment, 86-8, 242-55, 259-60 university federation. See university question University of Ontario, Nelles's plan for, 262 University of Toronto: Act of 1906, 277; administration, 238; appointment of examiners, 150; attack on Egerton Ryerson, 244-5; investigation by government,

247; monopoly of endowment, 150, 246 University of Western Ontario (Huron College), 239-40 Upper Canada Academy, 16-20; co-education, 40; curriculum, 40 Upper Canada College, 16, 242 V.R Journal. See Science Association V.P. Society. See Science Association Van Dusen, Conrad, 94, 104 Van Norman, Mrs Daniel. See Cobourg Ladies Seminary Victoria College: Act of 1850, 92; the "Bob," 231-2; college spirit, 230; conversazione, 99, 212-13; curriculum, 148-51, 196, 223-8, 3O5ni9; disrepair, 43, 95; enrolment, 95; examinations, 147-8; exclusion from receipt of endowment funds, 243-4; faculty, 41-2, 90-9, 112, 195- 203; federation with University of Toronto, 264—9; finances, 106-7, Z 39> 246, 253-6, 261; Glee Club, 213; gymnasium, 220-1; library, 44, 228; Literary Association, 99, 212; missionary societies, 217; move to Toronto, 278-9; preparatory department, 96; relationship with

369 Europe, 195-6; "riots" of 1844, 51; Ryerson Chair, 259; Samuel S. Nelles Chair, 276; scholarship plan, 107-8, 255, 268-9; scientific equipment, 196-7, 228-9; senior stick, 230; social life, 220-3; sport, 218-22; student discipline, 110-13; students, 42-4, 98-9, 222-4, 229-31; subscriptions, 107-8, 255, 268-9; teacher salaries, 85-6; and Victoria Opera House, 212-13 voluntaryism, 51 Wesley, Charles, 80 Wesley, John, 80 Wesleyan Female Academy, 106 Wesleyan Metropolitan Church, Toronto, 199 Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut, 48,55 Weston, Ontario, 105 Whately, Richard, 79 Whittier, John Greenleaf, 156-7 Wilson, Daniel, 241, 258 Wilson, John, 91-2 Wood, Enoch, 95, 125 Woodstock College. See McMaster University Workman, George C., 201 Young Men's Christian Association, 217 Young Men's Literary Society. See Genessee Wesleyan Seminary, Nelles's activities at