To Preserve & Defend 9780773585126

Citation preview

To Preserve & Defend

This page intentionally left blank

To Preserve & Defend

Essays on Kingston in the Nineteenth Century

edited by GERALD T U L C H I N S K Y

McGill-Queen's University Press Montreal & London 1976

This book has been published with the help of a grant from the Social Science Research Council of Canada using funds provided by the Canada Council. © McGill-Queen's University Press 1976 International Standard Book Number 0-7735-0214-5 Legal Deposit second quarter 1976 Bibliotheque nationale du Quebec Design by Peter Dorn, RCS, MGDC Printed in Canada by T. H. Best Printing Company

Kingston City Hall facade, c. 1860

Contents

viii Illustrations xi Preface xiii Contributors 1 Introduction GERALD TULCHINSKY

I The Shape of the City 17 The Character of Kingston ARTHUR R. M. LOWER

37 Architecture for a Boom Town: The Primitive and the Neobaroque in George Browne's Kingston Buildings J. DOUGLAS STEWART

63 The Settlement of Kingston's Hinterland BRIAN OSBORNE

II Fortress Kingston 83 Kingston and the Defence of British North America GEORGE F. G. STANLEY

103 Garrison and Community, 1815-1870 JOHN W. SPURR

119 The British Influence of RMC RICHARD A. PRESTON

in Economic Development 141 John A. Macdonald and the Kingston Business Community J. K. JOHNSON

157 The Canadian Locomotive Company GEORGE RICHARDSON

169 The Failure of the Commercial Bank MAX MAGILL

iv Politics in Kingston 185 John Macaulay: Tory for All Seasons s. F. WISE 203 Hugh C. Thomson: Editor, Publisher, and Politician, 1791-1834 H. PEARSON GUNDY

223 Municipal Government and Politics, 1800-1850 GEORGE BETTS

245 The Orange Order and the Election of 1861 in Kingston J. D. LIVERMORE

261 Kingstonians in the Second Parliament: Portrait of an Elite Group DONALD SWAINSON

V Social Change 281 The Poor in Kingston, 1815-1850 PATRICIA E. MALCOLMSON

299 John Travers Lewis and the Establishment of the Anglican Diocese

311 Immigrants in the City: Kingston as Revealed in the Census Manuscripts of 1871 ALAN G. GREEN

331 Queen's University: Town and Gown to 1877 HILDA NEATBY

D. M. SCHURMAN

343 Notes 388 Index

Illustrations

PLATES

Page v. Kingston City Hall facade, c. 1860. Photograph, Public Archives of Canada. 1 Kingston from Fort Henry, 1828. Coloured aquatint by James Gray, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. 2 View of the northeast corner of City Park, c.1890. Photograph by H. Henderson, Queen's University Archives. 3 The funeral procession of Sir John A. Macdonald, June 11,1891. Photograph by H. Henderson, Queen's University Archives. 4 George Browne, c.1870. Photograph, from Borthwick, History and Biographical Gazeteer of Montreal to the year 1892. 5 Wilson's Buildings, built 1841-42. Photograph by John Brebner. 6 Commercial Mart, completed 1842. Photograph by George Lilley. 7 St. Andrew's Manse, built 1841. Photograph by John Brebner.

8 Rockwood Villa, built 1841. Photograph by John Brebner. 9 Bedroom fireplace, Rockwood Villa. Photograph by John Brebner. 10 Kingston City Hall, front elevation. Detail from Plan of the City and Liberties of Kingston, 1850, by Thomas Fraser Gibbs, Douglas Library, Queen's University. 11 Kingston City Hall, front elevation, 1842. Drawing by George Brown, Public Archives of Canada. 12 Kingston City Hall, rear elevation, 1842. Drawing by George Brown, Public Archives of Canada. 13 Kingston City Hall, 1843-44. Drawing by Mrs. Harriet Cartwright, Fort Henry, Kingston. 14 Along the road between Kingston and York, c.1830. Water colour by James P. Cockburn, Public Archives of Canada. 15 Kingston Market Square, c.1880. Photograph, Public Archives of Canada.

ILLUSTRATIONS

16 The Launching of H.M.S. St. Lawrence at Point Frederick, September 10, 1814. Water colour, artist unknown, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. 17 View of Point Frederick and Fort Henry from the T£te de Pont Barracks, 1839. Water colour by H. F. Ainslie, Public Archives of Canada. 18 View of Kingston Harbour, c.1880. Photograph by H. Henderson, Queen's University Archives. 19 View of the entrance to the Tete de Pont Barracks, c.1830. Water colour by James P. Cockburn, private collection. 20 The Insolvent Subalterns Paying Morning Visits, 1843. Water colour by Sir Edmund Y. W. Henderson, private collection. 21 Major Edward Osborne Hewett. Photograph, Queen's University Archives. 22 Playbill for Leo, the Royal Cadet, Grand Opera House, Kingston, 1889. Douglas Library, Queen's University. 23 John A. Macdonald, c.1865. Photograph by W. Notman, Queen's University Archives. 24 Grand Trunk Railway locomotive no. 271, built in 1873. Photograph, Kingston Steam Museum. 25 The Honourable John A. Macaulay, 1857. Portrait by G. T. Berthon, Agnes Etherington Art Centre, Queen's University. 26 Hugh C. Thomson, c. 1825-30. Water colour, artist unknown, Mr. A. H. Thomson, Montreal.

27 Mayor John Counter, 1842. Portrait by Alvah Bradish, Corporation of the City of Kingston. 28 Arch of welcome erected by the Orange Order for the visit of the Prince of Wales, I860. Photograph, Queen's University Archives. 29 Sir Alexander Campbell. Portrait by Robert Harris, Ontario Ministry of Government Services. 30 Sir George and Lady Kirkpatrick, 1891. Photograph, Queen's University Archives. 31 Kingston General Hospital, 1893. Photograph, Public Archives of Canada. 32 Archbishop John Travers Lewis. Portrait, artist unknown, Anglican Diocese of Ontario. 33 St. George's Anglican Cathedral, 1882. Photograph, Queen's University Archives. 34 Kingston from Fort Henry, c.1870. Photograph, Queen's University Archives. 35 Princess Street, c.1863. Photograph, Queen's University Archives. 36 Princess Street, c.1890. Photograph by H. Henderson, Queen's University Archives. 37 Queen's University, 1868. Photograph, Queen's University Archives.

ILLUSTRATIONS

MAPS

Endpapers

Plan of the Town of Kingston, October 1815, by Thomas Ridout, Surveyor General, Public Archives of Canada. Plan of the City and Liberties of Kingston, 1850, by Thomas Fraser Gibbs, Public Archives of Canada. Bird's Eye View of Kingston, 1875, by H. Brosius, Kingston Historical Society.

Preface

In celebration of Kingston's tercentenary it seemed appropriate to the Kingston Historical Society to prepare for publication a collection of essays on Kingston during the nineteenth century, following the end of the War of 1812. This work is intended as in some respects a continuation of Richard A. Preston's monumental Kingston before the War of 1812. It seeks to explain and illustrate some of the most significant aspects of life in the city during the years when Kingston's special character was formed and became deeply imprinted on the structure and fabric of the community. Clearly not everything of importance could be included and it is hoped that studies of those themes which have been left out, and, perhaps, revaluations of those which are treated here, will follow soon upon the publication of this book. This collection is sponsored by the Kingston Historical Society and was brought together with the assistance of the Society's Publications Committee, whose members, H. Pearson Gundy, Margaret Angus, and Ian Wilson, provided me with immeasurable assistance in every way. Without their unstinting aid and advice, this collection might not have appeared. Mr. Gundy drew upon his experience over many years as editor of Queen's Quarterly and Historic Kingston to help me at every stage; Mrs. Angus, the noted Kingston historian, offered many helpful suggestions, and Ian Wilson, Queen's University Archivist, gave very useful technical help, as did Mrs. May Forrester in the Queen's Department of History. Mr. Wilson kindly made available to me his vast collection of references to Kingston in various travellers' accounts. All three participated in the planning of this book and, most important, provided me with invaluable editorial assistance by scrutinizing the essays as they appeared. Mr. Wilson and Douglas Stewart helped greatly in the selection of illustrations for this volume. I am deeply grateful to them and to Anne MacDiarmaid and Rosemary Gibson of the Queen's University XI

PREFACE

Archives, who kindly answered many requests for aid. My colleagues, Donald Swainson at Queen's University, and Leo Johnson at the University of Waterloo, have given me the benefit of their advice. I am also indebted to Ronald Hazelgrove who prepared the index. I regret to record the untimely death of two of our contributors, Max Magill, who was keenly interested in the publication of this work, and Hilda Neatby, whose chapter here anticipates her forthcoming history of Queen's. I also wish to thank my wife, Ruth, who cheerfully typed the dozens of letters that went out to contributors. My warmest thanks go to the members of the Kingston Historical Society who very generously supported this project and to its immediate past and current presidents, Lt. Col. Louis J. Flynn, Mrs. Margaret Angus, and Bogart Trumpour under whose guidance and warm encouragement this book was begun and completed. A grant from the Social Science Research Council of Canada aided its publication. Queen's University

Gerald Tulchinsky

xn

Contributors

George Betts Associate Professor of Political Studies, Queen's University

Alan G. Green Associate Professor of Economics, Queen's University

H. Pearson Gundy Emeritus Professor of English Language and Literature, Queen's University

J. K. Johnson Professor of History, Carleton University J. D. Livermore Foreign Service Officer, Department of External Affairs, Ottawa Arthur R. M. Lower Emeritus Professor of History, Queen's University

Max Magill (deceased) Toronto lawyer and economic historian

Patricia E. Malcolmson Instructor in History, Queen's University Hilda Neatby (deceased) Emeritus Professor of History, University of Saskatchewan

Brian Osborne Associate Professor of Geography, Queen's University

Richard A. Preston W. K. Boyd Professor of History, Duke University

George Richardson Assistant Professor of Engineering Drawing, Queen's University Xlll

CONTRIBUTORS

D. M. Schurman Professor of History, Queen's University

John W. Spurr Librarian, Royal Military College

George F. G. Stanley Director of Canadian Studies, Mount Allison University

J. Douglas Stewart Associate Professor of Art History, Queen's University

Donald Swainson Associate Professor of History, Queen's University

Gerald Tulchinsky Associate Professor of History, Queen's University S. F. Wise Professor of History, Carleton University

xiv

Introduction GERALD TULCHINSKY

Among Canadian cities, Kingston is in many respects unique. It has always been strongly influenced, if not dominated, by its distinctive institutions, military, educational, and penal. Kingston has become, in some ways, an institutional city, and because of the sharp differences of character and purpose among these establishments and the people they support, the city seems a fragmented community, in fact a collection of communities—each an almost separate sector. Like most generalizations, however, this one serves less to explain the character of Kingston—and especially its variety and complexity—than to offer a vague, even a distorted, impression. Nor does it adequately encompass the fascinating history of the community that was founded by a small group of Loyalists in 1784 near the site of the fort erected by Count Frontenac in 1673. A study of Kingston during the nineteenth century reveals that, notwithstanding the strength of influences from these institutions and from the Loyalist imprint on the city, its development was affected by many of the same factors that touched other Canadian cities during that era: commerce, shipping, banking, and small-scale manufacturing. Indeed, from the outset Kingston's leading merchants were convinced that their settlement was destined to become a major emporium of trade. R. A. Preston has pointed out in his Kingston before the War of 1812 how geography conferred upon Kingston valuable advantages over its eastern Ontario rivals.1 Lying on the mainland at the junction of the St. Lawrence river and Lake Ontario, the tiny settlement seemed admirably suited to the role of entrepot for river and lake trade. Exports of staples such as ashes, wheat flour, and timber from the Great Lakes regions, unloaded from lake vessels on to smaller bateaux and Durham boats, and the wide variety of imports from Europe—shipped upriver from Montreal—were handled by Kingston merchants from the late eighteenth century. Serving the vital function of an upriver transshipment centre 1

INTRODUCTION

for the burgeoning metropolis of Montreal during the first half of the nineteenth century, Kingston's fortunes were then intimately tied to the prosperity of the St. Lawrence economic system whose success, in turn, depended upon a number of factors over which Kingston's merchants had no control: British imperial trade policy, technological innovation, and the shifting balance in North American inter-city commercial rivalry. By the end of the nineteenth century Kingston was to fall victim to all of these major variables, but not before the city had experienced a prosperity and an efflorescence of almost imperial ambitions whose monuments and spirit dominated the community throughout the century. The commercial traffic and its attendant activities of shipping, shipbuilding, and small-scale manufacturing grew dramatically during the early nineteenth century and along with expenditures for the local British garrison—as John Spurr suggests in this book—provided the principal basis for the city's economic life during most of the century. Upon it were founded the fortunes of the town's early leading merchants: the Cartwrights, Kirbys, and Macaulays among others; upon its continuation and future growth were founded the aspirations of some of Kingston's most aggressive entrepreneurs, including lawyer-politician John A. Macdonald and businessman John Counter. Shipping assumed major importance in the life of Kingston, as Dr. E. J. Barker, temperamental editor of the British Whig, reminded his readers in his annual spring reports of preparations along the waterfront for another shipping season.2 Dozens of vessels, both sail and steam, called regularly at the city's wharves and a number of Canada's major forwarding companies made Kingston their regional headquarters. After the completion of the Rideau canal in 1832, Kingston became an even more important shipping centre, serving as an outlet for a rapidly mounting volume of exports from the newly-opened Rideau lakes region.3 The Ottawa and Rideau Forwarding Company, a substantial Montreal concern, opened a large warehousing, shipbuilding, and repair establishment at nearby Portsmouth.4 Booming as a result of the transshipping trade, the extensive construction of the Rideau canal, Fort Henry, and the Penitentiary, Kingston by the mid-1830s had became a prosperous, active, and ambitious town.5 Travellers in the Canadas were struck by the rapid growth of Kingston during these years. Usually arriving by steamboat, they observed and often commented on the bustle at the port. "The mercantile importance it has now attained as a commercial entrepot between Montreal and below, and the western settlements on the lakes above, may be inferred," wrote one traveller, "from the wharves on the river and the many spacious and well-fitted warehouses behind them, as well as the numerous stores, and mercantile employes within the town."6 Prosper2

1 Kingston from Fort Henry, 1828

INTRODUCTION

ing from this activity, some merchants like John Counter built magnificent stone houses in the city and on its western outskirts.7 The waterfront each summer was "crowded. . . with sloops, Durham boats, batteaux, and scows."8 Steamboats plied the river to Prescott, the Rideau canal and the Ottawa river to Montreal, the Bay of Quinte and Lake Ontario to Sackett's Harbor and Oswego in New York State, Toronto, and Niagara. In 1846 one contemporary reported that "there are ten daily first-class steamers running to and from Kingston" as well as thirty smaller steamers and propellers and 200 schooners and sailing barges.9 Nineteen of the steamboats and thirty-one schooners, a total of 6,621 tons in all, were owned at Kingston.10 The local fleet increased in 1851 to nearly 7,000 tons and there was now a satisfactory tugboat service to facilitate barge traffic between Kingston and Montreal.11 By 1871, twenty large steamboats and thirty seagoing sailing vessels were owned in and based at Kingston, which surpassed Toronto in both number and tonnage of ships.12 The early 1850s and the ensuing period were vintage years for Kingston's shipping business. The Anglo-American Magazine reported that, though St. Lawrence shipping was in temporary decline (due to the fact that large lake vessels could now navigate the St. Lawrence down to Montreal), Kingston was enjoying increasing trade, chiefly in exporting lumber to the United States.13 "There is in fact a decided aspect of awakening energy about the place," the reporter wrote. Indeed, so sanguine then were Kingston's new prospects of becoming a major entrepot of Canadian-American trade that the Wolfe Island Canal, one of John Counter's schemes, was formed to facilitate this commerce.14 Although this project failed, Kingston thrived on American trade during the early 1850s, even before the advent of reciprocity. The Tables of Trade and Navigation of the Province of Canada15 show that trade—most of it carried in American vessels—16 between Kingston and the United States was mounting rapidly, in all categories of imports and exports, between 1850 and 1853. A. R. M. Lower pointed out long ago that barge loads of sawn lumber coming down the Rideau canal to Kingston were loaded on to lake schooners bound for Oswego to supply the eastern United States market.17 During the ten years of reciprocal free trade in natural products between Canada and the United States from 1855 to 1866, the export of lumber through Kingston reached an enormous volume. (At the same time, of course, the huge rafts of square timber for the British market were being marshalled by the Calvins at nearby Garden Island for shipment down the St. Lawrence to Quebec.) Reciprocity also brought a renewal of Kingston's staples trade to Montreal. Immense quantities of Illinois-grown spring wheat, shipped down the lakes from Chicago, were received at Kingston for forwarding to Montreal;18 in 1857 alone Kingston received a million bushels from this one source in 4

GERALD TULCHINSKY

addition to substantial quantities from Oswego. Since 1857, James Richardson had made Kingston the base of his farflung grain business. Although early railways helped to reduce Kingston's share of the grain trade during the 1850s, the later transcontinental lines actually increased it, as Professor Preston has shown in his articles on the port of Kingston.19 Great Lakes grain ships made Kingston a significant way station in the flow of grain from the West to eastern and overseas markets. Grain ships would unload at Kingston elevators in order to avoid the necessity of time-consuming trips through the St. Lawrence canal system. This traffic mounted during the late nineteenth century. So important had Kingston become as a grain transshipment centre by 1900 that three large grain elevators with a capacity of 1.5 million bushels were built on the waterfront to handle the traffic.20 Shipbuilding became a major industry in Kingston early in the century. Waterfront shipyards, including John Counter's marine railway, were turning out substantial numbers of steamboats and schooners, as well as lesser craft. By 1871, three local shipyards employed more than 100 men in the construction and repair of ships.21 Large and small vessels continued to be produced at Kingston for many years. In 1894, the Montreal Transportation Company employed 150 men in building and repairing ships, while Davis and Sons, who employed fifty, turned out ferry boats as well as "handsome launches" for the local yachting set.22 Forwarding and shipbuilding stimulated the growth of ancillary industries. As some lake shipping began to convert to steam power, engines and boilers were required by local shipbuilders. By 1851, three of the five local iron foundries23 were advertising their readiness to produce marine engines and equipment as well as stationary and portable engines, mill gearing, and a wide variety of iron and brass fittings. As George Richardson's essay suggests, this segment of Kingston's industrial life grew substantially over the second half of the nineteenth century, when the city became one of the few centres of locomotive production in Canada. In addition to the firm whose growth he describes, there were by 1864 two other substantial foundries which turned out mill machinery, engines, pumps, railway axles, and forgings.24 Equipment was also produced for the ships built or repaired at the two local drydocks.25 Although shipyards and foundries seemed to dominate the Kingston industrial scene, they were by no means the only large employers nor were they—in some important respects—the major manufacturing establishments. In 1881 there were 114 men employed in three foundries, 50 men in one shipyard, and 153 in the locomotive factory.26 Yet in the same year there were three musical instrument factories with a total of ninety-nine employees and, for a city of Kingston's size, a huge garment industry: eighteen tailors and 5

INTRODUCTION

clothiers employed 199 men and women—fifty at Livingston's alone—27 while seventeen dressmakers gave work to 114 women and girls.28 Although the garment workers' total wages were only little more than half of those paid to foundrymen and shipworkers, the market value of their output was far higher.29 Tobacco processing was another major local industry; two factories, McGowan's and Oberndorfer's, each employed seventy-five hands turning out cigars, one named for Principal Grant of Queen's! Knitted woollen goods were produced in a plant established in 1882, which employed 170 people.30 Kingston's close economic ties with Montreal became stronger during the nineteenth century. Although Kingston entrepreneurs had established one short-lived bank in the city in 1819 and the Commercial Bank of the Midland District in 1831, Montreal had great influence in local banking. Not only were branches of the Montreal banks like the Bank of Montreal important in the city but, as Max Magill points out, even the Commercial came under the control of Montrealers by the 1850s. The principal shipping firm, MacphersonCrane, was a Montreal company and in the 1820s and 1830s Montreal's Thomas Molson had developed the distillery31 which, under James Morton, became one of the largest in Upper Canada.32 Montreal's influence on Kingston was reinforced towards the end of the century, in the locomotive company which had a number of Montreal men on its board of directors, and in the Montreal Transportation Company which all but dominated local shipbuilding and shipping. Although favoured in these ways by geography as a trading centre, Kingston was also cursed by geography which denied her a productive hinterland, as Brian Osborne explains in this book. Unlike her rival York (Toronto), whose population surpassed Kingston's by 1830, Kingston had a remarkably beautiful, but wild and poor, hinterland of pre-Cambrian rock, covered by thick forest which was broken by hundreds of lakes and only tiny pockets of arable land. Rich in wildlife, the region was a sportsman's paradise, as a number of travellers and former garrison officers noted in their reminiscences. The soil around the city was, however, not rich. "Land near Kingston is rocky, and in favourable seasons makes but a poor return to the farmer," observed one traveller of the early 1830s.33 Joseph Bouchette, a highly competent early nineteenth-century geographer, had a different opinion, however: "the soil in [Kingston's] vicinity is very fertile by nature, and much improved for a great distance all around," he wrote in 1815.34 Much the same opinion of the land in Kingston township was expressed by its farmers in 1817, in answer to one of Robert Gourlay's questions.35 In answer to another, however, the famous thirty-first: "what retards the improvement of the country?", they declared that it was not the poor quality of the soil but of some of the early settlers that was responsible. 6

GERALD TULCHINSKY

"The first original settlers were (generally speaking) discharged soldiers, whose habits were, and continue to be, foreign to the quiet and peaceful pursuits of industry: there is likewise another class of settlers, consisting of regardless characters, chiefly emigrants from the United States."36 Despite the fact that the soil was reasonably arable in the township, it was less productive than that of the nearby Bay of Quinte region. Owing to poor farming practices,37 it was quickly "mined" and by the early 1840s was probably less capable of producing large surpluses than it had been a generation earlier.38 York had been selected as Upper Canada's capital, yet Kingstonians always felt that the honour properly belonged to them. They believed that Kingston's rightful place as the provincial capital and main financial and commercial centre of the province had been usurped. Of the few attempts made to correct the error, only one succeeded, and that briefly. The British secretary of state for war, Lord Bathurst, concerned about York's vulnerability to American attack, issued instructions in 1815 that the capital be removed from York to Kingston, a more defensible site,39 but the move was successfully thwarted by York's leading citizens. When the same question was raised again in the legislative assembly, fourteen years later, solid opposition from most members crushed Kingston's chances.40 These unfulfilled aspirations were suddenly realized in 1840 when the new governor, Poulett Thompson, chose Kingston as the capital of the United Province of Canada. "In the centre of a district where unwavering loyalty of the people was a guarantee of free and undisturbed legislation,"41 Kingston seemed safe from radical turmoil and such attempts to overthrow the government by force of arms as had occurred at Toronto in 1837. The town enjoyed sudden bounteous prosperity "as extensive preparations were made, and the place was victualled as though for a siege. . . . Real estate rose greatly in value and house rents attained to what in what days were accounted as phenomenal figures."42 Numerous new structures began to rise, including Kingston's City Hall which was later offered to the government as a parliament building; houses were built to accommodate the distinguished new residents, a vice-regal mansion, "Alwington," was secured, and "Summerhill" rented for the civil servants, on the western outskirts where a number of other impressive new homes of well-off merchants were rising. Long accustomed to entertaining garrison officers, the local bourgeoisie preened itself for the social events that marked the city's new eminence: the opening of parliament, receptions, balls, teas at which a host of important guests including the governor general, his retinue of assistants, aides-de-camp, legislative councillors, assemblymen, and civil servants might be entertained. Dazzled by such social possibilities, Kingston matrons clamoured for homes worthy of a capital, while their husbands were 7

INTRODUCTION

more attentive to the business potential. Keith Johnson refers to the investments they made in land, buildings, and several joint-stock ventures during the buoyant 1840s. But Kingstonians would enjoy their newly acquired status for only a few years before the disadvantages of smallness, the very high price of accommodation for civil servants and members of parliament, and the distances members were forced to travel compelled the governor to move the capital to Montreal at the end of the 1843 session. French-Canadian members found it to be "une ville sans physionomie, sans charactere,"43 while one legislative councillor from Quebec City wrote to a friend, "Pourquois a-t-on choisi cette maussade place pour y f aire le siege du gouvernement? La ville elle-meme est passable, bien vite cependant vous en avez assez."44 The same general view was shared by some English-speaking members. Most visitors commented favourably on the town's appearance, especially its impressive stone structures, though there were some, like Charles Dickens, who formed unfavourable impressions of the Limestone City. A few were moved to rhapsodies. In the 1820 Emigrants Guide to Upper Canada, C. Stuart had exclaimed: "Kingston . . . may be regarded as a dawning emporium where wealth and grandeur shall hereafter stalk in places, then perhaps shorn of their meteor magnificence."45 Not content with this burst of eloquence, he exploded, with almost prophetic power, as follows: Oh Kingston, looking forward to thy future edifices, oh that I could foresee 'holiness to the Lord', written on their porticoes, and animating the lives of their inhabitants, instead of the stride of lust, and pride, and ambition; and the scowl of intolerance, and falsehood, and malice; and of hearing amidst them the bacchanalian cries of luxury and levity, and revelling, all shrouding their loathsomeness and their guilt, beneath the mask of external refinements.46

Similar sentiments were expressed by an army officer who had been stationed in Kingston during the War of 1812: Oh Kingston! Kingston! how shall I venture to speak of you! how shall I venture to recall to mind the days that I have spent within your happy precincts! Could I but bury them in Lethe's stream, could I but hurl them into the gulf of oblivion, then would my mind be at rest, and no longer experience what the recollection of them excites.47

In the 1820s traveller John McGregor was far less impressed. He noted that in Kingston "genteel society is to be met with, but it is considered to be divided by the spirit of party."48 "It is an uncomfortable-looking place," wrote C. D. Warburton more than twenty years later; "the public buildings are out of proportion to the size of the town; some of the streets are drearily wide."49 During the late 1830s, T. R. Preston received the impression that Kingston's 8

GERALD TULCHINSKY

"habits are essentially of the unprogressive order, and it reposes somewhat too complacently on its assumed dignity to be otherwise than stationary."50 One former officer, Francis Duncan, was downright hostile toward a city which, he said, "like every housekeeper who seeks an engagement in a widower's family, has seen better days."51 Disconcerted by the absence of friendly faces, he complained that the merry people of Kingston (if there are any) must keep strictly indoors, and confine their jocularity to the back rooms, for all you meet in the streets are as dismal as ... schoolboys the first week after the holidays, or lovers when they first know they love. . . . No wonder my old friends of the Wiltshire Regiment could stand it no more than a year; the wonder was that suicide had not become a daily occurrence among them after the first week.52

These were harsh words, but some of Warburton's remarks struck at the very core of Kingston's amour propre: The society of Kingston . . . wants the mixture of French Canadian grace and liveliness which gives such a charm to that of the Lower Province. From the constant intercourse with the United States, the tone of manners of all classes, savours not a little of these neighbours, and a slight nasal twang, and a "guess" or two, are by no means uncommon.53

Perhaps the last word may be given to the Prince of Wales who, when informed by the Duke of Newcastle that—for reasons which Daniel Livermore explains—he ought not to disembark at Kingston, is reported to have said (with chagrin, we hope), "Ah, it looks very well from the water."54 Had he stepped ashore, the prince would have seen a city whose busy waterfront and large commercial and public buildings, two cathedrals, many churches, and powerful fortifications could not have failed to leave a lasting impression. Yet beneath this facade of busyness, prosperity, and growth there had grown deep and bitter tensions in the city. It was, to be sure, a city by and large certain of its political choices, judging from election results which— since 1844—had safely returned Conservative John A. Macdonald to the legislature and for many years previously had favoured mostly Tories or "safe" Reformers. The city was, after all, a United Empire Loyalist settlement and the home, since the end of the War of 1812, of an increasing number of Scots. Many of its prominent businessmen and leading politicians were sons of the heather. At the same time Kingston was strongly influenced by St. Andrew's Church and Presbyterian Queen's College, struggling through penury and internal rivalry to a position of prominence. Its Scottish-trained principals and professors, mostly Edinburgh men,55 perhaps tended to emphasize the North British imprint upon the city. 9

INTRODUCTION

Yet an exclusive emphasis upon the Loyalist and Scottish character of Kingston would by 1860 no longer accurately portray its varied ethnic and religious composition. The city had an immense, vibrant, yet divided, Irish population that far outnumbered both the Scottish and Loyalist element. They had begun to arrive in numbers during the 1820s and the growing number of Irish Roman Catholics who settled in Kingston was a major factor in Bishop Macdonell's removal in 1826 from Alexandria to Kingston, where he established his episcopal seat. Although the Irish were overwhelmingly labourers or semi-skilled workers, as Patricia Malcolmson shows, some were clearly middle-class, either merchants or professionals. Donald Swainson points out in his essay that one or two politicians of note had emerged from the local Irish population during the post-Confederation years. A study of municipal politics would likely reveal similar upward mobility by Kingston's Irishmen. But the process of assimilation into the life of Kingston was painful, as Daniel Livermore here explains. As elsewhere in British North America, the Irish immigrants were often viewed as something less than a blessing, in part because of the prevailing opinion that the Irishman's cultural baggage was not very weighty and also because many of these immigrants were Roman Catholic. By 1848 more than a third of the city's population was of that faith56 and the numbers of Roman Catholics in Kingston increased over the next few years, though their proportion of the population declined.57 Among the Irish arrivals in Kingston and its vicinity were many Protestants who imported with them the tendency to view askance their Catholic countrymen, and the tension between the two groups was seldom far below the city's apparent calm. Members of the local Orange lodges, despite the strongest counsels of restraint, provoked bloody street fights by marching annually, on July 12, through the city.58 Kingston's annual Orange riots became notorious and often elicited dishonourable mention in the press, as happened in 1832 when the editor of York's Canadian Freeman commented that "some of our pious countrymen have attempted to butcher each other,/or the sake of religion, at Kingston."59 These annual displays of muscular Christianity, though not confined entirely to Irishmen (the Orange Order attracted other Protestants), nevertheless underline the significance of the Irish as a major component in Kingston's life. Kingston was, of course, by no means unique in this: W. L. Morton has pointed to the importance and broad pervasiveness of Irish influences and tensions through the Canadas in the mid-nineteenth century.60 In Kingston the Irish presence continued to increase. Whereas 37.5 per cent of the city was Irish-born in 1851, the percentage had risen to more than 50 per cent twenty years later.61 Less than half were Roman Catholic, but these were concentrated in the city's north

10

GERALD TULCHINSKY

end, Frontenac and Cataraqui wards, and to a lesser extent, in Ontario and Sydenham wards.62 In its special way, the Orange Order helped to strengthen the city's character as a very British community. The influences of the Loyalist settlement, the presence of the garrison and many retired British army and navy officers, "who live in great comfort," 63 the staples trade, and the immigration waves from the British Isles, all reinforced each other in making Kingston a community strongly conscious of its origins, its affiliations, and its duty to preserve and defend those traditions. In this environment flourished a political conservatism in some ways personified by Christopher Hagerman and John Macaulay who, as S. F. Wise explains, became the leaders of Kingston's family compact, often—but not always—working in consonance with Tories at York. These men, and John A. Macdonald, have come to typify Kingston politics in that era. Yet throughout the nineteenth century Kingston was also the home of reform politicians and sentiments. The gadfly, Robert Gourlay, had substantial support among farmers in the Kingston area in 1817 and 1818.64 H. P. Gundy writes of "Reforming Thomson," publisher and editor of the Upper Canada Herald, who, until his early death in 1834, represented Kingston in Upper Canada's legislative assembly and who seems to have been almost as influential a local politician as a Hagerman or a Macaulay. Kingston lawyer Marshall Spring Bidwell, represented Lennox and Addington (virtually a Kingston "pocket borough") between 1824 and 1836.65 Assisted by Peter Perry of Ernestown (Bath), the second member of the same constituency, Bidwell was the acknowledged leader of Upper Canada's Reformers until his death in 1836. To be sure, none of the politicians, nor other reformers, like the socialist RMC professor whom R. A. Preston mentions, were of the radical variety—a rare breed, in any case, in Upper Canada. But their emergence and survival in the Kingston area suggests—as do the essays by Swainson and Livermore—that the local political climate was not always overwhelmingly Conservative. During the 1837-38 troubles, Lt. Col. Richard Henry Bonnycastle, Royal Engineers, was so worried about dissidence in the Belleville region with support from Lennox and Addington that he put his militia forces on full alert to repel an attack from the United States which was to be supported by Bay of Quinte and local farmers—"degenerate sons . . . whose fathers had owed all they possessed to the generosity of the British government, on whose freely given land they had, as Loyalists, settled originally."66 During these tense February days of 1838, Kingstonians witnessed the fearsome preparations organized by the redoubtable colonel: patrols, pickets, marches and countermarches, outposts, videttes of cavalry, close interrogation of suspi-

11

INTRODUCTION

cious persons, "and a regular system of signals from Fort Henry, by rockets and blue lights, so that the whole of the defending force knew exactly what to do."67 Despite many advantages Kingston was never a cultural or artistic centre during the nineteenth century. Theatre was limited mainly to amateur productions, many of them staged by army officers; there was little music except for military band concerts and church organ recitals. The only Kingston area artist to attain more than local prominence was Daniel Fowler who lived on Amherst Island. But Kingston did produce several noted writers of verse and prose.68 Charles Sangster, who was born and raised at Point Frederick where his father was employed in the naval dockyard, drew inspiration from the St. Lawrence, the Thousand Islands, and the Canadian Shield. Less influenced by the locale was George Frederick Cameron, Nova Scotian by birth, a Queen's graduate, and a Kingston newspaperman who extolled the cause of political freedom in foreign countries.69 Agnes Maule Machar ("Fidelis") was superior to both in artistry and range. She began her career in 1874 with a historical novel, For King and Country: A Story of 1812, and as a prolific contributor of poetry and fiction to the popular Canadian Monthly achieved a national reputation. In 1907 she produced The History of Old Kingston, still a useful study.70 Yet neither these literary figures, nor Kingston's journalists, nor the many others who wrote about the city were able to interpret the special blend of Loyalist, Scottish, and Irish elements, and of military, religious, and educational influences, in its character and atmosphere. Principal Grant, who was a major Kingston figure for thirty years, and Charles Mair, a one-time Queen's student, devoted their attention to national issues and both contributed much in different ways to the emergence of Canadian nationalism during the late nineteenth century. Mair was not only one of Canada's first national poets, but also a member of the Canada First Group and an influential Western pioneer journalist. Principal Grant, who arrived in 1877, succeeded in establishing Queen's on a sound financial basis following its heavy losses of the 1860s. He did so in part by soliciting the alumni and secured a generous gift from a former Queen's medical student, John Christian Schultz, who by the early 1880s had achieved great financial success—besides a well-earned notoriety—in Winnipeg.71 Grant also importuned Mair to allow some proceeds of his writing to go "to good old Queen's."72 In Grant's day, Queen's became an institution of national repute whose members included Sandford Fleming, chancellor from 1880 to 1915, the philosopher John Watson, the mathematician Nathan Dupuis, the classicist T. R. Glover, the English scholar James Cappon, and the economic historian 12

GERALD TULCHINSKY

Adam Shortt, as well as other scholars of eminence.73 The progress of Queen's not only helped to provide recognition for what otherwise might by the 1880s have been little more than a faded river town, but it also helped greatly to enrich Kingston's intellectual and cultural life. Adam Shortt took a leading part in the establishment of the Kingston Historical Society in 1893 while other Queen's professors served the community in a variety of ways. Though perhaps not an integral part of Kingston, the college was not a separate world. Townsmen and students did mingle, as Hilda Neatby shows, and in providing the funds to erect Kingston Hall on the campus in 1901 the city gave tangible proof of its esteem for Queen's. At the turn of the century Kingston also had achieved stability, though it was perhaps the stability of arrested growth. Despite the promise of expansion in its major industry, the Canadian Locomotive Works, the economic life of the community was in equipoise if not in decline. Population had fallen by more than five per cent over the previous decade. Though still busy with shipbuilding and grain transshipment, harbour activity and its commercial and industrial "spin-off" had declined from the great mid-century boom period. The census of 1901 reflected the trend. The departure of the garrison in 1870 had also entailed a substantial loss to Kingston's economic life. While it is true that the size of the military establishment had waxed and waned and had decreased rapidly after the end of the American Civil War—as John Spurr points out—it had nevertheless always provided a substantial market for local merchants and a considerable inflow of money for the local economy. The Royal Military College and the small permanent force Canadian Army establishment, while in some ways perpetuating the military presence of the old British garrison, could not match the economic benefits Kingston had previously enjoyed. Only the deserted Fort Henry and the four martello towers scattered round the harbour remained as magnificent, though decaying, reminders of the strategic place of Kingston in the defence of British North America. Unlike many other cities in central Canada at the dawn of the new century, Kingston did not enter upon a new era of prosperity. Not only were Toronto and Montreal about to enter a period of phenomenal growth, but even secondary centres like Hamilton, London, Brantford, and Berlin74 shared in the economic expansion stimulated by the exploitation of the booming new western frontier. Kingston and the other upper St. Lawrence and eastern Lake Ontario cities reposed in the tranquillity of economic stagnation. But what distinguished Kingston sharply from her Eastern Ontario neighbours was that she had a historical experience in certain ways unique and, unlike them, she still retained an importance in the region and in the nation. County town and episcopal seat, the home of three colleges, two prisons, a military 13

INTRODUCTION

headquarters, various encampments, and staff college, substantial engineering works and an active shipyard, Kingston had reached maturity and its citizens could take pride in its history and continuing importance as a minor metropolis, and the enduring beauty of its lakeside setting.

14

I

The Shape of the City

This page intentionally left blank

The Character of Kingston A R T H U R R. M. LOWER

I

The character of Kingston? What is the "character" of a group of humans, some thousands of them, whose personnel changes from day to day? What is its "character'' when the business of dying and begetting, of going and coming, goes on for nearly two centuries? Is it not like the comparison often made to a river—every time one looks at it, it is a different river? From many points of view, yes: the river, both the river of water and the river of humanity, is a different stream every time one looks at it. From other points of view, however, that is not so. Rivers are more than running water. They are banks and channels, broad, straight stretches and narrows with rapids, sudden turns, unlooked-for vistas. So with that river of humanity we call a city. It is never the same two days in succession. People change, old buildings are pulled down and new ones put up, new streets opened, alterations to the mode of government effected. Yet the city somehow remains itself, unchanging though ever changing. The city's banks and shores are the deep categories that mark people off in groups. One man cannot contain, as it were, the character of a city: that must be sought in the groups, the groups marked by such matters as religion, origin, birthplace, literacy, the rate and age of dying and the diseases from which men die. It must be sought in the physical environment, which, pressing upon every individual who lives in a particular place, slowly moulds him more or less in its own image. It must be sought in the circumstances which surround the city's history, its founding, the great events that have occurred, the great men, if any, that it has produced and who have consciously built it, the ups and down of its fortunes: in short, in all that which has happened during the period of its existence. Even if all such material could be assembled and arranged in orderly, logical fashion, there would still be something else to be found in a search for the 17

THE CHARACTER OF KINGSTON

"character" of a city. It is the same problem that confronts the biographer. No matter how thoroughly and objectively he may seek to portray his man, he knows well enough that the individual in the end must elude him. One cannot get the essence, the personality, the "soul," of a man pinned down on paper; this may also be said of a city. Its "soul" can be described, but cannot be captured. I therefore apparently put myself out of court before I begin. Granted. But I can go as far as the biographer, perhaps farther, for I have known the subject I am investigating at first hand, and many a biographer has not. Nothing could make a greater difference. Far be it from me, however, to claim that I can paint the flawless portrait. One begins to describe a man by describing the place where he was brought up, then his parentage. A "character" of Kingston may begin in the same way. It is evidently of considerable importance that Kingston is the point at which the mighty St. Lawrence leaves the Great Lakes. It is of equal importance that it lies in a countryside of slender resources. As settlement proceeded in North America, it was inescapable that there should have been some kind of town or village at the exit of the St. Lawrence. If the political boundary had turned out differently in 1783 and Great Britain had not made such an abject surrender, it might well have been that the settlement would have been on the south shore rather than the north. Probably not, however, for it is the north shore point that leads most naturally up along the lake into the interior. As things turned out, it was Kingston's situation at the outlet of the lakes down the river to the sea that became a major factor in its growth. If behind Kingston there had lain a large countryside as fertile as Toronto's hinterland, Kingston would have had still another history. It would have combined this with its position as outlet and a much larger city would probably have grown up. Even in 1791, the growth dependent on a good countryside might already have been evident enough to have enabled the place to be selected as capital of the new province of Upper Canada. That was not to be. The new hamlet, Kingston as it became more or less by chance, would have to struggle along with neither the weight lent to it by a rich hinterland or the prestige that would have derived from being the seat of government. But it could not be robbed of its position and it was this that lay at the root of its history. First of all, after the creation of the new boundary of 1783, it was essential for the imperial government to keep a garrison at the river outlet. In those far from peaceful days, it was from that position that an eye could be kept on the new foreigners not far away and contact maintained both with the Indians and with the whole basin of the Great Lakes. From the first, therefore, Kingston became an outpost of empire, and was given a military character which it has never wholly lost. 18

ARTHUR R. M. LOWER

Secondly, some peaceful dividends began to accrue from the site. Settlement was going forward rapidly in the new province, both above and below Kingston, and since the presence of the military gave promise of security and also of demands for supplies payable in cash, merchants began to congregate. They engaged in the supply business or, as it came to be called, "forwarding," concentrating the surplus of the countryside, no doubt at minimum prices, and sending it down river to Montreal or Quebec. Agricultural surpluses began to come in from farther and farther up as settlement increased, so that even before the War of 1812, shipments were coming from the western end of Lake Ontario. Later on, especially after the first Welland Canal was built in the late 1820s, the range of this lake hinterland extended to the basin of Lake Erie. This "forwarding" business gave Kingston a prosperous merchant colony and also made it into an important port. Schooners brought cargoes eastward over the lakes and at Kingston most of them transferred cargoes to the batteaux and Durham boats that went on to Montreal. This meant a population in which sailors and batteaux-men were numerically prominent. Since there was much wintering over of ships at Kingston, where crews would be paid off, it also supplied the little town with a rough, disorderly element that registered in the town's life in the form of disturbances of the peace. The innumerable taverns and "grog shops" encouraged the turbulence of "the lower orders" (as they were without hesitation called in those days). Order came slowly, and various occurrences delayed its appearance. The War of 1812 filled the town with soldiers and sailors, dockyard workers and other secondary human adjuncts of warfare, not least the usual female adjuncts. In 1812,1813,1814, Kingston must have been an unusually unquiet place. Even after the peace, the dockyard for a considerable time maintained hundreds of workers. Little imagination is needed to picture what many of them did with their pay. Other classes of the community probably saved their wartime profits to build themselves houses. It is rather clear, though it cannot be proved, that a good many of the substantial stone houses of the countryside, especially to the west (where transport to the garrison by water had been easy) were built just after the war. It is also in the wartime period that there can be detected the foreshadowings of the little urban "aristocracy" which has had prominence in Kingston's story. Kingston benefited greatly from the War of 1812. In this respect, it is to be equated with the other towns in which the imperial effort was concentrated, Halifax, Quebec, and Montreal especially. Despite occasional and ineffective American invasions, however, all of Canada benefited from the War of 1812. It would be possible to go further: all of Canada has benefited (economically) from every war, first and last, in which it has been caught up. And no town has benefited more directly, positively, proudly, and righteously, than has 19

THE CHARACTER OF KINGSTON

Kingston. Without wars (with the exception of 1812, all fought at long, safe distances away), Kingston would not be half the place it was destined to become. So much for the environment and its consequences: it was to make Kingston into a governmental centre and a port. The next step the biographer has to take is to describe the individual's background and his youth. It is not appropriate to model the "character" of a city too closely on that of an individual, so "family" and youth may in this case be looked at together. "Parentage" was mixed from the first: soldiers, Loyalists, officials, and later on, immigrants from the British Isles. These people were bound by a common allegiance: they were by upbringing, and probably most of them by conviction, "British." Secondly, until late into the first half century of the town's existence, they were mostly ProtestantsProtestants who were divided among themselves, it is true, but between whom and their Roman Catholic fellow-citizens, there yawned a gulf that it is hard for us to picture today. Add to these human profundities, the incidents along the way which affected the economic life of the town: the opening of the Erie canal in 1825, which carried a threat to the forwarding trade to Montreal (especially after the Oswego canal was completed in 1828); the completion of the Welland canal in 1833, which partially removed that threat; the completion of the Rideau canal in 1832, which opened a large new hinterland to Kingston and by providing water transportation for lumber right from the backwoods to New York, negatived the threat of the Erie. The repeal of the Corn Laws in Britain, in 1846, and still more, the repeal of the British preference on colonial timber in the 1840s, had negative impacts on Kingston, threatening to some extent its forwarding trade; these however, do not seem to have been of major magnitude. A non-economic episode of the 1840s was of major weight: the choice of Kingston as capital of the United Province of Canada. It is true that Kingston enjoyed its glory only for a few years. But the mark then imposed was of tremendous depth at the time and it has not yet disappeared. Making Kingston the capital meant a sudden access of growth. The town rapidly increased in size, as we shall see when we discuss the population graph. New public buildings appeared—of which the most conspicuous is that architectural gem, the City Hall. The result of the transference of the capital to Montreal in 1844 has been usually pictured as disastrous. There is no question but that there was much hardship occasioned by the loss of the capital, but a glance at the population returns for the period may require us to take a second look at the assumption. "Compensation" for the loss may have come by a strange freak of fate: the 20

ARTHUR R. M. LOWER

Irish famine immigration of the period. At any rate, the great immigration of the second quarter of the nineteenth century gave Kingston the Irish quotient in its-population, and abundant cheap labour, even though many of the unfortunate newcomers died of the cholera, as in 1832, or the typhus, as in 1847. Developments in Kingston during the first half of the century evidently were many and weighty, quite apart from those that mainly touched other parts of the province, such as the Rebellion of 1837 or the struggle in the 1840s for responsible government. In contrast, Kingston in the second half of the nineteenth century had little to set it apart from other towns of the province. It was affected by the economic ups and downs of the times, loyally stood "at Britain's side" (the phrase is W. L. M. King's) during the Crimean War and the Boer War, rejoiced with others on the first Dominion Day—and otherwise saw itself more and more shunted aside in the unrolling story of Canada. Only as a sub-capital did it continue to have something of its old importance. When I was a boy, a standard joke among the youth was a sly reference to being sent to Kingston. This, of course, referred to the penitentiary there, which since the 1840s had been trailing along its more or less notorious path. The penitentiary was only one aspect of sub-capitalism. Another was the asylum and still another the continued presence of the military. Then came the founding of the Royal Military College in 1876, a continuation of the older tradition. Such establishments, military and civil, have not decreased as time has gone by. On the contrary, there have been considerable additions to them, both in size and number: the various military schools, for example, the large military camp just to the east of the city, and others. Kingston today, as it has been since the beginning, is a sub-capital, and it is this which differentiates it from all other Ontario cities, making a quite modest size a secondary factor in its character. Little to set it apart from the other towns? Yes, in most respects, but with an important difference. In the 1840s there was planted in Kingston a tender sapling, hardly more than a rootlet. This rootlet was called, almost derisively, a university, Queen's University. By the end of the century, Queen's had grown into a good-sized young tree, with the strength that sixty years of hard toughening in the wind of indifference had given to it. It had also acquired a MAN. The man was its principal, Rev. George Grant. Grant, in the years from his appointment in 1878 to his death in 1902, "put Queen's on the map." In fact by the turn of the century, though it was still quite small, Queen's had become the outstanding fact about Kingston: Kingston was the town where Queen's University was. John A. Macdonald and Queen's University had become the city's most distinguishable landmarks. Since those days, already 21

2 View of the northeast corner of City Park, c. 1890

ARTHUR R. M. LOWER

three-quarters of a century off, both Kingston and Queen's have grown and thriven mightily. During the whole period, Queen's has continued to be ever-present in the minds of Kingstonians. Today it is perhaps uppermost, having attained a stature that sometimes, even physically, tends to dwarf the town. II

The reflection of nearly all that has happened to Kingston from its early days to the present can be traced in the official information which is available from 1835. Possibly less formal material is to be found for the years from 1784 to 1834: this I have not found, so I abide by the official statistics. In 1835, Kingston was reported as having a population of 3,807. The next year this apparently had shrunk to 3,613. The figure remained practically unchanged until Kingston became the provincial capital. The first count taken after that event was for 1842, when the total was given as 6,292, almost double the previous count. The effect of the choice as capital could not have been more clearly demonstrated. The puzzling point about the population for the period, however, is that the removal of the capital in 1844 did not register in terms of population. In 1848 this was returned as 8,416, a considerable growth over 1843. As already suggested, one explanation lies in the Irish immigration of the day. The continued growth can be gauged in other ways, as will appear later. The town continued to grow: 11,585 in 1851; 13,743 in 1861. There followed a period of twenty years during which the numbers were stationary or in retreat. In 1871, the total was 12,417, a noticeable decline. Then a slight move forward to 14,193 in 1881 and a considerable jump to 19,263 in 1891. Then, after 1891, supervened thirty years of little movement: one period of sharp retrogression, 1891-1901, when the figure had decreased to 17,961, a decade of minimum recovery, 1901-11 (from 17,961 to 18,374), then a little better showing thanks to World War I (yes, thanks!) and after the war, from 1921 to the present a continuous rise, increasing in volume with each decade. Up to 1931, however, the increase was not remarkable. But in 1941 a jump took place to more than 30,000 and thereafter rapid growth set in, so that today we have a tidy, medium-sized community, which with its outliers in the townships, must be reaching up to about ninety thousand people. To account for this rapid growth over the last forty years would take us too far away from the subject of this paper, which is Kingston in the nineteenth, not the twentieth, century, but it can be put down in passing to three factors. One is our familiar friend, war, which has always done so much for Kingston. Another is the coming of two major industries. And the third is education. Of 23

THE CHARACTER OF KINGSTON

late years, the expansion of Queen's alone, without noting that of the Royal Military College and of the St. Lawrence community college, has in itself been sufficient to account for a city of considerable size. There could be added to these major factors, another, the army establishment maintained in or about Kingston. And as relatively minor ones, many other governmental establishments, such as prisons and asylums. Today, there is one very large asylum and there are five penitentiaries in and about Kingston. So that it has sometimes been jokingly said that one of the major industries of Kingston is keeping people locked up. Joking apart, this constant brooding presence of the prison, now going well into its second century, must have had considerable effect on the character of Kingston. A wide cross-section of Kingstonians, for example, have come into close contact with "the inmates" as they are politely called, as officials, police, or guards. What the effect has been on the mentality of the men of Kingston who for five generations have served as guards, no one has the power to estimate. It is an unknown, perhaps unmeasurable factor, but it seems to me that it must have a large place. Apart from the rapid expansion of the last forty years, the big point about the history of Kingston's population growth seems to me to be the long period of something close to stagnation from 1861 to 1921, sixty years of more or less suspended animation. The general prosperity of the 1850s, depending on railway construction—the railway came to Kingston in 1856—and the Crimean War (1854-56) lifted the population by about 18 to 20 per cent (from 11,585 to 13,743). Thereafter there was no incentive strong enough to do much more. Pushing the Kingston and Pembroke Railway through in the 1870s and thus tapping the timber of the Ottawa valley was not enough. It may be that it was an agency of "progress" itself that was the cause of the difficulty. The St. Lawrence canals were completed by 1849 and ships of the respectable draft of nine feet could then go straight through to Montreal. Was one result of this that Kingston was bypassed, its place as a port declining? Again, by 1898, the canals had been deepened to take ships of fourteen feet. Does this mean that once more the city was bypassed? In the 1950s, the St. Lawrence ship canal was completed. Ships promptly forsook Kingston harbour. I tried to tell a local politician at the time that the completion of the ship canal would do nothing for Kingston, except negatively, but of course, since the canal was "progress," he would have none of that point of view. The harbour, however, remains deserted. Kingston is no longer a port of consequence. That chapter has ended. The city's growth depends on other matters. Whatever the explanation, the fact is there, stubbornly there: Kingston from 1861 to 1921 hardly budged. Such a long period of—to use the best word possible—stability necessarily has had deep psychological effects. Among these, there stands out conservatism. This will be discussed below. The topic is a large one. 24

ARTHUR R. M. LOWER

What was the effect over two generations of the emigration of Kingston's youth? Every year, young people, except the fortunate few or the one or two children of the family who could find something to do, had to go away. In the days of the large Victorian family, this emigration of the young, at their highest point of vitality, must have been like constant bleeding. Some of the departing went to Toronto, others to Montreal. But Canada as a whole expanded slowly in the period from 1861 to 1901, so the assumption can be made that most of them went "across the line." No doubt a town like Watertown, New York, can find the origins of a majority of its people in our St. Lawrence river towns, Kingston, Brockville, Prescott, especially. It was a distinguished Kingstonian, Sir Richard Cartwright, who remarked of those bleak days that they "began in Exodus and ended in Lamentations." He was not far wrong. I have spoken above of "the deep fundamentals" of a people's life. I refer to such matters as birthplace, origin, and religion. The Canadian census gives us opportunity to investigate these. The figures are in good shape from 1851, more than 120 years ago, and in some instances reach back beyond that year. To look at birthplace first. Of the 11,585 people living in Kingston in 1851 some 4,800 or 41 per cent were native-born. Of these 210 were French Canadians, the rest just "native non-French." The proportion of natives increases rapidly with each census. By 1911, out of a total of 18,974, there were 16,143 or 96 per cent whose birthplace was returned as "Canada." More remarkably, nearly everyone had been born in Ontario. The city had "gone native" rapidly. In 1861,52 per cent were native-born, in 1881 about 70 per cent and in 1901 about 82 per cent. The high-water mark apparently was 1911 with its 96 or 97 per cent native-born. By 1961, as a result of the large immigration of the intervening years, this had shrunk to 85 per cent with Ontario contributing 72 per cent of the total. Throughout the period the British Isles were the point of origin of the majority of the non-nativeborn. In 1911, the British-born reached their maximum number, 2,995, up to that year. But later on the British-born again steadily increased, to 4,273 in 1961, the last year for which the figures are available. Another group of the non-native is of some interest, those born in the United States. In 1851, there were 365 of these, and there was a slow increase census by census, corresponding closely to the general growth of the city. In 1931, there were 499 natives of the United States living in Kingston, and in 1961, 736. Nothing to get alarmed at! The Americans were not taking over Kingston—though a considerable number among them were probably people of some status. Do Americans come over here to manage things for us and then return to their own country on retiring? There is some evidence that this may be the case. The increase in the French-Canadian colony in Kingston has been just about the same as that of the others—commensurate with the growth of the 25

THE CHARACTER OF KINGSTON

city as a whole. In 1851 there were 210 people calling themselves French Canadian, in 1861,100. The figures steadily increase, census by census: 1,871, 363; 1,881, 486; 1,901, 658; 1,911, 667; 1,931, 1,081, and so on. Related to the category birthplace is that of origins. "Origins" has always been an uncertain classification in the Canadian census. The authors of the census seem to define it differently on each occasion. But they have been fairly consistent in the major classes under the term. Are you English, Irish, or Scotch? Are you French? If not, you must be "other." "Other," so important and so finely divided in Western Canada, has not until recently been of much significance in Kingston. Kingston has been overwhelmingly "British Isles" from the first, though the census only gives us particulars from 1871 on. In that year, of the total population of 12,407, 3,271 put themselves down as "English," 1,621 as "Scotch," and 6,611 as Irish. The Irish group thus was about half the total, much the largest. Other groups were minor—363 French, 119 Germans, and very few others. The Irish continued to be the largest group until 1901 (8,075 as against 5,642 for the English) but the situation changed between 1901 and 1911, for in the latter year the English had increased to 7,897 and the Irish decreased to 6,509. Thereafter the relative weights shifted steadily towards "English." This trend is not easy to explain. It is conceivable that as time went on, many people lost track of their origins in the British Isles and simply put themselves down as belonging to the general, indistinct group "English." One check on this would be the classification by religion, a category in which the Canadian census has always been detailed. By 1881 Roman Catholics formed the largest single denomination in the city (4,451 as against the next, Anglican, 3,815). By 1901, they were barely ahead of the Anglicans and by 1911, they had fallen behind (5,259 to 5,483). By 1931 the gap had widened. The degree of coincidence between "Roman Catholic" and "Irish" may be considerable but it is not complete: there are plenty who are Irish but not of Roman Catholic descent, as the troubles in Northern Ireland painfully illustrate. The census does not enable us to identify the two groups. At any rate there is no doubt as to the main point: by 1911, Kingston was ceasing to be the predominantly Irish and Catholic city that it had been from at least 1851. To look forward to 1961, it is interesting to note that while Anglicanism had shrunk to third place, Roman Catholicism had greatly increased. It was considerably outweighed, however, by the more recently formed United Church of Canada. Of recent years, the United Church has been much the strongest denomination, which may be a reflection of the increasingly middle-class nature of our society or simply of the large migration of people from other parts of Canada, especially since the last war. There are numerous minor points about these counts of race and religion 26

A R T H U R R. M. LOWER

that throw an oblique light upon the nature of Kingston. In 1861, there were five Jews in Kingston. This number increased very, very slowly during the nineteenth century, but rather more rapidly in the twentieth. In 1961, there were 805 people describing themselves as Jewish. A matter for some surprise is the small total given in the nineteenth century for "Dutch." It is known that quite a number of the original Loyalist settlers were New York state Dutch: in fact, the Dutch language lived for a time in Canada. And there are still a great many Dutch names in the city and its neighbourhood. Such facts do not register in the census reports. Did the "Dutch" become "English." Of late years, of course, there has been a second incoming of Dutch people and their numbers have gone up. Another little group of some interest, because conspicuous, has been "African" or "Negro." In 1861 there were 69 Africans in Kingston, in 1881, 73, in 1911, 27. In 1961, this total was still only 33. There were in 1861 ten hardy souls who described themselves as of "no religion" and 78 who dodged the point by regarding themselves simply as "Protestants." By 1881, these numbers had shrunk to three and six. No doubt about it, Kingstonians were not departing far from the conventional Victorian pattern: they all were at least nominal adherents of a denomination and nearly all adherents of one of the major denominations. Many of these racial and religious statistics are available by wards. If it were possible to pinpoint the figures by streets, which it is not, it would show the degree of congregation by particular locality: that is, was there any tendency for the various groups to hive off into "colonies"? None of the figures I have looked out would bear such an interpretation: each group and religion was well scattered throughout the various wards. This may be a subject in which "common knowledge" has to do duty for exact knowledge. "Common knowledge" might suggest certain concentrations: we can be quite sure, for example, that Scottish Presbyterians did not live in the poorest areas. It was invariably alleged, especially in the first generation of immigration, that Irish Catholics did. If there were space to explore it thoroughly, a run of figures for births, deaths, and causes of death would tell us much about the character of Kingston. A few incidental figures must suffice: they are indicative. In 1851, there were 385 births reported for Kingston. This gave the high rate of 32 plus per thousand, which is not far from double the modern rate. The rate was not exceptional. It derived from the Victorian family. More especially, in Kingston, much of the population was far down in the social and economic scale, which status produces a high birthrate. It also produces a high death rate. In Kingston in 1881, this rate was only 12 per thousand, apparently quite low for the period, but in 1901, this had gone up to more than 23 per 1,000, the highest in the province. It compared with 19 per 1,000 in Toronto, 20.75 in Ottawa, and 27

THE CHARACTER OF KINGSTON

16.9 in Frontenac County. Some of the counties of peninsular Ontario had rates as low as 11.4, very low indeed for 1901.1 do not know the explanation for this, unless it reflected an epidemic. By the end of the nineteenth century, the character of the natural increase of English Canada, as compared with French, had been clearly established. The surplus of births over deaths gave Kingston a rate of natural increase of 1.06 per thousand. The older counties and cities of Ontario showed similar figures. Brockville actually had a minus rate of 0.31 per thousand. The lakeshore county of Durham was typical, nearly completely rural, and yet with an increase of only 4 per thousand. There was not much difference, though the contrary might have been expected, between urban and rural rates: the large farm families were almost things of the past. But the newer and frontier districts still showed the presence of numerous children. Bruce County had a natural increase of some twelve per 1,000, Muskoka and Parry Sound, one of 16.66. The French counties were entirely different: Prescott had a rate of 23.34. This was similar to the Province of Quebec, where many counties ran up to this rate, the highest being Beauce with 29.37 per thousand. This rate of natural increase must have required a birthrate of something like 50 per thousand, extraordinarily high. Did this falling off in births in English Canada mean failing vitality or the subtle influence of affluence and schooling? The two go together. At any rate the phenomenon is plain. By the census of 1871, there were 917 persons in Kingston who could neither read nor write or about 75 out of every thousand. In that year, 212 out of every thousand were recorded as "going to school." By 1881,211 were "going to school." By 1901, only 60 per thousand of persons five years of age and over were recorded as not able to read or write and 400 out of every thousand were "going to school." It is evident that literacy (of a sort!) was increasing rapidly. As literacy increases, must the birth rate decline? The character of the city is also reflected in the causes of death, which are given from 1861 to our own day. A vast revolution has occurred in the causes of death. In the early days, there was no question of what it was: in 1861, for 25 out of 129 it was "consumption," far and away the largest single cause. In 1881, "consumption" was still the biggest killer by far, closely followed by "diseases of the lungs." Cancer was very low, so were diseases of the heart. Twenty years later, 1901, this order of precedence still held throughout the country. Kingston, however, specialized: its leading cause of death was "Affections of the Intestines," followed by "senile debility." In Frontenac County, nearly everyone seemed to die of "senile debility." Heart diseases were running higher, but cancer was still low and mostly in the upper age groups. Even if we allow a good deal for carelessness or medical ignorance, the conclusion is evident—a big shift in causes of death has occurred over the 28

ARTHUR R. M. LOWER

past hundred years or so. A history of death causes would provide interesting material for discussion. In the year 1891 one person was returned as divorced. In 1901, there was no one in Kingston who was divorced. Here is evidence, again, of the stable Victorian community. Our early censuses give most elaborate returns of occupations. There was not a man who was not ticketed in one way or another. Most occupations were as they are today in non-industrial towns: that is, there were artisans, merchants, a sprinkling of professionals, and a scattering of less ordinary occupations. In 1851, there were in Kingston one architect, four artists (surprising, that!), 31 barristers (too many?), 20 ministers of religion, one dentist, 30 persons living by "private means," 78 dressmakers, two undertakers, 14 washerwomen, 25 male teachers and 12 female, 602 labourers, and 683 "servants," of whom 140 were male. The classification gives a description of a town of marked class structure. Hardly a house a little above the average without its servant and many a house with male servants, though some of the latter would have to be allocated to the 87 inn and tavern keepers. In 1861, the census taker by diligent search discovered "Bishops—1," "archdeacons—1." Otherwise his findings were not very different from ten years previously. Dentists had increased to four, teachers to 52, with the women now in a lead, which they have never lost. Five of the washerwomen had departed, leaving nine, as had five barristers. There were six policemen, 640 servants, and 42 persons living "by private means." For the first time "railroad employees" made their appearance. In 1871, the teachers had increased to 82 (for 14,000 people) and the policemen to eight. There were 24 doctors, 47 stone masons, 580 labourers, and 376 servants, of whome 76 were male. For the first time there was acknowledged the presence of a new breed, "professors," who were seven. The return is also available for 1881, by which year the categories had not greatly changed. The same seven professors, 52 teachers, 33 clergymen (a fairly liberal quota for 18,000 people), lawyers decreased to 20,27 doctors, 13 policemen, 74 stone cutters and masons, 683 labourers, and 475 servants, of whom 49 were men. After 1881, the classifications change somewhat and I did not think it necessary to follow them further, the pattern being plain, though various additional deductions could be drawn from them. One more significant area remains to be looked at before we dismiss this rather dull, but strictly objective, examination of "the character of Kingston." I refer to the circumstances of the surrounding townships. People who lament the "drift from the soil" may be consoled if they are informed that the drift from the soil began the day the first settlers went onto the soil. In Upper Canada, even before a township filled up, sons who were unprovided for were apt to drift off to the nearest town or to other occupations. When all the land 29

THE CHARACTER OF KINGSTON

in a township was granted, necessarily no more people could be put into it and as soon as men got an opportunity to buy additional land, the population began to decrease. In the neighbourhood of Kingston, the lakeshore townships filled up first, apparently reaching their maximum about 1842 in the case of Kingston township (4,963) and 1871 in the case of Pittsburgh. Thenceforward, both these townships declined. The low point for Kingston township was reached in 1921 (2,867), for Pittsburgh in 1931 (2,116), and for Ernestown, also in 1931 (2,669). Between 1931 and 1941, these townships were feeling the first stirrings of urbanization and their population was again beginning to increase. Today they are all growing rapidly, Kingston township leading. The large increase does not represent new life for the countryside: it is purely urban and the people composing it come from all directions. Kingston city's growth of course comes from the same sources. Both city and surrounding townships are thus new communities, with a high proportion of their population strangers to their neighbourhood and to each other. This is bound to affect the nature and possibly the standard of civic behaviour. It will probably not change such matters as much as the influx from the townships to the north. Most of these did not reach their maximum until about 1901, after which they too began to decline. Since many of their inhabitants were on very poor land, earning only a makeshift living, it is probable that Kingston did not benefit much from the gifts they had to bring to it. At any rate, there has quite clearly been a continued drift from the north of people who are close to the "poor white" status. They have come into Kingston, where some considerable colonization or segregation has taken place, much of it in the north end. There are huge tracts of land in Canada that should never have been settled, for poor land makes poor people. Large sections of the north end of Frontenac county are among them. They constitute a perpetual problem for Kingston. Ill

That this long, statistical survey is not of the highest immediate order of interest, I would agree. But I would claim that it gives the essential nature of the city quite clearly. There is, however, a range of observation that relies on subjective opinion, the judgment and feelings of people who have observed Kingston and commented upon it. Among these, there is considerable agreement, and this is supported by many semi-objective situations. Kingston began as a garrison and as a garrison it has continued. It necessarily has had the characteristics of a garrison town. Among them, disorder and irresponsibility in the ranks is as prominent as, though no more prominent than, the high sense of class division, the play-boy proclivities, marking 30

ARTHUR R. M. LOWER

the officers. Both these characteristics communicated themselves to the general population. They made Kingston, at least up to the middle of the nineteenth century, a deeply divided city. Saloons and "grogshops" stood on every corner, with drunkenness, crime, and violence as their accompaniments. On the other hand, officers got up private theatricals, contributed some musical entertainment, and engaged in healthy sports. They are said to have initiated our national game of hockey. Such class activities added a colour and interest to Kingston's life that few other towns in the colony could exhibit. Those citizens "living by private means," as the census puts it, came easily into touch with officers of the garrison and the two groups combined to form a little aristocracy. It was the proudest ambition of the Kingston matron whose people had "private means" to marry her daughter to a British officer. Many did so. There was thus a certain combination of the two groups, though no doubt "real aristocrats" never lost the sense of their superiority socially to the worthy burghers with whom chance brought them into contact. This kind of quasi-military society had also been known in the old colonies. The British troops who formed the army which years before had lost those colonies created, by their mere presence, the same kind of social distinctions wherever they went—loved by the few, disliked and sneered at by the next group below them. General Gage, whose soldiers fired the shots heard round the world at Lexington in 1775, had married a Boston lady. Many another British officer serving overseas has done the like. Records of their attitudes towards their new "in-laws" would be interesting. They would not be quite the same as those displayed by aristocrats who married London heiresses for the money they brought, a well-known eighteenth-century phenomenon, for the colonials would not bring as much wealth to the marriages. And a "colonial" cannot easily be ticketed as can an English person, so the officer marrying one would always be in some doubt as to the proper niche in which to put his wife. Moreover, such brides would have their own pride, which while tremendously "British" would not be English. It may also be surmised that such ladies, going about the world with their husbands, and writing back home to their mothers, would permit little rays of strange sunlight to penetrate the colonial backwoods. Through them people in Kingston would come to know a little about India or South Africa or Jamaica and this would have some effect in thinning out their provincialism. Even so, it is hard to believe that Kingston throughout most of the nineteenth century was anything but a very provincial, or parochial, town, the mass of its people interested in nothing but local or at most provincial affairs. There could have been little to alleviate parochialism. For some months of the year, winter sealed off every Canadian community. Schools were few, books were few. For intellectual fare, there were the garrison plays. And sermons! 31

THE CHARACTER OF KINGSTON

Not until the period of Confederation did a wider world become apparent, and for this we probably have the humble public school to thank, for increasing literacy meant wider ranges of interest and no doubt helped in the generation of the new spirit that made Confederation possible. James Roy, in his Kingston, the King's Town, has made a good analysis of the old pre-Conf ederation Kingston and some of his remarks may be appropriately quoted. The older families, he says, had developed certain characteristics and a political and social outlook which long stamped Kingstonians with a particular seal. They lived in close contact with the army and the navy, and were for a time, closely associated with the government class. . . . It was on Kingston soil that a most rigorous Toryism flourished.

Roy then quotes C. Cooper who in 1856 published a pamphlet describing Kingston: It is deemed that here is found as good a society as in any town in the Province, with all that refinement, luxury, attainments and physical and mental beauty can afford to adorn and gild existence.

Kingstonians, Roy goes on to say, were not very hospitable: they were exclusive and aped the mannerisms and the style of the English officers and their wives. . . . They kept their dinner parties and their tea-drinkings 'most select'. How their American neighbours, a few miles across the water, must have laughed at them!

There is a little counter-account here. Kingston Tories might be starchy, but for real starchiness one had to go to York, for York (Toronto) was the centre of power, where lieutenant-governors could be cultivated and manipulated. Kingston, except briefly as the capital, was not a power centre. The material of the period suggests that there was a certain bonhomie and neighbourliness in Kingstonian Toryism, perhaps augmented by the juxtaposition of big houses and small, rich and poor, which is still marked. Even to this day, the right wing in Kingston does not manifest the degree of hauteur that is immediately apparent in Toronto. Of course Confederation went a long way to bowl over all that sort of thing for it greatly enlarged the local scene. Then "there was a chiel amang them"—the Scot. How could stiff Tories condescend to John A. Macdonald? Or Oliver Mowat? The Scots, quick to scent their opportunities, came in after the War of 1812. They brought with them their attachment to success, Presbyterianism, and education, perhaps in that order. At any rate, many of them found success, they all remained Presbyterian, and they founded Queen's University. No sketch of the character of Kingston would be complete without 32

ARTHUR R. M. LOWER

emphasis on the contribution of the Scots. "John A.", of course, was outstanding among them. He was brought to Kingston by his parents as a child of five. As a young man of twenty-five he was already prominent. And at thirty-one, in 1846, he became a minister of the Crown. From that time on, his public life took him away from Kingston, but, save for short intervals, he never ceased to represent it. And when he died, in 1891, he was brought home for his last long sojourn. He is buried in Cataraqui Cemetery and his fellow citizens never cease to honour him as he rests there. There was Mowat, too, a native son. Mowat achieved early success at the bar and went on to win political prominence. He became premier of Ontario, minister of justice in Sir Wilfrid Laurier's cabinet, and finally, lieutenant-governor of his native province. His brother for years adorned the faculty of Queen's University. John A.'s brother-in-law, Professor James Williamson, was among Queen's earliest professors and he lived to complete half a century as a member of its staff. Every principal of Queen's, down to Grant, was Scottish-born and Scottisheducated. St. Andrew's Church, under the long pastorate of its minister, Rev. Dr. Machar, was Scotland's citadel on Canadian soil. The church is filled with tablets to its distinguished members. Two lieutenant-governors of Ontario, many mayors and city officials were of Scottish birth or descent. To this day, St. Andrew's Day is duly celebrated and St. Andrew's Society flourishes. Each autumn the incoming freshmen of Queen's blossom forth in their tartan tam-o'-shanters. The Queen's "yell" is in the Gaelic tongue. Scots have always been prominent in the professions and in business life. Some of the staunch old shops have had their Scottish names for two or three generations. There is no doubt about the mark that the founding generation of Scots made upon Kingston. And so, through the Scot, another segment of life impinged on Kingston. None can on occasion be more sensitive to rank than can the Scots. But the society founded upon the clan—and all Scots are influenced by it—can never be as caste-ridden as the Norman feudalism of the English. Is not every Highlander a descendant of chiefs of clans? So Scottish Kingston became somewhat more flexible than the older Tory or Family Compact Kingston. And it planted a mighty seed: Queen's University. Queen's for long was feeble. Indeed, right down to the end of the nineteenth century, it was still struggling. But it brought to Kingston great men, Grant and Watson and Williamson and others. In our day Queen's has become more and more conspicuous. It is now a city within a city, and its strength, together with the power that radiates out from its faculty, has not made for popularity with ordinary citizens. "These professors" know too much, think too much, use their brains too easily, for that. Men fear knowledge. Knowledge is power. A complex of ten or eleven thousand people, staff and students together, 33

3 The funeral procession of Sir John A. Macdonald, June 11, 1891

ARTHUR R. M. LOWER

dumped down in a town of some sixty thousand, cannot expect popularity— except when students win football matches, which is another order of existence. But Queen's is a great national institution and for many years past, it has been subtly affecting the character of Kingston. It has not succeeded in making Kingston into an intellectual community, far from that. But it has supplied superior intelligence to the Kingston City Council, to the board of education, and indirectly in every area. Without Queen's Kingston would be a small, probably rather backward, Ontario town, the quintessence of conservatism, and, without hinterland to help it grow, stagnant. With Queen's, Kingston regains something of its ancient capital city status. It is brought into close touch with the great world beyond its doors, through the universality of learning. It possesses extraordinarily good hospital and medical services. Its music and theatre are mostly reflections of Queen's. Its professoriate gives it close links with both federal and provincial governments. Nothing has removed modern Kingston farther from the old sleepy nineteenth century town than has Queen's University. Kingston, it will be observed, struggled through the nineteenth century a much divided and sluggish city. During three-quarters of the century the population increased only in a minor way, which meant that the energy of youth was drained away. It was a town of classes: first, the military, then the other governmental adjuncts, such as prisons and asylums, then the university, which until about 1900 was something apart, and lastly the congeries of small merchants who attended on the wants of the classes above them. It is hardly a typical Canadian picture. It has nothing of the rough democracy of the frontier (except among the "lower classes," properly kept in their place). It is almost old-world, rather than new-world; but so great is the power of the circumambient air, blowing freely about the open spaces of a vast country and a still vaster continent, that even the starchiness of Kingston slowly dissolved. The divisions were to become less obnoxious, if not less conspicuous, until finally—and this is the last chapter—Kingston was overtaken by the North American dream of "progress." Its inhabitants multiplied, as did their buildings. Its streets extended, as did its area. Its suburbs began to stretch across the countryside. While its port became deserted, some new industries arrived. The old sloth gradually, though not completely, dissipated. Slowly, and for many of its citizens, reluctantly, Kingston was dragged into the twentieth century. Retaining only memories and the half-ruined monuments of its limestone past, which its citizens did not value, it became an important centre, the "metropolis" of eastern Ontario, and perhaps most proudly, a genuine Canadian town.

35

This page intentionally left blank

Architecture for a Boom Town: The Primitive and the Neo-Baroque in George Browne's Kingston Buildings J. DOUGLAS STEWART

When the history of nineteenth-century Canadian architecture comes to be written in detail, it seems more than likely that the name of George Browne [pi. 4] will occupy a considerable place in it. His career spanned half a century—from the 1830s to the 1880s, crucial decades in the history of Canada, and of architecture, and it covered at least three major cities in the two most populous provinces of the developing country—Quebec City, Kingston, and Montreal. Considered simply from the amount of time Browne spent here, probably less than three years, Kingston would seem, for him, the least important. Yet it was Kingston, then in her halcyon days as a great military and commercial centre, and enjoying her brief meteoric rise to glory as capital of the United Canadas, which provided the Belfast man with his most challenging opportunities, and elicited some of his finest responses. In aesthetic terms, Browne's Kingston works are some of the finest buildings of the 1840s in Canada, a period which saw the influx of many professional architects from abroad, as well as the maturing of at least one splendid home-grown product, in Quebec, Thomas Baillairge. And it is in Kingston that Browne apparently first developed his feeling for materials, for textures, for the play of light and shade, and above all for solidity, for mass. Yet there is even more to his Kingston architecture. In it one can detect not merely an aesthetic response to a new environment—the limestone of the area—but also an intellectual and spiritual one. For Browne, I believe, consciously or unconsciously recognized the contemporary spirit of the United Canadas, as epitomized in Kingston—a heroic, still pioneering society, tremendously self-confident, burgeoning with energy, and expanding on all fronts. To give expression to this spirit he developed new stylistic means, and refurbished old—means which were, however, in some ways closely linked to architectural trends in contemporary Britain. Specifically, there is both a "primitive" element and a "neo-baroque" one in Browne's Kingston style. With the 37

4

George Browne, c. 1870

J. DOUGLAS STEWART

former he carries on a tradition dating from the eighteenth century; with the latter he is in tune with the most up-to-date ideas of London and Liverpool. Late eighteenth-century architects, like painters, had revolted against what they considered the decadence, superficiality, and frivolousness of the prevailing rococo style in favour of something more direct, more honest and heroic. They were aided by the explorations of archaeologists, especially the discovery and publication of Greek architectural forms from the 1750s on. The Greek Doric order, with its primitive massive scale and proportions and rudimentary abstract geometrical forms came to have a particular appeal. The study of the origins of architectural forms, and early forms like the Greek Doric or the Tuscan and their application, conjured up, for the Romantic mind, the vision of a heroic uncorrupted antique civilization. But these primitive antique architectural forms could, as has been observed, have the opposite effect: ". . . the destroyed classical past could also be used for constructive, regenerative purposes; at times, the retrospective attitudes of private, languorous melancholy could be replaced by prospective dreams of vast, public Utopias."1 This Utopian primitivism became particularly prevalent in France in the late eighteenth century, and most notably in the works of Claude-Nicolas Ledoux and in the theories of the Abbe Marc-Antoine Laugier. But it was essentially an international phenomenon, that soon spread to England and to America. Browne may have derived his ideas of the primitive from a variety of sources, but the works and writings of Sir John Soane were probably the most important single influence, since it is to Soane of all contemporary architects that his work seems most closely related in its highly personal use of classical forms. The Greek Revival movement triumphed everywhere in the early nineteenth century. But its austerity inevitably provoked a reaction in favour of something richer, more decorative, and with more movement than the static character into which its later forms tended to degenerate. The neo-baroque elements in Browne's architecture are in this way closely related to the architects of the new generation who still worked with classical rather than Gothic forms, men such as Harvey Lonsdale Elmes, Sir Charles Barry, and C. R. Cockerell.2 These claims for Browne may appear startling and exaggerated. Outside Kingston he is little more than a name to many, including some architectural historians. In the most recent survey of Canadian architecture, he receives no mention.3 Doubtless had he worked in Toronto he would have long ago been recognized—provided his works were still standing. But parochialism cuts both ways. When political and commercial leadership passed from Kingston, it meant that much of her past attracted little attention outside her own 39

A R C H I T E C T U R E FOR A BOOM TOWN

boundaries. Yet it also saved her early buildings, at least until the present, from destruction by the developer. Fortunately most of George Browne's buildings are still with us. It is these which provide the tangible evidence of their architect's achievements. We are still ignorant of much of George Browne's life and work before his arrival in Kingston. A contemporary source states that he was born in Belfast in 1811, the son of an architect, and that he came to Quebec in 1830.4 He appears in a number of Quebec newspaper advertisements in the thirties, which tell us that he gave lessons in architectural drawing and also practised his profession, although almost none of the buildings listed can be positively identified.5 During 1837-38 he apparently held a commission in the militia and in 1840 moved to Montreal.6 By 1841 he had been appointed government architect and the capital moving to Kingston, Browne moved with it. Browne's work for the government in Kingston was extensive, but it consisted chiefly of renovating or refitting existing buildings.7 However, his appointment left him free to take on private commissions, which he solicited in an advertisement in the Chronicle and Gazette of 17 February 1841 describing himself as "architect, measurer, and landscape gardener."8 One of the earliest responses to Browne's advertisement seems to have come from John Mowat, the prominent Presbyterian merchant. Mowat commissioned Browne to erect a building at the corner of Princess and Bagot Streets which was to contain two houses above shops. No documents have emerged concerning the precise date of the commission, but it is known that Mowat was buying the land here between February and April.9 However, we can follow the later stages of the raising of the building in two letters written by Mowat to his youngest son John, then at school in Brockville.10 On 24 July the elder Mowat state that: "The masons have got the cellar walls nearly on a level, if you stay away two weeks longer you will be better able to judge how the round corner suits the eye." On 7 October he reported: "Today the lintels are placed in the third storey windows of the corner house, and in two weeks they expect to have the roof on." Mowat's two descriptions of the building (which under protest has recently, and tragically, been destroyed by the Bank of Nova Scotia) call attention to the most striking aspect of its design, and one that was a novelty in Kingston in 1841, viz. the round corner. In the course of the next two years Browne was to build two more Kingston buildings with this feature, Wilson's Buildings [pi. 5] at Wellington and Brock Streets (now the Victoria and Grey Trust and now happily restored), and the Commercial Mart (pi. 6: now the S & R Stores). Both were built for merchants, William Henry Wilson and Charles Hales, and both combined shops on the ground floor with dwellings above. Browne's three commercial buildings show a distinct progression in mas40

5

Wilson's Buildings (now Victoria and Grey Trust Company), built 1841-42

6 Commercial Mart (now S & R Store), completed 1842

J. DOUGLAS STEWART

tery of the design problems connected with this particular building type, a favourite with British architects of the 1830s and 1840s, and one Browne may have already used in Montreal.11 In addition the architect shows increasing tendencies towards both primitive and neo-baroque architectural forms. The basic design problems of the building stem from its hybrid character. Open shop fronts are required on the ground floor, but the dwellings above require smaller openings. This creates a problem of unity, as does the fact that the facades are on two streets running at right angles to each other. In the Mowat Building Browne uses fairly conventional means to solve the problems. The lower three floors (the fourth is an addition)12 are divided vertically by pilaster-like strips, behind which run horizontal string courses above the first and second storeys. Above these floors is a plain cornice. Originally the building had a low pitched roof. The Mowat Building has a kind of clean-cut elegance and there is a distinctly primitive flavour about its use of architectural forms. In Browne's next round-corner building, Wilson's Buildings, this tendency increases.13 The ground storey is articulated with segmental headed arches while the upper, dwelling-house windows are square-headed. The second and third storeys are articulated with a series of giant pilasters which terminate in a cornice. However, the pilasters project at the cornice with a moulding form which derives from the heaviest and most primitive of the Greek orders, the Doric. Also, they continue above the cornice, between the attic windows, suggesting a sort of frieze composed of pilaster triglyphs, and window metopes. This windowed frieze is not at all uncommon, especially with American Greek Revival architects. But the moulding is quite unorthodox, and appears to be Browne's own invention. The third of Browne's round-corner buildings, the Commercial Mart, has unfortunately been much altered.14 The mansard roof with dormers replaces one destroyed by fire in 1908, but it must have been a later addition. The 1908 fire also destroyed the block cornice under the third storey which can be seen in an old photograph.15 What was above this cornice? I rather think there may have been a panelled parapet, perhaps somewhat like that on the ends of the City Hall. This suggestion gains credence when one realizes that the blocks on the cornice here were like those of the City Hall, simple and square in section, not elaborate corbels with moulded undersides. Whatever the crowning feature was originally on this building, enough remains to demonstrate that it is Browne's most sophisticated and subtle essay in the "round corner" type, and a structure which achieves a new synthesis of primitive and neo-baroque elements. The direct references to the classical orders are even fewer than in Wilson's Buildings. There are no pilasters and no capitals. The arches on the ground storey are simple, round43

A R C H I T E C T U R E FOR A BOOM TOWN

headed ones, not the segmental form found on Wilson's Buildings. (Sadly, these magnificent arches are totally obscured by a signboard on the south side. Fortunately those to the east are still visible.) Yet there are some direct and indirect references to the Tuscan order, generally regarded as the most primitive and "rustic" of all. The blocks under the cornice, as at the City Hall and Rockwood Villa, are those associated with the Tuscan. And the rustication around the arches is of a character which as early as the sixteenth century, in the writings of theorists like Serlio, had been associated with this mode and was later used in England, in the seventeenth century by Inigo Jones, with a similar intention.16 A further primitive reference is the plain, geometric pedimental form of the Greek stele type on the second storey window at the corner, a feature which is also found on the City Hall.17 Yet the Commercial Mart also triumphantly solves, in a baroque fashion, the problem of unifying the facades fronting on the two streets, together with the corner. This is a problem which, as we have seen, Browne did not attempt in the Mowat Building, since its facades were of unequal lengths. In Wilson's Buildings he virtually avoided it by using identical bay units on both facades. At the Commercial Mart he varies the grouping of his bays, and also their depth, in the most subtle fashion. As one might expect, it is the end bays on both facades which project the furthest. The adjacent bays in both cases are cut back, above the arcade. However, the third bay projects as far as the outside bay, and like it has square-headed windows, while those of the bay between have (on the upper floors) segmental-headed ones. This gives an illusion of the penultimate bay being squeezed between those adjoining. Moving inward one encounters a pair of bays recessed again, finally one reaches the corner consisting of a single bay, recessed yet further, but where the proportion of wall to opening is greater than anywhere else, giving a sense of strength at this point. Further strengthening features at the corner are the pedimental surround of the second-storey window, and the projecting voussoirs and keystone of the ground-storey arch. This raised keystone is used on all the ground-storey arches. On the second-storey windows there are also keystones, except on the penultimate bays. However, these keystones have been left roughly dressed in the centre, an additional but primitive or natural feature, and one that recalls the practice of baroque architects like Bernini. But the most baroque features about this building are the feeling for mass and the sense of movement in the facades, as well as the build-up of elements from the sides to the centre. Browne's connection with John Mowat may well have brought him the commission for his finest town house in Kingston, the St. Andrew's Presbyterian Manse [pi. 7]. Browne advertised in the Chronicle and Gazette of 30 June 1841 for tenders for the manse and on 24 July, in the Mowat letter 44

7 St. Andrew's Manse, built 1841

A R C H I T E C T U R E FOR A B O O M T O W N

already quoted from, the merchant stated that "the manse is to go on— McLeod and Logan were the lowest tender and they have got the job am't £900 and something to finish the whole including the outhouses & all in stone."18 The subtleties of Browne's design, and his brilliant use of materials at the manse have been sensitively analysed by Miss Marion MacRae.19 What seems to have escaped notice, however, is the peculiar treatment of the main doorway surround. On the exterior it consists of a simple chamfered roundheaded arch of smooth ashlar, supported by uprights of the same material. At the junctions of the two sections are simplified capitals, whose profiles are clearly meant to suggest the rugged spirit of the Greek Doric order, a very personal distillation of classical forms. The exterior columns contain no fluting, as an orthodox Greek Doric column should. Inside the door, however, Browne repeats the exterior motive, but using fluting on both the column and the arch! Again, it is a very personal adaptation of classical forms.20 There is not very much overtly neo-baroque in the manse, except the feeling for texture, light and shade, and mass, perhaps because it is early in Browne's Kingston period. In a later domestic work of 1841, however, Rockwood Villa [pi. 8], Browne does display very strong specifically neo-baroque qualities, both externally and internally, as well as those of the primitive.21 The medium is not the usual ashlar, but rubble stone covered with stucco ruled in squares to resemble ashlar, and wooden trim. With these simple materials Browne created one of his boldest compositions. Rockwood is a two-storey, five-bay structure. Its entrance is perhaps its most dominating feature, consisting of a pedimented porch of giant wooden Tuscan columns between piers, i.e. in antis—a Greek feature. The space between the columns contains steps which lead up to a shallow elliptically-shaped porch. The sides of the porch contain a niche and a windowed niche, while the rather narrow door is in the centre. The sense of constriction continues in the entrance vestibule, but then the space suddenly and dramatically expands into an octagon of two storeys in height and beyond that a long rectangular dining room from which originally one must have had one of the grandest panoramic views in Ontario—in the foreground Kingston harbour, beyond Wolfe and Simcoe Islands, and in the far distance the lake.22 The central octagonal space, which is covered with imitation ashlar, like the exterior, contains a gallery at first-floor level and is lit by a cupola. It is an unusual architectural feature (and very rare in the North American context) known as a "tribune." As has recently been shown, it was a peculiarly English feature in domestic architecture, begun apparently by William Kent and carried on by neoclassical architects like Adam, Holland, and especially Sir John Soane, from whom it seems likely that Browne derived it.23 46

8 Rockwood Villa, built 1841

A R C H I T E C T U R E FOR A BOOM TOWN

The ultimate sources and meaning of the tribune are threefold. It evokes the idea of the ancient Roman basilican apse, where the tribune sat in judgment. Later, in Florence, the word was used to describe an octagonal room in the Uffizi (much admired by English eighteenth-century travellers and painted by Zoffany for George III) and in Venice by Scamozzi to describe a room of the same shape in his master Palladio's most famous country house, the Villa Rotunda at Vicenza. At this point, one cannot forbear asking the question, what did the tribune mean, if anything, to its owner? Unfortunately none of John Solomon Cartwright's thoughts on his house have come down to us. However, he was by profession a lawyer and judge, and a member of the Legislative Assembly, who would no doubt have gone on to a brilliant political future had his career not been cut short by his tragically early death in 1845.24 He had been educated in Canada, then in England, and had travelled in Europe. The records of his book-buying when he returned to Canada, together with the portion of his library which still survives, give us a picture of a sophisticated man of broad culture, whose interests included history, architecture, and landscape-gardening. As evidence of the latter, his signed copies of Britton and Brayley's famous Beauties of England and Wales, a 25-volume set (and for which Cartwright seems to have paid 12 guineas) and Repton's Landscape Gardening (edited by J. C. Loudon in 1839), both of them classics of the "picturesque" movement, still survive.25 With this kind of background, there can be little doubt that Cartwright could talk to his architect Browne on an equal footing, in the eighteenthcentury fashion of the architect and patron, as opposed to the architect-client relationship which was displacing it.26 Certainly Browne's primitivism would have been understandable to him, as well as the tribune which may perhaps have evolved as a personal reference to his own profession and aspirations. The interior planning of Rockwood shows Browne at his most imaginative. Not only is there the exciting sequence of shapes from the porch through the tribune to the dining room but there are also, to the right of the entrance, an apse-headed room (whose form is ingeniously fitted into the convexity of the porch), and an extremely compact staircase of elliptical form over to the left.27 Upstairs, the spaces behind the angles of the octagonal tribune provide small entrance halls for the bedrooms, thereby increasing their privacy. The handling of the detail inside Rockwood is as masterly as the planning, and fortunately much of it has survived and has been sympathetically restored and maintained. It shows Browne making use of the vocabulary of classical ornament, but as usual in a personal fashion, yet with a strong feeling for overall harmony. For example, in the upper storey of the tribune Browne uses a frieze with simple roundels, a feature derived from the porch 48

J. DOUGLAS STEWART

of the maidens at the Erectheum on the Athenian Acropolis. Since it derives from the Ionic order, its position on an upper level is "correct/' and links it in the spectator's mind with the Tuscan on the exterior of the ground floor. Yet there is nothing of the delicacy of the Ionic in the proportions. On the contrary the roundels are large and bold. This boldness also characterizes the mouldings above, and the ribs of the vaulting, whose simple forms are crowned by an inner skylight of interlaced "star" forms. Colour and texture are also important factors in the design of the tribune. The walls on both floors are ruled like the exterior of the house to suggest ashlar masonry. By suggesting this outside character, the tribune becomes linked with the Roman atrium, which was open to the sky. The walls are painted a warm terracotta colour, while above them some of the detail is picked out in white. The character of the colour scheme lightens as one's eye rises, and culminates in the glass of the skylight which is partly white and partly mauve, but rough and opaque, thereby providing a cool colour contrast and a textural one. In the upstairs hall there is a feature which seems at first disquieting, the rather frail appearance of the mouldings of the arches at the corners, compared to the rich, robust character of those around the doors at the front and back. Moreover, this difference in character is accentuated by the tension of the segmental arches at the corners, compared with the stability and repose of the broad square central doorway surrounds. A little thought reveals that by these means Browne is deliberately emphasizing the front-back axis, which is so prominent downstairs, and the prominence of the central bedroom doorway not only announces a larger space beyond it but also gives it an importance in keeping with its position as the master bedroom. Of the original fireplace surrounds, only those in the upstairs bedrooms survive. They are nearly all identical [pi. 9]28 but they are among Browne's most exciting designs. The tops are plain chunky pieces of pine with simply rounded corners. The upright pieces have attached ornaments which appear like elongated inverted U-shapes. At first glance these features appear to be wholly abstract. Yet closer examination reveals that they derive from a special kind of acroterium (the terminals on the roofs of ancient temples) which has been extended enormously. Moreover, they are narrower at the top than the bottom, suggesting the strong diminution of the Greek Doric column. As one moves through the various-shaped spaces of the interior of Rockwood, one is constantly conscious of references on the inside to the outside, all part of a deliberate plan to harmonize the two. Several of the features have been noted already, but more can be seen by examining the exterior more closely, with the interior in mind. It will now be realized clearly, for example, 49

9 Bedroom fireplace, Rockwood Villa

J. DOUGLAS STEWART

that the bold projection of the portico is not merely an appendage or a piece of exterior decoration. It does of course endow the building with a tremendous primitive gravity. But its projection also announces the main axis of the interior, and two of the most important rooms, the tribune and the dining room. A secondary axis is also announced by exterior forms, viz. the projecting section of the side wall at the right, punctuated above by a large recessed panel and below by a niche, which announces the apse-headed rooms which lie along the front of the house.29 These projections and recessions serve to create a strong feeling of mass in the villa and also create visual interest. Strong contrasts of light and shade are added by the heavy wooden blocks under the cornice, a Tuscan feature. The back of the house has now been greatly altered by the addition of the conservatory. But many of Browne's original features remain, notably the tent-like balcony over the window of the master-bedroom (in striking contrast to the massive severity of the balconies on the front and sides) and the wooden quoins at the corners, a feature which, along with the Tuscan portico, makes one wonder whether Browne had in mind the greatest English exemplar of the Tuscan, Inigo Jones's St. Paul's at Covent Garden.30 We have noticed certain Tuscan features in earlier Browne buildings, but Rockwood is his first full-scale exposition of the Tuscan mode. It is important to try to understand what Browne was driving at by his use of this order at Rockwood, not only for the villa itself, but because this same mode reaches its grandest flowering in the City Hall. The Tuscan was recognized by Renaissance architectural writers, following Vitruvius, as the most primitive of all the classical orders—the one closest to the vernacular. Its proportions were heavier than those of other orders, its decoration simpler and there was a marked tendency in the Tuscan for the structural forms like horizontal eaves supports (cornice blocks or corbels) to show in all their functional nakedness. Its primitive qualities gave it distinctly workaday associations among sixteenth-century writers. Scamozzi describes it as maintaining "the plainness of primitive times" and recommends it for military architecture, city gates, arsenals, and prisons. His master Palladio, because of the widely-spaced columns which Vitruvius had described the Tuscan as having, recommended it for country buildings where the passage of carts had to be considered. It thus acquired rustic as well as primitive associations.31 The most consistent practitioner in the Tuscan before the eighteenth century, as has only recently been realized, was Inigo Jones, whose church at Covent Garden has been called by Sir John Summerson "an archaeological essay probably unique in the architecture of its period and at the same time prophetic: prophetic of the theory and practice of Neo-Classicism as it was to be understood more than a hundred years later."32 51

A R C H I T E C T U R E FOR A B O O M T O W N

To the neoclassical mind, the Tuscan had an immediate appeal, not only because of its primitive and direct qualities of construction and the way it seemed to be founded in nature, but also because of its evocation of a simpler, golden age, always an appealing feature to the Romantic mind. Browne's relationship to tradition and contemporary theory is thus clear. Nonetheless, as Summerson observes in a later passage, 'The Tuscan image varies from author to author and their graphic expressions are equally free."33 And Browne is no exception. His portico at Rockwood is certainly very close to Scamozzi's drawing of a Tuscan portico.34 There are the same square piers at the corners flanked by an inner pair of columns, and the openings in the wall behind, a door flanked by round-headed niches, are the same. But Browne gives the whole passage a more powerful baroque character by increasing the proportions of the parts, compressing the columns close to the piers, making the porch elliptical in form, and projecting the portico forward. Again, it is a highly personal adaptation of traditional forms. Rockwood is not only a gem of architecture in itself, and one of Browne's finest and most personal works, but is also a fascinating prediction of many aspects of the Kingston City Hall [frontispiece and pi. 13]. The basic T-shape ground plan is seen here, and so are the Tuscan portico in front, and the large-scale cornice blocks projecting vigorously and densely from under the eaves. The Kingston City Hall was Browne's most ambitious building in Kingston, indeed perhaps the most ambitious that he was ever to undertake. It was also the largest building of its kind to be constructed in Canada up to that time, and perhaps the largest in North America. Its building history is complex and would require a sizeable book to do justice to it and its architect. Here we are concerned primarily with its primitive and neo-baroque aspects, but to understand these something of its building history and its functions must be given. This is especially necessary since the City Hall as we now see it has on the one hand lost must of its original structure and on the other has gained a number of features. Fortunately we can, from old photographs and contemporary descriptions and documents, reconstruct the original building. In June 1842 "The Commonalty of the Town of Kingston, being desirous of erecting a Town Hall and Market for increasing the conveniences of the Town," advertised a competition for designs, stating that it would pay £50 for the first plan selected, £30 for the second and £20 for the third.35 The winners were announced in August as Browne, Alfred Brunell of Kingston, and John Howard of Toronto. The originally advertised estimates were £10,000 but the city council appears to have revised this almost immediately. The mayor in fact went to England to borrow £20,000. It is usually stated, on the basis of a report in the British Whig of 22 March 1844 that Browne was dismissed by 52

J. DOUGLAS STEWART

the Corporation and replaced by William Coverdale. However, this appears to be an error, as an examination of the city records indicates. There certainly were differences of opinion between the architect and the city, especially after he moved to Montreal, accompanying the government. But he was never dismissed, and "delivered" the building in December 1844.36 The building was to have a remarkable variety of functions. These were given in great detail in a report on Kingston in a letter to the New York periodical The Anglo-American by a correspondent named "Leo," and the letter was reprinted in the Kingston Chronicle and Gazette of 16 December 1843.37 (The identity of Leo is not known, but he was evidently an American, since he observes near the end of his letter that "the new City Brewery well deserves notice, they are following close in this establishment on our celebrated Albany Brewers in the manufacture of a very superior article of Ale.") Sir Richard Bonnycastle, the prominent engineer-soldier-traveller, gave a more succinct description: "The Town Hall is probably the finest edifice of the kind on the continent of America, and cost £30,000, containing two splendid rooms of vast size, Post-Office, Custom-House, Commercial Newsroom, shops, and a complete Market Place, with Mayor's Court and Police-office, and a lofty cupola, commanding a view of immense extent."38 To all this, Bonnycastle might have added that there were rooms for an eating-house and auction rooms, which were housed in the pavilion at the King Street entrance to the market. The rear wing of the hall as it now exists is merely a fragment. A fire on 10 January 1865 gutted the whole wing. After the fire the end pavilion was torn down, and a frontispiece, the design of which was a sort of miniature version of the King Street front, was placed at the end of the truncated wing. Further changes to the market wing occurred in the 1940s when the upper storey was added to. Hence much of what we now see bears very little relation to Browne's original conception. The main block, fronting on Ontario Street, has survived more or less intact. But here too it requires an effort of the imagination to envisage Browne's original intentions, because of the later disfiguring additions to the roof. Originally, as can be seen in his fagade drawing [pi. 10] and early photographs [frontispiece], only the central cupola rose above the skyline.39 Moreover, it was a cupola of severe and noble form—a pure hemisphere, supported by a row of Tuscan columns and walls pierced by windows with recessed frames. This simplicity of form (now destroyed by fussy later decoration) was in keeping with the forms in the rest of the wing. The cupola rose from a series of platforms consisting of a square, an octagon, and a circle. Below this is the focal point of the facade, and the most majestic feature of the whole building—the great portico of four Tuscan columns. 53

1*50. Hugh Scobie ,LittL .Toronto.

10 Kingston City Hall, front elevation (probably based on George Browne's final drawings)

J. DOUGLAS STEWART

The Tuscan theme of the portico is continued all over the building—in the corner pilasters, the varied rustication of the walls, the stately rhythms of the round-headed arches on the principal floor, and at the roof, by the great bold cornice blocks, recalling those of Rockwood, but here hewn from stone, and real functional cantilevers, weighing some 400 pounds apiece.40 As at Rockwood, the great entrance portico is no mere "front." It announces, as it were, the market wing which runs behind it and terminated originally in a great facade of three entrances as well. But it also links the three wings together, for while the central arch provided an entry to the market, the entrances on the left and right provided access to the "commercial" and the "town" sides of the building. The building is thus designed from the inside out, not the reverse as was the case with all too many later Victorian buildings. The disparate functions of the different parts of the building are expressed in other ways on the exterior. For example, the severe, stately character of the front elevations seems admirably suited to the dignity of the activities which take place behind them. Behind, the bulk of the market wing is simpler in treatment, with the exception of the clock cupola surmounting the pavilion which was adorned with baroque scrolls (a nice counterpoint to the sobriety of the main cupola and a witty rejoinder to that of St. George's across the way), whose fluid forms struck a festive note in keeping with the restaurant which lay beneath it. Browne's City Hall, in its original form, was essentially still a classical building, linked to the classical or Greek Revival tendencies which had been one of the main trends in Anglo-American architecture since 1800. But there are other features which are more baroque, which look forward to the architecture of the 1850s, indeed to the High Victorian style. These are a strong sense of mass, texture, and movement. The strong projecting portico, the rich superimposition of pilaster forms at the corners, the rounding of the back corners, the continuity of motif from front to back, the contrasts of rusticated basement, the channelled ashlar first floor, and the smooth jointed ashlar surface above—all these features and many more could be cited. Of the evolution of Browne's design we know, as yet, very little, although fortunately what are probably his first proposals have recently emerged.41 These, which include some exquisitely drawn elevations [pis. 11 and 12], show marked differences from the finished building and are graphic witnesses to the effort which the architect must have expended before he ultimately achieved the seemingly effortless ease and serene elegance of the finished designs. The most obvious change is of course in the scale of the storeys, but this was presumably simply a result of the decision to enlarge the structure and 55

11 Kingston City Hall, front elevation (George Browne's competition drawing, 1842)

12 Kingston City Hall, rear elevation (George Browne's competition drawing,

A R C H I T E C T U R E FOR A B O O M T O W N

virtually double the original cost. From the point of view of architectural design and style there are other, more important features. Particularly striking are the presence of more primitive and baroque features in the final design. Originally Browne made provision for a flat frontispiece of pilasters. In the final design, this has become the boldly projecting portico. Moreover, in the building as executed the rather weak ends of the front have been strengthened below by square antae superimposed on half-pilasters at the corners, while above a panelled parapet has been added, and the Greek pediments have been removed. The final dome is much stronger and simpler, and rises more logically from platforms beneath it. There is also, in the final building, more variety of texture. As with any artist or architect, it is an exciting experience to follow the changes from the early to the finished stages of a project. In Browne's case it is also fascinating to see how little he wastes, how ideas start in a small way in one part of the design, are removed, and then turn up in other parts. For example, the original design for the main entrance on Ontario Street was superseded, but it turns up as the germ of the final design of the market pavilion facade on King Street. On the other hand, the panelled parapets of the corners of the main block are first seen in embryonic form on the first design for that same pavilion facade. Features like these demonstrate the flexibility of Browne as a designer and the organic quality of his thought. Browne's achievement seems to have been widely recognized among his contemporaries. Sir Richard Bonnycastle's praise has already been quoted. W. H. Smith, a Torontonian, described it unequivocally in his 1846 Canadian Gazetteer as "the finest and most substantial building in Canada."42 "Leo," the unknown 1843 correspondent to the Anglo-American cited above, and evidently a man with some knowledge of architecture, also praised it, in detail: a splendid new Market, with public offices. . . the finest building of its kind in Canada and reflects great honor on George Brown [sic], Esq., the talented architect. . . . The wings are finished with pilasters and half pilasters, giving a bold striking effect, surmounted with a panelled attic, which gives them a very pleasing light appearance. . . . This building is excellent in its features of design, and substantial in the dimensions of its parts; the lights and shades are beautifully blended, and when viewed from a short distance has a light and elegant appearance.

But to at least one contemporary the style of Browne's building was far from pleasing. A correspondent signing himself simply "Antonia" wrote to the Kingston Chronicle and Gazette in April 1844, expressing shock at the quick decisions of the judges of the competition for a market hall in Montreal, a competition Browne (who had by this time moved there with the government) had evidently just won. He pointed out the inadequacy of the time 58

13 Kingston City Hall, 1843-44

A R C H I T E C T U R E FOR A B O O M T O W N

which had been allowed between the final date for submission of competition designs and the decision, only a week. He went on to observe how misleading drawings could be, and interestingly enough recommended that for works of importance "small models in relief, would give a better idea of the play of light, and the proportion of the different projecting parts to each other, and to the whole edifice," citing Michael Angelo and Sir Christopher Wren as instances of architects who had used such models. He added that "Simplicity of style is most commendable in this country, not gaudy in ornament, nor setting consistency at defiance." Then came his attack on Browne, and the City Hall, which to him was absolute anathema: ". . . let me advise Mr. G. B. not to imitate the beforementioned Architects until he has sufficiently studied Stuart's Athens and other works of equal merit, to enable him to do so with justice. The barbarism displayed in the useless, heavy, unmeaning cornices, and ill proportioned portico of the Town Hall in Kingston, reflects anything but credit on the Architect, and a useless expense on the inhabitants." "Antonia's" vitriol and violence is, of course, typical of much correspondence in nineteenth-century periodical literature. He does show an awareness of the distinctly personal elements of style in Browne's building, viz. the robust character of the cornice and portico. The fact that he finds them "barbarous" indicates his preference for the more refined style of earlier Greek Revival architects. His criticism is also ironic, since he is sensitive enough to the historical and social situation of Canada to observe that "simplicity of style is most commendable." Yet Browne's use of the Tuscan order, the most direct and simplest of them all, escapes him. Moreover the heavy cornices, far from being "useless," in fact act as eave-troughs.43 If the personal, primitive qualities of Browne's style excited "Antonia's" wrath, he may also have been offended by the neo-baroque elements in his style—the scale of the parts, the insistence of the masses, the richness of textures, or the bold rounding of the corners of the main block. For these features are a presage of the future, when architecture would move away from the simplicity of the style of the first half of the nineteenth century towards something richer and more ornamental. And by making this move Browne showed his awareness of the most advanced ideas in British architectural thought. The great bold richly articulated rounded corners of the Kingston City Hall are found in fuller form in Harvey Lonsdale Elmes's Liverpool Town Hall, the design of which may well have influenced Browne.44 And behind both lies perhaps the most famous round corner of them all in British architecture—the apse of Sir Christopher Wren's St. Paul's. Nor is it perhaps a mere accident that James Elmes, Harvey's father, should have been the author of the first documented life of Wren.45 60

J. DOUGLAS STEWART

George Browne and the Kingston City Hall are thus firmly linked to the British architectural tradition, indeed to some of its greatest exemplars. But at the same time the building is a product of the Kingston of the early 1840s. It was the most stirring moment in her history, when she seemed to have achieved so much and appeared to be on the threshold of a brilliant future as capital of the United Canadas. In the presence of George Browne the town was fortunate. He was able to create a structure which had strong elements of baroque "triumph," appropriate for the celebration of the town's good fortune and hopes. He was also responsive to the heroic primitive features in a society so recently emerged from the pioneering stage.46 In its original form the Kingston City Hall was a highly personal synthesis of architectural forms and ideas, which won its creator the admiration of his contemporaries. Today it still excites by the daring grandeur of its forms, and its evocation of a poignant moment in local and national history.

61

This page intentionally left blank

The Settlement

of Kungston's Hinterland BRIAN OSBORNE

The metropolitan relationship is a chain, almost a feudal chain of vassalage wherein one city may stand tributary to a bigger centre and yet be the metropolis of a sizeable region of its own. J. M. S. CARELESS

A populous and productive hinterland stimulates urban growth by generating flows of primary products into, and flows of services and manufactured goods from, the central city. In consequence, cities should be particularly concerned with improving the transport system, stimulating settlement, developing regional resources, and providing goods and services to the tributary area. For much of the nineteenth century, Kingston under-emphasized this dimension of its development. The importance of an extensive waterborne commerce, a preoccupation with such exotic functions as the military and government, together with a rugged physical environment to the north, were all related to Kingston's initial neglect of its landward hinterland. This chapter is concerned with identifying what efforts were made by the city to establish control over a "sizeable region of its own" and the progress, form, and effect of the settlement that did take place in the tributary area to the north. During the nineteenth century, Kingston was on the frontier of settlement of Upper Canada, and was very much a "city in the wilderness." Such frontier areas are usually defined in terms of their isolation, the absence of transport and economic linkages with the central markets, and the general underdevelopment of the region. Ideally, the progress of such a region from the state of "wilderness" to that of socio-economic maturity is marked by a series of stages. The initial concern with determining the physical nature and potential for settlement of the area is followed by the distribution of land and its occupation by pioneers. With the ensuing replacement of a pioneer subsistence economy by commercial agriculture, the region embarks upon a period of 63

THE SETTLEMENT OF THE HINTERLAND

development characterized by the addition of various social and economic institutions to serve the region. These stages of settlement were experienced by the Kingston area and, in fact, recapitulated several times as Kingston's effective hinterland was extended and new areas were opened for development. Extending in a general north-south direction from Lake Ontario into the Canadian Shield, Frontenac County serves as a representative cross-section of the Kingston region in the nineteenth century as it experienced the successive northward extensions of the city's hinterland. It will be shown that such hinterland extension was produced by improvements in the technology of transport and successive additions to the network of routes linking Kingston with its surrounding areas. Furthermore, an insight into the progress of the settlement of the hinterland will be gained by the analysis of the frequency and location of the land patents granted by the Crown to the first settlers. Because land was often patented some years after the locating of settlers on the land, while in other cases the patenting was fraudulent and did not produce actual occupation of the land by settlers, these records reveal only the general pattern of settlement. To arrive at a more realistic assessment of the settlement of hinterland, the progress of the distribution of land will be analysed in the context of the growth of population and the development of economic activities throughout the hinterland during the nineteenth century. For the purposes of this study, three main periods in the expansion and settlement of Kingston's hinterland may be identified, each being associated with a distinctive location, land policy, and economic interest: 1783-1814: Settlement of the Lake Ontario Littoral. 1815-1852: Settlement of the Interior Townships. 1853-1880: Settlement of the Rear Townships.

1783-1814: The Lake Ontario Littoral For the first thirty years following the establishment of Kingston and the survey of the first townships abutting onto Lake Ontario, the effective area of settlement was restricted to an area extending no more than fifteen miles inland from the lakeshore. Water transport was dominant during this period, and Kingston developed as an important nexus of water routes because of its location at the junction of the St. Lawrence and Lake Ontario shipping systems. But while the city's water-borne connections were extensive, its landward hinterland was quite restricted. Those roads that were first constructed were complementary to the water transport linkages and reinforced 64

14 Along the road between Kingston and York, c. 1830

THE S E T T L E M E N T OF THE H I N T E R L A N D

the York-Montreal line of movement. As late as 1816, however, a relieved traveller could report that the journey from York to Kingston took "only" four-and-a-half days "as the frost had not yet got out of the ground sufficient for the horse to sink."1 Furthermore, the local road system was so fragmented, poorly maintained, and generally inadequate that a resident was inspired to comment upon "the many good purposes to which the Air Balloon might be applied in a country like this, where the roads are in general so extremely bad."2 If the transport system left much to be desired, the first settlers were fortunate with regard to the physical capabilities of the land. Climate, vegetation, physiography, soils, and geology are always of importance to settlers, but particularly so to those first occupying the frontier areas. These elements must not be considered merely in terms of their absolute measures, but more relevantly in terms of such relative expressions as growing seasons, clearing costs, and potential productivity. Kingston township is located on a low-lying limestone plain constituting a narrow belt of relatively good agricultural land and the initial survey reported the land to be: "Of an Excellent Quality fit for the production of Wheat, Oats, Indian Corn, Hemp, Timothy, and Clover. The Woods in general are Maple, Hickory, Ash, Elm, Pine and White Oak etc., the two latter are in many parts from two and half to three feet Diameter."3 This preoccupation with the timber reflects a concern not only with the potential for lumber and clearing costs, but also with the quality of land which was thought to be indicated by the vegetation. With distance from the lake, however, the topography became more varied, the drainage deteriorated, and the soils were stony and acidic. Land less amenable to settlement was encountered as the survey of additional townships progressed, and, in 1792, Alex Aitken abandoned the survey of Pittsburgh township because the land was so bad that "I would be putting Government to a useless expense to Survey lands that never will be settled."4 Similarly, Wilmot's survey of Portland township in 1808 reported that the land "cannot settle, being either Swamps or Rocks (and) in many places there is nothing growing except small Ironwoods and Elm Timber with Juniper Berries."5 Even within the area adjacent to Kingston, therefore, there was much land unsuited to agriculture and not conducive to settlement. But the process of land distribution cannot be explained solely in terms of the physical characteristics of the land being settled during this period. The effective settlement of a region is also a physical problem of locating people on the lands. The appropriateness of the scheme of survey and the efficiency with which land is distributed and occupied is, therefore, fundamental to the success of the settlement process. Fig. 3 (p. 71) shows two distinct patterns of distribution before 1815. First, the land immediately adjacent to Kingston 66

BRIAN O S B O R N E LAND PATENTING IN FRONTENAC COUNTY 1792-1880

Fig. 1

1830

1880

appears to be solidly settled and represents the area of pre-1792 settlement. This first wave of pioneers was associated with the British policy of relocating and rewarding the loyalists of the War of Independence. Land was allocated according to the military rank and social status of the recipient and distributed by lottery.6 Within the first few years following the arrival of the loyalists in 1783, much of the township of Kingston and part of Pittsburgh exhibit the characteristic checkerboard pattern produced by the Simcoe system of land distribution. A new land policy had been established following the partition of the former province of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada in 1791 and the western province was divided into districts, counties, and townships. Townships, in turn, were divided up into concessions containing lots of two hundred acres each. While most of the lands were to be granted free in these 200-acre blocks, two-sevenths of all lots were to be reserved for rental, the income being directed to the maintenance of the provincial government and church.7 It is these Crown and Clergy Reserves that produced the checkerboard pattern associated with the pre-1815 pattern. Fig. 1 reveals the rapid distribution of land during this period but much of the land so patented was left unimproved and unoccupied. Large quantities of land fell into the hands of a few people and absentee landlords and land speculation flourished. Fig. 2 gives an example of this process whereby Richard Cartwright of Kingston had, by 1815, acquired 5,292 acres in Frontenac and a total of 28,632 acres distributed throughout the province as a whole.8 Such manipulations of the system served to make the settlement a "hollow frontier/' more real on paper than it was on the ground. However, the population in the immediate area surrounding Kingston continued to in67

THE SETTLEMENT OF THE H I N T E R L A N D

Fig.

2

crease. In 1784, of the 50,000 who had left the former British colonies for Canada, 6,152 were estimated to be in the western part of Quebec with 3,686 of them being located around Kingston and the Bay of Quinte.9 By 1815, Simcoe's promotional policies had increased the provincial population to close to 100,000 with the Kingston-Bay of Quinte area accounting for some 17,000 people.10 For much of this period, however, this population contributed but little to the commerce and trade of Kingston. The primary objective of these new "settlements in the Bush" was subsistence and the first problem, the clearing of the forest. Accordingly, the pioneer proceeded to "chop, log, burn, fence and put in crop" as many acres as possible. The actual planting of the major crop, wheat, was beset with many difficulties and it was noted that: "The only mode in which a crop can get got into newly cleared forest land, thus thickly covered with stumps and undecayed roots, is by sowing the seed on the surface of the land, after the vegetable matter is destroyed by fire; and then scratching it in with a very strong harrow."11 In this way, the pioneer could be expected to clear and bring into production between five and ten acres of land each year, depending upon his resources. With the primitive techniques at his disposal, the settler could not expect a yield much better than fifteen bushels per acre and for the first few years little, if any, of this would be surplus. As continued clearing increased the arable area of the farm, the production gradually exceeded that required for the support of the family and livestock. This surplus, together with the provision of communications with the local market, allowed the settlers to orientate themselves increasingly to the production of the prevailing staples and thus become part of the regional economy. By the end of this first period of occupancy, many of the settlers in the Kingston area were already engaged in commercial agriculture and producing grain and livestock for both local and regional markets. 68

BRIAN OSBORNE

1815-1853: The Settlement of the Interior Townships During the first half of the nineteenth century, Kingston had established itself as the principal settlement of the province, an important port and naval base, and a major fortified centre. Despite this influential position, the city continued to be surrounded by a relatively under-developed hinterland. Land communications with the interior were still neglected and those farms that had been established in the bush were isolated from the local market. Thus in 1819, potatoes imported from the United States cost 3s.6d. per bushel while Loughborough potatoes at ls.6d. per bushel could not be brought to market because of the "badness of the Roads . . . and the poor devils in the rear can only get to town with their produce about three months out of twelve which is shocking encouragement for actual settlement."12 Recognizing this state of affairs, the Grand Jury of the Midland District recommended the construction of four roads to Hinchinbrooke, Kennebec, Kaladar, and Madoc respectively, "the more effectually to arrive at some plan for opening the back Townships of this District."13 Similarly, other local settlers petitioned the lieutenantgovernor to continue the existing road running along the line between Bedford and Hinchinbrooke into the townships of Olden, Oso, and Kennebec. This would extend Kingston's hinterland some twenty miles inland and open up an area which had been "long since surveyed but no settlement has hitherto been attempted."14 Others were concerned with pushing Kingston's sphere of influence even further afield and, in 1844, the rising local politician, J. A. Macdonald, promised that, if elected, he would promote the settlement of Kingston's back townships and encourage the construction of the plank road to Perth and Ottawa, so making Kingston "the market for a large and fertile, though hitherto useless country."15 But if such plans promised to extend Kingston's connections, the quality of the roads already constructed left much to be desired. It was reported in 1845 that "both the Loughborough and Portland Roads, in the fall and spring of the year, and even in mid-summer after heavy rains, are nearly impassable for carriage and weighty loads."16 The introduction of turnpike roads promised both to extend the network and to improve the quality of the roads. By the mid-nineteenth century, six such roads f ocussed on Kingston and linked the city with Perth, Napanee, Phillipsville, Gananoque, Portland, and Storrington.17 This improvement of Kingston's communications added to the city's potential hinterland the interior townships such as Hinchinbrooke, Bedford, Kennebec, Oso, and Olden. Here tne surveyors encountered the Canadian Shield with its igneous and metamorphic rock outcrops, interspersed with swamps and lakes. While some settlement was possible on the ubiquitous pockets of good clay land, more frequently the lands were described as 69

THE SETTLEMENT OF THE HINTERLAND

"entirely unfit for cultivation being very hilly and rocky and much broken with Lakes." Surveyor Elmore's report on Oso township in 1826 may be regarded as typical of the contemporary assessment of these townships: the principal part of the land in it (Oso) is particularly rocky and uneven, especially the high lands, the low lands are principally swamps and generally dead and sunken nature. There are, however, some lots which will admit of improvement and are well adapted to agricultural pursuits, but being in general surrounded with rough rocky and uneven land, and in some instances with impassable swamps, no very extensive improvements or settlement can ever be anticipated.18

While having the same facts at their disposal, the promotional interests based in Kingston arrived at a different conclusion. Thus, "Ichabod" in a letter to the editor waxed poetic about the virtues of the lands to the north of Kingston: But let emigrants go equal distances from Kingston for good lands that they do there (Toronto), and they shall find such as would surprise them. Let them pass the gloomy woods of Portland, and open their eyes on the fine lands in Hinchinbrooke, Holden, etc. not forgetting many parts of Loughborough, with their small crystal lakes of countless numbers, their rivers and rivulets, and springs, not of muddy and stagnant waters, but clear as Ferentosh, and all abounding with fish. The very sight of the timber itself, without putting a spade in the ground, is sufficient to convince any judge of the fertility of the soil.19

Opinions such as these were directed at the potential settlers passing through Kingston during this period. But having skirted the edges of the region while travelling along the Rideau Canal, they had had the opportunity of assessing the lands first-hand and few were prepared to settle there. The relative lull in the distribution of land and settlement in the Kingston area between 1815 and 1853 (fig. 3) cannot be attributed solely to the nature of the land being encountered in the interior townships. One of the major considerations was that the munificence of the former Simcoe policy had resulted in 80 per cent of the population being of American origin at a time when there was still considerable friction between the two nations. Accordingly, the flow of "late Loyalists" from the south was staunched. The new emphasis was on establishing loyal settlers as a military buffer throughout the region, and in particular in such strategic areas as the Rideau corridor. Another factor during this period was that by 1824, while 8 million acres of land had been granted throughout the province, only 3 million acres were occupied and only half a million were under cultivation.20 The reaction was to establish a new policy which introduced taxation of wild lands as an induce-

70

BRIAN OSBORNE

ment to improvement, the creation of Land Boards throughout the various districts to advertise the land available, and a move away from the principle of free land grants. With the Public Lands Disposal Act of 1837, land was to be sold by public auction.21 Fig. 3 reveals several distinct spatial components in the granting of lands

Fig. 3 between 1815 and 1853. First, Wolfe and Howe Islands became available for settlement following the surrender by C. W. Grant and the heirs of the Baroness of Longueuil of a former seigneurial claim and its regranting "in free and common socage."22 A second component is the infilling of the "checkerboard" pattern as the Clergy and Crown Reserves were appropriated. The reserve system had not produced the expected revenue as few people were prepared to rent lands when they could avail themselves of free grants elsewhere. Often lying uncultivated, the reserves had become an irritant as they interrupted the road system and constituted pockets of wild and unimproved lands adjacent to land being reclaimed. In consequence, first the Crown and later the Clergy Reserves became available for settlement during this period. Thirdly, the extension of the Portland road into the BedfordHinchinbrooke area was accompanied by the clustering of patented lots along

71

THE SETTLEMENT OF THE HINTERLAND

this route constructed to open up the "interior townships." Finally, a scattering of lots is noticeable in the northern townships, in advance of the main frontier line. Often, these represent grants to surveyors as their "share of Land according to Contract for the survey of the said Township."23 Thus, Samuel Benson surveyed Bedford in 1824 and some 2,800 acres is recorded as being patented by him. It would be expected that the lots selected by these individuals would most certainly be in those few areas which "admit to improvement and are well adapted to agricultural pursuits." But if there appears to have been a lagging in the distribution of land during this period, the population in the Kingston area continued to increase. Between 1815 and 1853, the population of the province increased from approximately 100,000 to close to one million people. In the same period, the Midland district of Frontenac, Lennox and Addington, Hastings and Prince Edward counties grew from 17,000 to over 90,000.24 However, the district fell behind the western districts in attracting settlers. While most of the immigrants of the period of mass migration in the 1830s and 1840s travelled via the Rideau Canal and passed through the Kingston region, few of them were persuaded to stay. In 1840, of the 32,000 immigrants to Canada, 12,000 entered the province via the Ottawa-Rideau route, of whom 1,400 stayed in the Ottawa area, 3,000 stayed in the Kingston area, while the remaining 6,600 passed to the western parts of the province around Toronto, Hamilton, and London.25 Much concern was expressed by local interests at this failure of Kingston to attract settlers and that "the section of the country with which we are more immediately connected does not appear to receive its proper share. It would seem that with us as in the world, 'Westward the star of empire takes its way/ leaving the more Eastern portion of the Province but little cherished by its beam."26 The district's prejudice against the generality of immigrants and a desire to attract only "the most respectable and better order of society" served to limit the number of immigrants considered to be suitable. The absence of formal colonization agencies advertising the district meant that those looking for opportunities bypassed the area. It was noted that "While in other portions of the Province, the inhabitants are indefatigable in their invitations to settlers; in our vicinity everything seems 'to sleep on'; and Emigrants, instead of coming among us, are most certain to go by us, often for the reason that they were not even asked to stay."27 By 1851, Kingston's population was 11,697 and had fallen to third place behind Toronto (30,775) and Hamilton (14,112). Several factors accounted for this relative decline of Kingston but it was recognized that "The extensive trade carried on at Toronto is maintained by the rich country in the rear of it."28 Since the greater part of the older front townships was already claimed, there was a need to open up the townships inland from Kingston. The importance of 72

BRIAN OSBORNE

attracting settlers to the Kingston hinterland had long been advocated and it was declared that "A well settled back country would greatly promote the prosperity of this City."29 Those pioneers that did establish new farms during this period experienced the same initial stage of a subsistence economy identified earlier. By this date, however, the older farms had benefitted from a generation or more of improvements and were actively engaged in producing the dominant cash crop, wheat. At the first annual meeting of the Board of Agriculture in 1846, the president observed: . . . the great and almost sole object of serious interest to the Canadian farmer, has been to grow wheat as largely, and to repeat the crop as frequently as any decent return could be obtained. This system was perfectly natural, if not perfectly wise. Wheat was found to be always less or more in demand, commanding a cash payment, while most other articles of farm produce were only to be disposed of in barter or in trade.30

In 1851, wheat accounted for 35 per cent of the acreage under crops in Ontario and in many counties exceeded 50 per cent. The commercial agriculture developed in the Kingston region at this time was not so heavily dependent upon this crop with only 15 per cent of the land under crops in Frontenac county being devoted to wheat. More significantly, oats also accounted for some 15 per cent of the crops with peas occupying just under 10 per cent of the acreage.31 The "cold" clay soils frequently found on the limestone were thought to be better suited to the production of grass than wheat and the importance of the feed crops of oats and peas reflects the significance of livestock rearing in the Kingston area. Writing in the 1850s, W. H. Smith commented: "Kingston is always considered to have a bad or unproductive back country, yet the market is always well and abundantly supplied. The supplies of meat in particular, are large and of excellent quality, vegetables are brought in in moderate quantities, and the chief deficiency in fruit."32 By this date, therefore, many of those farms that had been established throughout the city's hinterland were contributing to the market of the city although they were not partaking in the production of the dominant staple to the extent of other areas to the west. 1853-1880: The Settlement of the Rear Townships During the latter half of the nineteenth century Ontario experienced both an increase in the rate of land patenting and the development of a new economic motivation for pioneers. While new settlement took place throughout the county, it is the opening of the rear townships that typifies this period. This is 73

15 Kingston Market Square, c. 1880

BRIAN OSBORNE

associated with major innovations in transport which dramatically extended the hinterland of Kingston and with new economic opportunities in the interior. The Public Lands Act of 1853 was intended to encourage the settlement of the hitherto neglected Ottawa-Huron tract by providing for the construction of colonization roads into this region. It had long been argued that: One or two roads connecting the lumbering districts on the Ottawa with the back settlements of the districts on Lake Ontario, would be of great benefit to all parties; it would facilitate and cheapen the supplies to the lumbermen, and stimulate the farmer to raise larger crops, for which he would find a ready, home and cash market and employment for himself, and teams, in transportation, during the winter. . . . These roads would open up that extensive region, called the 'Huron and Ottawa Tract'. . . . which is known to contain a large amount of arable land and an almost unlimited supply of timber. . . . there is no portion of Canada, perhaps of America, which can offer the same inducements to the industrious Immigrants, if they could be transported to it.33

The northern townships of Kingston's hinterland extended into this region and colonization roads were constructed through Addington and Frontenac to the Madawaska and Mississippi rivers respectively. These were complemented by the Lavant and Mississippi roads which constituted an east-west link between these two main north-south routes. Furthermore, a Grand Trunk Colonization Road was mooted to run from Lake Huron to Lake Ontario at Kingston, making that city the chief port for the lumber products of the Ottawa-Huron tract.34 While this was never realized, by 1861, 61 miles of the Addington Road, 35 miles of the Frontenac Road and 57 miles of the Lavant Road had been constructed.35 Kingston anticipated significant benefits from these developments and declared an interest "in the opening up of the splendid back country we possess bordering upon the Valley of the Ottawa. Its settlement will bring with it increased wealth and importance to this city and the extent of the country intervening."36 Another influential transport development was the advent of railroads and, in the second half of the nineteenth century, some nine railroads were proposed to connect Kingston with such places as Madoc, Pembroke, Sault Ste. Marie, Ottawa, Napanee, Gananoque, and Peterborough. While most of these were not realized, the construction of the Kingston-Pembroke in the 1870s was intended as a tap-line for the extensive territory to the north. This route was expected to divert the lumber trade of the Ottawa River to Kingston and to allow the development of such minerals as iron ore, galena, plumbago, mica, phosphate and so forth, which had been identified through the Huron-Ottawa tract. Although the colonization roads soon deteriorated and the Kingston75

THE S E T T L E M E N T OF THE H I N T E R L A N D

Pembroke railroad failed to live up to the expectations of its promoters, they did serve to attract the attention of Kingston to the possible settlement and development of the rear townships. By the end of the nineteenth century, Kingston's hinterland extended in excess of one hundred miles north and was encroaching on the area tributary to Ottawa. The actual survey and exploration of the northern townships had preceded these innovations in transport and while they were no longer inaccessible, the greater proportion of them was as unreceptive to permanent agricultural settlement as ever. The rear of Frontenac county was said to be generally "uneven and much broken by rocky hills and swamps interspersed however with cultivable and fertile tracts of land."37 The surveyors noted that where settlement had already occurred, crops of wheat, oats, corn, potatoes, and turnips are grown but that the land was generally "better adapted for grazing and pasture than other kinds of farming."38 Particular attention was directed to the many natural meadows of "Beaver Hay" that fringed the lakes and rivers. These were used by lumbermen and settlers for summer pasture and winter fodder and it was anticipated that "A large portion of this tract will no doubt be purchased for the meadow alone, besides these only small patches of arable land are to be met with in this section."39 Even so, in 1864 a report described half of Palmerston, the northern two-thirds of Clarendon, and the western half of Miller and Canonto as being suited to settlement.40 Pockets of potentially productive land throughout the shield had been recognized earlier but had been considered unsuited to settlement because of their isolation. The construction of roads and the increase in lumbering activity in these townships made the occupation of the suitable land an economically viable proposition and introduced a new dimension into the assessment of their qualities. The decision regarding the potential of Frontenac's most northerly township, Miller, may be taken as representative of the attitude towards these rear townships: The facilities which will be afforded for transport by the Mississippi and Frontenac roads when completed, passing through a healthy section of country; the land tolerably good, building materials in abundance; a sufficient supply of water power for manufacturing purposes; a ready market for the surpluses produced of the settlers, and employment for themselves and teams during the winter months at the lumbering settlements; serve to render Miller and the adjacent townships as desirable a field for settlement, as this part of the country affords.41

With such encouragement, the post-1853 period experienced a significant settlement of these rear townships on the shield and the opening up of Kingston's northern hinterland. Fig. 3 emphasizes the northern emphasis in the land patenting of the late 76

BRIAN OSBORNE

nineteenth century. The few lots left unpatented in the older townships to the south were taken up during this period but the major activity occurred in those townships north of Portland and Hinchinbrooke. It had been prophesied that the Ottawa-Huron tract could accommodate some eight million settlers and Kingston expected its northern townships to attract some of these. The main foci of activity were the region's colonization roads and many people took up the free grants along the Frontenac, Addington, and Lavant roads. By 1862, 750 settlers had located along the Addington Road and had cleared 413 acres and chopped a further 231 acres.42 Settlement was also progressing along the Frontenac and Lavant roads. Others pioneering throughout the shield townships in this period did not take the free grants along the roads but rather sought out the pockets of good land for patenting. By 1864 it was reported that: The back townships of Miller and Palmerston are now filling up fast. . . . Nearly all are "squatters," persons who do not purchase the land from the Crown until they have made some improvements and practically tested the value of the lands they select. Many of these persons are from the United States who come to Canada to escape the draft and to bide over the period of financial uncertainty which is overshadowing the land.43

Frequently, these settlers preceded the surveyor into a township and used their practical experience of the land to determine the best lands for patenting. Many of the lands patented, however, were not selected for their agricultural capabilities but rather "for the purpose of disposing of, or cutting the timber."44 While the spread of settlement into the northern limits of Kingston's hinterland is suggested by the map of patents granted, it was not accompanied by any significant increase in the permanent population of the region. In fact, the southern townships of Kingston, Wolfe Island, Pittsburgh, Storrington, Portland, and Loughborough all attained their population peaks before 1861 and thenceforth declined.45 The collapse of local wheat production, the opening up of the western prairies, and the rise of urban-based industry all contributed to a rural emigration that was to continue into the twentieth century. However, new townships were being opened for settlement in the latter half of the nineteenth century and these experienced a unique pattern of development. The usual experience of "clearing the bush" was being repeated but it was here characterized by a symbiotic relationship with the lumber interests of the area. While isolated on the shield, these late nineteenth century pioneers were able to develop a viable economy at an early stage of their occupancy of the area. However, this dependence of the pioneers upon lumbering or supplying produce to the shanties caused much of 77

THE SETTLEMENT OF THE H I N T E R L A N D

the settlement to be transitory. With the exhaustion of the forest resources and the departure of the lumbermen, the pioneer found himself isolated from markets and was obliged to abandon the area. That this symbiotic relationship between the pioneer and the lumbermen was thought by some to be more of a parasitic relationship is revealed by the following letter to the Bobcaygeon Independent: A fictitious settlement follows the lumbermen; he is surrounded by parasites, plunderers and blackmailers who dog his footsteps and victimize him at each turn; and then, when the lumbermen's work is done and he leaves for new localities, this much boasted pioneer of civilization, this industrious settler, this stalwart and hardy frontiersman with the glittering axe, throws up the lot on which he has squatted, sacrifices all the improvements he has made on about an acre and a half of land and follows the lumbermen to continue this predatory and plundering existence. . . . The story is told in scores of patches of clearing all through the province—the story of lumbermen robbed, of timber burnt, of law evaded.46

While this is an obvious overstatement of the position, there can be no doubt that the agricultural settlement of many of these shield townships constituted an artificial occupancy. Agriculture was only viable as long as lumbering continued, and only as permanent, therefore, as that highly transient economy. The population of all the northern townships was still increasing at the close of the century, but none of them attained densities in excess of ten per square mile and all were to experience an out-migration and a loss of population within a generation of their first settlement. The continuity, adjustment, or decline of a settled area depends upon the population's capability for adapting to new demands. Failure to do so results in declining income, farm abandonment, and the return of the wilderness. By the end of the nineteenth century, the maximum spatial extent of settlement had been effected in the Kingston hinterland and rural emigration was already taking place in some areas. The twentieth century has, however, seen the revitalization of many of the communities that began to decline with the decrease in rural population. Each year, the basic population of the northern townships is supplemented by an infusion of tourists and cottage dwellers. As far back as the 1850s the potential for such a development was recognized by the surveyor of one of the northern Frontenac townships: the pleasant situation of the lands adjacent to several of these lakes, the picturesque scenery, the water clear and deep, usually stocked with fish, chiefly trout, which are 78

BRIAN OSBORNE

caught both winter and summer, have a tendency to lead the explorer to the conclusion that these pieces of water may in some respects, be considered as inducement rather than obstacles to settlement.47

This exotic population is as seasonal as the former lumber economy was but is, however, dependent upon a fixed resource, the beauty of the wilderness. As long as this stays, the seasonal population will continue to return. It is ironic that the physical environment, the very factor that prevented the permanent settlement and development of much of Kingston's hinterland, now constitutes one of the area's most important resources.

79

This page intentionally left blank

II

Fortress Kingston

This page intentionally left blank

Kingston and the Defence of British North America GEORGE F. G. STANLEY

I

From the founding of Fort Frontenac in 1673 to the present day, Kingston has played an important role in the defence of Canada. In more recent times, this role has been limited to training specialized troops for the Canadian Army and to educating Canadian officers; but in the nineteenth century, the fate of Upper Canada turned largely upon the success or failure of the British to hold Kingston against the aggressive efforts of the Americans to incorporate the province of Upper Canada into the American union. Military factors, as well as economic considerations, had brought Fort Frontenac, Kingston's predecessor at the mouth of the Cataraqui river, into being in the seventeenth century; military factors gave Fort Frontenac its importance in Canadian history during the Seven Years' War in America in the mid-eighteenth century; naval factors gave Kingston a preeminent position during the Canadian War of 1812 during the nineteenth century. Throughout the whole of our history, Fort Frontenac and Kingston have, each in turn, played a dominant role in the preservation of the land we know as Canada. In the mid-seventeenth century, the French at Quebec recognized the strategic advantages of the site at the eastern end of Lake Ontario where the St. Lawrence river takes its origin. Movement from Montreal to Fort Frontenac by boat posed relatively few logistical problems when compared with those encountered along the Mohawk river-Oneida Lake-Oswego river route, and from Fort Frontenac to Niagara and the west was a matter of easy sailing. At Cataraqui were to be had good supplies of timber for fort and boat construction, land to sustain a colony, and a harbour to shelter ships and other watercraft. When Count Frontenac saw the entrance to the Cataraqui river in July 1673, he described it as "the pleasantest harbour that can be seen; it is more than three quarters of a league in depth; its bed is only mud and there is 83

THE DEFENCE OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA

more than seven or eight feet of water in the shallowest places. . . . A point situated at the entrance puts the harbour . . . so much under shelter from all winds that boats could lie there almost without cables."1 He therefore set his men to work and within a few days a wooden fort was constructed and put in a posture of defence. During eighty-five years Fort Frontenac served as the western bastion of Montreal, the main entrepot for the western Indian trade, and Canada's naval base on Lake Ontario. It was the vital link in the chain of forts connecting the heartland of French Canada with its western extremities on the Ohio and the Mississippi rivers. For over half a century Fort Frontenac's dominant position on Lake Ontario remained unchallenged save by the Iroquois Confederacy, and even the Indians were unwilling to pit their strength against the stone walls which replaced the original wooden stockade of July 1673. However, there were men prepared to challenge Fort Frontenac. In 1726 Governor William Burnet of New York extended Anglo-American influence to Lake Ontario by constructing a fort at the mouth of the Oswego river. The presence of the Americans on the lake constituted a much more serious threat to the Canadian position than the Iroquois had ever posed. To Canada, Oswego was nothing less than a dagger in the hands of their stronger rivals, its point pressed hard against the flank of Canada's tenuous line of communications with the west.2 For the protection of their supply base at Cataraqui, the Canadians were disposed to rely upon sailors rather than upon soldiers. A fleet not only required fewer men—Canada never had a surplus of men at her disposal during the ancien regime—it provided the mobility that might offset the enemy's advantages in manpower. Most Canadians today recall Fort Frontenac as the base from which the Marquis de Montcalm launched his surprise and highly successful offensive against Oswego in 1756; it would be more significant to remember that Fort Frontenac was the headquarters of the Canadian lake fleet during the decisive struggle which saw the reduction of French power in North America. When the Seven Years' War broke out in 1755, the Canadians had two vessels, each of about sixty tons and armed with up to six cannon, sailing out of Cataraqui harbour. These were La Victoire and La Louise.3 Two larger vessels, La Hurault and La Marquise de Vaudreuil, each carrying 12-pounder guns, were laid down in 1755. By 1758 seven ships were based upon Fort Frontenac, furnishing Fort Niagara and the other western posts with commercial and military supplies and maintaining a blockade-watch upon Oswego. Perhaps the French in Canada were disposed to rely too heavily upon their fleet at Cataraqui. Governor Vaudreuil had taken it for granted that the Anglo-Americans would "not dare to enter the lake on which we had ves84

G E O R G E F. G. S T A N L E Y

sels."4 However, the fleet failed to intercept Bradstreet's raiders in 1758 and Fort Frontenac was put to the torch.5 Nevertheless, the Canadian authorities continued to give high priority to naval strength on Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence river, until the capitulation of Montreal in 1760. II

The acquisition of Canada by Great Britain, as a result of the military victories over the French and Canadians and the political victory over those Englishmen who would have preferred the sugar island of Guadeloupe to Voltaire's "few acres of snow," did not alter in their essentials the factors which had given strategic significance to Cataraqui in the Ancien Regime. During the American Revolutionary War, the British used Carleton Island, near Cataraqui, as their naval-military base; but after that war was brought to an end, Cataraqui once more came into use. In 1783, the governor of Canada, Sir Frederick Haldimand, sent the surveyor, Samuel Holland, to report upon the condition of the old French fort. He found that "the Vaults still remain entire with part of the Walls of the Fort, Barracks, etc. etc., are in such a State as will contribute to lessen the expence of its reistablishment." He added that "the Works or Lines began by the French on the Commanding grounds near the Fort, will cover a sufficient space for a Town; the harbour is in every respect Good, and most conveniently situated to command Lake Ontario."6 Holland also sent Haldimand a copy of Charlevoix's Histoire et Description de la Nouvelle France, published in 1744, to show the Governor that "the importance of this post Cataracouy... is become nearly of the same consequence" to the British in Canada "as it was in the times of Count Frontenac or rather to the time of Monsieur de Montcalm."7 On the strength of Holland's recommendations Haldimand ordered detachments of several line regiments, including the King's Royal Regiment of New York and the Royal Artillery, to move to Cataraqui. These were the forerunners of the numerous British and Canadian regiments which were to be stationed in Kingston during the next ninety years, and which were to play so important a role in the military tradition of this part of Canada. To accommodate the newly arrived troops, barracks were constructed and old Fort Frontenac rose from its ashes as the Tete de Pont Barracks. At the same time a group of Loyalist refugees from the United States made their way to the same site to establish the community henceforth known as Kingston. For the time being—i.e. until the conclusion of Jay's Treaty in 1794—Great Britain retained control of a number of American posts including Oswego. Secure against attack from this quarter, it was possible for the British political authorities to devote more attention to the problems of settlement 85

THE D E F E N C E OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA

than to those of defence. Nevertheless the defences were not neglected. When the province of Upper Canada came into being, following the adoption of the Canada Act in 1791, two military districts were set up, one including the Upper Posts, Oswego, Niagara, Detroit, and Michilimackinac, and the other Kingston and its "dependencies," Carleton Island and Oswegatchie (Ogdensburg).8 A few years later the British garrisons were withdrawn from the Upper Posts, and defence became a matter of more pressing concern. Admittedly the British still retained possession of Carleton Island, but that island's defence works were in a state of decay and its armament was unserviceable. Kingston would have to resume its traditional role as the major British defence post on Lake Ontario. As far as land defences were concerned, Kingston was scarcely better off than Carleton Island. Fort Frontenac, although in an improved state of repair, had never, at best, been anything more than a protection against musket fire. It could hardly be expected to withstand artillery fire or to undergo a siege. Muskets it contained, in good numbers, for the use of the militia; but cannon were apparently in short supply. Historical evidence suggests that cannon were available in the military stores. Some of these may have been mounted at Mississauga Point or Point Frederick, but of this there is no positive proof. We do not really know the disposition of any of Kingston's armament until the outbreak of the War of 1812. What is beyond doubt is that the British defence authorities were disposed to rely, as the French had done, upon the navy for security against attack from across Lake Ontario. The lieutenant-governor of Upper Canada, John Graves Simcoe, did not think very much of Kingston as the principal naval base in the province. He much preferred Toronto. But the governor general, Lord Dorchester, who as Guy Carleton had served in the Seven Years' War, was disposed to favour Kingston as the most "eligible station for the King's Ships of War to protect the Navigation of Lake Ontario, and the Upper Part of the River St. Lawrence."9 With the future allegiance of Carleton Island in question, Dorchester ordered the move of all ships and naval stores to Kingston. In 1789 Point Frederick, where the Royal Military College of Canada now stands, was chosen as the site of the new naval dockyard. Two vessels were already in commission when Simcoe visited Kingston in 1792. The governor's wife, in her diary, refers to two gunboats "built on a very bad construction." The governor was inclined to refer to them disparagingly as the "Bear" and the "Buffalo," because they were "so unscientifically built." They were, in fact, Sophia and Catherine. These and three other vessels mentioned by Mrs. Simcoe, the top-sail schooners, Onondaga and Mississaga, and the sloop, Caldwell, were employed in transporting troops 86

G E O R G E F. G. S T A N L E Y

and provisions "f or the garrison of Niagara, Fort Erie and Detroit."10 In 1795 Mohawk was built and launched at Point Frederick. Mrs. Simcoe, who witnessed the launching, wrote, "She is the size of the Mississaga. She came with such rapidity that it appeared as if she would have run over the Ship we were in which was at anchor ahead of her."11 In 1798 two new gunboats were constructed, Speedy and Swift, and in 1801 the scow, Duke of Kent, came off the stocks to replace Onondaga. Within six years—the normal life of a lake vessel built of green lumber was eight years—Duke of Kent was superseded by the armed schooner, Duke of Gloucester; and in 1809 the keel of the most pretentious vessel yet built for the Provincial Marine, the corvette, Royal George, was laid at the naval dockyard at Point Frederick. These preparations were minimal in view of the rapid deterioration of the relations between Great Britain and her muscle-stretching former colonies. Fort Frontenac was falling to pieces, the soldiers' barracks were undefended, the dockyard buildings were exposed. There were no fixed defences, either in Kingston or in the dockyard, no blockhouses, no redoubts, no batteries, no fortifications. Point Henry, whose high ground dominated the dockyard, remained bare of any form of defence. Carleton Island, that "dependency" of Kingston, was now useless for defence purposes and continued to be occupied only by a handful of soldiers (an officer, sergeant, and four privates) as a token gesture of British determination to retain possession of it.12 When war finally came in June 1812, Kingston faced the possibility of invasion with a fleet comprising Earl of Moira, a clumsy vessel in need of refitting, Duke of Gloucester, almost beyond repair, Duke of Kent, no more at this date than a floating barrack, and Royal George, lying "in ordinary" with her canvas and her 22 guns in store. There were not enough men to man the ships that were available. Royal George was able to muster no more than seventeen ratings out of a complement of 200, and Earl of Moira, seventeen ratings out of a complement of eighty. The former commanding officer of the Provincial Marine—which was, incidentally, administered not by the Royal Navy but by the Quarter-Master General's Department of the Army—Captain Steel, a man well past the prime of life at seventy-five years of age, had only just retired to give place to a younger man. The military garrison numbered less than 100 men of the 10th Royal Veterans. It was commanded by a Revolutionary War officer, Major Donald Macpherson.13 The militia in the vicinity was estimated at 1,500 men.14 So inadequate were the defences that the governor general, Sir George Prevost, wondered whether it might not be advisable to remove the marine establishment from Kingston to Toronto and make that station the principal military depot rather than continue to rely upon what he called "a defenceless frontier Post" for the protection of Upper Canada.15 Only the outbreak of war forestalled this development. 87

THE DEFENCE OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA III

Tension between the United States and Great Britain had been building up for some years before war actually broke out. British interference with American shipping, the impressment of British deserters to the American navy, the continued Indian opposition to American western expansion, connived at if not encouraged by the British Indian service in Canada, all aroused American resentment. To this might be added the feeling that somehow or other the glorious revolution remained incomplete without the incorporation of Canada into the American union. The conquest of Canada, wholly or in part, was thus an essential element in American war psychopathy in the early part of the nineteenth century. Among those who felt this way was a member of Congress, who later served as a major-general on the Niagara frontier and as secretary of war, Peter Buell Porter of New York. Porter was one of Henry Clay's "War Hawks." He was chairman of the committee which recommended the adoption of a policy of war against Great Britain, with Canada as the chief military objective.16 Contemplating the possibility of an American invasion of Canada, the British military authorities appreciated the necessity of the rapid despatch of reinforcements from Great Britain. An invading army might be expected to follow the traditional invasion route along Lake Champlain and the Richelieu river; if it could be held up long enough by the permanent garrison supported by Canadian militia, to permit the Royal Navy to rush assistance to Quebec, then at least Lower Canada could be secured. But what of Upper Canada in the meantime? Would it be necessary to abandon the western province? Some officers thought so. Others, like Lieutenant-Governors Simcoe and Gore, thought otherwise. So too did General Isaac Brock. These men believed that as long as the Provincial Marine outweighed anything the Americans could float on Lake Ontario, Upper Canada would be relatively safe against any "partial or sudden incursion."17 That is why the American naval strategist, Admiral A. T. Mahan, wrote in 1905, that the capture of Kingston was the key to any successful American operation in Upper Canada. Its capture would have solved every problem "at a single stroke" for the Americans. "No other harbour was tenable as a naval station," he wrote, "with its fall, and the destruction of shipping and forts, would go the control of the lake, even if the place itself were not permanently held. Deprived thus of the water communications, the enemy (i.e. the British) could retain no position to the westward, because neither reinforcements nor supplies could reach them."18 Mahan obviously had in mind the effect of Bradstreet's raid of 1758 on Fort Frontenac. The American army commander, General Henry Dearborn, had other ideas. He contemplated several simultaneous thrusts into Canada, one to88

G E O R G E F. G. S T A N L E Y

wards Montreal along the Lake Champlain route, and another towards Kings ton over Lake Ontario—thus far he had good historical precedent in Amherst's operations in 1760. But Dearborn included two other movements, one across the Niagara river, and a fourth across the Detroit river into southwestern Upper Canada. These last two movements, as every Canadian knows, resulted in the most startling American defeats in the war, namely the surrender of Detroit and the surrender at Queenston Heights. When war was declared in June 1812, the military authorities in Kingston moved quickly. The Frontenac county militia was mustered to support the Royal Veterans, and a regular officer was appointed to command the garrison;19 supplies were forwarded from Montreal, additional regulars were sent to the city, batteries were erected at Mississauga Point and Point Frederick, and a blockhouse was constructed on Point Henry Hill. On 19 July the Provincial Marine carried out a reconnaissance of Sackett's Harbour,20 where the Americans had established a new naval base in 1809, owing to the shallow water and exposed position of Oswego. This reconnaissance has given rise to a certain amount of historical mythology based upon the alleged exploits of American gunners, who, lacking 32-pounder shot, retrieved a ball fired from Royal George, stuffed it down the muzzle of an old 32-pounder cannon, nicknamed "the old sow," and dismasted the British flagship! The story does not take into account the improbability of a corvette like Royal George carrying guns of the calibre of 32-pounders, particularly in view of the British preference for close action carronades rather than long-range cannon on their ships of war.21 However that may be, there is no doubt that the American commodore, Isaac Chauncey, by purchase and requisition of civil sailing craft, was able to muster sufficient vessels and guns to chase Royal George from the waters of Lake Ontario into the protection of the harbour batteries at Kingston, on 10 November 1812. The American ships and the shore batteries exchanged shots for several hours, neither side inflicting much in the way of damage upon the other. The Americans did, however, gain the strategic advantage of controlling the lake for a brief period before winter set in, and of capturing and sinking several Canadian merchant craft.22 Some thought was given in Kingston to a winter attack upon Sackett's Harbour, but the governor general, Sir George Prevost, preferred to remain strictly on the defensive, a strategy which Chauncey likewise was disposed to adopt. Chauncey's cautious approach was reinforced by "Red George" MacdonelFs successful raid upon Ogdensburg on 22 February 1813. Perhaps the British were planning the same kind of raid against Sackett's and he should remain on the alert to prevent them from interfering with his boat building program. In Washington, the secretary of war was all for offensive action. General John Armstrong was thoroughly impressed with the advantages to 89

THE DEFENCE OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA

be gained by crippling Kingston and its naval base, particularly before the Royal Navy should arrive to take over the Provincial Marine. Chauncey and Dearborn were both as aware as Armstrong of the advantages of an attack upon Kingston, but both were timid and defensive-minded, and both preferred to play it safe. The more they thought about Kingston, the more formidable it appeared in their imagination. York, they believed, would be an easier nut to crack, and it was hoped that its capture would injure the British, even if it was not likely to cripple them.23 Instead of launching a combined military-naval assault upon Kingston as Armstrong would have liked, the two American commanders attacked York and then directed their energies to the invasion of the Niagara peninsula which led ultimately to the defeats of Stoney Creek and Beaver Dams and the British occupation of Fort Niagara. While Chauncey was supporting Dearborn's operations against York and Fort George, Sir James Yeo, the Royal Navy officer now in command of the British lake fleet to which had been added a new 24-gun frigate, Wolfe, bombarded Sackett's Harbour. The attack was not as successful as Yeo had hoped it might be; a little more resolution on his part and on that of Sir George Prevost might well have resulted in a blow as serious to the Americans as Chauncey might, with equal resolution, have inflicted upon the Canadians. Nevertheless Yeo was able to retard Chauncey's building program and to compel the American commodore to hurry back to Sackett's, thus leaving Yeo free to cooperate with the British land forces in the Niagara peninsula driving the Americans back towards the Niagara river. As soon as he felt safe and strong enough, Chauncey once more ventured forth and during the remainder of the summer he and Yeo engaged in a see-saw contest, each seeking to engage only when weather conditions favoured long range or close combat as suited the armament each chose to carry. Both Chauncey and Yeo were fearful of the consequences of defeat and anxious to conserve their strength. The result was that while there were several skirmishes on Lake Ontario during 1813, there was no pitched naval battle. In Washington, Armstrong sat, frustrated by the failure of his commanders, naval and military, to achieve anything of permanent strategic value in the war his predecessor had boasted could be won without soldiers.24 Early in August he informed his new army commander, Major-General James Wilkinson, that Kingston must be captured that autumn as a preliminary to an offensive against Montreal. "Operations westward of Kingston, if successful, leave the strength of the enemy unbroken," he wrote. "It is the great depot of his resources. So long as he retains this, and keeps open his communications with the sea, he will not want the means of multiplying his naval and other defences, and of reinforcing or renewing the war in the west." Wilkinson was given positive instructions that "in conducting the present campaign, you will make Kingston your primary object."25 Perhaps it was the contagion of 90

G E O R G E F. G. S T A N L E Y

Chauncey's caution that made Wilkinson temporize. The lateness of the season, the probable autumn rains, the possibility that Yeo might elude Chauncey and catch Wilkinson's men in their batteaux; these and other objections were raised by the American general when he met the secretary of war at Sackett's on 5 October. The two finally agreed, somewhat indecisively, that "if the British fleet shall not escape Commodore Chauncey and get into Kingston Harbour; if the garrison of that place be not largely reinforced; and if the weather be such as will allow us to navigate the lake securely, Kingston shall be our first object, otherwise we shall go directly to Montreal."26 Armed with this conveniently flexible order, Wilkinson and Chauncey forgot about Kingston and proceeded merrily down the St. Lawrence towards Montreal. Better they had tried their luck against Yeo. The Montreal expedition ended in the disastrous defeats of Chateauguay and Crysler's Farm. Armstrong made one more attempt to get his soldiers and sailors to attack Kingston. This time he tried a new general, Jacob Brown, of kidney stronger than either Dearborn or Wilkinson, who had recently accepted the military command at Sackett's Harbour. But Armstrong bargained without Chauncey. Again the naval commander talked the military commander out of the Kingston operation, diverting him to the Niagara frontier and the defeat of Lundy's Lane. A major factor in Brown's misfortune was Chauncey's unwillingness to act as a carrier or porter for the army.27 Meanwhile the British general, Sir Gordon Drummond, yearned to take another crack at the American naval base, if only to do something to slow down Chauncey's naval building program. Failing to secure the support of Sir George Prevost for his plan, he settled for an attack upon the less significant port of Oswego.28 The attack was successful, but Yeo missed what Drummond most desired to destroy, the guns and naval stores en route to Sackett's Harbour. After a young marine had climbed the flagpole and torn down the stars and stripes which had been nailed to the pole,29 Yeo returned to Kingston to await the completion of his giant ship of war, St. Lawrence. A three-decker, larger than Nelson's Victory and cut for 112 guns, she slid into the waters of Navy Bay on 10 September 1814. Unwilling to encounter a vessel capable of blowing anything he had out of water, Chauncey wisely remained in Sackett's, building two ships of 130 guns each to nullify the advantage enjoyed by Yeo. Yeo too, was hard at work. New keels were laid down on Point Frederick for two vessels, each of 120 guns. The naval war had become a ship-builder's race.30 With the signing of the peace at Ghent on Christmas Eve, 1814, the Americans lost their chance of realizing Peter Porter's ambition to seize Canada, and Armstrong's to destroy Kingston. In fact Armstrong had really lost his opportunity when he allowed Dearborn to use his men and ships against York instead of Kingston in the spring of 1813. The Canadian student may be tempted to speculate upon what might have happened had Zebulon 91

16 The Launching of H.M.S. St. Lawrence at Point Frederick, September 10, 1814

G E O R G E F. G. S T A N L E Y

Pike, covered by Chauncey's guns, stormed ashore at Kingston. Had he succeeded in seizing Point Frederick, might he not have held the base for the rest of the year, with the local resources at his disposal and uninterrupted water communications with the United States? In such circumstances he would, by a single imaginative operation, have paralysed the whole British army west of the Cataraqui river.31 It was Canada's good fortune that the American command rested with men like Dearborn and Chauncey. Sir Gordon Drummond and other Scots in Upper Canada may well have raised their glasses and muttered thankfully, "Cha do sh£id gaoth riamh nach robh 'an seol cuid-eiginn."32 IV

In 1814 the great Duke of Wellington wrote, "I have told the Ministers repeatedly that naval superiority on the lakes is the sine qua non of success in war on the frontiers of Canada, even if our object should be only defensive."33 His advice fell upon deaf ears. More concerned about the heavy costs of the Canadian naval establishment than about Canadian defence needs, the British government entered into an arrangement with the United States by which each country agreed to limit its armament on the lakes to one vessel of 100 tons burthen armed with a single 18-pounder gun on each of Lakes Champlain and Ontario, and to two such vessels on the upper lakes. This agreement, which bears the name of the British minister to Washington, Charles Bagot, and the American secretary of state, Richard Rush, was concluded in 1817. It satisfied both British and American taxpayers, but left the Canadians firmly convinced that the Americans had got the better of the deal, just as they had got the better of the deal in the peace of Ghent. There was no question that the Rush-Bagot Agreement, by accepting the principle of naval disarmament on the lakes, robbed Canada of its first line of defence against American invasion. There was little likelihood of an attack from Canada upon the United States but, with its overwhelming superiority in manpower and with its vastly improved overland communication system, an anti-British American Republic might too easily be tempted to renew a war which had stopped short leaving them with no substantial gains. To Canadians there was no essential difference in the defence problem after the War of 1812 from that which had existed prior to the war, or even that which had existed during the ancien regime. Canada west of the Ottawa river needed the navy. What was to be done without the lake fleet, of which it was now deprived by the British policy of appeasement? Nothing. Financial needs dictated that the ships of war should be laid up and their gear stored in various sheds and in the "Stone Frigate," the great storehouse constructed on 93

THE DEFENCE OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA

Point Frederick in 1820; finally, on 1 July 1834, the naval dockyard was closed.34 Reopened briefly during the Rebellion of 1837-38, it remained in operation until 1853 when it was once again shut down. Subsequent historians and politicians have tended to look back upon the Rush-Bagot Agreement of 1817 as the beginning of the era of the "undefended frontier" so popular among ill-informed after-dinner speakers.35 Looked at historically, it will be seen that whatever the British taxpayer saved by not building ships on Lake Ontario was soon lost in building land fortifications. The years between the Rush-Bagot Agreement and the Treaty of Washington (1870) were the great years of military building in British North America. Kingston profited from this active period of defence construction. Taking to heart the experience of the war, Lord Bathurst instructed the commanderin-chief in Canada, Sir Gordon Drummond, to look into the feasibility of digging a canal at Lachine, and of rendering the Ottawa river-Rideau riverCataraqui river system navigable: this last was to provide a waterway from Kingston to Montreal well beyond the possibility of the kind of easy interception to which the St. Lawrence had been exposed during the period of hostilities. Joshua Jebb, to whom Drummond turned over the task, reported both projects practicable. Work was started on the Lachine project in 1821, but it was not until after several commissions, civilian and military, had looked into the matter, including one chaired by Major-General Sir James Carmichael-Smyth in 1825, that steps were taken to build what became known as the Rideau Canal. The speedy action which followed the earlier delays suggests the firm hand of the Duke of Wellington, who had favoured the project from the outset and who served as prime minister of Great Britain between 1828 and 1830. During his period of office much of the important work on the canal was carried out.36 The 7th and 15th companies of the Royal Sappers and Miners were raised in England for the purpose of working on the new canal. These men, supplemented by Irish immigrant labour, completed the work in 1832 under the direction of Lieutenant-Colonel John By. In addition to digging the Rideau waterway, the British military authorities took steps to strengthen the fixed defences which had been built on the heights of Point Henry by Captain Jacques Viger and his Voltigeurs during the first months of the War of 1812. In 1815 Commodore Owen of the Royal Navy at Point Frederick reported that the principal defences of the dockyard and harbour included a barrack block and two stone towers standing on Point Henry Hill, a redoubt, blockhouse, and barrack block at Point Frederick, and a small blockhouse and battery on Snake Island. These seemed scarcely adequate in the event of another war, and following the Rush-Bagot Agreement, Great Britain undertook a survey of British North American defence needs. 94

17 View of Point Frederick and Fort Henry from the Tete de Pont Barracks, 1839

THE DEFENCE OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA

The movement of American population and communications along the south shore of Lake Ontario—the Erie Canal was constructed between 1817 and 1825—added a new dimension to the Canadian defence problem, particularly in view of the strict limitation the agreement had placed upon naval power on the lake. The Carmichael-Smyth Commission looked into the problem in 1825 and, as far as Kingston was concerned, not only recommended the building of the Rideau Canal, but also the construction of additional defence works at Kingston. New works were to include fortifications on the city side of the harbour and three towers, one on Cedar Island, one on Snake Island, and one on the mainland north of the existing Fort Henry "to command a hollow way by which the Dockyard could be approached."37 Nothing was done, however, to implement Carmichael-Smyth's proposals except to quarry and dress a quantity of stone. For the moment the Rideau Canal project absorbed the attention of the military authorities. However, in 1828, another military commission, this time headed by Sir James Kempt, took another look at Kingston's weak and inadequate defences. Proceeding on the assumption that the Americans would be deterred, by the Rush-Bagot Agreement, from putting together a fleet of proportions adequate to destroy the British position at Kingston, and that they would, in consequence, probably mount a massive land operation outflanking the town, Kempt suggested the construction of six large redoubts or forts, three on each side of the harbour, each facing outwards, designed to keep the enemy at a distance from 2,300 to 2,700 yards from the entrance to the Rideau Canal, the harbour, and the dockyard. Plans were drafted in accordance with these recommendations, and after the completion of the Rideau Canal in 1832, existing fortifications on Point Henry were razed and work started on the first of Kempt's six forts. The main portion of the new Fort Henry was completed in 1836.38 Had the Kempt proposals been adopted in their entirety, Kingston would have become the most heavily fortified position in British North America, including both Halifax and Quebec. However, no effort was made to finish, or even start, the other five forts. The high cost of construction and the rapid increase in land values (only Fort Henry was located on Crown land) discouraged the British authorities, and one by one the other works contemplated by Kempt were abandoned in the planning stages. The first to go were the forts on the west, or city side, of the harbour. The question was discussed whether fortifications for the town, however desirable, were really necessary. Perhaps the local authorities might look into the possibility, when constructing "Jails, Churches, or other Strong and Extensive public Buildings," of building them in a manner "so as to admit of their being rendered into respectable Military Posts; and of sufficient strength to be capable of imped96

G E O R G E F. G. S T A N L E Y

ing the advance of an enemy's force, or of resisting the aggressiveness of an internal revolt."39 The other forts east of the harbour were dropped for financial reasons40 and partly because of a change in the military thinking of the day.41 The development of steam navigation and the large number of American steamboats already operating on the lakes suggested the possibility such vessels might easily be converted into armed cruisers in the event of war; if such an eventuality were to take place, then the principal threat to Kingston would come from a water-borne force rather than from a land force. This being the case, forts to the north of Fort Henry would serve little real purpose. It was this thinking which justified the abandonment of the Kempt scheme, and which led to the construction of the advanced battery at Fort Henry, facing the water side, in 1841. In consequence only Fort Henry, that great five-sided redoubt, with seventeen 24-pounder guns on traversing platforms, seven carronades, and four large mortars,42 ever got beyond the drafting board in the 1830s. Whether the guns of Fort Henry would have been sufficient to repel invaders from across Lake Ontario, will never be known. The fort was never tested by bombardment or siege. Only in 1838 was it faced with the possibility of an attack, when the American adventurer, Rensselaer Van Rensselaer, and a band of Upper Canadian rebels and New York sympathizers, occupied Hickory Island near Gananoque, as the first step in a plan to seize Fort Henry and open its gates to the alleged "Patriots" who supported William Lyon Mackenzie.43 Additional fortifications were constructed in Kingston during the mid18408. The demand of American settlers who had made their way overland to British Oregon for the establishment of American sovereignty in that region seemed to hint too much of the tactics which had been followed in Texas. In 1844 the Democratic Party adopted the slogan of "Fifty-four Forty or Fight" as an election cry, and James Polk was elected to the United States' presidency on a platform of belligerent continentalism. If the United States government was firmly determined to possess the whole of the Pacific coast as far as Russian Alaska, then war would be the outcome, and steps were taken in Kingston to prepare for this eventuality. Acting with unaccustomed celerity the military authorities let contracts in 1845 and 1846 for the construction of martello towers, supported by earthworks and flanking defences, covering the Kingston waterfront from Cedar Island to Murney's Point. In addition to the towers, plans were made for a shore battery opposite the City Buildings and the market. That these works were given a high priority is evident from the facts that the Local Commissariat Office in Kingston was given the authority to accept at once, without reference to headquarters, the most favourable tenders for construction, and that only one contract was 97

THE DEFENCE OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA

allotted to a company in order that work could be proceeded with simultaneously on all four towers.44 The three towers on Cedar Island (Cathcart), harbour shoal (Victoria), and Murney's Point (Murney), were two firing-deck structures with a ditch and a small glacis. The tower on Point Frederick was much larger; it had three firing-decks, with an earthwork bastion in front of which a picket palisade was placed to impede assault. It also possessed a loop-holed stone curtain on the land side, traced in such a way as to allow flanking fire from a fortified redan. The whole system was designed to provide interlocking fire in connection with the advanced battery at Fort Henry and the Market battery on the harbour. V

With the signing of the Oregon Treaty in 1846, the tensions which had led to the construction of the martello towers at Kingston rapidly diminished. Canadians were only too anxious to turn their attention to the development of their new political status under "responsible government," and "Little Englanders" in Great Britain to their familiar theme of querying the costs of the imperial connection. Even under the shadow of a new Napoleon rising to power in France, the colonial secretary, Lord Grey, wondered whether the British garrisons in Canada might not be limited to "two or three fortified posts of importance, probably only Quebec and Kingston."45 Then, suddenly, on 12 April 1861, Confederate batteries opened fire on Fort Sumter, and the American Civil War had begun. Charles Stanley, Viscount Monck, governor general of Canada, immediately took steps to expedite defence preparations against the possibility of the war spilling over the frontier into the British province. Batteries were erected at Toronto and Kingston, and when four United States revenue boats put into Kingston harbour seeking refuge from a storm on Lake Ontario, the local commander sent an officer on board, ostensibly to enquire as to the extent of the damage the boats had suffered, but in reality to determine whether they were carrying heavy guns for war purposes.46 Late in December 1861, a provincial department of defence was established and Kingston's member of the legislature, John A. Macdonald, then attorney general for Canada West, became "Minister of Militia Affairs." Monck's next step was to appoint a provincial military commission to advise his government as to the proper measure to be taken in view of the threatening attitude of the United States following the Trent Affair.47 The commission recommended the construction of a series of defence works at various locations across Canada from Quebec to Sarnia. The cost of such works was well beyond the resources of the provincial authorities to finance, or the political disposition of the British government to approve. 98

18 View of Kingston Harbour, c. 1880 (showing Martello Towers, Fort Henry, the Royal Military College, and ruins of the Market Battery)

THE DEFENCE OF BRITISH NORTH AMERICA

Accordingly, Lt. Col. W. F. D. Jervois, deputy director of fortifications, was sent to Canada to give what the British hoped would be better informed and more politically realistic advice. After a short visit to the several British North American provinces, Jervois reported that, in his opinion, Canada could not be successfully defended without naval superiority on Lake Ontario. Failing the widening of the Rideau canal to permit the passage of British ironclads to the inland waters of the Great Lakes and the strengthening of Kingston (which Jervois favoured as the principal naval base against the suggestion of a new base on the Bay of Quinte advanced by the commissioners), everything in Upper Canada should be abandoned and available defence forces concentrated in the lower St. Lawrence. W. E. Gladstone, one of the chief exponents of "Little Englandism," went a step beyond Jervois. He regarded the whole country as indefensible and was ready to abandon it to the United States. The Canadian governor general was not happy about a policy of easy surrender to the Americans. Neither were his ministers. At the request of the Canadian authorities, Lt. Col. Jervois was asked to return to Canada to take another look at the situation. Vicksburg and Gettysburg had made it evident that the Northern States were likely to emerge victorious from the Civil War, and the possibility of attack by a successful Northern army, irritated at Canadian sympathies with the Confederates, was not one the Canadians viewed with equanimity. They and the Maritimers were talking of a political union, and at the very time delegates from all the British North American provinces were meeting at Quebec to hammer out the details of a federal union which would better enable them to organize the defence of British North America, Colonel Jervois was preparing a revised report on Canadian defence needs. In his second report Jervois modified some of his earlier views. He omitted any reference to the widening of the Rideau canal, and expressed his belief that Upper Canada could be defended if gun boats were placed on Lake Ontario, naval superiority secured, and steps taken to strengthen Kingston and its naval establishment. As a further precaution he also recommended extensive defence works at Montreal and Quebec.48 In the end little was done to implement the Jervois recommendations beyond constructing three forts at Quebec. Kingston saw neither new ships of war nor new forts. As it turned out they were unnecessary. The American Civil War was almost at an end and in April 1865 General Robert E. Lee surrendered to General U. S. Grant at Appomattox. Not that Lee's surrender removed all the tensions between the United States and Great Britain. Ill-feeling continued for several years, and Canada suffered from the depredations of those Irish-Americans who illogically sought to free Ireland from British rule by attacking Canada. But even the Fenians could not bring about a new war, and with the signing of the Treaty of Washington by Great 100

G E O R G E F. G. S T A N L E Y

Britain and the United States, and the withdrawal of the British garrisons from Canada, the tranquility which had existed prior to the outbreak of the Civil War was restored. The imperial promise of financial help to build fortifications was converted into one to build a railway. Transcontinental communications were becoming more essential than obsolescent defence works. What is interesting about this period of defence plans proposed and unrealized, is less the fact that they were not put into effect in Kingston, than the fact that the strategic thinking behind these plans marked the complete abandonment of the kind of thinking that had prompted the elaborate land defence works suggested in 1825 and 1829. British military thinking in the 1860s, in regard to Upper Canada, implied a return to the familiar doctrines of 1812, namely, reliance upon lake power, with Kingston as the principal naval base on the Great Lakes.49 In its essentials, strategic thinking about Kingston never really did shake itself loose from its obsession with the water, and the advantages of naval as against military defence. It was a tradition which the British of the nineteenth century carried over from the French of the eighteenth century. VI

Soldiers of the British garrison watching a future prime minister of Canada laying the stones of Fort Frederick in 1846 could hardly have realized that the days of Kingston as one of Canada's major military and naval centres were almost over. Only twenty-five years were to pass before the British regulars would be marching out of the Tete de Pont on their way back to England, the last of a long and illustrious line of British regiments to serve in Kingston and in Fort Henry. Henceforth Great Britain would leave the politicians and the diplomats to defend the country as best they could until Canada was in a position to assume responsibility for its own protection. Not that Kingston ceased to be a military centre. The Tete de Pont was soon occupied by "B" Battery of the Royal Canadian Horse Artillery, and in 1876 the Royal Military College, located on Point Frederick, the site of the old naval dockyard, opened its doors to the first class of Canadian officer cadets. In later years the Royal Canadian Corps of Signals and the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers were to establish their permanent camps at Barriefield near Kingston. The Canadian Army Staff College and the National Defence College were also established in Kingston during the present century. But Kingston's formerly vital strategic role was played out. Only those great limestone monuments, Fort Frontenac, the Stone Frigate and Fort Henry, remain to remind us of the days when the fate of our country depended upon the guns and ships at the entrance to the Cataraqui river. 101

This page intentionally left blank

garrison and Community, 1815-1870 J O H N W. SPURR

Founded under military auspices in 1783 at the junction of Lake Ontario with the headwaters of the St. Lawrence, Kingston was, by deliberate intent, assigned a dual role in British plans for the future of Upper Canada. It was, on the one hand, intended to serve as the capital of a solidly Loyalist heartland; on the other, by virtue of its strategic position it was the obvious site for the central garrison post and major supply depot on the 350-mile-long reach of Britain's lines of communication between Montreal and the head of the lake. Hard upon its founding a depot and dockyard to service the Provincial Marine were constructed across the harbour, on the eastern flank of the peninsula of Point Frederick, and with this development the town's future seemed eminently promising. To the official mind, however, Kingston was too near the American border, and too vulnerable to an attack across the ice in winter to serve as the prime British base in Upper Canada. York was its rival, and with the establishment of the provincial capital in that settlement, Kingston was relegated to an important, but secondary support role, and in that capacity it continued to serve until the fall of York to the Americans in April 1813. Meanwhile the civilian community had achieved an identity closely related to but basically separate from its importance as a garrison post. This was due primarily to the efforts of a coterie of Loyalist and later emigrant entrepreneurs who had earned an enviable prosperity by exploiting the commercial potential of the town's strategic site, developing a thriving "forwarding trade," an enterprise which involved the export to Montreal by batteaux and Durham boats of produce garnered both from Kingston's immediate hinterland and the head of the lake, and the import by return, of cargoes of consumer goods, whether for local consumption or trans-shipment by sail to York and Niagara. Their success was conditioned to a degree by lucrative government contracts for the transport of troops, baggage, and supplies, but it was at least 103

GARRISON AND COMMUNITY

real enough to have earned for these "gentlemen-in-trade" recognition— together with the clergy, the families of a few government officials, and those of a small group of ex-officers, medical gentlemen of the forces, and former senior employees of the Ordnance and Commissariat who had retired in the area on half-pay—as Kingston's "establishment." From the first they combined with officers of the staff, the military and naval departments and the garrison in a natural alliance—frequently reinforced by intermarriage— which set the social tone and character of Kingston for the greater part of the century. On the outbreak of war with the United States in June 1812, the town automatically became the pivotal centre of the British front in Upper Canada. Save in one important aspect, the unquestioned loyalty of its 1,000 or so citizens, it was ill-prepared for its new role. Physically, the community had little substance: possibly 150 houses, two small churches, a few other unpretentious public buildings, including a ramshackle government house, and a semiderelict but habitable barrack and government stores complex. Across the harbour the naval establishment was run-down but functional, yet Maj. Donald MacPherson, who commanded the 100-man garrison of the 10th Royal Veterans' Battalion, could find only a corporal's guard to protect the King's ships and vital naval stores. Moreover, the town was singularly defenceless. It could, of course, depend on the guns of warships in port, and there may have been a rudimentary battery on Mississagua Point, but the evidence for its existence is conjectural: there were pieces of ordnance in store in 1812, the point was the obvious site for a battery intended for the defence of the harbour, and there was, in fact, a miniscule detachment of gunners attached to the garrison. The war lasted some thirty months and transformed the town almost beyond recognition. One authority has it that the number of houses had increased by 1817 to 450, the civilian population to 2,250.* Disbanded soldiers accounted for a sharp rise in the population in 1816, but in the main its growth was due to the influx of labour required to build the war fleet and fortifications and, too, to service the expanding interests of the mercantile community. And it must be obvious that the capital required for the physical development of the town was derived in large part from profits on disbursements from the military chest which, at the midpoint of the war, were said to amount to £1,000 per day.2 But the most significant and lasting result of the war for Kingston was that it became, from 1813, the unchallenged citadel of British power in Upper Canada. In the course of these thirty months the town was provided with its first perimeter defence: a line of five strategically sited blockhouses interconnected by 14-foot cedar picketing—Nos. 4 and 5 commanding the exit 104

JOHN W. SPURR

roads to York and Montreal—supported by redans between Nos. 3 and 4, and 4 and 5, and a small line barrack near No. 3. On the waterfront a strong garrisoned battery had been erected on Mississagua Point, a smaller, supporting battery on the Murney Point. Moreover, the old military compound on the point separating the harbour from the basin of the Great Cataraqui, Major Ross's mouldering barrack and stores complex of 1783-84, had been largely rebuilt, enlarged, and reoriented so that the barracks now fronted on a Place d'Armes bordered to the north and south, along the south bank of the sometime French harbour and the north side of Barrack Street, by picketed areas for each of the several military departments. Finally, an enclosure at the head of Barrack Street, known in 1812 as the Garrison Garden, had become Artillery Park, a unit complete with its own parade, gunsheds, forges, stables, barracks, and a residence for the commanding officer, Royal Artillery. Across the harbour a powerful battery supported by a blockhouse, barracks, and necessary ancillary buildings had been constructed on Point Frederick for the purpose of protecting fleet, dockyard, and harbour. The citadel proper, however, was a massive twin-towered fortress which crowned Point Henry, the great hill which rises steeply above the eastern shore of Navy Bay. Its guns dominated the whole strategic area of Kingston, including both its land and water approaches. Below the crown of the hill, and almost directly opposite the dockyard, an ordnance wharf, and a picketed compound enclosing the workshops and stores of the Ordnance and Royal Engineers, completed the defensive works of 1812-15. This great complex of fortifications was, of necessity, a monument to expediency, having been constructed in haste from materials most readily at hand, namely logs, pickets, and rubble. During the next forty years, however, the major buildings in question were reconstructed in limestone following plans recommended by the Duke of Wellington in 1819, and by the Carmichael-Smyth report of 1825. The building of the Rideau Canal, which began in 1827, was an integral feature of the 1825 plan, and the rebuilding of Fort Henry, which started in 1832, was intended to a major degree to provide an adequate defence for the Kingston terminus of this vital waterway. Moreover, it should be noted that between 1827 and 1828 communication between the town and the service installations on the east side of the harbour was vastly improved when the old military scow-ferry connecting the Tete de Pont with Point Frederick was replaced by a toll-bridge erected by a civilian company in which, however, a majority of the shares were owned by service officers. The final period of fortification, 1846-54, planned long in advance, was implemented because of the Oregon crisis. It endowed Kingston with Fort Henry's great advance battery and ditch towers, the harbour battery, and the town's distinctive martello towers. 105

19 View of the entrance to the Tete de Pont Barracks, c. 1830

JOHN W. SPURR

It goes without saying that the life and work patterns of a garrison are directly conditioned by the military duties it must assume, the amenities provided for it, and the character of the town it is intended to protect. In several contexts Kingston was not an ideal site for a garrison. It is not significant that despite the extent of its military installations, the Ordnance found it necessary, year after year, to call for tenders for the lease of single officers' quarters, messes, regimental hospitals, departmental offices, and barracks for married soldiers and their families—£450 was required for such purposes in 1840, plus an unknown amount paid directly to Kingston landlords by married officers in receipt of rental allowances3—but it is significant that regiments-in-garrison found the town unhealthy during much of the summer due to the prevalence of a debilitating fever apparently caused by emanations from the swamplands bordering the west bank of the Cataraqui. The experience of the 37th (North Hampshires) is illuminating in this context. The regiment returned to Kingston in June 1824 after an absence of six years. On 25 July, forty-six of its 493 rank and file were ill, the great majority with the fever. Forty cases were reported on the same date in August, thirty-eight in each of September and October, and thirty as late as 25 November. But Kingston was also unhealthy for a more serious reason: it was cursed with a proliferation of both licensed premises and illegal "shebeens" or grog shops, which were a constant temptation to the soldier in his off-duty hours. This situation became so serious that the common council, in a memorial to Lord Sydenham dated April 1841, noted that "There was then a drinking shop for every 7th or 8th male adult, while the town was over-run with drunkards." Further details were given in the draft of a letter to the Hon. S. B. Harrison dated 25 July 1842: in that year Montreal, with a population of 45,000 had only 220 licensed premises, while Kingston, with 8 or 9,000 in town and suburbs had 136, only thirty or forty of which possessed the accommodation for the traveller which the law required. Nearly all the rest were described as "low dram shops, the constant resort of the idle and dissolute." And it was added, "the bad influence which they have upon the soldiers stationed in this garrison has been the complaint of every commanding officer, and had given pain to all who feel an interest in the welfare of the gallant men . . . engaged in this branch of the Service." Council concluded with the opinion that four taverns per each 1,000 souls was an "ample" allowance!4 Commanding officers had good reason to protest: apart from their natural concern for the health of their men, the drunken soldier was prone to truculence, insubordination, and desertion. Then, too, all-too-many soldiers fuddled with drink from the shebeens of Front Street drowned while striving to reach their quarters at Forts Henry or Frederick, whether by boat or, in the winter, across unsafe ice. Finally, the drunken soldier was fair game for 107

GARRISON AND COMMUNITY

gangs of muggers which haunted the waterfront in winter, especially after the advent of the steamboat when Kingston became a major port. They were, it is assumed, men paid off at the end of a season of navigation, with little prospect of steady employment until the late spring. It is worth noting, in this context, that drunk or sober the soldier would often suffer a mugging on the premise that a beating was preferable to the severe disciplinary action which would inevitably follow if he were caught by the military police in a brawl with civilians. By all odds, however, Kingston's greatest disadvantage as a garrison town stemmed from its close proximity to the American border, and the relative ease—despite long-established look-out posts on Wolfe Island and other vulnerable points in the area—with which the would-be deserter could find his way to the Republic. Concern on this score was amply justified: 571 infantry deserted in the first decade after the war, 370 infantry and gunners between 1825 and 1834, 377 in the next decade, and 214 between 1855 and 1857. In the latter year headquarters at Montreal decided that Kingston was no longer a "safe" site for a regular garrison, and from then until mid-January 1862 there were seldom more than 50 gunners and three or four companies of the Royal Canadian Rifles, a regiment recruited of seasoned veterans, a high proportion of whom were married, and who were considered largely "desertion proof," on duty in Kingston. The town was demonstrably the poorer during these lean years of its garrison, and when it suddenly received massive reinforcements during the early years of the American Civil War, when Anglo-American relations again threatened to involve the Canadas in armed conflict, and it became wellknown that Yankee "crimpers" and their accomplices in the area were active in seducing or kidnapping both regulars and civilians for service with the Union armies, Council voluntarily added a $50 bonus to the official reward for information leading to the apprehension of these miscreants, an action warmly commended by the commander of the forces. The 62nd Foot (Wiltshire Regiment) under Colonel Ingall lost few men by desertion during a brief sojourn in the town in 1862-63, and proved so popular that Council petitioned headquarters to allow it to remain in Kingston until its scheduled return to England. The petition was unsuccessful and in June 1863 the 47th (Lancashire Regiment) succeeded the 62nd. Some months later the American "bounty" on a British regular rose to $700, and the 47th suffered no less than 64 desertions before it was abruptly withdrawn after a single year in the garrison. Relations between London and Washington were still seriously strained at this point, however, and the commander of the forces felt it necessary to maintain a convincing show of strength in Kingston. He decided, therefore, 108

J O H N W. SPURR

to replace the 47th with the headquarters and much of the company strength of the tried and true RCRR. The 1st battalion of the prestigious Rifle Brigade also served in Kingston between June and September 1864, but thereafter, until the spring of 1870, the garrison consisted of one battery (approximately 238 gunners and drivers) of the Royal Artillery and the Royal Canadians. Meanwhile, as expected, desertion had ceased to be a problem of prime concern. But in the spring of 1870 rumours that the battery would shortly be posted to one of the fever-ridden posts in the West Indies provoked so many desertions that it was hurriedly withdrawn at the beginning of June, and promptly shipped to England. The exact number of desertions from Kingston between 1815 and 1865, the last year for which monthly strength returns are available, is impossible to state with certainty as returns from the RA in garrison were only reported from its headquarters in Quebec until 1832. Similarly, desertions from the few companies of the RCRR stationed in Kingston during the lean years were reported from their headquarters at Montreal or Toronto. Nonetheless the known total by the end of 1865 was an astonishing 1,833! On the credit side of the ledger an incoming regiment could at the least count on a cordial reception. Many casual visitors recorded unflattering opinions of Kingston during the period 1820-40, commenting on its cold dullness and its lack of first-rate accommodation. No doubt their observations. were honest enough, but at least one, Charles Dickens's well-known "Indeed it may be said of Kingston that one-half of it appears to be burned down, and the other half not to be built up" was rather drastically unfair as the town had only recently experienced the most disastrous fire in its history. In contrast note the comment of Dr. Walter Henry, surgeon to the 66th on its return to Kingston in May 1834: "Our numerous friends . . . received us with a warm welcome. Our former stay of two years in their kind-hearted town had produced an almost affectionate intimacy. The place had improved in appearance, and several substantial houses, including a bank, had been built in the interval of our absence."5 Apart altogether from considerations of economic self-interest there was a special reason for Kingston to welcome each succeeding regiment, for the community had been oriented in favour of the services since its founding. Moreover, its population had been constantly reinforced by retired servicemen, and its military orientation strengthened by marriage. The names of fourteen officers and fifty rank and file are listed in the marriage records of St. George's for the years 1804 to 1815, and if these totals seem unimpressive it should be borne in mind that army regulations limited the number of married soldiers in a company to eight, many of whom may have already married elsewhere; further, few officers could afford to marry in Canada's 109

20 The Insolvent Subalterns Paying Morning Visits, 1843

JOHN W. SPURR

garrison towns unless they possessed independent means or were assured that the prospective bride possessed a satisfactory dowry. But that some officers did contract marriages in Kingston which their commanding officers must have considered financially reckless is indicated by the petitions of their widows for pensions and for allowances from the Compassionate Fund for their children. In any event, counting only the army marriages recorded in the registers of the Anglican churches of St. George's, St. Paul's, and St. Mark's, Barriefield to 1870, and in those of the Roman Mission of St. Mary's from 1817-50 the totals are 32 for officers and 248 for other ranks. And it is a matter of record that by the mid-1850s almost all of the establishment and perhaps would-be establishment families had intermarried with the military. Others had married into the hierarchy of fleet and dockyard. These particular unions were not taken into account, however, as the history of these establishments is not germane to this essay. Yet it must be remembered that the navy maintained a considerable presence in the town until 1853. Meanwhile, between 1815 and 1865, 1,258 soldiers were discharged in Kingston. It is not, of course, claimed that all of these men eventually settled either in the town or, in fact, the Midland District; nor is it claimed that the officers and men who married here returned at the end of their careers. It is, however, reasonable to assume that these statistics, incomplete as they are, suggest that a not-inconsiderable proportion of the civilian community had continuing personal interests in the garrison throughout its life-span. And it is equally reasonable to assume that this proportion decreased appreciably after the early 1840s, by which time the civilian population of whatever background greatly exceeded the normal strength of the garrison and its dependents. Nonetheless throughout Kingston's history as a garrison town an incoming regiment could confidently look forward to fraternal associations with every class in the community. It is a cardinal fact of garrison life that it is largely "inner-directed," and functions in its assigned environment more or less independently of the life of the community in which it serves. But this is not to say that any regiment in garrison would be indifferent to the amenities of its immediate surroundings. Kingston had always been a paradise for the soldier-sportsmen interested in fish and game, not to mention aquatic sports. As a result of the building boom which followed the cessation of hostilities in 1815, its early success as the province's prime centre for the building of steamships, the continued burgeoning of its forwarding trade, and prosperity produced by profits on the building of the Rideau system and the rebuilding of Fort Henry, it had become, even before its incorporation in 1838, a town of considerable consequence. It grew prodigiously during its brief period (1841-43) as the capital of the United Canadas, suffered a sharp recession 111

GARRISON AND COMMUNITY

when the capital was removed to Montreal, but recovered, and by 1854, when the rebuilding of its fortifications had been completed, it boasted a population of some 12,000 and was both handsome and prosperous. Its prosperity was short-lived, however, for the completion of the Grand Trunk Line between Toronto and Montreal in 1855 brought desolation to the waterfront. Thus it was especially unfortunate for the economy of the town that its garrison was reduced to a token force during the Crimean War and between 1857 and 1862. Nonetheless, Kingston's establishment, long since ensconced in impressive town-houses and elaborate country villas, especially along the Front Road to Portsmouth, was still in a position to entertain the officers of the garrison, and the town itself was well provided with the amenities of civilized living. It did, however, lack both a theatre and a concert hall. In January 1815 Kingston was the headquarters of Lt. Gen. Gordon Drummond, commander of the forces in Upper Canada. The town was crowded— one would assume to the point of near suffocation—with 167 staff and regimental officers, 3,549 army rank and file, two companies of the Royal Artillery, the formidable strength of the wartime fleet, and an unknown number of service dependents and employees. This situation was short-lived as disbandments and withdrawals began almost immediately after Sir George Prevost's proclamation of peace, and by the end of the 1815 season of navigation the strength of the army in the Canadas had been reduced from 29,500 to approximately 9,000. But Kingston's garrison was not stabilized until May 1817, when the 1st battalion of the 37th (North Hampshire Regiment) succeeded the 70th (Glasgow Lowland). From this date until the Rebellion of 1837-38 its components were two companies of the Royal Artillery—approximately 100 all ranks—and one line battalion. The latter, after 1822, had an official establishment of 74 sergeants and drummers and 576 other ranks, the total of 650 being organized in eight companies and two "wings" or divisions: a right division which included the regimental headquarters and band, and a left division of four service companies. In fact, however, the strength of any line battalion in the Canadas in this period fluctuated considerably in any given year, being dependent on the ability of its depot battalion at home to make good losses due to deaths, desertions, and discharges of "time-expired" men before the close of navigation in November. The town ceased to be the military headquarters for the province with the departure of Maj. Gen. G. F. Tinling-Widdrington in July 1818. For the next twenty-three years it was a district headquarters commanded by the senior colonel in the garrison, often the local regimental commander, but not infrequently a colonel of artillery or the commanding Royal Engineer in Upper Canada. The commandant was assisted by deputy-assistant quarter-master, adjutant, and commissary generals, a barrack master, one or more surgeons, a 112

J O H N W. SPURR

chaplain, and a town major who also frequently served as the brigade major of the militia. The staff itself was served by a miscellany of support personnel including senior clerks, storemen, "issuers," assistant barrack masters, hospital mates, and the like. In July of 1841 the army's headquarters for Upper Canada returned to Kingston with Maj. Gen. John Clitherow in command. He was succeeded in turn by Maj. Gen. Sir Richard Armstrong (July 1842September 1848), Maj. Gen. William Rowan (October 1848-May 1849), and Maj. Gen. the Hon. Charles Stephen Gore (September 1849-September 1852). Thereafter Kingston reverted to its former role as a district headquarters. Many of the general officers, regimental commanders, and many a staff officer won the respect and affection of the town. Lt. Col. Francis Skelly Tidy of the 24th (Warwickshire Regiment), who died in Kingston in October 1835, Lt. Col. the Hon. Henry Dundas of the 83rd, later the 3rd Viscount Melville, Lt. Col. William Lenox Ingall of the 62nd, and Major-General Rowan (later Field Marshal Sir William, KCMG), Sir Richard Armstrong (subsequently commander-in-chief, Madras, 1851-53), and the Hon. Charles Gore (later General Sir Charles) all deserve honorable mention in this context. But so do the distinguished soldier-scientist and militia commander during the Rebellion of 1837-38, Lt. Col. Sir Richard Bonnycastle, RE, who died in Kingston on 3 November 1847, Col. Thomas Cubitt, RA, garrison commander during the rebellion, whose funeral in March 1840 was the occasion of general mourning in the town, Col. Plomer Young, for some nine years, 1846-55, a distinguished member of the Army Staff, Lt. Col. Thomas Lightfoot, DAQMG, 1818-27, Capt. Patrick Corbett, town major from 1816 to his death in 1832, Col. H. P. Bourchier, also town major from 1839 to his death in 1862—an officer who in addition, had served as brigade major, on occasion as AADAG, and had commanded the garrison from 1855 to 1862—and two chaplains to the forces: Kingston's own Rev. Robert David Cartwright, 1832 until his much lamented death on 24 May 1843, and Rev. J. Bartlett, 1843-63. Thirty-three, or slightly less than one-third of the infantry regiments of the British line, paraded their colours in Kingston between 1815 and 1870. A few were only represented by a reserve battalion, their 2nd or left division, or from one to four companies, but the great majority were present in strength, and a goodly number served more than one posting in the town: thus the 9th (East Norfolk) Regiment in 1815, and again, forty-odd years later, in 1856-57; the 15th (Yorkshire East Riding) in 1827-28 and 1833-34; the 24th (Warwickshire) in 1835-37 and 1840-41; the 37th (North Hampshires), 1816-18 and 1823-25; the 68th (Durham Light Infantry), 1823 and 1825-27; the 70th (Glasgow Lowland), 1815-17 and 1819-21; and the 71st (Highland Light Infantry) in 1828-29 and in 1852-53. Save in the case of the Scottish regiments the territorial designations in question have little relevance, for by the 113

GARRISON AND COMMUNITY

early 1830s Irishmen considerably outnumbered Englishmen in the British infantry, but it must be remembered that each of these regiments brought to Kingston a distinctive individual presence symbolized by the special characteristics of its uniform—the regiments of "redcoats" had their own special facings, the Scots their particular regimental tartans, and the Rifles their dark bottle-green with black facings—colours emblazoned with the regiment's battle honours and a bewildering corpus of customs and attitudes which stemmed from its war-scarred past. It is not difficult to believe that each incoming regiment intrigued and enriched the town not only because of the interest and appeal of its defined identity, but because of a certain sophistication derived from service in the farthest outposts of a worldwide empire, and participation in famous battles and sieges which were proud and familiar landmarks in the folk-memory of profoundly "loyal" Kingston. If Kingston regarded certain officers with special respect and affection, the same may be said of particular regiments. It should be noted, however, that the forthright and outspoken Dr. E. J. Barker, who founded Kingston's British Whig in 1834, and remained its proprietor and editor until 1872, made it clear early in his career that respect, in particular, was not accorded automatically, but had to be earned. Dr. Barker was quick to censure an officer for arrogance or incivility, or conduct which in his opinion was unbecoming to a British officer—he was, incidentally, not always fair in his judgments—or to reprove a regiment for misconduct. Thus, on 30 June 1835 he printed an article on the recently arrived 24th in which he advised this regiment "that nothing adds so much to the personal comfort of the soldier as the good will of the civilians among whom he takes up his temporary abode," and hoped that when it had sown its "wild oats" it would merit the good opinions won by the 15th and 66th. But his strictures are few, and that fact is itself eloquent testimony to the general good conduct of the garrison. Normally the departure of a unit was recorded in the Whig with the warmest of tributes. Major Cameron's company of the RA left Kingston on 29 October 1837. In the Whig of 1 November we find the following: "the appearance of the men at the moment of their embarcation was in accordance with their steady, orderly demeanour during a period of more than four years they were stationed at this post," and it was also noted that a numerous assemblage attended to witness the departure of "this gallant little band." And on the departure of the 83rd in May of 1840: "In taking leave of this fine corps, which we do with hearty good will, we cannot avoid remarking that the conduct of the men during the two years the regiment has been here has been orderly in the extreme, and a better or more gentlemanly set of officers never sported Her Majesty's scarlet. . . , as to its Colonel, the Hon. Henry Dundas, a future peer of Great Britain, he is the very prince of commanders and pink 114

J O H N W. SPURR

of good fellows—a man beloved by his officers, and idolized by his men." Finally, the 62nd: Mayor John Creighton, writing to the commander of the forces on 12 February 1863—the letter was printed in the Whig on the 28th—requesting a year's postponement of the withdrawal of this regiment, commented on "the utmost cordiality and good feeling [which] had existed between the officers and men and citizens." It had had "fewer desertions than from any similar corps previously stationed at this post," and in his forty years in Kingston "not one of them . . . exhibited such a high state of discipline as the 62nd." He continued with the observation that no single instance had occurred of any of the men having been brought before the civil authorities for drunkenness or disorderly conduct. In the event the mayor's intervention was fruitless and the 62nd duly embarked on 27 May. Five hundred citizens were on the wharf to see the left division leave on the Empress at 6 A.M., its bugle band playing "Auld Lang Syne." The right division left at seven on the Passport with that "magnificent band which has so often contributed to the enjoyment of our citizens playing farewell airs, answered by the plaudits and shouts of the spectators" among whom were "a goodly number of girls of the genus housemaid, who manifested a tearful regret at the departure of their red-coated gallants." Thus the Whig on the 28th. It goes without saying that Kingston always had a decidedly practical interest in its garrison. More likely than not each new regiment arrived, together with its baggage and dependents, and eventually departed in steam transport chartered from companies in which Kingstonians held interests. Once in garrison it was rationed by contract—notably with prime beef and government-inspected flour of the finest quality—while additional contracts provided cordwood, candles, "best quality wheaten or oaten straw" for its barracks, and fodder for its horses. The average garrison of the 1820s and early 1830s required 2,000 cords of firewood, 1,600 barrels of flour, 3,000 12-lb. bundles of straw, and 4,500 Ibs. of beef tallow candles per year. Moreover there were profits to be made in leasing regimental canteens, and in supplying regimental hospitals and company and officers messes with groceries, vegetables and, in the case of the latter, with ale, spirits, and fine wines. And, too, during this period both Ordnance and Commissariat were issuing tenders for all manner of maintenance and housekeeping tasks, a policy which produced contracts for laundering and mending barrack and hospital linen, for painting the exterior and whitewashing the interior of barracks, for cleaning barrack stoves and replacing worn stovepipes, for supplying the troops in Fort Henry with fresh water, for emptying ash pits, privies, and barrack stables, and for cartage and cab transport between the several garrisoned posts in the citadel. As the garrison strength was more than doubled after the Rebellion 115

GARRISON AND COMMUNITY

of 1837-38, and continued to be substantial through 1853, large additional sums were required for its maintenance. In fact one citizen estimated that in 1845, apart altogether from pay and allowances and expenditures on the fortifications, the military chest was then disbursing from £5 to £6,000 per month in Kingston. This estimate was published in the Whig on 9 September in an effort to calm public feeling aroused by an incident at the races on 2 September, when for the first and only time in its history as a garrison town citizens and soldiers came to blows. But if the town's business community had a vested financial interest in the garrison, to the generality of its citizens it was, especially in its years of strength, a continuing, omnipresent, vibrant, and colourful pageant renewed with the arrival of each garrison relief. This involved a consciously dramatic scenario in four acts, as the right or headquarters divisions of the incoming and outgoing regiments effected their exchange with bands playing and citizens crowding the waterfront. A day or so later there was the less impressive exchange of left divisions. Meanwhile, the incoming regiment had occupied its barracks and taken over all necessary guard duties. It then "posted its credit" in a curious ceremony which sent a senior noncommissioned officer accompanied by drummers to salient points in the town to announce that citizens would extend credit to the soldiery at their own risk. From this point the relief was truly "in garrison." For the remainder of its posting it would be continually in evidence through the ceremonial relief of guards and sentries, Sunday afternoon church parades, the semiannual public inspections by the commander of the forces on Barriefield Common—events which frequently involved the thrill of sham battles—and the many parades in honour of royalty, the accession of the sovereign, his or her birthday, the birth of a prince, etc. And there were other, sombre parades as well, as the garrison buried its dead: 625 in the years 1815-65. Naturally all of these ceremonials involved the regimental band, and it was Kingston's good fortune that the great majority of its regiments maintained bands of considerable distinction. In fact, if one could believe the press, each seems to have been superior to its predecessor! The band was the property of the officers of the regiment, each of whom was obliged to subscribe twenty days' pay on joining the mess, and eight days' pay per year toward its support. In practice, however, it was exclusively at the disposition of the commanding officer, and a colonel who valued good public relations made it available to the public on a generous scale: for promenade concerts in Artillery or City Park in the summers, in City Hall during the winters; for the annual parades and dinners of the patriotic societies, and for charity fetes and balls. Moreover the quadrille section, automatically present at any function or theatrical event patronized by the colonel, could be hired for a nominal fee for private dinners, fetes champetres, and soirees dansantes. 116

JOHN W. SPURR

A much more serious contribution to the life of the community was, however, the garrison's ever-ready response to appeals from the civil power for assistance in fighting the many fires which plagued the town during this half-century. Its services were especially commended in this context in 1840, when much of the centre of the town and a large area of its waterfront were devastated; and again in 1865, when the regiment-in-garrison was officially credited with having saved Kingston's pride, its magnificent City Hall. Both officers and men were notoriously ill-paid during Kingston's years as a garrison town, although the lot of the common soldier improved considerably in this and other respects between 1829 and 1836. Nonetheless his basic pay remained a miserable shilling per day, and it says much for his character that he not infrequently joined with his comrades-in-penury in generous contributions to the relief of distressed immigrants and to the building of more than one of Kingston's churches. His daily life was a monotony of drill, guard, and look-out duty until the mid-years of the garrison when the army cautiously introduced programs of physical training and regimental sports. Off-duty he was left to his own devices save that he was not allowed to stray far from the town, even to hunt or fish with a comrade, because of the prevailing fear of desertion. The officers, almost exclusively sons of the aristocracy or upper middle classes, were well-known both for their paternal care of their men, and as the leaders of the local social and sporting fraternity. They entertained lavishly at dinner and whist in their messes, and participated enthusiastically in the assemblies, the subscription dances which were the highlight of Kingston's social season until the late forties when these functions became unpopular because of friction between the establishment (the "Nobs") and the well-to-do mercantile community (the "Snobs"). Thereafter each regiment normally gave a grand ball in City Hall per season to entertain their friends of the military and civil establishments. Their most appreciated efforts, however, were their amateur dramatic productions. Most line regiments maintained a corps of amateur actors, both officers and soldiers, and from the very end of the war an association of officers of the navy and army, supported by a few gentlemen from the town, established a theatre—Kingston's first—in a disused brewery owned by the navy. During the next half century there were few years indeed in which there was not a garrison theatre to assist in relieving the tedium in the town's long winters. The elaborate ceremonies which marked Kingston's celebration of the first Dominion Day were due in large measure to the participation of the garrison whose commandant, Colonel Gibbon, RA, "took the greatest pains to render all the aid to the civil power it was possible for him to do." By this time, however, the days of Kingston's prominence as a garrison town were numbered. Citizens and garrison joined forces again in a splendid welcome to HRH Prince 117

GARRISON AND COMMUNITY

Arthur (later Duke of Connaught and governor general of Canada, 1911-16) on 6 October 1869, but this was the last of the great occasions. It was already known that the redcoats would be withdrawn in the spring. The end was swift. The Royal Canadian Rifles were disbanded on 1 April 1870, the battery withdrawn on 2 June. Dr. Barker lamented in the early autumn, "How Kingston will survive the loss of its garrison is a problem to be solved. The military spent £100,000 a year in the city, and the loss has to be made good, but how?" It was, for the moment, a rhetorical question, and Kingston's history as a British garrison town ended on a sombre note on 3 October when, for the first time in fifty-eight years, the noon gun from Fort Henry was silent.

118

The British Influence of RMC R I C H A R D A. P R E S T O N

The character of a community is created by its people; and the human factor is exerted most effectively through leaders and elites. Nowhere is this clearer than in Kingston to which the Loyalists gave conservative characteristics that have endured to this day. Kingston was in one respect unique among Canadian towns. In no other place were both military and university influences so important because in no other place did they both feature so large proportionately. But of these two factors the military influence was probably the more significant, partly because it came first. From the time of first settlement by Major John Ross of the 34th Regiment and the veterans of the King's Royal Regiment of New York,1 until the withdrawal of the British troops in 1870, the military garrison, and to a lesser extent also the naval dockyard, were powerful formative influences. It was not the rude illiterate soldiery who frequented the taverns around the Tete-du-Pont barracks who shaped Kingston. British officers and NCO'S made the city what it was, and indeed still is.2 The influence of the military was more significant than that of academia because it was even less in conformity with the pioneer society of North America. The officer corps of the nineteenth-century British Army had changed little from that of the previous century. Its class distinctions and consciousness, undisturbed by revolution and social change, had apparently been confirmed by Waterloo. They were entrenched by the system of the purchase of commissions. In all the line regiments, and even more in the Guards and the Cavalry, commissions were an exclusive preserve for the sons of the landed and military gentry. Officers' messes were virtually private clubs maintaining the rituals of the previous century. "Horses and hounds, fine crystal, and expensive silver were as essential to the well-being of a regiment as were field exercises and target practice," wrote a recent historian of the British Army.3 119

THE BRITISH I N F L U E N C E OF RMC

A regiment took its mess silver overseas. It also carried along its traditions and social mores. In exotic climes these became the distinguishing characteristics of an alien regime. In British settlements they had a strong effect on local society. British regiments brought to the garrison towns of Canada the flavour of English "society," fashions and manners that were little known in other parts of North America. Officers dominated a garrison town's social life.4 They formed racing, trotting, riding, and sleighing clubs, and packs of foxhounds. They organized cotillions and "assemblies," or balls; and they were joined in all these affairs by the upper stratum of the local people, especially by its young ladies, or "muffins" 5 as the officers called them surreptitiously. British officers enjoyed the relatively greater informality of Canadian society. Chaperones were de rigueur, but apparently more permissive than in England.6 The Guards officers who came to Montreal as a result of the rebellions of 1837 and the American Civil War mixed so freely with Canadian girls that, to the dismay of the authorities, impressionable subalterns began to contract unsuitable marriages. What was objectionable was not that the Canadian women were not respectable (except for an occasional girl like one known universally as "short horns" who "swore like a trooper"),7 but that they had no dowries to support an officer in his career.8 The line officers who came to Kingston were not quite as exclusive. Many became Kingstonians by marriage and, on retiring, by settlement.9 An anonymous Canadian com mented when the garrison left in 1870, "We shall miss the social qualities o the officers, and the familiar faces of many of the most charming of our women, won from us by men whose choice approves their taste; we shall miss the presence of a grave and respectable soldiery; our farmers' daughters will lose many good husbands, and the country a wealth of useful settlers."10 Various aspects of the story of the Kingston garrison have been sketched in detail by John Spurr in an address to the Kingston Historical Society and also in this volume. He unfolded a long list of distinguished temporary residents in Kingston, army officers who sometimes had aristocratic connections but who were invariably "gentlemen" in the nineteenth-century sense of the word. There were also distinguished sailors. A typical example, and perhaps the most noteworthy, was John Marks, a former naval purser, who had charge of the dockyard on Point Frederick for many years after it was put on a reduced footing. Marks had served with Nelson at Cape St. Vincent in 1797 and on the ships of the Lakes fleet, including the great St. Lawrence, during the War of 1812. After settling in Kingston he farmed in Barriefield, founded the Frontenac Agricultural Society, and served in the provincial legislature and as warden of Frontenac County. Marks was concerned in building a macadamized road to Gananoque and in the purchase of the Cataraqui Bridge; and he was one of the builders of St. Mark's Church in Barriefield. 120

RICHARD A. PRESTON

Marks died in 1872, two years after the garrison left. He had long been out of the public notice in retirement as a semi-invalid, but the British Whig give him an unusually long obituary and a longer funeral notice. It recalled that he had been "known and respected throughout the length and breadth of Canada." Marks's death must have been a nostalgic reminder to Kingston of the dockyard that had, by that time, gone forever.11 The garrison and the dockyard had not only been economically advantageous through the local contracts they distributed; they had also been socially beneficial. That this judgment is based on more than merely snobbish standards of value can be illustrated by reference to the contribution of medical officers. Not only did they often give free medical attention to the poor during their period of military service, but, like Dr. James Sampson, they often remained to establish practices in the city. Sampson has been one of the most brilliant of young army hospital mates in London at the time of the Napoleonic Wars.12 He and men like him made Kingston a medical centre long before the founding of the Queen's medical school. For Kingston the British garrison had thus always been more than merely a defence against a possible invasion or against feared Fenian raids. It was more than a guarantee against social disturbance. It stimulated a way of life in the city that became part of Kingston's distinctiveness; and it also helped to maintain the British connection which many Canadians and many Kingstonians valued. The vacuum left by the withdrawal of the British garrison was not much filled up by the subsequent establishment of a militia artillery training school in Tete de Pont Barracks and by the location of summer camps on Point Frederick. But in 1874 Prime Minister Alexander Mackenzie's plan for the foundation of a Canadian military college suggested a way to revive Kingston's profitable association with the military. Leading citizens, led by the mayor, petitioned for the new college to be placed in their city.13 The small number of British officers it would bring could obviously not have as much impact as the garrison had had; but the college would renew, not only some of the economic returns which the city had lost, but also the social and cultural advantages that it had long enjoyed. Furthermore it would help to maintain British influence. Selby Smyth told the Duke of Cambridge that he wanted British troops back in Canada as a garrison "as a means of keeping up a current of English feeling and thought and flow of ideas by the frequent passing to and fro of British officers. Ideas which I fear in the absence of such incentive and motive causes are gradually becoming Continentalized since the withdrawal of H. M.'s troops, through constant American intercourse, commercial as well as social."14 No one at the time believed that a miniscule British Army representation at a military 121

THE BRITISH INFLUENCE OF RMC

college in Kingston could lead to military influence in Canada (though this idea has been suggested since by one historian);15 but it could and did help to preserve British attitudes in Kingston. Two circumstances seemed different from those prevailing in the period before the garrison left. A year after the withdrawal, the British Army's system of the purchase of commissions was abolished by royal warrant; and a military college would have a higher proportion of engineer and artillery officers than would a garrison. But these differences were not as great as might seem at first sight. The social composition of the British officer corps changed little until the end of the century. Abolition of purchase did, it is true, make it harder for incompetents to get commissions or promotion, but it did not eliminate conventional insistence that officers be "gentlemen."16 Furthermore, although engineer and artillery officers, for the most part men of the upper classes, included fewer socialites and more men of intelligence and ability than the non-technical corps, and although some of the latter were sons of men who had made money recently in trade, finance, or industry, all had adopted the traditions and style of the officer corps. The officers sent to Canada to man the Royal Military College were handpicked individuals more than usually distinguished in various ways, militarily, scientifically, and culturally. Their influence on Kingston was, therefore, despite their smaller numbers and their sometimes less elevated social status, not far short of that which had been lost with the garrison. The nature of this influence was noted by Rev. George Ferguson, a Queen's professor who sought a supplementary appointment at the military college. A cultured man of considerable learning, a historian, and a linguist, Ferguson had lived for several years abroad, partly because Canada seemed backward. His wife was reluctant to leave Europe to come to Kingston, allegedly for health reasons but also because of her fondness for cultured society. To persuade her, Ferguson wrote about the advantages which the new military college would bring through its staff. Its officers, he said, would be "a great acquisition to our little society. . . . They are all learned men and have been educated at Woolich [sic]." He stated that the commandant and his wife, Major and Mrs. Hewett, "are a wonderful improvement to our society. The Hewetts live in grand style but yet are very simple and nice." He thought the cadets "all nice gentlemenly men." Finally he noted "a grand champagne lunch given at the barracks by Colonel Straubenzie [sic], & Mrs. Hewett's At Home . . . [which] passed off splendidly."17 Ferguson thus saw that an important result of the re-establishment of the military in Kingston through the college would be their social and cultural contributions. It would be difficult to measure the overall effect that RMC'S British officers had on the city. The result of their impact on Kingston is buried deep in the 122

RICHARD A. PRESTON

fabric of its life. The purpose of this paper is to attempt to illustrate its nature by examining it at its source, the qualities of the men who conveyed it. Study of a selected number of British officers should tell something about the kind of influence that they must have exerted. The first commandant, Major Edward Osborne Hewett, typified in his person the kind of man RMC was to bring to Kingston for over a quarter of aa century. Hewett's middle name Osborne was derived from the family name of the Dukes of Leeds. The rise of the Osbornes in the sixteenth century had been aided by a profitable marriage to the daughter of a Lord Mayor of London named Sir William Hewett.18 The Hewett-Osborne family connection was thus remote in time, but Edward's middle name suggests that it was still treasured. Hewett's father John was a landowner in Glamorgan who had served as justice of the peace and a deputy lieutenant of the county. He had been in the Navy and the Royal Marines; and at Fort Ontario (Oswego) in 1814 he had distinguished himself by climbing a mast under fire to tear down the starsand-stripes nailed there. He recorded this feat in an excellent water-color which formed a permanent reminder of his heroism.19 Edward Osborne Hewett was educated at Cheltenham college and at the Royal Military Academy where he stood high academically. Commissioned in the Royal Engineers too late for service in the Crimea, he was employed in the construction of important military works in England before being sent to Canada at the time of the Trent affair. He visited both of the American Civil War armies and was hospitably received by General McClellan. After being Commanding Royal Engineer in London, Canada West, Hewett worked on the fortifications at Halifax. When he left Kingston, Hewett was given command of the Royal Engineers' school at Chatham and then became governor of RMA, Woolwich, where he died as a result of a fall playing tennis. A man with a sense of his own dignity, Hewett had a depth of human understanding. Hewett acted as inspector of the science and art schools of Great Britain. He also inherited something of his father's talent for sketching. A practical man of science, and with cultural and artistic interests, he not only launched the first military college in a British dependency, but also brought to Kingston considerable social, intellectual, and artistic distinction.20 John Ryder Oliver, senior professor from 1877 to 1886 and commandant thereafter, was from a North of Ireland Protestant family whose lineage he had recorded in a volume of which the second and third editions were entitled The Olivers of Claghanadfoy. Educated at Caius College and Trinity Hall, Cambridge, where he won a mathematical scholarship, Oliver stood fifth among 150 candidates for the Royal Artillery in 1855. After distinguished 123

21 Major Edward Osborne Hewett

RICHARD A. PRESTON

service during the Mutiny and on the Bhutan Expedition (where he served both with J. B. Ridout, the first staff adjutant, and Captain Roderick Cameron, his successor as RMC commandant), Oliver served in St. Helena and was brigade major at Aldershot. He was then posted to the new Intelligence Department at the War Office. Oliver published several mathematical text books and pamphlets on military subjects, and also a geological study of St. Helena. His A Course of practical astronomy for surveyors with elements of geodesy appeared while he was at RMC.21 The third commandant, Donald Roderick Cameron, also had an upper-class background and a record of scientific attainment. His father, Hugh Innes Cameron, was a deputy-lieutenant of Ross-shire, a banker, and a prominent figure in the county. In 1856 the son obtained one of a batch of direct commissions granted to provide officers for new Royal Regiment of Artillery batteries created when the East India Company's army was reduced. Cameron distinguished himself in India, especially in the Bhutan campaign. By his marriage to Emma, daughter of Sir Charles Tupper, a family with claims to gentility in its British background,22 Cameron obtained a powerful patron whose nepotism was notorious. The appointment of Cameron, first to a boundary commission and then to head the police and militia in the Northwest Territories, came to nothing, in the one case because of American failure to provide funds and, in the other, through Cameron's own rashness and the subsequent Riel Rebellion. In 1871 Cameron received the Royal Humane Society's medal for rescuing a boy from the icy waters of the Rideau Canal in Ottawa, a point which Tupper mentioned along with Cameron's lost appointments when asking for military preferment for him. On this occasion an anonymous Colonial Office clerk minuted the petition, "He is an able man."23 In 1872 Cameron obtained the command of the Canadian team to delineate the frontier across the prairies with an American party. While engaged on this task, he was asked to estimate the cost of marking the Alaska boundary. He answered that if an attempt were made to decide the boundary laid down in the treaty of 1825 between Britain and Russia the cost would run very high indeed; and when he was appointed to make a more detailed estimate in 1886 he suggested that Britain should offer the United States one hundred thousand pounds for the Panhandle because it would be cheaper for Americans to accept that than to pay for the survey. Cameron's report was used extensively by both sides in the subsequent negotiations and arbitration. Cameron thus had experience in important public survey work and he had received public notice. But this had not always been favourable, for he was less successful in his personal relations. The newspapers poked fun at an alleged order to the Metis, "Remove that blawsted fence,"24 which was followed by Cameron's captivity; and the international survey team found 125

THE BRITISH I N F L U E N C E OF RMC

him very difficult to get along with. Through the Tupper influence Cameron was appointed to succeed Oliver at RMC. Oliver was let go on the grounds that he was not an engineer officer and that he had been put on the army retired list; but both of these things applied equally to Cameron. After leaving RMC Cameron represented the Royal Geographic Society at an International Astronomical Conference in Halifax. Lt. Col. Gerald Charles Kitson, appointed to succeed Cameron in 1896, had had a very different background and career. The son of a country parson in Morval, Cornwall, Kitson could claim to be an affiliate of the upper class; but unlike his predecessors he was not a technical officer. He had been commissioned in the infantry from Sandhurst. However, Kitson had attended the Staff College at a time when professional military training was beginning to be stressed, and he was a junior member of the group of reforming officers associated with Sir Garnet Wolseley. Brought to RMC to reinvigorate it after a period of decay, Kitson stressed military efficiency rather than academic attainment. Shortly before coming to Canada Kitson had married the daughter of an Indian Civil Service officer. Kitson was a distinguished officer who went on to be British military attache in Washington, to command at RMC Sandhurst, to retire as a major-general, and to be knighted.25 Kitson's successor as commandant in 1901 was similarly a non-technical officer with no previous connection with Canada. Lt. Col. Raymond Northland Revell Reade was the son of John Page Reade of Crowe Hall, Stutton, Suffolk. His mother, Lady Mary Stuart Reade, was the eldest daughter of the second Earl of Ranfurly. Reade went through Eton and Sandhurst to the 85th Light Infantry (later the 2nd Shropshire Light Infantry). He served in the Afghan War, passed Staff College, was deputy assistant adjutant in Egypt, and served in other parts of Africa. In the South African War he was DAAG (Intelligence) with Lord Methuen in the advance on Kimberley.26 These two professional British infantrymen were followed by an entirely different kind of appointee. In 1905 the Canadian government asked the War Office to send a Canadian as commandant. By this time many RMC graduates had risen to high rank in the British Army. The one selected was Edward Thornton Taylor, the son of a Montreal stockbroker. He had come to RMC from McGill, and had become battalion sergeant major and winner of the Sword of Honour. Commissioned in the Cheshire Regiment, he had served in India and Burma before going to Staff College where he excelled. Returning to India his staff appointments were mostly in educational duties. A good athlete with tremendous physical energy, a boxer and a footballer in his younger days, Taylor was well known in India as a climber and a first-class shot. Said to be of a retiring nature, he was nevertheless a stern disciplinarian. In his obituary 126

RICHARD A. PRESTON

it was stated that he was notable for being "an officer and a gentleman" and that he had taught the cadets by his example "to face manfully and cheerfully the hardships of life."27 All these commandants were, in their different ways, men of character and achievement who would have made their mark anywhere in the world and who must have impressed the rather provincial society of Kingston as much as, or even more than, their predecessors of the British garrison. We know something of the extent to which they became involved in the life of Kingston and of Canada. When in Canada as a young officer during the Civil War Hewett had married Catharine Mary Biscoe, a daughter and sister of British officers who, after serving in Canada, had settled there. As he had a large family, Hewett's Canadian connections had made him the more willing to accept another Canadian posting that would incidentally help him to support his family financially. The size of his family may also have inclined him to take a house in Kingston and refuse the house provided for him on Point Frederick. Living in Kingston helped to bring him more into contact with his fellow citizens. Although he protested that he was inadequately remunerated in Canada, he lived in great style, first by renting the magnificent porticoed house still standing at the corner of Barrie and King, and later in a house which he bought on Emily Street. When Hewett was appointed it had been stressed that he should do some of the teaching; but one cadet claimed that he and his fellows saw little of Hewett in the college except when he drove over from Kingston in a barouche drawn by two bay horses. However, he entertained Kingston society at receptions in his home and introduced his gentlemen-cadets to it there. His earlier Canadian experience and his family connections must have helped to make these contacts easy for him. On 17 March 1886 the marriage of Hewett's eldest daughter, Catherine Frances, to a Toronto man, Arthur Wanton Grassett, helped to cement Hewett's link with Canada and to perpetuate it. Several Grassett boys became gentlemen-cadets in future years. It is interesting that an usher at the Hewett-Grassett wedding was Courtlandt Strange, a long-time president of the Kingston Historical Society who died as recently as 1958.28 It can thus be seen that Hewett's contacts, and therefore his influence, lingered in Kingston long after his departure. Two years after coming to Kingston Colonel Oliver married Mary Hinds, the daughter of a Kingston banker who was a friend of John A. Macdonald, Kingston's greatest son and prime minister of Canada. The Olivers lived on Centre (now Earl) Street. Oliver was thus fully admitted into the Kingston community; but on his retirement as a major-general in 1887 the Olivers went to live in England.29 Nevertheless, the ten years during which he had lived in Kingston had been time enough for Oliver to make his mark there. 127

THE BRITISH I N F L U E N C E OF RMC

Major-General Cameron's brother-in-law, Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper, induced the minister of militia, Adolphe Caron, to arrange for the purchase of a house for the Camerons in Kingston. (This house, 157 King Street East, became the residence of the area commander after World War II.) Although Cameron's scientific and cultural attainments did not equal those of his predecessors, the Tupper connection, Cameron's rank as a major-general, and his sense of his own importance, assured the Camerons a distinguished place in Kingston's social life.30 The Kitsons lived in quarters on Point Frederick which were especially remodelled for them in what had once been a naval hospital and later the ordnance storekeeper's house. They thus had less contact with the city across the river. However, Kitson was on familiar terms with the governor general, Lord Minto, and with the new GOC, General Hutton, with both of whom he exchanged visits and hospitality; and in his day members of the RMC staff were participating fully in Kingston's cultural and social life. There can be little doubt that the Kitsons also played a very prominent role. Taylor was the first commandant who did not lay claim to British upperclass origins. But Canadians commissioned in the British Army were freely admitted into otherwise exclusive British social circles. Like most of the RMC graduates in the British Army, Taylor married in England; and he eventually settled there on retirement. He was thus a British gentleman by adoption. But like all recent proselytes he tried harder than any of the British officers who had preceded him to make the cadets into British officers and gentlemen. No doubt in his relations with the citizens of Kingston he similarly displayed the British manners and style that he had acquired overseas. The first captain of cadets (later called a staff adjutant), Joseph Bramley Ridout, had family connections in both Britain and Canada. The Ridouts stemmed from landed gentry of French origin who had settled in Sherborne, Dorset, in the early fourteenth century. Members of the family emigrated to Maryland and one of these, Hon. Thomas Ridout, who had arrived only in 1774, rejected the Declaration of Independence and fled to Canada. His son, Thomas Gibbs Ridout, born in 1792, was a deputy assistant commissary general during the War of 1812 and became cashier of the Bank of Canada in 1822, a position which he held until shortly before his death in 1861. Joseph, T. G. Ridout's fourth son, a Canadian by birth and upbringing, apparently had connections with a Yorkshire family from whom he derived his middle name, Bramley. In Canada the Ridouts had Loyalist traditions and were associated with the Family Compact, but they also maintained good relations with the Liberals. Ridout was commissioned in the 86th Regiment and served in the Bhutan campaign in northern India. He married his cousin, Wilmot Beresf ord Hayter 128

RICHARD A. PRESTON

of Manchester Square, London. As a member of the staff of the British Army's Hythe School of Musketry he developed useful contacts with members of the Canadian Militia who came to compete there. Political leverage in Canada succeeded in bringing about his appointment to Kingston in 1876. When he retired from the army in 1886 Ridout settled in Gillingham, Kent, where he championed the cause of ex-soldiers and became chairman of the District Council and a justice of the peace. However, in 1896 when the Liberals got back to power in Canada, Ridout immediately applied for appointment as commandant at RMC. He was unsuccessful, but his widow returned to Canada where she died in 1930, aged 88. Ridout brought to Kingston the fruits of a background of service life in Britain and the army; but his Canadian upbringing also helped him in his work at RMC where his appointment put him in the closest touch with the gentlemen-cadets. He was very popular with them and the seniors called him "Joe." As captain of cadets he was said to be the only disciplinarian on the staff, perhaps because he was the only infantry officer; but his Canadian background may account for his easy familiarity and popularity with the cadets. When Hewett reorganized the college and reduced Ridout's authority because the captain of cadets had objected when another professor was promoted over his head, Ridout received strong support from the cadet body and from the public in the ensuing newspaper controversy.31 There can be no doubt that Ridout had very close ties with the people of Kingston; but it may be taken for granted that his influence upon them was tempered by the effects of his life in Britain. Ridout's successor as staff-adjutant, Sydenham Clitheroe McGill, who was at RMC for seventeen years and at times was acting commandant, had much less service in the British Army than Ridout. The second son of Hon. Peter McGill, president of the Bank of Montreal and speaker of the Legislative Council of Canada, McGill was commissioned in the Royal Canadian Rifle Regiment in 1859. After the regiment was disbanded he commanded a supply depot at Prince Arthur's Landing during the Riel Rebellion and then obtained a commission in the Cheshire Regiment. He had served in it only two years when his ties with the Conservative party in Canada helped to get him appointed to RMC; but his popularity and efficiency enabled him to survive the Liberals' purge of the staff in 1896. McGill was far more Canadian than British in his personal experience, and it is hard to say how much his brief service in Britain had affected him.32 It may actually have done so more than his short service there would imply. The British traditions in the army fed on themselves and affected men whose British experience was minimal. The quality of the less senior British officers sent to Kingston is not as easy to demonstrate because most of them had fewer achievements before arrival 129

THE BRITISH I N F L U E N C E OF RMC

and often very little is known about them. But in some cases their contribution to Kingston can be estimated by reference to their later careers. In the earliest years many of the military college appointments were British officers with few Canadian connections; and the remainder were Canadians, including RMC graduates, with little English experience. Within a short time, however, RMC graduates with longer service in the British Army were available; and some of these, like Taylor, may have become more British than the British. The British influence of the college was strong. A British officer who taught fortification, descriptive geometry, and geometrical drawing from 1887 to 1893, Major George Robert Walker, RE, had been educated at Trinity College Dublin and RMA, Woolwich, and was a prizeman at both places. He had served four years in India and from 1874 to 1877 was an assistant instructor at the School of Military Engineering, Chatham. Walker was a man of impressive personality who exercised an extraordinary influence on the cadets which caused Ridout's son in later life to say, "All the RE instructors were really 'giants'."33 Walker produced what was described as "the first Canadian manual" on military engineering.34 Another British officer had come to RMC from Woolwich a year before Walker. He was Lt. Edgar Kensington, RA, who had had the distinction ofon of coaching Eugene-Louis-Jean-Joseph, the Prince Imperial of France, who was killed in Zululand in 1879 while serving with the British Army. Kensington was the son of a fellow of New College, Oxford. At RMC he occupied the very large house (now called Hewett House) which the Hewetts had refused and which was later on divided into its present two parts. This suggests that Kensington lived in considerable style. When he left Kingston in 1886 Kensington retired on half-pay; but thirty years later, during World War I, he was employed in the Ministry of Munitions.35 Major Edward Raban, professor of military engineering from 1883 to 1886, had served as a Royal Engineer in campaigns against the Nagas, the hill tribes in northeastern India. His family origins are not known. In Canada Raban gained a great reputation as a brilliant and popular lecturer and he also won widespread publicity by his use of expletives to break an ice jam on the St. Lawrence, thereby opening the river for navigation earlier than usual. Raban later became director of works at the Admiralty and he was a deputy director at the War Office in 1917. He became a brigadier-general and was knighted.36 Major Charles Blair Mayne, RE, professor of surveying, military topography, and reconnaissance from 1886 to 1893, had served previously in Afghanistan. He was to work later in the War Office. We have General Cameron's testimony that Mayne was a "man whose versatility and ever active unselfish zeal" won him many friends outside the college.37 Another Britisher, 130

RICHARD A. PRESTON

Charles Edward English, professor of artillery and military law, 1891 to 1898, was an artillery officer whose service in Kingston led to the command of the Esquimalt garrison and transfer to the Permanent Canadian Militia. During World War I English commanded the 84th Brigade, Royal Field Artillery, in France.38 Each of these two British officers thus in his own way became thoroughly acclimatized in Canada; but they had helped to spread their British attitudes and ideas in Kingston when they lived there. The most noteworthy of the young men brought to Kingston by RMC was, however, Arthur Hamilton Lee, later Lord Lee of Fareham. Lee was professor of military history, military topography, reconnaissance, and tactics from 1893 to 1896. He organized a survey of the Canadian border by RMC gentlemen-cadets for defence purposes between 1894 and 1897. Like Raban, Lee was a very popular public lecturer and speaker. He and a number of the other bachelor officers lived in one half of Hewett House. A personable young man, Lee took a leading place in Kingston's social life including playing roles in amateur dramatics. He made a great impact on the life of the city and especially on its ladies. In 1900 Lee became military attach^ in Washington and also went as a military correspondent to Cuba where he was stricken by fever. Mrs. Kitson hurried to New York to nurse him on his return from the seat of war. Lee married a wealthy American, retired from the army, and went into politics in Britain. He was elected to parliament and after World War I was first lord of the admiralty and British representative at the Washington conference on naval disarmament.39 A great collector of art, he bestowed his valuable collection of Chinese pieces on the University of Toronto. Two other quite different cases must be mentioned to show the variety of RMC'S British impact on Kingston. Sergeant-major Morgans, instructor in gymnastics, fencing, boxing, and infantry drill, 1878-97, was an outstanding athlete. As a boy he had joined the Scots Fusiliers (later called the Scots Guards) and he had won British Army medals for marching-order races and single-handed tug-o'-war. Morgans was a first-class rifle shot and a sculler. In 1888 he was named the fencing champion of all America with foils, swords, and bayonets, a title which he held against all comers until 1895. The following year he took a team of cadets to Toronto where it defeated a bayonetfighting team selected from all the Canadian Militia, an RMC achievement widely noted by the Canadian press. Morgans ran a private gymnasium in Kingston and taught calisthenics to young ladies. He also gave physical training instruction at Queen's College and later at the Ottawa Ladies' College. After retiring from the army, Morgans toured with Bill Cody's Wild West Show.40 A second, less orthodox British import was Major Eustace Gresley Edwards, 131

THE BRITISH I N F L U E N C E OF RMC

RA, professor of artillery and military law, 1890-91. Edwards was a competent instructor but had unusual political opinions for that day. His belief in public ownership of property and of the means of production led him to challenge the prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, in his Kingston riding. Edwards. offered to drop the socialist elements in his platform if the Liberals would adopt him as their candidate. When they refused to do so, he entered a three-cornered fight. Macdonald at first wanted to have Edwards quietly dismissed from the college but then thought better of it. Edwards resigned on his own initiative to contest the election but polled only 29 out of 3,114 votes cast. He then returned to England where he was on half pay from 1897 to 1915.41 Edwards was very different from his colleagues, and his ideas were uncommon in the Britain of his day. They were even more novel in Canada. His influence was out of line with that usually exerted by RMC but it was noteworthy for its originality and its progressivism in a conservative town. RMC staff members took part freely in local dramatic societies, sporting events, squash tournaments, and choral presentations.42 For obvious reasons it was unusual for them to participate in politics, though there is evidence that Kitson supported General Hutton, the GOC, in his efforts to arouse Canadian support for Britain in the Boer War. Ex-cadets who returned to the staff after training and service in England also added to the British influence which RMC exerted. Arthur Hope Van Straubenzee, a Kingston boy, was the first ex-cadet to be commissioned in England in the Royal Engineers. He returned to RMC as instructor in fortification, military engineering, geometric drawing, and descriptive geometry from 1886 to 1893. He later became an instructor at the RE school at Chatham and he also served in Ceylon and Bermuda. During World War I Van Straubenzee was CRE on Salisbury Plain. Cameron reported that Van Straubenzee's influence on the cadets when he was teaching at RMC was "beneficial andl and. lasting," that he was always ready to take part in their amusements, that he influenced by unobtrusive example and gentle precept, and that he kept before them the pattern of a Christian gentleman enjoying life yet mindful of the reasonable limits within which those enjoyments should have play.43 Obviously, a man of this quality would also have an influence in the community in which he lived, especially as it was his native place. Another ex-cadet member of the junior staff, Capt. Philip Geoffrey Twining, RE, who was instructor and professor of military engineering from 1895 to 1899, also had a very distinguished later military career. He became director of fortifications at the War Office from 1918 to 1920, received a knighthood, and retired as a major-general.44 Like Van Straubenzee, he was a young man of promise who must have had a strong influence in Kingston. He too conveyed something of the British manners and standards that he had 132

RICHARD A. PRESTON

acquired when he was training in Britain after graduation from the Royal Military College. All this strong British influence in Kingston was accompanied, and perhaps qualified, by the presence of a number of Canadians on the RMC staff, Rev Rev. George Ferguson, mentioned above, and Robert Carr-Harris, a professor of engineering, 1879-91, also taught at Queen's university. Professor J. B. Cochrane, one of the "Old Eighteen" (the first RMC class) taught surveying an. physics and chemistry at the college until 1905. Dr. Herbert A. Bayne, professor of experimental and natural sciences from 1879 until his death in 1886, was a founding member of the Royal Society of Canada. Rev. Clarendon Lamb Worrell, who taught English literature from 1891 to 1904, became Primate of All Canada in 1930. Forshaw Day, a London-born painter who had emigrated to Canada in 1862, was elected a member of the Royal Canadian Academy of Arts when teaching at RMC in 1880. These and others, Canadian by birth or adoption, may have matched the distinction of the British officers on the staff; but they all held less important appointments in the college and they therefore could probably not counter-balance the Britishers and the prevailing British influence in the community. Within a very short time of the college's founding it had made its social mark in Kingston. The first graduation, in 1880, was accompanied by a military review of the whole "garrison" (by this time an inaccurate and nostalgic term). There was also a gym display and regatta. That night the commandant and staff entertained the city and garrison in the educational block. "Everyone present speaks with delight of the enjoyment and courtesy extended by the hosts. A fine supper was spread, and altogether the College surpassed itself in hospitality."45 Very soon the predecessors of the June Balls of the future became one of the most fashionable social events of the Kingston year. The words "large and fashionable assembly" used in 188146 remind one of the annual "assemblies," or balls of the past. Once again, the military was taking the lead in staging the most brilliant type of social event. The scene in 1890 was glowingly described in the Whig. The ball, it said, passed off as pleasantly as the warm weather would permit. . . . The heat was considerably mollified by the ingenuity of the cadets who had charge of the decorations. Adjoining the ball room was the drawing room tastefully decorated with flags and bunting and decorated with military emblems, a prominent feature being a life size emblem of "Leo the Royal Cadet" with a sword in his hand as if leading a charge against the Zulus. Just opposite the drawing room was a cool sitting room whose central attraction was a rockery covered with wild flowers and mosses and a huge block of ice whose grateful presence lent a delightful coolness to the air which was most acceptable. At the end of the ball a large Union Jack curtained off steps leading 133

THE BRITISH INFLUENCE OF RMC

to a window through which many of the heated dancers retired to the roof of the portico to enjoy the beautiful view of the lighted city, the moonlight on the water, and the refreshing breeze which came down the lake. The celebrated "Pullman car" was located in the same old place at the head of the stairs and was usually "taken" all the time. Many other resting places there were artistically decorated and comfortably furnished.47

"Leo, the Royal Cadet," mentioned in this passage, was the title of a locally written light opera in the vein of the contemporary Gilbert and Sullivan musicals. It enjoyed a fairly long vogue in Kingston and vicinity. Published in Kingston in 1883 or earlier, Leo, the Royal Cadet was described as "an entirely new and original Canadian Military opera in four acts/'48 The four acts were located at Kingston Mills, "at the military college," in Zululand, and "on the banks of the St. Lawrence."49 The theme was the romantic appeal of cadets for the local girls, one of whom is made to say, "If I can't get on the right side of the Commandant I'll die an old maid."50 This "spirited military opera" played in Ottawa, Toronto, Guelph, Stratford, Woodstock, and Utica, N.Y., as well as Kingston.51 It amply illustrates for us an important aspect of the impact of RMC on the community and of the way in which the gentlemencadets purveyed it. The theme of Leo, the Royal Cadet dealt with the social relations of the young Canadian gentlemen-cadets. But these impressionable young men had undoubtedly already absorbed much of the code of conduct and manners introduced to them by British officers on the college staff and so they had become purveyors of the mores of a Mother Country that most of them had never seen. There is no doubt that the indoctrination of the cadets with British manners, ideals, and perhaps ideas was consciously procured. The highest gentlemen-cadets on the graduation list each year were offered commission in the British Royal Engineers or in other corps. An important aim of the college was thus to turn out young men ready to take their place beside the products of the British public schools in a British environment. The extraordinary success of RMC'S graduates in the British Army proves that it was successful, not merely in turning out young men of exceptional quality but also young men who were already moulded sufficiently into a British pattern to be able to compete in the British Army. Many of them married and settled in England after retirement. The number of gentlemen-cadets of the pre-World-War I period who married Kingston girls cannot now be learned from the parish records, college records, or the newspapers. It does not seem to have been large, perhaps because in that day marriage was not sought during college years by ambi134

22 Playbill for Leo, the Royal Cadet, Grand Opera House, Kingston, 1889

THE BRITISH I N F L U E N C E OF RMC

tious men. But photo albums and scrapbooks in the RMC library show much about the social life of the gentlemen cadets in canoeing and tennis parties, skating, and tobogganing; and young ladies were invariably present. RMC'S Sunday morning church parade was in effect a continuance of the parades of the garrison days and if a modern parallel is anything to go by it furnished an opportunity for the gentlemen-cadets in the gallery and the young ladies seated with their parents down below to see each other. An interesting souvenir of the friendly contact between cadets and the young ladies is a miniature landscape of Kingston as seen from Point Frederick which was treasured by a Kingston lady for over half a century before being handed over to the college for safe keeping. It was painted by Gentleman-Cadet Percy Girouard, later Sir Percy, perhaps RMC'S most distinguished graduate in British service, who became, among other things, the lieutenant-governor of Northern Nigeria. Another gentleman-cadet, George Macaulay Kirkpatrick, who became equally distinguished in the British Army and ended as Commandant of the Royal Corps of Engineers, 1927-39, is noteworthy not as a purveyor of British influence (which he had not yet experienced first-hand) but as a link between the college and the days of the garrison. His father was a Kingston QC and a a lieutenant-governor of Ontario, and his mother was a Macaulay, a merchant family which dated back to the earliest pioneer days of the city. RMC'S Closing Exercises brought parents, friends, and military and political dignitaries from all parts of Canada to the little town at the junction of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence. The June Ball that accompanied the exercises made Kingston seem briefly to be the social metropolis of the Dominion. Retired senior officers and friends of the college living in the area gave dinner parties for gentlemen-cadets and their ladies. Uniforms, decorations, and beautiful gowns graced Kingston's streets and halls. RMC'S presence also brought Kingston more gubernatorial visits than any other city in Canada except Ottawa and Quebec. Despite relative inferiority in numbers, the pre-1914 RMC excelled in sports, even winning dominion championships. An interesting souvenir is the cubeshaped puck of what has been claimed to be the "first organized hockey game in official records." It was played on the ice of Kingston harbour between gentlemen-cadets and Queen's students in 1888. As ice hockey is supposed to have been developed from "field hockey" by British officers stationed in Canada, the continuation of a former garrison influence is obvious here as in so many other areas. It is also significant that for a long time cricket was a major sport at RMC. RMC'S function as an agent for transmitting British social influences to Kingston was thus a continuance of the function of the old garrison. The 136

RICHARD A. PRESTON

British members of the RMC staff and the gentlemen-cadets helped Kingston to retain an old-world air and a dignity that had been lost elsewhere. In the first decades of the college's existence many other British immigrants were pouring in to settle in all parts of Canada. But the social position of the British officers at RMC made the influence which they exerted very different from that of ordinary British immigrants. They prolonged the same kind of British influence that the garrison had conveyed until at least World War I. Thereafter RMC was largely staffed by the Canadian Army and by civilian professors. There were still a few British staff officers to teach staff courses in the 1920s and 1930s; and the Canadian Army was still very British in many ways. The British influence of RMC was therefore not yet entirely extinct. Yet it was passing. It had, however, made Kingston more socially conscious and more conservative. It had also promoted British athletic, cultural, and intellectual patterns. If Kingston is, as many believe, more British and more conservative than the average Canadian city this is partly, perhaps mainly, due to RMC.

137

This page intentionally left blank

Ill Economic Development

This page intentionally left blank

John A. Macdonald and the Kingston Business Community J. K. J O H N S O N

In 1843 John A. Macdonald began his political career as alderman of the Fourth Ward of the town of Kingston. In 1867 he attained the highest political office open to a British North American, prime minister of the new Dominion of Canada. In twenty-five years he had risen from local political obscurity to become the dominant political figure of his time. This rapid political rise has been described, over and over again, by his many biographers and by other historians of the period. Interest in his career as a provincial and national political leader has no doubt been perfectly natural but it has led to a certain neglect of some of his other activities, both political and private. This study deals with one such neglected aspect of Macdonald's life—with Macdonald as member for Kingston, as a Kingstonian representing at the central government the interests of his home town and its people, and is concerned in particular with a limited group of his constituents, the Kingston business community, and with his relationship to it, both as a politician and as a Kingston businessman in his own right. John A. Macdonald's pre-Confederation career as a businessman has been shown to have been extensive and diversified, involving among other things, dealings in railways, steamships, and road companies and especially speculation in real estate in many parts of Canada West.1 A good many of his business affairs were naturally carried on in Kingston itself. Macdonald's real estate speculations, for example, included the creation of at least three Kingston subdivisions and an almost constant series of other smaller purchases and sales.2 Macdonald, then, was a Kingston businessman. But the term "businessman" is not particularly revealing in itself. Was Macdonald primarily a politician involved in a few speculative enterprises on the side, or was he during the period being considered, a businessman who also had a growing political career? To try to answer this sort of question it is necessary to know how Macdonald's business activities in Kingston compared with those 141

23 John A. Macdonald, c. 1865

J. K. JOHNSON

of other Kingston businessmen, to know something about the nature and personnel of the nineteenth-century Kingston business community and especially to know something about its leading members. Deciding who was or was not a leading member of a business group is not an easy matter at any time. This study uses as its starting point an examination of ten nineteenth-century Kingston corporations in order to determine who were the men most concerned in promoting, founding, directing, and supporting these enterprises. The companies chosen for study, with the dates of their incorporation, are: 1. The Commercial Bank of the Midland District, incorporated in 1831. The second chartered bank in Upper Canada and the central financial institution in Kingston. 2. The Trust and Loan Company of Upper Canada, incorporated in 1843. A company with British backing (after 1850) which dealt widely in mortgages on land. 3. The Wolfe Island, Kingston and Toronto Railroad Company, incorporated in 1846. An attempt to make Kingston an important railway terminus which would link western Upper Canada with the U.S. railroads being built to Cape Vincent. Reincorporated 1851 as the Wolfe Island Railroad and Canal Company, an even more ambitious scheme to funnel traffic from both east and west of Kingston across Wolfe Island to join the Watertown and Rome Railway at Cape Vincent. 4. The Kingston Gas Light Company, incorporated in 1848. A successful business whose stock was "at a premium" by 1856. 5. The Kingston Water Works, incorporated in 1849. Also a money-making concern after initial difficulties. 6. The Kingston Fire and Marine Insurance Company, incorporated in 1850. Reincorporated 1861 after becoming moribund. 7. The Cataraqui Cemetery Company, incorporated in 1850. 8. The Cataraqui and Peterborough Railway Company, incorporated in 1853. The railway was never actually built. 9. The Kingston and Newburgh Railway Company, incorporated in 1856. Never built. 10. The Kingston Hospital. Originally incorporated in 1849 with a board of ex officio members (mayor, sheriff, county court judge, county warden and three aldermen). Reincorporated in 1856 with a board made up of local businessmen.3 These ten corporations have been chosen as examples of various kinds of enterprises of the day. They range from safe, conservative, essential businesses like the gas company and the waterworks to highly speculative (even ephemeral) railway enterprises like the Kingston and Newburgh or the Cataraqui and Peterborough; from important financial institutions like the Commercial Bank or the Trust and Loan Company to a semi-charitable institution like the Kingston Hospital. They reflect also the preoccupation of 143

JOHN A. MACDONALD AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY

many forward-looking businessmen of the 1840s and 1850s with railways and especially the local preoccupation with an American railway link via Wolfe Island to Cape Vincent, N.Y. Obviously any short list of Kingston companies must be somewhat arbitrary. The present list does not include any of the large private enterprises of the time, such as Morton's Distillery, at one time the largest in Canada West, or the Ontario Foundry (in which James Morton was also involved), or the Kingston Marine Railway, which in 1856 employed 200 men. It does not include large wholesale merchant firms like those of William Wilson or James Harty, or the Portsmouth tannery of M. W. Strange, or the extensive wholesale hardware firm of John Watkins.4 It does not therefore necessarily indicate the importance to the Kingston business community of businessmen who stuck mainly to the running of their own businesses and who took only a limited part in public or joint stock enterprises. But there are two good reasons for using as test cases companies which had been incorporated under provincial charters. First, the men involved can be assumed to have been community business leaders, seeing their own commercial hopes in terms of the economic welfare of the community as a whole, creating and supporting businesses which were public and collective in nature and which were meant to bring economic rewards to the entire community and not only to an individual or a small group. The second reason is a matter of historical convenience—far more information is available about public companies than about private ones. The acts of incorporation themselves invariably listed the names of the original organizers or promoters and very often the names of the original directors, as well as providing a good deal of detail about the intended scope and function of the firms. This nucleus of information provides a base to build upon by the use of additional sources such as city and provincial directories and private papers. The extent of involvement by Kingston businessmen in the ten sample companies provides at least one kind of test which may be used to estimate their respective standing in the business life of the community. Who then, using this method of evaluation alone, were the leading Kingston businessmen of their day? If it is assumed that membership in a Kingston business elite can be denoted by participation in the affairs of at least half of the ten companies, eleven Kingstonians qualify for inclusion. Ranked in numerical order (the number representing the number of companies in which they were actively involved) they were: John Watkins (9), John Richardson Forsyth (8), Thomas Kirkpatrick (8), John A. Macdonald (7), John Counter (6), Alexander Campbell (5), Archibald John Macdonell (5), Francis Hill (5), William Ford Jr. (5), John Mowat (5), Maxwell W. Strange (5). To this list may also legitimately be added the father and son team of Henry and 0. S. Gildersleeve with a 144

J. K. JOHNSON

combined score of 5 since after the death of the elder Gildersleeve in 1851, 0. S. Gildersleeve assumed complete control of the family business interests.5 This simple numerical listing is however partly misleading since it does not take into account the relative importance of different levels of involvement by each man within each corporation. Obviously, for example, being president of the Commercial Bank was a more significant activity than being one of many promoters of the Cataraqui and Peterborough Railway. Distinctions of this kind emerge more clearly if the corporations and their respective executive officers, directors, promoters etc., are listed as follows:6 1. The Commercial Bank of the Midland District7 Watkins, director, promoter Macdonald, director Macdonell, director Mowat, director Strange, director 2. The Trust and Loan Company of Upper Canada8 Watkins, director, promoter Kirkpatrick, director, promoter Macdonald, director, promoter Counter, director, promoter 3. The Wolfe Island, Kingston and Toronto Railroad 1846. The Wolfe Island Railway and Canal Company 1851.9 Macdonald, promoter 1846; director, promoter 1851 Counter, promoter 1846; director, promoter 1851 Campbell, promoter 1846; director, promoter 1851 H. Gildersleeve, promoter 1846; director, promoter 1851 Hill, director, promoter, 1851 Ford, director, promoter 1851 0. S. Gildersleeve, director 1851 Watkins, promoter 1851 Forsyth, promoter 1851 Kirkpatrick, promoter 1851 Strange, promoter 1851 4. The Kingston Gas Light Company10 Counter, president, director, promoter Forsyth, vice-president, director, promoter Watkins, director, promoter Hill, director, promoter Ford, director, promoter Mowat, director, promoter H. Gildersleeve, director, promoter Strange, director Kirkpatrick, promoter Macdonell, promoter 5. The Kingston Water Works11 Ford, president, director, promoter 145

JOHN A. MACDONALD AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Mowat, vice-president, director, promoter Forsyth, director, promoter Kirkpatrick, director, promoter Macdonell, director, promoter Hill, director, promoter Macdonald, director The Kingston Fire and Marine Insurance Company^2 Watkins, director, promoter Macdonald, director, promoter Counter, director, promoter Campbell, director, promoter Hill, director, promoter Ford, director, promoter H. Gildersleeve, director, promoter Strange, director Mowat, promoter Forsyth, promoter The Cataraqui Cemetery Company^ Campbell, president, director, promoter Kirkpatrick, director, promoter Watkins, director Forsyth, director Strange, promoter The Cataraqui and Peterborough Railway Company^4 Watkins, director, promoter Forsyth, director, promoter Counter, director, promoter Hill, director, promoter Ford, director, promoter Macdonald, director Kirkpatrick, promoter Campbell, promoter Macdonell, promoter Mowat, promoter 0. S. Gildersleeve, promoter The Kingston Hospital^ Watkins, director Forsyth, director Kirkpatrick, director Macdonald, director Counter, director The Kingston and Newburgh Railway Company^ Watkins, promoter Forsyth, promoter Kirkpatrick, promoter Campbell, promoter Macdonell, promoter 0. S. Gildersleeve, promoter 146

J. K. JOHNSON

Using this list, a new and probably more accurate rank order can be assigned to the original group of businessmen by discounting the importance of the promotional function and measuring significance in the business community primarily in terms of company presidencies, vice-presidencies, and directorships. Use of this standard also permits the inclusion of an additional businessman, Hon. John Hamilton. The new order becomes: 1. John Watkins and John A. Macdonald, each a director of seven companies 2. John Counter, a director of six companies and the president of one of them 3. William Ford, Jr., a director of five companies and the president of one of them 4. John R. Forsyth, a director of five companies and the vice-president of one of them 5. Francis M. Hill, a director of five companies 6. Thomas Kirkpatrick, a director of four companies 7. Alexander Campbell, a director of three companies and the president of one of them 8. John Mowat, a director of three companies and the vice-president of one of them 9. M. W. Strange and Henry Gildersleeve, each a director of three companies 10. John Hamilton, a director of two companies and the president of one of them17 11. A. J. Macdonell, a director of two companies18 To most students of Canadian history the names of John A. Macdonald, Alexander Campbell, and one or two others on this list may be familiar because of their political careers, but most of the others are a good deal less so. Yet they all had at least this much in common, they were mutually involved in starting and running a number of Kingston corporations. It may also seem surprising to see Macdonald's name at the head of a list of contemporary Kingston businessmen. Does he really belong there, or is his presence artificial, based perhaps on his usefulness as a "figure head"? Again it is necessary to make comparisons, to ask what kind of people these Kingston businessmen were. Did they share common backgrounds? Did their interests coincide in areas other than business? Were they dominated by particular national or religious groups? And how well did John A. Macdonald fit into the group? To answer these questions it may be helpful to present a brief biographical profile of each man to permit comparisons under some headings for which evidence is available—place of birth, occupation, business activities in addition to those already mentioned, professional and charitable activities, political activities, and religious affiliation.19 John Watkins (1789-1876) emigrated from Walmsley, Hertfordshire, in 1816 and came to Kingston in 1818, where he became an ironmonger. By the 1850s 147

JOHN A. MACDONALD AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY

he was a wealthy wholesale hardware merchant specializing in marine hardware. In addition to seven Kingston directorships he was a director on the Canadian board of the Athenaeum Fire Insurance Society of London.20 He was president of the Kingston Board of Trade for at least three years. He was active in a number of charitable causes as a director of the Kingston House of Industry and of the Permanent Building Society and as a member of the Charitable Committee of St. George's Church. His wife, Eliza Watkins, was a life member of the board of directors of the Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society of Kingston.21 He was an Anglican. John Alexander Macdonald (1815-91) emigrated to Kingston from Glasgow in 1820. He was a lawyer who studied with George Mackenzie and was called to the bar in 1836. In addition to the seven company directorships which he held he was a director of the Kingston and Philipsville Road Company, and of the Perth Road Company, and speculated in Kingston real estate. He was a director of the Midland District Building Society. He was an alderman, 1843-46 and member of the Legislative Assembly for Kingston, 1844-67. He was a Presbyterian. John Counter (1799-1862) emigrated from Devonshire to Canada about 1822. He began his business career as a baker but became a prominent shipbuilder and owner as proprietor of the Marine Railway Works, as a partner in the firm of Calvin, Cook and Counter and in association with Henry Gildersleeve and Hon. John Hamilton. In addition to six company directorships he was a local director of the Bank of British North America and a Kingston land speculator.22 He was president of the Auxiliary Bible Society of Kingston. He was mayor of Kingston, 1841-43, 1846, 1850, 1852-53. He was an unsuccessful candidate for the Legislative Assembly (opposing John A. Macdonald) in 1851 and 1854. He was a Methodist. William Ford Jr. (1811-93) emigrated to Canada from Ireland in 1820 and came to Kingston in 1834. He became a successful leather merchant. He was a director of five companies and a speculator in real estate. He was president of both the Kingston Building Society and the Kingston Permanent Building Society and a director of the House of Industry. His wife, Mary Ford, was a director of the Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society. He was mayor of Kingston in 1848 and an alderman in 1851-52. He was a Methodist. John Richardson Forsyth (1813-91) was a native of Kingston, the son of Joseph Forsyth, a wealthy merchant who had been connected with the Montreal firm of Forsyth Richardson and Company. He was a lawyer, called to the bar in 1843. He held five Kingston directorships and was a local director of the Athenaeum Fire Insurance Society of London and of the Bank of British North America. He was vice-president of the Kingston Building Society and a land speculator. He was an unsuccessful Conservative candidate for the 148

J. K. JOHNSON

Legislative Assembly in 1841. He was an Anglican. Francis Manning Hill (1809-54) emigrated to Canada from England at an unknown date. He was a lawyer, called to the bar in 1845. He was a director of five companies. He was mayor of Kingston in 1849 and 1851. He was an Anglican. Thomas Kirkpatrick (1805-70) emigrated to Canada from Ireland about 1820. He was a lawyer who studied under Christopher Hagerman, was called to the bar in 1828, and succeeded Hagerman as collector of customs at Kingston in the same year. In addition to four company directorships he was the Kingston agent of the Phoenix Fire Insurance Company and a land speculator. He was president of the Midland District Building Society and vice-president of the Kingston Permanent Building Society. His wife, Helen Kirkpatrick, was a life member of the board of the Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society. He was (first) mayor of Kingston in 1831 and again in 1847, and an alderman in 1851. He was an unsuccessful candidate for the Legislative Council for Cataraqui Division (opposing Alexander Campbell and 0. S. Gildersleeve) in 1858. He was an Anglican. Alexander Campbell (1822-92) emigrated to Canada from Hedon, Yorkshire, in 1824 and came to Kingston in 1837. He was a lawyer who studied under John A. Macdonald. As well as being a director of three Kingston companies, he was also a local director of the Athenaeum Fire Insurance Society and a land speculator. He was a director of the Kingston Building Society and the Kingston Permanent Building Society. His wife, Frederica Campbell, was a life member of the board of the Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society. He was an alderman in 1851 and a city councillor in 1855. He was elected to the Legislative Council for Cataraqui Division (defeating 0. S. Gildersleeve and Thomas Kirkpatrick) in 1858. He was an Anglican. John Mowat (1791-1860) came to Canada in 1814 as a sergeant in the British Army. He established a successful retail grocery business in Kingston in 1819. He was a director of three Kingston companies and a land speculator. He was vice-president of the Kingston Permanent Building Society, a director of the Kingston Building Society, treasurer of the Religious Tract Society, and vice-president of the Auxiliary Bible Society of Kingston. He was an alderman in 1846. He was a Presbyterian. Maxwell William Strange (1820-80) was born in Kingston. He was a lawyer and also built and operated an "extensive" tannery at Portsmouth, a suburb of Kingston. He was a director of three Kingston companies and was also a director of the Kingston, Pittsburgh, and Gananoque Road Company. He was a speculator in Kingston real estate. He was a director of both the Kingston Building Society and the Kingston Permanent Building Society. His wife, Charlotte Anne Strange, was a life member of the board of directors of the 149

JOHN A. MACDONALD AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY

Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society. He was an alderman in 1865 and an unsuccessful candidate for the Legislative Assembly for Frontenac in 1854. He was a Presbyterian. Henry Gildersleeve (1785-1851) emigrated to Kingston from Chatham, Conn., in 1816 and became a shipbuilder and shipowner. He was a director of three Kingston companies and a land speculator.23 He was president of the Kingston Building Society. He was an Anglican. Overton Smith Gildersleeve (1825-64) was born in Kingston and was a lawyer. He succeeded his father as the head of the family shipping business. He was a director of one Kingston company. He was mayor of Kingston, 1855-56 and 1861-62. He was an unsuccessful candidate for the Legislative Council for Cataraqui Division (opposing Alexander Campbell and Thomas Kirkpatrick) in 1858 and for the Legislative Assembly for Kingston (opposing John A. Macdonald) in 1863. He was an Anglican. John Hamilton (1802-82) was born at Queenston, the son of Hon. Robert Hamilton, a wealthy merchant and the founder of Queenston. He was a successful shipbuilder, shipowner, and stagecoach proprietor who came to Kingston from Montreal about 1840. He was a director of two Kingston companies and the Life Association of Scotland, and was a land speculator. He was chairman of the board of trustees of Queen's University, 1841-82. His wife, Frances Hamilton, was a life member of the board of directors of the Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society of Kingston. He was a member of the Legislative Council of Upper Canada, 1831-41 and of the Province of Canada, 1841-67. He was a Presbyterian. Archibald John Macdonell (1822-64) was born at Glengarry, a descendant of Alexander Macdonell of Greenfield, who emigrated to Canada from Scotland in 1792. He was a lawyer and held the office of recorder of Kingston. He was a director of two Kingston companies and was also a director of the Kingston and Philipsville Road Company. He speculated in Kingston real estate. He was a director of the Midland District Building Society. He was an alderman in 1851. He was a Roman Catholic. These fourteen sketches reveal a number of obvious patterns and recurring characteristics, some of which are summarized numerically below. Place of birth Canada — 5 England — 4 Ireland — 2 Scotland — 2 U.S.A. — 1

Religion Anglican — 7 Presbyterian — 4 Methodist — 2 Roman Catholic — 1

Occupation Merchant-land speculator — 5 Lawyer-land speculator — 5 Lawyer-merchant-land speculator — 1 Lawyer-merchant — 1 Lawyer — 1 Merchant — 1

150

J. K. JOHNSON

Involved in civic politics

Involved in provincial politics

yes — 10 no — 4

yes — 8 no — 6

Known to have been involved in charitable causes yes — 12 no — 2

Age in 1850 over 40 — 7 under 40 — 7

It is not very difficult to fit John A. Macdonald satisfactorily into a set of general patterns which he shared with his contemporaries. He was, like most of his fellow businessmen, an immigrant.24 He attended an acceptable, if not the dominant, church.25 He was a part of one of the largest occupational groupings. In company with the majority of the others he took part in local politics, an activity which provided valuable connections for a businessman,26 and in provincial politics (though in this case it should perhaps be said that the other men were conforming to his pattern). He shared with other business leaders a sense of noblesse oblige, expressed through a virtually mandatory support of charitable or religious causes.27 That the group can be divided neatly into an older and a younger half, with Macdonald in the latter group, may seem at first glance of no particular relevance but in fact it does show him to have been a part of a significant trend within the business community. If the age of each man is correlated with his primary occupation it becomes apparent that (with slight overlap) such a division did indeed exist. Most of the older group, Henry Gildersleeve, Watkins, Mowat, Counter, and Hamilton were (using the term broadly) merchants. Most of the younger men, Forsyth, Macdonald, Strange, Campbell, Macdonell, and 0. S. Gildersleeve were lawyers,28 who did not usually have businesses of their own but who had entered the business world by using the law as an entree to business. A contemporary observer, writing in 1856, described this evolving situation: "Younger representatives of the old inhabitants possessing all the advantages of good education, free municipal institutions and the general intelligence diffused by the progress of knowledge have taken the place of those whose opportunities for advancement were more limited. An infusion among these of the talent and energy of many educated and talented inhabitants of Celtic and Saxon origins has still further aided in creating a more enterprising class."29 There is no doubt that Macdonald was a part of that younger, better educated, "more enterprising class" who among other things took full advantage of the "free municipal institutions" of their city. Finally, as might be expected, there were a number of business, professional, and personal cross-connections or sub-groups within the overall business elite, which cannot be demonstrated statistically but which were none the less real and important. All of the lawyers for instance (except 0. S.

151

JOHN A. MACDONALD AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY

Gildersleeve who was probably too young) were charter members of the "Cataraqui Club/' a short-lived society founded in 1848 "for the discussion (under proper restrictions) of the various subjects which ought to interest society."30 Three of the merchants, Hamilton, Counter, and Henry Gildersleeve, were closely associated in shipping and shipbuilding and the latter two in land speculation.31 John Watkins also had an obvious business connection with Hamilton, Counter, and Gildersleeve as a supplier of marine hardware. Most of the men of Scottish birth or ancestry such as Mowat, Macdonald, Forsyth, Campbell, Macdonell, and Kirkpatrick were members of the St. Andrew's Society of Kingston.32 There was at least one example of intermarriage—between M. W. Strange and Charlotte Campbell, sister of Alexander Campbell. Macdonald had a lasting relationship with Alexander Campbell, his first law partner and with a later law partner, A. J. Macdonell, with whom he was also associated in many real estate dealings. Macdonald, Campbell, and Strange were brother Masons.33 Forsyth, Mowat, Campbell, Strange, and Macdonell served as officers of the Frontenac Militia.34 It seems safe to conclude that John A. Macdonald was a typical Kingston businessman of his time, and also a leading businessman. In other words he would have occupied a prominent position in Kingston's affairs even if he had never had a political career at all. His business career, at least as a land speculator and as a director of the Commercial Bank and the Trust and Loan Company, predated his political activities. When he did enter politics it was on the basis of a solid local business background. But at the same time his rapid political success quickly made his role as a member of the business elite even more significant. As member for Kingston and as a politician of growing provincial importance he was in a position to be more than normally useful to the Kingston business community, and while his constituency extended far beyond a mere handful of businessmen, it is nonetheless relevant to ask how far Macdonald as a member of the legislature represented the particular interests of the Kingston business elite, which included his own interests. With this question in mind it is instructive to look once more at the ten Kingston companies, some of whose organizers and directors have already been identified. By tracing the legislative process which led to the chartering of these companies by the provincial legislature (and which also permitted numerous amendments to the original charters) through a survey of the Journals of the Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council, Macdonald's dual role as businessman and political "front man" becomes readily evident. It was Macdonald who tirelessly carried the many petitions from the interested parties in Kingston to the legislature. It was almost always Macdonald who introduced the required legislation into the Assembly and who served as its advocate. The charter of the Commercial Bank, for example, was amended 152

J. K. JOHNSON

five times between 1856 and 1862 for a variety of reasons: to permit increases in the bank's capital stock, to extend the time for paying up stock, to make the bank's stock transferable and its dividends payable in the United Kingdom, and so forth. Macdonald was a bank director and also its solicitor but no fear of conflict of interest prevented him from presenting three petitions for bank amendments or from introducing and sponsoring three of the necessary bills. He also served on one occasion as chairman of a select committee on a bank amendment.35 The legislative history of the Trust and Loan Company is even more consistent. The company's charter of 1843 (before Macdonald was in the House) named him as one of the original directors. In this case also his law firm represented the company. The company's charter was amended in 1845,1850, 1858, and 1862 for purposes similar to those already described in the case of the Commercial Bank: to increase the capital stock (to £3 million in 1858), to permit an infusion of British capital, to increase the permissible interest rate, and to permit the company's commissioners and attorneys (the firm of Macdonald and Macdonell) to convey property under the company's seal. On all occasions Macdonald acted as spokesman and sponsor of the requisite legislation.36 Much the same can be said of the other eight Kingston companies which have been used as examples. Between 1846 and 1861 all of these companies were chartered and in some cases rechartered or had their charters amended, requiring a total of thirteen pieces of legislation. Macdonald was the initiator of eleven of these.37 It may be relevant to note that the only company with which he had no legislative involvement whatever was also a company—the Cataraqui Cemetery Company—with which he had no personal connection of any kind. Macdonald was also concerned, as member for Kingston, with legislation which did not directly benefit particular companies but which had wider implications for the entire business community or for the city as a whole. In 1846 he sponsored the bill to incorporate Kingston as a city.38 In 1852 and 1862 he carried petitions to the legislature calling for the chartering of the Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society.39 When the Anglican rector of Kingston had a problem that only legislation could solve,40 when the Catholic Regiopolis College wanted to be elevated to the status of a university,41 Macdonald fought their political battles. One of his most useful acts was to engineer the passage of a complicated bill in 1852 to permit the city of Kingston to raise a loan of £75,000 to consolidate the city debt.42 From Macdonald's personal point of view this legislation is intriguing enough to bear examination in some detail. The act permitted the city to sell debentures in order to achieve several objects. The money so raised was to be deposited in the Commercial Bank (John A. Macdonald, director, solicitor, shareholder) and 153

JOHN A. MACDONALD AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY

was to be used to pay off a number of debts including one of £14,000 to the same bank. The rest of the money was to be used to invest in road companies leading in and out of Kingston (Macdonald was a director of two of these) and in Kingston-centred railroads. One of these was named specifically: £2,500 was to be used to buy shares in the Wolfe Island Railway and Canal Company (John A. Macdonald, promoter and director).43 It must be admitted that it is part of the business of legislators to speak on behalf of their constituents and to further the progress of their communities where they can. In this sense Macdonald as member for Kingston was merely carrying out his normal duties. But it can be argued that Macdonald's zeal went a bit beyond normal. He was not after all the only member for the Kingston area. There was a member for Frontenac, also invariably a Kingston resident, who could have sponsored, but rarely did so, legislation concerning Kingston. Besides, Kingston had some high-powered political advocates in the Legislative Council where it would not have been surprising to find the interests of the business community receiving active encouragement and support, but this was simply not the case. Kingston's legislative councillors, Hon. John Hamilton, Hon. John Macaulay, and after 1858, Hon. Alexander Campbell, did not take any significant part in furthering Kingston business aims in the upper house. Hamilton and Macaulay in fact were very often absent when Kingston matters were discussed.44 The legislative load was carried in the lower house and carried by Macdonald, presumably both because he wanted it that way and because he was in the best position to get results. Certainly he seems to have been generally successful in getting legislation passed which he and his fellow Kingston businessmen believed to be necessary to the commercial welfare of their city. Even John A. Macdonald could not achieve the impossible. The city of Kingston had once been the leading commercial centre of Upper Canada but that leadership had been lost forever to the rising city of Toronto by the 1830s. Much of the entrepreneurial activity undertaken by Kingstonians after that time was an attempt to fight gradual decline, an attempt to restore Kingston to its rightful place as a leading, prospering business centre. But Kingston, as even contemporary observers saw well enough, suffered from some incurable weaknesses—the lack of an agricultural hinterland of significant productivity and the lack of a really first-class harbour for large ships. To these initial disadvantages were periodically added a series of economic misfortunes: the deepening of the St. Lawrence system which weakened Kingston's position as a transshipment point and also destroyed the commercial value of the Rideau Canal, the economic dislocation resulting from the British adoption of free trade, and the transfer of the provincial capital from Kingston to Montreal, a blow to business, political influence, and prestige.45 154

J. K. JOHNSON

The aggressive commercial activities of the Kingston business community were carried out, with political help, on at least three fronts: the establishment and expansion of financial institutions, the creation of industrial enterprises such as foundries and distilleries, and the construction, or at least the attempted construction, of a communications network with Kingston at its centre. The latter involved road building (which was also designed to give Kingston the hinterland which never really existed) and shipping, but from the mid-1840s onward it was increasingly expressed in railway schemes. As in business communities elsewhere Kingston had its group of far-sighted entrepreneurs, including John A. Macdonald, who saw railways as the key to economic salvation and who were prepared to take some risks to launch railway enterprises. The Kingston railway dream of the 1840s and 1850s was to make Kingston, rather than any other Canadian city, the funnel through which Canadian trade from both east and west entered the U.S. railway network and through which American goods entered Canada. Like so many other railway dreams of the time Kingston's dream failed to become reality, though not from want of initiative on the part of Kingston businessmen. The car ferry John Counter was in operation between Kingston and Cape Vincent, N.Y., by 1853, the Wolfe Island Canal was finished by 1857, but the traffic never really materialized.46 By the end of the 1860s it was apparent that Kingston's grand design had ended in failure. John Counter's bankruptcy in 1856, James Morton's death in 1864 leaving a debt of over a quarter of a million dollars,47 and the failure of the Commercial Bank itself in 1867 were signs of the times. John A. Macdonald's career as a businessman, tied intimately to the fortunes of his leading business contemporaries and to the fortunes of the city as a whole paralleled the wider trend. His overextended land speculations left him embarrassed after the depression of 1857, the sudden death of Macdonell in 1864 revealed further serious financial problems arising from their joint business activities, and the failure of the Commercial Bank, to which he owed a great deal of money (to say nothing of the failure in 1867 of the Bank of Upper Canada to which he also owed money),48 made him, while not a ruined businessman, a businessman severely limited in scope. Neither Macdonald nor the city of Kingston were ever again to dream quite such grandiose dreams, to aim quite so high. Yet hard times were not confined to Macdonald and the Kingston business community and both were to survive and to achieve at least stability. If during the years 1843-67 Kingston failed to achieve economic greatness and John A. Macdonald failed to become the really wealthy man he once expected to be, it was not from lack of trying on the part of the Kingston business elite and especially on the part of its premier political spokesman. 155

This page intentionally left blank

The Canadian Locomotive Company GEORGE RICHARDSON

The railroad building boom in Canada in the 1850s tempted many companies to try to manufacture railway equipment. The making of rolling stock and, in particular, locomotives was a very precarious business with a complex technology and a restricted and volatile market. Few companies survived more than a few years and therefore it is surprising to find one that lasted more than a century. The little foundry that grew into the Canadian Locomotive Company was the only one of the pioneer builders that even reached the twentieth century. It evolved from a tiny establishment in the 1850s into a comparative giant by 1900 with orders for thirty-two locomotives on its books. It not only survived but even developed an international reputation in its field. The CLC was to commence the second half of its life span with a great deal of promise. It produced the largest locomotives in the British Empire, the first diesel electric locomotives in North America, and the first opposed piston diesel engine in Canada.1 The company went on to wax and wane through two world wars and a worldwide depression, only to be dealt a mortal blow by its second and last foreign owner.2 The development of transportation in Canada was an expensive and agonizing process. Canadian politicians and engineers found themselves in a quandary. The British example was foremost in their minds; the rapid development of the canal, road, and rail transportation systems in Britain was an integral part of the Industrial Revolution that Britain herself had spawned. They were economically and technologically justifiable and in return they had handsomely rewarded their builders and owners. Canada's older, wealthier, and more heavily populated neighbour to the south was not in quite as strong a position as Britain when it became necessary to develop its internal transportation systems. But the United States was not slow to catch up and was quick to appreciate that British methods and equipment were not always suitable in North America. 157

THE CANADIAN LOCOMOTIVE COMPANY

Canadians realized that, in spite of the fact that they lagged far behind the United States in industry, capital, and population, they were in competition with the Americans in world trade and if they were to exploit the wealth of their country, and in particular the newest colony of Upper Canada, they had to develop their internal communications. The commercial leaders in Canada attempted to plan the transportation systems to enable them to be the middlemen in the exchange of goods between the Midwest of North America and Europe. This placed them in direct competition with their American neighbours, and the frantic building schemes generated thereby coloured the whole picture of transportation in central and western Canada for generations. Kingston, at the foot of the Great Lakes, was on the direct route of this system and originally played an important role as a halfway point between Toronto/Niagara and Montreal. High hopes were raised by the building of the Welland and Rideau Canals but Kingston received very little lasting benefit from either, and the completion of the St. Lawrence Canals in 1847 served only to decrease Kingston's importance as a halfway house. Before these canals were even finished it became apparent that they could not meet the American competition, which had already started to build railroads. This new form of transportation could reach areas not available to canals and did not freeze up in winter. The new American railroads posed a double threat to Canada's commerce. They not only drew grain from the American Midwest but were even starting to draw some trade from Upper Canada to New England seaports. In an effort to channel some of this trade through Kingston, the local entrepreneur, John Counter,3 built a stone warehouse on Mississagua Point at the foot of William Street and a ferry in 1853 to carry goods between Kingston and Cape Vincent, the terminus of the Rome, Watertown and Oswego Railroad. However, the enterprise did not succeed.4 The first railways built in Canada were tiny ones designed as "portage" lines. That is, they were built around rapids on the rivers and intended to supplement water transportation. However, money was difficult to raise and, although longer lines were chartered during the 1840s, few were built until the Guarantee Act of 18495 enabled the railroad companies to sell their bonds. Construction began on several major railroads almost at once, and the first great railroad building boom of 1850 to 1860 was started, culminating in the Grand Trunk Railroad that passed two miles north of Kingston on its way from Sarnia, Ontario to Portland, Maine. The probable cause of this remote location of the Kingston station was that the railroad boom was accompanied by a land speculation boom that prevented the railroad from buying land any nearer at a reasonable price.6 Even without satisfactory railway connections, Kingston at mid-century 158

24 Grand Trunk Railway locomotive no. 271, built by the Canadian Locomotive Company, Kingston, 1873

THE CANADIAN LOCOMOTIVE COMPANY

was a growing city. Small industries had sprung up to meet local needs. These included breweries, distilleries, saw and grist mills, woolen mills, a marine railway, shipyards, and a rope factory. Three of the five foundries produced high pressure steam engines. Raw materials for foundry work had to be imported so it is not surprising to find advertisements in the old city directory for bar iron from the best scrap, or to learn that copper in the bell at St. Andrew's Church was salvaged from HMS St. Lawrence. The Board of Trad was established in 1841 and a steam-driven waterworks was opened in 1849. The railway boom was bringing full employment and a large influx of ready cash. The air was full of optimism. Kingston seemed to have a bright future in spite of being bypassed by the canals.7 Messrs. Tutton and Duncan established the Ontario Foundry in John Counter's warehouse on Mississagua Point sometime in the early 1850s, for the purpose of building stationary engines and general machine repairs.8 The foundry apparently was not successful and in 1854 Messrs. Morton9 and Hinds purchased the operation. When or how Morton and Hinds developed the capacity to produce locomotive engines remains a mystery. In 1856 the Ontario Foundry delivered five locomotives to the Grand Trunk Railroad in time for the recently inaugurated service between Toronto and Montreal. They were wood-burners of the 4-4-0 wheel pattern.10 Flynn's Kingston directory of 1858 says: The establishment under the superintendence of Mr. Francis Tutton is doing a rapidly increasing business; as it has already finished 12 locomotives and tenders which on trial are found to compare favourably with those imported from either England or United States. Four others are now in a forward state. Three engines have been built here for Mr. Morton's saw mills at Trenton and four others for grist mills besides other business. The works employ 150 men from 5 shillings to 10 shillings per day; wages paid every Friday evening.11 It was by then the largest employer in the city.

From this point on the production records are very scarce. The number of locomotives manufactured can be estimated fairly closely by using the surviving records of railway companies. However, in spite of the fact that this company and its many successors advertised a wide variety of goods ranging from locomotives and "snow ploughs" to iron bridge components, there is no record extant that anything except locomotives and a very few stationary steam engines were produced in the nineteenth century.12 At one point James Morton became heavily involved in the construction of the Southern Ontario Railway (Fort Erie to Windsor) and it was feared he would move the foundry to Western Ontario.13 Indeed, it would have been logical to do so but the affairs of the railway were so complex that the move 160

GEORGE RICHARDSON

was never carried out. The Kingston Board of Trade may have had some influence as they were so alarmed about the proposed move that they sent a special memorandum to Morton begging him not to remove his "Locomotive and other works."14 James Morton then controlled a large financial empire in Kingston and both his foundry and his brewery were for a time very successful. He eventually encountered considerable difficulty in his other financial affairs and although the foundry was apparently doing well he sold his interest in 1864.15 In 1864 the Canadian Engine and Machinery Company was incorporated by federal letters patent.16 Among the directors were C. J. Brydges (general manager of the Grand Trunk Railway, 1861-74, commissioner of the Intercolonial Railway, 1874-83); J. Hickson (accountant, then general manager, of the Grand Trunk Railway, 1854-91); G. Stephen (later president of the Bank of Montreal and president of the CPR); H. W. Hinds (manager of the Bank of Montreal, Kingston); J. Shedden (president of the Toronto and Nipissing Railway, later vice-president of the Toronto Grey and Bruce Railway), and John Molson (Montreal brewer, ship and railway owner). The head office was moved to Montreal. Despite the impressive list of stockholders the company had only indifferent success and surrendered its charter in 1878.17 It is difficult to understand why this firm failed. The directors should have been able to offer sound business and technical advice. They were apparently well connected with the government, which many thought was all that was necessary for success in any business and certainly in the railroad business. George Stephen wrote to Sir John A. Macdonald on 15 March 1870, asking Sir John to do his best to help the company secure an order with the Intercolonial.18 The company did start in a lull in railroad building but during the boom days of the 1870s when the Intercolonial was being built, and new engines were being ordered, the company suffered its worst losses. Nor is it clear why the head office was moved. Absentee directors could not be very effective before the advent of the telephone, although the two cities had been connected by telegraph service since 1847.19 A new company, the Canadian Locomotive and Engine Company Limited, was incorporated by federal letters patent in 1878.20 This company had some new blood among its stockholders, such as Sir Francis Hincks (former prime minister of the United Province and minister of finance from 1869 to 1873); James Reekie, who was appointed manager; G. Stephen, and Mrs. J. Hinds, who was the widow of a previous stockholder and a friend of Sir John A. Macdonald. The head office was situated in Kingston. This new company seemed to have a lot of potential strength. The Intercolonial Railway had been officially opened in 1876 and the government was talking seriously about a transcontinental railway to the Pacific coast. Hincks 161

THE CANADIAN LOCOMOTIVE COMPANY

and Stephen could provide the firm with business and political advice, and in 1879 the new protective Tariff Act increased the tariff on imported locomotives from 17.5 per cent to 25 per cent. However, by 1880 the company was in serious difficulty and was soon in bankruptcy. Mrs. Hinds wrote to Macdonald about the difficulties of the company expressing concern about her shares, which she hoped "would not be bought by a Grit company," and wondering if "it would be possible to sell them to the Syndicate."21 Mrs. Hinds later wrote to Sir John again to say that "Mr. Reekie has so mismanaged the Engine Works that today the Bank of Montreal take them and sell them." She went on to say "I did not know he was behaving like a mad man and hardly ever sober!"22 The "Syndicate" that Mrs. Hinds referred to was probably the syndicate that became the Canadian Pacific Railway in 1881. Thus the Canadian Locomotive and Engine Company failed in the same year that construction was begun on the great transcontinental railway whose president was also a stockholder of the Kingston company. A group of Kingston businessmen united at this point to take over and save the works for Kingston.23 The most important of these were Hon. William Harty (later a Liberal MP for Kingston 1902-11); Hon. Sir G. A. Kirkpatrick (Conservative MP for Frontenac, 1870-92); A. Gunn (Liberal MP for Kingston, 1892-97); Hon. Sir R. J. Cartwright (MP for various ridings almost continu ously from 1867 to 1904); John McKelvey and John Breden (one-time mayors of Kingston). Harty was the company's very successful managing director and Kirkpatrick became the president. The political power of this group was enormous. In addition to being the Conservative member for Kingston during the second Macdonald government, the president was the chairman of the House Committee of Ways and Means that brought forth the Tariff Act of 1879. The head office was returned to Kingston which seemed to be the logical location for it. The years of struggle for the company seemed at an end. The CPR had been started, the Intercolonial and the Grand Trunk required locomotives, and the tariff on all imported locomotives was raised to 30 per cent in 1883. The company did prosper even though Canada was in a mild depression and many firms across the country were failing. Indeed, the company prospered to such an extent that a Scottish firm, Dubs and Company, purchased a controlling interest in 1887 rather than set .up their own branch plant. They assumed the management, G. A. Kirkpatrick remained as president, and William Harty resigned. The new shareholders seemed to have entered the business at the right time. The CPR was extending its branch lines in the West and the tariffs on imported locomotives were increased again in 1894 to 35 per cent. Several of the previous shareholders who had political and railroad experience, such as 162

GEORGE RICHARDSON

George Stephen, retained their shares and from 1887 to 1904 the Canadian Locomotive and Engine Company was the only company in the entire country making locomotives.24 However, the new owners, who had an excellent record of locomotive building in Glasgow, failed in Canada. One source blames this on the "mixed character of control" and "the different conditions of doing business in Canada." Strangely, the CPR and Intercolonial saw fit to order locomotives from the United States at this time in spite of the tariff barrier which would presumably have made these more costly than Canadian engines. The only possible reason for these unusual purchases would be the CLC'S inability to produce the required product. During the 1890s the number of employees dwindled from 500 to 100. At this point Dubs and Company sold their shares to a Montreal syndicate who also retained G. A. Kirkpatrick as president until 1899. It, too, was unsuccessful. Practically bankrupt, it made an assignment of its assets to creditors and operations shut down for several months.25 The plant was not to remain closed, however. William Harty, the former managing director, with M. J. Haney26 and C. Birmingham,27 purchased the assets from the liquidators for $60,000 and organized the Canadian Locomotive Company Limited, which was incorporated by letters patent of the Province of Ontario on 7 February 1901.28 Kingston was delighted. The Daily British Whig headlines, announcing the purchase on 6 November 1900, read: Secured the works. Honourable William Harty is now in possession. Orders for 32 engines. Liberals only friend of working man after all. The announcement comes as speedily as possible from Montreal—The works will be reopened with all possible expedition. The Honourable William Harty has bought the Locomotive Works. Has orders for twenty engines for Intercolonial and twelve for Mackenzie and Mann. This is the kind of friend for Kingston. Where was the Conservative help on this occasion?29

Business was good. The Intercolonial needed engines and the Great Northern Railway was under construction. The number of employees rose to 520.30 It would appear that, having weathered the first fifty years, the CLC was going into the twentieth century as a strong and healthy company with good prospects. But the fact that the CLC survived for another half-century in reasonable prosperity was due primarily to the extensive reconstruction and reorganization that Harty and his associates carried out over the next eight years. Political patronage was often evident but was less important than plant efficiency. 163

THE CANADIAN LOCOMOTIVE COMPANY

William Harty was the Liberal MP for Kingston from 1902 to 1911, when his party formed the government under Sir Wilfred Laurier. An interesting editorial appeared in the Kingston Daily Standard, 29 May 1911, on the occasion of the complete reorganization of the management when William Harty retired. "One direct result of the reorganization of the Locomotive Company would be to take the Locomotive Works altogether out of politics. . . . In former days with Mr. Harty in control it was perhaps not unnatural—though we ourselves have always felt it unreasonable—that the view was held that the future of the Locomotive Works depended on Mr. Harty's success at the polls."31 The editor goes on to say that the real reason for success was the excellence of their product. This view, however, was not strictly correct. The extensive reconstruction of the company under Harty was achieved mainly as a result of his attempts to keep up with advances in locomotive building technology. It appears that previously the shops were not equipped with up-to-date machinery, operated by trained men. It is difficult to understand why this lapse had been allowed to occur. The technical excellence of the CLC products in the twentieth century is beyond question. The Russian government ordered one hundred locomotives from the CLC in 1915 because the Russian engineers said they were the best in the world.32 During the nineteenth century there were a number of major technological changes that required corresponding adjustments in industry. If the company did not react, it would lose business. The first major change was the adoption of the standard North American railway gauge of 4'8£" in 1870. A number of Canadian railways had adopted a 5'6" gauge and as a result new engines had to be built rather than just new undercarriages.33 This should have resulted in a spurt of new orders, if the locomotive companies had been ready for them. In 1865-78 the Canadian Engine and Machinery Company, with five railway men as shareholders, lost money instead of prospering. The second and most important change came with the use of steel rails. By 1859 Bessemer had solved most of the problems with his process, and beginning in the 1860s, Bessemer steel was made in huge quantities in America, with almost all of it going into the production of rails for the expanding transcontinential railroad. The steel rail was not used extensively in Canada until the 1880s.34 The use of steel rails had a profound effect on the whole railway industry. Their greater strength and durability made construction and repair of the line easier, and permitted the running of faster and heavier trains. Heavier trains needed heavier rails—80 to 100 pounds as opposed to the 40 to 50-pound rail used in the early days. Bridges also had to be strengthened to support heavier and longer trains. The first engines weighed 30 tons and were capable 164

GEORGE RICHARDSON

of hauling 500 tons, while the engine of 1900 weighed 80 to 90 tons and hauled 1,500.35 The increase in weight was only part of the story. New design criteria were needed to substitute steel for brass and iron throughout the engines. Larger cylinders were used as were higher steam pressures, all requiring more sophisticated design and working methods. There is also reason to believe that the Canadian company was caught between two differing locomotive designs evolving in Britain and the United States. The British pioneer railway builders had no great problems with terrain and the distances were relatively short. With characteristic thoroughness they built heavy rigid roadbeds that were precisely level and relatively straight. The locomotives were correspondingly heavy and rigid. Both the driving wheels and front supporting wheels were mounted on axles that were rigidly attached to the engine frame. Conditions were different in North America, however. Distances were great, the terrain was varied, the climate disturbed the roadbed, and capital and time were relatively more scarce. American railroads were often uneven, had greater slopes and sharper curves. A locomotive was therefore developed with swivel "bogie" truck suspension and equalizing devices that made up for the rougher and more quickly laid track. As both American and British locomotives were imported into Canada even after the tariff impositions raised their cost considerably, and both American and British railroad building methods were used, it is reasonable to assume that the CLC management would be faced with a dilemma. Their hesitation is reflected by the lack of sales and could account for the failure to modernize the plant. There is no evidence that prior to 1900 any major attempt was made to keep abreast of these changes. In fact, there is direct evidence to the contrary. The agreement that William Harty signed with the liquidators in 1900 included the clause that he must spend $20,000 on the property in one year. This might be the first indication that the trustees felt that before they would risk the mortgage they must be sure that the new proprietor would make some attempt to up-date the plant.36 It is obvious that William Harty felt the same way. One of his partners, M. J. Haney, was sent on an inspection tour of American locomotive builders to learn about the latest methods and equipment. Haney wrote to the minister of railways and canals from Pittsburgh to assure him that his inspection would prove "The Canadian Locomotive Company is determined to leave nothing undone to meet all the requirements of the Canadian railways for locomotive engines."37 In another letter of January 1901, requesting a further order for locomo165

THE CANADIAN LOCOMOTIVE COMPANY

tives, Haney refers Blair, the minister of railways and canals, to their present contract with his department for twenty 82-ton locomotives: ". . . taking into account the large plant which we informed you this morning we are adding to our present equipment we can, if orders are placed with us immediately, make delivery of one hundred locomotives on or before July 1st, 1902. Better than this cannot be done by the shops in the U.S. which as you know have orders to the limit of their capacity for the balance of the year. "I may take the liberty" he continued, "of pointing out that as ours is a Canadian industry employing none but Canadian workmen (of whom we will have six hundred or more on our payrolls) it is deserving of encouragement at the hands of the government."38 The content and tone of the letter suggest that a great effort was being made to modernize the plant and equipment. An undertaking had been given to deliver one hundred heavy locomotives in eighteen months (better than one per week), and the company's request had been presented as a reasonable business proposition rather than as a request for patronage. Further evidence of Harty's determination to keep abreast of technology is found in the hiring of a professional engineer, H. Goldmark, to prepare plans for the enlargement and modernizing of the works, to provide for immediate needs and to arrange for successive additions so that the entire property would be used. Goldmark's introductory remarks in his report are very revealing: "Dating back as they do almost 60 years the history of these works exemplifies the fact that commercial success depends on ability, in management more than any other condition. Under different administrations the fortunes of this works have been various. Though but little change was made in the plant itself apart from some enlargement." He goes on diplomatically to say "While excellent engines have been built in these works, the plant has lacked modern facilities for handling heavy weights and in many other respects has not been well adapted to the most economical and rapid prosecution of the work."39 Goldmark further describes in great detail the changes made in the structure of the physical plant and machines including the addition of a 20-ton travelling crane. It is obvious to the reader that the previous equipment must have been primitive indeed. The failure of the previous management to keep up with changes in technology would explain the fact that the CPR and Intercolonial ordered locomotives from the United States in spite of the tariff and in spite of the fact that the CLC was practically idle. Because of their earlier conversion to steel, the American companies were prepared to accept the orders for the new engines. The new company had demonstrated its sound business sense and understanding of locomotive business. By 1907 it was again the largest employer in 166

GEORGE RICHARDSON

the city and in that year made an agreement with the city council to expend $250,000 on expanding and improving the works, thus earning a municipal tax rebate.40 In the light of this detailed examination of the economic, political, and technical roles of the CLC, it must be obvious that the company also played an important role in the community life of Kingston. Its position as the city's largest employer had tremendous social implications in itself. Most significantly, during its first half-century the CLC had deep roots in Kingston at both the management and worker levels. Very few universityeducated staff were brought in, Canadian or foreign. Most of the middle management had worked their way up through the apprentice system. There was a close relationship between owners, management, and labour—a sense of loyalty to the firm seldom known in these days. It was not unusual for the newest apprentice to have personal contact with the president. Reminiscences of former workers regularly recall that "family atmosphere," the generations of f ather-and-son combinations, the pride the workers had in doing the job and doing it well. Hours were long, the work dirty, but there existed an esprit de corps which would not be found in later years, when the union took away the responsibility which was once shared by worker and management alike, and it became a matter of "them and us." Still later, when ownership passed out of the country, the sense of loyalty was badly strained. In the early days most of the workers lived within easy walking distance of the plant and went home to lunch. The company's steam whistle regulated all lives within hearing distance, not merely those of the employees. As the company and city grew the workers became more dispersed, geographically and socially. The CLC was, in a number of ways, a typical Canadian company. It was born during the frantic race that Canada was running with the United States for dominance over the inland transportation routes. It was caught between the example of Britain, the motherland, and the United States, the neighbour and competitor, and from this hectic childhood it emerged with the strengths of both and few of the weaknesses. It went on to grow into a strong company that proved to be a great asset to Kingston and to Canada.

167

This page intentionally left blank

The Failure

of the Commercial Bank MAX MAGILL

When the capital was transferred to Montreal in 1844 Kingston businessmen realized that the future of the city depended on its success in meeting the competition of Toronto for the commercial leadership of Canada West. In spite of some disadvantages it must have seemed that its chances in this competition were good. It was still an important lake port, with a flourishing local trade and growing industries and, above all, as the headquarters of the Commercial Bank1 it was the financial centre of a region extending eastward from the vicinity of Port Hope to the old boundary with Lower Canada. The bank was founded in 1834 after a long struggle to secure a local bank, dating from 1820 when the Family Compact allegedly stole the charter of the Bank of Upper Canada from its Kingston incorporators. Wisely and prudently managed, the bank was by 1844 firmly established as the financial support of the eastern half of Canada West and regarded as the equal of its old rival, the Bank of Upper Canada, or even of the Bank of Montreal. It continued to prosper and in 1857, with a paid-up capital of $4,000,000, branches or agencies in every important city and town, its note issue accepted without question throughout the province and the bordering states, its credit high in London and New York, its stock at a premium, it was the pride of Kingston. Yet the decision of the directors in that year to accept the account of the Great Western Railroad Company2 led in ten years to its complete collapse. The Great Western, though incorporated in Canada and with a Canadian board of directors, was wholly owned by English shareholders. They controlled its funds through a finance committee in London and appointed the general manager. For many years this was C. J. Brydges, a brilliant railway man who was to have a distinguished career in Canada but whom the shareholders were many times to wish they had never heard of. They sent him to Canada to construct and operate a main line railroad: the only type of line, as English experience demonstrated, likely to prove profitable. What they got was a 169

THE FAILURE OF THE COMMERCIAL BANK

main line encumbered by various branches not only unprofitable in themselves but which ate up the mainline profits. Worse still, they acquired the eventual ownership of the Detroit and Milwaukee Railroad Company.3 When Brydges came to Canada he shared his employers' views but shortly after his arrival became a convert to the Canadian theory that the success of a main line railway depended on two things—attracting local traffic by building branch lines to areas not served by the main line and, above all, securing through freight bound from the American Midwest to the Atlantic, to be carried to Montreal if possible. This involved main and branch lines connecting if possible with American railways at the border. In pursuance of this theory Brydges persuaded the London committee to sanction the building of a number of branches and the extension of the main line from London to Windsor; also, as the result of a search for a connection with an American road at Detroit, to interest itself in the D&M. This was an American company chartered in 1855 to build a railway across the Michigan peninsula from Detroit to Grand Haven. It was in financial trouble from the beginning because its promoters had no connections in the money market in London, the great source of railway capital at this period. In this dilemma they approached Brydges and the Canadian board of the Great Western with a proposition. Though the D&M expected to make money from local traffic, the great source of profit was to be the carrying of goods shipped from Chicago to Grand Haven and on to Detroit for ultimate shipment to New York. What the promoters proposed was to divert this traffic to the Great Western at Windsor, provided that company would help them raise funds in London. Brydges was delighted and undertook to push the scheme. The Great Western could do nothing, but Brydges persuaded the London finance committee of the value of the D&M to the company and, with its help, sold to the shareholders of the Great Western 7 per cent mortgage bonds of the D&M in the amount of £1,250,000, with the assurance that this was enough to finish the road. As far as the bondholders and the Great Western were concerned the D&M was a complete disaster. It was really a promoters' road and by the end of 1856 not only were its funds exhausted, but it had large debts and a number of outstanding judgments. The major problem, as far as the directors were concerned, was how to raise more money. The only source was the Great Western through Brydges, but the company was finding difficulty in raising money in England to pay its bills in Canada, especially an outstanding debt due to the Bank of Upper Canada, and was reluctant to put any money into the D&M. When the Great Western was organized the company had had difficulty in obtaining banking accommodation in Canada. The reason was that at least 170

MAX MAGILL

during construction it would require accommodation in large sums. Though the loans would be covered by bills of exchange on London, the banks were reluctant to handle the account and it was only under political pressure that the Bank of Upper Canada accepted it in 1850. At first all went well but by late 1856 the account was overdrawn by £70,000 and the bank was pressing for payment. Part of the overdraft had arisen in Canada, but part was the result of advances made by Brydges on behalf of the D&M. Instead of settling the account, the Great Western wanted further advances which the bank refused to make and, after acrimonious dispute with T. G. Ridout, the board decided in July 1857 to transfer the company account to the Commercial Bank.4 The fact that the Commercial accepted the account though its directors knew of the unsatisfactory relations with the Bank of Upper Canada does not mean that they were incompetent or their cashier—C. S. Ross—mad. There was no evidence that the Great Western could not or would not meet its obligations, especially as the bank's directors knew it was preparing to increase its capital. The difficulty with the Bank of Upper Canada was temporary and occurred because that bank was not in as liquid a position as it might have been. The Great Western had a large cash flow which would aid the circulation of the bank's notes; it would provide an additional source of and market for exchange and altogether seemed a highly desirable account for the Commercial Bank. This would undoubtedly have been the case if it had not been for the D&M. Its position was desperate. Brydges saw that unless more money could be found, the Great Western would not only lose all the advantages he had expected it to gain but the bondholders (all shareholders in the Great Western) stood to lose heavily on their investment. In this situation he turned to the Commercial Bank. When the bank took the railroad account it took only the account of the Great Western itself and had nothing to do with the American company. In December Brydges approached Park, the Hamilton manager of the Commercial, about aid to the D&M and a meeting was arranged at the Rossin House in Toronto, at which Park, Ross, Brydges, and Reynolds, a vice-president of the Great Western, were present. Ross refused to sanction any loan to the D&M which he knew to be on the point of bankruptcy. What he finally agreed to do was to make advances on behalf of the Great Western through a special account—set up as the Great Western-Detroit and Milwaukee Railroad account—on the understanding that repayment of the funds advanced through the account was the responsibility of the Great Western which would cover it by draft on England.5 The reason why he made the arrangement was that Brydges, quite truthfully, told him that he was arranging for a loan of £150,000 for the D&M from the Great Western. The proceeds of this loan were to be paid to the D&M under the 171

THE FAILURE OF THE COMMERCIAL BANK

control of the Canadian board and from it the Commercial's advances were to be repaid. The first loan enabled the road to be completed in a sense but left nothing for such trifles as stations, so Brydges obtained a second loan of £100,000 from the Great Western who at the same time positively prohibited him from making any further advance whatever to the D&M.6 The two loans were advanced through the Commercial by overdrafts on the Great Western-D&M account. As money was required Brydges would write cheques and eventually cover the overdraft by drawing on London at from thirty to ninety days. All would have been well if (as Brydges had alleged) the loans had been sufficient to provide an operating railroad. They were not, because as far as money was concerned the D&M was a bottomless swamp. It was poorly built so maintenance costs were excessive. Grand Haven, on which it depended for through traffic, was continually silting up and cost a fortune in dredging to keep open. Worse still, the road, because of the depression of 1857, produced so little revenue that it could not meet operating costs let alone the interest on its debt. The only source of financial help was through Brydges who was now president of the road with Reynolds as vice-president. The only way he could raise money was through the Great Western which had absolutely forbidden any further advances to the D&M. What he could not do directly he did indirectly. He had dispersed the two loans by means of overdrafts and he simply continued to do this. The bank had originally allowed the overdrafts because it knew they would be covered by bills on London. It continued to do so on Brydges's false assurance that he would soon be in a position to cover the overdrafts. This continued until by 1859 the unsecured overdraft was $2 million, exactly half the bank's capital. Why this situation was allowed to arise cannot now be ascertained. There are three probable reasons. As was typical of most banks at this time, not only the day to day operations but much of the policy of the bank was controlled by the cashier, C. S. Ross. He was honest, capable, with the best interest of the bank at heart, but there was no real control of his actions or judgments by the directors. As had always been the case, they were prominent Kingston merchants and professional men who attended to the affairs of the bank in the intervals of dealing with their own concerns. Above all, they were not bankers; they looked on banking as a business like any other and handled the bank's affairs accordingly. They were apparently mesmerized by Brydges and the Great Western. It was their largest account, a great English company, and though they knew their money was going to the D&M, they knew the Great Western controlled it and did not doubt for a moment that it would pay—an opinion supported by a letter of guarantee signed by Brydges and Reynolds on behalf of the Great Western.7 172

MAX MAGILL

Late in 1859 the real seriousness of the situation became apparent. Efforts had been made to induce Brydges to cover the account but now real pressure was brought to bear and, when this produced no results, a writ was issued. The Canadian board promptly returned the Great Western account to its old love, the Bank of Upper Canada, and, with the support of the angry and disgusted English shareholders, prepared to fight the action. The trial was held at Kingston in May 1860. Because of the complexity of the amounts involved it was agreed that it should be confined to a single issue: was the Great Western liable for the overdraft? If so the amount of the bank's claim was then to be decided by arbitration. After a three-day trial the jury found in favour of the bank but this did not end the matter. On 30 December 18628 the Great Western moved for a new trial, and when the motion was dismissed appealed the original judgment to the Court of Error and Appeal in 1864. This time the Great Western succeeded. It was held that the company was not liable for any part of the overdraft on the Great Western-D&M account other than for advances on account of its two loans totaling £250,000. These were the only loans the company had authorized; moreover, it had specifically forbidden any further advances and the bank must have known this. As for the guarantee of the account given by Brydges and Reynolds, not only was it given without authority but both Brydges and Reynolds knew this, and the bank should have known it. The court therefore ordered a new trial confined to the issue of how much of the loans of £250,000 advanced by the bank was still owing to it. The bank promptly appealed to the Privy Council but in 1865 this appeal was dismissed. This meant that there must be a new trial unless the parties could come to some agreement. Simply because, no matter what the result, a new trial was certain to be followed by more appeals, so that the matter would be before the courts for years, a settlement was arranged. The whole question was submitted to two arbitrators, Street and Douglas,9 who were to settle all the matters in dispute. The Great Western was found liable to the bank for £100,000, which it paid. The D&M debt was set at $1,720,000, for which it gave the bank 19-year bonds at 7 per cent payable in American funds. Any relief the bank may have felt was a mixed one. True, in place of an unsecured debt it now had a secured one, but the security was a dubious advantage. Over the long term it was possible that the bank would receive the face value of the bonds but because of the poor position of the D&M the bonds could not be turned into cash, and cash was the crying need of the bank. When it took the Great Western account in 1857 the Commercial Bank was to all appearances as sound as a rock and the appearances did not belie its actual position. Like all Canadian banks it suffered from the depression of 1857. During the boom period from about 1852 to 1856 it had followed a liberal 173

THE FAILURE OF THE COMMERCIAL BANK

discount policy, based largely on the discounting of notes backed by two or three endorsers. Like all the banks it found during the depression that many borrowers defaulted and that in such cases, since the endorsers could not pay, the only real security behind a lot of its paper was the personal property of its debtors in the form of land; and land from about 1858 to 1861 was virtually unsaleable. In all, its losses on ordinary loans during this period were about $1 million, which though substantial were about the same as those of the Bank of Montreal. The difference was that beyond a certain tightening of discounts the Commercial did nothing about the situation; the Bank of Montreal did. It hired from the Bank of British North America one of the ablest bankers Canada has ever known, E. H. King, made him inspector of branches, and sent him into Canada West to clean house. In the process he earned a reputation for ruthlessness and a hatred that clung to him for the rest of his life, but by 1860 the Bank of Montreal had its house in order. The Commercial Bank did nothing. It was known that as a result of the depression it had suffered losses, but no special provision was made to meet them and, except for some tightening of discounts, no one seemed in any way concerned. This is the most surprising fact about the last years of the Commercial Bank. The directors were concerned about the state of the D&M account, but neither they nor the shareholders seem to have been in the slightest concerned about the safety of the bank itself, until the annual meeting in 1864, when a change was made in the composition of the board. In the previous year it had been made up of C. S. Ross as president, M. W. Strange as vice-president, Edward Berry,10 R. J. Cartwright, John A. Macdonald, A. J. Macdonnell, and T. W. Robison, most of whom had been members for several years. During the year Ross resigned to become cashier once more and Macdonnell died. In 1864 the shareholders, realizing that the board's repeated promises of an early settlement of the D&M account were unlikely of realization, reconstituted the board. Cartwright became president, Berry vice-president, and three new directors, C. F. Gildersleeve, James Harty, and James Paton, were elected. It was this board which ordered the appeal to the Privy Council and when it was lost they apparently decided to look into the real condition of the bank and to press vigorously for the payment of outstanding accounts. The prime mover was Cartwright, who among other measures got rid of Berry, a very heavy debtor of the bank for some years past. The settlement of the D&M account and other attempts to put the bank's house in order took from about October 1864 until the annual meeting in 1867. The results made a gloomy picture. The losses, going back many years, had wiped out the reserve fund completely. The D&M debt was secured but as a source of cash it was useless, because the bonds were unsaleable and hence 174

MAX MAGILL

could not be valued satisfactorily as an asset. The shareholders were assured that the bank was perfectly solvent but the necessity to re-establish a reserve fund and to obtain a complete picture of its affairs led the directors to recommend that the capital should be reduced by 25 per cent and that a committee be appointed to conduct a complete audit. Both proposals were agreed to and to conduct the audit Luther Halton, Hugh Allan, and Alexander Morris were elected to the board.11 When the directors stated that the bank was perfectly solvent they could point to a balance sheet which demonstrated that this was true. It correctly showed the position on 25 June 1867 as: Liabilities $1,321,261.00 Notes: Deposits: Due other banks:

3,410,213.56

Capital:

4,000,000.00

38,691.84

Dividends:

123,691.31

Reserve: Profit and loss:

400,000.00 48,433.75

Assets Coin and provincial notes: Notes of other banks: Due by other banks & foreign agents: Government securities: Real estate: Discounts and other debts due to the bank:

$9,347,298.36

$1,012,331.80

122,572.86

374,846.04 400,000.00 277,315.02

7,187,323.64 $9,347,298.36

But in making their recommendations the directors were running a risk and they knew it. In the previous year the Bank of Upper Canada had failed. In 1861, realizing that the bank was in trouble, the shareholders had appointed new management and accepted its recommendation to reduce the capital to cover heavy losses, and when it collapsed a further reduction was being arranged. The danger was that the public, on seeing the Commercial Bank doing the same thing, would disbelieve the assurance of its solvency and begin a run on it. The audit committee was also a risk. No such body had been 175

THE FAILURE OF THE COMMERCIAL BANK

appointed for the Bank of Upper Canada, but since its failure enough had come out to indicate that such a committee would have discovered some very strange things indeed. The public might well fear that a similar situation would be found by an investigation of the Commercial Bank. What the directors feared was the reaction of the noteholders. At this time the actual currency was the bank note though, in itself, a bank note was not money. It was simply a promise on the part of the issuing bank to pay the holder its face value in real money, i.e. gold and silver coin. Normally the redemption of bank notes was rare, but if doubt concerning the solvency of the bank arose then its noteholders rushed to redeem their notes. The risk which the directors thought they were taking was that the public would panic and a noteholders' run begin. They did not fear that they could not redeem, since, as a glance at the statement will show, they could redeem all their outstanding notes with relative ease, but a run would damage the credit of the bank by shaking the public confidence in it as a financial institution. Unfortunately the directors feared the wrong people. One of the things which they failed to appreciate was that the nature of the bank's liabilities to the public had changed. Formerly the major liabilities of the bank were to the noteholders and to the shareholders for their capital; the change in the liabilities was that a third had arisen—that to the depositors. There had always been, of course, a liability to depositors but it had never been serious. Though the banks had never encouraged deposits they had always held them but these deposits were not large in total; they were mostly merchants' accounts and hence relatively stable, since withdrawals and deposits tended to balance each other, and, since most of them were created by loans, the banks could control mass withdrawals simply by calling its loans. This was no longer the situation. In the case of the Commercial Bank in 1867 its deposit liability was more than 2| times its liabilities to the noteholders. The nature of the deposits had also changed. The major portion of the deposits were no longer those of merchants or others who had business connections with the bank. They were the property of companies or corporations, of wealthy private individuals, many of them trustees of estates, of public bodies such as the Court of Chancery. The only concern of these depositors was the safety of their funds and this was their sole connection with the bank. If they became alarmed and began a depositors' run then they could drain the bank of cash in a matter of days. This is what happened. It was not the noteholders who brought down the Commercial Bank (they never lost confidence), it was the depositors. At first the decision of the annual meeting seemed to have no effect on public confidence. About the middle of August, however, trouble started.12

176

MAX MAGILL

The depositors, having had time to consider the annual report, became nervous when they realized that to cover a note issue of $1,321,261 and deposits of $3,410,213.56—in all $4,731,474.56—the bank had quick assets of only $1,472,750.70, a situation which normally would have caused no alarm since the ratio of quick assets to liabilities was more than 1:3. But times were not normal. Owing (it was believed) to the policy of the Bank of Montreal, money was tight. The failure of the Bank of Upper Canada had caused a substantial loss of banking capital and had been preceded by the measures now being taken by the Commercial. The major depositors, therefore, began withdrawing their deposits, and by September a full-scale depositors' run was in progress. The bank simply could not meet such a run out of its quick assets. It was not then, and never was, insolvent in the sense that its assets would not meet all its liabilities in full. But this fact was no help to it in the face of demands for cash because its assets were not immediately realizable. Finally, after paying out more than $1,250,000 and receiving notice of the intended withdrawal of another $600,000, the directors, on 22 October 1867, stopped specie payments. This decision was not arrived at until the most desperate efforts had been made to save the bank. It was clear from the beginning that only two things could do so—the intervention of the government or the help of the other banks, especially the Bank of Montreal. After the annual meeting the real authority on the board was in the hands of Cartwright, Holton, Allan, and, to some extent, Morris. It must have seemed to the rest of the board that these men had a good chance of securing government help. Cartwright was a strong Conservative, a supporter of his leader and fellow director, John A. Macdonald. Holton was a friend and former partner of A. T. Gait, the minister of finance, who was also a substantial shareholder in the bank; Allan was a financial power both in the Conservative party and in Montreal where, among other things, he was president of the Merchants Bank. In the event their efforts failed, though Gait brought great pressure to bear on Macdonald and the rest of the cabinet.13 The trouble was that the only real help the government could give was either to authorize a large amount of public deposits or to exert effective pressure on the other banks, especially the Bank of Montreal, in order to induce them to come to the aid of the Commercial. Both courses were quite impractical, the one from a political, the other from a financial standpoint. The government of the old province of Canada, with Macdonald as prime minister and Gait as finance minister, had provided aid to the Bank of Upper Canada long after both had known it was bankrupt, with the result that at its failure over $1 million in public funds had been lost. There had been much criticism and if public money were now to be

177

THE FAILURE OF THE COMMERCIAL BANK

deposited in a bank known to be in difficulty, and of which the prime minister was a director and the minister of finance a shareholder, then the fat would be in the fire. Knowing this, Gait devoted his efforts to rescuing the Commercial through the assistance of the other banks, in particular by bringing pressure to bear on the Bank of Montreal which held the government account. There were two difficulties: the state of government finance and the banking theories of E. H. King. The new dominion was in fact broke and only viable with the support of its London agents, Glyn Mills and Company and Baring Brothers and Company, and the support of the Bank of Montreal, to which it owed a very large sum and on which it depended for the success of the Dominion Note Scheme. Nevertheless, it might have been possible to do something had it not been for the attitude of E. H. King. Bankers as a class have never been popular in Canada, but there has never been a banker who was quite as cordially hated as King, especially in Canada West.14 He had long realized that the system of banking based on accommodation paper, where everyone and his brother backed one another's notes and the ultimate security was land, was finished. The day was gone likewise when, as Thomas Gibbs Ridout once declared, every respectable man in reasonable circumstances was entitled to bank accommodation. In King's view the only acceptable collateral was marketable security and the only person entitled to accommodation was the man who possessed it. He hated banks like the Commercial that had branches and foreign connections yet persisted in conducting business on the old system. They should, at best, be small local banks looking after local needs, leaving all other fields to such institutions as the Bank of Montreal. King was general manager and soon to be president of that bank. He had the entire confidence of its board, which seldom reversed his decisions, and as far as he was concerned he wouldn't lift a finger to aid the Commercial or any similar bank, though he had in September lent it $300,000 on the security of its prime commercial paper. Gait must have exerted considerable pressure for finally King agreed to attend a meeting of representatives of all the banks on 21 October 1867.15 The meeting was attended by representatives of the Bank of British North America, the City Bank, the Bank of Toronto, the Ontario Bank, and the Royal Canadian Bank, while banks not represented agreed to accept any decision arrived at by the meeting. The Commercial asked for a loan of $750,000 at four and six months on the security of $1,500,000 of D&M bonds. King refused any loan to the Commercial. In agreement with the Bank of British North America, he stated that these two banks would lend to the other banks any amount they were prepared to lend the Commercial in the ratio of 2:3 and 1:3 on the security of their best commercial paper. The other banks 178

MAX MAGILL

wanted a loan from all the banks in proportion to their capital.16 King simply repeated his offer, said in effect, take it or leave it,17 and withdrew. Finally an agreement was reached on a contribution by the other banks, subject to confirmation by their respective head offices. This was refused because the Bank of Montreal and the Bank of British North America were not parties and, when a further appeal to King failed, the meeting dissolved. Next morning the Commercial Bank of Canada was gone. The fact that the bank had suspended specie payments did not mean that it had ceased to do business, and its doors remained open as usual. It could do this legally because it forfeited its charter, which gave it legal existence, only if it suspended specie payments for sixty days. The purpose of the suspension was to give it breathing space; once it had suspended, withdrawals ceased, since funds were not payable in specie. The hope of the directors was that during the sixty days before the charter was forfeit the bank could either be reorganized by obtaining fresh capital or could be sold to, or amalgamated with, another bank. No one, except perhaps King, wanted the ruin of the bank. The directors knew that if there was any possibility of a rescue operation the period of suspension without forfeiture of the charter would be extended and they set to work to restore it if possible; if not to arrange a sale or amalgamation. Obviously, as well, it was important to get in as much of the assets and to pay off as many of the liabilities as possible. To deal with these matters the board seems to have divided itself into two sections—one in Kingston headed by Cartwright and made up of the directors there, and one in Montreal headed by Holton, aided by a committee of Montreal shareholders. The reason for this division of authority goes back to the annual meeting which appointed Holton, Allan, and Morris to conduct an investigation of the affairs of the bank. All three were substantial shareholders but all were from Montreal and this appointment merely confirmed a change in the nature of the bank which had been going on for several years. When the Commercial was first founded it was purely a Kingston bank, not only in the sense that its head office was in the city, but as well in the sense that the majority of its shareholders lived there, or in the area between Kingston and Brockville. In consequence, right from the beginning its directors and officers were Kingston merchants and professional men. By about 1860, however, two changes had occurred. In the first place, the shares had become very widely held. In the second place the proportion of shares held in Kingston and the immediate neighbourhood had greatly declined. In October 1867 there were only 129 shareholders with Kingston addresses and of these the few with substantial holdings included the City of Kingston with 200 shares and Queen's with slightly more than 300. Montreal, on the other hand, had 186 shareholders and 179

THE FAILURE OF THE COMMERCIAL BANK

among these were not only Thomas Paton, the single largest holder of stock with 1,264 shares, but many others whose holdings were larger than those of any single Kingstonian.18 This did not mean that the control of the bank lay in any meaningful sense in Montreal, but it did mean something else. The major Montreal stockholders, men like Paton, Anderson, Allan, Workman, Holton, Gait, representatives of the business and financial power of what they correctly regarded as the financial capital of the country, had begun to look on the management of the bank as a bit backward and provincial. The Kingston business and professional men who had for years furnished the directorate of the bank were big frogs in a small puddle, competent, no doubt, to sell groceries at wholesale, or run a small industry, but without the talent or largeness of view necessary to running a large bank. These could only be found in Montreal, and as early as 1860 there had been faint suggestions that the head office should be moved there.19 The Montreal committee, therefore, had two objects in view: if possible to save the bank as a going concern or if not to amalgamate it with another bank, in that case moving the head office to Montreal to ensure that the other was a Montreal bank. The committee reported to a meeting of shareholders on 6 November. The report was not optimistic. Its most interesting point was an offer from E. H. King. He had apparently changed his mind. After some correspondence he informed the committee that "his Bank was now disposed to assist the Commercial Bank to resume business" on condition that its state proved satisfactory to examiners to be appointed by him. The committee replied that if assured that help would be given should an examination prove its affairs to be as they represented them, then they would agree to this. King, after consulting his directors, refused: the state of the bank must be satisfactory to him. The committee, fearing that this was merely a fishing expedition with a view to enabling the Bank of Montreal to pick up its best customers, refused. The shareholders approved, agreed that the committee should continue its efforts and that application should be made for an act of parliament to amend the charter by, among other things, permitting the head office to move to Montreal, and then adjourned the meeting to await results. Matters dragged on for another five weeks with the bank still reducing its liabilities, but having no success with its efforts to raise new capital. It was finally clear that the choice was amalgamation or liquidation and negotiations were begun with the Merchants Bank which had been founded and was controlled by Hugh Allan. Allan had large capital resources and he wanted to expand the operations of his bank into what was now Ontario. As he saw it, the easiest way was to get control of the Commercial with its branches and established business connections in the province. 180

MAX MAGILL

He made an offer, therefore, not for the assets but for the shares, of one share of the Merchants Bank for three shares of the Commercial. This offer was considered at a general meeting on 7 January 1868. While the meeting was in progress King made a new offer in an attempt to forestall the Merchants which he realized would, because of the hatred felt for the Bank of Montreal, prove a formidable rival in Ontario. He proposed to purchase the assets of the Commercial, except for the D&M bonds which were to be left at the disposal of the shareholders, for thirty cents on the dollar. Since the Merchants Bank was quoted at $100 per share, King's proposal was probably slightly better than Allan's but the shareholders refused it. The probable reason was the hatred of King.20 On 5 March 1868, therefore, the following notice appeared in the Kingston Daily News: Merchants Bank: The Branch of this Bank, in Kingston, under the management of Mr. J. G. Macdonald, is now open for business in the old premises of the Commercial Bank.

With its appearance the Commercial Bank of Canada vanished. The effects of its collapse were felt far and wide for years. The most important was probably the part it played in bringing about the Dominion Bank Act of 1871 but there were many others. A. T. Gait had fought hard to save the bank and on 1 November 1867 he telegraphed Macdonald his resignation as minister of finance, stating that "failure of the Commercial Bank" had made attention to his own affairs necessary. It is known that there were other reasons for thus ending his political career, but the failure of Macdonald to support him over the bank triggered his resignation. Another man who never forgave Macdonald was Cartwright. Like Gait he had other reasons for deserting the party but resentment over the bank was one of the prime motivations. The suffering arising out of the failure was widespread, of course, but two Kingston institutions were particularly hard hit—the Presbyterian Church and Queen's University. The church had more than $133,000 invested in the stock of the bank, representing a great part of the pension fund to which its ministers looked in their old age. Queen's owned $35,000 worth of stock and the loss nearly ruined the university. The Kingston taxpayer suffered also since the city owned 200 shares which represented its sinking fund for the retirement of its bonds. There was, however, a more important loss. In 1867 the spirit of the city seemed to suffer a blow from which it never recovered. It had been evident for at least a decade that the city was losing ground but after the failure of the Commercial Bank its people seemed to mutter, Ichabod—the glory is departed, and be content that Kingston should be merely a way station on the road between Toronto and Montreal. 181

This page intentionally left blank

IV

Polities in Kingston

This page intentionally left blank

John Macaulay: Tory for All Seasons S. F. WISE

Kingston's three most notable institutions—Queen's University, the Royal Military College, and the penitentiary—are all concerned, in their different ways, with order and discipline. So too have been most of Kingston's political leaders. Long before any of these institutions was founded, Kingston had already begun to produce the first members of a remarkable succession of conservative politicians (though, like Queen's, some of these men might protest that they were "Liberal"). The first of them was Richard Cartwright, a pillar of Tory Loyalism in eastern Upper Canada from the founding of the province to his death just after the end of the War of 1812. Shortly after Cartwright died, three young men of similar stamp entered public affairs almost simultaneously. The members of this Kingston trio were all the sons of Loyalists; each, through his public career, was to play a part in that Tory coalition of local interests and provincial bureaucracy that is fated permanently to be known as the Family Compact. Two of these men, George Herchmer Markland and John Macaulay, were sons of prosperous merchants. Each was related to other prominent Kingston families—the Herchmers, the Kirbys, the Andersons, the Macphersons, the Kirkpatricks—who together constituted the town's "society" and controlled its affairs. Both were former pupils of the man who was coming to be the most important single figure in the provincial administration, John Strachan. The third, Christopher Hagerman, had neither of these advantages. His father Nicholas was a farmer and part-time lawyer of Adolphustown. Christopher, very much an outsider to begin with, was to make his way through his legal talents and a fortuitous boost on the ladder of preferment as a result of his military exploits during the War of 1812.1 Hagerman, outgoing, ambitious and physically impressive, was elected Kingston's first member of the provincial assembly in 1820; in the 1830s, as solicitor general and then attorney general, he was to be one of the most articulate and combative members of 185

JOHN MACAULAY: TORY FOR ALL SEASONS

the provincial Tory elite. Markland, full of early promise, with a quickness of wit and social glitter rarely found among the conservative worthies of Upper Canada, was Hagerman's defeated opponent in that first election. Through Strachan's influence he was promptly named to the Legislative Council and later to the office of inspector general of public accounts and to the Executive Council. His public career ended in scandal in 1838. Even before then, however, he had not fulfilled the hopes Strachan had placed in him; his influence upon the political life of the province had been negligible. John Macaulay was as different, both in personality and in political role, from Hagerman and Markland as those two differed from each other. Hagerman, something of the Tory demagogue, excelled in the clash of will and emotion in the courtroom and on the hustings; Markland cultivated the ease and position his rank in the administration brought him in the provincial capital. Macaulay preferred the shadows. He belonged to that class of men so necessary to the working of any political mechanism, especially one so loose and unstructured as Upper Canadian Toryism. Publicist, patronage gobetween, election organizer, confidant, the writer of other men's speeches— Macaulay was all of these and more. "Back-room boys" are often cynics about the politics they espouse and help manipulate; just as often, however, they cherish the true faith more rigidly than the public men they serve. Macaulay was one of the latter kind. There was no cynicism in him; only a deepening pessimism about his fellow Upper Canadians as the years passed. In 1818, John Macaulay became editor of the Kingston Chronicle; in 1836, he joined the provincial administration as surveyor general of Upper Canada. In the intervening years, he was deeply involved in the politics both of Kingston and of the larger provincial scene. There was nothing accidental about this. Macaulay's standing in the community, because of his family, his comparative wealth, his prominence as an Anglican layman, his service in the local militia, as well as his involvement in the economic life of the town as postmaster and bank official guaranteed him a place of some importance in Kingston's politics, should he choose to take it. More than that, his position ensured that he would be important to the provincial administration. The Compact's political system was, in part, a coalition between a central bureaucracy and local conservative elites. In most parts of the province, local Tory chieftains performed functions for the government at York, and received a variety of favours in exchange. Macaulay was scarcely a typical specimen of the local Compact Tory, however. His position was a special one because of the political and economic importance of Kingston, and because, first as a newspaper editor and then as a political agent in a number of other ways, his value to the provincial administration transcended the local scene. The Macaulay papers in the Ontario archives provide most of what is known 186

25 The Honourable John A. Macaulay, 1857

J O H N M A C A U L A Y : TORY FOR ALL SEASONS of his activities. Unhappily, there are few of John Macaulay's own letters in this large collection, and those few are chiefly from his later career, after he joined the provincial administration in Toronto and wrote home to relatives in Kingston. Judging from the references in letters written to him, the range and volume of his correspondence was very large, but only a few of his own letters have been preserved in such collections as the Strachan and Robinson papers. So his activities must be pieced together, in part at least, from what his political friends wrote to him; this account cannot pretend to do more than show their general nature. One thing we know for certain: the opinion held of him by his friends. He was thought of as serious, intelligent, responsible, and diligent; his few personal letters confirm this opinion. They show also that Macaulay was an intensely private man, a trifle pompous, perhaps, quick to take offence at a slight to his dignity, never a blind follower of administration policies but its fierce partisan nonetheless, and occasionally apprehensive and even fearful about the threats, from within and without, to the peaceful world of Upper Canada. When John Macaulay and a friend and fellow-townsman, Alexander Pringle, bought the Kingston Gazette from Stephen Miles in December 1818 and began to publish the Kingston Chronicle, their intention was to produce a newspaper that was independent of party.2 Gradually, however, the Chronicle swung to strongly partisan Tory views. Hugh Thomson's Upper Canada Herald, which began publication shortly after the Chronicle and also adopted an independent line (though with a Reform bias) may have persuaded Macaulay and Pringle that a pro-administration approach would at least assure them of conservative readers. Moreover, from the outset they were subjected to direct pressure from York to become the defenders of government in eastern Upper Canada. Yet it is interesting that Macaulay resisted such a role for his paper for some time. Most of the pressure came from John Strachan. For him, the chance seemed too good to miss. An organ outside York, edited by a former pupil, seemed just the vehicle to counteract the "sullen discontent" the Gourlay agitation had caused. He blandly told Macaulay that he intended writing a few letters for his paper under a pseudonym, and that he would guarantee the Chronicle against costs "should I say anything considered libellous." The editors' prized independence would not be affected—"I restrain you in nothing"—but surely a "little zeal" in the correspondence column "is not a bad thing."3 Strachan was in for a shock. Apparently he had enclosed a letter attacking Robert Gourlay's charges against provincial land-granting policy. Macaulay not only refused to print it, but gave some credence to Gourlay's charges. The astounded Strachan was "mortified . . . that there should be a leaning on the part of the Editors against the Government in the discharge of one of its functions before hearing its defence."4 188

S. F. WISE

Nor, despite Strachan's pleadings, did the stiff-necked editors revise their view of the Gourlay affair. Evidently Strachan chose to accept Macaulay's explanation of the Chronicle's stand as an apology, "notwithstanding some little asperity of expression," and continued to send letters on the subject. Macaulay and Pringle, however, believed that the use of the Alien and Sedition Act of 1804 against Gourlay, an act passed to meet dangers to internal security during the Napoleonic Wars, was plain persecution. Gourlay himself they saw as a pitiable figure, and compared the action to expel him from Upper Canada to the expulsion of John Wilkes from the House of Commons. It might be legal; it was not expedient; it was certainly unfair. The most Strachan was prepared to concede, and that "between ourselves," was that Gourlay's arrest might have been inexpedient; he thought the Alien Act "wise and salutary for a Colony like this."5 Macaulay's final editorial on the Gourlay affair was all that Strachan could have wished, since the Chronicle quarrelled mainly with the methods employed against Gourlay while regarding his agitation with hostility. Yet the gap between the two was not inconsiderable, and Macaulay had refused to be dominated by Strachan.6 The two were to quarrel often enough in the future. On fundamental political principles, however, they (and their Tory brethren) were in profound agreement. It was inevitable that the Kingston Chronicle, given the times, should become a partisan of government and of those in authority in church and state. Its editors, independent though they thought themselves to be, believed fiercely in the special need for order, due morality, and proper subordination in a province so vulnerably situated as Upper Canada. To support government was not to be truly partisan but to be truly loyal; to oppose it on principle was to be factious and even subversive of good order, and hence was to menace the existence of the colony. Strachan's tenaciousness and diplomacy helped, however, to speed the Chronicle into the government fold. A constant flow of letters from him during these years, filled with advice, information, and flattery, proved difficult for Macaulay to resist, especially since Strachan, once burnt, was careful to avoid too direct a clash over political matters. Instead, he turned to a subject dear to the hearts of Kingstonians and one to which Macaulay himself was to give much time during his career: public improvement, or, as another age would put it, economic development. Macaulay believed that economic advance was the surest way to build an orderly and contented society, and he was confident of Kingston's place in such a society. Under his editorship, the Chronicle became the leading advocate of canal-building, improvements in lake navigation and in internal communications. Both Strachan and John Beverley Robinson were in accord with Macaulay's views, and in 1819 the Chronicle printed a series of essays and articles calling for 189

JOHN MACAULAY: TORY FOR ALL SEASONS major improvements in the St. Lawrence waterway, particularly at Lachine, to meet the challenge of the Erie Canal, and for a canal to connect Lakes Erie and Ontario. Most of these essays were probably by Strachan; certainly he had promised something "to make amends for the political remarks with which I am troubling you." Interestingly, it was argued that "all these Canals should be made by the public, and the whole expense defrayed by the Provincial Treasuries;" since such works were natural monopolies and therefore any objection to government enterprise was "trite."7 At least one of these articles was by Robinson. It was probably an essay commending American enterprise and "anticipation," while at the same time satirizing the American penchant for excess. The founding of universities upon the banks of the Mississippi, or the proliferating of banking institutions "without having any stock to depend upon, but the stock of credulity" of the public was irrational and imprudent, but American confidence was better than the "fatal mistrust" of Upper Canadians. "This Province certainly affords fair scope for anticipation, and as there is no danger of its people over-rating their strength, or expecting too much in the compass of a short time, those who venture to show a little public spirit and rational enterprise will assuredly not be disappointed."8 More and more the Chronicle turned to the fair prospects opening out for Upper Canada, now that its "peaceable and loyal inhabitants are no longer annoyed and disturbed by the visionary schemes of a restless demagogue." In a complacent New Year's survey of the state of the world in 1820, Macaulay pronounced editorially that "rational liberty," as distinguished from the noxious revolutionary variety, was everywhere gaining ground. Even France was now guided by the light of English jurisprudence in building a constitution. England, though a little troubled by a "strolling mountebank politician" like Orator Hunt, needed nothing more than more equitable parliamentary representation, more economical poor laws, and more humane criminal laws, to safeguard "the venerable fabric of the British Constitution" from dangerous innovation. The United States, however, was a troubled giant, racked by tempestuous politics and ruinous economic ventures. In contrast to it, Upper Canadians had much to be thankful for. Under a "wise, vigorous and provident administration" the colony was increasing in wealth, and immigrants were pouring in to take advantage of the prudent measures adopted for developing the resources of the country.9 In view of such sentiments, it is scarcely surprising that by the close of 1820 the Chronicle was regarded as the chief organ of Tory opinion in the province. The powerful at York were not slow to express their gratitude. Macaulay was instructed by Strachan in the manner in which he could qualify for a modest subsidy: 190

S. F. W I S E

I have reminded the General of the importance of your paper of which I may have told you before—he says that you must make a lumping account of £50 annually for advertisements—to enable you to do this copy Govt Advertisements occasionally or always from the Gazette. Send such an account for one year ending with last June that arrears may not accumulate. If you find any difficulty enclose it in quintuplicate to me & I will speak to Hillier or if necessary to the Governor on the subject.10

J. B. Robinson bestowed warm compliments, "without a fee." The Chronicle had given "the highest satisfaction to every well wisher of Church & State," he wrote, in promising to "subscribe (his) mite" more frequently.11 For the rest of his tenure as editor Macaulay was the recipient of a stream of letters from York, not only from Strachan and Robinson, but also from Hagerman, Markland, Hillier, and other political notables. These letters, which make the Macaulay papers one of the most valuable sources of Tory opinion during the Maitland administration, provided the Chronicle with background information on current political issues, drew the editor's attention to subjects which needed airing, provided grist for columns in the form of "squibs" and satiric material, and furnished corrections to slanted accounts of assembly debates appearing in less sympathetic newspapers. Macaulay did not always confine his political interests to his editorial chair. One of his most interesting ventures concerned Barnabas Bidwell. "Old Barney," as the Tories called him, had come to Upper Canada from his native Massachusetts in 1810, and established himself as a schoolmaster in the Bath-Ernesttown area. Almost immediately he had attracted the unfavourable notice of John Strachan and his faithful pupils by a witty attack in the Kingston Gazette upon Strachan's effusive pamphlet, A discourse on the character of George III.12 Bidwell himself was not invulnerable. A highly successful Republican congressman during Jefferson's administration, he had been indicted for misappropriation of state funds in Massachusetts and left his country under a cloud. When, in 1820, Bidwell ran for election to the Assembly for Lennox and Addington, Strachan hoped that he would be "hissed off the Hustings" because his election would be "a disgrace to the Province." The Chronicle, which took no sides in the Kingston election—the only candidates were two Tories, and Macaulay himself was the returning officer—printed a number of satirical pieces on Bidwell, apparently written by Rev. William Macaulay, John's brother. To the general satisfaction of the Tories, Bidwell finished a well-beaten fourth in a five-man field.13 But Bidwell was not to be so easily disposed of. The death of Daniel Hagerman opened one of the Lennox and Addington seats, and Bidwell won it in an 1821 by-election. His election was received by conservatives with some consternation. It was not simply that the Assembly opposition, erratically 191

J O H N M A C A U L A Y : TORY FOR ALL SEASONS guided by William Warren Baldwin and Robert Nichol, would receive a formidable augmentation. Nor was it solely a question of BidwelPs fitness to serve, given the charges against him in Massachusetts. It was rather that his election forced into the public arena a most dangerous question; as Robinson told Macaulay, "more depends upon it than you are aware of, or I can answer for."14 Although Bidwell had taken an oath of allegiance to the Crown during the War of 1812, he had previously, in taking elective office in the United States, specifically abjured that allegiance in taking his oaths under the forms of the American constitution. At least half the population of Upper Canada was composed of United States-born, non-Loyalist Americans and their offspring, brought into the province under the liberal immigration policy inaugurated by John Graves Simcoe. Their political and civil rights (for example, the right to acquire and transfer property) had never been challenged in Upper Canada until a reference for clarification from Lt.-Gov. Gore had elicited a most disturbing response. A despatch from Lord Bathurst, the colonial secretary, called into question the rights of resident Americans, at least until they had been formally naturalized. On Attorney General Robinson's advice, the Maitland administration had decided to ignore Bathurst's instructions, since public disclosure of them would have caused the gravest complications. But with Bidwell's election, the alien question was thrust into politics, and became one of the most divisive issues of the 1820s.15 The Tory instinct was to get rid of Bidwell as quickly as possible, and it was in this effort that Macaulay took a leading, if hidden part. He first helped to organize a petition signed by 126 freeholders of Lennox and Addington, asking that the election be voided on the grounds that Bidwell was both morally and legally disqualified. This petition, sent by Macaulay to Robinson, enabled the attorney general to raise the matter in the Assembly. Macaulay then proposed that proof be secured in the United States of the allegations so often made in the past against Bidwell. Robinson seized immediately upon this method of disposing of "old Barabbas." "If you have reason to believe," he wrote Macaulay, "that the old vagabond has solemnly sworn to renounce forever all allegiance to the King of Great Britain & that proof can be obtained of it, I will go you halves in the expense of procuring a certificate of it, properly authenticated—but this is of course, as Judge Boulton says, sub rosa."16 Macaulay promptly despatched one of his employees, named Driscoll, to Boston to get the goods on Bidwell, not only with respect to his oath of office but also in connection with his alleged defalcations. Driscoll was equipped with a letter of introduction from Strachan to a leading Boston clergyman; his expenses were paid by Robinson, Strachan, Markland, Eagerman, and Macaulay. The conspirators also secured the services of the solicitor general, Henry John Boulton, to bring the evidence against Bidwell before the House.17 192

S. F. W I S E

DriscolPs evidence, both of the oaths of abjuration and of the indictment for malversation of funds, was sprung upon an astonished House and an unprepared Bidwell. Though lamely presented by Boulton, it was sufficient to unseat Bidwell, but in a manner scarcely satisfying to the Tory plotters. By the narrowest of margins, the Assembly voided his election upon moral, not legal grounds, and only after the most powerful speeches by Robinson and Hagerman. "I am sure there is no one who will more rejoice than yourself," Hagerman wrote Macaulay, "at the triumph we have at length obtained in the expulsion of old Bidwell & certainly without flattery or exaggeration I know of no one who is more entitled to share in the credit of the victory than yourself—he is expelled, but by a Majority of one!"18 Macaulay could not refrain from lambasting editorially those who had failed to vote for the righteous cause: "While we congratulate the honest part of the community on this grand triumph of the cause of correct principle and sound morals, we cannot, nor indeed are we anxious to disguise our regret on seeing that it was a majority of one only that saved the Province from appalling disgrace, and its House of Assembly from indelible pollution." Members who, in spite of everything, had persisted in voting for Bidwell were "apostates"; "their names should be emblazoned on the tablet of memory by every true hearted man in the country." Very properly, the Assembly declared this editorial a libel and a breach of privilege. Macaulay could not have been repentant—Hagerman declined to present his apology to Speaker Sherwood, because "it was more in justification than in excuse of your conduct."19 Few editors in Upper Canada escaped such raps on the knuckles from the Assembly. But Macaulay's self-righteousness led him far beyond the bounds of fair comment in his treatment of Barnabas Bidwell, "that crest-fallen individual." In effect, Macaulay declared that Bidwell was an outcast and a leper, generously suffered to live in Upper Canada but betrayed by ambition into exposing his unsavoury past to public debate. Bidwell had "dragged his own sins before the light of Heaven, and met with well merited exposure and overwhelming disgrace. Henceforth, when he walks the streets, he must expect that 'the slow unmoving finger of scorn will point' him out as an unprincipled peculator and a notorious refugee from justice." The editors of the Chronicle excused this savagery by appealing to their "paramount . . . duty as Journalists." How could they be silent on an issue affecting "the honour and safety of the Province? When hardened profligacy boldly rears at any time its unblushing head, all good men and true patriots should combine to quell the hideous monster and expose it in the nakedness of its own loathsome deformity."20 Such language helped to poison politics in Upper Canada. John Macaulay, who preached (and most of the time practised) moderation and decorum in public and private life, forgot, like many of his brother Tories, such warnings against excess when confronted by really 193

JOHN MACAULAY: TORY FOR ALL SEASONS dangerous political enemies. Macaulay not only wanted to win—he wished to vanquish opponents, to crush them utterly. This crisis mentality was the source of many of the difficulties which were ultimately to beset conservatives in Upper Canada. Even in the short run, Macaulay's victory over Bidwell proved a hollow one: for "old Barney" was immediately succeeded by his son Marshall Spring Bidwell, destined to be a leader in the provincial reform movement for years to come. John Macaulay also became much involved in the controversy over the proposed union of Upper and Lower Canada in 1822. The imperial government sought, through union, to check French-Canadian political power, to meet the demands of the Montreal mercantile community, and to solve Upper Canada's revenue problems, which stemmed from the failure of Lower Canada to renegotiate the interprovincial customs-sharing agreement after 1818.21 The union bill provided for equal representation of the two provinces in the new legislature, despite the fact that Lower Canada was more than twice as populous as its neighbour. All government records were to be kept in English only, and English was to become the sole language of debate in the legislature after fifteen years. Eligibility for the Assembly was to be restricted by introducing a high property qualification of £500. The executive arm of government was to be guaranteed a voice in the Assembly through a device permitting the governor to name four executive councillors to seats in the Assembly, where they might debate but not vote. The bill split opinion in Upper Canada on regional as well as upon political lines. By and large, most reformers opposed the bill because of its reactionary character. Conservatives from western Upper Canada, and the officialdom at York, also opposed the bill, partly from fear and distrust of French Canadians and partly because they could see no strong economic advantage in union. Tories from the eastern part of the province (and some Reformers as well), strong believers in the development of the St. Lawrence water route, saw union as an economic necessity, and were inclined to overlook, or underplay, the political problems it might raise. John Macaulay was the most effective spokesman for the eastern interest. During the summer of 1822, as public discussion of the union question got under way, the Chronicle indicated that it was prepared to swallow the political provisions of the imperial bill in order to get union itself.22 Indeed, some of these provisions it welcomed. "Young Gallo-Canadians" would now learn English, Macaulay wrote (perhaps thinking of th^struggle he had as a youngster in Terrebonne, learning French from Father Varin), and "our language must now become with them, as it ought to have long ago been, an essential branch of education."23 During October and November, the Chronicle carried many accounts of meetings for and against union throughout 194

S. F. W I S E

Upper Canada. Kingstonians had their say at a meeting arranged by "the Friends of Union," held at the Court House on 30 October, with Allan MacLean in the chair. Macaulay was the chief speaker at this meeting. It was a novel experience for him. Throughout his long political career he was most reticent about speaking in public, and his willingness to do so on this occasion is a testimony to his belief in the union cause. Much of his speech was an attempt to allay the doubts some of the Union Bill clauses had aroused. While he agreed that the seating of executive councillors in the Assembly was an impolitic proposal because "liable to distrust and misrepresentation," he found the intent of the measure good. After all, there was nothing in the present provincial constitution which forbade an executive councillor from sitting in the Assembly, provided that he had "the good fortune to be also a favourite with the people." Too often assemblies were led astray by simple ignorance. Members of the executive could supply information upon the policies of the provincial administration that could be obtained in no other way. It was absurd to construe a measure designed to increase the flow of information as one intended to obtain undue influence on the part of the executive over the decisions of the House. "What is in reality the influence of the Crown here? It is indeed little more than a phantom, and is scarcely sufficient to preserve the due weight of the Executive and the just poise of the Constitution." On the other hand, Macaulay disliked very much the proposed increase in property qualifications for members of the Assembly, terming it "an infringement of the rights vested in us by our Constitutional charter." While admitting that the current £20 qualification was perhaps too low, he thought that the figure established ought to bear a close relationship to the general distribution of wealth in the society, and certainly should not exclude "men of moderate fortune, yet of worth and independence and sound judgment . . . from the great council of the country."24 On the whole, however, Macaulay was impatient with particular criticisms of the bill, believing that its main aim was too important to be smothered by partisan controversy over details. "It is as a general measure of policy, affecting the general happiness and prosperity of the great Canadian family, as well as our external political relations, that the legislative union of the Provinces ought to be discussed," he said. Macaulay's use of the word "family" is most interesting, and scarcely accidental. For one thing, he was not alone among Tories in experiencing the first faint stirrings of the conception of a distinct Canadian national destiny at this time. Moreover, Macaulay detested empty partisanship and factiousness (never recognizing his own behaviour in that light). Society should cohere, like a family, rather than be divided against itself by the "discord, clamour, prejudice and distrust" which characterized 195

JOHN MACAULAY: TORY FOR ALL SEASONS the political process, especially in Lower Canada where public men were "wasting their time in factious debates." Political union would bring the stability and sense of direction of Upper Canada, where "the great body of the people continue loyal and zealous," to bear upon the factiousness and discontent of Lower Canada, while the language provisions would in time eliminate those "national prejudices and jarring interests" which encouraged faction. Thus brought together, "the great Canadian family" could address itself to the chief object of political union, the large-scale economic development of the St. Lawrence-Great Lakes system. The resultant prosperous and contented society would have a substantially enhanced influence upon the direction of imperial policy. This vision was not Macaulay's alone; it was one he shared with such Kingston "Friends of Union" as Archdeacon G. 0. Stuart, Allan MacLean, Thomas Markland, Allan McPherson, Christopher Hagerman, John Gumming, T. R. Cartwright, and John Kirby. Other conservatives were not so confident as the Kingston elite. Jonas Jones of Brockville, a fellow-pupil of Strachan's but always something of a maverick among Tories until his elevation to the bench, wrote Macaulay to reproach "you Kingston people" for stomaching so easily the politically objectionable sections of the bill. "You are a staunch Govt man," he told Macaulay. "I am as much disposed to support the Govt in what I consider right as you or any other man can be; but I will never consent to yield the privileges of the people and sacrifice all to the Influence of the Crown."25 The same post may well have brought Macaulay a disapproving letter from a genuinely staunch government man, John Strachan. He sweetened the bitter pill with a teacher's bouquet: "You were wont to be so bashful and sparing of your tongue that I am not a little surprised at the length of your speech—it is by much the best on the occasion. . . . I congratulate you on being able to speak so well, for tho' the matter is in my opinion objectionable the style and arrangement do you much credit." Convinced that union would serve only to unite French and English radicalism to form a new and threatening majority, and that "in all questions of a nature to produce collision on Provincial feeling this Province would go to the wall," Strachan pronounced Macaulay's generous idealism "all fudge."26 Macaulay, however, heeded Strachan's somewhat insincere assurance that he had always encouraged "Young Friends who have any parts" to think for themselves, rather than his criticisms, and continued to uphold the Kingston view of union until it was clear that the matter was politically dead in England.27 In early 1823, Macaulay gave up the editorship of the Kingston Chronicle. He did so in order to accept preferments that Strachan had arranged. He was offered the position of secretary to the commission for arbitrating the division of customs duties between Upper and Lower Canada. As Strachan pointed out, he would be the real power on the commission, nominally headed 196

S. F. W I S E

by James Baby. Baby was "a man of most Gentlemanly manners tho' rather slow of apprehension"; he would be guided by Macaulay's "superior intelligence." The other office was that of cashier to handle the Bank of Upper Canada's business in Kingston; acceptance of it necessitated that Macaulay step down as editor of the Chronicle. Strachan advised his protege to take both positions; it was the first chance he had had of "bringing you forward in so honourable a way," and the next opportunity might be long in coming. On this occasion Macaulay took his mentor's advice.28 For the next fifteen years, little occurred of a public nature in Kingston in which John Macaulay was not involved. As agent for the Bank of Upper Canada, and as postmaster from 1828, he was at the centre of the commercial life of Kingston and the surrounding district. As a justice of the peace, he became familiar with the squabbles and vagaries of his fellow-townsmen. As chairman of Quarter Sessions, he led his brother magistrates in protesting the provocative activities of the local Orangemen, to the outrage of "their Catholic fellow subjects." With them, he deplored "the transfer to this happy portion of the British Empire of public exhibitions commemorative of the ascendancy of one religion over another" and of "societies assuming a higher degree of loyalty than their Christian brethren of another faith."29 As a community leader, he helped organize the Kingston Bridge Company, interested himself in the establishment of a Mechanics' Institute, and, concerned to maintain a sanitary water supply for the town, campaigned for a Kingston waterworks.30 He became, in fact, the Tory man-of-all-work in Kingston. As Strachan once wrote, in connection with Macaulay's labours in the drafting of reports and papers for Archdeacon Stuart, "the truth is at all places there is only one or two that do anything. Mr. Cartwright before your time did every thing at Kingston. Now it has luckily fallen on you."31 As a matter of course, Macaulay was consulted by the provincial administration on patronage matters in Kingston and the surrounding area. His assessments were based upon his wide knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses, both political and moral, of the people in his region. A man in Prince Edward County, "a good natured idle drunken fellow," was not sufficiently respectable for the office of coroner. A Fredericksburg man was probably "an extensive smuggler" and though "externally loyal from convenience" had political principles "better suited for the meridian of Jefferson County." So confident were those at York of the soundness of Macaulay's political judgments that when he nominated Davis Hawley, a former Bidwell supporter, for justice of the peace, J. B. Robinson, though amazed, could only write that "I take it for granted by your recommending him, you are aware that his appointment wd. rather give satisfaction than disgust to the loyal part of the population."32 During these years Macaulay served the provincial government in an 197

J O H N M A C A U L A Y : TORY FOR ALL SEASONS official capacity in a variety of ways. Successful as secretary to the customs duty commission, he subsequently served as commissioner in further negotiations, demonstrating astuteness in the defence of provincial interests.33 At various times he was a commissioner for settling the affairs of the "Pretended Bank" of Kingston ( a thankless task that temporarily estranged him from Hagerman, one of its directors), for inquiring into the state of lighthouses on the lakes, and for investigating the affairs of the Welland Canal. After a tour of American penal institutions, he wrote, with Hugh Thomson, the report that resulted in the establishment of Kingston Penitentiary.34 Above all, he involved himself with enthusiasm in the promotion of provincial waterways and internal navigation. As a commissioner of internal navigation (from 1822), he took part in an early survey of the Rideau route. His warm support of this and similar projects brought from Robinson the comment that "one day or another we shall be a great people—that's certain." For a time, in the 1830s, he was also one of the commissioners for the improvement of St. Lawrence navigation.35 He kept himself informed on the progress of internal improvement in the United States; in 1835, for example, he sent Lt.-Gov. Sir John Colborne a series of reports on American canal and railway projects. He strongly advised Sir John, despite the province's weak finances, to have a canal route surveyed between Lake Huron and the Bay of Quinte, for such a route would connect "the whole trade of Michigan, Indiana and the future establishments in the West" with Montreal and New York. A Georgian Bay canal "would immortalize His Excellency's Administration."36 Such activities testify not only to the regard in which Macaulay was held by the provincial government and the legislature but also to his public spirit and his keen interest in improvement. Despite his interests, he chose never to run for an Assembly seat, though repeatedly urged to do so, especially by Robinson and, at a later time and under other circumstances, by Sydenham. On one occasion, when Macaulay predicted (correctly) "a stormy parliament and the revivifying of the seeds of faction," Robinson made a direct personal appeal to him to run, in the rather suffocating manner he tended to use in such circumstances. "We must buckle on our armour to meet them," he told Macaulay, "& let me tell you, Classmate, you ought to have made it your calculation to be ready to join us in the fight. You are of the regularly bred, and Tou owe the State some service'."37 Macaulay preferred to serve the state, and the Tory party (although he would have recognized no such distinction), in other ways. There were few elections in the Kingston area in which Macaulay did not take some shadowy part. In the Lennox and Addington by-election of 1823, in which the Tory candidate, Ham, was pitted against Marshall Spring Bidwell, Macaulay seems to have enjoyed himself thoroughly. He wrote squibs and 198

S. F. W I S E

handbills, "rather bombastic and libellous of course," noted that "old Barna, Dalton & Bartlet" had "set themselves to work transferring titles & splitting freeholds" in order to create votes, bemusedly reported that Tories were adopting "the same way of getting votes as Bidwell," and concluded that "the party which can make bad votes the fastest will carry the day."38 In 1828 he tried to keep the Kingston nomination open as long as possible in case Hagerman should be available to run, sought for a suitable candidate to oppose Thomas Dalton in Frontenac, and distributed election pamphlets and handbills to political allies not only in the Kingston district but in Brockville, Prescott, and Cornwall.39 In the key election of 1836, he was in touch with political developments in at least five seats, from Carleton to Hastings, and used his influence to try to ensure that "only two conservatives shall come forward" for each two-member constituency. Radicals, he thought, were much more disciplined than conservatives; "we never see them put into the field 3 or more candidates, where only two can be elected."40 Between elections, Macaulay continued to exert some influence upon politics through the press. As he had told Hillier in 1824, he and Pringle had had no regrets about giving up the active editorship of the Chronicle: There was a prejudice existing against the paper, excited by old Bidwell, and not to be conquered by us, while we were editors, that it was wholly a Government paper. This feeling was sufficient to keep away a good many subscribers, for it unfortunately happens that though a man may oppose the Government from principle, it is impossible in the opinion of the multitude that he can support it from principle. No man, they are taught to think, can go with the Government, unless from corrupt motives, and the Chronicle therefore which did not revile or abuse its measures, was not a favourite with such people. To get the better of this prejudice, I have advised Macf arlane to throw the paper open to discussion rather more liberal, as the phrase is, than we chose to publish.41

It may well be that Macaulay retained a share in the ownership of the Chronicle after he and Pringle had been succeeded as editors by Thomas Thomkins in 1823 and by James Macf arlane in 1824.42 But part-owner or not, Macaulay continued to write for it, and for other conservative newspapers, until he joined the provincial administration in 1836. No particular piece he wrote can now be positively identified; his papers simply make it evident that he was a regular contributor, especially to the Chronicle and to the York Gazette and U. E. Loyalist, and occasionally to Hugh Thomson's Upper Canada Herald. Among his own circle his activities were no secret. "You are the very best political writer in the Province," Strachan told him in 1832.43 The one-sided correspondence of the Macaulay papers also shows that Macaulay attempted to influence provincial policy on quite a range of matters 199

J O H N M A C A U L A Y : TORY FOR ALL SEASONS other than his main interest in economic development. How often he did this, or precisely what line he took when he did, there is now no way of knowing. Just what was contained in the draft bill he sent Robinson in 1828 which, the attorney general told him, "shews your itch for legislating, as well as your talent"?44 What experiences in Kingston led Macaulay, in 1835, to propose to Robinson a bill providing penal sentences for adultery, incest, and bigamy? The chief justice was amused. "You long to spread your net where you know there will be abundance of game," he teased the sober Macaulay. "But my dear Sir, should you not consider that an Irishman or any other man who has two or three wives pays already the penalty of hard labour, & as for 'solitary confinement' I should think . . . it would come as a relief to him."45 Macaulay does not seem to have had much more satisfaction from John Strachan, to whom he frequently wrote on questions of religion and education. Macaulay was a staunch Anglican, but Strachan's aggressive and often injudicious defence of the church frequently dismayed him. He was most disturbed by the Ecclesiastical Chart of 1827, and its attacks upon Methodists.46 It may be that Alexander Pringle, his partner on the Chronicle and a Presbyterian, had educated him to appreciate the claims of other denominations; it may be that Macaulay was impressed with the political importance of the supporters of the Kirk. At any rate, he did not accept Strachan's claim to exclusive Anglican rights to the Clergy Reserves, and considered it only sensible to work out some arrangement with the Presbyterians. When Macaulay proposed such an alliance to Strachan in 1832, the Archdeacon rejected it out of hand.47 In later years, Macaulay continued to believe that had a more moderate approach been taken by Anglicans in the 1820s and 1830s the religious issue would not have embittered politics as much as it did, and the Church of England would have fared better. When, in 1839, it appeared that there was a chance to settle the Reserves question, he wrote his mother: "I feel that the safety of the Country requires its being settled at all hazards, even if we retain but a third for the church. If no settlement takes place this session, matters will only grow worse. Our people have sadly mismanaged things for many years. In 1825 we might have secured two thirds. A few years hence it may be all forever lost."48 John Macaulay's labours on behalf of the conservative cause in Kingston and throughout the province rendered him, according to the Tory standard, a person deserving of higher preferment. If not so greedy for office as some of his contemporaries, he was certainly not devoid of personal ambition. As the years passed, and his claims failed to win the recognition he thought they merited, he became somewhat querulous. When Christopher Hagerman was raised, temporarily, to the Bench in 1828 and his lucrative appointment as collector of customs for Kingston fell vacant, Macaulay felt that the job should 200

S. F. WISE

be his. "I have fagged for years in editing a paper—the only one which defended the administration at the time, & though I had great trouble I had no profit/' he wrote Robinson in appealing for his support. He had always tried to be "useful," and the customs job would enable him (in ways he did not specify) to continue to combat "the unceasing efforts of our democrats to injure the tone of public feeling."49 Considering Kingston's status as a port of entry, the customs appointment was one of the most coveted at the disposal of the colonial government. Like other candidates, Macaulay was dependent upon the interest his friends could make with the lieutenant-governor, Sir Peregrine Maitland. His friends were either unable to serve him, or reluctant to do so. Strachan and Markland backed him, but Robinson's influence with Maitland was crucial—and he supported the impecunious Dr. Sampson. Somewhat lamely, Robinson explained to Macaulay that the lieutenant-governor had "better things" in mind for him; moreover, he was thought "to be very rich, because all the world knows you to be very industrious & prudent."50 Before an appointment was made, Sir John Colborne succeeded Maitland, and to the dismay of Macaulay's circle, Thomas Kirkpatrick got the job. He was a protege of Hagerman's, having articled for him and assisted him in the collectorship. The incident showed how much Strachan's influence had declined—"nothing could be worse in taste and heart than Sir P. or rather perhaps Col. Hilliers conduct for the last year in the way of appointments," he complained—and also the favoured position that Hagerman enjoyed from the commencement of the new administration.51 It was Christopher Hagerman who paved the way for Macaulay's eventual appointment to the Legislative Council. In 1830, he first suggested to Colborne that Macaulay would make a good member. "He always talks to me of my friend Mr. McAulay" Hagerman wrote; "sometimes he abuses you and then I defend you—sometimes he praises you and then I abuse you." Not until 1834, however, did Colborne recommend Macaulay to the colonial secretary as a legislative councillor. He identified him as the son of a Loyalist, as "an opulent Merchant of Kingston and a large proprietor of Land," who "from his character, intelliegence and acquirements possesses great influence." 52 It was characteristic of Macaulay that when informed of his appointment, he wrote not the customary letter of thanks but a short essay on the Council and the spirit of the times: The restless spirit of innovation, now abroad, in its assaults on existing authorities and institutions has not spared the middle branch of the Legislature, which, indeed, it seeks either totally to destroy by one open and mortal stroke, or else to wound, by means of such a change, as would not merely disturb the equilibrium which the wise 201

JOHN MACAULAY: TORY FOR ALL SEASONS founders of our Constitution fondly hoped they had succeeded in establishing, but would degrade the Council from its present independence and dignity as a co-ordinate Branch of the Provincial Parliament into a pliant tool of the party possessing temporary predominance in the Lower House, a mere passive instrument for giving effect to an unbridled democratic will. This spirit does not, in fact, confine its machinations to the Province of Upper Canada, but displays an incessant activity in other Colonies, and even at the very seat of Empire. Such being, according to my view, the political circumstances of the times, a steady and unbending adherence to its duties by the Legislative Council does certainly appear most important to the stability of the Constitution, and the permanent welfare of the Province.53

This statement was typical of Macaulay's ponderous orthodoxy on matters of principle. One doubts that he ever enlivened debates during his long career in the upper house (he died in 1857); in the 1830s politics for John Macaulay had become, on the whole, a pretty gloomy business. When, through Strachan's influence, Macaulay became surveyor general of Upper Canada under Sir Francis Bond Head, his appointment might be viewed as a piece of Family Compact favouritism—as it was. Yet he was well suited to the job. As a politician he had been honest and responsible; as a local agent of government he had been efficient and reasonably imaginative. His long Kingston apprenticeship had prepared him well for the curious double role of higher civil servant and backstairs politician that the unreformed constitution of 1791 demanded of senior officials. His subsequent career as surveyor general, secretary to Sir George Arthur, and inspector general of public accounts under Sydenham belongs more properly to provincial than to Kingston history. His shift to Toronto, to new duties and to coping with the "frostwork of ceremony" erected by Toronto hostesses came in early 1836.54 But John Macaulay remained the most Kingstonian of conservatives: responsible, respectable, and unquestioning in his faith in material prosperity as a sure cure for political ailments. Above all, he had a profound conviction that proper institutions, whether constitutional, religious, or educational, could not only control conduct but transform men into persons as sober, sound, and respectable as himself. He must have strongly approved of Queen's.

202

Hugh L. Thomson:

Editor, Publisher, and

Politician, 1794–1834 H. PEARSON GUNDY

"Reforming Thomson,"1 regarded in his own day as a leading parliamentarian, author of the standard work on parliamentary procedure,2 and influential editor and publisher of the Upper Canada Herald, Kingston, a weekly newspaper which W. L. Mackenzie once described as "perhaps the most consistent, temperate and useful periodical work in the Province,"3 has been largely ignored by Canadian historians. When mentioned at all, he is identified with the inauguration of the provincial penitentiary, of which at the time of his death he was slated to become the first warden.4 The reasons for this neglect are not far to seek. In the first place, files of the Upper Canada Herald are scarce and very incomplete (even in microfilm). In reports of the debates in the Legislative Assembly, Thomson's name infrequently appears. Not a facile or fluent speaker himself, he took a rather cynical view of what so often turned out to be, in his words, "useless debating." Few members, however, were more closely involved in the politics of the day than Thomson, or served on so many select committees of the House. Another reason why he is so seldom mentioned is the apparent uncertainty of his political affiliation. When he entered public life, it was with all the credentials that would normally classify him as a Tory—a native Canadian of United Empire Loyalist parentage, a staunch Anglican, and a successful merchant. During the ninth and tenth parliaments (1824-29), however, he normally voted with the moderate Reformers; it was not until the eleventh parliament (1830-34) that he became a consistent supporter of the administration. The reasons for this change will appear later. Finally, as editor and publisher, Thomson has received scant attention because so little has been done on the history of publishing in Canada. Archibald Thomson, the father of Hugh C., was a master carpenter from Westermark, Scotland, who had emigrated to Tryon County, New York, in 1773. At the time of the revolution, he joined the Loyalist forces, served under 203

HUGH c. THOMSON: EDITOR AND POLITICIAN Captain Joseph Brant, was captured, escaped, and gained a commission as lieutenant. After the war, he settled for a brief period in Kingston, where he married Elizabeth MacKay, and where Hugh Christopher was born in 1791. (As the parents neglected to have the birth recorded in the parish register, the day and month are not now known.) Archibald Thomson was commissioned to build a home in Kingston for Sir John Johnson, and also to build the first St. George's Church, a frame structure which stood on the present site of the Whig-Standard Building. In 1794 the family, which later numbered nine, moved to Niagara and then to York, where Archibald was joined by two brothers, Edward and George. Edward was the great-grandfather of the well-known Canadian journalist, E. W. Thomson; George the great-grandfather of Lord Thomson of Fleet.5 Where Hugh Christopher went to school is not known; he was not a pupil of George Okill Stuart or of John Strachan. But either at school or as a junior clerk in the employ of Quetton St. George, he gained a knowledge of business methods and bookkeeping, learned to write well, and acquired a taste for reading. The first records we have of him are business letters written in his late teens to his employer, St. George, a French royalist emigre who had established a chain of stores at York, Niagara, Kingston, and two or three other places. Thomson first worked in the York store, then went to Niagara, and in the spring of 1810 to Kingston. A score of his surviving letters give us an intimate picture of business life and methods in the early years of the last century.6 On two or three occasions, Thomson had to defend himself against complaints and calumnies, and did so with such aplomb that he retained the confidence and good will of his employer and patron. On 18 September 1813, Thomson married Elizabeth Spafford of Kingston. But the new life together, so full of hope and promise, was destined to be cut short. On 8 July 1814 a poignant obituary notice appeared in the Kingston Gazette: "Died in this town on Thursday last, after a lingering illness which she bore with Christian resignation and fortitude, Mrs. Elizabeth Thomson, wife of H. C. Thomson, Merchant, and second daughter of Elijah Spafford, aged 22 years; leaving a disconsolate husband, a tender mother and a numerous concourse of relatives and friends to deplore her loss." Work was the only anodyne, and Thomson threw himself into business and community life. He was initiated into the Kingston lodge of the Masonic Order, and he took an active part in the Midland District School Society of which he became treasurer. He was appointed a warden of St. George's Church, subscribed generously to the Kingston Auxiliary Bible and Common Prayer Book Society, and made a donation towards the building of the first British Methodist chapel in Kingston. Later on, he became secretary of the Frontenac Agricultural Society. 204

26 Hugh C. Thomson, c. 1825-30

HUGH c. THOMSON: EDITOR AND POLITICIAN In 1815, when Quetton St. George was preparing to return to France, Thomson was able to make arrangements to take over the Kingston business, and soon afterwards to expand it by taking as partner another of St, George's agents, George H. Detlor of Napanee. In a notice in the Kingston Gazette, 23 October 1815, Thomson "respectfully informs his friends that he has entered into co-partnership with Mr. George H. Detlor and that the business will in future be carried on under the firm of Thomson & Detlor." It was not the most promising time to launch an expanded mercantile business, for already there were signs of a postwar economic depression. Army requisitions largely ceased and with the lifting of import restrictions, the market was flooded with manufactured good from across the border. Prices and wages slumped. As there was a chronic shortage of money, many customers paid in country produce. Thomson had been one of a group of Kingston merchants who, during the War of 1812-15, formed a banking association "for the purpose of issuing bills for the convenience of making change." After the war it was reorganized in 1818 as the Bank of Upper Canada, though without a charter. Banks and banking would become a matter of absorbing interest to Thomson. Despite the recession, the affairs of Thomson & Detlor prospered sufficiently to enable Thomson once again to contemplate marriage. This time the lady of his choice was Elizabeth Ruttan, daughter of William Ruttan, of U.E. Loyalist stock in Adolphustown. They were married 18 March 1816, and from then on Thomson enjoyed a happy, congenial home life, saddened only by family deaths. Ten children were born to the couple, seven of whom died in infancy. Six lie buried with their father in St. Paul's Churchyard, Kingston, their names and death dates inscribed on the weathered gravestone. Hugh Christopher Thomson, Jr., born posthumously, lived only four months. By 1819 Thomson was becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the routine life of a small town shopkeeper. He wanted something that would challenge his mind and provide scope for social action. When, at the end of 1818, the Kingston Gazette sold out to two fellow townsmen, John Macaulay and Alexander Pringle, Thomson conceived the idea of starting a rival paper more liberal in policy than Macaulay's conservative Kingston Chronicle. He therefore published a prospectus for the Upper Canada Herald, "a candid, impartial, independent newspaper," to be issued as soon as the necessary arrangements could be made (15 January 1819). Wisely enough, he did not specify the date of publication. It took him longer than he expected to dispose of his business to Detlor, find a new office, purchase a printing press, type fonts, and all the appurtenances of a printing house, engage a printer and probably an apprentice. Thus it was not until September 1819 that the Herald finally made its appearance. In stating his 206

H. PEARSON GUNDY

editorial policy, Thomson promised his readers that the paper would be "loyal, patriotic, open to all parties but under the control of none; and as instructive, entertaining and authentic as his best exertions can make it."7 Unfortunately all but a few of the issues for the first two and a half years are missing, but a relatively complete file in the Douglas Library at Queen's for 1822 enables us to form an accurate impression of Thomson as editor and publisher. One of the first things that strike the reader is the fairness with which Thomson presents opposed points of view. On the question of the union of Upper and Lower Canada, for example, an issue hotly debated in 1822, the Chronicle was strongly in favour, the Herald just as strongly opposed. But whereas the former gave comparatively little space to the opponents of union, Thomson reported union meetings just as fully as anti-union meetings in which he himself participated. He also gave prominence to French-Canadian opposition and recognized the unfairness of reducing French-Canadian representation in a united legislature to minority status. Two Kingston petitions were forwarded to the imperial parliament, a pro-union petition signed by Macaulay, Pringle, Hagerman, Markland, Dr. James Sampson, among others, and an anti-union petition signed by Thomson, James Atkinson, A. Monahan, Joseph Rocheleau, Dr. E. W. Armstrong, and many others. As petitions from other parts of the Canadas were published in the press, it became increasingly clear that the consensus was against union. The editors of the Chronicle were rather put out about this and vented their disappointment in gibes at Thomson, who took it all good-naturedly: The Editors of the Chronicle continue to sport their Italic wit with a more than ordinary degree of spirit, and old woman like, appear determined to have the last word. Be it so—for really we are not anxious to prolong a controversy that seems to have robbed our neighbours of their temper and induced them to deal in language which we conceive unmerited and rather ungentlemanly. Paper shot can break no bones, and therefore it will be time enough to "dodge" when the facetious Editors think proper to assail us with a more formidable weapon. (26 November 1822)

Surprisingly enough, a month later, Macaulay announced that he and Pringle were giving up the paper and transferring it to other hands. For an interim period Macaulay continued as owner, but on 5 November 1824 James Macfarlane announced that he had become sole proprietor. As a newspaperman, Thomson had an intuitive sense of what readers wanted, and a good eye for a pleasing layout. From his exchanges he printed interesting, "instructive," and sometimes amusing short items; he also ran much more foreign, especially British, news than most North American papers today, often including accounts of debates and even full-length speeches in the House of Commons. In every issue there were letters to the 207

HUGH c. THOMSON: EDITOR AND POLITICIAN editor on all manner of subjects trivial or serious. An amusing example of the former was a letter that appeared in the issue for 30 April 1822, complaining of noisy distractions in church—which church the writer does not say—from the "disagreeable and vexatious crying of children and yelping of dogs." Noisy infants could and should be stopped by their mothers, but, the writer says, "the discord, confusion and noise created by the running, barking and fighting of dogs in the house of God not only manifest a want of reverence to the Divine Being, is not only offensive and embarrassing to the speaker, but is in the highest degree ridiculous and contemptible." Perhaps the correspondent thought that Thomson, as a churchwarden of St. George's, should include dog-catching among his duties. When Thomson published a letter attacking John Macaulay and the Family Compact, the Chronicle took him to task for a lack of courtesy to a fellow editor. To this, Thomson replied a trifle pompously: A liberal press is the noblest distinction and most valuable privilege of a free people; and with the blessing of God we intend that ours shall maintain that character, and shall be open impartially to all parties and all men who respect the laws and institutions of our country and do not transgress the limits of decorum. Under these restrictions, we are ready to publish the sentiments of those who agree or disagree in opinion with us or with any other Editors. (18 June 1822)

But he was soon to find out that when the privileges of the House of Assembly were violated by the exercise of the privileges of a free people, the House had ways and means of making editors toe the line. Within a few months of his editorial on a free press, Thomson was cited in the House of Assembly by the member for Norfolk, Robert Nichol, for circulating what was considered to be "a false, scandalous and malicious libel and a contempt of the privileges of this House." The offending piece was a contributed article in the Upper Canada Herald lampooning a recent report of a select committee on banking matters relating to Kingston.8 After due discussion, the Assembly voted in favour of summoning the editor to appear at the bar of the House to be admonished by the Speaker. Commenting on this in his Weekly Register, Charles Fothergill of York referred to the libellous article as "a strange production . . . of a nature without doubt well calculated to find out the limits of the Freedom of the Press in this Colony; which perhaps may have been the object of the real author" (20 November 1823). Though not himself the author, Thomson could scarcely escape responsibility for printing it. When Thomson finally appeared before the House on 1 December 1823, he was asked by Speaker Sherwood what he had to say in his own defence. He replied that he had no intention of committing an offence against the dignity 208

H. PEARSON GUNDY

or privileges of the House. As an editor, he had always tried "to do my duty to the public with fidelity and independence and at the same time respectfully toward all constituted authorities." He said he had not the least idea that the article was, or could be considered, libellous or disrespectful, though it was, he admitted, "not in the same style or tone that I perhaps should have chosen." He was sorry indeed if it was considered a libel or a breach of the privileges of the House. The Speaker was not disposed to treat the subject lightly in administering his admonition. The effect of the article, in his view, was to undermine confidence in the people's representatives. Its publication was the more inexcusable in that it supplied no information but was "wholly addressed to the bad passions of mankind and not to their reason." Under the circumstances, he concluded, "it becomes my painful duty to reprimand you for your improper conduct. You are accordingly reprimanded and at liberty to retire from the bar of the House."9 It was a sober, chastening experience for Thomson which he would not soon forget; it also confirmed his new ambition to enter public life himself and, as a member of the House, erase the impression that he held it in contempt. Not a few of Thomson's friends felt that he had been harshly treated. Compared with other editors who either supported or opposed the administration, he was remarkably free from bias or vituperation. Before making up his own mind, he looked at both sides of a question and also gave his readers the opportunity to do so. As a testimony to the esteem in which he was held, a group of Kingstonians who called themselves the "Friends of Free Discussion" took up a subscription and in June 1825 presented Thomson with an inscribed silver cup as a mark of their respect for "the candour, intelligence, impartiality and independence with which you have edited the Upper Canada Herald." The presentation address, dated "Kingston, 13 June 1825," was signed "with sentiments of personal esteem" by Marshall Spring Bidwell, Dr. E. W. Armstrong, Thomas Smith, Theophilus Harvey, S. 0. Tazewell, William Donaldson, Henry Lasher, Abraham Truax, Henry Dalton, and Joseph Delay. The cup, which had been brought out from England and cost $133, was ten inches high and "embellished with embossed work and encircled with a vine and clusters of grapes." On one side was the following inscription: Liberty will have become extinct when an Editor of a Public Print who performs his duty with impartiality and spirit, shall cease to be regarded as an invaluable member of society.

On the other side was engraved another inscription: This cup was presented by the friends of free discussion resident in Kingston, Upper Canada, to their fellow townsman Hugh C. Thomson, Esq., Editor of the Upper 209

HUGH c. THOMSON: EDITOR AND POLITICIAN Canada Herald, as a token of their regard for his manly independence in the conduct of his Paper.10

An example of his "manly independence" appeared in an editorial written soon after the lieutenant-governor, Sir Peregrine Maitland, had appointed John Strachan to yet another public office, indeed a multiplicity of offices, as a trustee of the public schools in every district of the province. Too much responsibility, Thomson contended, for a man already overburdened with public duties. A facetious contributor followed up this editorial with an amusing squib entitled "Whoe Dobbin!" . . . The Reverend and Honourable Doctor of Divinity and Politics appears to be free and willing to run, with accelerated velocity, and an accumulating weight of Church and State and Supplies and Funds and Schools and all upon his back. But is not His Excellency a cruel rider thus to push a free horse with whip and spur, up hill and down, through thick and thin, in all official directions? . . . From an apprehension of danger, the anxious spectators, as they step out of the way, involuntarily exclaim Whoe Dobbin! (2 August 1825)

William Lyon Mackenzie picked this up and with great glee reprinted it in the Colonial Advocate, then in its second year of publication. During the early years of the 1830s, newspapers in Upper Canada began to proliferate rapidly, though some were short-lived. At four dollars per annum they were considered relatively expensive and were often passed from one family to another. The number of readers thus greatly exceeded the number of subscribers. When he inaugurated the Colonial Advocate in 1824, Mackenzie listed subscription figures for the six leading papers of the province as follows: Upper Canada Gazette, 300; York Observer, 290; Kingston Chronicle, 350; Upper Canada Herald, 420 (later corrected to 520); Brockville Recorder, 300; Niagara Gleaner, 190. On this showing Thomson's paper was clearly out in front, though later to be overtaken by Mackenzie's more sensational Colonial Advocate, and both eclipsed by Ryerson's Christian Guardian after 1829. Commenting on the newspaper press of the province in 1826, Peter Russell specially commended the Upper Canada Herald: "The Kingston Herald issues nearly 600 a week: its Editor, Mr. Thomson, is a native Canadian, a member of the Assembly, and supports what are called popular measures, both in his paper and in the Assembly. The Herald is held in great estimation by all classes." n The Colonial Advocate also supported "popular measures" but in a shrill, offensive way calculated to insult and infuriate the governing clique whom Mackenzie pilloried in issue after issue. Nothing could have been farther 210

H. PEARSON GUNDY

removed from Thomson's tactics. But when, on 8 June 1826, some young bloods of the Family Compact smashed up Mackenzie's printing plant while he was out of town, and threw his type (including some of the forms of the statutes he was printing) into the near-by bay, Thomson denounced the outrage in a special issue of the Herald. "Such a conspiracy/' he declared, "and outrage against the freedom of the Press, the palladium of civil rights, was never before witnessed in this Province. . . . The perpetrators of it are said to be attached to or connected with, and as it were selected and delegated from, almost all the public offices in York, from the Lieut. Governor's office down to that of the Clerk of the Peace" (20 June 1826). In the Chronicle, Macfarlane was much less concerned over this "outrage" than his contemporary. Undoubtedly the spirited young men had overstepped the mark, but by insulting their families, Mackenzie had asked for this retribution, and the public would rally to their support. Thomson, however, read the public mind more shrewdly. There was a general outcry against the "type rioters" for having gone too far altogether. So sharp was the public reaction that Maitland felt obliged to dismiss one of his clerks, John Lyons, who had taken part in the prank—an action, said Thomson, that would be "gratifying to the whole Province, with the exception, perhaps, of our neighbour, the Chronicle, and a few others" (4 July 1826). In the end, Mackenzie was awarded £625 damages, which enabled him to pay his debts and set up in business again, a result scarcely anticipated by the rioters. Some months later Maitland compensated Lyons by appointing him registrar of the Niagara District. For his vigorous protest over this appointment, Thomson was soundly berated by Macfarlane, in terms so harsh that the Herald editor protested the attack as "false, unwarrantable and rather ungentlemanly." "We think," he continued, "it will puzzle Mr. McFarlane [sic] to give a substantial reason for this departure from the ordinary rules of civility" (12 June 1827). Thomson found that irony was often a cutting weapon which could be used within the "rules of civility." When, for example, Dr. John Strachan, en route to London to plead the claims of the Church of England, stopped off in Kingston in March 1826 to preach at St. George's, Thomson duly reported the sermon in the Upper Canada Herald. Strachan's text he found to be "beautiful and truly significant": "It is expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away the Comforter will not come unto you." And then, no doubt with an inward chuckle, he mischievously concocted a rumour "that the object of the Hon. and Rev. Gentleman's mission is to advocate the claims of the Scotch Kirk to a proportion of the Clergy Reserves of this Province." In September 1827, Strachan's notorious "Ecclesiastical Chart for the Province of Upper Canada" was made public. It was designed to bolster the 211

HUGH c. THOMSON: EDITOR AND POLITICIAN Anglican position while Strachan was in London petitioning for a charter for King's College. Thomson, though a good Anglican himself, was shocked at the archdeacon's effrontery. "Every person who knows anything of the religious state of Upper Canada," he wrote editorially, "will readily perceive that the Hon. and Rev. Gentleman's statement is in many important points exceedingly incorrect. . . . It is doubtless the interest as well as the duty of Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, &c, &c, &c to step boldly forward and contradict the unfounded assertions which the 'worthy rector of York' has so fully circulated in England to their disadvantage" (25 September 1827). This brought a flood of letters which he published in subsequent issues of the Herald, and later issued in pamphlet and book form. Like most newspaper editors and proprietors in the early years of the last century, Thomson from time to time published pamphlets, brochures, annual reports, and even full-length books. At least twenty-five separate publications before 1835 bear the H. C. Thomson or Herald Printing Office imprint; twenty-two are listed in the Toronto Public Library Catalogue of Canadiana.12 As pamphlet literature is essentially ephemeral, many of these items are now extremely rare; one is known only through the advertisement for it ^n the Herald, and if the files of the paper were complete other titles might be added to the list. In the spring of 1822, Thomson informed his readers that "Pindar Swift's Poems are in the Press and will shortly be ready to deliver to subscribers." This seems to have been the first volume of verse to be published in Upper Canada, but unfortunately no copies have been located. The author's name appears to be a pseudonym, combining the names of Peter Pindar and Jonathan Swift, thus suggesting that the poem was a political satire. Another verse pamphlet appeared from the Herald Press in August 1822, A Poetical Address to the Liege Men of Every British Colony and Province in the World by "A Friend to his Species." A copy of this poem is in the Lawrence Lande Collection of Canadiana at the Redpath Library, McGill University. Dr. Lande reproduced the title page and a brief extract (quite sufficient!) in his Old Lamps Aglow (Montreal, 1957). The author was probably Thomas Dalton of Kingston, some of whose poetic efforts had already appeared in the Herald. All newspapers at the time ran poetry columns of original or reprinted selections most of which were of little or no literary value, as one correspondent was at pains to point out—in verse, of course: More rhyme, more nonsense! Oh my luckless stars Can nothing still these literary jars? 0 for a Byron to chastise the throng Whose raving fancies kindle into song— 212

H. PEARSON G U N D Y

To stop the force of this increasing tide Which spreads its noxious mania far and wide!

And so on, for 112 lines—signed "XUS" (8 October 1822). Thomson published not only verse; he had the distinction of issuing the first novel by a native of what is now Canada to be published in British North America. The author was Julia Hart (nee Beckwith), born in New Brunswick, the wife of a Kingston stationer and bookbinder, G. H. Hart. The novel appeared anonymously in two volumes, 1824, under the title St. Ursula's Convent, or the Nun of Canada. It was accorded a two-page review in one of the first literary journals in the Canadas, the Canadian Magazine, published in Montreal. The reviewer was not greatly impressed. "These two little volumes," he wrote, "the one containing 101 pages, and the other 132, printed in large type, upon coarse paper, and charged inordinately high, contain a mass of incidents, all borrowed from other works of imagination, greater than we ever remember to have met with in so small a compass."13 Although the price may have seemed "inordinately high," it is doubtful whether Thomson could have recovered the cost of printing and binding. Today this exceedingly rare item of Canadiana would command a very fancy price indeed on the antiquarian book market. Taken as a group, Thomson's pamphlet publications cover a fairly wide variety of subjects, social, economic, religious, political, and educational. They include sermons, addresses, letters, annual reports, the brief biography of a convicted murderer, reflections on municipal government, and five separate publications (one extending to over 200 pages) on the controversy over the Clergy Reserves. The charter of King's College, first published by Strachan in London, was reprinted by Thomson in 1828. Two items deserve special comment, Thomson's own compilation, A Manual of Parliamentary Practice, 1828, and a revised and indexed volume of the Statutes of Upper Canada, 1831, published jointly with James Macfarlane of the Kingston Chronicle. The former was a labour of love for Thomson who, after four years as member for Frontenac, had become an expert on parliamentary procedure. The rules of the House of Assembly were printed in the Journals of the House, but what often gave rise to disputes were the "unprovided cases" which were supposed to follow precedent set by the British House of Commons. What Thomson did was to compile a collection of precedents and provide a subject index to them for ready reference, reprinting in an appendix the rules of both the House of Assembly and the Legislative Council. For the convenience of users, this handbook was interleaved with blank pages so that members could jot down in the appropriate place the latest rulings of the Speaker and thus keep it up to date. The Ontario Archives 213

HUGH c. THOMSON: EDITOR AND POLITICIAN now has Attorney General John Beverley Robinson's autographed copy of this manual with his holograph annotations; the Toronto Public Library has the copy which belonged to Solicitor General H. J. Boulton. The volume of consolidated statutes was a major undertaking and a credit not only to Thomson and Macf arlane but to James Nickalls, Jr., the Kingston lawyer who edited the volume, and to Francis M. Hill, the printer. The press announcement, 16 April 1831, that Thomson and Macfarlane would publish the revised statutes roused the ire of Robert Stanton who, as King's printer, felt that they were poaching on his preserves. "Never a word was said to me," he complained to John Macaulay, ". . . until I saw the advertisement. . . . All things considered there has been, I think, a want of decent courtesy toward me in this matter." Both parties petitioned the legislature—Stanton to have the work stopped, Thomson and Macfarlane to seek official authorization. A committee under C. A. Hagerman disallowed Stanton's petition, but declined to give the work official sanction although it commended the venture as "a very great accommodation to the people of this Province."14 The Assembly authorized the purchase of 200 copies for the use of members, a gesture which Thomson was quick to communicate to the Legislative Assembly of Lower Canada, hoping for a matching order.15 The work, which bears the imprint date 1831, is a very substantial volume of 692 pages, bound in hard covers, and as fine an example of bookmaking as any produced in British North America in the first half of the century. It is, of course, difficult to separate Thomson's career as politician from his career as newspaperman and publisher. The Herald not only kept him before the public and made him well known, but also served as a vehicle for expressing his political views, sometimes in a more forthright manner than in the House of Assembly, and this, on occasion, got him into serious difficulty. He entered public life in the autumn of 1824,16 winning one of the two seats for Frontenac County in the Legislative Assembly, and in December proceeded to York for his first session. Having established a reputation for impartiality, he was at once made chairman of a select committee to consider alleged irregularities in the Essex County election. Another controversial issue before the House was the Clergy Reserves, and Thomson as a liberal Anglican was a logical choice as chairman of that investigating committee. The members learned that a portion of the reserves was to be sold and, to the dismay of John Strachan, recommended that a petition be forwarded to the imperial parliament "humbly praying that His Majesty will be pleased to cause an application of the proceeds of such sale to be made towards the support of the Protestant clergy of every denomination throughout this Province."17 Of course the recommendation was thrown out by the Legislative Council, but it served to show which way the wind was blowing. 214

H. PEARSON GUNDY

At the second session of the ninth parliament which opened in November 1825, Thomson was appointed to the committee to superintend the printing of the House. This was always a controversial problem involving the King's printer (appointed to issue the official Gazette) and other printers anxious to obtain government contracts. The printing of the Journals was given to the lowest bidder who, after getting the contract, almost invariably petitioned for additional remuneration to cover unforeseen difficulties. The reporting of the debates raised some thorny questions. When left to the discretion of newspapers editors, the reports differed according to the political bias of the paper, and members constantly complained that their speeches were either garbled or suppressed. In an attempt to improve coverage, Charles Fothergill, the King's printer, had engaged for the first session, 1824-25, a young Irishman, Francis Collins, who was a shorthand expert. Impressed by his performance, Thomson's committee voted him £100 to continue, with the assistance of John Carey, editor of the York Observer. During this session, Thomson also served on a select committee to inquire into ways and means of reducing contingent expenses, and on the vital Committee on Public Accounts. In the matter of new legislation, he proposed a bill to increase revenue by imposing a tax upon dogs, not in the country but in towns. (Did he recall the complaint about dogs fighting in church?) Charles Fothergill who, while retaining his post as government printer, had been elected to the Assembly as member for Durham, was an active and vocal member of the House. But when he voted once or twice against government measures, he was summarily dismissed from the office of King's printer. Reformers used this as another stick with which to beat the administration. It "proved to a demonstration," Mackenzie wrote, "that no man but a sycophant or a mere automaton can fill the situation" (C. A., 19 January 1826). Thomson, who had a high regard for Fothergill, criticized the Chronicle for supporting the government's action. But he was probably pleased when his own brotherin-law, Robert Stanton, was appointed as FothergilPs successor. Stanton, a fellow Kingstonian, was a high Tory, but despite occasional disagreements he and Thomson remained good friends. The Upper Canada Herald for 5 December 1826 noted that "On Wednesday Messrs Bidwell and Thomson left Kingston on their way to York and were joined, we hear, on their way by Messrs Perry and Peterson." At the start of this session Thomson introduced two important motions, one for a committee to take into consideration the state of the public highways, and the other to consider the propriety of erecting a penitentiary within the province. For the latter he was congratulated by Mackenzie (a dubious honour) in the Colonial Advocate: "Mr. Thomson of Frontenac introduced a very useful measure on Friday last, namely an enquiry whether a penitentiary ought to be built in 215

HUGH c. THOMSON: EDITOR AND POLITICIAN Upper Canada—this is what we call legislating on subjects that will be of service to the colony now; and we trust the country will give Mr. T. the credit he deserves on the occasion" (28 December 1826). Thomson supported BidwelFs bill "to abolish the punishment of whipping and the pillory," spoke with some feeling on the Canada Trade Act from his experience as a businessman, and along with other reform members voted solidly against the government's Naturalization Act. Commonly referred to as the "Alien Bill," it was resented by American-born Upper Canadians who had to take the oath of allegiance, whether or not they had taken it before, and even then found that their status as British subjects was valid only in Upper Canada. It managed to squeak through the Assembly by four votes, but its opponents, determined to block the measure, sent Robert Randall, an American-born member of the Assembly, to London where he managed to get the bill disallowed, much to the indignation of Sir Peregrine Maitland. On this subject Thomson publicly disagreed with the new King's printer. Stanton, he declared, "seems to think it just and equitable that persons who have resided in this Province thirty or forty years, taken the oath of allegiance and fought in defence of the country during the late war, should now be called upon to declare themselves aliens. . . . Let the public decide" (27 March 1827). In the 1826-27 session Thomson chaired two committees which were sharply critical of the lieutenant-governor. One was concerned with a breach of customs regulations, the other with a charge of disloyalty against a Reform member of the House, Captain John Matthews. The terms of reference of the first committee were "to enquire whether any and what quantity of salted pork has been imported into this Province from the United States of America since the passing of the Imperial Act of 6th George IV and by what authority such importation may have taken place." Summoned by the committee, the inspector general reported that 600 barrels of salt pork had been imported by J. G. Bethune through special dispensation of the lieutenant-governor, who had waived regulations on the grounds that the original contract was signed in Rochester before the Imperial act went into force. Duty in the amount of £100 had been paid and the consignment sold to Hon. Peter Robinson. To the committee it looked as if two friends of the government has been specially favoured by Sir Peregrine. In their report, they said they could find no clause in 6th George iv, c. 114, which gave the lieutenant-governor discretionary powers.18 Editorially in the Herald, Thomson was more outspoken. The fact, he said, that Maitland gave a "license to a favourite in the District of Newcastle to import salt pork from the United States . . . could not legalize that violation of the law" (13 June 1826; 17 September 1828).

216

H. PEARSON GUNDY

Incensed by this challenge to his authority, Maitland ordered the attorney general to indict Thomson as "a malicious and evil-disposed person . . . contriving and intending to traduce, defame and vilify His Excellency Sir Peregrine Maitland . . . and bring [him] into great and public hatred, contempt and disgrace." Thomson published the indictment in full, along with the evidence and the report of the select committee (17 September 1828). Readers rushed to his defence. One wrote that if official acts could not be publicly examined without incurring prosecution for libel "we may bid farewell to the freedom of the press, the boasted palladium of constitutional Liberty" (24 September 1828). In the end, the case seems to have been quietly dropped after the departure of Maitland. The Matthews case which Thomson's committee investigated was a clearcut example of viceregal and military interference with the civil rights of a citizen who also happened to represent Middlesex in the Assembly. Matthews had offended Maitland's sense of decorum at a New Year's Eve performance in the York Theatre by a visiting American troupe when, at the conclusion of the entertainment, he had called for "Yankee Doodle" and "Hail Columbia." This was reported to Lord Dalhousie as commander-in-chief of the forces, who in turn summoned Matthews, called his conduct "utterly disgraceful and disloyal," and suspended his pension. Matthews's friends in the Assembly, some of whom had been with him at the theatre and knew it was no more than a New Year's Eve lark, were outraged by this inquisition. The Thomson report completely exonerated Matthews of disloyalty and attributed the "malignity and falsity" of the charges to political motives aimed at discrediting a Reform member of the House.19 With the arrival in Upper Canada in September 1827 of John Walpole Willis, appointed a puisne judge of the Court of King's Bench, Thomson gained a new friend. Ambitious of becoming chief justice in succession to the aged and ailing Judge Campbell, Willis had to discredit John Beverley Robinson whose chances of preferment were considerably better than his own. He first clashed openly with Robinson over the handling of two libel cases, one involving Francis Collins, who had risen from parliamentary reporter to owner and editor of the Canadian Freeman, an anti-government paper, the other involving statements by William Lyon Mackenzie in the Colonial Advocate. Willis agreed with Thomson and other Reformers such as Bidwell and Rolph that the cases should be quashed, that judges should be independent of the Crown, and that the chief justice should not sit in the Legislative Council. Thomson and his friends were delighted by this unexpected support from a newcomer of unimpeachable character, a son-in-law of the Earl of Strathmore. But before they could decide on what strategy to adopt, Maitland

217

HUGH c. THOMSON: EDITOR AND POLITICIAN intervened and summarily dismissed Willis for refusing to act with Judge Sherwood on the Court of King's Bench in the absence of the chief justice, whose presence, he claimed, was necessary to make the court legal. Thomson stoutly defended Willis and deplored his dismissal. "If this highhanded party measure should be suffered to pass without redress or remonstrance, it will be a fatal blow to the judicial independence of our Provincial courts (1 July 1828). Macfarlane in the Chronicle retorted that Willis was "wrong-headed, weak-minded," and totally unjustified in bringing the administration of justice to a stop on a dubious technicality.20 The Willis affair was fully exploited by the Reformers during the election of 1828 and undoubtedly won them some additional seats. Dr. W. W. Baldwin was elected in Norfolk County; his son Robert won the York seat at a 1829 by-election occasioned by John Beverley Robinson's promotion to the chief justiceship. William Lyon Mackenzie was elected to this parliament for the first time as member for the County of York. Of the three, the latter was much the most vocal in the house, talking endlessly in debate and drawing up grievances both real and imaginary. Mackenzie's root and branch radicalism alarmed the more moderate Reformers, Thomson especially who deplored his methods and said so quite openly in the Upper Canada Herald. It was highly ridiculous, he said, that Mackenzie should go about stumping the countryside and collecting grievance petitions to be sent to the imperial government, praying at the same time that His Majesty would not meddle in the internal affairs of Upper Canada. A York correspondent for the Chronicle wrote in his column, 14 March 1829: ". . . if I may judge from appearances, the eyes of many hitherto misguided but in reality loyal members are beginning to be opened. . . . Already schism and disagreements have occurred. The young men of the country and the old men long resident in it of acknowledged loyalty, such as your neighbour Thomson . . . and others, have in several instances refused to bow the knee to Baal." Thomson had recently supported a government measure, a switch which prompted Macfarlane to rejoice in his contemporary's "repentence." He would gladly "rescue him from such society as that of the Colonial Advocate (with whom we were reluctantly obliged to couple him). . . extend to him the olive branch and . . . receive him again within the pale of civilized society" (14 March 1829). Most of Thomson's opposition had been focused upon acts of LieutenantGovernor Maitland, whose rigid military mind and autocratic interference in politics had blocked progressive legislation. His successor, Sir John Colborne, though equally conservative, was a man of more tact and independence, less influenced by members of the Family Compact. Thomson had presented a 218

H. PEARSON GUNDY

welcoming address to him on his first visit to Kingston, and was prepared to give him reasonable support. In his address to the Parliament of 1830, Sir John referred specifically to the need for a penitentiary and expressed the hope that the Assembly would take steps to bring forward a bill. As no action had been taken on the resolution Thomson had sponsored three years earlier, he now moved once more, seconded by William Morris, that a select committee be appointed to consider the question. He was made chairman and within a month brought in a preliminary report. The aim of a penitentiary, the report stated, was not only to protect society and punish offenders, but by inducing a penitent attitude in prisoners to effect a reformation of their character. They should be given productive work to do, the proceeds from which would help to defray the cost of the institution. Kingston was considered to be the most eligible site because it was protected by a garrison and strong fortification; land was available on the lakefront with water in abundance and an inexhaustible supply of limestone for quarrying—the most suitable work for prisoners.21 The report was adopted unanimously and Thomson was appointed with John Macaulay a commissioner to visit penal institutions in the United States, collect information, and procure plans and estimates of cost. The two friends, once political opponents but now united in a common cause, visited three penitentiaries in New York State and one in Connecticut. They would have gone farther afield had not an outbreak of Asiatic cholera sent them scurrying back home. They were most impressed by the institution at Albany on which Sing-Sing was modelled—a separate cell for each prisoner, good ventilation, cleanliness, wholesome food, strict discipline, a rule of silence, and collective hard labour. Their report was a lengthy one, appending a large body of correspondence, plans, and estimates.22 The house acted upon it, 13 February 1833, providing £12,500 over three years to build the penitentiary, and appointing Thomson, Macaulay, and Henry Smith commissioners to purchase the site and oversee construction. The following June they bought a 100-acre site a mile west of Kingston for the sum of £1,000.23 One wing was to be ready to receive inmates by the spring of 1835. This was Thomson's greatest achievement, for he had taken the first initiative, had kept up interest in the project in the Upper Canada Herald when it seemed to languish in the Assembly, renewed the campaign vigorously with Colborne's encouragement, made on the spot investigations, gained expert knowledge, kept a watchful eye on building operations, and shortly before his last illness was largely responsible for drawing up a comprehensive act for the administrative structure and maintenance of the institution. Henry Smith, who coveted the post of warden, freely admitted to the civil secretary that he considered Thomson's claims "paramount to those 219

HUGH c. THOMSON: EDITOR AND POLITICIAN of any other person," but wished his name to stand if Thomson turned down the position. As fate would have it, death intervened and Smith got the appointment by reversion. But although the penitentiary was his chief concern during the four sessions of the llth parliament, Thomson was kept busy in other ways as well. He chaired a banking committee and served on another looking into question of currency, sponsored a bill to provide a police force for Kingston, and rapped Mackenzie over the knuckles when called upon to give evidence before the committee on printing to which Mackenzie had applied for a supplementary grant. Asked if the request was reasonable, he replied shortly, "Most certainly not!"24 Mackenzie didn't forget the rebuff and when, a few months later, Thomson was appointed deputy crown clerk and commissioner of the Court of Requests for the Midland District, the Colonial Advocate remonstrated: "Who would have expected to see reforming Thomson installed a tory deputy clerk of the crown and justice of the quorum, and employed in defending a permanent vote of the last shilling of the public revenue!" (26 May 1831). At the midsummer assizes Thomson served as foreman of the grand jury in a murder case, and later filled for a short time the position of chairman of the Quarter Sessions. Perhaps his most painful experience, as a member of parliament, was the action he took in seconding a motion of J. H. Sampson in December 1831 to expel W. L. Mackenzie for having characterized the Assembly in his newspaper as "a sycophantic office for registering the decrees of as mean and mercenary an executive as was ever given as the punishment for the sins of any part of North America in the nineteenth century" (24 November 1831). Bidwell made an abortive attempt to have the matter referred to a committee with power to inquire whether any other libels on the house had been published. Mackenzie was then called upon to defend his conduct. He spoke all afternoon until adjournment and continued all the next day, quoting dozens of defamatory statements from the Tory press that had been passed over in silence, and turning on his enemies one after the other. Thomson he denounced as a turncoat "who has openly abandoned the principles which procured him a seat on this floor and a silver cup elsewhere." "Surely, Mr. Speaker," he continued, "the Scriptural advice offered to him that standeth, that he take heed lest he fall is deserving of deep consideration when we see the editor of the Kingston Herald ranged among the persecutors of the Press!" Here he was interrupted by indignant shouts of "Order! Order!" It was a desperate ordeal for all concerned, perhaps less so for Mackenzie who was a better commander in the war of words than he later proved to be in the field. On 13 December the motion for his expulsion was carried 27 to 12. 220

H. PEARSON GUNDY

"Anyone," said Thomson editorially, "who attentively peruses the documents . . . must applaud the proceedings of the House of Assembly which without compromising its dignity and the rights of the people could not suffer so reckless a slanderer to retain his seat" (19 December 1831). To which Mackenzie retorted in the Advocate: "If Mr. Thomson was not a canting, miserable hypocrite but a sincere public writer and legislator during the first 8 years of his political life, what appelation can be too degrading for him now" (22 December 1831). But Thomson's time was running out. When the fourth session of the llth parliament met in November 1833 he was a sick man. He managed to move the bill for the maintenance of the penitentiary on 4 December; it was seconded by Attorney General Boulton and carried. On the 19th he was appointed to a committee on the Kingston General Hospital, and on the 20th gave the first reading of a bill in which he took a keen personal interest, the Midland District School Society Amendment Bill. It was his last act in the House of Assembly. With a heavy cough and a persistent fever, he took to bed and a few days later suffered a haemorrhage of the lungs. Robert Stanton wrote at once to John Macaulay: "Thomson, poor fellow, has had a most serious attack . . . the vomiting of blood has had two or three returns . . . I shall sit up with him myself tonight as he seems low in spirits and dejected unless some acquaintance is near him. Mrs. T. has been written to and I dare say is now on the way here . . . and this morning I sent for his brother Edward."25 A month later he was able to report that Thomson had taken a carriage ride and was seeing various members of the House on penitentiary business. At the beginning of April when navigation opened, he was taken back to Kingston, but his condition suddenly took a turn for the worse, and on St. George's Day, 23 April 1834, he died. Mrs. Thomson's brother, who was with him when the end came, wrote to a friend in Adolphustown that "he died the death of a Christian without moving a finger and praising God to the last."26 A long obituary in the Chronicle reviewed his career, emphasizing his efforts in establishing the penitentiary of which, had he lived, "he would in all probability have been appointed Governor," and deprecating the calumnies he had had to suffer. "In his private life," the obituary concludes, "the deceased was universally esteemed. He was a warm and faithful friend; an obliging and kind neighbor, and a most affectionate husband and father. . . 'Not as the fool dieth, did he prepare for eternity', but literally his end was peace" (26 April 1834). In a comparatively short life, Hugh Christopher Thomson achieved much and deserves to be remembered. As a businessman in York, Niagara, and Kingston he gained a reputation for integrity and resourcefulness; in the 221

HUGH c. T H O M S O N : E D I T O R AND POLITICIAN social and religious life of the community he played a prominent part. Through the Upper Canada Herald he raised journalism in the province to a higher level than it had achieved before his time; testimony to his editorial fairness and independence was paid not only by fellow townsmen but by outsiders as well. As a publisher he issued the first volume of verse and the first prose fiction in Upper Canada in addition to numerous tracts for the times. In public life he strove always for social and economic betterment and as a skilful committeeman served his constituents and the country to the best of his ability. He had a shrewd sense of the forces that sway the popular mind and mould public opinion, and in veering away from the extreme left he carried his readers and constituents with him as a representative man of his times. It cannot be said that he forsook his principles which were always those of independent judgment and moderation. Finally, his crowning achievement was the establishment in Upper Canada of a better and more humane penal system.

222

Municipal Government and Politics, 1800–1850 G E O R G E M. BETTS

At the beginning of the nineteenth century—only sixteen years after the arrival of the first Loyalists—Kingston was still very much a frontier community, in size hardly more than a village. A map dated 1801 shows only about one hundred houses.1 Apparently the number of houses did not increase substantially before the War of 1812. In addition it seems probable that the population of the Kingston urban area was considerably less than one thousand until the war caused a great expansion.2 How was the little urban community of Kingston governed? In 1800 "local government" was the responsibility of the justices of the peace meeting four times a year in the court of quarter sessions, which undertook limited judicial, legislative, and administrative duties.3 The judicial functions were largely concerned with maintaining the peace; legislative functions with controlling the wandering of domestic animals and conditions for holding tavern licences; administrative functions with appointing minor officials and the laying out and superintending of the highways in the district.4 Even this limited degree of local government was not obtained without an effort on the part of the early settlers, United Empire Loyalists who had migrated to Canada before, during, and after the American War of Independence.5 The newcomers had long been accustomed to British laws and institutions as well as a considerable degree of local self-government in the colonies from which they had come.6 Those settling in the western portion of the province (which included Kingston) found commissioners or justices of the peace with summary powers both individually and collectively. As settlement continued additional justices of the peace were appointed for these localities. However, no provision was made at first for a local court system. In fact the arrangements for dispensing justice were totally inadequate and great inconveniences resulted. In all matters not permitted to be disposed of in a 223

MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

summary manner by one or more magistrates, the only recourse was to the courts at Montreal. As a result there were various protests and petitions from settlers for some form of local courts and administration. They objected strongly to a system under which they were subject to the prevailing French civil law or to the system of land tenure provided by the Quebec Act. In 1785 they petitioned for the settlement above Montreal to be constituted a separate district distinct from the province of Quebec. Then in 1785 an ordinance was passed by the governor and council which partially remedied this unsatisfactory state of affairs. It granted the justices of the peace in remote parts of the province limited civil power and jurisdiction.7 At length a further ordinance was passed in April 1787 which allowed the governor and commander in chief for the time being, with the advice and consent of the council, to form at his discretion one or more districts and to commission such government officers for these districts as would be necessary for the convenience of His Majesty's subjects residing in the remote parts of the province.8 Information of this intended additional relief was apparently conveyed to the magistrates of the new settlements by Sir John Johnson who had general supervision of the western territory. In a letter from the magistrates to Sir John, dated Cataraqui (later Kingston), 22 December 1787, the concession is gratefully acknowledged and further improvements suggested.9 The magistrates appeared very sympathetic to the settlers' grievances with regard to the lack of judicial and administrative facilities near at hand and recommended on their behalf the establishment of local courts with both criminal and civil jurisdiction. They also suggested that English law be substituted for French civil law and that officers be appointed or elected in the several townships to see that the necessary roads be opened and kept in proper repair and that overseers of the poor be appointed.10 The following year the governor, Lord Dorchester, by virtue of the power conferred upon him by the 1787 ordinance, issued a proclamation dividing the new settlements to the west of the French limits above Montreal into four districts, from east to west—Lunenburgh, Mecklenburgh, Nassau, and Hesse, which extended from Lake St. Francis in the east to the Detroit river in the west.11 By 1800, owing to the expansion of settlement, the districts had been subdivided to provide for four additional districts: Johnstown, Niagara, London, and Newcastle. Each district had a court of common pleas consisting of three judges, justices of the peace, a sheriff, a clerk for the court of common pleas and of the sessions of the peace, and coroners for each district. The courts of quarter sessions began their meetings the following year, the first being held in Kingston for the District of Mecklenburgh on Tuesday, 14 April 1789. 224

GEORGE BETTS

As the population increased and problems demanding local decisions multiplied, more powers for the management of local affairs were added to the duties of the court of quarter sessions, the only existing medium by which such matters could be handled. But the settlers remained dissatisfied with the system of local administration. Following the passing of the Constitutional Act of 1791, which established Upper Canada as a separate province with English civil law and a freehold system of land tenure, the first bill introduced in the first session of the new Parliament of 1792 was intended to provide for representative municipal institutions similar to those in the adjoining United States, by authorizing town meetings for the purpose of appointing various town officers.12 In fact, this system appears to have been in operation already among several of the Loyalist settlements, for example the township of Adolphustown where it had sprung spontaneously into existence.13 Thus, shortly after the passing of the 1791 Act, Adolphustown records show that the township meeting elected certain township officers, namely a town clerk, two constables, two overseers of the poor, "three pound officers," to take charge of stray animals, and two "fence viewers." It also passed by-laws to control animals and fencing and to punish negligence in burning off the land.14 However, the bill introduced to legalize and extend this procedure was not passed. Governor Simcoe was frankly opposed to anything that savoured of American democracy and was appalled when such people as Hon. Richard Cartwright pressed for the most moderate measures of local self-government. A counterbill was introduced authorizing the justices of the peace to appoint various public officers, but this did not pass either. The following year a compromise act15 was passed providing for the nomination and appointment of parish and town officers. This merely permitted the ratepayers to elect certain executive town officers (a clerk, two assessors, a collector, a number of overseers of highways, fence viewers, a pound keeper, and two town wardens)16 whose duties were either prescribed by the act or left to be regulated by quarter sessions. Beyond permission to fix the height of fences the town meeting had no legislative function legally, the town officers being independent of each other and responsible to the magistrates, not to those who elected them.17 This act, while authorizing town meetings, effectively reduced all interest in them, except in such places as Adolphustown, where the limitations of the act were disregarded to a certain extent.18 In the records of the court of quarter sessions of the Midland District there are no references to town meetings in Kingston because the assembly of the inhabitants played no significant part in local government.19 The power to govern Kingston and the other little urban settlements at this time was thus totally in the hands of the resident magistrates and the district quarter sessions.20 In fact, "for years to come the Court of Quarter Sessions remained the only living centre of municipal affairs."21 225

M U N I C I P A L G O V E R N M E N T A N D POLITICS

However, "Kingston's growing position and prestige in the economic, social, military and naval life of Upper Canada gave the urban settlement a reasonable claim to a more advanced form of municipal organization than that of the township as a whole and of other townships."22 As a result the Hon. Richard Cartwright, chairman of the quarter sessions of the Midland District, submitted a draft bill to Governor Simcoe, for the town's incorporation. The municipal body was to consist of some persons appointed by the government and some elected by the inhabitants. The corporation was to have the power to regulate the police, take measures to prevent fires, provide public markets, determine the price of bread, improve and clean the streets, establish charges for carters, and have power to administer and dispose of the public domain.23 Simcoe was in favour of establishing municipal corporations but for an entirely different reason. Submitting the idea to the colonial secretary, the Duke of Portland, for prior approval (Simcoe had already envisaged that objections might be made to his scheme) he wrote: The towns of Kingston and that on the river Niagara from their situation must be places of great resort, . . . I think it would be for the public interest and the King's benefit that these places should be incorporated and named the cities of Kingston and Niagara; I should propose that the Corporation should consist of a Mayor and six aldermen, Justices of the Peace, ex-officio, and a competent number of common council, to be originally appointed by the Crown and that the succession to vacant seats might be made in such manner as to render the Elections as little popular as possible, meaning such Corporations to tend to the support of the Aristocracy of the country.24

However, the Duke of Portland had no use whatever for municipal corporations,25 and the following despatch from Osgoode reveals that he was by no means alone in his opinion: You suggest an idea of incorporation . . . the policy of such a measure after the experience we had at Home during Lord Shaftesbury's time and in the dawn of Jack Wilkes' patriotism, together with the conduct of the Mayor and Corporation of New York in the Colonies is no longer of Matter of Doubt. Repeated experience has proved it to be a most powerful Engine in the hands of an Unprincipled Demagogue—And in a free state every cunning Workman is happy to find such a Tool to make his Way in the World. The prevailing Opinion is that Charters do not tend to promote but rather to check Trade and Manufacture, they are useful for purposes of Police—but more useful for the purpose of Faction—It was one of the few Subjects on which I spoke to Mr. Dundas—he did not approve of Incorporations. Nor does your humble servant for Reasons aforsd.26

The inability of the courts of quarter sessions to provide adequate local 226

GEORGE BETTS

government in the small urban centres only gradually became apparent. By virtue of their general and ill-defined police powers the quarter sessions were able to provide for most of the little villages' and towns' needs, for example, for the abatement of nuisances, the maintenance of streets, and the prevention of fires. In addition, to support the general powers a few special enactments were obtained. Thus, in 1801, a market was established by statute in Kingston, a method that was subsequently followed for all subsequent markets, the power to regulate and to prescribe a fine of 20s. for breach of regulations being given to the quarter sessions of the Midland District.27 However, by 1815 it was becoming obvious that as a town Kingston left much to be desired. A resident writing to the Kingston Gazette in December 1815 observes of Kingston: possessing so many advantages it is time that its inhabitants adopt some plan of improving and embellishing it. The streets require very grave repairs as in the rainy season it is scarcely possible to move about without being in mud to the ankles; footpaths ought to be paved, at least in the parts of the town where the buildings are connected. . . . There is a need for lamps to light the streets at night. To embellish the town (for few towns have finer streets) trees might be planted on both sides of the streets—it would have a fine effect and be a very great ornament. . . streets should be kept free of lumber of every description. Among the wants of the town—an engine (fire) with the necessary pipes and a certain number of buckets for the preservation of property. . . . That obtained a company of firemen will be wanted who will have it in charge, learn to work and manage it and be ready at all times to transport it to the spot where wanted. But before these various improvements can be carried into effect the legislature must furnish the town with a code of laws forming a complete police for its internal government and commissioners with sufficient authority to enforce them by fine or otherwise. For all these purposes funds will no doubt be required; to procure them the legislature might lay a rate upon every inhabitant householder in proportion to the value of his property within the town . . . that these general objects may be obtained the legislature ought to be petitioned at their next sitting to have a bill passed for that purpose.28

Other letters in similar vein followed. It was generally conceded that the leaders of society had shown a liberal spirit in contributing toward turnpiking the roads and paving the footpaths before their own front doors. However, as one correspondent expressed it, "what is necessary is that this spirit be infused into the lower ranks and induce them to imitate though faintly that noble and generous example."29 Having shown initiative in getting a statutory market, Kingston took the lead in obtaining more police powers to be exercised within the town by quarter sessions,30 although the lack of evidence suggests that in all likelihood 227

MUNICIPAL G O V E R N M E N T AND POLITICS

it was the result of necessity as much as through agitation by Kingston residents. In any event the Kingston Police Act was passed in 1816.31 A summary of some of the provisions of this act illustrate the rather wider meaning of "police" than the current one of law enforcement. It gave the quarter sessions, among other things, authority to make prudential "rules and regulations" relative to paving, keeping in repair and improving the streets, slaughter horses and nuisances, the inspection of weights and measures, firemen and fire companies,32 the enforcement of town laws respecting the running at large of animals, and the authority to impose fines of up to 40s. for the breach of such regulations. In addition the quarter sessions were given the authority to levy a sum not exceeding £100 a year on the inhabitants of Kingston for fire equipment and any other necessary improvement.33 This act served as a model for similar acts for several other towns. From time to time its provisions were altered; for example, in 1824 the Midland quarter sessions were given power to regulate the assize of bread for Kingston (and also the harbour of Kingston). Apparently some difficulty developed in enforcing the rules of the court for Kingston, for it was provided that where any person, after 24 hours notice left in writing at his home, failed to perform any service required by a rule of the quarter sessions, any justice or constable was to employ someone else for a reasonable consideration which the offender was to pay, in addition to his fine.34 In 1822 the Midland quarter sessions ordered that "there shall be established in the Town of Kingston, eighteen carmen, who shall keep good and sufficient horses, carts, sleighs and tacking and shall have the exclusive privilege of carrying loads with wheel carriages or sleighs for pay within the town of Kingston." The carmen were placed under the direction of "the police officer" and rates were laid down for different distances.35 The grant of explicit powers and an additional taxing authority undoubtedly injected new vigour into Kingston local government. This can be seen from the use of these powers. For example, the Midland District quarter sessions imposed penalties for galloping along, or digging holes in, the streets of Kingston and for leaving wood, sleighs, and filth on them. To prevent fire it prescribed the equipment and precautions to be used by householders and shopkeepers and authorized a number of persons to act as special constables, organized into squads and divisions, with the special duty of enforcing the orders of magistrates during fires. Malt kilns were required to be inspected for fire hazards by the "police officer."36 For at least a decade after the Kingston Act was obtained there was little or no demand for elective institutions.37 But the Kingston model as a "police" town did not escape criticism. The quarter sessions issued market regulations for Kingston. It ordered for example that "no bartender, huckster or any 228

GEORGE BETTS

other person whatsoever, shall be allowed to purchase, within the Town of Kingston any butchers' Meat, Poultry, Butter, Cheese, Eggs, Fish or any kind of vegetables for the purpose of selling again, before the hour of twelve o'clock under penalty of fine."38 However, it was easy enough to issue such regulations but it was another matter to enforce them. After fraudulent dealings in hay had been detected the following comment appeared in the Kingston Chronicle: It is surprising that in the year 1823, the Market of this town should remain without any regulations. To protect the fair dealer, and detect the fraudulent one, it is the object of all established regulations for markets and without them it is impossible that those who have the supply in their hands can meet with that encouragement which alone secures competition. There is a clerk of the market, but what is his use? There is also a numerous magistracy, and why have they not made the wanted regulations?—Are they too busy with their own concerns? Is it from supineness, or is it from want of information on this subject? If from the latter reason, they might not be ashamed to seek it from those more enlightened brethren of the Lower Province, where the police is on a much more active and better footing. At a time when our town is becoming daily more extensive by substantial and handsome buildings our market remains in the same confused state that we may suppose it to have been in fifty years ago. How creditable to our magistrates?39

The additional taxing power was the key to whatever success was achieved in Kingston and the other "police" towns.40 But opposition to increased taxation combined with opposition to control by the magistrates kept the number of police towns down to five. By the late 1820s the movement for a different form of town government began, as local government by quarter sessions became increasingly unsatisfactory. Kingston was in the forefront of the agitation. A public meeting was held in the Court House in Kingston on Boxing Day 1828, the main purpose of which was to seek incorporation for the town.41 Having first agreed that the authority now 'Vested by law in the Justices of the Court of General Quarter Sessions of the Peace in and for the Midland District to make and administer by-laws and regulations for the police of the town of Kingston and the blending of funds and accounts of the town with those of the District in the hands of the District Treasurer was both inconvenient and unsatisfactory,"42 the meeting proceeded to frame a series of eight resolutions. It was proposed that in addition to the incidental powers of incorporation the municipality should be given the power of purchasing lands without the King's licence and of enforcing by-laws by fine and imprisonment.43 At an annual meeting the assessed householders were to elect twenty-four burgesses who in turn were to elect seven of their number as councillors, one 229

MUNICIPAL G O V E R N M E N T AND POLITICS

of whom was to preside as chairman of the corporation.44 Voting was to be by ballot of bona fide local taxpayers. The council was to have the power to appoint a town clerk, treasurer, assessor, collector, town crier, and constables, and would establish and regulate fire companies. No additional taxes were to be imposed upon inhabitants except by an act of the legislature or petition by the corporation. The rents and funds received by the trustees of the market property were to be paid annually to the new corporation. Most important the council was to be required to publish a current annual statement of "police taxes and all other monies, funds and accounts" in the town's newspapers.45 Kingstonians were not, it seems, universally in favour of the petition. There was, for instance, controversy over voting requirements. An amendment to the effect that all householders paying an annual rent of £10 (including leaseholders) who were qualified by law to vote for the House of Assembly should be entitled to vote in choosing a town council was approved by the majority of the electors present but lost by the meeting. As a result many eminently respectable electors, including David J. Smith, the chairman, and Thomas Kirkpatrick, the secretary, refused to sign the petition on account of the amendment not having been adopted—an early example of grass roots democracy in action.46 In addition it was claimed in some quarters that the petition was largely organized through the influence of a few partisans and that signatures had not been obtained spontaneously without undue influence.47 In the event the whole affair was a storm in a tea cup, a bill embodying the proposals passing through the Assembly only to be negated by the Legislative Council. The widespread disagreement over points of detail (i.e. the franchise, terms and qualifications for office, method of election, etc.) in demanding incorporation for Kingston was mirrored in other urban centres. In fact it has been argued that these differences delayed for some years the establishment of separate urban authorities and that, for example, the Act of 1832 setting up a board of police in Brockville—the first really important breach in the monopoly of the justices of the peace over local government—was obtained only after much bickering.48 The movement to incorporate Kingston begun in 1828 did not achieve success until 1838 when Kingston was incorporated as a town with a mayor and corporation.49 This in spite of the fact that in the interim Hamilton (1833), Belleville, Cornwall, Prescott, Port Hope (1834), Cobourg, and Picton (1837) all obtained incorporated boards of police elected by adult male inhabitant householders who were British subjects and freeholders. These boards took over the local government functions previously undertaken by the quarter sessions and magistrates. In addition Toronto, not satisfied with a mere board of police, was incorporated as a city in 1834. 230

GEORGE BETTS

Why was Kingston so backward in obtaining a form of representative local government when initially it had been so much in the forefront in its demand for municipal change? Basically, Kingstonians could not agree whether incorporation would be an advantage to the community or not. They had seen the gestation of the York corporation and were unimpressed. Those against the idea were undoubtedly aware of the arguments conducted prior to the incorporation of York: that York was too small for a corporation—commerce and manufactures had to grow and attract a more dense and intelligent community, independent of, and too powerful for the tools of office, before a corporation could be safely established;50 that the change would be in the interest of the official compact and not the ordinary citizens who would be paying through increased taxation for a valueless corporation. Some citizens might have echoed the views of the editor of the Canadian Freeman, an extreme reformer, who wrote: If we are to have a Corporation at all let it be on liberal terms—let the poor have a voice in it as well as the rich, particularly as they are to be taxed for its support. We admit that our present police system is bad and calls out for amendment—but we would rather put up with it a little longer, bad as it is and endeavour to improve it, than to plunge the town into a gaudy, expensive and exclusive system of incorporation, by which the rich would be benefitted at the expense of the poor, and which might give to a set of rich, plump and lazy Aldermen the power of feasting on our industry, and grinding us down with taxation, to be appropriated as their caprice or sinister views might direct. We have seen enough of the vain pomp, gaudy display, extravagant equipage and grinding taxation of corporations in the old country to make us almost tremble at the name. Besides we think that this town is too young to bear such a burthen.51

In the event a petition from 105 freeholders and 102 householders of Kingston was sent to C. A. Hagerman, who represented Kingston in the House of Assembly, setting out the objections to incorporation and asking him to give it his support. He was glad to do so. Addressing his constituents through the medium of the local press in February 1836, he wrote: No memorial has been sent to me from any of my constituents praying for an act of incorporation for the town; neither am I informed that it is intended to do so. But should I receive one I shall feel myself bound to oppose it. In a matter seriously affecting the interests of every individual inhabitant of Kingston I should hesitate to act in opposition to the remonstrances of even a respectable minority. I should think it easier and safer to wait until all parties could agree on some measure that, when put into operation would be cordially received and acted upon by everyone. . . . I do not believe that the cumbrous and expensive machinery (if I may use the term) of a 231

MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

corporation, such as is established in this city (Toronto) is at all calculated to advance the prosperity of any place either in a pecuniary or social point of view, and I earnestly hope that when my constituents decide on a change in the laws by which the town is at presently governed they will devise a scheme that will combine simplicity, economy and efficiency. I do not think that any of these three principles are to be found in the Act incorporating the city of Toronto.52 However, a measure of agreement on the best means of incorporation was never reached; instead, as one writer observed, it was "obtained by stealth."53 Under the caption "Incorporation of Kingston," the British Whig wrote: Our town readers will be astounded at the caption of this scrap but they will nevertheless find 'more truth than poetry' in the matter. The Kingston big boys have smuggled the Incorporation of the town through both branches of the legislature, without one hundredth part of the inhabitants knowing anything about the matter. The provision of the Act we have not seen, but presume we shall have the usual quantity of Mayors, Aldermen, Common Councilmen and all that sort of thing. Although we object to the manner in which this Act has been passed, yet we are friendly to the measure itself. The town of Kingston ought to have been incorporated long ago, and we are glad it is incorporated now. The said big boys thought so too, and as sick children are used, they administered the physic clandestinely.54 At the subsequent election the "said big boys" received their just desserts. As the British Whig reported after the elections: The Municipal Elections have terminated and the Common Council of the town is chosen. The big boys have been routed hand and foot. In no single ward did they show their faces so deep was the indignation raised against them for having incorporated the town contrary to the wishes and knowledge of the inhabitants. Notwithstanding those gentry retired from any personal contest there was stiff opposition in two of the wards to put in their nominees. They were defeated. In the other two wards the contest was chiefly national—the Irish were the victors. Every Irishman who put up was returned and the council consists of six Irishmen and two English—all good men and true, although as the Canadian exclusives would call them they are all foreigners.55 In the main, Kingston's Act of Incorporation was a replica, in remarkable detail, of the Toronto Act as amended in 1837.56 Like Toronto all the inhabitants of Kingston were incorporated but only as the "Commonalty of the Town of Kingston."57 The act provided for the division of the town into four wards each of which was to elect one alderman and one common councilman;58 both aldermen and councilmen were elected for four-year terms with one-fourth of

232

GEORGE BETTS

them retiring annually—partial renewal with a vengeance. The mayor was to be chosen by the council from duly qualified inhabitants.59 Neither aldermen, councillors, nor mayor were to receive any salary; in addition, the council was given authority to punish its members for disorderly behaviour and to expel a member convicted of an infamous crime. The right to vote was highly circumscribed by the act, one of the reasons possibly why many Kingstonians objected to it.60 Voters were required to be registered on the voters list, to have a yearly residential qualification in the town, and to be possessed for three months prior to registration as male freeholders and householders, of a town lot and dwelling house within the ward in which the election was to be held, assessed at a yearly value of £10. Voters were also required to have actually paid the rents and taxes at the time of registration. The clerk of the common council was required to make alphabetical lists for each ward of those entitled to vote by the first Monday in December of each year and a court of three members of the council with power to expunge and insert names was required to sit to hear objections at least once a week from 10 A.M. to 4 P.M.61 The new corporation was given various necessary powers by the incorporating act. It could only borrow in anticipation of five years revenue (except for borrowing funds required for a new market building, the city hall) unless authorized by statute; all assessable property, including animals and vehicles, was to be assessed at its yearly or rental value. All houses, shops, warehouses, and other buildings, and the land on which they stood, were to be assessed according to the real "rack rent" or full yearly value, as ascertained annually by the assessors, subject to appeal to a court of five appointed by the council from its own members. Then as now Crown property was exempted. All other land was "vacant" land and the yearly value of such land and that of vehicles and animals was fixed arbitrarily. Thus the act laid down that the first half-acre of a piece of land "being a separate tenement" was valued at £5 of its yearly value, under an acre £10, an acre and over £20; and so forth up the scale. The council was authorized to strike an annual rate provided that it did not exceed 6d. in the pound. Those males between the ages of 21 and 60 who did not possess ratable property and who formerly were liable to statute labour were required to pay a tax of 10s. per year. Council was empowered to appoint various officers of the corporation, including a clerk, a treasurer, and a high bailiff. They were to receive such salaries as the council thought proper, provided that they did not exceed £100 each. In addition a long "general powers" clause authorized the council to pass such laws as they decided proper from time to time, for the good of the town. Once the election was over the new council soon got down to business. At its first official meeting in April 1838 the council appointed various officers, 233

MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

appointed a subcommittee to devise various by-laws, and authorized the new clerk (N. Dawe) to proceed to Toronto to procure a copy of the Act of Incorporation and "any other such information as to the by-laws and regulations of the corporation of that city as he might consider useful."62 Alderman Greer was requested to wait upon the trustees of the market reserve and obtain from them a list of the lessees, the accounts of their several rents, and the terms and conditions and other particulars of their respective leases together with all accounts and documents relating thereto.63 Business completed, the council adjourned until the return of the clerk of the council from Toronto. During the next few years the hostility of many Kingstonians to the original Act of Incorporation did not appear to abate with the passage of time. On several occasions in the year following incorporation Kingstonians petitioned the legislature to repeal the act incorporating the town; with what turned out to be misplaced optimism one Kingston newspaper reported, "we learn this morning that the prayer of the petition has been attended to and that the Act of Incorporation has been consigned to the Tomb of all the Capulets,"64 retracting the statement publicly a few days later.65 However, it appeared that what the petitioners required was repeal of the incorporating act mainly in order to give time for the preparation of an amended act more suitable to the wants of Kingston.66 The representative for Kingston, C. A. Hagerman, was once again drawn into the controversy. He had been entrusted with the petition for the repeal of the act, but had been rather overtaken by events when an amendment to the incorporating act was passed.67 In a letter published for the information of his constituents, he said: "I regret to learn that the Act of Incorporation does not give general satisfaction; at the same time my constituents must acquit me of being the cause of any inconvenience arising to them from the adoption of the law as I was not consulted or applied to with respect to it."68 There were various reasons why some Kingstonians wished the original incorporating act repealed and a fresh start made with new municipal institutions operating under more favourable legislation. Since incorporation the elected council had not generally been considered a universal success and had been plagued with problems not all of its own making. For example, there had been disputed ward election results in both 1838 and 1839;69 accusations of imprudent, expensive and wasteful management70 had been made from time to time, and an examination of the corporation accounts by the collector of taxes respecting arrears of 1843 had confirmed citizens' worst fears. The Argus thought the disclosures showed "the gross neglect and incompetency which have always marked their [the council's] proceedings. Dissatisfaction of the public with the management of that body has loudly been expressed . . . 234

GEORGE BETTS

enough has been ascertained to demonstrate the absolute necessity of an instant and thorough reform in the management of our civic affairs?"71 In addition, the council was accused of failing to conform with the enabling act by not publishing the corporation accounts annually and it was alleged that aldermen and councillors had misappropriated public money for their own purposes.72 In 1838 the mayor, Thomas Kirkpatrick, had resigned his position for living outside the town limits in contravention of the act and in 1840 charges were preferred against the unfortunate clerk of the council, N. Dawe, who was accused of being unfit for his duties due to gross intemperance.73 Another controversial item concerning the council was the question of whether or not Lot 24 (the village of Stuartsville) was to be annexed to the town.74 The council promoted petitions within the lot in favour of annexation and wanted to parcel it out among the different wards.75 The inhabitants of the ward were sharply divided. They were mainly composed of "mechanics and labouring men who were at first mainly induced to settle there in order that with some inconvenience they might escape the Police Tax at that not a heavy burthen."76 They were strenuously opposed to annexation, but others, claiming that they were taxed heavily by the Midland District, for which they got little in return, were equally anxious for annexation.77 There was a great deal of concern also over the lack of an efficient police force in a garrison town where there were so many soldiers, boatmen, and sailors, and where, on Kingston becoming the capital, there had been a sudden increase in population along with the influx of a large number of transients. In 1841J. S. Cartwright introduced a measure providing for the appointment of a stipendiary magistrate,78 and when that failed for simple lack of time in the House of Assembly, the council resolved to establish a police force in the town to consist of one chief constable (who was also to be the high bailiff) and a number of sub-constables not to exceed six in number. Matters concerning both the inadequacies of the town council and the incorporating act came to a head at a town meeting held in Kingston in March 1846,79 for the prime purpose of adopting measures for processing a new and more satisfactory act of incorporation. It was not the first time that such a meeting had been held. As already mentioned, abortive attempts had previously been made to repeal the act and to obtain incorporation for Kingston as a city.80 But it was now felt that the time had come when the affairs of the town must force themselves on the attention of the inhabitants with some urgency. The first task of the meeting was to ascertain the state of the town finances. Although official corporation figures were unavailable, Mr. Hill (a recently resigned councillor) had obtained some figures which showed that it 235

MUNICIPAL G O V E R N M E N T AND POLITICS

was high time to remedy such an unfortunate state of affairs.81 It was conceded at the meeting that the act of incorporation was a bad one in many respects and in some instances operated injuriously on the town; for example, about half the taxes levied on the inhabitants were by law required to be paid into the Midland District treasury for district expenses. This was felt to be an extreme hardship.82 The citizens of Toronto by law paid only £400 a year into the treasury of the Home District for a gaol and courthouse, while the citizens of Kingston, a town with a much smaller population and a smaller revenue, had been paying into their district about £1,000 a year for the last eight years. It was observed that the district was out of debt and did not need the money whereas Kingston needed all its revenue. In any case Kingston was taxed for the district although it had no representation on the district council—another act of injustice.83 John A. Macdonald, also recently resigned from the town council,84 stressed that one bad feature of the existing act of incorporation was the fact that it only provided for eight council members. He felt that the number of council members should be increased under any new act of incorporation. In addition, it was of great inconvenience to council members that present legislation laid it down that without two aldermen, two common councilmen, and the mayor present (five out of a total of nine representatives), there was no quorum. Macdonald stressed that once Kingstonians had completed their deliberations regarding the changes needed in a new act of incorporation he would use every exertion to steer it through both Houses of Parliament.85 Henry Smith (the member for Frontenac County) drew attention to two additional disadvantages of the existing incorporating act. The absence of any provision for a proper assessment meant that rates were most unequally levied and thus formed a fruitful source of complaint;86 in addition, the fact that only a quarter of the councillors retired annually was a great evil; he was in favour of the whole retiring at the same time; he felt that if council members who had faithfully served their constituents should choose to stand for re-election they would be re-elected. On being put to the meeting, this suggestion—the annual election of all council members—elicited unanimous approval.87 Macdonald was as good as his word and in April 1846 introduced a bill to incorporate Kingston as a city.88 He fought hard to see that those provisions which the majority of interested Kingstonians had agreed on were incorporated in it.89 In this respect he was not entirely successful; for example, the bill fixed one qualification of electors (among others) as the possession of a freehold or the tenancy of a town lot or dwelling assessed at the yearly value of ten pounds. Macdonald pointed out in the course of the debate that he had received instructions from his constituents to have this qualification reduced 236

GEORGE BETTS

to £7.10s. However, as the Whig reported, "The House would not listen to the proposed reduction—not one member could be found in favour of the change."90 However, most of the provisions agreed on at the public meeting and submitted to Macdonald for inclusion in the bill were obtained. Thus council was both increased in size and elected annually. Two aldermen and two councillors were to be elected annually in each of five wards, Sydenham, Ontario, St. Lawrence, Cataraqui, and Frontenac, instead of one each. The mayor was to be elected from the aldermen by the council instead of from the inhabitants at large. He was to receive a salary not exceeding £100 if the council saw fit to grant it. He was to preside at city council meetings and was to have a casting vote in the event of a tie, in addition to his vote as a council member. A majority of the members of council were to form a quorum including the mayor and if the mayor was absent then the council were to choose an alderman to be their chairman. The most significant change was the exclusion of the district rates. In lieu of such rates the city was to pay the district council the sum of £300 annually until it had built its own gaol for which it was empowered to borrow £5,000. Other reforms included the raising of the maximum rate to ls.6d. in the pound, exclusive of the tax for common schools and the lunatic asylum tax; the introduction of a business franchise; the introduction of a new leasehold qualification, and a slight reduction in the qualifications for aldermen and councillors. Only the mayor was made a justice of the peace, although the council members as well as the mayor were empowered to arrest rogues and vagabonds and imprison them for one month.91 Kingston thus became a city under an incorporating act which appeared to be a great improvement over the previous one. It might have been expected that Kingstonians would have been only too anxious to get the infant city off to a good start with an energetic election campaign by candidates well qualified for office, the winners providing an intelligent and enthusiastic first city council. However, as one citizen warned his fellow Kingstonians: It is just seven years ago since the expiring Act of Incorporation became law. Every inhabitant will testify that during the major portion of that period the Common Council has been composed in the most unsatisfactory manner . . . the grand error committed by the people of the town under the now expiring system was the utter indifference manifested by the respectable portion of the community at the first elections. No one cared who was coming out or who was first returned. Through this indifference a leaven was introduced which has always clung to the body. The operation of the old system fostered the evil and all subsequent exertions in different 237

MUNICIPAL G O V E R N M E N T AND POLITICS

wards have not entirely overcome it. For the last two years we have been sweating under the apathy of 1837—the common council have been condemned and despised and we have ourselves to blame . . . no more important elections will ever occur than those in ... June.92

As yet another correspondent reminded citizens: For want of due caution on the part of the people on former occasions our financial affairs are so much bungled it will take some of the wisest heads in Kingston to put them in order. I am quite surprised to hear that some of the men who aided in the confusion of our pecuniary affairs are again in the field. . . . I hope there is sufficient good sense among us to reject the men who appoint collectors and did not exact from them a proper account of the public money. . . . We are all interested in the good government of the town; every blunder the council commits falls upon us all; every farthing unaccounted for the people will have to pay; every person evading the just portion of his taxes causes others to pay more. We therefore should take a more lively interest in seeking upright and straight-forward men; should we fail in this the blame will be at our own doors. Let us put in men of intelligence who will not soil their fingers with the public money and who can afford to devote a portion of their time to the service of the town. By doing so we will raise ourselves from the depressed position we now occupy to the more elevated one we ought to attain.93

In the event the Kingston electors did not bestir themselves; as the Argus remarked, "the election passed off very quietly,"94 with little sign of vigorous campaigning, despite the traditional fighting qualities of the voters, the majority of whom were Irish or of Irish extraction. In the five city wards Ontario ward seems to have been the scene of the only real contest in the whole election. Of the twenty new members elected it was claimed that the Kingston Irish voters had combined to elect sixteen of them and the Irish could have elected the whole body if they had wanted to.95 Of the new council only Messrs. Counter, Thibodo, Brent, and Hunter were not Irish. In spite of the preponderance of Irish, however, one of the four outsiders was chosen as mayor. At the inaugural meeting following the election the council elected a mayor from among its own members by open voting. There were two nominees, John Counter and Henry Benson, the former winning the office by one vote.96 It is hardly surprising that many merchants and professional men were reluctant to run for municipal office in view of the state of the infant city's public affairs. Change of municipal status in itself, even under a more benevolent incorporating act, was no panacea; what was required to solve Kingston's problems was vigorous and resolute action by its new council; initially at least, however, the leadership required did not appear to be forthcoming. It was 238

27 Mayor John Counter, 1842

MUNICIPAL G O V E R N M E N T AND POLITICS

almost as if incorporation had been regarded as an end in itself, rather than as a means to an end. The new council did not commence its term of office in a convincing manner. Too many of the weekly meetings were adjourned for want of a quorum; much time was spent discussing trivia or whether council should adjourn; in general, council procedure was conspicuous by its absence. As the Argus reported after one council meeting, "squabbling at the council last night was even worse than at its previous meeting. We would recommend for the council to advertise for some person to teach them to address one another with becoming courtesy—a schoolmaster is very much needed among them."97 However, later in the month it appeared that the council was beginning to mend its ways. Members started to behave with greater courtesy and dispatch. One newspaper commented that "it had great hopes of them."98 It was just as well; the council could not afford to waste time on inessentials as problems of moment began to come crowding in on them. The most outstanding problems were, needless to say, financial ones, largely inherited from their predecessors. First, the new city council commenced its labours under the burden of serious debt; for example, a deficiency of £3,000 in public funds had built up over the past three years, owing partly to lack of vigilance on the part of the tax collectors. Taxes in arrears for 1842-43 were still not collected by 1845 and the council found that its predecessors had made no provision for the assessment of taxes in 1846.99 It was thus hardly surprising that both the system of collection and of distribution of revenues was described at the time as being unsatisfactory and dangerous.100 Secondly, by far the most disturbing financial problem was the difficulty the council encountered in arranging a satisfactory settlement of a large outstanding debt with the Commercial Bank. Since 1842 the council had been exercised regarding arrangements for liquidating the English loan of £20,000 for the erection of the City Buildings. Unable to borrow sufficient money in Kingston, the then mayor, John Counter, had gone to London to negotiate a loan. The city treasurer had reported in June 1843 that he had "received notification from the Commercial Bank they have placed to our credit the sum of £23,919-9s.-5d., being the proceeds of the loan negotiated by His Worship the Mayor for £20,000 at 9 per cent premiums."101 Over the years the council had been unable to repay this sum, ostensibly because the cost of erecting the City Buildings had far exceeded the estimate and the annual assessment had been diminished by the losses and reduction in the value of the property consequent upon the unexpected removal of the seat of government from Kingston in 1844.102 The matter dragged on with a succession of injunctions, law suits, and meetings between the bank and the city; by late 1849 the debt had reached the huge sum of £40,500; however, eventually the city managed to make a settlement.103 240

GEORGE BETTS

In February 1849 the mayor revived the custom of presenting an annual address to the council. He listed the tasks which he believed faced the city in the future.104 These included the settlement of the city debt—it was imperative that annual expenditures be reduced if council were to be able to pay the Commercial Bank £3,500 a year in liquidation of its debt and interest; the annual assessment had been struck at ls.3d. in the pound exclusive of school tax. There was a need for a small tax for the support of the poor; in spite of the proposed reduction in expenditure, improvements of the city required some attention. The slope of many of the streets required altering because of the poor drainage; there was a need to change the type of material used in macadamizing the streets, and for sidewalks of stone rather than plank walks. Shade trees were needed at the edge of the walks and a public square or park was required. He was pleased that the organization of companies for supplying water and gas to the city was coming along and hoped that adequate debt arrangements could be made; the fire department required encouragement and was short of volunteers; a better plan was needed for the issuing of beer or victualling licences; the schedule for renting the town hall should be raised so that the valuable and expensive buildings could earn more revenue; there was a need for endowments for the general hospital. There was little, if any, criticism in the local press of this catalogue of worthy, if somewhat pedestrian by today's standards, municipal housekeeping tasks. In other words the corporation had rapidly come of age; it had become accepted; the time when there was controversy over whether there should be a corporation and what form it should take had long passed. Such controversy as there was no longer hinged around the idea of local selfgovernment but rather the means by which the municipality could improve the city for the benefit of its citizens. But there was no time for official complacency. Determined to obtain better terms for itself through improved legislation, a select committee was appointed to review the incorporating act and after due deliberation a revised bill was to be handed to the city member so that it could be laid before Parliament.105 The council resolution proved to be abortive, however, because at the same time, unknown to council, a much wider legislative measure was in process of formulation, a measure which, if enacted, would determine the whole structure of local government in Ontario for many years to come. For some time at the central government level it had been realized that the province badly needed a general municipal framework.106 The structure of local government in 1849 was complicated, rather inefficient, and still subject to widespread control by the central authorities. It was true that the District Councils Act of 1841 applied to all districts in Upper Canada, and that there was also general legislation concerning all populated townships. But, for example, new towns or cities incorporated in the period 1841-49 received 241

MUNICIPAL G O V E R N M E N T AND POLITICS

widely varying powers. There were no rules which automatically applied to a town when it reached a certain size of population and petitioned for incorporation. There existed no closely knit general framework of municipal law by which local government in the province could be welded together into a comprehensive whole. This was a deficiency which the ruling Reform party, under the leadership of Baldwin and Laf ontaine, was determined to remedy. News of the proposed new Municipal Corporations Bill was reported in the local press toward the end of January 1849,107 and on 2 February a special council meeting was called by the mayor in consequence of his having received a copy of the proposed bill.108 The council realized that it was now useless to pursue a new act of incorporation on their own. But it was necessary to ensure that the provisions they had drawn up were incorporated in the government's new bill. Initially there appeared to be three main provisions: the first was annexation—the extension of the city limits as laid down in the defunct city bill was requested, with the proviso that in the event of Lot 24 being annexed to the city it be divided into two wards; the second provision was a request that no person be eligible to be elected to the council who was not a resident within the city or its liberties; a third resolution concerned the appointment of a police magistrate, the council requesting emphatically that the present incumbent be allowed to remain in office. A few days later, at a public meeting in the City Hall, a stormy debate took place over the various sections of the bill. At least one resolution emerged—that there should be a lower standard of qualification for aldermen and councillors than that proposed by the bill.109 In the event the mayor and Councillor Crawford were authorized by council to proceed to Montreal in order to assist Kingston's parliamentary representative in getting the council amendments included in the new bill; in due course they reported back to council.110 Apparently they had only with some difficulty obtained an interview with Baldwin who had taken the new Municipal Bill into his own hands. He had been willing, albeit somewhat reluctantly, to support the annexation of Lot 24; he felt the matter would pass with little or no opposition but was not so sanguine as to the parcelling out of the suburb into several wards. Concerning the police magistrate, Baldwin would not attempt to thwart the wish of the council that the present incumbent be retained, but considered (in the case of a change) that a barrister should be appointed to fill the vacancy. He would not oppose the eligibility of persons being elected members of the council, although they did not reside in the city, as he was unwilling to restrict the choice of the people.111 The mayor had also discussed with Baldwin the possibility of obtaining a grant of government land at the west end of the city for the purposes of laying out a pleasure ground. He had also taken the opportunity while in Montreal to leave a bill with the city member incorporating the Kingston Hospital.112 242

GEORGE BETTS

The Municipal Corporations Bill passed its third reading in May 1849 and came into effect on 1 January I860.113 "In form its most striking feature was its comprehensiveness. Previous general acts had dealt with only a single category and incorporated towns and cities had never before been touched by a general enactment."114 In one respect the scheme of government introduced was essentially a county one. County status was made the basis of distinction between incorporated cities on the one hand and incorporated villages and towns on the other. Thus as counties, the cities of Toronto, Hamilton, and Kingston were made completely independent of the rural counties whereas incorporated towns and villages were not. City councils were empowered to create "outer wards" out of the liberties of the cities and when the population and wealth of any such "outer ward" became equal to the population and wealth of the least populous and wealthy of the original wards, the mayor was required to annex it to the city. As a result of the act the controversial Lot 24115 (and several other lots) were annexed to Kingston and two new wards, Rideau and Victoria, were created, bringing the total number of wards in the city to seven. Thus terminated one of the most contentious issues in the municipality's short history. One disadvantage was that in fact representation for each ward was at the same time reduced; each ward of the city was to elect only one alderman instead of two, although the same number of councillors (two) as previously were to be elected. Many of the provisions of the old incorporating act had been included in the new municipal act; for example, the city council were to continue to elect the mayor from among the aldermen and all elections were to be held annually. In substance the most significant features of the Baldwin Act were the establishment of township councils, the granting of wide powers (particularly with respect to taxation and revenue generally), and the virtual elimination of the last vestige of central administrative control.116 The act has been described as a great one—the municipal Magna Carta of the province.117 Perhaps it was almost too great in that its very success enabled the fundamentals which it originally laid down for a basically rural society to remain unchallenged for too long into the period of rapid change and urbanization we know today. As the city had received some positive benefits from the act, what criticism there was in the press appeared either for or on behalf of other affected local government areas, rather than on behalf of Kingston.118 The 1849 act thus stands as a high-water mark in Kingston's municipal history as it does in that of Ontario generally, drawing as it did the main outlines of municipal government. It could be argued that in passing the Baldwin Act the provincial government was acknowledging for the benefit of local communities in Ontario in general a principle which Kingston in particular had long been striving for 243

MUNICIPAL G O V E R N M E N T AND POLITICS

and already had partially achieved, through its incorporation as a town in 1838 and as a city in 1846: that is, the principle of local self-government with its attendant duties and privileges. As has been shown, Kingstonians were not invariably so far-sighted as to envisage the need for changes in the municipal structure or always particularly keen to strive to bring about the necessary changes in it. At times local attitudes toward municipal development were ambivalent if not downright negative. However, once the Baldwin Act became a reality, civic leaders of the period could look with some satisfaction on the wide recognition of the achievements for which many of Kingston's most distinguished citizens and advocates of municipal self-government, from Hon. Richard Cartwright to Sir John A. Macdonald and John Counter, had fought for over half a century. For the act contained in essence the very privileges which such men had long sought. If the newly elected city fathers who sat down in City Hall to face the second half of the century in 1850 perhaps felt rather smug or satisfied, they should be forgiven; they had behind them more than fifty years of positive, if at times uneven, municipal development and achievement based on some sound, innovative local government legislation to help them face the municipal future with confidence. Will our future city fathers be able to look back at Kingston's more recent attitudes toward municipal development and innovative change and find they have been as fortunate in this respect as their 1850 predecessors?

244

The Orange Order and the Election of 1861 in Kingston J. D. L I V E R M O R E

They had travelled over dusty roads for hours, some for days, to welcome Albert Edward, Prince of Wales, the eighteen-year-old heir to the British throne. Now, on 4 September 1860, the Orangemen gathered at the Kingston wharf to await the prince's arrival. Some fifty-four lodges in Canada West were represented, from Toronto, Belleville, and Picton to the west, and Brockville and Cornwall to the east, all told over four thousand Orangemen, most in full regalia, impatiently waiting to demonstrate their fervent loyalty to the Crown. Arches had been erected at the foot of Princess Street and decorated with Orange slogans, "Victoria Regina," "Our God, Our Country, and Our Queen, 1690," and "No Surrender." The city echoed to old Irish tunes like "Boyne Water" and "Croppies lie down" as the crowd passed the time, growing restless as the hours drifted by. Then, in mid-afternoon, the Royal Standard was unfurled above Fort Henry, and the steamer Kingston, accompanied by a flotilla of pleasure craft, appeared on the horizon. The waterfront scene was chaotic. Cannons and rifles fired in salute; church bells tolled their welcome; blue smoke drifted from the batteries, while the crowd sang, cheered, and surged toward the water. But, at the last moment, the Kingston drew close, then steamed past the wharf into the harbour, where it anchored. For two more hours the throng waited in strained silence, until 0. S. Strange, mayor of Kingston, announced that the prince would not land. By appearing in full regalia the Orangemen had consciously courted the ire of the prince's official consort, the Duke of Newcastle. A week earlier, when the duke heard of the demonstrations of loyalty throughout Canada West planned by Orangemen, he had announced publicly that he could not allow the prince to acknowledge the existence of a secret society which had been outlawed in Great Britain. A deputation from Kingston, led by John A. Macdonald, attorney general west and member of the Legislative Assembly for Kingston, had met the duke at Brockville to appeal the decision, pleading 245

28 Arch of welcome erected by the Orange Order on Princess Street for the visit of the Prince of Wales, 1860

J. D. L I V E R M O R E

that the Orange Order was completely legal in Canada. But Newcastle's fears that the prince would become embroiled in a violent confrontation between Protestants and Catholics had been confirmed by protests issued by the Roman Catholics of Kingston against the appearance of the Order, and he had reiterated his ban on all Orange displays. In Kingston on 4 September, the duke ordered the steamer to anchor well off the wharf, and gave the city council sixteen hours to clear the area of Orange insignia. But the council lacked both the legal authority and the desire to prevent the Orangemen from exercising their rights, and it appointed a "reconciliation committee" to effect a compromise with the Orange leaders. At the same time the demonstrators met, refused to remove their regalia, and determined to march again the following morning. The invitation to meet the reconciliation committee was summarily rejected. The next day the city council met again, and passed a polite request that the prince reconsider the situation and visit the city notwithstanding the displays. At 8 A.M. the Orangemen once again marched to the wharf, and, insisting upon their constitutional rights, refused to leave. Believing that "an attempt was being made to fasten upon the mind of the Prince of Wales the delusion that Canada is a country where Popery has the ascendancy," the Orangemen determined "as men of truth, to stand for truth and freedom and never surrender."1 The duke's threats had only made them more intransigent. Finally, after Newcastle had denied the council's request, the Kingston weighed anchor and began its journey westward towards Belleville.2 The Prince of Wales had not set foot in the City of Kingston. The Orangemen who had gathered from all over eastern Canada West were disappointed, disgusted, and bitter. They had read of the prince's progress throughout Canada East, where he marched with robed priests and received deputations of Roman Catholic clergymen. They felt that they were merely insisting upon a similar right to appear in public in the dress of the Orange Order. There was a crucial principle involved in their stubborn refusal to submit to Newcastle's seemingly harmless demand. As the Kingston News argued, "they recognized his Royal Highness as the living embodiment of their political and religious principles, and they would be deemed traitors to themselves and the cause they are associated to sustain, if they failed to manifest in their person by their external embellishments the principles they have sworn to honor and respect under the constitution of Great Britain."3 The Orangemen could salvage only the grim satisfaction that they had not yielded to the pressure mounted against them. As William Shannon, who chaired the committee which planned the demonstration, later wrote, "every man who thought—and thought was busy—was satisfied that on this day the liberties of Canadian loyalists had been jeopardised and imperilled; on this day, however, they wer vindicated and strengthened."4 247

THE O R A N G E O R D E R AND THE E L E C T I O N OF

1861

What was euphemistically branded "the Orange difficulty" at Kingston was soon magnified into an issue of critical importance. As an example of antiCatholic or militant Protestant feeling, the Orange difficulty was only one of a series of incidents which plagued Canada West in the 1850s and 1860s. But such incidents were more than simple examples of religious animosity. There were more deeply rooted divisions within Canadian society which created the atmosphere in which Orangeism thrived. In 1860, therefore, the Orange Order was simply the vehicle through which militant Protestantism channelled its grievances, and, as such, the Order was symptomatic of broader and more serious social problems. When Orangeism was transplanted to Canadian soil, local lodges were organized chiefly as fraternal societies providing a certain measure of coherence in an often chaotic and unstable pioneer social life.5 Gradually, as the movement evolved, it owed its appeal less to memories of Irish issues and more to indigenous Canadian problems, such as the union of the Canadas, responsible government, and annexationism. During the 1840s and 1850s Orangeism acquired respectability as Orange leaders became more prominent and as lodges attracted members of wealthier classes. By the 1850s the Order had been "Canadianized." The ceremonies, regalia, and rhetoric were reminiscent of its Irish heritage, but the Order spoke no longer to Irish problems. It drew strength from renewed fears of Catholic immigration, from an increasingly bitter resentment of French Canada, and from a growing anxiety about the future of the British connection in the face of what many Canadians perceived to be an expansionist and militaristic republic to the south. It was the conjunction of these fears, which reflected the traditional "siege mentality" of Upper Canadians,6 with the economic and social effects of nascent Canadian industrial society, that contributed to the unstable environment in which Orangeism flourished. The Orange Order, in short, rose to prominence in Canada West not as an alien influence disturbing the harmony of the New World, but in response to particular social and economic problems confronting the Canadian Protestant community. The economic malaise which gripped Kingston throughout the 1850s provided fertile ground for the growth and expansion of the Orange Order. The repeal of the corn laws in Britain, the gradual reorientation of Canadian commerce towards the United States, further canalization of the Welland-St. Lawrence waterway, and the emergence of railways as a challenge to water transport all struck severe blows to the transshipment trade in grains, which was the core of Kingston's economy. Larger and deeper canals began to eliminate the need for transshipment, and railways from Montreal to the hinterlands of Canada West virtually bypassed Kingston. Despite continual accommodation to the technological imperatives of the transportation revolution, Kingston was both unable to establish herself as a rail centre on the 248

J. D. L I V E R M O R E

east-west Grand Trunk Railway, and incapable of developing a new northsouth communications system between "Central Canada" and northern New York State in which she would have become the commercial capital. In the 1850s Kingston's shipbuilding industry fell into a chronic state of financial crisis, and the manufacturing sector of the economy, built largely on the iron foundries, began to languish. With Kingston's failure to establish herself as a metropolitan centre came the slow realization that the visions of the 1840s were illusory.7 Commercial recession in the 1850s, aggravated by the depression of 1857-58, triggered social unrest. Although all levels of society were undoubtedly affected by hard times, the gravest signs of social tensions were among the working class, where an expanding population engaged in competition for jobs in a shrinking job market, and among the small merchants whose businesses were most severely hurt by recession. The scapegoat for the frustrations of Protestants were the Irish Catholics, who by 1861 constituted approximately 30 per cent of the population of Kingston.8 Not only did the Irish Catholics pose a direct threat to Protestant workingmen in the fight for employment, but by 1861 the immigrant Irish were breaking into new fields, becoming artisans, contractors, lawyers, and merchants, and thus competing with Protestant businessmen. Protestants disliked the emergence in Kingston of a small Roman Catholic bourgeoisie, and they sensed in the general growth of Catholic economic power a challenge to the ascendancy of the Anglo-Scottish Protestant community. In this atmosphere of suspicion, the Orange Order assumed a role as the spokesman for the threatened Protestant majority, defending its bastions against further intrusions by Catholics. In the hands of Orangemen, anti-Catholic rhetoric became a functional weapon in a war of religious prejudice, which at once guaranteed Protestants their economic well-being and status in the community and at the same time denied Catholics access to jobs, promotions, or positions of power.9 Thus, occurring as it did in a period of latent religious tension, the Orange difficulty became an explosive and divisive issue in Kingston society. The Orangemen had never accepted the Duke of Newcastle's explanations of the prohibition against the Order, and they readily assumed that the measure stemmed from a protest issued by leaders of Kingston's Roman Catholic community in late August. They viewed the visit of the prince therefore "as a practical test, a sort of struggle for supremacy between Protestant and Roman Catholic influences at work in the Province."10 The prince's failure to land implied that Catholics had won the battle for supremacy. Among members of the Order long accustomed to abuse from Catholics and moderate Protestants, the fiasco became the symbolic example of the Catholic domination of Upper Canada. "What the Orangemen could not 249

THE O R A N G E O R D E R AND THE ELECTION OF

1861

brook," commented the Kingston News, was "that a handful of popish nonentities should have it in their power to obstruct the Protestants of Upper Canada in the free use of their rights and privileges." n This sense of outrage stimulated new activism within the Orange Order. Men troubled by the overbearing influence of French Canada in the political life of Canada West and worried that the United States was entering a new phase of instability which threatened to spill over into Canada began to swell the ranks of the lodges to support the cry for religious and political emancipation. As early as October 1860, the Lambton County Lodge noted that "the alarming increase of Popery in our midst, and consequent power has caused the members of our Lodges to increase four-fold."12 In the four months following the visit of the prince, thirteen new lodges were opened in the Midland District alone.13 The Orange difficulty had served as a catalyst in accentuating all of the dissatisfactions of Protestants with the Union of 1841, and, as the decade of Confederation opened, militant Protestants began to take up the cudgels to find a solution to their dilemma. The immediate repercussions of the abortive visit of the prince were political. When the Toronto Patriot, a Conservative Orange organ, defended the conduct of the Liberal-Conservative ministry in the affair, a group of disgruntled Orangemen founded the Orange Herald in order to present an Orange viewpoint independent of political parties. In early October 1860, a meeting in Toronto censured the Cartier-Macdonald ministry, and later that month the Provincial Grand Lodge of Western Canada passed the "Hamilton resolutions" condemning the ministry for its failure to defend the Orange position more vigorously.14 In Kingston, where the sensibilities of lodge members had been most directly offended, the reactions were similar. At a meeting at the Kingston City Hall in early November, Alexander Campbell's explanation of John A. Macdonald's conduct was greeted with "a storm of hisses and groans" and a motion of censure was carried against the government.15 In January, D'Arcy Boulton, the prominent Barrie Orange leader, charged before a Kingston audience that "the present Government had done everything to forward the interests of Popery in Canada," and he suggested that "if the members of the government had been allowed to keep their places when the Orange vote would have removed them, it was . . . the fault of the Orange body themselves."16 The Orange Herald contended that Orangemen had to "increase our power and command respect" after their humiliation at the hands of the Duke of Newcastle.17 Militant Protestants had come to believe that the political structure of the Union of 1841, which tied Canada West to French Catholic Canada East, enabled Roman Catholics to govern Canada West. Not only did most Orangemen support some measure of constitutional change, but many 250

J. D. L I V E R M O R E

of the disenchanted even repudiated the party system through which Catholic domination was allegedly maintained. Orangemen revived eighteenthcentury conceptions of politics, charging that Canadian parties were combinations of manipulators conspiring to stifle truthful discussion and compromising on vital issues which would admit of no compromise. Revealing their deep-seated sense of order and authority, which craved a homogeneous society governed by a consensus, Protestants demanded a return to the Burkean idea of party, in which principle was the chief basis of political action.18 As D'Arcy Boulton advised his Kingston audience, the Orange Order "should know no party—no friends—no principles—but the altar and the throne."19 The repudiation of what Orangemen believed to be the factious and unprincipled Canadian party system fully emerged in February 1861, when Nassau C. Gowan, son of Ogle R. Gowan and secretary of the Grand Orange Lodge of Western Canada, entered the Grey County by-election as an independent candidate against the Liberal J. T. Purdy and the "coalition Liberal" J. C. Morrison. Although Gowan inadvertently played into the hands of politicians by splitting the Orange-Conservative vote and allowing Purdy to win,20 his candidacy was motivated by legitimate fears of Catholic ascendancy at the polls. Around the banner of "non-partisanship," an implicit rejection of the structure, composition, and platforms of the Liberal and Conservative parties, he hoped to unite all Protestants who believed in the principles of loyalty to the throne, Christianity, and liberty. Gowan based his appeal squarely on Protestant reaction to Catholic domination, and proposed as a solution either "rep by pop" or outright dissolution of the Union of 1841.21 The Reform victory in Grey County warned John A. Macdonald of increasing restiveness within the Liberal-Conservative party and the emergence of a dissident faction of militant Protestants. So seriously did Macdonald regard the political crisis that he postponed a general election until he had bolstered the popular basis of the coalition. He bid for the support of Wesleyan Methodists with a compromise solution to the university question, negotiated with the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church for a settlement of the separate schools issue, and adjusted his stance on the representation question to conciliate certain regions in which the "rep by pop" cry was intensifying in popularity.22 Each compromise was intended to blunt the acerbity of racial and religious strife, and to knit together different elements of Canada West's divided population in the fabric of Liberal-Conservatism. By the end of May 1861, Macdonald felt that his strategy had been mapped out sufficiently well. Noting that "Brown is hors de combat and the Grits disorganized," and hoping to carry the elections before 12 July, when "the Orangemen and R. C.'s will be breaking each others heads,"23 he called a general election for late 251

THE O R A N G E ORDER AND THE ELECTION OF

1861

June and early July. In the pluralistic society of Canada West, plagued by regional jealousies and torn by racial strife and religious animosity, Macdonald had shaped a flexible program capable of drawing different elements of society together. His political success was as much a function of the diverse community which produced him as it was of his own personality and genius. In Kingston the Orange affair had produced such a sense of outrage that Macdonald received his first serious political challenge since he had won the constituency in 1844. Elections in Kingston had always been marked by both the bizarre and the unusual, and the principal electoral issues were seldom related to the broader and much publicized provincial themes. Politics were also complicated by a tendency towards factionalism, religious disputes, and squabbling amongst local economic interest groups.24 The elections of 1844 and 1847 were not ideological battles, despite the broad provincial issues of loyalism versus responsible government. Anthony Manahan, MacdonakTs opponent in 1844, was a Roman Catholic former anti-Compact Conservative who apparently drew most of his meagre support from his Irish coreligionists. Kenneth MacKenzie, the opponent in 1847, was described as a "constitutional Reformer" in contrast to Macdonald, the "tory of the Draper or crafty school,"25 but both candidates concentrated on the university question and rarely mentioned the constitutional issue. The three elections of the 1850s had been marked by a similar absence of ideological strife. The great issues had been settled; more contentious problems were yet to come. In 1851 the Daily British Whig admitted that "there is no political question before the people."26 John Counter, Kingston's former mayor and Macdonald's opponent in 1851 and 1854, was a Reformer but claimed to be nonpartisan. His platform in 1854 consisted chiefly of promises of greater aid to railways. In the election of 1857, John Shaw, who campaigned to bring the Grand Trunk main line into the city, was defeated (after attempting to withdraw) by 1,189 votes to nine. Although there was a small group of Reformers in Kingston, they lacked the political weight to elect a member, and elections became in consequence non-ideological battles in which local interests vied for political ascendancy. By the 1850s even political foes were tied together by a common adherence to railway politics and to sharing the spoils of the first "Great Barbecue." Railways continued to be the key to many political alignments in Kingston well past Confederation. John A. Macdonald also succeeded in blocking the emergence of Conservative factions in Kingston, through the judicious use of patronage, and by warning that a split in the Conservative vote could incidentally contribute to a Reform victory. Thomas Kirkpatrick's short-lived candidacy in 1847 was Macdonald's last challenge from the "compact" wing of the Conservative party in Kingston. In the absence of those noble constitutional issues which allegedly ani252

J. D. L I V E R M O R E

mated the provincial electorate as a whole, the key to political power in Kingston was the control of the Roman Catholic vote. Between 1844 and 1861 Catholics constituted one-third of the population of Kingston, and they used their substantial political muscle on a provincial level to secure legislation favourable to Roman Catholic interests, and on a local level to garner their share of the lucrative spoils of office. In 1847 the Kingston clergy complained that "the Catholics of Upper Canada are not in the possession of that share of public honors and emoluments, nor of those professional distinctions, to which their capital-stake in the country, as well as their growing numbers. . . ought justly entitle them."27 But Catholics were gradually able to use their power to force access to positions of prestige and to break down the barriers to their social advancement. In return for the political support of Roman Catholics, John A. Macdonald apportioned patronage on the advice of the local bishop, E. J. Horan, and tailored his platform according to the wishes of prominent Catholic laymen like A. J. Macdonell, Macdonald's law partner, and James O'Reilly, the acknowledged leader of Kingston's Roman Catholic community.28 The ability of Catholics to act as power-brokers was due to the homogeneity of their vote. Whereas Protestants tended to divide on any number of political issues, the Catholics tended to remain united and to support one candidate en masse. This was perhaps a function of their minority status in the community. As Macdonald perceived about another minority, "At present [the French Canadians] divide, as we do, they are split up into several sections, & are governed more or less by defined principles of action. As they become smaller and feebler, so they will be more united, from a sense of self preservation, they will act as one man & hold the balance of power."29 Interest-group bartering between religious and political leaders tended to reinforce the non-ideological and pragmatic nature of politics. Macdonald's Roman Catholic allies, befriended in the 1850s, were linked to the LiberalConservative party not by adherence to a common political philosophy, but by a realistic calculation that their interests, economic as well as religious, could best be promoted by the alliance. In the election of 1861 Macdonald counted heavily on the support of the Roman Catholic clergy and a number of influential members of the emerging Catholic bourgeoisie. Macdonald's campaign for re-election began in late May. Within a few weeks it was announced that his opponent would be Oliver Mowat, his former student-at-law. A convention of Kingston Reformers had invited Mowat to challenge Macdonald, and he had accepted, probably as part of a concerted Reform drive to eliminate Macdonald from the assembly. As James Carmichael, who later nominated Mowat in South Ontario, commented, "Mr. Mowat had gone to Kingston for the sake of his party in order to defeat the Attorney General."30 So impressive was Mowat's reputation, and so vulnera253

T H E O R A N G E O R D E R A N D T H E E L E C T I O N O F 1861

ble was Macdonald in the aftermath of the Orange difficulty, that the Kingston Daily News cited Mowat as "as strong a candidate as could be brought forward" in the Reform interest.31 Both Macdonald and Mowat were Kingstonians well grounded in the complex network of religious and economic issues which constituted politics in Canada West. Both men also typified the integration of politics and business which characterized nineteenth-century Canadian public life. Macdonald's ascendancy in Kingston stemmed largely from his Old Kirk background. He took an active interest in the affairs of St. Andrew's Church and Queen's College, and, as a young lawyer, became a member of the Celtic Society, the Young Men's Society of Kingston, the Masonic Lodge, the Oddfellows, and the Orange Order. For most of his life Macdonald remained closely tied to Kingston by numerous business arrangements and by an enduring interest in Queen's College.32 Oliver Mowat came from much the same background. His father, John Mowat, had come to Kingston in 1815, and, in a long and respectable career, had become a leader of Kingston's financial community and of St. Andrew's Church. Long after the elder Mowat's death in 1860 members of the family remained prominent in local business and politics and at Queen's College.33 In social background, from the Old Kirk Presbyterian mercantile family, to John Cruikshank's school, to the local militia, to admittance to the bar, the early careers of Macdonald and Mowat were remarkably similar, suggestive perhaps that access to political preferment followed a predictable and well understood cursus honorum involving debating, drilling in the militia, and meeting in local religious and fraternal societies in order to develop social polish and to cement ties with the elite of the community. By such a gradual process both Macdonald and Mowat had been judged by society to be competent to handle the affairs of the day. Groomed by this method of "natural selection," two mature politicians prepared to confront each other in the City of Kingston. Despite the similar backgrounds of the candidates, there were also marked differences. Mowat's power base was really Toronto, where he had set up his legal practice in 1842 and built a reputation in religious and educational activities. Although the elder Mowat had been an anti-Compact Conservative and a political associate of John A. Macdonald, Oliver Mowat became a Reformer. The reasons are not clear. Mowat confessed early in his career that "the difference of avowed principle between the two parties is all moonshine," 34 and he worked closely throughout the 1850s with both George Brown and Macdonald. But in 1857 Mowat contested successfully the constituency of South Ontario for the Reformers. Macdonald believed Mowat's conversion was for the sake of office and prestige, although Mowat claimed that he joined the Reform party to secure principled men in office.35 Macdonald's opinion is perhaps more credible. While Macdonald dominated the Liberal-Conservative 254

J. D. L I V E R M O R E

party, there was little future in the organization for a politician from Kingston (as Mowat was usually considered). Given Mowat's belief that no ideological barriers separated the two parties, his conversion may have been a means of achieving in the Reform party a position of leadership which would have been denied him in the Conservative party. By 1857 Mowat was prepared, through ample earnings in the equity courts, to serve in public life, and, following his election in South Ontario, he rose swiftly to the front ranks of the Reformers. By 1861 he was George Brown's chief lieutenant, and one of the two or three contenders for the leadership of the party in Canada West. The election campaign in Kingston began formally on nomination day, 22 June 1861. The rival parties marched to the courthouse escorted by their most ardent followers. Mowat, accompanied by the Victoria Orange Band and the Kingston Brass Band, was the first to arrive. Macdonald's procession, headed by Murdoch and Eraser's Band, arrived shortly thereafter and the official ceremony began. Macdonald was nominated by Samuel Muckleston, and the nomination was seconded by Dr. Michael Lavell. Mowat was nominated by the newly elected mayor of Kingston, 0. S. Gildersleeve, and his nomination was seconded by William Robinson. Both candidates addressed the assembly at length, then waited as the sheriff conducted the preliminary poll. Macdonald was declared the victor, but Mowat demanded a formal vote, which the sheriff set for 1 and 2 July. Finally, in much the same manner as they had arrived, the candidates withdrew amid cheers, blaring music, and catcalls for the opposition. By nomination day Macdonald had already organized an impressive electoral machine. To canvass the seven wards of Kingston, he had set up "ward committees," consisting of from nine to fifteen members, and chaired by influential local conservatives, some by aldermen or councillors, one by former mayor 0. S. Strange. Each committee had a vice-chairman and most had sub-committees to handle finances and canvassing. Macdonald's committees were composed of the upper strata of Kingston society. Although there were doctors and lawyers, the majority were businessmen, such as tavernkeepers, hardware merchants, grocers, or wealthier artisans, such as saddlemakers, blacksmiths, or carriagemakers. Macdonald apparently insisted upon religious representation in his campaign organization. Each committee had at least one Roman Catholic member, in addition to a group drawn from various Protestant denominations. James O'Reilly, the most influential Roman Catholic layman in Kingston, was a member of the committee in Ontario Ward, the largest Catholic district. The committees dealt chiefly in the mundane but critical chores of canvassing neighbourhoods, arranging speaking engagements, and stalking the vote by various means ranging from "moral suasion" to outright bribery.36 Of Mowat's campaign organization little is known. He drew a great deal of 255

THE ORANGE O R D E R AND THE ELECTION OF

1861

support among merchants and artisans in much the same fashion as did Macdonald, and his candidacy was backed by almost one-half of the Kingston City Council. In addition, he had a war chest rumoured to be £500, and certainly enough financial support to found an election newspaper, The Press of Kingston, which Reformers published several times to compensate for the absence of an opposition organ in Kingston.37 Mowat's popular support could best be gauged during the campaign by crowd reactions to various ward meetings. The initial confrontations between Macdonald and Mowat, which featured unparallelled animosity towards the attorney general, led the Toronto Globe to believe that Macdonald was "in a desperate fright as to his own reelection."38 Macdonald's weakness in Kingston could be traced directly to the Orange difficulty. The Daily News warned that party lines "have changed considerably in this locality of late, and it will require the most accomplished argumentation to make good the defections which have taken place."39 The defectors who had joined the Reformers were apparently Orangemen, whose ranks had received "a large accession of strength after the local troubles in connection with the visit of the Prince of Wales."40 Even before nomination day Macdonald had realized the strength of the opposition. He was confronted with antagonism bordering on violence. His speeches were interrupted by continual heckling, and his ward meetings were dispersed by bands of stonethrowing rowdies. Mowat deplored the violence so uncharacteristic of Kingston elections. But his supporters were driven on by more than partisan desire for victory. Theirs was a violence borne out of frustration and anger, which had exploded ten months earlier at the time of the Orange crisis and had continued virtually unabated. Macdonald decided to focus on the university question as the heart of his campaign for re-election. "University Reform" was a slogan which could impose a superficial unity on Conservatives like Alexander Campbell and A. J. Macdonell, who differed on the representation issue, and it could thus conceivably nullify the strong demand for "rep by pop." But Mowat effectively countered Macdonald's tactics. Just as Macdonald had hinted at state aid to denominational colleges, Mowat committed himself to "increased aid . . . to colleges occupied with the work of Superior Education."41 The critical issue in Kingston, despite Macdonald's attempts to use the university question as an electoral red-herring, was the representation question. In his election broadside Mowat announced that he regarded as "unjust, injurious and altogether intolerable" the existing system of parliamentary representation.42 Meanwhile, his election newspaper kept alive the burning resentments harboured by Orangemen as the heritage of the Orange difficulty. On the representation question Macdonald was virtually abandoned by his partisans. The Conservative Toronto Patriot had warned in 1860 that 256

J. D. L I V E R M O R E

"nobody supposes that . . . the status quo can be maintained,"43 and the Kingston Daily News predicted in April 1861, that if the forthcoming decennial census returns "prove greatly in favour of Upper Canada, the result will be a return to the new Parliament of representatives who will advocate that concessions should be granted to the Upper Province."44 Macdonald argued the case against "rep by pop" on two grounds: first, because of its unsavory democratic implications; and, secondly, because any increase in representation granted to Canada West would tend to give "western Canada" hegemony over central and eastern Canada.45 In maintaining that the interests of western Canada were tied to New York State via the Erie Canal, in opposition to the interests of the rest of Canada, which were tied to the St. Lawrence, Macdonald was consciously pursuing what the Toronto Globe contemptuously referred to as a policy based on "uniting Central Canada with the French against the West."46 But in Kingston Macdonald's arguments drew little public support. Alexander Campbell, Macdonald's local organizer, had already opted for constitutional change, and the Kingston British Whig supported Macdonald only because "no Government could be formed from either side of the House to carry that principle."47 The Kingston News, which eventually endorsed Macdonald, refuted his nomination address point by point and called his policy "an evasion of the representation difficulty."48 "Rep by pop" was not a problem in political theory, nor was it a calculation to be made in dollars and cents. Kingston Protestants, convinced by the Orange difficulty of the pervasive power of Catholicism, sought to escape what they perceived to be Roman Catholic domination, and the representation question was the issue around which the discontented rallied. Despite the hostility confronting Macdonald, and the lukewarm support which he received from his nominal allies, his election victory seemed easy. At the end of the first voting day he had built up a commanding lead, and when the polls closed the following day, he had captured 785 votes to Mowat's 474.49 Compared to other constituencies across Canada West, in which a one hundredvote majority was a "safe" seat, and in which a fifty-vote majority was not uncommon, Macdonald had fared well. But, in Kingston, which had elected him almost by acclamation in 1857, the 311-vote majority was disturbingly small, and revealed the growth of a large, vocal, and determined opposition to his policies. Among the Protestant voters of Kingston, Macdonald received at best a narrow majority and probably a slight minority of the votes.50 Oliver Mowat captured the support of a large majority of Orange leaders whose votes could be determined,51 sustaining the contemporary analysis that militant Protestants constituted the core of Macdonald's opposition. Macdonald's margin of victory was assured, not by the Protestant merchants and businessmen under whose aegis he had begun his political career, but by the 257

THE O R A N G E O R D E R AND THE E L E C T I O N OF

1861

Roman Catholics, who had taken virtually no part in the noisy and rowdy campaign. In the wards in which the Roman Catholic population was greatest, Macdonald won his largest majorities. In Ontario Ward, where the population was almost half Catholic, Macdonald received approximately 75 per cent of the vote, while in Rideau Ward, where Catholics constituted 17 per cent of the population, Macdonald won only 54 per cent of the vote.52 In formulating his compromise agreement to extend financial support to separate schools, Macdonald had assured himself of the continued support of the Catholic community. His opposition to constitutional change was also attractive to the Catholic hierarchy. Because Catholics realized that their ability to secure favourable legislation depended on the parliamentary majority secured mainly by Carrier's followers from Canada East, they resolutely opposed "rep by pop," which could shift the balance of power and lead to a ReformRouge victory. The mechanics by which Macdonald and his allies appealed for Roman Catholic support is not clear. There were no overt attempts to court the Catholic vote. Macdonald's re-election advertisements included no promises of legislation on separate schools, and his addresses repudiated charges of Catholic domination.53 None of Kingston's newspapers spoke to the interests of Catholics, most of whom were Irish immigrants who constituted a virtually voiceless labouring class. In that quarter Macdonald had little to fear from Mowat, who was harmed by the vitriolic anti-Catholic rhetoric of the Toronto Globe, by the militancy of his Orange supporters, and by his stand in favour of "rep by pop." Reformers apparently knew well in advance how the Catholics would vote. A letter from Thomas D'Arcy McGee to Daniel Macarow, a prominent Catholic layman and Kingston Reformer, lamenting that their compatriots were supporting the Conservatives, was reprinted in the Globe, probably in a last-ditch attempt to avert the landslide in Macdonald's favour.54 In its post-election analysis the Globe conceded that across Canada West "the whole Irish Roman Catholic vote was thrown for the Ministerial candidate."55 Given a relatively even split among the Protestants of Kingston, the Roman Catholic vote gave Macdonald the victory. Bishop E. J. Horan was probably correct in claiming that "John A. doit son election aux Catholiques, et sans leur concours il n'aurait pas terrasse son adversaire."56 Backed by the strong support of clergy and laymen within the Roman Catholic community, Macdonald's political career as the member from Kingston was assured. John A. Macdonald won re-election in Kingston in 1861, as did the CartierMacdonald ministry as a whole, but not without a difficult struggle marred by violence. In the aftermath of the visit of the Prince of Wales in 1860, the Orange Order had become a bastion of the discontented, who saw consti258

J. D. L I V E R M O R E

tutional change as a panacea for all of the ills plaguing Canada West. The cries of discontent were not silenced by Confederation, as the Reformers had hoped. In the next three decades, as the economy of Kingston deteriorated, through the stagnation of commerce and industry and the withdrawal of the British garrisons, the city continued to be marked by serious social tensions. Only a politician possessed of the most flexible of principles and a sharp eye for the narrow ground of acceptable compromises could hope to preside for long over the political fortunes of a community plagued by religious, racial, and ethnic divisions. Even Macdonald, a genius at understanding and manipulating the varied forces of a pluralistic society, eventually lost control, as recession deepened in the 1870s. The Orange Order remained a crucial factor in Kingston politics. Its dynamism and continued importance in the latter half of the nineteenth century bore witness to the virtually irreparable rifts between Catholic and Protestant. The hostility, anger, impatience, and disgust brought to the surface that September day in 1860 became a constant element in Kingston society in the late nineteenth century.

259

This page intentionally left blank

Kingstonians in the Second Parliament: Portrait of an Elite Sroup D O N A L D SWAINSON

I

During the past few years, the concept of metropolitanism has received considerable attention.1 For recent historians it provides a conceptual framework within which can be sketched, albeit in a somewhat whiggish way, a great deal of urban history. The concept, at least in an unsophisticated version, is not unique to the twentieth century. Nineteenth-century Ontarians were very aware of the importance of metropolitan domination in both economic and political terms. An editorial in a Kingston newspaper made this point very clearly. In exulting over the election to the second parliament of James O'Reilly as Conservative MP for South Renfrew, the Daily News referred to the extension of the city's political power through the election of various Kingstonians to Parliament: "We heartily congratulate Mr. O'Reilly upon the result of the election. Apart from the gain to the Conservative party . . . it is a gain to the city to have another of our talented sons in the great council of the Dominion, ready to throw in his influence for the city and this section of the country. Toronto has prospered in a great measure by the number of members which she has all over the country ready to stand up for her interests on all occasions, and thus adding to her strength."2 While the group of Kingstonians in the second parliament (1872-74) may have marked the culmination of the city's political authority, these men did not represent an isolated or short-term phenomenon. Kingston was a powerful centre during the settlement period of Upper Canada and retained that status throughout the nineteenth century. Even though Kingston itself could elect only one member, six Kingstonians sat in the House of Commons during the second parliament: John A. Macdonald, Richard Cartwright, George A. Kirkpatrick, James O'Reilly, George Dormer, and Schuyler Shibley. Alexander Campbell and John Hamilton sat in the Senate. They influenced all 261

KINGSTONIANS IN THE SECOND PARLIAMENT

areas of Kingston life, and possessed great authority in both national parties.3 They perpetuated within the new Dominion the kind of power that Kingstonians had possessed in both Upper Canada and the Union of 1841-67. Of more immediate concern to Kingston, these politicians were, as the Daily News observed, "ready to throw in [their] influence for the city and this section of the country." II

The career of John A. Macdonald (1815-91) is one of the most fascinating in Canadian political history.4 Born in Glasgow, he emigrated with his family to Kingston when he was five. His father, Hugh, was an unsuccessful businessman who ended his career in "a mean little clerkship"5 in the Commercial Bank. Hugh had decided to settle in the "King's Town" because he possessed valuable contacts there through a relative, Lt. Col. Donald Macpherson. One of Macdonald's cousins was married to Francis Harper, cashier of the Commercial Bank. Thus, while John A. Macdonald lacked middle or upper-class financial advantages, he possessed valuable business and social contacts, and membership in a closely-knit Scottish Presbyterian community. After a limited formal education he studied law, gaining experience in Kingston, Napanee, and Hallowell, and was admitted to the bar in 1836. He was highly successful as a local lawyer and entrepreneur. In 1839 he became a director of the Commercial Bank and the bank's solicitor, and in 1844 solicitor to the Trust and Loan Company of Upper Canada. These two corporations were Macdonald's most important legal clients, but during the 1840s, 1850s, and 1860s he also became extensively involved in numerous business activities, especially in real estate, transportation, finance, and various local concerns. As J. K. Johnson shows, Macdonald became an important and not untypical Kingston business leader whose interests extended throughout Canada West.6 He regularly acted politically for firms in which he had an interest. By 1867 Macdonald's professional position was in decline. Political commitments made personal attention impossible, and the Commercial Bank, after an unsuccessful appeal to the government for assistance, failed. Macdonald's practice owed the bank over $79,000. Within five years his business investments were in ruins and he was financially dependent on his salary and the income from a testimonial fund collected on his behalf by Conservative friends. Although Macdonald's career in local politics was brief (he was elected an alderman in 1843) he was firmly identified with the Kingston area. In addition to involvement through education, law, and business, he participated in various associations including the Celtic Society, the Freemasons, the Orange Order, Queen's University, and the Presbyterian Church.7 262

DONALD SWAINSON

MacdonakTs career in politics was, of course, unusually impressive. He sat in the Union assembly or federal parliament from 1844 to 1891, securing election for five seats in three provinces. His ministerial experience stretched over forty-four years, 1847-91, and involved eight portfolios plus the prime ministership. In 1856 he became Conservative leader in Canada West and remained the party leader until he died. His career pattern underwent basic change in the early confederation years. During the Union Macdonald was a sectional leader with his power base in the Midland district. He participated extensively in business and professional activity as we have seen, and maintained an intimate identification with Kingston. After 1867 he became a full-time professional politician leading a transcontinental party and a federal state. His identification with his old district became less definite. Politically, the Midland district became less important to him and during the election of 1872 it was managed by Senator Campbell. Macdonald, the only Ontario Conservative MP of real political weight in the cabinet, was required to act as Ontario leader, an excruciatingly difficult task during these years. He also supervised party activity in other provinces, and, all told, was a pragmatic, malleable conservative, preeminently a party manager and parliamentary leader. He emphasized leadership: "[W]hen the Directing mind is removed, things always go wrong."8 Certainly Macdonald formulated policies and adhered to principles, but he always allowed ample room for manoeuvre and within this space operated superbly as a political strategist, tactician, technician, manager, and craftsman. Although Alexander Campbell (1822-92) was one of Macdonald's closest collaborators, he remains a relatively unknown figure. Of Scottish origin, Campbell was born in England in 1822. His father, a physician, moved to Canada in 1823, and settled in Kingston in 1836. After a thorough secondary education, Alexander studied law as John A. Macdonald's second articled student. He was called to the bar in 1843 and in the following year began a highly successful professional career as Macdonald's law partner. The partnership was short-lived, but the two Scots remained close political and business associates for decades. Campbell served as dean of Queen's law faculty and was a member of the Anglican church. His business interests were extensive. During the early confederation years, for example, he served as president of the Intercolonial Express Company, chairman of the board of the Toronto Branch of the Consolidated Bank, and vice-president of the Isolated Risk Fire Insurance Company. He was a director of the Kingston and Pembroke Railway and the London and Canadian Loan and Agency Company. Campbell was also concerned with enterprises involving finance, transportation, mining, and land speculation. Some ventures, like the Isolated Risk Fire Insurance Company and the Kingston and Pembroke Railway, involved 263

29 Sir Alexander Campbell

DONALD SWAINSON

cooperation between Campbell and his political foes. Like Macdonald, Camp bell was clearly a member of Kingston's business elite.9 Campbell entered electoral politics in 1850, serving for two years as an alderman. In 1858 he was elected to the Legislative Council, and was speaker for a few months in 1863. In 1864 he was asked to form a government but failed. In the same year he joined first the Tache-Macdonald government, and then the confederation coalition. In 1867 Campbell, a Father of Confederation, went to the Senate, where he remained until 1887. When the first Dominion government was formed he was appointed postmaster-general and Conservative leader in the Senate. His new portfolio "involved dealing with large public interests and a very extended patronage."10 Campbell served briefly as minister of the interior in 1873. During the Mackenzie interregnum (1873-78) he retained the Conservative leadership in the Senate. He reentered the cabinet in 1878, and held four separate portfolios before becoming lieutenant-governor of Ontario in 1887. He held that post until shortly before his death in 1892. Campbell was a cool and conscientious minister, but his real role in politics was as a Conservative "fix-it-man." He acted as a sort of party general manager, primarily for the eastern Ontario section. His activity in this area was very important, especially during the first Macdonald government (1867-73). The extent of his political involvement can best be illustrated by simply listing some of his activities in 1872-73. He was concerned with political problems relating to Nova Scotia, British Columbia, and Manitoba. He collected money for the party, and, because of his numerous close contacts with Toronto Conservatism, served as a link between the government and Ontario big business. Campbell helped manage the lower house and dispensed patronage throughout Canada. He was a key figure in Conservative attempts to manage the press. In 1872 Senator Campbell managed Macdonald's personal election in Kingson and at the same time was active in a series of ridings stretching from Toronto to the Ottawa River. A close ally of Campbell was not exaggerating when he referred to those elections "which you manipulate in Kingston."11 Campbell had no base from which to challenge Macdonald's leadership, but he was an enormously useful and influential lieutenant. The utility of his political and administrative skills, strengthened by a host of social, business, and political contacts with powerful men in both parties was not always recognized.12 In 1878, for example, John Henry Pope lumped together Campbell, J. C. Aikins, and Mackenzie Bowell as ministers who were "smaller than the little end of nothing."13 Although Campbell was in decline by 1878, he is a far larger figure in the history of nineteenth-century politics than was understood by Pope, or by many twentieth-century students of nineteenthcentury Canada. 265

KINGSTONIANS IN THE SECOND PARLIAMENT

Richard Cartwright (1835-1912) was born in Kingston. Of English origin and an Anglican of United Empire Loyalist stock, he was the scion of a powerful Conservative family. He attended Trinity College, Dublin, 1851-56, but took no degree. After his return Cartwright "began the study of law but was never called to the bar."14 Instead he became a businessman-investor. His grandfather owned the site on which Napanee, in Lennox and Addington County, was built. This was the basis of Richard Cartwright's wealth. Additional business involvements were legion. He had interests in various financial concerns and served as president of the Commercial Bank until it folded in 1867. He participated in iron, plumbago, and gold mining ventures, and was heavily involved in transportation. Cartwright was even involved in the manufacture of tannin. At the local level he bought and sold land, managed his extensive properties, rented office space, took mortgages on land, and served as a director of the Kingston and Pembroke Railway. Business brought him into close contact with such businessmen-politicians as Alexander Morris, J. B. Robinson, Macdonald, and Campbell. A comment by Campbell indicates that he used his political influence on behalf of business associates: " I . . . will with pleasure see what can be done for your American lumbering friends "15 Cartwright's unusually long political career started when he was elected MPP for Lennox and Addington in 1863. Although a leading Kingstonian, both socially and in business, he had many close ties with his riding, based on his family's long relationship with the area. He was thus able to enter Parliament while a young man, without political experience. As an MPP he concernedrned himself with patronage and press management in the area, and pushed local interests.16 Cartwright held his seat until 1878, when he was defeated. He then sat for western Ontario constituencies until 1904. From 1904 until his death he was a senator. Cartwright served in Mackenzie's government as minister of finance, and in Laurier's regime as minister of trade and commerce. The question of Cartwright's affiliation is of considerable interest.17 Prior to 1869 Cartwright was a Conservative backbencher on warm terms with Macdonald. In 1869 he objected to the appointment of Francis Hincks as minister of finance. From time to time it is suggested that Cartwright's motivation was pique caused by his exclusion from office. This was hardly likely. Of five Ontario ministers he would have become the third Kingstonian and third Conservative in an ostensibly coalition regime—a politically absurd situation! Like many Conservatives, Cartwright was appalled by Hincks' appointment. His disillusionment with Macdonald probably dated from 1867 when the federal government refused to aid his ailing Commercial Bank, and his alienation was perhaps intensified by the realization that he had little 266

DONALD SWAINSON

future in a Conservative party dominated regionally by his fellow Kingstonians, Macdonald and Campbell. Nonetheless, he kept his options open for several years, and in the election of 1872 the Globe denounced him as "a Tory and a corruptionist."18 The revelations of the Pacific Scandal finally propelled Cartwright out of the Conservative party. By the time Macdonald's government fell in November 1873, Cartwright was a leading oppositionist. A senior portfolio in Mackenzie's government clinched his Liberal affiliation, and he remained a leading Liberal until he died. George Airey Kirkpatrick (1841-99) was the aristocrat in politics, wealthy, popular, educated, connected, haughty, and Anglican. Of Irish descent, he was born in Kingston. His father, Thomas Kirkpatrick, was a wealthy businessman and successful lawyer who studied law with Christopher Hagerman. In 1838 he was selected as first mayor of the Town of Kingston. He was later mayor of the City of Kingston and MP for Frontenac, 1867-70. From his father George Kirkpatrick inherited "large private means"19 and a host of useful contacts. John A. Macdonald, for example, was a family friend. George married twice. His first wife was a daughter of John Macaulay, an influential Tory politician. His second wife, whom he married in 1883, was a granddaughter of William Molson, and a daughter of Sir D. L. Macpherson, a powerful Toronto businessman and a Conservative senator. Kirkpatrick, who was a militia leader, was also a lifelong friend of Edward Blake and had close business and political ties with Macdonald, Cartwright, Campbell, O'Reilly, C. F. Gildersleeve, and the Calvins. Kirkpatrick's education was unusually extensive for a Canadian of that day. After attending the Kingston Grammar School and the High School at St. Johns, Quebec, he went, like Richard Cartwright, to Trinity College Dublin, where he graduated with the degrees AB and LLB (and as moderator and silr medallist in law, literature and political economy). In Canada, Kirkpatrick studied law and was called to the bar in 1865. Thereafter he practised law in Kingston and participated in numerous business endeavours, taking "a prominent part in establishing some of the more important industrial and commercial institutions of the Limestone City."20 These concerns included the Kingston Water Works, of which he was president, the Canadian Locomotive Company, of which he was also president, and the Kingston and Pembroke Railway, of which he was a director. During the 1880s Kirkpatrick became heavily involved in railways. In Parliament he regularly acted for a variety of businesses, especially in the fields of finance and transport. Perhaps because he was very young when he entered Parliament, Kirkpatrick had no career in local politics. Nonetheless he had numerous local associations through business, law, and education. He was closely tied to the 267

30 Sir George and Lady Kirkpatrick, 1891

DONALD SWAINSON

Kingston Collegiate Institute, Royal Military College, and Queen's. His federal career began in 1870 when he replaced his father as MP for Frontenac. He held Frontenac until he resigned in 1892. Although he was a lifelong Conservative, Kirkpatrick was almost persuaded by Cartwright and Blake to abandon Macdonald over the Pacific Scandal. As a politician he was only a minor success. Like Cartwright, he was effectively barred from advancement within the Conservative party because of the regional dominance of Macdonald and Campbell. Nonetheless he obtained the chairmanship of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts and the speakership of the House of Commons. In 1888 Macdonald refused him a cabinet post: "You are not strong enough in the House, when you were Speaker of the Commons you were afraid of Blake, and decided Parliamentary questions against your Conservative friends."21 In 1892 he succeeded Campbell as lieutenant-governor of Ontario, and served in this capacity until 1897. He refused to enter Bowell's cabinet in 1896.22 As a parliamentarian Kirkpatrick was active and able, intervening on hundreds of occasions with short comments. He was especially concerned with business problems, maritime transport, local affairs, important Kingston institutions, law reform, the tariff, the militia, land policy, and parliamentary procedure. Although he sat for Frontenac, Kirkpatrick regarded himself as a spokesman for Kingston interests. In 1891 he stated in the House of Commons that Kingston was "the city whence I come, where I was born and brought up, and where I have lived all my life. It is therefore needless for me to say that I take a great interest in it."23 A Roman Catholic, James O'Reilly (1823-75) was born in Ireland. His father, Peter O'Reilly, emigrated to Canada in 1832, settling in Belleville where he was a merchant. In 1847 Peter O'Reilly, an active Baldwinite, moved to Kingston where he obtained several patronage posts from the Reformers. After secondary education O'Reilly studied law with several powerful figures, including John Ross and J. W. Crawford. He was called to the bar in 1847. O'Reilly then moved to Kingston and quickly became a successful attorney, serving as defence attorney in a number of notorious criminal cases. In his most famous case, however, he prosecuted James Whelan, the alleged assassin of O'Reilly's friend, D'Arcy McGee. The Whelan trial of 1868 was a spectacular affair in which O'Reilly successfully took on five defence lawyers including J. H. and M. C. Cameron. It revealed O'Reilly as a tireless, brilliant, and savage attorney, who had proved publicly that he was in no way sympathetic to the Fenian movement.24 While primarily a lawyer, O'Reilly was marginally active in business as both a director and standing counsel of the Kingston and Pembroke Railway. 269

KINGSTONIANS IN THE SECOND PARLIAMENT

He was extensively involved in political and community activity in Kingston. He was an alderman, 1850-55, and served as Kingston's recorder, 1864-69. For a number of years he was president of the St. Patrick's Society and was active in the militia. O'Reilly's influence, which was based on his wide-ranging law practice and close association with Bishop E. J. Horan of Kingston, extended throughout eastern Ontario. He was first elected to Parliament in 1872. Macdonald and Campbell made the decision to run him in South Renfrew and secured for him the Conservative nomination.25 They then extended considerable assistance to a man who proved to be a prickly political colleague. O'Reilly declined to run in 1874. A consistent Conservative, he described himself as "A Baldwin Reformer, and a supporter of Sir John A. Macdonald."26 O'Reilly wanted a well-paying judicial post. His search for a judgeship was both active and well known. N. F. Davin was convinced that only premature death prevented O'Reilly from becoming Ontario's first Roman Catholic superior court judge: "[N]ot long before his death, he expressed satisfaction at having been assured that had Sir John Macdonald's Government remained in power, it was their intention to elevate him to the Bench whenever a vacancy should occur."27 O'Reilly's ambition for preferment and his considerable influence with Catholic voters almost certainly explain his brief career in federal politics. George Dormer (1838-75), another Irish Catholic, was born in Kingston where his father practised medicine. He was educated at Regiopolis College in Kingston, Laval University (BA, 1856), and the University of Toronto (BA, 1858). He then studied law in Macdonald's office. In 1862 he "was admitted as an Attorney, u.c." but was not called to the bar until 1872.28 For a time he was a civil service clerk. He then moved to Lindsay, where he was mayor, 1871-72. In the latter year he was elected to Parliament for South Victoria. His friend O'Reilly campaigned on his behalf, as did Macdonald who commented that "He had come to Lindsay for the purpose of doing what he could in his humble way for his personal and political friend Mr. Dormer."29 George Dormer was too ill to run in 1874. In 1875 he was with James O'Reilly when O'Reilly died. Dormer died of consumption a few weeks later. Schuyler Shibley (1820-90) was born in Frontenac county and lived in Murvale village, a few miles northwest of Kingston. He was educated at the Waterloo Academy in the Kingston area, and rounded out his training with a European tour. Shibley was a Methodist of German origin and UEL descent on both sides of his family. Jacob Shibley, an uncle, represented Frontenac in the Upper Canadian Assembly. Schuyler Shibley operated a farm, speculated heavily in land, and was a director of the Kingston and Pembroke Railway.30 270

DONALD SWAINSON

Shibley had the dubious distinction of being arrested with his mistress in 1866 on the charge of murdering their natural daughter. He was not tried but the unsuccessful trial of his mistress revealed a pathetically sordid private life. The ensuing publicity does not seem to have done serious harm to his public career. He served as a member of the Frontenac county council and was warden of Frontenac, 1868-69 and 1872. In 1867 he unsuccessfully contested Addington. He won the seat in 1872. Shibley's affiliation illustrates some of the political complexities of the Kingston district. In 1867 he was defeated by James Lapum, a Conservative. Shibley too was a Conservative, but was not then favoured by Conservative leaders. By 1872, however, Campbell feared that Lapum would lose to Shibley. In order not to alienate Shibley, senior Conservatives refrained from being too enthusiastic on Lapum's behalf during the 1872 campaign. As O'Reilly pointed out, Shibley was "as good a friend of the Government as Lapum."31 Shibley, who satisfied Campbell that he was a loyal Conservative, thus entered the House of Commons as a self-proclaimed and accepted member of the government caucus.32 His loyalty was of short duration. Late in 1873 he defected to the Liberals over the Pacific Scandal. Shibley was undoubtedly influenced by R. J. Cartwright (his county colleague) and by a strong desire to retain control over Addington's patronage. He sat as a Liberal until defeated in 1878. Shibley was a factionalist with an unusually sordid private life. His defection to the Liberals is an interesting comment on the leadership of Mackenzie and Blake. In spite of their high moral tone over the Pacific Scandal, they accepted support from any willing politician regardless of his reputation, judgment, or moral worth. John Hamilton (1802-82)33 was the son of Robert Hamilton, UEL. Robert, once Richard Cartwright's business partner, became a merchant at Queenston, "of which he was the founder."34 He was a member of Upper Canada's Legislative Council. The City of Hamilton was named after his son George (John's older brother), "who bought in 1813 a tract of land at the head of Lake Ontario."35 John was born at Queenston and educated at Queenston, Hamilton, and Edinburgh, Scotland. One of his daughters married a son of William Henry Draper, a Conservative leader during the 1830s and 1840s and John A. Macdonald's mentor. Hamilton, a wealthy and powerful businessman, settled in Kingston in the 1830s.36 He "was one of the pioneer steamboat men, and either owned or chartered [numerous boats] plying upon Lake Ontario and the River St. Lawrence."37 His business interests were extensive. In addition to shipping and shipbuilding (by land and water), Hamilton served as president of the Commercial Bank of the Midland District and of the Canadian Inland Steam Navigation Company, and he founded "the Royal Mail Line, which was . . . 271

KINGSTONIANS IN THE SECOND PARLIAMENT

handsomely subsidized by the Government in connection with the postal service."38 He had retired from business by 1872. He was intimately associated with Kingstonians, as president of the St. Andrew's Society and as a founder of Queen's. He served as chairman of the board of trustees of Queen's College, 1841-82. His political career, unmarred by electoral hazards, was unusually long. In 1831 he was appointed to the Legislative Council of Upper Canada. He was a legislative councillor of the Province of Canada, 1841-67, and served in the Senate from 1867 until his death. Hamilton, dean of the Senate when he died, thus served as a Conservative legislative councillor for fifty-one years. In 1873 he was seventy-one. Macdonald, the next oldest Kingston legislator, was fifty-eight. Hamilton was at least a political generation older than his local colleagues, and, although he was still active in the Senate from time to time, he was past his prime by the second parliament. Ill

These eight politicians constitute an impressive group.39 Five were born in Ontario; one each in England, Ireland, and Scotland. These latter three men emigrated when young. Only O'Reilly, who came when he was nine, was subject to strong foreign influences while growing up. In ethnic terms three were Scottish, three Irish, one English, and one German. Three were Anglicans, two Presbyterians, two Roman Catholics, and one Methodist. Three were of UEL origin. Cartwright, Kirkpatrick, and Hamilton came from elite backgrounds. Campbell and Dormer were both sons of physicians. Shibley and O'Reilly were from prosperous middle-class homes. Macdonald's background was the most modest, his father being a declining small businessman. Nonetheless, Macdonald possessed valuable contacts through relatives and belonged to a supportive religious-ethnic group. He thus possessed many middle-class advantages. Education and family status were closely associated. Shibley and Hamilton attended secondary schools; Macdonald, Campbell, and O'Reilly had secondary educations followed by professional training; Kirkpatrick and Dormer each earned two university degrees before studying law; Cartwright completed part of a university training. Hamilton, Cartwright, and Kirkpatric studied abroad (as did Shibley if one counts his European tour)—an option available only to wealthy families in nineteenth-century Ontario. Vocationally, this group was unusually homogeneous, including three businessman-lawyers, two businessmen, two lawyers, and one businessmanfarmer. Only O'Reilly and Dormer were not heavily committed to business. The following table indicates the wide spectrum of business activity represented at various times by the members of this group: 272

DONALD SWAINSON

Finance— Macdonald, Campbell, Cartwright, Kirkpatrick, Hamilton Transportation— Macdonald, Campbell, Cartwright, Kirkpatrick, O'Reilly, Shibley, Hamilton Real Estate— Macdonald, Campbell, Cartwright, Shibley Mining— Campbell, Cartwright Manufacturing— Cartwright Utilities— Kirkpatrick Agriculture— Shibley

Macdonald, Campbell, Cartwright, Kirkpatrick, and Hamilton were wellestablished members of Kingston's business elite. Macdonald, Campbell, Cartwright, and Kirkpatrick used their political influence on behalf of their business interests. All had deep roots in Kingston, and the nonresident MP'S had many associations with their ridings. Five had careers in local politics; Cartwright, Kirkpatrick, and Hamilton, who came from the most powerful and prestigious families, did not. This kind of experience was apparently unnecessary for those who came from the highest social strata. Cartwright, Kirkpatrick, O'Reilly, Shibley, and Hamilton came from families with political traditions at least a generation old. The average age of these Kingstonians in 1873 was forty-six. Their contribution to politics was inestimable. They sat in the House of Commons and/or Senate for an average of twenty-six years. Hamilton, Cartwright, and Macdonald served respectively for fifty-one, forty-nine, and forty-seven years. Macdonald, Campbell, Cartwright, and Kirkpatrick attained leadershi, cabinet rank, or lieutenant-governorships. In 1872 these men were all Conservatives. Cartwright and Shibley joined the Liberals in 1873. The toughness of Macdonald's leadership and the Conservative tradition in the district is indicated by the fact that in 1878 Shibley was defeated and Cartwright driven out of eastern Ontario. A host of relationships tied the group together. Macdonald, Campbell, Kirkpatrick, and Hamilton were influential Queen's men. Cartwright and Kirkpatrick attended Trinity College, while Dormer and Campbell studied law in Macdonald's office. Campbell was once Macdonald's law partner. O'Reilly collaborated closely with Campbell and Macdonald, and was Dormer's close friend. Macdonald and O'Reilly were confidants of Bishop Horan and worked in intimate association during Whelan's trial. Shibley collaborated with Campbell, O'Reilly, Macdonald, and Cartwright. Seven of these men were businessmen in a small city. They built up common interests in such major business areas as finance, transportation, and real estate speculation. Personal interactions were numerous and these business-oriented men shared experiences, knowledge, and assumptions. 273

KINGSTONIANS IN THE SECOND PARLIAMENT

Prior to the mid-1870s they did not differ on business or business-related matters like the tariff. Their specific business associations are interesting. The Commercial Bank was a powerful Kingston institution. Hamilton and Cartwright both served as its president and Macdonald was associated with the bank as a director and solicitor, as well as through his cousin and father. The most impressive illustration of business cooperation, however, was the Kingston and Pembroke Railway, which was both private enterprise and a community endeavour.40 The "Kick and Push," as it was called locally, got under way in 1871. The object was to run a line north to Pembroke, in order to enlarge Kingston's hinterland. This would enable the bringing of lumber, mineral resources, and quarry products to Kingston for transshipment. In addition the KPR would. connect Kingston with the projected transcontinental line. The KPR was speedily constructed, and it "served the lumbering, quarrying and mining interests along its route for 40 years, to the benefit of Kingston."41 Six of our politicians were active in the firm! Campbell, Cartwright, Kirkpatrick, O'Reilly, and Shibley were directors. O'Reilly was also the line's standing counsel. Macdonald's concern was deep and detailed, as this letter to Cartwright indicates: "The Robinson-Livingston-Fraser clique are intriguing and I want to checkmate them. It you can't attend personally Wednesday sent your Proxy like a good fellow to O'Reilly." Macdonald was seconded by Campbell.42 Other Kingston politicians promoted the line, including C. F. Gildersleeve (Liberal) and D. D. Calvin (Conservative). An interesting telegram signed by a number of these politicians and addressed to Macdonald illustrates the ties between politicians and business, and business and all levels of government: "Have sent alderman Price to Toronto to induce premier [Sandfield Macdonald] to introduce a bill into the assembly to grant bonus to railways without special charter. Most important to us. Write or telegraph to induce Sandfield to help us."43 The Kingston and Pembroke is an excellent example of the fusion of economic and political power in the interests of a metropolitan thrust: all constituencies through which the line passed were controlled by Kingston politicians. Dormer and O'Reilly stood slightly apart from this prestigious and unusually homogeneous group. In 1872 lay and religious leaders of Ontario's Irish Catholics were seriously disturbed over neglect at the hands of Macdonald and lack of adequate political representation. Action was demanded, with the result that four Irish Catholics were elected for Ontario seats in 1872. John O'Conner was an incumbent, and Darby Bergin a Liberal. O'Reilly and Dormer were elected with the direct assistance of Macdonald and his Kingston colleagues.44 It was probably the power, prestige, and elite status of Macdonald's Kingston group that obtained for O'Reilly and Dormer nominations and then electoral success. 274

DONALD SWAINSON

The tremendous power of these politicians is illustrated by the fact that two of them led the governing party in Commons and Senate. This power was consolidated and enhanced by far-ranging associations.45 Business activities involved contacts throughout the new federal state, and these contacts included J. B. Robinson Jr., Alexander Mackenzie, Alexander Morris, Edward Blake, George Brown, M. C. Cameron, Adam Crooks, William McMaster, C. J. Brydges, A. T. Gait, and James Domville. Through his two marriages Kirkpatrick was allied to three powerful families—Macaulays, Molsons, and Macphersons. Campbell linked the conservative traditions of Kingston and Toronto, and Toronto business with the Conservative Party. Macdonald, at least during his first administration, was oriented towards Montreal. Campbell, the organizer, was a confidant of Senator John Hamilton, an Ottawa valley lumberman (not to be confused with Hamilton of Kingston), and a close ally of E. B. Rathbun, a lumber baron who exercised great influence in the Lennox and AddingtonHastings area. Macdonald represented the moderate conservative tradition of Sydenham and Draper. While this sometimes placed him at odds with Toronto conservatives, it enabled him to maintain an alliance with both Catholics and Orangemen, and to keep within the Ontario wing of his party Baldwinites like O'Reilly, Tories like J. B. Robinson Jr., factionalists like Mackenzie Bowell, and moderates like himself. The Kingston group was a sort of microcosm of the Ontario wing of the party. Over the long run leadership of the Macdonald type was essential to the stability and success of both. IV

When studying politicians through patterned biographies it is tempting to draw from the patterns revealed firmer conclusions than is warranted by the evidence. The five most powerful members of the Kingston group emerge as a homogeneous group. It would be erroneous to assume that they were in politics simply to act for those interests with which they were clearly identified. They did, of course, represent various interests; they also made decisions that contradicted personal interest. Macdonald, for example, refused to aid the Commercial Bank in 1867. This damaged his relationship with Cartwright (the bank's president) and precipitated personal bankruptcy, for his firm was heavily indebted to the bank. It is well known that Macdonald's party accepted huge sums from Sir Hugh Allan during the 1872 campaign, and that Allan was consequently given the charter to construct the transcontinental railroad. It is not so well known that Allan's chief rival, Senator D. L. Macpherson, was the treasurer of the testimonial fund raised for Macdonald in 1871-72. Had Macdonald opted for Macpherson's syndicate instead of Allan's, he would have allied himself with a man to whom he was personally indebted 275

KINGSTONIANS IN THE SECOND PARLIAMENT

instead of to a man to whom his party was indebted! Cartwright provides a further example. He owned quantities of western land that would have increased in value with a successful National Policy. His support of continentalism during the 1880s militated against his own interests. Other considerations motivated these men. They accepted politics as a way of life. Macdonald, Campbell, Cartwright, Kirkpatrick, and Hamilton spent most of their adult lives in Parliament. They could do this because nineteenth-century politics was not a full-time job. It is not easy to plumb the inner minds of men who did not write or talk about their motivations, but one pattern is fairly clear. Forms of prestige common now—university chancellorships, royal commission memberships, heads of philanthropic organizations, ambassadorships—did not exist in any abundance in nineteenth-century Canada. Politics and local leadership, on the other hand, were very prestigious. Four members of the Kingston group obtained knighthoods, two became lieutenant-governors, one served as Laurier's Ontario lieutenant, two were Fathers of Confederation, and one was Canada's most famous prime minister. Through politics the members of the Kingston group rose within Ontario's social structure. For men like Campbell and Kirkpatrick the lieutenant-governorship capped two generations of upward mobility. These nineteenth-century politicians were not simply spokesmen for the interests they represented, but it would be wrong to dismiss their homogeneity and elite status as unimportant. They were intellectually restricted by their backgrounds and by their colleagues and opponents. Personnel limitations made them less responsive to unrepresented interests and classes than might have been the case with more heterogeneous representation, and this helps explain their political assumptions. John Porter has put it well: From the point of view of political power what is more important than interest representation is the range of social perspectives which are brought to bear on public issues. If we accept Mannheim's persuasive argument that a person's beliefs about social reality are shaped by the social milieu to which he has been exposed, we can see that the definitions of reality which provide the framework for making political decisions depend much on the social background and life experiences of politicians. The predominance of some occupational groups and people of one class background means that limited perspectives are brought to bear on public issues.46

It should be noted that these men could not act as brokers among a wide variety of interests, because they did not represent any such variety of interests. Their milieu was very limited. In 1872 the population of Kingston was about 12,500.47 The tremendous concentration of power represented by the Kingston group must have had a 276

DONALD SWAINSON

considerable impact on social relationships in a small, closely-knit community. Homogeneity of type did not prevent quarrels among the political elite, especially after the traumatic events of 1873. An interesting example occurred in the House of Commons in 1881. The subject was the CPR charter. Cartwright, who then represented Centre Huron, and Kirkpatrick got into a dispute over public opinion in Kingston. Cartwright claimed that Kingston, which was represented by his fellow Liberal Alexander Gunn (who defeated Macdonald in 1874), opposed the charter. Kirkpatrick disagreed and challenged Cartwright: "If he [Cartwright] will resign his seat for Centre Huron I will resign mine for Frontenac, and I will run against the hon. and gallant knight in Kingston, and we will test the opinion of that constituency."48 During the entire session poor Gunn spoke only once—on the sugar tariff!49 He was not needed to represent Kingston views with Macdonald, Cartwright, and Kirkpatrick in the House. Canadian historical writing is often criticized for being excessively oriented towards politics. Nonetheless we know relatively little about nineteenth-century political parties or political culture. Perhaps great men have been studied in excessive isolation, and too much attention paid to catastrophic crises. It may be time to devote more energy to studying politicians in relation to their localities, and local groups within their parties. This might lead to a more comprehensive understanding of national parties, policy formation, and political culture.

277

This page intentionally left blank

V

Social Change

This page intentionally left blank

The Poor

kin Kingston, 1815-1850 PATRICIA E. MALCOLMSON

From a small settlement of some five hundred people in 1800, Kingston grew to an active urban community of 10,160 in 1850.1 Much can be learned from memoirs, newspapers, and other documentary sources about the more prominent citizens of this Upper Canadian town: their way of life, their homes, their businesses, their political and social concerns, and their cultural activities. But Kingston, in common with any community, had its share of the labouring poor, the destitute, the helpless, and the social misfits. Here the task of historical reconstruction becomes more difficult. The urban poor in the first half of the nineteenth century left few accounts of their lives and thoughts. Theirs was not the world of the diarist, the energetic man of affairs, or the writer of letters. Most of them were illiterate and the rest had little time to devote to a culture of literacy. One must, therefore, rely heavily upon scattered comments and descriptions by their social superiors (whose class background almost certainly coloured their observations and reactions) in order to piece together a picture of life at the lower levels of Kingston society. Kingston in the first half of the nineteenth century was a prosperous community which included a military garrison, naval and private shipyards, a number of small workshops and industries, and many commercial establishments. It was one of the most thriving ports on Lake Ontario; in 1847 there were "ten daily steamers running to and from Kingston, and about thirty smaller ships and propellers, and a fleet of two hundred schooners and sailing barges."2 Kingston's strategic position at the head of the lake enabled the community to become an important transshipment port where goods were transferred from canal vessels to lake boats. The town was a major transportation centre; immigrants usually stopped at Kingston after having travelled up the St. Lawrence and transferred to lake boats, stage-coaches, or wagons to continue to their destinations. Hotels, inns, and taverns thrived on this traffic. Kingston was also an important market town for the surrounding 281

THE POOR IN K I N G S T O N , 1815-1850

area; a market was established by statute in 1801. Farmers from Kingston's hinterland brought their produce to sell in the marketplace and returned home with purchases from the town's shops. The general prosperity of Kingston in this period was relatively secure, in part because its economic activities were so many-faceted. The economy of the town depended as much upon the labour of its working people as upon the enterprise of its men of property. The labouring poor in the first half of the nineteenth century were employed as general labourers or as semi-skilled workmen. Journeymen carpenters, millwrights, masons, and most other skilled artisans were in great demand in Upper Canada, particularly in the early years of the century, and consequently were well paid. A letter from Kingston area residents to Robert Gourlay in November 1817 reported that carpenters earned an average of 8s.6d. per day plus room and board.3 In 1834 the Kingston Spectator printed a list of wage rates in Upper Canada which gives 3s.6d. to 7s.6d. as the range for carpenters but only 2s. to 4s. for agricultural labourers.4 In 1837, a year in which the demand for labourers in Kingston was unusually high, the Chronicle and Gazette reported that the daily wage for labourers on the King's works at Point Henry had been raised to 3s.6d. and that 3s.6d. to 4s. was the current wage rate for labourers on the road being built between Kingston and Napanee.5 Probably the largest single area of employment for labouring men was the building trades. The expansion of the town, which had been spurred by the War of 1812, continued in succeeding decades, and construction provided jobs for many labourers. Between 1820 and 1850 many of Kingston's most important public buildings were erected: St. George's Cathedral, the "Stone Frigate," the first St. Andrew's Church and the Union Church (the latter no longer standing) were all built in the 1820s; the original sections of the Kingston General Hospital and Regiopolis College were constructed in the 1830s, and the Kingston City Hall and St. Mary's Cathedral in the 1840s. Further employment opportunities for labourers were afforded by two major engineering projects: the Cataraqui Bridge (the Cataraqui Bridge Company was incorporated in 1827), and the Rideau Canal, begun in 1826 and completed in 1832. Both projects employed large numbers of poor Irish immigrants.6 The completion of the canal did not result in a complete cessation of employment for labourers. In March of 1836, for example, an advertisement for sixty to seventy labourers "to whom liberal wages will be given" appeared in a Kingston paper; the men were to be employed on the canal between Kingston Mills and Brewers' Lower Mills.7 The government required labour for small construction projects as well as such major undertakings as the building of Fort Henry. In 1821, for example, tenders were called for a government contract to build sixteen cottages on Point Frederick "Of good solid rubble 282

31 Kingston General Hospital, 1893 (original building of 1835 in the centre)

T H E P O O R I N K I N G S T O N , 1815-1850

work . . . the walls to be eighteen inches thick, with stud partitions."8 The erection of private residences provided further labouring jobs, especially from 1841 to 1844 when Kingston was the capital of the Canadas. The extent of private building is suggested by the development of Farm Lot 24 (officially annexed to the city in 1850), for which more than 550 deeds were registered in the years 1831-50, the majority of which would have represented new building.9 Road building provided temporary jobs for the able-bodied; in 1837, for instance, nearly five hundred persons were actively employed in the construction of a macadamized road between Kingston and Napanee.10 Employment was frequently available in the countryside around Kingston for labourers willing to assist settlers of means in clearing their land and preparing it for crops. Advertisements for labourers to clear land, chop wood, erect fences, and burn lime appeared periodically in the local press.11 For others, somewhat less arduous work might be found in private gardens or nursery grounds and market gardens in or near the town, such as that owned by James Wadsworth in Stuartville.12 From its earliest days Kingston and a number of neighbouring centres (Bath, Portsmouth, Garden Island) had been associated with shipbuilding and docking. A military dockyard was established in 1789 and activity there reached its height during the War of 1812. Thereafter commercial vessels rather than warships formed the core of Kingston's shipbuilding industry. The Marine Railway Company is a good example of commercial shipping activity in Kingston. The company, formed by John Counter in 1836, constructed a dock and warehouse for the transshipment trade and opened a shipyard for building both lake boats and ocean-going vessels. Enterprises like this one made Kingston by the 1830s one of the most important ports on Lake Ontario; a large number of ships were owned and registered there, and shipbuilding and the holding and forwarding of goods played a significant role in the town's economy. The editor of the British Whig made it a practice to tour Kingston's dockyard at the beginning of the shipping season; in 1836, for instance, he found three new wharves in the course of construction and a number of ships being built, including the 108-foot long steamship Bytown.13 Many workingmen were able to find work in the dockyards; some were employed in the building or repairing of ships, others as dockers loading and unloading vessels, still others in the warehouses, and some as sailors. Other workers in ancillary industries, such as foundries and lumberyards, were indirectly dependent on the shipyards for their jobs. Although work was plentiful in the Kingston dockyard in the summer months, there was very little employment available in the winter. Many of the labouring poor found work in what may be termed the service 284

PATRICIA E. MALCOLMSON

sector. As the town grew and prospered the number of its taverns,.hotels, and shops increased, and with them the positions available for barmen, grooms, hostlers, servants, and shop assistants. As early as 1817 there were sixtyseven shops and forty-one taverns, inns, hotels, and coffee-houses in the town and township, and most of these enterprises would have employed at least one male servant or assistant.14 Jobs were also open for servants in private households. Those of a more independent cast created work for themselves as hucksters, pedlars, or carters: among the Roman Catholic population in Kingston in 1844 there were twenty-five Irish hucksters and fourteen carters.15 Some carters transported goods on a casual basis, others obtained contracts for delivering goods at specified times. An advertisement in the British Whig of 16 September 1837, for instance, called for tenders for carting wood for the military. The life of the huckster was precarious; at times they must have hovered about the ill-defined line between selling items of little value and begging. Even those who were relatively successful were not without problems. Their success was an irritation to stall-holders in the marketplace and to small shopkeepers, and in 1854 city council passed a by-law "to impose a duty on Hawkers and Petty Chapmen trading within the City of Kingston."16 There would have been a great many artisans in Kingston who were very well paid but by no means all local artisans could be considered men of property. For instance, how many of the 36 carpenters, 6 ship's carpenters, 33 shoemakers, 12 stone masons, and 24 tailors listed in a census of the Roman Catholic population were fully qualified journeymen, and for how many was work sufficiently regular and well paid to raise them above mere subsistence? Certainly their wages were subject to the caprices of the market and a comfortable income could quickly be drastically reduced. For instance, in 1835 J. Murray, a Kingston shoe manufacturer, sought to cut the losses incurred by the falling price of shoes by slashing his journeymen's wages. In this case the workers protested by smashing windows and smearing the front of Mr. Murray's house with "human ordure."17 On 1 May 1837 the British Whig reported that, contrary to the editor's own notion of justice in the case, five journeymen bakers had been acquitted of "a conspiracy to raise their wages." Thus while some artisans in the first half of the nineteenth century occupied a very favourable economic position, others took their place among the labouring poor. Women and children formed a significant segment of the labouring poor. Female servants, by far the largest single group, were paid 15s. to 30s. per month with room and board, according to an 1834 estimate.18 In 1844 there were 105 Irish Catholic women and one Scots Catholic employed as servants in the homes and hostelries of Kingston. Certainly many others of different 285

T H E P O O R I N K I N G S T O N , 1815-1850

nationalities and religious persuasions were similarly employed. Immigrant women unfortunate enough to be widowed or deserted had little choice but to sell their services as domestics. Sometimes pauper women were sent to North America specifically to seek work as domestics. Poor Law Unions, especially after 1840, sent Irish workhouse girls to British North America where the local immigration agent tried to place them in domestic situations. Many proved capable, trustworthy, and hard-working; others knew nothing of domestic work and had no desire to learn.19 Temperament and lack of training made a small number unemployable.20 A few poor women were employed as dressmakers (seven Irish Catholics in 1844) while others took in washing.21 In 1821 a Mrs. Leevas advised the public that she "takes in washing and clear starching, at Mr. Joseph Ransur's, below the Roman Church."22 Occasionally notices in the press offered the services of a young woman as a wet nurse. Some women would have been part-time workers, only entering the labour market (usually as dressmakers' assistants, charwomen or washerwomen) when the family's principal breadwinner was unemployed or earning less than usual. The possibility of taking in washing or doing a little plain-sewing was the closest thing the poor woman had to an insurance policy against financial disaster or widowhood. Some only joined the ranks of the poor after having been widowed. Sometimes such women would put together their last pennies to set up a small shop, perhaps a millinery or dress shop, and often they found that their modest businesses, as a writer to the Kingston Spectator complained in 1836, were "neglected in favour of the shops of 'men of property'."23 Finally, as in any town, some women earned a living through prostitution. Kingston's position as a garrison and port town encouraged opportunities for this trade. The low taverns located near the waterfront and garrison were often frequented by prostitutes, and the small communities dominated by the poor on the outskirts of the town sometimes harboured brothels. Court reports contain notices of convictions for "keeping a disorderly house"24 but there is little to suggest that such convictions resulted in any long-term reduction in such activities. The children of the poor often earned their keep from an early age. In 1837, for instance, children were employed breaking stones for a road being built between Kingston and Napanee.25 At this time in England, stone-breaking was a task generally reserved for adult male paupers and convicts. Many children were hired out as servants, errand or delivery boys, apprentices, and agricultural labourers, while others assisted their parents as junior pedlars, carters, washerwomen, or even as beggars. As late as 1872 a pastor cited instances "in which children, instead of being sent to school, are sent out day after day to beg from door to door, that their miserable parents might gratify 286

PATRICIA E. MALCOLMSON

their craving for strong drink."26 More frequently children were hired on the basis of an oral understanding between the parents and the employer as to the length of service and the child's duties and care, but occasionally written agreements were drawn up. In 1814, for instance, a Kingston householder and a child's mother signed "articles of agreement" under which "the woman's son was to be a servant for five years 'to perform all such services and business whatsoever' as his mistress might demand. In return he was to receive board, lodging, clothing, and instruction in reading the English language."27 In the Kingston House of Industry it was common practice to hire out to area residents the children of destitute families and orphans admitted to the institution. Of those admitted to the institution in December 1847, for instance, 43 per cent of the children between ten and twenty years of age were hired out.28 The Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society continued this policy and normally children under their care were indentured at the age of twelve.29 For most of Kingston's poor children the hard realities of life came early and the idylls of childhood were short indeed. Many people had become poor because of sickness, or found their precarious circumstances aggravated when disease struck. Frequently illness was the weight which tipped the delicate balance of a poor family's economy from subsistence to destitution. Unable to work and without funds to support themselves, they became a concern of the community. The harshness of the climate, disease, accident, and insufficient medical attention were hazards which threatened all early nineteenth-century colonists. The poor, who were frequently ill-housed, ill-nourished, and ill-clad, were the most vulnerable. Kingston, as the town where most immigrants stopped after their journey up the St. Lawrence, had to cope with illness among immigrants who had never intended to settle there as well as with the sick poor who were permanent residents. Immigrants formed the human cargo of timber ships on their outward voyage to British North America. A timber ship became a passenger vessel by the simple addition of a temporary deck laid less than six feet below the upper deck and the erection of two tiers of rough wooden berths along each side and sometimes up the centre. A lower deck, approximately ninetyfive feet by twenty-five, with no portholes or adequate means of ventilation, was considered adequate accommodation for 240 passengers under the Passenger Act of 1835.30 That disease was prevalent under such conditions, especially when many of the passengers were ill-prepared for the rigours of the journey, is scarcely surprising. Even the best emigration schemes, those for which settlers were carefully chosen and equipped and where conditions aboard ship were relatively good, were plagued by illness. Peter Robinson's Irish emigration scheme of 1825, often acknowledged to have been one of the best, was marred by sickness: "At Kingston where the shiploads of emigrants 287

THE POOR IN K I N G S T O N , 1815-1850

were soon encamped, 300 cases of fever and 33 deaths occurred before Robinson arrived to move the new arrivals on to Coburg."31 The ravages of disease left large numbers of widows and orphans to add to the ranks of Kingston's poor. Each new shipload of immigrants seemed to bring more poverty and disease. In 1828 there was a serious outbreak of typhus fever among the families of navvies brought from Ireland when the Cataraqui Bridge and the Rideau Canal were being constructed; in 1832 a cholera epidemic, apparently carried by the newcomers, claimed an estimated four hundred Kingstonians as well as unnumbered new immigrants. In 1847 the thousands of poor Irishmen who had left Ireland to escape the potato famine brought a cholera epidemic to Upper Canada: the estimated twelve hundred who died in Kingston were buried in a mass grave near the Kingston General Hospital. Numbers of immigrants arrived in Kingston without the means to proceed any further and joined the ranks of the unemployed or the casual labouring population. From time to time immigrants unable to find work locally, or without the means to proceed to their original destination, were given assistance to search for work elsewhere. For example, in March 1820 a meeting of the Kingston Compassionate Society was informed that in the previous two months twelve persons had been assisted to proceed to the country where they hoped to find work, four men had been sent to Montreal, and two families to York, and that poor travellers en route to other parts of Upper Canada had been furnished with bread for their journey.32 Occasionally immigrants not completely destitute upon their arrival in Kingston quickly became so through misfortune or mismanagement. Without ready means of support, some found the prospects of a precarious subsistence as part of the coterie of hangers-on of a garrison and port town more attractive than the physically demanding and socially isolating task of pioneer farming. Begging, gambling, prostitution, and theft provided an uncertain livelihood for some of those on the fringes of Kingston society. The dwellings of the poor, unlike some of those of the wealthy, have not survived to provide any details of how those at the bottom of the social and economic ladder lived in Kingston in the first half of the nineteenth century. Many labourers probably lived in small and insubstantial buildings made of logs, green or used lumber; others found accommodation in a room behind a shop or in servants' quarters at the top of a house. In the early years of the century few of Kingston's homes were very grand and on the small townsite the dwellings of rich and poor were intermingled. As the town grew in size and wealth, it acquired a number of impressive private residences and public buildings and enjoyed a brief prominence as the capital of the Canadas, and with time a greater degree of residential differentiation became apparent. Although wealth and poverty could still often be found cheek by jowl, there 288

PATRICIA E. MALCOLMSON

were a number of areas in the town and vicinity where there were pockets of poverty and low-life. Perhaps the largest areas in which the poor were to be found were in the "villages" scattered around the outskirts of the town. One area which seems to have been almost exclusively poor was Picardville or the "French Village," located in the York Street and Picard Street (now Raglan Road) area. The village, which grew up as a result of a brief period of settlement by French royalist emigres at the end of the eighteenth century, retained its French name long after the French settlers themselves had moved onwards, and was principally known by Kingston and area residents as a locality which thrived on drink, vice, and prostitution. One of the larger concentrations of labouring people was to be found in the area known as Stuartville or Farm Lot 24 (which extended west from Barrie Street to University and north from the lake to the first concession). Stuartville was named after its owner, Archdeacon George Okill Stuart, who was an enthusiastic land developer.33 On this property Stuart built Summerhill, the commanding residence which now belongs to Queen's University. Much of the rest of the land on the lot he divided into small plots which he sold to artisans and labouring men as well as to more prosperous buyers. In the years between the mid-1820s and 1850 there was a great deal of building activity on Lot 24. Artisans and labourers, such as one Patrick Donelly, a stone mason, and Robert Douglas, a yeoman, purchased small plots from Stuart34 upon which they then erected homes for themselves and, in all probability, accommodation for rental to others unable to purchase land of their own. By 1844 there were 388 Roman Catholic residents in Stuartville (south of Store Street), all but fifteen of them Irish born. All but one of those for whom an occupation was listed, that is, fifty-four of the ninety-nine males over the age of fifteen, were employed as manual workers, twenty-eight (51.8 per cent) giving their occupation as labourer. A select committee of the Legislative Assembly, as a result of enquiries made in 1845, found that with few exceptions the inhabitants of the lot were mechanics and labourers, some being land owners, others tenants at low rents.35 The records of the House of Industry reveal that some of the residents were forced to turn to charity for help.36 When subdividing this land, Archdeacon Stuart effectively isolated the poor by laying out virtually all of the small plots on a piece of land north of the lake and well away from Summerhill and other imposing residences. The result was the creation of a crowded settlement of relatively poor people just beyond the city limits. A map dated 1842 shows a concentration of small wooden structures on Lot 24 between the present Union and Johnson streets, 65 per cent of which had been erected since November 1840.37 One hundred and fifty-six structures (not all perhaps dwellings) were constructed on the sixty lots in this area; only eight of them were stone or brick. The most cramped buildings were aligned 289

THE POOR IN K I N G S T O N , 1815-1850

along two alleyways—a total of thirty-two wooden buildings on two small lots. An editorial in the Daily British Whig of 4 June 1849 commented on the filth and disease prevalent in the area, which the article attributed partly to the lack of proper sewerage and drainage and partly to the slovenly habits of the inhabitants. According to this account, medical men had found mortality in the suburb to be two or three times that of the rest of the town. The preponderance of labouring men in the area continued and in 1861 41 per cent of all labourers who were heads of households resided in Victoria Ward, which included most of what had been Lot 24 (south of Store Street) before its annexation to the city in 1850.38 How can one account for such a large concentration of labouring people in this location? The land was not intrinsically undesirable for development by those of greater means; indeed, the proximity to the large City Park and to the lake made it an attractive site. Some persons, including of course Stuart himself, erected substantial buildings on the lot, and the original General Hospital located beside the lake housed the legislature of the United Canadas for a brief period. Nor, conversely, was the site so close to a large source of employment as to give it particular appeal for labouring people. The prime factor in the type of residential development which occurred was the initiative taken by Archdeacon Stuart, who laid out small lots and sold them "at low rates for the purpose of encouraging industrious mechanics and labourers who were unable to purchase land in the limits of the Town, and pay Town taxes."39 These two financial incentives attracted labouring people and provided the basis of Stuartville's notoriety. Stuartville came to the notice of Kingstonians not because of its social life, as was the case with Picardville, but because of the strenuous objection to annexation voiced by many of its residents—a cause which in the view of one historian served to keep municipal politics alive in Kingston for a decade.40 The town council sponsored petitions in favour of annexation while the lot's inhabitants, not wanting to assume any responsibility for the town's large municipal debt, supported the anti-annexationist petitions of Archdeacon Stuart.41 Ultimately the city council had its way and in 1850 Stuartville and its many labouring residents were absorbed officially into the City of Kingston. There was little security in the lives of the labouring people. Disease, unemployment, crop failure, or crippling accident could make them paupers overnight. The death or desertion of the principal breadwinner could have the same effect. The climate took its toll: cold weather increased the chance of illness, especially for those least well equipped physically and financially to cope with it, while during long spells of hot weather infection spread quickly in unsanitary and overcrowded conditions; a long winter could mean destitu-

290

PATRICIA E. MALCOLMSON

tion for labourers who found work most difficult to find in winter. Fire was a major hazard. Sparks from a chimney could destroy a block of shops and homes in a few minutes. Open fires, closely packed wooden buildings, and rudimentary fire precautions were a lethal combination. Hazards of this sort, as well as a variety of personal and social problems, such as alcoholism or mental illness, frequently created destitution. Those in distress looked to the more fortunate in society for assistance. In the first half of the nineteenth century the poor in Upper Canada had no government welfare services to which they could turn. The first statute of the Legislature of Upper Canada introduced English civil law but specified "that nothing in this Act. . . shall . . . introduce any of the laws of England concerning the maintenance of the poor."42 It remains unclear why, when England had had a Poor Law since 1597, similar provision was deliberately excluded in Upper Canada. Possibly it was felt that such measures would be unnecessary in a pioneer society or that the property taxes necessary to finance such provision might provoke a hostile response. Simcoe, a centralist, might have opposed the local power which would have to be given to overseers of the poor. Whatever the reason, the result was that responsibility for the poor was shifted to relatives, friends, and private philanthropy, although occasionally magistrates ordered payment of small sums for the sick poor, unmarried mothers, orphans, and for the burial of pauper immigrants. Richard Cartwright, a legislative councillor in the time of Simcoe, was reportedly the first to suggest the appointment of an official to look after the poor of Kingston.43 He further proposed that some provision be made for the aged and infirm and that a civic hospital be erected.44 In 1819 the magistrates and inhabitants of the Midland District met several times with the aim of preventing poverty and bettering the condition of the poor, but despite the considerable interest which was aroused these meetings appear to have accomplished little.45 Kingston's poor were cared for by a variety of private charities, most of which were supported by the middle and upper classes; at least one charity, however, the Carters' Benefit Society, was formed by labouring people themselves. The Kingston Compassionate Society, later absorbed by the Female Benevolent Society, was the most important single charitable organization. Founded in 1817 under the chairmanship of Rev. George Okill Stuart, the society was supported by many of the town's leading citizens and was dependent for its finances on the subscription of charitable citizens, although in later years the city council, the district council, and the provincial government sometimes made grants to assist the body. Its finances were precarious and frequent appeals for funds were made. The society was also dependent on volunteers who gave of their time to visit the poor and administer the

291

T H E P O O R I N K I N G S T O N , 1815-1850

society's affairs. The society both organized out-relief and later provided institutional care for the sick, the elderly, the orphaned, and the deserving poor. Illness, no respecter of persons, evoked sympathy from the well-to-do and aid for the sick poor was perhaps the most generously supported form of charity. Such charity served the twofold purpose of aiding the afflicted and restricting the spread of disease. One of the main activities of the Compassionate Society had been the distribution of medical relief to the poor, and in 1821 the society, renamed the Female Benevolent Society, in response to the increased numbers of sick and indigent immigrants, opened a hospital for "sick and distressed persons of every country and of all denominations . . . [who] are immediately admitted when it is ascertained that they are actually destitute of the means to provide food and medicine for themselves."46 The hospital operated during the winter months when distress among the poor was greatest. With its limited resources, the society did what it could to aid the sick, but the increased flow of immigrants and the "whole tide of settlers" which it was confidently expected would come to Kingston with the opening of the Rideau Canal pointed to the need for a permanent hospital. In 1838, with the aid of a grant of £3,000 from the legislature, the Kingston General Hospital was finally completed, although lack of funds for equipment, and then the building's use as a legislature for the United Canadas from 1841 to 1844, precluded its use as a hospital until 1844.47 About the same time the Roman Catholic community began to make institutional provisions for its sick poor: in 1845 the Hotel Dieu Sisters arrived in Kingston and opened a hospital on Brock Street near Sydenham Street. Hospitals in the first half of the nineteenth century were patronized almost exclusively by the very poor; those who could afford to were treated at home. The poor as well as the rest of the community benefited from the precautionary measures taken by the magistrates during the cholera epidemics of 1832 and 1847.48 Kingston citizens were fortunate to reside in a city which had been among the first in Canada to establish a Board of Health.49 Illness, and in particular the massive epidemic of cholera of 1847 which killed hundreds of destitute Irish immigrants and many local residents, created problems beyond those which could be alleviated by medical services. Widows, orphans, and elderly and disabled persons unable to subsist on their own suddenly became more numerous and needed to be cared for, and in November 1847 a meeting was called for the purpose of establishing a House of Industry.50 Not only was such an institution required because of the number of widows and orphans left following the epidemic, but also, the committee decided, because of the condition of the resident poor of the city. What they meant is made clear by the comment of the editor of the Chronicle 292

PATRICIA E. MALCOLMSON

and News in support of the new institution's campaign for funds: "It will be worth a handsome sum to each housekeeper to be relieved of the annoyance which a pretty strong regiment of street-beggars has for some time occasioned."51 The House of Industry opened its doors in December 1847 and in its first month of operation admitted 183 persons, 175 of them Irish born. Of the inmates 44 were widows (and another 3 originally listed as widows appear to have married before leaving) and 63 were children under 10.52 The ladies of the Female Benevolent Society undertook to "devise means of employment for the inmates of the institution and promote the sale of articles made there."53 The ladies later set up a school for the children of the institution, but in general the children were ill cared for and little supervised. In 1856 the society, by then known as the Widows' Friend Society, taking note of "the suffering and neglected state of destitute orphans and homeless children" at the shelter, changed its name yet again to the Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society and devoted its full attention to setting up and running a home for orphans.54 While a great many of the orphans at the House of Industry were Irish Catholics, there were still more Catholic orphans who were cared for at the Hotel Dieu and after 1861 at the House of Providence.55 The House of Industry and the House of Providence were organized on much the same lines as an English workhouse, except that they were privately administered; they cared for the elderly, widows, orphans, those unable to work, and the temporarily distressed. In the wake of the English Poor Law of 1834, some opinion in Upper Canada tended toward the view that institutional care for the poor was preferable to outdoor relief. Nonetheless, outdoor relief, the earliest form of aid to the poor in Upper Canada, continued. Bishop Macdonell, the first Roman Catholic Bishop of Kingston, discovered upon becoming acquainted with his flock that many of the people of Kingston were "literally starving." "In place of getting [anything] from them," he commented in a letter of 23 July 1820, "I have been obliged to give to distressed families in flour and money and credit to the amount of from forty to fifty pounds currency within the month."56 A quarter of a century later, Bishop Phelan, the third bishop, was "daily visited by numbers of poor, and, if circumstances permitted, he would always afford them some relief."57 Various national societies, such as the St. George's Society and the Hibernian Society, gave assistance and relief to those of their fellow countrymen who were in need. Early in 1836 a St. Patrick's Society was formed to assist distressed immigrants on their landing at Kingston. Within a few weeks the English followed the example of the Irish and formed a society of their own with similar aims.58 Special assistance was provided to immigrants in the form of temporary housing, money, clothing, food, and passage to their destination. In 1818 a committee was 293

THE POOR IN K I N G S T O N , 1815-1850

appointed "to assist British emigrants in finding employment and so prevent their discomfort or departure."59 In 1836 a musical soiree was planned to raise funds for recently arrived immigrants, some of whom had been driven to begging.60 Bedding and clothing were sometimes solicited from the wealthier citizens to ease the lot of the poor. The Board of Health, for instance, made a request in the British Whig of 11 September 1847 for clothing and materials for the widows and orphans lodged in the immigrants sheds. The Dorcas Society was formed with the express object of making and remodelling clothing for the poor, in particular poor children. In its first annual report in 1825, the society revealed that in a five-month period 117 children had been provided with clothing.61 In 1844 the town made something of a contribution to out-relief by advising the poor that they might apply for a portion of "the Remainder of the Provisions cooked for the recent Public Dinner." A measure of local poverty (and the amount of the leftovers) was the fact that "upwards of 130 poor were supplied."62 The methods of aiding the poor underlined the charitable principles of the philanthropists. The guiding principle for most of them was that only the "deserving poor" should be assisted. It was widely believed that many of the poor had brought their misfortunes upon themselves as a result of sloth, dissipation, or other moral lapses. The "deserving" minority must be distinguished from the mass before aid was given. Charity was not only a means of relieving the poor but also a means of social control. The rules of the House of Industry, for instance, stipulated that no persons of bad character, "especially unchaste women with bastard children," should be admitted; the possession of liquor and consumption of liquor meant instant dismissal.63 Not only, however, should the undeserving be excluded but also the deserving should be sought out. The Female Benevolent Society in 1848 recorded its belief that "the personal visits made by the members, to the abodes of the indigent are the most efficient means of preventing imposition, and securing a judicious and economical expenditure of their funds; whilst it also enables them in many instances to instruct the ignorant, to impart encouragement to the desponding mind, and consolation to the stricken heart."64 The society distributed clothing, food, bedding, and firewood (but rarely money) to the deserving along with exhortations to "industry, method, neatness and economy."65 In 1820 the officers of three charitable societies agreed to keep in touch with one another in order to prevent duplication or abuse of relief,66 a system which was adopted only many years later by the English Charity Organization Society. While government assistance remained meagre, charitable organizations had to choose where best to direct their often scanty resources. Many felt that their funds would be directed most profitably towards the education of poor 294

PATRICIA E. MALCOLMSON

children. A good example was the Midland District School Society, founded in 1815 and organized originally along Lancastrian lines, with the aim of providing education for the children of the poor. In 1819 circumstances caused the closure of the school and it did not reopen until 1837, after its charter had been altered. Although fees ranging from Is. to Is.lOd. per month were charged, the regulations provided that the different churches could send free scholars to the school. In addition, the trustees divided the town into wards in order to carry out an investigation to ascertain how many parents were unable to afford to educate their children.67 Needy children were supplied with books by the trustees and with clothing by the auxiliary ladies association; in the winter of 1842,234 children were supplied with clothing so that they could attend Bible classes and church services.68 The ladies of the Benevolent Society, a Roman Catholic group modelled after the Female Benevolent Society, supported a charity school run by the Sisters of Notre Dame, who also ran fee-paying schools, and the Hibernian Society provided places at schools for the children of indigent Irish who applied to the organization.69 The bishops were also personally generous in their support of parochial schools. In a sermon on the education of youth, Bishop Horan estimated that threequarters of the boys attending Roman Catholic Schools paid nothing for their education; nonetheless, it appears that some parents still neglected to send their children to school.70 Not all interaction between rich and poor, of course, took the form of relief or assistance. Many of those comprising the "under-belly" of Kingston society came into contact sooner or later with the law and harsh justice was meted out: whipping, standing in the pillory, capital punishment, and banishment, as well as terms of imprisonment, were the primary methods of punishment in the first quarter of the nineteenth century. In 1822, for instance, a sentence of one month's imprisonment and twenty-five lashes seems to have been the usual punishment for assault and petty larceny.71 In the same year a woman found guilty of keeping a disorderly house was sentenced to three months' imprisonment and to stand twice in the pillory.72 Fourteen years later a husband and wife convicted of the same offence were sentenced to two months' imprisonment on a diet of bread and water, during which time their four children were to be public charges.73 Theft, fraud, and assault regularly appeared on the list of cases to be tried at assizes. The theft with which some of the poor were associated was often of a petty nature. For instance, on 21 January 1837 the Chronicle and Gazette reported that a woman from the French village was apprehended with a large bundle of clothes which she had taken from two yards on Store Street. Cordwood also seems to have been a favourite target of thieves. The activities and demeanor of some of Kingston's poor presented prob295

T H E P O O R I N K I N G S T O N , 1815-1850

lems and irritation to other residents. Bishop Macdonell, having spent much of his early career with poor Scots immigrants, found his poor Irish parishioners much more obstreperous, and feared that the radicalism of the 1830s might spread to this group. (Macdonell strove throughout his bishopric to assure the government of the loyalty of the Catholic population in the hope that government positions in future might have more Catholic incumbents.) The Irish, whom he had great difficulty "tranquillizing and reducing . . . to order and regularity," he described as of "turbulent disposition."74 What actual violence there was amongst Kingston's poor was usually directed against each other rather than against their social superiors. Many assault charges arose out of bar-room brawls or fights, others from violence directed against a family member. An elderly Irishman, named Thomas Kilduff, for example, was bound over to keep the peace for two years, the Chronicle and Gazette reported on 17 November 1835, after he was convicted of beating his wife and knocking her into the fire, which caused her severe burns. One of the great social problems of the poor was drunkenness. In 1842 there were 136 licensed taverns in Kingston and its suburbs serving a population of between 8,000 and 9,000. At the same time Montreal, a community of 45,000, had 220 licensed drinking places. A select committee of city council investigating the problem of the proliferation of taverns found on one street "within the distance of 180 yards ... no less than thirteen licensed taverns or drinking houses four of which adjoin each other, and in more than one instance two taverns . . . under one roof."75 The great majority of these establishments were "low dram shops." Taverns and beer houses were the social centres of the poor community. For the price of a drink a workingman could enjoy many amenities frequently absent from his home. The beer-house provided warmth, light, companionship, comfortable furniture, an absence of squalling infants, a place to entertain one's friends, a centre for the latest news, gossip, and job openings, and sometimes opportunities for gaming and prostitution. The cheerful communal atmosphere of the tavern was more home-like than the dwellings of many poor people. The magistrates sometimes interfered with the activities of the tavern: for instance, in 1819 Mark Law, a beer-house keeper, was convicted and fined forty shillings "for keeping a Shuffle Board, and nine pins Court" and allowing these games, which were accompanied by gambling, to be played on his premises.76 Groups like the Kingston Temperance Society sought to stop the problem of drink at its source; a local resident, signing himself "Anti-Drunkenness," recommended the "Tread Mill" as "highly conducive to bettering the morals of the lower classes."77 Sometimes it was too late for any attempt at cure, punishment, or moral improvement. In 1835 an inquest was held "on the body of Mary Fagan, a poor woman, who for some time past had been wandering the streets in a state of inebriation and 296

PATRICIA E. MALCOLMSON

was found dead . . . in Front Street."78 An Irish labourer met the same fate after he responded to a challenge to consume a substantial quantity of liquor in a very short time.79 In 1847 the city council sought to minimize the inconvenience caused to other citizens by the unruly poor by passing a by-law "to restrain and punish Drunkards, Mendicants and Street Beggars." The measure was supported by the local press partly on the grounds that the undeserving poor were the principal beneficiaries of begging. As the editor of the Chronicle and News commented: "This is a measure rendered absolutely necessary by the number of lazy and insolent beggars prowling about the city, and directing the contributions of the charitable from legitimate to improper channels."80 But he also warned that systematic provision for the poor should not be left in private hands but should become the concern of the municipal authorities. In other words, negative sanctions should be accompanied by positive policies. Others agreed with the editor that public policy would be a more equitable way of supporting the poor than private philanthropy, and by 1849, the mayor, in his address to the city council, was advocating "the propriety of collecting annually a small tax for the support of the poor."81 Gradually governments assumed more responsibility for their less fortunate citizens and the poor came to be better served than they had been in the first half of the nineteenth century. Much of the development and prosperity of Kingston, like that of any colonial community, was based on the labours of inarticulate and unprivileged people whose efforts have been too seldom acknowledged by historians. Almost all of these working people had recently arrived from the British Isles, many of them had left their homeland in the hope of finding greater opportunities and better success in British North America. A few of these propertyless people achieved moderate affluence and occasionally even considerable importance, though many of them continued to find life, even in the new world, extremely hazardous and full of disappointments. Without their contributions, however, communities such as Kingston could not have prospered as they did. A colonial town was made up not only of clergymen and lawyers, teachers and manufacturers: it also included a large number of artisans and labourers of various trades, as well as many people whose existences were fully absorbed in the experience of poverty.

297

This page intentionally left blank

John Travers Lewis and the Establishment of the Anglican Divocese D. M. S C H U R M A N

When the Church of England and Ireland sent representatives overseas those men and women took old world traditions with them. The old faith and the new environment acted and reacted on each other. In the beginning, however, it seemed natural that small struggling colonies whose very existence often depended upon the close attention of secular officialdom would, or ought to be, spiritually served by the official religion of the old land. But the rule of life, in colonies in particular, is change. Small settlements that numbered in the tens and hundreds in the 1780s were measured in thousands thirty years later. The change was even more apparent in the years immediately preceding Confederation in Canada. It was true, of course, that the exclusivist claims of the Church of England and Ireland were challenged almost immediately. By the 1850s the economic residue of those claims, the Clergy Reserves, passed from the control of that church—although the act of secularization provided for financial compensation. The dominant figure during those years of change was John Strachan who was, successively, schoolmaster in Cornwall, Rector and Archdeacon of Toronto, and finally, in the later 1830s, Bishop. His diocese was cut out from the Diocese of Quebec. His strength came from his own powerful personality, and from his unflinching determination to maintain the secular position of primacy to which he believed his church entitled. He had a great interest in promoting high standards in education under church control, and he was fortunate that fate had set him down at the commercial strong point in what later became Ontario. He used his secular offices to further his church's interests, and his appointments were contrived. Yet in matters of spiritual patronage his vision exceeded that of the merely grasping for short run in the sweep. His clergymen were required to be well educated, and to put high qualifications at the service of the backwoods settlers for meagre rewards. This shrewd judgment in the selection of personnel served well when the 299

JOHN TRAVERS LEWIS AND THE ANGLICAN DIOCESE

secular power represented by the Clergy Reserves was swept from his control. His appointees were often men of high character and strong principle who made their force felt. When he died both his friends and enemies were aware of his stature. However, by the time that Straehan's land reservation policy had fallen in ruins it was clear that new problems had appeared that demanded new treatment: problems of size and growth. These made it impossible for one old man to oversee all from Toronto. This was a big church problem, since isolated communities tended to harden into small groups devoted to their own local practices: practices hallowed by fickle memories of pioneering days. To the ordinary problems that are the inheritance of all mortals and give rise to local vendettas under the cloak of "truth," were added the new views on church life and practice that were made, newly made, in England. These quarrels began (or perhaps recurred in new form) at the time of the tractarian movement in the 1840s and involved matters of church practice, doctrine, and discipline. Imported into Canada they were a plague. This is not to say they were not intrinsically important, or that there were not people who understood their significance, but in Canada they tended to be grafted onto local arguments and lent some dignity to nonsense. Looking back over a hundred years it would be hard to find another group that so dissipated its energies in quarrels only dimly understood—all of course done in the name of The Master. One example was Bishop Cronyn of the new Diocese of Huron who attacked the theological teaching at Trinity College in Toronto.1 He and his supporters designated themselves as defenders of Protestantism against the Catholic tendencies of Strachan's foundation. Such restless tendencies were not confined to the Diocese of Huron, and were present in the Archdeaconry of Kingston—soon to become the Diocese of Ontario. Anti-catholicism was an emotive cry and, of course, had periodically raised the banner of bigotry ever since the reign of King Henry VIII. No doubt these in-church quarrels were part of the background to the relationship between bishop and flock in Ontario. Another unsettling factor was the question of the origin of hierarchical authority. This was related to views on churchmanship. It had been the custom for an episcopal appointment to be formalized (or authorized) by the issuing of letters patent by the Crown. After all the Queen was the Supreme Governor in the mother church. The authority of those letters was unquestioned so long as colonies were not self-governing. With the advent of self-government and disestablishment in colonies there were, inevitably, anomalies. The paramount example was that of Bishop Colenso in Natal, who appealed against disciplinary action by his Metropolitan (Gray of Cape Town) and was upheld by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in 1864.2 The 300

D. M. SCHURMAN

problem of authority was important in the Canadian church. Strachan had encountered it in an oblique way over the Clergy Reserves. It had an influence on the new Diocese of Ontario—as will be shown. It is not generally realised how often secular problems between colonies and mother country found counterparts in church affairs. Toronto had the Diocese of Huron carved from it first. This diocese raised the necessary funds without undue difficulty. Indeed Cronyn's intransigence towards Strachan took strength from the fact that he was appointed by letters patent and consecrated in England. Another Huron strength lay in the low church support for his missionary work. The handling of funds in the C of E and I in Canada was most often in the hands of a church society.3 Each of these was an incorporated body authorized by church consent and legal regulation to handle the dispersion of church money. In practice this meant that church disbursements might be authorized by men with slight or nominal religious affiliations. Indeed the sine qua non for appointment to such a body was more usually business acumen than it was acknowledged piety. This made sense from a purely financial point of view, but it could make for unpleasant consequences in times of church debate. It might be termed irresponsible responsibility. It probably suited the prevailing ethos in which the word "democracy" was often a materialistic term of pragmatic convenience to suit "government by men of affairs." The worst evils had been evaded in Toronto itself owing to Strachan's shrewd combination of businessman and clergyman in his own person. The eastern part of Ontario was not a very wealthy part of the Diocese of Toronto. However, by 1861 sufficient money had been raised so that Strachan felt enabled to create a new diocese. Indeed, time and special circumstances had combined at that moment to make such a difficult step necessary. A word of background is necessary. When the first Rector of Kingston, Rev. John Stuart, died in 1811, men thought that his city would be Upper Canada's premier metropolis. Strachan went to Toronto to make way for John Stuart's son, George Okill Stuart, to succeed to his father's rectory. He became archdeacon in 1825 and remained as Dean of St. George's and Rector of Kingston until he died in 1862.4 He was not a dynamic figure, except in real estate transactions, and his views posed special problems for Bishop Strachan when he wished to expand the church east of Trenton. Bluntly, Stuart made Kingston a bastion against expansion. In other words, the natural development centre was quiescent. No doubt the habit grew with the passage of time. This in turn caused Eastern Ontario churches to be disinclined to regard Kingston as their spiritual Jerusalem. This meant, in sum, that Kingston was out of step with new developments, and it had no missionary traditions of consequence. The impression is of an inward-looking group of churchmen. 301

32 Archbishop John Travers Lewis

D. M. SCHURMAN

It was into this situation that the thirty-seven year-old John Travers Lewis was propelled in 1861 when a meeting of Eastern Ontario clergy and laymen elected him their bishop.5 Lewis's immediate home was Brockville where he had been Rector of St. Peter's since 1854. Although he was very young for the task assigned to him he was not unwilling, and, it must be said, he was not without marked qualifications. As we have seen, the church was then designated as "of England and Ireland." Lewis was an Irishman. As the late K. C. Evans has shown, he was a personality who cannot be dismissed simply as an Englishman who happened to grow up in Ireland.6 He graduated from Trinity College Dublin in 1848, winning the Gold Medal for excellence in theological studies. His university made him LLD in 1855. Again, as Bishop Evans has shown, the nature of those studies was important. They took place under the supervision of R. Elrington, editor of the works of James Ussher, the seventeenth-century Archbishop of Armagh.7 The close study of Ussher undoubtedly shaped Lewis's mind and strongly influenced his impact on Canada. Ussher is worthy of notice.7 He was a learned scholar whose luminosity was somewhat hidden then, as now, by his propensity to publish in Latin. He is usually remembered for his attempt to fix the precise chronology of the world which, though it intrigued scientists then, now arouses their amusement. In seventeenth-century England, before Cromwell, theological disputes might take place, but the ultimate yardstick of orthodoxy was what the English, in England, determined upon and made law. Ussher, however, was a scholar who investigated the origins of the early church. As a result he had a higher opinion of presbyters than that held by most episcopalians.8 He was not inclined to argue against the necessity for Royal control any more than he was to prosecute resultant disciplinary cases in his ecclesiastical courts.9 Rather he was a gentle soul who disliked violence: yet when the English Thirty-nine Articles were made mandatory in Ireland he had his ordinands swear fealty to Irish articles as well.10 He appreciated the practical need for conformity, but theologically he apprehended that different circumstances in the past had called forth different doctrinal decisions. Living in London, under the Protector, he spoke straightforwardly to Cromwell and found both his person and his opinions respected. In fine he was a man whose learning had convinced him that theological truth did not naturally proceed from prelates either in Rome or London, but who yet refused to set men against one another for any particular version. Even Elrington, his biographer, frequently castigates Ussher for not agreeing with Laudian (English) mandates that derived their authority from English power. In the sense that Ireland was a colonial church so he was a colonial bishop who was capable, on the authority of his own learning, of looking to the past of the early church for guidance rather than to 303

JOHN TRAVERS LEWIS AND THE ANGLICAN DIOCESE

a system of dogmatics. To lovers of inflexible rules he appeared as a "trimmer"; for those who wished for knowledge as light he was a modest but powerfully intelligent guide. It was fresh from exposure to this subtle, erudite mind that Lewis came to Canada. Also while at Dublin Lewis, in Ussher terms, watched controversies grow within the church in England. He acquired for these efforts to divide the church a contempt that he never lost—a viewpoint shared by his father, also a clergyman, who was a "no party" man. It must also be noticed that in choosing a church career Lewis had turned his back on wealth and the life of an Irish landlord. His patrimony would have been considerable. Thus there was added to a powerful independent brain a sense of his own social worth and dignity. He also inherited an acid turn of phrase that made him appear less than humble in Canada. It would prove to be an unsettling accoutrement in Kingston! In the new world he had powerful personal connections that were not centred in Kingston. Serving for two or three years in the mission parish of Hawkesbury, on the Ottawa, he was well known to the Hamilton brothers who were big lumbermen. Shortly after his arrival in Canada he married Annie Sherwood, daughter of the one-time attorney general of Upper Canada. Also he must have made a marked impression on the Toronto Synod, for his election as bishop was not widely contested, despite the fact that he shared the candidature with Rev. A. N. Bethune who had Strachan's support. In any event his talents and support secured his election on the first ballot at Kingston on 13 June 1861. "Thirty-nine parishes or missions cast their votes for the Rev. J. T. Lewis LLD, one for the Rev. A. N. Bethune DD and one for the Rev. William Macaulay."n "One vestry," said Lewis later, "stood almost alone in its opposition to my being elected Bishop."12 That vestry was St. George's of Kingston. To state that one vestry was strongly opposed to Lewis's election is, on the surface of it, to say very little, for the vote clearly revealed an overwhelming feeling for the young Irishman. Nevertheless, to state that Kingston opposed Lewis is virtually to write the background to the history of the bishop's relationship with his diocese in one sentence. It was not a transitory confrontation. It is not known why St. George's took such a strong dislike to Lewis from the outset. No doubt the prospect of a dynamic young import, especially from Ireland, was unsettling to a people who had for years been ministered to by an ageing and in some ways pliant figure. Also, in order to secure support from such an overwhelming proportion of the "marches" of the new diocese Lewis may have pointed to atrophy in Kingston, against which he might be contrasted to advantage. No doubt Lewis was ambitious—a most common 304

D. M . S C H U R M A N

human condition sometimes, erroneously, supposed to be absent from the character of clergymen. But if Lewis offered himself he had something to offer, and no one with any knowledge of church history would ever suggest that a colonial bishopric was a sinecure, or could be viewed as one. What was the new bishop's program? It was clearly his purpose to spread churches throughout the length and breadth of his vast new diocese. The boundary of this diocese stretched along the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence front from Belleville to Cardinal, moved north to the Ottawa River which it followed as far as Pembroke and thence west to Bancroft and finally south to Belleville again. It was huge, badly served with roads, and characterized by scattered settlements. Lewis wished to sprinkle the area with churches, staffed by stalwart clergy, and to stand the whole on a sound financial base. It was a missionary purpose. No doubt this intent was clear to those who elected him. Did it interest Kingstonians or not? Lewis clearly had aims that involved church politics in Canada as well, but to secure the support of small parishes in backwoods Canada it must have been the mission note that was rung with the most clarity—and as has been seen that support was overwhelming. When Lewis began to move, then, how would Kingston react? His first move was conciliatory. He located the seat of his diocese in Kingston, and selected St. George's as his cathedral. Then he faced a real setback. Elected, and still living in Brockville, he was unbearably inconvenienced by British delay in issuing his letters patent.13 This was partly due to the fact that Lewis was one of the first colonial bishops who elected to be consecrated outside England. The document did not arrive until March 1862. This delayed his consecration until April. This meant that for ten months he was a leader without power. Kingston had a year to prepare against and for his coming. It later turned out, as already noted, that when Bishop Colenso of Natal challenged the validity of letters patent in a self-governing colony the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council decided that such letters, in such circumstances, had no legal binding validity.14 That did not prevent the elaborate charade from having its malevolent effect in Ontario in 1861 and 1862. A second setback occurred in the autumn of 1862, when Lewis appointed the Rev. W. B. Lauder to succeed George Okill Stuart as Dean of St. George's and Rector of Kingston. There were violent protests from influential members of St. George's congregation. For upwards of six months the Kingston newspapers reported, gleefully and blow by blow, the unseemly wrangle that resulted. Undoubtedly the bishop had the legal right of appointment. He knew that Lauder would not have been the first choice of St. George's; whether he knew of the violence of their antipathy to the appointment is not so clear. Lauder had been a strong supporter of Lewis's episcopal candidature, and his new post was widely represented as a vulgar simoniacal reward for 305

33 St. George's Anglican Cathedral, 1882

D. M. SCHURMAN

services rendered. In any event, when directly challenged, Lewis stood his ground, producing an impasse that was only finally solved by Lauder acknowledging himself to be an impediment to harmony and leaving the diocese. The present writer has described that squalid affair elsewhere.15 The bishop may have used bad judgment. He was imperious when crowded. He did not descend to the level of abuse that characterized his opponents. Above all he was young for such an exercise of powerful prelacy in a colonial, egalitarian environment. However, bearing in mind the local background, and Lewis's own particular background as we have seen it, it is possible to look at the relationship somewhat differently. The key to Lewis's mind was his mission purpose. No doubt resistance to that purpose existed, as the election had shown. It was natural therefore that the new bishop wished to have a friend to his aims in the key parish of the diocese. In the event he seems to have miscalculated. Meanwhile, as he had been waiting for the letters patent at Brockville, Lewis was faced with an attempt on the part of some Kingston churchmen to inaugurate a church society to manage the finances of the new diocese.16 This had precedent. It was the method in Toronto, and in the relatively new Diocese of Huron. But this expedient had grown up under Strachan's control in the palmy days of the Clergy Reserves. Also Huron was naturally richer than Eastern Ontario. With slight resources in a vast area Lewis had to decide whether a church society would best serve to meet the immense missionary challenge. One straw in the wind was the fact that the episcopal trend had taken a long time to gather in Eastern Ontario: much longer than in the case of Huron. Furthermore, the new diocese found the provision of a suitable See House to be beyond its capacity. Just after his election the new synod toyed with the idea of securing Alwington House.17 But by 1867 it still had not set aside enough money to provide any imposing structure for its bishop. Lewis did not complain. He kept no great state. He knew as well as his people that the whole new edifice was begun on a financial shoestring, and he kept his mission priority. In any event he was convinced that a church society would not obviate the need. Church societies tended to get into the hands of men with party prejudices, and as we have seen Lewis was determined to keep in-church squabbles over doctrine, dogma, and practice to a minimum. He was a no-party man. He brushed aside the Kingston initiative and persuaded his synod to seek incorporation. Putting his case to the synod he used the missionary argument. He plainly told the synod that it was a means to an end. He felt that they had to decide what system would best expand the ministry of the church in the backwoods where people were too poor to do it all themselves. It 307

JOHN TRAVERS LEWIS AND THE ANGLICAN DIOCESE

seemed to him that a church society would only gain the real affections of those who joined it, whereas an incorporated synod would command the affections of all who were party to it—i.e. the whole population of the Church of England and Ireland in the Diocese of Ontario. Certainly, although he did not say this, it would be unwise to rely entirely on a society run by a few businessmen centred largely in Kingston. No doubt this was a wise precaution, and it must be noted that this decision predated the rectory dispute. It should also be said that the bishop must have found the attempt to preempt his decision, while he was still unconsecrated, somewhat presumptuous. Further evidence of Lewis's preoccupation with the priority of missions comes from the knowledge that in 1862, as soon as he was consecrated and after his first synod, he undertook a fund-raising trip to England.18 This was the first of well over a dozen such journeys. He raised a goodly sum, in all about £1,225. He originally intended to tap the warm hearts in the industrial north, but this was precluded by the distress contingent upon the American War between the States. He raised about £500 each from the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts and the Society for Promoting of Christian Knowledge. The SPG grant was to run for three years with hope of extension at expiry. The SPCK'S was a single grant but it included money for a library foundation and the provision of prayer books for new churches. The balance of the money Lewis collected by preaching in various churches whose pulpits were opened to him in Greater London. He also secured the services of four trained mission clergymen, who followed him back to Kingston. It must be emphasized that this trip, and those that followed it, were vital for the growth of the diocese. Life was not easy. His own salary was under £500 per annum. Indeed it was known that the diocese, "inferior in wealth and population to the Diocese of Huron," had a "climate more severe and soil less easily tilled than is the case in the West," and hence the tide of immigration largely passed it by. Yet there were some 81,000 nominal adherents of the church spread over the whole area. Of 150 surveyed townships, only 42 had resident clergymen.19 The harvest was truly plenteous and the talent labourers were few. The bishop stretched his funds. Support normally intended to go to one missioner was almost invariably split between two. To provide local support the diocese was divided into mission areas and toured by fund-raising teams. In the beginning the annual contribution was in the vicinity of $2,050, of which about $500 came from Kingston, a reasonable but not overwhelming sum. The scale of giving was not high, and Lewis had to face the fact that the SPG might not renew its grant. He attempted to provide for the slack through a "Sustentation Fund." It is clear from his markings in copies of the Synod Journal, in his hand, that he considered this expedient a vital precaution. The 308

D. M. S C H U R M A N

"Mission Board Report" in the Journal of 1864 put it this way: "unless the grant [SPG] be renewed wholly or in part. . . . the 10 or 11 clergymen who are in part supported from this grant will be at once thrown upon our missionary Fund, causing a burden which it is evident, without previous preparation, it would be impossible for it to sustain." By 1866 the bishop was able to report to his synod, not that the Sustentation Fund had grown satisfactorily, but rather that the SPG had granted £550—for three more years.20 This again was the result of a further visit of Lewis to England. The day of local reckoning was postponed as the pattern repeated itself. It was slow work. Some idea of the reality behind the sober Mission Board Reports can be observed in 1866. That year saw $2,000 added to the Sustentation Fund from a collection area that embraced Kingston and Belleville. Of that amount the sum of $500, or one quarter of the whole, was contributed by the Indians at Tyendinaga. The report spoke of "the fruit of faith in a simple and unpretending people."21 Stronger words might be used today. It is unnecessary to trace the mission growth problem further in great detail. It is enough to state that British support continued for years. Growth there was. By 1877 Lewis had added 100 new churches to his diocese. By 1898 eighty-nine congregations had multiplied to 283.22 The mission success was outstanding. At the same time Lewis managed to cut a figure as a promoter of the First Lambeth Conference, held in 1867, and as a promoter of the Canadian Anglican Church union that came about in 1893. For the latter service he was made archbishop.23 But the achievement was gained at great cost. This may help to explain the ambivalent figure that we now discern through the dim halls of history—a man perceived through the combined medium of gossip, memory, and reminiscence. The first thing to note is that in 1870 he removed to Ottawa and stayed there until the late 1880s. He wished to divide his diocese, and was rebuffed by his synod in the 1870s. He was away a great deal. There were rumors that he drank.24 What is the truth? A key factor, as we have seen, was the long-standing rift with Kingston. This meant that in the first heavy years of his episcopate he secured his successes despite his See Cathedral, and, socially, he was unable to relax in his hometown. The lack of firm Kingston support, in turn, made it imperative for him to make frequent trips to England. No doubt he enjoyed the travel, but continuous travel is destructive of that settled rest so necessary to soothe the nerves of a busy man. No doubt his decision to move to Ottawa had some personal pique in it, but it is true that by 1870 Ottawa was the capital of the new Canada—a natural place for a bishop to reside. It is also true that Lewis's See City was in no hurry to house him properly. There is also the fact, largely due to his own exertions, that the diocese was 309

JOHN TRAVERS LEWIS AND THE ANGLICAN DIOCESE

too big for one man eight years after it was founded. The division he desired did not come about until 1896. His confirmation visits taxed him physically to the utmost. He often slept night after night in railway station houses, he had several close calls from exposure when away, and every couple of years his visits were extensive. One year he was on the road for 100 days. These realities took their toll and by 1875 he recognized that his nervous system was under attack.25 By that time English trips which had begun as necessities took on the nature of escape valves. Also it is possible that he liked his cheering glass. In other words the stresses and strains of mission expansion in the midst of a slow-giving population broke him to an extent. After his first wife died he met and married, in 1889, Ada Leigh who was a rich philanthropist. No doubt that saved his life or prolonged it. He was no longer a pauper prelate. It lends emphasis to these considerations to realize the strain of any bishopric on a man. Five years is a reasonable time to be a bishop. Ten years is a long colonial bishopric. By 1875 Lewis had been thirteen years a bishop, and thirty-five in that position by 1897. Small wonder that his later portraits show a somewhat fragile-looking individual. He was a man of great accomplishments who achieved much, at some personal cost. It is not argued here that Lewis bears no responsibility for the alienation that took place in Kingston in the years 1861-63. It could be argued that the clash was inevitable or even that Lewis should bear the greater part of the blame. What is suggested is that despite this difficulty Lewis kept his priority for missions clear, and that he was successful in achieving his aim. We have a magnificent work on the one hand, and a somewhat tragic figure living in some human isolation on the other. A further irony lies in the fact that Lewis, who supported local colonial self-help, and who helped make the Canadian Anglicans autonomous was forced to appeal to England for the funds to do his work. It should not be forgotten that the English filled the need.

310

Immigrants in the City: Kingston as Revealed in the Census Manuscripts of1871 ALAN G. G R E E N

This essay is concerned with the origins of the people who made up the population of Kingston in 1871 and with the skills they supplied to the work force of the city. The questions considered are: What proportion of the total population was of foreign as distinct from native birth? What explanations can be offered for the observed distribution? Was there a difference in rank between positions held in the city by people born in Canada and by those born in Europe? The history of the growth of cities like Kingston remains to be written. In the past research has tended to concentrate on factors determining the location of cities or on the relationship between cities and their hinterlands.1 Yet despite all of this valuable research, we remain virtually ignorant about why cities grow, why some cities grow faster and become larger than others, and, equally as intriguing, why growth, for some cities, eventually stops. Only one segment of the problem is reviewed in this essay: the source of labour supply and labour skills. The approach is to present a profile of the city's population as revealed in the census manuscript records for 1871. The supply of new entrants to the urban labour force has generally come from outside the city itself. In European countries, the nearby countryside has been the main source (largely because the natural increase of rural population has exceeded that of urban population). For a thinly-populated, open country like Canada, immigrants were an additional source of supply to meet the growing demand for labour, particularly in the cities. The relative importance of these two sources (native and foreign) has, however, received little attention in Canadian historical literature. Lacking for the moment any direct evidence concerning the distribution by place of birth in Canadian cities, it is not unreasonable to review the American experience in this regard. Given that much of nineteenth-century development in the United States paralleled that of Canada, it is possible to make, 311

I M M I G R A N T S IN THE CITY

and have some confidence in, such a comparison. W. F. Wilcox has observed that during the later nineteenth century the majority of immigrants to the United States settled in cities and towns rather than in rural areas.2 Why immigrants exhibited such a high propensity for urban life is not entirely clear. As a first approximation one might suggest that they received their largest potential wage gain (over home conditions) in the city, rather than by applying their talents in the countryside. Or they may simply have had a strong preference for urban amenities over life on the farm. It is probably a combination of both these factors which caused so many to settle in the cities. In this respect, immigrants were really no different from their native-born counterparts. The history of developed countries has been one of rural-urban migration. Thus, whatever the disadvantages of urban life, the advantages (higher wages, greater variety of cultural and social activities, and larger supply of amenities) have traditionally been greater.3 This whole process of rural-urban migration, whether originating within the country or outside it is, however, not a random event nor does it occur in the form of a continuous flow. People move to cities in response to the availability of employment opportunities (given the existing money wage). The absorptive capacity of the city depends, of course, on the rapidity of growth in the particular city or town.4 The actual jobs available are determined by the main economic functions of each such urban area. For example, the structure of occupations in cities such as Hamilton or Pittsburg is undoubtedly different (not only in number but in type) from that in Ottawa or Washington. As far as its major functions were concerned, Kingston in the late nineteenth century could not be classified as an industrial city. Rather it was commercial and institutional in nature. It was an entrepot for timber moving from the Rideau system and from the Great Lakes to Europe, a former seat of government, and until the 1860s an important garrison town. It also served the local farming community. As noted, the present study is concerned not only with the structure of occupational skills in total but also with the ethnic origins of the workers (native or foreign born) and the role played by each in the hierarchy of jobs. One question comes to mind immediately: was one group (e.g. native-born workers), at the "top" and the other at the "bottom" of the spectrum? The notion that foreign workers are often brought in to take on the less attractive jobs begs the question. Is that what, in fact, happened and if that is their initial position, does it remain constant over their working life in the new country? Finally, if it applies to the first generation, does it apply equally to the second generation? These questions are not without some relevance to the formation of an urban or national labour force in an open economy such as 312

34 Kingston from Fort Henry, c. 1870

I M M I G R A N T S IN THE CITY

Canada's. If foreign workers always enter at the bottom and remain there then the native workers obviously benefit directly, since they capture and hold the skilled jobs (in economic terms their relative incomes increase). On the other hand, if migrants compete with natives for highly skilled jobs, the opposite holds. The magnitude of these two effects will, of course, depend directly on the size of the immigrant flow relative to native-born workers— the larger the former, the greater the hypothesized effect. Our concern here, however, is less ambitious. It is simply to study the origins of Kingston's labour force and to examine occupational distributions, adjusted for such background. Data Source To obtain even a partial look at any differences in occupational distributions between immigrants and native workers requires very detailed data. Fortunately, the recent release of census manuscript materials provides the beginning for such an analysis. The manuscripts list the actual occupants of each house as collected by the census enumerator. Data on family size, family "completeness" (i.e. the existence of a husband and wife), occupations of all members of the family who hold jobs, age, place of birth, nationality, religion, and so forth are available. As a result, the researcher can cross-classify, say, occupation with place of birth for each individual in the community. As can be readily seen, a complete record of every individual in the community (approximately 12,000 in 1871) would be unwieldy. To simplify the process a random sample of 10 per cent of the population was taken.5 The discussion of the skill structure of the labour force which follows is based on this sample. As will be shown later, the actual occupations, as recorded in the manuscript census, are classified in seven skill categories which range from doctors, lawyers, etcetera (Group i) to labourers (Group vn). Owing to the smallness of the numbers in some groups, these categories have been compressed into three broader groupings. These cover skill categories as follows: Class I, white collar workers (Groups i-iv); Class n, blue collar workers—skilled and semiskilled (Groups v-vi); and unskilled workers (Group vn).6 Population and Economic Change in Kingston, 1851-71 The occupational structure of Kingston workers in 1871 was the net result of changes in the city over the preceding decades. Periods of expansion require not only more labour, but potentially new skills as well. Thus, the expansion of the locomotive works in the early 1850s increased the demand for factory 314

ALAN G. GREEN

workers, machinists, millwrights, and foundry men. The closing of other firms, such as the piano factory, released workers for employment in other industries within the city or elsewhere. Such a process is continuous, although hardly smooth. Changes such as these are bound to be more numerous during periods of rapid expansion than during years of slow growth or stagnation. It is necessary, therefore, to review briefly the nature of the changes which occurred in Kingston in the years before 1871, so that the census results can be placed in their proper perspective. The simplest index of growth in such a case is the change in population size over the preceding decades. Table I sets out such change for Kingston from TABLE I

Population Size and Annual Average Percentage Growth Rates, by Decades, for Montreal, Kingston and Toronto, 1851, 1861, and 1871 Annual Average Percentage Change

Number

1)

1851 2) 1861 3) 1871

Montreal Kingston (2) (1)

Toronto (3)

11,585 13,743 12,407(a)

30,775 44,821 56,092

57,715 90,323 107,225

Montreal Kingston (4) (5) 3.6 1.9

1.9 -1.0 0

Toronto (6) 4.6 2.5

Methods and sources: Cols. (4)-(6): Average percentage change between census dates divided by 10. Line 1: Census of Canada, 1850-51, I, 308, 492 Line 2: Census of Canada, 1861, I, 520, 365 Line 3: Census of Canada, 1871, I, 31, 214 (a) The drop in the population of Kingston between 1861 and 1871 is largely due to the withdrawal of the garrison to Montreal. In 1861 the garrison was included in the total population of Kingston. Part of the population increases in Montreal between 1861 and 1871 occurs for the opposite reason (i.e. the reinforcement of the garrison there by troops transferred from Kingston). The population of four Kingston institutions (Forts Henry and Frederick, the Penitentiary, and the Lunatic Asylum) in 1861 was listed as 1,369 [Census of Canada, 1861,1,390]. It is probable that troops made up the majority of this number.

1851 to 1871. In addition, population growth has been derived for the two Eastern cities which "bracket" the St. Lawrence transportation systemToronto and Montreal. Before any conclusions can be drawn from these data, a caveat is required. The population estimates of the three cities have been taken directly from the 315

I M M I G R A N T S IN THE CITY

census records, without any adjustment being made for change in urban boundaries. On the basis of the figures shown, it is simply not possible to tell how much of the growth resulted from incorporation of surrounding areas and how much from the growth of population within fixed areal units. However, it seems reasonable to assume that the growth rates shown here are good first approximations to reality, although little weight should be attached to fine shadings of differential change. If we look first at the absolute size of Kingston, it is clear that we are examining the labour force structure of a relatively small city. Between 1851 and 1871 Kingston was never larger than half the size of either Toronto or Montreal and, in fact, over this period Kingston's relative position (in terms of population size) steadily declined. At the start, then, one should expect a less highly differentiated labour force structure (i.e. less occupational specialization) than in Montreal or Toronto. Secondly, probably even more revealing is the much slower growth rate of Kingston compared with that of the other two cities. The 1850s witnessed annual average growth rates in Montreal and Toronto of approximately 4 per cent and 5 per cent respectively (Table i), while Kingston's rate was barely 2 per cent. The 1860s exhibited slower growth rates for all and for Kingston a negative rate appears.7 If we allow for the withdrawal of the garrison, a zero growth rate might seem a more appropriate description for Kingston. These sharply different population growth rates, given the interconnection between the three cities (all parts of the St. Lawrence transportation system), require some preliminary explanation. To place the two decades in perspective it should be recalled that the 1850s were, for the most part, years of expansion: reciprocity with the United States was begun in 1854; large-scale railway building was carried out (the core of the Grand Trunk system from Montreal to Toronto was built in the early 1850s and opened for traffic between the two cities in 1856); overseas export demands were high, especially to Britain during the Crimean War. Canada experienced the usual results of such conditions: large-scale net immigration and net inflows of capital. However, by the end of the decade, these expansionary forces had been exhausted. Reciprocity came to an end in 1864, the American Civil War, with its heavy demands for Canadian raw materials, ended in 1865, and the European continent experienced no major wars during this decade. The results were the reverse of those of the 1850s: net immigration turned to net emigration (mainly to the United States); capital inflows declined, and railway building virtually ceased.8 From Table I, then, it would appear that these events, both rapid expansion in the 1850s and apparent contraction in the 1860s, largely bypassed Kingston

316

ALAN G. GREEN

(if we discount, for the latter decade, the impact of troop withdrawals from the city).9 A complete explanation of this differential performance is beyond the scope of this paper. However, one tentative hypothesis may be advanced in explanation. In the case of Kingston, the opening up of two new transportation systems along the St. Lawrence seems to have played a key role in the city's development. First, the St. Lawrence canal network was fully operational by 1849 and secondly, as mentioned above, the Grand Trunk railway was opened between Montreal and Toronto by 1856. The effect of these two events was apparently to concentrate growth at the two end points of the system: Montreal and Toronto. G. P. de T. Glazebrook suggests this was the case: It did not follow, of course, that all towns on railways made notable progress, indeed to some extent the opposite was true since the railways made possible concentration of industry in a few places like Toronto and Hamilton. Raw materials could be collected and finished products distributed by rail over distances and to a degree that had hitherto been impossible. Thus railways were essential to industrial development and influenced its geographical pattern.10

If transportation change can be considered an exogenous variable in the explanation of variation in Kingston's growth rate (like troop withdrawals and the decision to remove the capital from Kingston to Montreal in the 1840s), the question that remains is how the previous transportation arrangement (the St. Lawrence-Ottawa-Rideau canal system) favoured Kingston's expansion. That the latter exerted some positive influence on the city's growth is seen from the evidence of population growth in the decades before 1851. At the beginning of the War of 1812 Kingston's population was approximately l,000.n If we allow for the rapid population growth which occurred during the war, it appears that Kingston's population more than doubled between then and 1851. Events such as the opening of the Rideau Canal in 1836 and the choice of Kingston as capital in 1840 must be included in any overall explanation of this rapid change.12 Yet one is tempted to give the new transportation arrangement (Ottawa-Rideau route) in the 1830s a central role. It made Kingston a main "break-point" on the Montreal to Toronto transportation route and conferred on the city a distinct locational benefit which induced rapid growth. Briefly, then, this survey reveals that Kingston's growth "spurt" apparently occurred before 1850 and probably was concentrated in the decade stretching from the late 1830s to the late 1840s. In the period from 1850 to 1870 expansion was slower (compared either to Kingston's past growth or to contemporary change in Toronto and Montreal).

317

I M M I G R A N T S IN THE CITY

Population by Place of Birth What role did the foreign-born play in population growth during the middle decades of the nineteenth century? Earlier in this essay, it was suggested that in the United States their role was significant because they formed the majority of city dwellers. To obtain a partial insight into the Canadian case, Table n was constructed. It shows the proportion of foreign and native-born TABLE II

Place of Birth of Household Heads, Kingston and Hamilton, 1871 Kingston

(i)

1 Number(a) 2 Total 3 Native-born 4 Foreign-born 5 Ireland 6 England 7 Other 8 Total (5)— (7)

Hamilton(b) (2)

233 100.0%

357 100.0%

25.8

17.0

39.6 21.9 12.7 74.2

21.6 32.2 29.2 83.0

Method and source: (a) Line (1) refers to the total number of male household heads in the sample who were listed as holding a specific occupation. (b) Sampling technique for Hamilton is identical with that used for Kingston (see n. 5). Line (2) sum of lines (3) and (8). Census of Canada, 1871, Microfilm Reel No. C-646.

male household heads in Hamilton and Kingston in 1871. The foreign-born are in turn classified as migrants born in Ireland, England, and other countries. Hamilton was included to provide some comparative evidence against which the Kingston results could be evaluated. The method used in drawing the Hamilton sample was identical with that used for Kingston. The first conclusion which emerges from the sample data is the dominant role played by immigrants in the labour forces of Kingston and Hamilton.13 The foreign-born accounted for approximately three-quarters of Kingston's male workers and more than four-fifths of Hamilton's. If we assume the male labour force distribution by place of birth is representative of the population as a whole, there seems little doubt, at least for these two cases, that immigrants were as important an influence in shaping Canadian cities as they were in the United States. A simple statistic reveals that the results shown 318

ALAN G. GREEN

here apparently mirror the pattern in other urban areas in Canada. According to the census of 1871, of the 722,000 residents recorded as living in urban areas only 44,000 were Canadian-born. The balance of the approximately three million natives resided in the countryside.14 This is undoubtedly an overstatement of the role of the foreign-born in Canadian cities but it does lend support to the conclusions derived from Table n. The discovery of a sharp dichotomy between urban and rural inhabitants in respect to place of birth, especially in Kingston, raises some interesting questions. For example, did the voting patterns of the farmer and city worker differ not only because of their habitats but also because of their different backgrounds? Could the prolonged lag in readjusting voting districts to reflect the increased concentration of people in the city be partly a reaction of the countryside against the new and foreign element in the city? How were municipal elections affected by the sudden influx of newcomers from outside the country? It would be interesting to study the variation in municipal voting patterns in Kingston, especially after one of these surges had disturbed the ethnic balance in the city. Obviously, distinguishing the influence of ethnic and place of birth factors from that of other factors is essential if the true influence of the former is to be known.15 The second conclusion from the sample concerns the large role played by the Irish in the labour forces of both cities, but especially in Kingston. According to the results (Table n), almost 40 per cent of the male labour force in Kingston listed their place of birth as Ireland. This finding is even more surprising when you reflect on how little has been said of the role played by Irish workers and their families in shaping Kingston's growth. James Roy states (amid a general discussion of the number of Irish who died of plague on arriving in Kingston): "It is amazing, however, that anyone at all should have survived in Kingston, considering that more than twenty-five hundred infected persons were arriving every week for some months, in a city with eight thousand of a population."16 This occurrence does indeed give one pause for wonder. If Roy is right, and we assume that this weekly flow of "infected persons" continued for only three months, approximately 30,000 Irish migrants would have stopped in Kingston (and this excludes the "uninfected persons"). It is obvious that such an intensity of arrivals (2,500 a week) could not have persisted for very long. Yet over the peak period of Irish emigration (1846-49), approximately 60,000 a year came to Canada.17 It is not unreasonable to expect that some of the later arrivals also passed through and stayed in Kingston. Death caused by typhus undoubtedly reduced these numbers by a considerable amount, while others moved on up the lake or headed south to the United States. The point of this digression is not to contest Roy's estimates—the number of Irish immigrants arriving in Kingston in either absolute or relative terms (to the base population) was obviously 319

35 Princess Street, looking west from Wellington Street, c. 1863

ALAN G. GREEN

large—but to illustrate the surprising size of the Irish component in the city's population and to raise the question of why so little has been written about the Irish impact on the social and economic development of this minor metropolis, not only in the late 1840s and early 1850s but in succeeding decades as well. Roy makes scant mention of the Irish elsewhere in his book. The importance of Irish immigrants to Kingston's development becomes even clearer when compared with Hamilton's experience. Here also, foreignborn residents dominate the labour force but in Hamilton immigrants from Ireland, although still an important component (21.6 per cent), are only half that in Kingston. English and Scottish-born immigrants (the latter dominate the "Other" category) account for almost two-thirds of the labour force as revealed in the sample data. Why should such sharp differences in ethnic structure occur? Two hypotheses suggest themselves. First, the greater inland distance and its attendant transport costs may have reduced the westward flow of the Irish. Indeed, it is surprising to find Irish even as far west as Kingston. In the United States during this period they were largely concentrated along the eastern seaboard in such cities as Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore. Secondly, as suggested earlier, the arrival of Irish immigrants coincided with an expansionary period in Kingston's nineteenthcentury development. A quick review of construction activity in Kingston in the 1840s reveals this to be an extremely active period in this regard. The construction of churches, fortifications, and public buildings was widespread during these years. Did Hamilton's period of rapid expansion come later in the century? If so, then did it coincide with the next stage of British emigration, when English and Scottish shares were a larger component?18 These interactions between the specific timing of a city's expansion and the supplies of particular foreign labour needs further exploration. The resulting ethnic balance might give some hints as to subsequent differences in urban social and economic development. Immigrants at Work The important contribution immigrants played in the growth of Kingston's labour force and population has been indicated. What remains now is to examine where these overseas arrivals fitted into the fabric of the working life of the city. This is the heart of the problem of how foreign labour was assimilated into the community—assimilated, not so much culturally, as in the sense of securing a viable economic position in the community. The job held, it is assumed here, provides some indication of the nature of this process. Were these new arrivals concentrated in the less skilled and, therefore, less well

321

I M M I G R A N T S IN THE CITY

paid jobs or were they dispersed throughout the spectrum of skill levels in much the same manner as the "natives"? Table in was constructed to study this question. It divides the male houseTABLE III

Occupational Distribution by Selected Skill Categories, for Male Household Heads, by Place of Birth, Kingston, 1871 Occupational Category Place of Birth

Level I % (1)

Level II

1 Native-born 2 Foreign-born 3 Ireland 4 Others 5 Total Foreignborn (3) & (4) 6 Grand Total

Number

% (2)

Level III % (3)

53.4

28.3

18.3

60

27.2 34.6

35.9 43.2

37.0 22.2

92 81

30.6 36.6

39.3 36.4

30.0 27.0

173 233

Methods and source: Col. (1): Includes Blishen's skill classes (l)-(4) inclusive (see n. 6). These classes cover such white collar occupations as professional, commercial, and clerical workers. Col. (2): Includes Blishen's skill classes (5) and (6). These are basically skilled and semi-skilled blue collar workers such as machinists, stonemasons, barbers. Col. (3): Identical to Blishen's skill-class (7). Included here are unskilled workers such as labourers and janitors. Line (6): Total workers sampled. The percentage distribution represents a weighted average of the two sub-groups, J.e. native and foreign-born workers. Census of Canada, 1871, Microfilm Reel C-646.

hold heads of the sample into three broad skill categories. Level I (the top skill group) includes mainly white collar workers such as lawyers, clergy, doctors, proprietors, and clerks. Level n brings together semi-skilled and skilled workers. This group may be designated the blue collar workers and includes a very wide range of occupations from highly skilled stone masons to less skilled sailors, painters, etcetera. Hawkers, labourers, janitors, and those with similar occupations make up workers grouped in Level in—the unskilled. These particular groupings were derived (a) to capture, within each, occupa322

ALAN G. G R E E N

tions of a fairly similar skill level and (b) to provide a sufficient number of observations within each level to permit some confidence that the results are more than random events.19 Before discussing the actual distribution of skills, by place of birth, it may be interesting to compare the categories of all workers as shown by the 1871 sample results with Blishen's results for Canada in 1951.20 The latter, when grouped into the three aggregate categories, show that for Level I the shares are about the same—33 per cent in 1951 and 37 per cent in 1871. However, a large change occurs when the lower two skill categories are compared. In 1951 Level ii (skilled and semi-skilled) accounted for 57 per cent of all workers while in 1871 only 36 per cent fell in this group. Level in (unskilled) contained about 9 per cent of all workers in 1951 but 27 per cent in 1871. Although great caution must be shown in interpreting these results, it seems that over the past century most occupational mobility has gone on between the unskilled and the skilled and semi-skilled worker categories. These results imply that the main impact of the spread of industrialization, which was the main feature of Canadian development during this period, was to increase the demand for specialized labour skills, i.e. more machinists, carpenters, and plumbers and fewer labourers, bootblacks, and sectionmen. It is also interesting that these developments (from a frontier to an urban-industrial structure) had relatively little impact, at least until 1951, on the share of white-collar workers. Again, caution must be applied to these conclusions since we are comparing Kingston in 1871 with Canada in 1951, but the trend changes, if they hold up under more intensive research, may provide an interesting insight into the process of development. Since one of the assumptions underlying this discussion is that some relationship exists among skill, prestige, and income, the distribution of workers among the three levels, in 1871, according to place of birth, takes on particular interest. In surveying skill distribution by ethnic origin in 1951, Blishen found that workers of British origin were under-represented in the lowest skill categories, while the French were over-represented at these levels. In our case the foreign-born in 1871 are over-represented in the latter (Level in), while the native-born are over-represented in Level I type of occupations. In fact, if the Level I group is disaggregated into its constituent parts we find that 18 per cent of all native-born workers are at the highest skill level while only 2 per cent of the foreign-born are similarly placed. Thus, with only one or two exceptions the clergy, lawyers, and engineers were native-born. The Family Compact was apparently alive and well in Kingston in 1871.21 Another interesting feature revealed, but not shown here, is the youthfulness of this "upper class." Most of this group in the sample were less than 323

I M M I G R A N T S IN THE CITY

thirty-five years-old and virtually all were less than forty-five. This is not to infer that there were few older doctors, lawyers, and clergymen in Kingston, but their numbers were smaller than might have been expected, especially in a community which had been growing rather slowly during the previous ten years. This finding, although intriguing in its implications, needs to be treated cautiously at this stage since the size of the sample is relatively small. It is worth noting also that the majority of foreign-born in Level I (Table in) were concentrated in skill level 3. Grocers and small merchants tend to dominate this group. Apparently one way up the ladder for the immigrant was through small shop-owning (a relatively low-cost method).22 These latter results tend to confirm the observation made by Helen Cowan that "During their first years, all but those possessing a few hundred pounds capital cast about for employment by the day. But as soon as a little ready money was obtained, the labourer himself became a proprietor, and within a few years an employer."23 However, the small number shown in the sample, relative to the position of other foreign-born workers, indicates that relatively few made it this way. Support for this last statement appears in column 3 of Table in. Almost a third of the foreign-born workers were concentrated in the unskilled jobs, while less than a fifth were so placed among the native-born. Whereas for workers in the blue collar category (Level n), more foreign-born appear than native born (39 vs. 28 per cent respectively). If Levels n and in are combined, then, they reveal an interesting split between these two groups. More than two-thirds of the immigrants found employment opportunities among manual occupations (skilled, semi-skilled, or unskilled), while less than half of all native workers were employed in such jobs. The reasons for this difference are not clear. It could be that the background, education, and training of the foreign-born were inferior to that of native workers and therefore the former were filling jobs for which they were trained; i.e. the differential was less a case of overt discrimination than of ability matching job requirements. It might also be the case that community pressures (discrimination owing to background) confined all but the very talented to the lower hierarchy of skills. Both hypotheses need further testing before any firm conclusions can be drawn as to the occupational assimilation of immigrants. With regard to differential employment opportunity, it is worth comparing the differences between Irish and non-Irish immigrants. It was shown in Table n that first-generation male workers born in Ireland dominated the ethnic structure of Kingston's labour force in 1871. Since they were such a large element, it is possible to show their occupational distribution separately. The category "Others" (line 4) covers all non-Irish foreign-born workers, and is dominated by workers born in England and Scotland and a few immigrants 324

36 Princess Street, looking east from the Grand Theatre, c, 1890

I M M I G R A N T S IN THE CITY

from the United States. The results of this split are quite interesting. The Irish-born workers are more over-represented in Level in occupations than either "Other" or total foreign-born and are, accordingly, under-represented in the upper two levels. It is also worth noting how over-represented are workers born in England and Scotland in Level n occupations. Apparently even in the nineteenth century Canada was drawing heavily on these two regions for its skilled and semi-skilled workers. Are these differences in occupational opportunities between natives and foreigners and within the latter group unique to Canada? Although no other Canadian study such as this is known to the present writer, a partial answer to this question can be given by comparing these results with those revealed in a similar study of Boston. In the Boston study Stephen Thernstrom found much the same structure.24 He observed that: In one major American city [Boston] in the classic period of heavy immigration there were dramatic differences in the occupational opportunities open to immigrants, the children of immigrants, and Americans of native stock. . . . There were [also] important differences in the experiences of newcomers of various national backgrounds. Some groups were exceptionally well suited to flourish in the American marketplace, others adjusted much more slowly and painfully.25

Thernstrom's observations are remarkably similar to our results for Kingston. This is not too surprising since, size of city apart, both received large immigrant inflows and as shown in Table in, the Irish were the dominant ethnic group in these overseas arrivals. According to Thernstrom, British and Jewish immigrants adapted most quickly (in terms of moving into the upper skill ranges), whereas the Irish and the Italians took much longer and their adaptation, even long after arrival, was less complete. In the Kingston area, the English and Scotch immigrants adapted more quickly, as shown by their over-representation in the upper skill categories, while the Irish in Kingston, like their fellow countrymen in Boston, tended to group in the lower prestige, lower income jobs and stay there long after their initial arrival. The Second Generation: How Did They Compare With Their Fathers? We have seen that occupational differences occurred both between native and foreign-born male members of the labour force and within the latter category. Such differences might have been expected, given the background of the groups involved. For example, the Irish, many of whom emigrated during the famine of the 1840s, came from poor, rural backgrounds and were, by any measure, poorly equipped for North American urban life. It is hardly surprising to find clusterings of such workers near the bottom of the skill scale, even ten or fifteen years after arrival. Though many such immigrants remained in 326

ALAN G. GREEN

these lower paying jobs they were undoubtedly far better off financially than they had been in Ireland. By contrast, native-born workers educated in Canada could be considered to have had a head-start and therefore were able to fill the more skilled occupations. However, what happened to the sons of these two groups? Unlike their fathers, the sons of both types of parents (native and foreign) grew up in the North American environment. In Ontario, at least, they all could attend public school. The sons, especially those of foreign parentage, would have observed, as they grew up, the demands exerted by the North American economy on its citizens and so have been able to sort out the type of effort and training required to succeed, or in our terms to move up the occupational-skill ladder. One might expect, then, given this comparatively similar background among second-generation children of foreign and nativeborn parentage, that their occupational distribution would also be comparatively similar. Whether, in fact, such convergence in structure did occur is, in the first instance, an empirical question. Fortunately, for the researcher, the Kingston sample was collected in such a way that a partial test of this hypothesis could be made. By collecting data on a family unit basis information on children living at home could also be observed. Table iv summarizes the results obTABLE IV

Occupational Differences among Second-Generation NativeBorn Sons of Native and Foreign-Born Parents, Kingston 1871 Occupational Categories

1 Native-born Parents 2 Foreign-born Parents

Level I (1) %

Level II (2) %

Level III (3) %

Number (4)

27.5

52.2

20.2

69

(a)

(a)

(a)

5

Methods and source: see Table III. (a): The number of observations in any one cell was too small to justify calculating a percentage distribution.

tained from this survey, which covered only those children who were living at home and who reported an occupation; children living at home but still in 327

I M M I G R A N T S IN THE CITY

school were not counted. The occupational groups shown in Table IV are identical with those in Table in. The first and most surprising result is the virtual absence of children of native-born parents (5 compared with 69). This difference is much greater than that exhibited by the numbers of native and foreign-born male workers in the community as a whole. Simply, the results show that in the upper age groups (children over 14) the majority of native parentage were either (a) still in school or (b) not living at home—in which case we do not know if they were in the labour force or not. By comparison, the sons of foreign-born parents were more likely to be both living at home and (more important) actively engaged in full-time employment. School training was, for them, completed. Therefore, the first conclusion from this look at the second generation is that children of foreign-born parents were more likely to leave school earlier than their contemporaries whose parents were born in Canada. The potentially high returns of advanced education which apparently accrued to native-born over foreign-born workers (see discussion of results shown in Table n) might explain some of this difference. To reinforce this conjecture a check of the original sample was made and it showed that a large number of children of native-born parentage were, in fact, still living at home and, in virtually all cases, were attending school (given their median age, presumably high school). The other point raised in this discussion of the younger generation was that acclimation to North American society might advance their relative occupational position over that of their parents. Table iv lends some support to this contention. Before any conclusions are drawn, however, it might be well to recall that the entrants shown in Table iv are still young and so the occupations they were reported as holding at the time of enumeration probably represented their first job. Assuming this to be true, the results, when sons are compared with their fathers, are most revealing. Comparing line 6 of Table in with line 1 of Table iv shows that the second generation of foreign-born parentage are now under-represented in the lowest (Level in) occupational category. (Their fathers, it will be recalled, were over-represented in this category.) By contrast sons are now over-represented in the skilled and semi-skilled workers' category (Level n), as were their fathers, but now to an even greater extent. Finally, given the age of this group, it is surprising indeed to find that the share in Level i is almost identical with that of the senior group. The explanation, once one digs below the surface, is easily given. Virtually all of the sons were concentrated in class 4 occupations and in this group clerks predominate. From these data it would appear that one way up the ladder, at least in terms of prestige if not in income terms, was through the lowest skilled job in the white collar occupation group. 328

ALAN G. G R E E N

Given the youth of these labour force entrants, and their minimum schooling, the extent to which even at this early stage in their lifetime careers upward migration is evident is revealing in itself. What would be even more interesting is to know how many children of foreign-born parentage went on to higher levels of education and what types of positions they eventually attained. Indeed, how did the young workers shown in Table iv fare after a decade or two in the work force? What is revealed in this exercise is, first, that large changes in status between generations, at least for those who chose to remain in Kingston, were not evident and, secondly, that the next generation of European parentage did improve on the experience of their fathers. If one of the aims of migration is to improve not only one's own lot in life but that of one's children, the experience observed here confirms the belief that migration does yield large returns, especially when measured over longer periods of time. Summary This micro-view of Kingston's working population, although by its nature narrow in focus, has nevertheless provided some interesting insights into the social and economic life of the city in the late nineteenth century. Most surprising of all the findings is the large role played by immigrants in the growth of the city, and especially the role played by the Irish. If this finding is sustained when other Canadian cities are studied, and it appears so for Hamilton, at least in terms of the distribution between foreign and native population in total if not by ethnic composition, then the basic "European" nature of our cities and the implications that naturally follow merit more scholarly inquiry than they have been given in the past. Examination of Kingston's labour force, by place of birth, reveals again the complexity of the social and economic structure even in such a small urban area. The extent of the over-representation of newcomers in the lower skilled jobs, and their persistence in this position through time, sheds new light on inequalities in the process of change. Sudden inflows of "foreigners" to the city apparently can increase the inequality of income distribution (the occupational classes here were designed to reflect not only skill variations but also income earning power). As shown in this essay, such an influx of unskilled labour—here the Irish—tends to exert a strong shift towards greater inequity. As the sample revealed, two decades later the "newcomers" were still over-represented in the low-paid, low-skilled jobs. The question which remains unanswered is the extent of skill migration which did in fact take place between the late 1840s and 1871. The suspicion is that inequity was even larger.26 The much closer conformity between the occupational distribution of the 329

I M M I G R A N T S IN THE CITY

second generations reveals that the process of "migrating up the income ranks" does occur. However, it does so slowly and may involve a lengthy process of learning, not only in the formal schooling sense but also through increased familiarity with the competitive nature of urban life in North America. Armed with this knowledge, which was unavailable to their parents, the children of the foreign-born could begin the process of capturing a larger share of the higher income and more prestigious jobs in this or another community. Kingston was hardly unique in this experience of absorbing, in brief periods, large numbers of newcomers. Intensive study of the impact such arrivals exerted on other urban areas is obviously a most important area for further inquiry. A proper understanding of the past will undoubtedly yield large returns in solving the uncertainties of the present with which the field of urban research is amply endowed.

330

Queen's University: Town and Sown to 1877 H I L D A NEATBY

In February 1840, an act of the legislature of Upper Canada incorporated "The Presbyterian College at Kingston." In October 1841, even before the new institution was ready to receive students, the college became, by Royal Charter, a new creation, with a new name, "Queen's College at Kingston." The founders of the college were members of the Presbyterian Church in Canada in communion with the Church of Scotland. The church was only in part self-supporting; it received from Scotland steady and substantial assistance in the shape of recruits for the ministry and for missionary work, and money for their support. Queen's College was founded with the advice and assistance of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland to train Canadians for the ministry of the Canadian branch. The principal would be ex qfficio a minister of the church and primarius professor of divinity. For the next twenty years there was only one member of the faculty who was not a minister of the Church of Scotland.1 Although in the opinion of the church the main purpose of the college was the training of ministers, instruction in arts was justified by the failure of Dr. Strachan of King's College, Toronto to open his institution to students, and by the gloomy certainty that when he should do so the instruction provided would be unsuitable for young members of the Kirk. Some also of the lay founders of Queen's, notably William Morris and Francis Harper of the Trust and Loan Company of Kingston, were directly interested in a Presbyterian arts college which would give young men not bound for the ministry such education as would enable them to compete with the favoured Anglicans in the professions and in government service. For many reasons Kingston appeared to be the ideal site for this new foundation: it was the centre of the solid settlement of the Church of Scotland Presbyterians, it was a prosperous port, it was a military post, and it was the chosen capital of the new large province of United Canada, created by the 331

T O W N AND G O W N TO 1877

Imperial Act of Union in 1840 and brought visibly into being with the assembling of the united legislature in 1841. This great event, and the establishment of a new governor general, Lord Sydenham, at Alwington some three miles to the west of the town, were of far more interest to most of the citizens of Kingston than the news that the trustees of the little college had optimistically paid £1,100 for a considerable tract of land at the very gates of the viceregal residence. But Queen's from the beginning did have loyal supporters in Kingston, notably Francis Harper who has already been mentioned, Alexander Pringle of the Customs House, John Mowat, merchant and owner of "the house with the round corner" at Princess and Bagot Streets, and Hon. John Hamilton, lawyer and member of the Legislative Council. All of these were members of St. Andrew's Church which stood then as now at Clergy and Princess Streets and which was expected to be the chapel of the new college. Together they succeeded in raising in Kingston £2,018 for the purchase of land and the creation of an endowment, the largest subscription made to the college from any place in Canada West, and exceeded only by Montreal and Quebec in the lower province.2 This, however, was a church project; no one then in Kingston, the new capital, thought of a time when the city would be known most widely as the seat of Queen's University. No member of the university thought of it either in those early years. The endowment campaign did not reach a third of its objective, and the college, which at the beginning attracted barely a dozen students, for some ten years existed obscurely and precariously in rented houses about the town. From the beginning, however, Queen's did offer a direct service to Kingston in the shape of the Queen's Preparatory School. The school was maintained, somewhat grudgingly, by the trustees to meet the needs of ill-prepared aspirants to the college courses. Opened under the direct supervision of the professor of classics, Rev. Peter Colin Campbell, who later became the first principal of Aberdeen University, the school came to be entrusted to masters who were also taking theological training at the college and who were obliged to tutor backward students there in addition to their other duties. In spite of these somewhat makeshift arrangements the school prospered, its numbers rose to more than eighty pupils, and the staff was increased by the appointment of a permanent assistant. Meanwhile, however, the Kingston Grammar School was developing and raising its standards. As the college school approached its twentieth year the trustees of the grammar school suggested to the trustees of Queen's that their school was now prepared to undertake the preparation of students for university, but was suffering from the competition of the Queen's College School. An amalgamation was suggested. The trustees agreed and the arrangement was carried through with the cooperation of the then principal, Rev. William Leitch, in 1862.3 332

37 Queen's University, 1868

T O W N AND G O W N TO 1877

Long before this time, however, Queen's had come to occupy a position of some importance and even dignity in Kingston. In 1853 the college left its rented premises and moved to what became its permanent home, Summerhill, the pleasant country house of Archdeacon Stuart, situated in the midst of some seven and one-half acres of ground on the hill behind the Kingston hospital. It was a good situation and, as one of the trustees noted, a good advertisement for Queen's, Summerhill being at that time clearly visible from ships travelling up and down the lake and offering "the idea of health and comfort in the very appearance of the place,"4 and yet not too far from the centre of the town. This move was the signal for the beginning of direct negotiations with the city council in relation to street improvements and taxes. Twelve years before this time Alexander Morris had suggested to Francis Harper that Kingston might well accommodate the members of the legislature by laying a plank walk to the entrance of their meeting place, the Kingston hospital.5 Now there began a correspondence over the improvement of Arch street, the muddy trail that ran by the eastern boundary of the college property and across the stream which wandered in front of Summerhill. The city was prepared to consider improvements if the college would give sufficient land to widen the road. To this the trustees consented on conditions, such as a good fence between the road and the college property, and the covering of the college stream into which drainage from the road would flow. The ground was then surrendered, although not without protest from Rev. James George (a somewhat dissenting member), but the council, even though reminded from time to time of its obligations, with the plea that in the spring the college was "almost inaccessible," for years did nothing—frankly admitting that there was no money. Meanwhile the college, also in low water financially, was begging for a remission of taxes.6 Another more agreeable matter brought the college to the attention of the town at this time. For a few years the trustees had operated a boardinghouse for students. When the college moved to Summerhill this was closed and the young men lived during the term in private homes. There must have been some problems, for in the spring of 1857 the senate urged the vice-principal to "impress strongly on the students who are boarders the duties of cultivating a courteous and gentlemanly demeanor towards the families with whom they reside,"7 but on the whole the relationships were good and the students had reason to be grateful for many kindnesses.8 For their part, as time went on and as the port of Kingston became somewhat less prosperous, the townspeople were able to congratulate themselves on the amount of hard currency that the students brought into the town. Other town and gown relationships were even more closely connected with 334

HILDA NEATBY

the business of the college. Not only did the young men conduct Sunday Schools, hold temperance meetings and, under the supervision of their principal, man preaching stations in the vicinity of Kingston, but their professors began the extension services for which Queen's later became famous. In 1859-60 the new science professor, George Lawson, offered a course of lectures in Kingston to workingmen on "The Application of Chemistry to the useful Arts of Life."9 A more ambitious scheme and one more directly related to the city as a whole was the acceptance by Queen's of the responsibility for the Kingston Observatory. The observatory had been established in 1855 by private subscribers with the help and cooperation of the citizens of Kingston. In 1861 it was transferred to Queen's and a new building was erected in the City Park with a central dome, a transit room, and a room for observers and the public. It was agreed that a course of not less than six public lectures on astronomy should be presented by the college each year in the City Hall or in the observatory. The chief mover in this project was the always active Professor James Williamson, supported by the newly appointed principal, Rev. William Leitch, who although professor of divinity was also a scientist of some reputation.10 The lectures on astronomy and other series offered from time to time were much appreciated and were greatly missed when, apparently from pressure of work, the professors felt obliged to discontinue them. The Alma Mater Society made an effort to compensate and to provide stimulus by arranging every year one or two public debates. Valuable as were the contributions of Queen's to the life of the city at this time it was Principal Leitch's ill fortune to preside over the university during a period of contention and scandal, which, though a coincidence, gave it most unfavourable publicity in Kingston and elsewhere in the province. When Leitch came to Kingston in the autumn of 1860 Queen's had existed for fourteen very difficult years with no permanent administrative head. The first principal, Thomas Liddell, had resigned in 1846, discouraged by the partial failure of the endowment campaign, and by the success of Bishop Strachan in blocking all efforts at a union of the colleges which would make available to Queen's some share of the generous endowment of public lands held by King's College.11 From this time Queen's had been presided over by a series of reluctant and temporary principals and vice-principals: Rev. John Machar of St. Andrew's Church, who added this responsibility and the teaching of the Hebrew class to his ministerial duties; Rev. James George, who served for a few years as vice-principal, a position of doubtful legality under the charter; and Rev. John Cook, who for one winter most reluctantly left his fine old church and manse in Quebec and for one more served as principal in absentia. At last in 1859 the trustees and all friends of Queen's in Kingston were delighted to learn that a committee of the board sent to Scotland to find a 335

T O W N AND G O W N TO 1877

new principal and including Alexander Morris, son of the first chairman, had received the warmest recommendations for Rev. William Leitch. He was said to be a man of sound theological learning, who within a year or two of his appointment to Queen's was to be a serious contender for the chair of divinity in Glasgow awarded to John Caird. He was also keenly interested in science, carried on entomological research, and wrote articles on astronomy as well as more popular contributions for various encyclopaedias and periodicals. Finally, in that age of evangelical fervour, Leitch welcomed the opportunity of building up what must have seemed to him a frontier theological college and of working in close contact with professors and students presumably as missionary minded as he was himself.12 Alas for Leitch! All his theological training had not prepared him for the energy and efficiency with which the serpent had been reducing Queen's Eden to chaos. Most of the early group of trustees, residents of Kingston who had helped found the college, and had necessarily been responsible for the day to day administration, had died or resigned as a result of ill-health: Alexander Pringle, William Morris, John Mowat, Francis Harper were all gone and Rev. John Machar was to die a year or two later. The board was passing through a period of weakness and indecision under the chairmanship of Hon. John Hamilton whose active and perhaps too busy son-in-law, John Paton of the Trust and Loan Company, had been secretary since 1855.13 Paton was obviously both pious and competent, but he was too obviously so, and he made powerful enemies. Meanwhile the overworked and underpaid arts faculty, Professor J. A. Williamson, brother-in-law of John A. Macdonald, in natural philosophy, the young George Weir in classics, the young George Lawson in chemistry, and the young J. B. Mowat (brother of Oliver and son of the trustee), had not been pulling together as a team under the elderly, tired, and occasionally opinionated Rev. James George, formerly of Scarborough, the only administrative head to have been in continuous residence from 1853 to I860.14 For a year or two Leitch would have had a difficult time even if he had arrived in Kingston under the most favourable auspices. Had he been able to settle permanently in Kingston as a citizen and put down roots in the place, he might have pulled the college together and established its reputation and his own authority. Unfortunately Leitch was a widower and his two young daughters could be cared for only in Scotland; so that family ties, family business, and intellectual and social interests all drew him back to Scotland almost every summer. At the same time, during his first year or two, he was harassed by the recurring question of university federation which necessitated fatiguing journeys to Toronto. During the winter he worked hard and successfully with his young theological students. But he found little time to 336

HILDA NEATBY

confer informally with trustees and professors on college business, or to see Kingstonians in their own homes, or to invite them to his. In fact, he had no home. He lived in a boardinghouse and had a study in the college. Moreover, having struck up a friendship with John Paton, who after five years as secretary was much better informed about college business than anyone else, he came to rely heavily on him, making him almost a deputy principal during his visits of Scotland, and thus incurring to some extent the enmity of the professors.15 As if this were not enough, Leitch arrived at a moment when the medical faculty, composed of doctors who lectured for fees, without salary, and who complained, with some reason, that their faculty was a stepchild in the house, were engaged in a feud among themselves which also involved the Kingston Hospital Board and the board of trustees. At the centre of the conflict, his hand against every man's, stood the secretary of the medical faculty, the energetic, able, eccentric Dr. John Stewart, a Highlander who habitually wore his plaid, and who looked with infinite scorn on his English and Irish colleagues. Leitch mistook the brief truce which followed his arrival as a sign that he had resolved the discord, and was proportionately disconcerted when Stewart in the spring of 1861 resigned his position as secretary, and a year later had to be dismissed from the chair of anatomy on a threat from his colleagues that if the board refused to take such a step they would resign in a body.16 This was bad enough, for Dr. Stewart was an influential figure and, in his own opinion, by far the best doctor in town. Unhappily for Leitch and for Queen's, he was also a practical journalist, the owner and chief contributor to the Kingston Argus. From the spring of 1861 he took advantage of his increasing freedom from college responsibilities to wage a campaign against the medical faculty, the trustees, and above all, against Principal Leitch and John Paton. Stewart was a notably unrestrained writer, even in those days of unrestrained journalism, but he was more than violent and abusive, he was also persuasive and convincing. Even today it is hard not to think that he must have had at least half a case and perhaps a little more. Eventually his activities were brought to a halt because one of his medical colleagues had him jailed for criminal libel but this was small comfort to his victims whom he had made the talk of the town and, they feared, of many other towns.17 Even as the medical troubles were approaching their climax Leitch was confronted with a major scandal within the faculty of arts and theology which, to do Dr. Stewart justice, he did not attempt to exploit in the columns of the Argus. A long-standing feud between two professors, the former Vice-Principal James George and George Weir of the classics department, culminated in the fall of 1861, when the latter accused George of being the 337

T O W N AND G O W N TO 1877

father of the six-year-old illegitimate son of Weir's sister. The existence of the child had been kept a secret from Weir until his visit to Scotland in the preceding summer. His sister had spent the winter of 1854-55 with him in Kingston, at which time, he and George still being friends, George had been a frequent visitor at his house. Weir publicly accused George before the board of trustees and demanded an immediate public investigation. When this was delayed he carried his complaints and accusations among the students and through the town. Although many were dismayed by his want of taste and discretion he was charming and convincing and he never wanted for friends and supporters. Meanwhile George had angrily denied the charge but had immediately offered his resignation which the trustees thankfully and weakly accepted, using this as a reason for not carrying on any investigation. Weir angrily protested this evasion of the issue, was admonished for his violence and urged to be discreet. In spite of this he continued to be so independent and even defiant in his attitude to the principal and to the trustees that he was dismissed early in 1864. He had, however, the skill and good fortune to get himself dismissed on the highly creditable issue of "academic freedom" during a complicated discussion of the proposed college statutes which were to define the relative powers and duties of the board of trustees and the senate. Two of his colleagues, Professor George Lawson and Dr. Dickson of the medical faculty resigned over the same issue. Lawson left in the fall of 1863 after a noisy and disorderly indignation meeting among his students, and Dr. Dickson made Convocation ceremonies of the following spring the occasion for receiving an address from the students highly critical of the Board of Trustees, to which he replied in kind.18 Thus during three and a half years of Leitch's administration two professors had been dismissed, three had resigned in indignation or in semidisgrace. Finally, in the spring of 1864, Leitch himself, having suffered a heart attack, died after some weeks of illness, with little to comfort him except a sense of his own honest effort in the midst of overwhelming difficulties. It was useless now to look to Scotland for a successor. Queen's needed a skilled, cautious, but above all knowledgeable person to bring peace and order within the college walls and to rebuild a badly damaged reputation. The man chosen is of special significance in the history of Kingston, for he above any other principal, before or after, was the means of bringing Queen's to Kingston and Kingston to Queen's through those all-important outward and visible signs which hitherto had been lacking. Rev. William Snodgrass of St. Paul's Church, Montreal, was a Scot who had served in the Maritimes before coming to Central Canada and who, at the time of his appointment to Queen's was clerk of the synod. He was fortunate enough to know all about the college 338

HILDA NEATBY

without having been involved, as trustee or as lecturer, in any of the troubles of the last few years. On his appointment, he came, with his family, to Kingston where he lived for thirteen years with no long absences. In 1870, space in the former medical building having become available for arts classes, he took as his residence the central portion of Summerhill, the adjacent wings being occupied by two of his colleagues.19 It meant much to Queen's and to its relations with Kingston to have this quiet, moderate, kind, and very clearsighted and determined man living in the town as a citizen and on the campus as principal. He began a new era in the college and in its relations with Kingston. It was not long before Snodgrass was to prove what those relations were worth. As Leitch had been dogged by weakness within his successor had constantly to ward off blows from without. In 1868 the college suffered a double financial disaster. The Commercial Bank of Kingston had failed in 1867, and it now appeared that Queen's had lost some two-thirds of the considerable portion of its investments there; and following the federal union of British North America and the acceptance by the provinces of responsibility for education, secularist forces in Ontario led by the Globe proved strong enough to cut off all grants to denominational colleges. As a result Queen's lost an amount equal to about half its annual expenditure. In this emergency Snodgrass promptly placed his plan before the trustees. Queen's must now appeal to its own friends for support. An endowment of $100,000 would be needed to replace the lost income and the campaign must be conducted throughout the province. Support would be asked not so much for a Church of Scotland college existing uneasily between the Free Church colleges at Toronto and Montreal, as for Queen's, the university of the eastern section of the new province of Ontario, not primarily denominational, but providing a Christian environment and Christian teaching for young men away from home for the first time. At the very outset of the campaign Snodgrass displayed his shrewdness and common sense. He would begin immediately with an appeal to the City of Kingston to maintain its own university. Having made his home there now for four years, he knew not only the college staff and the circle of substantial citizens of St. Andrew's Church, but the town as a whole, and he confidently asked, not the church, but Kingston to set an example of generosity. His faith was justified. His own faculty led the way with contributions of $500 each from four prof essors—Williamson, MacKerras, Murray, and Mowat—one-third of a year's salary for the three junior men. St. Andrew's Church gave generously and so did other Kingstonians. Subscriptions at one time estimated at $20,000 in the end totalled about $17,000.20 This lead from the city was loyally followed by Queen's geographic con339

T O W N AND G O W N TO 1877

stituency, the triangle of land lying between the Ottawa and St. Lawrence Rivers and Lake Ontario, and reaching north to Perth and westward toward Belleville. With a little over a quarter of some 4,500 contributors, this relatively unprosperous area gave well over a third of the sum raised.21 Queen's was still a church college but it was increasingly, too, the university of Kingston and of eastern Ontario. The success of the campaign confirmed the new friendship and intimacy between Kingston and Queen's, which grew stronger with the years and with the encouraging growth of the university. Then and for some time to come three-fifths of the students came from the eastern district. In Snodgrass's time the college recovered although not rapidly. In the year of his appointment there were sixty students in arts and theology; the number fell below thirty during the years of financial disaster, but in the fall of 1877 Snodgrass left his successor with an enrolment of more than 100. The cordial relations with the city continued under Principal Grant, and were strikingly demonstrated at the end of his career by the magnificent gift of Kingston Hall. One of the slighter but still significant evidences of this friendship was the institution of the "Conversazione." Begun by the student society, the Alma Mater Society, as an acknowledgement of the hospitality extended by Kingstonians to students throughout the year, the Conversazione came to be a part of the annual spring Convocation, an occasion for a general social mingling of town and gown, with alumni and other visitors from all parts of the country. The Conversazione was an elaborate "open house" combined with a concert and, of course, speeches. Every room in the college was thrown open to the guests, who were invited to walk about, listen to the music of a military band, look at the science rooms where Professor Dupuis was conducting experiments for their enlightenment, visit the refreshment room where attentive students were waiting to serve the food prepared by the professors' wives. The young often found their way to a classroom near to the band where someone had pushed back the benches in preparation for a semi-surreptitious dance. Dancing was, it seems, permissible so long as it was not done blatantly but with some appearance of spontaneous improvisation. The quaint and stilted reporting of the Queen's College Journal gives something of the atmosphere of a successful college party in Kingston a century ago: The long looked for Conversazione to be given by the Alma Mater Society was held in the University buildings on the 25th inst. [April 1877]. A very large number of invitations had been issued, and the number of acceptances was unusually great. The Hall was finely decorated with flags, banners and evergreens, and looked well. About nine o'clock the scene was a very brilliant one, the Hall being crowded by ladies and 340

HILDA NEATBY

gentlemen, the rich dresses of the former, contrasting harmoniously with the more sober evening dress of the latter. Graduates and alumni from all parts of the Dominion were present. Promenading, so far as practicable, was the order of the evening, and the panorama of moving faces set off with rich dresses, made a scene scarcely ever equalled in Kingston for beauty.

The core of the entertainment was, however, a concert-cum-speeches given in three parts in Convocation Hall. The Journal does careful justice to every item, not, however, without reflecting what must have been moments of strain for the hosts: "After a speech by the President of the Society the Glee Club of the College . . . sang "The Song of the Gypsies" in very good time and with considerable effect, marred somewhat by the surging of the audience which by this time had become very large." Miss P. Walkem and Mr. J. B. Walkem sang very finely "Mother Can This the Glory Be," after which the surging audience was released for a period of conversation, science, and refreshments. Later, more musical items led up to a general speech by Principal Snodgrass who welcomed the guests, thanked them for their many kindnesses, and pointed out the all too obvious need of more buildings to accommodate the students and to cover the land being held by the college for the purpose. After which "The Glee Club . . . sang 'God Save the Queen' and the interesting proceedings came to a close about 11:30 o'clock." And so the guests and their hosts went home to bed. This was Principal Snodgrass' last Convocation. Under his successor, Principal Grant, Queen's was to become a great national university; but the national institution grew, and could only have grown, from the little college that was now solidly and happily at home in Kingston.

341

This page intentionally left blank

Notes

Introduction 1. R. A. Preston, ed., Kingston before the War of 1812: A Collection of Documents (Toronto: Champlain Society, 1959). 2. I am grateful to John Spurr who drew my attention to these reports. 3. For this information I am indebted to a former Queen's student, David Roberts, whose research essay "The Bedford Forests," and further work on a related subject, methodically explore the social and economic development of Bedford Mills and North Crosby in Kingston's Rideau Lakes hinterland. 4. G. Tulchinsky, "Studies of Montreal Businessmen in the Development of Transportation and Industry in Montreal, 1837-1853," (Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto, 1971). 5. "This town exhibits a state of improvement greater than we ever witnessed in the same space of time," enthused a reporter in the York Patriot, quoted in Montreal Gazette, 5 Nov. 1833. 6. Andrew Picken, The Canadas (London, 1832), p. 113. 7. Adam Fergusson, Practical Notes Made During a Tour in Canada and a Portion of the United States in MDCCCXXXI (1831} (London, 1834), pp. 94-95. Similar comments on commercial and residential construction in the city during the early 1830s can be found in T. R. Preston, Three Years' Residence in Canada from 1837-1839, 2 vols. (London, 1840), I, 126 and J. E. Alexander, Transatlantic Sketches, comprising visits to the most in North and South America and the West Indies, 2 vols. (London, 1833), I, 303. 8. John McGregor, British America, 2 vols. (Edinburgh, 1832), n, 534. 9. Canada and the Canadians in 1846 (London, 1846), p. 281. 10. W. H. Smith, Smith's Canadian Gazetteer (Toronto, 1846), p. 94. 11. W. H. Smith, Canada: Past, Present and Future, 2 vols. (Toronto, 1851), n, 283-85. 12. Census of Canada, 4 vols. (Ottawa, 1871), in, 6-7. 13. I, no. 2 (August), 99. 343

NOTES

14. E. T. Horsey, "Cataraqui, Fort Frontenac, Kingston" (typescript, Queen's University Archives, 1937), p. 87. 15. (Toronto, 1851 and 1854), passim. 16. Ibid. (1854), p. 472. 17. A. R. M. Lower, The North American Assault on the Canadian Forest (Toronto: Ryerson, 1937). See also Roberts "The Bedford Forests," p. 5. 18. D. C. Masters, The Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1963), pp. 110-11. 19. R. A. Preston, "The History of the Port of Kingston," Ontario History, XLVII, no. 1 (1955), 29. 20. Wright's Classified Business and Professional Directory and Gazeteer of the Dominion of Canada and Newfoundland (Halifax, 1900), p. 184. 21. Census of Canada (1871), m, 392-93. 22. Kingston News, 27 Oct. 1894. 23. Although the census of 1851 reported only two foundries existing in Kingston, Census of Canada (1871), iv, 199, a provincial business directory of the same year lists five, Robert W. MacKay, The Canada Directory: Containing the Names of the Professional and Businessmen of Every Description in the Cities, Towns and Principal Villages of Canada (Montreal, 1851), p. 127. 24. Mitchell's Canada Gazetteer and Business Directory for 1864-65 (Toronto, 1864), pp. 286, 288. 25. Wright's Classified, pp. iv, 184. 26. Census of Canada, 4 vols. (Ottawa, 1881), III, 368, 428, 460. 27. Kingston News, 27 Oct. 1894. 28. Census of Canada (1881), m, 358, 388. 29. Ibid. 30. Kingston News, 27 Oct. 1894. 31. See Alfred Dubuc, "Thomas Molson: Entrepreneur Canadien, 1791-1863," (These de Doctorat, Universite de Paris, 1969), ch. iv, "L'Exil A Kingston, 1824-1834." 32. Max Magill, "James Morton of Kingston—Brewer," Historic Kingston, no. 21 (1973), 28-36. 33. E. T. Coke, A Subaltern's Furlough: Descriptions of Scenes in Various Parts of the United States, Upper and Lower Canada, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in 1832 (London, 1833), p. 321. 34. A Topographical Description of the Province of Lower Canada with Remarks Upon Upper Canada (London, 1815), p. 602. 35. Robert Gourlay, Statistical Account of Upper Canada, 2 vols. (London, 1822), 1,472. 36. Ibid., 476. 37. Ibid. 38. See Smith's Canadian Gazetteer, p. 91. 39. Edith Firth, The Town of York, 1815-34 (Toronto: Champlain Society, 1966), pp. xix, 4, 5. 344

NOTES

40. Ibid., pp., 23-30. 41. J. C. Dent, The Last Forty Years, The Union of 1841 to Confederation, abridged and with an introduction by Donald Swainson (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1972), p. 20. 42. Ibid., p. 44. 43. Le Canadien, 1 July 1841, quoted in J. Monet, The Last Cannon Shot: A Study of French-Canadian Nationalism (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969), p. 82. 44. R. E. Caron to Abbe Gazeau, quoted in ibid. 45. (London, 1820), p. 143. 46. Ibid., p. 145. 47. P. Finah, Journal of a Voyage to Quebec, in the Year 1825, with Recollections of Canada, during the late American War, in the Years 1812-13 (Newry, 1820), p. 228. 48. British America, n, 532. 49. Hochelaga: or England in the New World (London, 1854), p. 98. 50. T. R. Preston, Three Years' Residence, I, 125. 51. Francis Duncan, Our Garrisons in the West, or Sketches in British North America (London, 1864), p. 192. 52. Ibid., p. 192-93. 53. Warburton, Hochelaga, p. 98. 54. Robert M. Hamilton, comp., Canadian Quotations and Phrases Literary and Historical (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1965), p. 113. 55. For a traveller's impression of early Queen's see James Bryce Brown, Views of Canada and the Colonists: embracing the experience of a residence; views of the present state, progress and prospects of the colony. By a four years' resident (Edinburgh, 1844), p. 62. 56. Census of Canada (1871), iv, 165. 57. Ibid., p. 180. 58. Hereward Senior, Orangeism: The Canadian Phase (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1972), p. 11. 59. Quoted in Firth, York, p. 208. 60. W. L. Morton, The Critical Years, 1857-1871 (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1964). 61. Census of Canada (1871), iv, 182; I, 127. 62. Ibid., i, 127. 63. Warburton, Hochelaga, p. 98. 64. See Lois D. Milani, Robert Gourlay, Gadfly: Forerunner of the Rebellion in Upper Canada, 1837 (Toronto: Ampersand Press, 1972), ch. 18. 65. G. M. Craig, "Marshall Spring Bidwell," Dictionary of Canadian Biography (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1972), x, 60. 345

NOTES

66. Sir Richard H. Bonny castle, Canada, as it was, is, and may be, 2 vols. (London, 1852), II, 80. 67. Ibid., 82. 68. I am indebted to H. Pearson Gundy for information and insights on this subject. 69. Roy Daniells, "Minor Poets (1880-1920)," Carl F. Klinck, ed., Literary History of Canada: Canadian Literature in English (Toronto: University of Toronto, 1964), p. 428. 70. Klinck, "Literary Activity in Canada East and West," ibid., pp. 162, 196. 71. N. Shrive, Charles Mair, Literary Nationalist (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1965), p. 79n. 72. Ibid., p. 155. 73. See T. R. Glover, A Corner of Empire, The Old Ontario Strand (Cambridge; 1937), chs. 7 and 8, passim. 74. J. Castell Hopkins, ed., Morang's Annual Register of Canadian Affairs (Toronto: Morang, 1902), p. 422.

Architecture for a Boom Town I have received special kindness and help from a number of people in the course of preparing this article. To Mrs. Margaret Angus I am indebted for conversations about Browne and his Kingston, for several references acknowledged in their place, and for reading the manuscript. My colleague Professor Gerald Finley also criticized the manuscript, for which I am grateful, and also for his constant encouragement. I am also particularly grateful to another colleague, Professor Pierre du Prey, for helping me to avoid a number of errors and for his stimulating criticism. To yet another colleague, Mr. Peter Fraser, I am deeply indebted for permission to use his unpublished B.A. thesis on Browne, to which specific reference is hereafter made as Fraser. Finally, I am exceedingly grateful to Mr. A. J. H. Richardson of the Historic Sites Division, Department of Indian Affairs, for encouragement, and for helping me to avoid some major errors. 1. See Robert Rosenblum, Transformations in Late Eighteenth Century Art (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1970), p. 119. Chapters 3 and 4 of this work contain an excellent exposition of the doctrine of the 'Primitive' and its effects on architecture in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. 2. See J. Mordaunt Crook, The Greek Revival (London: Royal Institute of British Architects, 1968), p. 42. 3. See P. Mayrand and J. Bland, Three Centuries of Architecture in Canada (Montreal: Federal Publications Service, 1971). Further indication of the lack of recognition of Browne is provided by Mayrand and Eland's statement about John Wells's Bank of Montreal of c. 1845-46 as "the most ambitious piece of classical revival architecture yet attempted in Canada" (p. 95), which clearly ignores the Kingston City Hall, an infinitely larger structure. Alan Gowans (Building Canada, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1966) discusses and illustrates several of Browne's works without, however, indicating 346

NOTES

their originality. Marion MacRae, in Ancestral Roof (Toronto: Clarke Irwin, 1963), treats Browne fairly extensively, although limited by her theme to his domestic architecture, and confused by two misattributions. The most accurate treatment of Browne's Kingston architecture is in Margaret Angus's The Old Stones of Kingston (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1966), hereafter referred to as Angus, Stones. For the most extensive treatment of Browne's career as a whole see A. J. H. Richardson, "Guide to the architecturally and historically most significant Buildings in the Old City of Quebec with a Biographical Dictionary of Architects and Builders," APT (Bulletin of the Association for Preservation Technology), II, nos. 3-4 (1970), 76-77. 4. See Rev. J. Douglas Borthwick, History and Biographical Gazeteer of Montreal to the year 1892 (Montreal: John Lovell, 1892), p. 259. This information is also given in the first (1875) edition of Borthwick's work. In his 1892 edition Borthwick merely says that Browne "died a few years ago." In fact, according to the list of burials of the Mount Royal Cemetery Company he died, at the age of 74, on 19 Nov. 1885. (I am grateful to Mrs. P. Lemieux for answering my enquiries on this point, and to the editor, Professor G. Tulchinsky, for suggesting this approach.) Browne is buried in plot Bl beneath a monument which consists of a large plinth, some four feet in diameter, above which rises a column, banded with vermiculated rustication, topped by an urn, the whole being about twelve feet in height. This splendid neo-baroque affair was, according to the inscription, "Erected in Affectionate Remembrance of Anna Maria Jameson wife of George Browne Architect who died 31st Octr- 1859, Aged 44 years. Also of Four children who died in infancy." Presumably it was designed by the architect, and indeed its rustication is strikingly similar to that on his Molson's Bank (Montreal), 1864-66. The inscription on the west face of the monument reads "And His Eldest Son Thomas Richardson 1833-1894." This strengthens the suggestion of A. J. H. Richardson ("Guide to Old Quebec") that Goodlate Richardson Browne and Richardson Browne, who are recorded as architects and sculptors in Quebec and Montreal in the 1830s and 40s, are connections of George Browne. 5. Fraser, passim, and Richardson, "Guide to Old Quebec." 6. Borthwick, History of Montreal to 1892. 7. See M. Angus, "Architects and Builders of Early Kingston," Historic Kingston, no. 11 (1963), 25-27. (Hereafter cited as Angus, Architects.) 8. Quoted in Angus, Architects, p. 25. 9. Information from Mrs. Margaret Angus. For an illustration of the Mowat Building, see Angus, Stones, p. 33. 10. See M. Angus, "The Mowats of Kingston," Historic Kingston, no. 13 (1965), 45-46. Citations from Mowat Papers, Queen's University Archives. 11. Fraser suggests that the round-corner building at Rue St. Paul and Rue St. Jean Baptiste may be by Browne, c. 1840, which stylistically seems a very plausible attribution. 12. The building appears as a three-storey structure in a photograph of Bagot Street, probably taken in the 1870s. See Kingston: The Limestone City (illustrated souvenir industrial number), Kingston, Daily British Whig, 1909, p. 41. 347

NOTES

13. Tenders were called in the Chronicle and Gazette, 28 April 1841 and on 28 May 1842 the building was offered "for rent by August next." (I am indebted to Mrs. Margaret Angus for these references.) 14. The following notice appeared in the Chronicle and Gazette of 18 Aug. 1841: TO MASONS AND CARPENTERS/Tenders will be received by the Subscriber on or before Monday the 23d inst. . . . for enlarging and building a wing to a house and store in Store Street, according to Plans and Specifications to be seen at the Office of G. BROWNE ARCHITECT Kingston, 14th August, 1841.

On the basis of this Mrs. Angus (Stones, p. 30) dated the Commercial Mart 1841. However, a document preserved among the Kingston City records (on deposit at Queen's University Archives) appears to confirm what is here argued on stylistic grounds, viz. that the Commercial Mart is the most highly evolved, and hence the latest of this group of Browne's buildings. It is an indenture, dated 1 May 1842, between William Fender, Arthur Harper, carpenters, and Charles Hales, merchant, for the carpentry and joiners work for "three cut stone warehouses or stores at the intersection of Front [Ontario] and Store [Princess] Street" according to the specification of "George Brown [sic] architect." The carpenters agreed to complete their work "before the expiration of Forty two days after the walls . . . shall be completely erected and finished," clear evidence that the building was certainly not finished by the spring of 1842, and perhaps not even begun. In any case, it is highly unlikely that the Commercial Mart had been put out to tender over eight months before the indenture. It would seem that the advertisement of August 1841 must refer to another, as yet unidentified, Browne building on Store Street. The Hales buildings seem to have been first advertised for rent in the Chronicle and Gazette of 13 Jan. 1843: ". . . splendid mercantile buildings, recently erected. ..." (Information from Mrs. Margaret Angus.) Hales was an early client of Browne, as appears in a notice from the latter in the Chronicle and Gazette of 5 May 1841: "Tenders will be received ... for erecting FIVE COTTAGES, in the vicinity of this town, for Charles Hales, Esq., . . . " I am grateful to Mrs. Mary Fraser for informing me of this reference which documents the four buildings (a fifth was later destroyed by fire) known as "Hales Cottages" which still stand on King Street, east of Centre Street. (See Angus, Stones, pp. 84-85.) 15. See Kingston: The Limestone City, p. 63. The building, then occupied by the Wormith Piano Factory had apparently been gutted by fire in 1908, and was being rebuilt. 16. See Sir John Summerson, "Inigo Jones," Proceedings of the British Academy, 50 (1964), 179. 17. Above and behind the portico. 18. Mowat Papers, Queen's University Archives. 19. See MacRae, Ancestral Roof, pp. 115-16. 20. The design of the interior door surround appears, with slight modifications, in the interior window surrounds of the room presently known as Ontario Hall in the Kingston City Hall. 21. Rockwood was tendered for as "an Italian Villa" on 24 July 1841. See J. Douglas 348

NOTES

Stewart and Ian Wilson, Heritage Kingston (Kingston: Agnes Etherington Art Centre, 1973), p. 183. (Hereafter referred to as Heritage Kingston.) See also Marion MacRae, Ancestral Roof, p. 117, although MacRae is inaccurate both in her description of the materials used at Rockwood, and also in her ground plan. The window in the left-hand niche in the porch provides light for a small cloak room behind it, not as MacRae shows, for the staircase, which is further to the left and lit by a facade window. Recently, what appear to be an early set of plans and an elevation of Rockwood have emerged, in the Maps and Plans Division, Public Archives of Canada. (I am grateful to Mr. Edward Dahl for his assistance in locating these.) On the plans the final layout and dimensions of the interior spaces have been arrived at. However, the facade is quite different from the final version, being distinctly less primitive and neo-baroque, e.g. it has a bracketted, instead of a blocked cornice, the portico columns are slimmer and not in antis. Browne also uses quoining on the main facade at this stage, which suggests he had not as yet decided on the niche and panel of the right-hand elevation, since they could scarcely be used together. 22. The view is now largely blocked by the Ontario Hospital. Since Browne was apparently also a landscape gardener (see n. 8) he may have designed the original garden layout. Some of this appears to survive in the terraces behind the house, which are approached by very imposing sets of stone steps, which have all the earmarks of Browne's designs. (See Heritage Kingston, no. 183A.) 23. See S. Millikin, "The Tribune in British Architecture," Burlington Magazine, 112 (1970), 442-46. 24. He was born in 1804, the son of Hon. Richard Cartwright. He studied law first in York and then at Lincoln's Inn, London, returning to Canada in 1830. He became the first president of the Commercial Bank of Kingston in 1831. He entered the Legislative Assembly in 1836 and in 1842 was offered the solicitor-generalship by Sir Charles Bagot, but refused because he opposed the Union. See W. S. Wallace, The Macmillan Dictionary of Canadian Biography (Toronto: Macmillan, 1945), I 104. Following Wallace, and a number of others, I mistakenly gave Cartwright's death-date as 15 Dec. 1845 in Heritage Kingston (p. 153). The true death-date is 15 Jan. 1845, which appears on the Cartwright family memorial in St. Paul's Churchyard, Kingston. (I am indebted to Mrs. Mary Stewart for this observation.) 25. His papers are among the Cartwright Papers, Douglas Library, Queen's University. A portion of his library which until recently belonged to his descendant, Miss Edith Van Straubenzee of Kingston, is also now in the Douglas Library. (See also Heritage Kingston, p. 154.) In addition to the architectural treatises cited, the library contained John Crunden's Convenient and Ornamental Architecture. . . , new ed. (London: I. and J. Taylor, 1790) and J. C. Loudon's An Encyclopedia of Cottages, Farm and Villa Architecture and Furniture . . . , new ed. (London: Longman, 1839). 26. See F. Jenkins, Architect and Patron (London: Oxford University Press, 1961), passim. 27. For the plan of Rockwood see MacRae, Ancestral Roof, p. 117; but see also the warning given in n. 21 above. 28. The master-bedroom fireplace surround includes a carved laurel wreath. 349

NOTES

29. These features do not appear on the left side of the house, nor on the early plans of the house. (See n. 21.) 30. See Summerson, "Inigo Jones/' passim. 31. Ibid., p. 174. 32. Ibid., p. 176. 33. Ibid., p. 175. 34. Ibid., pi. 19b. 35. Chronicle and Gazette, Kingston, 25 June 1842—although the city clerk's letter to that journal is dated 15 June. 36. For a preliminary account of the building history of City Hall, and some of the surviving documents and much illustrative material see Heritage Kinston, nos. 159-77. 37. The letter is headed "Kingston, Nov. 24, 1843." 38. Sir Richard Bonnycastle, Canada and the Canadians (London: Henry Colburn, 1846), n, 280-81. 39. Browne's final plans have disappeared, but what is presumably his final plan for the front elevation is reproduced on Thomas Fraser Gibbs's 1850 Plan of the City and Liberties of Kingston. It includes the statue on top of the dome, which according to "Leo" was to represent Lord Sydenham. 40. I am indebted to Mr. Neil MacLennan, the architect in charge of the recent restoration of the City Hall, for this information and for illuminating discussions about the building in general. 41. Public Archives of Canada, Division of Maps and Plans. (See Heritage Kingston, nos. 159-66.) 42. W. H. Smith, Smith's Canadian Gazetteer (Toronto: H. & W. Rowsell, 1846), p. 91. As late as 1852 the editor of the (Toronto) Anglo-American wrote that "nowhere in Canada can a better piece of masonry be seen than that exhibited by the [Kingston] City Hall, with the fortifications in front of it." Quoted in F. H. Armstrong and N. C. Hultin, "The Anglo-American Looks at Urban Upper Canada on the Eve of the Railway Era," in E. G. Firth, ed., Profiles of a Province (Toronto: Ontario Historical Society, 1967), p. 49. 43. "Antonia's" letter was published in the edition of 27 April 1844. He had written an equally vitriolic letter about Browne and the City Hall which appeared in the British Whig, 26 Jan. 1844. In it he referred to the "boyish babyism displayed in the proportions of the Pilasters, Cornices, Window openings," said the style of the building was "neither Modern nor Antique," and wondered sarcastically if "the Architect will favor the public with the True style of the Building, and if he means to dedicate it to the Great King John [Counter]." (I am grateful to Mrs. Mary Fraser for drawing my attention to this earlier letter.) The January letter provoked a letter from another correspondent, "Candide," which was published in the British Whig on 2 February. He too attacked the City Hall: "I thought it resembled a huge unwieldy paper-kite, which, after being wig-wagged in the air by divers currents and puffs of wind, had at length grounded all askew in the Market Square." 350

NOTES

The identity of both correspondents is unknown. It is possible that they were architects since they are conversant with architectural terms. On the other hand, such knowledge then formed part of the education of any private gentleman. Antonia's first letter is signed "Antonias," but this is perhaps a misprint. The name may perhaps be a biblical reference—again something that would be readily understood in the 1840s. "Antonia" was the name given by King Herod to a fortress at the corner of the temple square in Jerusalem, and named in honour of his patron Mark Antony. See P. A. M. Marijnen, Encyclopedia of the Bible (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall, 1965), p. 13. 44. Elmes won the competition 1839-40 and construction was begun in 1842. See Crook, Greek Revival, pis. 35-40, and Henry-Russell Hitchcock, Early Victorian Architecture in Britain (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1954), I, 309-12. 45. See Crook, Greek Revival, p. 2. 46. There is further evidence at the City Hall of Browne's fascination with the 'primitive* and the unorthodox. In the decoration of Ontario Hall the Ionic order is used. However, the bases of the pilasters flanking the main door have the peculiar splayed sections found on the columns of the Temple of Apollo at Naucratis, while one of the plaster floral designs on the ceiling derives from the volutes of the capitals of the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus, both Archaic Ionic structures. See D. S. Robertson, Greek and Roman Architecture (Cambridge: University Press, 1969), figs. 41 and 45.

The Settlement of Kingston's Hinterland 1. Public Archives of Canada (PAC), RG5, Al, pp. 12511-13: W. Hamilton to E. McMahon, 8 April 1816. 2. Kingston Gazette, 27 Nov. 1810. 3. John Collins' Survey of Kingston Township, October 27th, 1783; quoted in R. A. Preston, ed., Kingston before the War of 1812: A Collection of Documents (Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1959), in, 40. 4. Public Archives of Ontario (PAO), Department of Lands and Forests, Surveyors' Letters, vol. 9, folio 2: Alex Aitken to D. W. Smith, Surveyor General, 26 Dec. 1792. 5. Ibid., Vol. 34, folio 68, 11 March 1809. 6. Gilbert Patterson, Land Settlement in Upper Canada, 1783-1840, (Sixteenth Report of the Department of Archives for the Province of Ontario, 1921), pp. 22-24. 7. Ibid., pp. 46-47. 8. See the Records of the Probate Court of Upper Canada, Osgoode Hall. Hon. Richard Cartwright's will, 18 May 1815. 9. G. M. Craig, Upper Canada, the Formative Years, 1784-1841, (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1963), pp. 6-8. 10. PAC, RG5, Al: W. Harrison to Governor General Sir G. Arthur, 22 Dec. 1840. 11. Province of Canada. Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, 1855, Grey County Report (Toronto, 1856) I, 370-73. 351

NOTES

12. PAC, RG5, Al, pp. 20940-20941: George Medley to Lt. Governor, 26 April 1819. 13. Kingston Chronicle and Gazette, 8 Aug. 1835. 14. PAC, RG5, Al, pp. 82063-82065: Petition of inhabitants of Midland District. 15. Kingston British Whig, 12 April 1844. 16. Kingston Chronicle Herald and Gazette, 26 Nov. 1845. 17. Thomas Flynn, Directory of the City of Kingston, 1857-1858 (Kingston, 1857), p. 272. 18. PAO, Department of Lands and Forests, Field Notes, vol. 846: Surveyor P. Elmore's report on Oso townships, 18 Dec. 1826. 19. Kingston Chronicle and Gazette, 11 July 1835. 20. Craig, Upper Canada, p. 131. 21. L. F. Gates, Land Policies of Upper Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1968), pp. 186-95. 22. PAC, RG5, Al, folio 22709-22711, 21 Jan. 1820. 23. PAO, Department of Lands and Forests, Surveyors' Letters, vol. 2, folio 910: Neil MacDonald to Thomas Ridout, 10 Oct. 1822. 24. Census of the Canadas, 1851-2 (Quebec, 1853-55), I, app. 1. 25. PAC RG5, Al, 28 Dec. 1840: A. B. Hawke to S. B. Harrison. 26. Kingston Chronicle, 6 July 1833. 27. Ibid., 21 Sept. 1833. 28. Kingston Chronicle and Gazette, 15 Nov. 1834. 29. Ibid., 4 July 1842. 30. Transactions of the Board of Agriculture of Upper Canada, 1855 (Toronto, 1856), Presidential Address, First Annual Exhibition, 21 Oct. 1846, I, 36. 31. Census of the Canadas, 1851-2, II, app. 12. 32. W. H. Smith, Canada: Past, Present and Future, Being a Historical Geographical, Geological and Statistical Account of Canada West, 2 vols. (Toronto, 1851-52), II, 278. 33. Province of Canada. Journals of Legislative Assembly, 1847, app. (L.L.); quoted ind in G. W. Spragge, "Colonization Roads in Canada West, 1850-1867," Ontario History, XLIX, no. 1 (1957), 1-17. 34. Kingston Chronicle and News, 12 April 1861. 35. Province of Canada, Sessional Papers, 1862, III, no. 5. 36. Kingston Chronicle and News, 18 April 1862. 37. PAO, Department of Lands and Forests, Field Notes, Book 1605: T. F. Gibbs' report on the resurvey of Oso, 1862. 38. Ibid., Field Notes, Book 1599: T. F. Gibbs' resurvey of Olden, 30 Jan. 1861. 39. Ibid., Field Notes, Book 1051: J. A. Snow's report on Clarendon, 11 Aug. 1862. 40. Kingston Chronicle and News, 9 Sept. 1864. 41. PAO, Department of Lands and Forests, Field Notes, Book 1479: J. S. Harper's report on Miller, 27 Oct. 1860. 352

NOTES

42. Province of Canada, Sessional Papers, 1863, v, no. 30. 43. Kingston Chronicle and News, 26 Feb. 1864. 44. PAO, Department of Lands and Forests, Field Notes, Book 1599. 1871 1881 1891 1861 1851 45. 3,739 4,101 3,349 4,587 Kingston 5,235 2,654 2,737 2,383 2,003 3,601 Wolfe Is. 3,352 4,394 4,126 3,000 Pittsburgh 3,258 2,882 2,894 2,811 2,285 Storrington 2,130 2,512 2,452 2,836 2,718 2,388 Portland 2,394 2,452 2,325 2,218 Loughborough 2,003 46. Bobcaygeon Independent, 4 Oct. 1858. 47. PAO, Department of Lands and Forests, Field Notes, Book 1479.

1901 3,176 1,796 2,544 2,062 2,502 2,144

Kingston and the Defence of British North America 1. R. A. Preston and L. Lamontagne, eds., Royal Fort Frontenac (Toronto: Champlain Society, 1958), pp. 111-12: Frontenac to Colbert, 13 Nov. 1673. 2. G. F. G. Stanley, "Kingston and Oswego," Historic Kingston, no. 13 (1965), 76. 3. E. B. O'Callaghan, Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York (Albany, 1855) pp. 729-30: Lieutenant Lindesay to Johnson, 10 July 1751. It is interesting to note that the Anglo-Americans thought very much along the same lines. Governor Golden of New York wrote to the Earl of Halifax, 3 Aug. 1754, to the effect that "one large armed vessel with two or three smaller on that lake (Ontario) would more effectually and with less expence defeat the designs of the French . . . than any other method, which can be thought of." S. Pargellis, Military Affairs in North America, 1748-1756, Selected Documents (New York: Appleton-Century, 1936), pp. 19-21. 4. O'Callaghan, Colonial History of New York, p. 822: Vaudreuil to Massiac, 2 Sept. 1758. 5. Ibid., p. 831: Montcalm to Belle-Isle, 9 Sept. 1758. In this letter Montcalm deplored the loss of the navy "for which we were indebted for my capture of Chouaguen." He stated that five sloops were burned and two carried away—"we had only twelve men on each of these sloops." 6. R. A. Preston, ed. Kingston before the War of 1812: A Collection of Documents, (Toronto; Champlain Society, 1959), p. 22: Holland to Haldimand, 26 June 1783. 7. Ibid., p. xli. 8. E. A. Cruikshank, The Correspondence of Lt. Gov. John Graves Simcoe, 5 vols. (Toronto: Ontario Historical Society, 1923-30), I, 335: Clarke to Dundas, 25 May 1793. 9. Preston, Kingston before the War of 1812, p. 132: Draft Instructions to Capt. Mann, 29 May 1788. See also G. F. G. Stanley and R. A. Preston, A Short History of Kingston as a Military and Naval Centre (Kingston, 1950) p. 7. 10. M. Q. Innis, Mrs. Simcoe's Diary (Toronto: Macmillan, 1965), p. 71. 11. Ibid., p. 156. 12. Preston, Kingston before the War of 1812, pp. 257, 258, 267: Cross to Mackenzie, 22, 222 353

NOTES

Aug. 1808, Mackenzie to Cross, 27 Aug. 1808; MacPherson to Thornton, 24 June 1810. 13. J. W. Spurr, "The Kingston Gazette, The War of 1812, and Fortress Kingston/' Historic Kingston, no. 17 (1968), 21-22. 14. Preston, Kingston before the War of 1812, p. 276: Prevost to Liverpool, 18 May 1812. 15. Ibid., pp. 275-76: Prevost to Liverpool, 14 April 1812. 16. A. Pound, Lake Ontario (New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1945), p. 149. See also L. M. Hacker, "Western Land Hunger and the War of 1812," Mississippi Valley Historical Review (March 1924), pp. 366, 370-77, 381-89, 393-95. 17. J. M. Hitsman, "Kingston and the War of 1812," Historic Kingston, no. 15 (1966), 50. 18. A. T. Mahan, Sea Power in its Relations to the War of 1812 (London, 1905), p. 30. 19. This officer was Colonel Lethbridge. His instructions were, "the post of Kingston is the object of primary importance committed to your charge": quoted in Hitsman, "Kingston and the War of 1812," p. 52. 20. Modern usage spells the name as "Sackets Harbor." Contemporary sources spelled the name with two "t"s. President Theodore Roosevelt attempted to restore the original spelling but without lasting success. See Pound, Lake Ontario, p. 151n. 21. R. A. Preston, "The First Battle of Sackets Harbor," Historic Kingston, no. 11 (1962), 6. 22. Kingston Gazette, 17 Nov. 1812. See also C. P. Stacey "Commodore Chauncey's Attack on Kingston Harbour, November 10, 1812," Canadian Historical Review, xxxii (1951), 126-38. 23. C. W. Elliott, Winfield Scott, The Soldier and the Man (New York: Macmillan, 1937), p. 89. 24. J. Hannay, The War of 1812, Collections of the Nova Scotia Historical Society 1899-1900, XI (Halifax, 1901), 27. The secretary of war, William Eustis, had said, "we have only to send officers into the Provinces and the people, disaffected towards their own Government, will rally round our standard." 25. Hitsman, "Kingston and the War of 1812," pp. 58-59. 26. E. A. Cruikshank, The Documentary History of the Campaign Upon the Niagara Frontier in the Year 1813 (Welland: Lundy's Lane Historical Society, 1905), p. 198: From the Journal of the Secretary of War, 5 Oct. 1813. 27. E. A. Cruikshank, The Documentary History of the Campaign Upon the Niagara Frontier in 1814 (Welland: Lundy's Lane Historical Society, n.d.), pp. 129-30: Chauncey to Brown, 10 Aug. 1814. Chauncey wrote that the task of the fleet was "to seek and to fight the enemy's fleet." He added, "This is the great purpose of the government in creating this fleet, and I shall not be diverted in my efforts to effectuate it by any sinister attempt to render us subordinate to or an appendage of the army." 28. Ibid., p. 24: Drummond to Bathurst, 3 July 1814. 29. The marine, John Hewett, was the grandfather of the first commandant of RMC at Kingston. See Stanley and Preston, Short History of Kingston, p. 15. 30. For descriptions of the various vessels constructed at Sackett's Harbour and Point 354

NOTES

Frederick see H. I. Chapelle, The History of the American Sailing Navy (New York: Bonanza, 1949). 31. C. S. Forester, The Age of Fighting Sail, the Story of the Naval War of 1812 (New York: Doubleday, 1956), p. 159. 32. "No ill wind ever blew that did not fill someone's sails." 33. Quoted in G. F. G. Stanley, "The Rush-Bagot Agreement 1817," Historic Kingston, no. 16 (1967), 78. 34. RMC, Barrie Letters: Admiralty to Barrie, 10 Jan. 1834. See also T. L. Brock, "H. M Dock Yard, Kingston, under Commissioner Robert Barrie, 1819-1834," Historic Kingston, no. 16 (1967), 19. 35. See C. P. Stacey, The Undefended Border, The Myth and the Reality, Canadian Historical Association Booklets No. 1 (Ottawa, 1953.) 36. Robert Legget, Rideau Waterway (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1955). 37. John Dendy, "The Fortifications of Kingston, 1790-1850, Documents, Plans and Commentary" (B.A. thesis, RMC, 1960), p. 43: Carmichael-Smyth Memoranda relative to the proposed reforms and repairs to the fortifications at Kingston in Upper Canada, 14 March 1826. 38. For a description of Fort Henry see R. L. Way, "Old Fort Henry, The Citadel of Upper Canada," Canadian Geographical Journal, XL (April 1950), 148-69. 39. Dendy, "Fortifications of Kingston," pp. 105-106: Holloway to Bonnycastle, 7 July 1843. 40. Ibid. Holloway wrote, "Adverting to the various reports and designs which, from time to time, and from different quarters, have been submitted for the defence of Canada . . . although these Projects have been for the most part favourably received, yet very little progress has hitherto been made towards the carrying of any of these systems into eifect (principally, I believe, on account of the very heavy Expence which they would entail from the Mother Country; and of the ground proposed for their sites being overrun with private Buildings and improvements in the interim). . . . " 41. Ibid., 97, pp. 108-109, 119. 42. This was the armament of Fort Henry in 1866. The fort was originally designedsignedd for twenty-seven 24-pounder guns. 43. G. F. G. Stanley, "William Johnston: Pirate or Patriot," Historic Kingston, no. 6 (1957), 17-21. 44. Dendy, "Fortifications of Kingston," p. 111. The values of the tenders awarded were: Fort Frederick, £15,573.15.4|; Market Battery, £9,013.2.3|; Victoria Tower, £6,885.4.11; Murney Tower, £6,181.2.11|; Cathcart Tower, £9,836.1.3|. 45. Quoted in C. P. Stacey, Canada and the British Army 1846-1871 (London; Longmans, Green, 1936), p. 80. 46. R. W. Winks, Canada and the United States, The Civil War Years (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1960), p. 73. 47. The commission consisted of Col. J. W. Gordon, RE; Lt. Col. H. L. Gardiner, R Hon. H. H. Killaly, a Canadian engineer; Capt. W. Grossman, RE; Col. E. R. 355

NOTES

Wetherall, chief of staff in Canada; and Capt. J. Bythesea, RN, naval attache at Washington. See R. A. Preston, Canada and Imperial Defense (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967), p. 40n. 48. Lt. Col. W. F. D. Jervois, Report on the Defence of Canada and of the British Naval Stations in the Atlantic . . . Part I. Defence of Canada (London 1864); Report on the Defence of the British Naval Stations . . . together with Observations. . . . (London, 1865). 49. This was not the thinking of everybody. In 1865 Sir William Russell, in Canada, its Defences, Condition and Resources (London, 1865), p. 237, argued that it "would be necessary to erect strong works to resist the advance of an enemy landing either above or below the town." He suggested fortifications should be built on Wolfe Island, Abraham's Head, Simcoe Island, and Garden Island, flanking works at Prescott and Belleville and the enlargement of the Rideau Canal.

Garrison and Community, 1815-1870 While this chapter is based in part on my article "The Kingston Garrison, 1815-1870," published in Historic Kingston, no. 20 (1972), it required considerable additional research, specifically in the Archives of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Kingston and those of the Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Ontario, in the series "Monthly strength returns of the British Army in Canada . . . , 1815-1865" [PAC, W017, mic. reels B1591-1691], and in the files of the Kingston press. Other sources are indicated in footnotes. 1. Robert Gourlay, Statistical account of Upper Canada (London, 1822), I, 471. 2. Francis Hall, Travels in Canada and the United States in 1816 and 1817 (London,Lomdo 1818), p. 162. 3. PAC, R. G. 8, "C" Series, vol. 47, item 7. 4. The Common Council of the Town of Kingston, Report Book, 1842-44, p. 21. 5. Walter Henry, Events of a Military Life . . . (London, 1843), n, 228.

The British Influence of RMC 1. R. A. Preston, ed., Kingston before the War of 1812: A Collection of Documents (Toronto: Champlain Society, 1959), pp. xl-xlvii, 18-46. 2. John W. Spurr, "The Kingston garrison, 1815-1870," Historic Kingston, no. 20 (1972), pp. 14-34. 3. W. S. Hamer, The British Army: Civil-Military Relations, 1885-1904 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1970), p. 14. 4. Massey Library, RMC, Xerox, J. Talbot Coke, "Diary, 1866," gives a day to day account of the off-duty activities of a British officer in the Montreal garrison. 5. Walter S. Avis, ed., Dictionary of Canadianisms on Historical Principles (Toronto: W. J. Gage, 1967), p. 495. 6. Sir Desmond D. T. O'Callaghan, Guns, Gunners and Others (London: Chapman Hall, 1925), p. 21. 356

NOTES

7. Royal Archives, Windsor, Cambridge Papers: Williams to Cambridge, Montreal, 1 Oct. 1863. (Consulted by gracious permission of Her Majesty the Queen.) 8. Viscount Wolseley, The Story of a Soldier's Life, 2 vols. (Westminster: Archibald Constable, 1903), n, 116. 9. E.g. Capt. Bowen Van Straubenzee who married Annie Macaulay Cartwright, Diocesan Records, Kingston, St. George's Register, 8 Oct. 1857.1 am indebted to Mr. Spurr for this information. 10. A Canadian, Thoughts on Defence (Montreal: John Lovell, 1870), p. 7. 11. British Whig, 7, 11 March 1872. 12. Col. William Johnston, Roll of Commissioned Officers in the Medical Service of the British Army . . . 1744 to . . . 1898 (Aberdeen: University Press, 1971), pp. xxxii, 218; and information from Mrs. Margaret Angus. 13. PAC, Deputy Minister of Militia Papers, 9657; "Petition of the Inhabitants of Kingston, 20 May 1874." 14. Cambridge Papers, Selby Smith to Cambridge, 2 June 1876. 15. Adrian Preston, "The Founding of the Royal Military College: Gleanings from the Royal Archives," Queen's Quarterly, LXXIV (1967), 398-412; cf. R. A. Preston, Canada's RMC (Toronto: RMC Club and University of Toronto Press, 1969), pp. 18n-19n. 16. Hamer, The British Army, p. 17. 17. Preston, Canada's RMC, pp. 63-64. 18. L. G. Pine, ed., Burke's Peerage, Baronetage & Knightage (London: Burke's Peerage Ltd., 1933), p. 1244. 19. William Wood, ed., Select Documents of the Canadian War of 1812, 3 vols. (Toronto: Champlain Society, 1920-28), pp. 56, 62, 64. The water colour is in RMC Library. 20. Preston, Canada's RMC, pp. 34-35; PAC, Macdonald Papers, vol. 318,32-37, "Qualifications of Colonel Hewett." 21. Preston, Canada's RMC, p. 58n. 22. Burke's Colonial Gentry, pp. 85-87. 23. Public Record Office, C.O. 42/698, Lisgar 116, 1 June 1871. 24. Ottawa Free Press, 14 July 1888; Ottawa Daily Citizen, 16 July 1888. 25. Who Was Who, 1941-50 (London: Adam & Charles Black, 1952), p. 646; Preston, Canada's RMC, p. 153n; Times of London, 4 March 1950. 26. Preston, Canada's RMC, p. 180n; Peter Townsend, ed., Burke's . . . Peerage, Baronetage & Knightage (London: Burke's Peerage Ltd., 1967), p. 2076; Times of London, 21 Oct. 1843. 27. Times of London, 8 March 1922; RMC, Register of Admissions; Preston, Canada's RMC, pp. 186n, 191; R.M.C. Review, in, 76; xxx, 52-53. 28. Massey Library, RMC, Morrow Scrapbook; Diocesan Archives, Kingston, St. George's Parish Register, 17 March 1886. 29. St. George's Parish Register, 30 June 1880. 30. Preston, Canada's RMC, pp. 101-104. 357

NOTES

31. Sir Bernard Burke, A Genealogical and Heraldic History of the Colonial Gentry, 2 vols. (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1970), pp. 667-71; Preston, Canada's RMC, pp. 40n, 85n, 151; RMC Club, Proceedings, 1894, p. 45. 32. Preston, Canada's RMC, p. llln. 33. R.M.C. Review, xm, 27. 34. Guide to the Course of Military Engineering at the Royal Military College (Kingston, 1883). 35. Preston, Canada's RMC, 40n. 36. Who Was Who, 1916-1928, p. 864; R.M.C. Review, vm, 10. 37. Preston, Canada's RMC, p. 125n. 38. John Kane, List of Officers of the Royal Regiment of Artillery from June 1862 to June, 1914, 2 vols. (Sheffield: Royal Artillery Institution, 1914), pp. 84-85. 39. T. L. Brock, "Lord Lee of Fareham: Professor of Strategy and Tactics, RMC, 1893-98," R.M.C. Review, XLIII, 159-65. 40. RMC Club, Proceedings, 1909-10, pp. 366-67. 41. Preston, Canada's RMC, pp. 110, HOn. 42. Douglas Library, play bill, rrGarrison Theatricals, Opera House, 13 April, 1883." Lt. Cochrane and Dr. Duval of the RMC staff were billed to sing in a male quartet. 43. R. F. Edwards, ed., Roll of the Officers of the Corps of Royal Engineers from 1660 to 1898 (Chatham: Royal Engineers Institute, 1898), p. 57; Canada, Sessional Papers, xxvii, no. 11, S.P. no. 19, Militia Department Report, RMC Commandant's Report, 1893, p. 144. 44. Who Was Who, 1916-1928, p. 1062. 45. British Whig, 2 July 1880. 46. Massey Library, RMC, Dixon Scrapbook, p. 56. 47. Ibid., p. 115. 48. George F. Cameron and Oscar F. Telgmann, Leo, the Royal Cadet (Kingston: Henderson & Co., n.d.) 49. Douglas Library, Queen's University, playbill, 11 July 1889. 50. Leo, The Royal Cadet, p. 53. 51. Ibid., playbill appended in Massey Library copy, RMC.

John A. Macdonald and the Kingston Business Community 1. J. K. Johnson, "John A. Macdonald, the young non-politician," Canadian Historical Association, Historical Papers (1971), pp. 138-46. 2. PAO, Land Abstract Index, Frontenac County, Kingston and Pittsburgh Townships, l-iv (L.M.L. 2371-2374). 3. The Kingston Hospital was not strictly speaking a business, that is, it was not a profit-making enterprise, but it was run as a business by businessmen, one of whose duties was to invest the hospital's funds "in good safe and sufficient securities" (Stats. Prov. Can. 107). As shall be seen, however, membership on the hospital's board of governors or involvement in some other charitable organization was an important function of the business elite. 358

NOTES

4. References to these and other businesses of the day may be found in such sources as W. H. Smith, Smith's Canadian Gazetteer (Toronto, 1846); R. S. MacKay, ed., The Canadian Directory (Montreal, 1851); A Directory of the City of Kingston (Kingston, 1855); The Canadian Directory for 1857-8 (Montreal, 1858); The Canadian Directory for 1864-5 (Montreal, 1864). 5. A. G. Young, Great Lakes Saga, the Influence of One Family on the Development of Canadian Shipping on the Great Lakes, 1816-1931 (Owen Sound, 1965), p. 43. 6. This data is undoubtedly incomplete since in some cases only the names of the original directors are known. In the case of the Kingston and Newburgh Railway only the names of its promoters have been found. 7. The promoters of the Commercial Bank are named in Stats. Upper Canada, iv Vic., c. 11 (An Act to Incorporate the Commercial Bank of the Midland District, 1832). The names of its president and directors appear subsequently in The Canadian Directories for 1851-52, 1857-58 and 1864-65, and in the Directory of the City of Kingston for 1855. 8. Stats. Prov. Can., 1 Vic., c. 63 (1843), "Proprietors7' listed. 9. Ibid., 9 Vic., c. 108 (1846); 14 and 15 Vic., c. 149 (1851). 10. Ibid., 11 Vic., c. 13 (1848); Canadian Directory, 1851-2; Kingston Directory, 1855; Canadian Directory, 1857-8. 11. Stats. Prov. Can., 12 Vic., c. 158 (1849); Canadian Directories, 1851-2, 1857-8; Kingston Directory, 1855. 12. Stats. Prov. Can., 13 and 14 Vic., c. 139 (1850); Canadian Directory, 1851-2. 13. Stats. Prov. Can., 13 and 14 Vic., c. 140 (1850); Kingston Directory, 1855; Canadian Directory, 1857-8. 14. Stats. Prov. Can., 16 Vic., c. 135 (1853). 15. Ibid., 19 and 20 Vic., c. 107 (1856); Canadian Directory, 1857-8. 16. Stats. Prov. Can., 19 and 20 Vic., c. 117 (1856). 17. Hamilton was president and a director of the Commercial Bank and a director of the Kingston Fire and Marine Insurance Company. 18. Needless to say this does not pretend to be a definitive list since other methods of evaluation would undoubtedly produce a different order and even different names. By many standards, such as scope of operations, number of employees, taxable property, other men, perhaps especially James Morton, who in 1856 was described by C. W. Cooper as one of the two heaviest taxpayers in Kingston (the other was J. R. Forsyth) might well qualify. 19. Most of the personal biographical details which follow have been extracted from the voluminous Kingston family files of Mrs. Margaret Angus, past president of the Kingston Historical Society. The business information is from the Kingston and Canadian directories. 20. He also owned stock in the Commercial Bank worth £4,350 in 1857. Province of Canada, Journals of Legislative Assembly (1857), xv, app. 11. 21. The life members and ordinary members of the board of this society (which succeeded the earlier Female Benevolent Society) are listed in Stats. Prov. Can., 25 Vic., c. 97 (1862). 359

NOTES

22. PAO, Land Abstract Index, Frontenac County, Kingston and Pittsburgh Townships, n, contains frequent references to property bought and sold in Kingston and district by all of the "e"lite" except Watkins and Hill. The general practice was to subdivide former farm land for building lots. Counter, Macdonald, Henry Gildersleeve, Macdonell, Campbell, and Kirkpatrick appear to have been most deeply involved. 23. He was also a large stockholder in the Commercial Bank, owning stock worth £1,825 at the time of his death. Journals of Legislative Assembly (1857), xv, app. 11. 24. On the other hand, since he arrived in Upper Canada at the age of five he could be said to belong more properly, in terms of his childhood and education, among the native born, in which case he would be in the largest single group by birthplace. Most of the native born, however, unlike Macdonald, had the advantage of being born into well-established wealthy merchant families. 25. The Church of England was clearly the "right" church. The Gildersleeves, for instance, who had been Presbyterians and Congregationalists in the United States, became Anglicans in Kingston. 26. See for example J. K. Johnson, ed., The Letters of Sir John A. Macdonald, 1836-1857 (Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1968), p. 193: Macdonald, Macdonell, and Campbell to the Kingston City Council, 7 March 1853, in which they urge the city to extend a street westward to permit access to a subdivision they were developing. 27. The building societies in which so many of the leading businessmen were involved, while helping to provide cheaper housing for Kingston's labouring classes, no doubt also provided some additional opportunities for land speculation. Undoubtedly also they provided a certain social and political power base for the publicspirited men who ran them. 28. Most of the native born were also in this group. 29. C. W. Cooper, Frontenac, Lennox and Addington (Kingston, 1856), p. 18. 30. PAC, Macdonald Papers, M.G. 26, A, vol. 336, pt. 1, p. 152483. 31. Young, Great Lakes Saga, pp. 33-35. 32. G. F. G. Stanley, "Evan McColl—Kingston's Gaelic Poet," Historic Kingston, no. 17 (1969), 36; D. G. Creighton, John A. Macdonald, The Young Politician (Toronto: Macmillan, 1956), pp. 80, 89. 33. J. R. Robertson, The History of Freemasonry in Canada (Toronto, 1899), II, 340. 34. PAC, Department of Defence, R.G. 9, ici, vol. 112. 35. Journals of Legislative Assembly (1846), v, 49, 63, 96; (1849) vm, 177, 197; (1854) xin, pt. I, 83, 129; (1856) xiv, 85, 128; (1862) xx, 107, 132. 36. Ibid., (1844-45), IV, 298,306; (1850), IX, 150,165; (1858), xvi, pt. 1,467,569; (1861) ixx, 43; (1862) xx, 95, 113. 37. Ibid., (1846), V, 10,91; (1851), x, 57,107,108,267; (1848) vn, 19,58; (1849), vm, 16,28, 56,62,102,132; (1854-55), xm, 651,675; (1850), ix, 12,49; (1861), xix, 116,225; (1852), xi, pt. 1, 282, 646; (1855), xm, pt. 2, 58; (1856), xiv, 190, 242, 258, 352. 38. Ibid., (1846), v, 65. 360

NOTES

39. 40. 41. 42. 43.

44.

45. 46. 47.

48.

Ibid., (1852), xi, pt. 1, 409; (1862), xx, 65. Ibid., (1864), xxn, 77, 215. Ibid., (1866), xxiv, 22, 43. Ibid., (1852), xi, pt. 1, 283, 325. Cooper's Frontenac, Lennox and Addington lists among the assets of the city of Kingston in 1855: Stock in the Wolfe Island Railway and Canal Co. £3,750 Stock in the Perth Road £17,108 Stock in the Pittsburgh and Gananoque Road £5,000 Stock in the Kingston and Phillipsville Road £7,317 See for example Journals of Legislative Council (1850), pp. 32, 36, 131, 179; (1853-54), pp. 50,153,304,424,431; (1862), p. 64; (1863) (7th Parliament), p. 186 (8th Parliament), p. 40. R. A. Preston, "The History of the Port of Kingston," Ontario History, XLVII, no. 1 (1955), 23. Ibid., pp. 25-26. PAC, Department of National Revenue, R.G. 19, D5, vol. 25, p. 573 (Bank of Upper Canada, Trustees Ledger); Queen's University Archives, Kirkpatrick-Nickle Collection, Morton Estate Papers. PAC, R.G. 19, D5, vol. 25, p. 573.

The Canadian Locomotive Company The preliminary research on this subject was carried out by G. A. Snider and R. H. Barraclough under the direction of Prof. W. G. Richardson. 1. Kingston Whig-Standard, 6 June 1952. 2. Fairbanks Morse (Chicago) bought the controlling interest in 1950 and control was again shifted in 1959 to a giant American holding corporation which eventually became Colt Industries Ltd. 3. Counter was the first mayor of Kingston. 4. Daily British Whig, Special Edition, 10 Dec. 1886. 5. Proposed by Francis Hincks, inspector-general in the second Baldwin-Lafontaine ministry and later a major shareholder in the Canadian Locomotive and Engine Company. The Act guaranteed, under certain conditions, the interest at a rate not over 6 per cent on half the bonds of any railway more than seventy-five miles in length. 6. E. E. Horsey, "Cataraqui, Fort Frontenac, Kingston" (typescript, Queen's University Archives, 1937), p. 124. 7. Ibid., pp. 121-24. 8. Daily British Whig, 10 Dec. 1886. 9. James Morton was better known as the owner of one of the largest breweries in North America. See Max Magill, "James Morton of Kingston—Brewer," Historic Kingston, no. 21 (1973), 28-36.

361

NOTES

10. "The Canadian Locomotive Company Limited," Queen's Quarterly (1902), p. 455. 11. Flynn's Directory of the City of Kingston (1858), pp. 4-5. 12. J. M. and Edw. Trout, The Railways of Canada (Toronto, 1871), pp. 178-79. 13. J. K. Johnson, ed., The Letters of Sir John A. Macdonald, 1836-1857 (Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1968), p. 205. 14. Queen's University Archives, Minute Book, Kingston Board of Trade, 15 July 1859. 15. Johnson, ed., Macdonald, p. 206. 16. Canada Gazette (1864), p. 2298. 17. "Canadian Locomotive Company," p. 454. 18. PAC, Macdonald Papers, vol. 267, pp. 121001-121003. 19. E. Green, "Canada's First Electric Telegraph," Ontario Historical Society Papers and Records (1927), p. 370. 20. Canada Gazette (1877-78), p. 1059. 21. PAC, Macdonald Papers, vol. 371, pp. 173027-173028: M. Hinds to Macdonald, 31 Dec. 1880. 22. Ibid., vol. 373, pp. 173529-173532: M. Hinds to Macdonald, 2 Feb. 1881. 23. Canada Gazette (1882), p. 1046. 24. "Canadian Locomotive Company," p. 457. 25. Ibid. 26. A contractor from Toronto. 27. A businessman from Pittsburgh and a brother-in-law of William Harty. 28. PAO, Order in Council, 24 Jan. 1901. 29. Daily British Whig, 6 Nov. 1900. 30. "Canadian Locomotive Company," p. 458. 31. The Daily Standard, Kingston, 29 May 1911. 32. PAC, Borden Papers, vol. 54, pp. 27255-27256: F. C. T. O'Hara to Sir Joseph Pope, 31 May 1916. 33. W. T. Easterbrook and H. G. J. Aitken, Canadian Economic History (Toronto: Macmillan, 1958), p. 314. 34. M. Kranzberg and C. W. Pursell Jr., eds., Technology in Western Civilization (New York, Toronto, 1967), p. 355. 35. "Canadian Locomotive Company," p. 463. 36. PAO, Agreement between William Harty, purchaser and K. W. Blackwell, liquidator, A. F. Riddell, liquidator, signed in Montreal, 6 Nov. 1900. "William Harty agrees to purchase the Canada Locomotive Works in Kingston as they stand for Sixty thousand dollars, including stores on hand, plant and machinery: Thirty thousand dollars cash, payable January 2nd, 1901, and balance in one year at 6% interest, secured by mortgage on the property, and one hundred fully paid up shares of the Ontario Bank; and he undertakes to expend $20,000 upon the property within one year."

362

NOTES

37. PAC, Laurier Papers, vol. 187, p. 53664: Haney to Hon. A. G. Blair, 22 Feb. 1901. 38. Ibid., pp. 53405-406: 25 Jan. 1901. 39. H. Goldmark, "Improvements of the Works of the Canadian Locomotive Co., Kingston, Ontario," Transactions of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineers, xxn (1908), 383-84. 40. The Daily Standard, 29 Dec. 1911.

The Failure of the Commercial Bank 1. The bank was incorporated as The Commercial Bank of the Midland District and the name later changed to The Commercial Bank of Canada. It was known and will hereafter be referred to as the Commercial Bank or simply as "the Commercial." 2. Hereafter referred to as "the Great Western." 3. There were several versions of the name. It will be referred to as "the D&M". 4. PAC, MG24-D80: R. W. Harris to T. G. Ridout, 23 Dec. 1850; RG30-vol. 6: Minutes of the Canadian Board of the Great Western Railway, 30 July 1857. 5. Kingston Daily News, 12 May 1860, reprinted by Toronto Leader, 16 May 1860, "The Commercial Bank of Canada vs. The Great Western Railway Company." 6. It was discovered after the first loan was made that the company had no power to lend money to build a road in the United States and before the second load was made a charter was amended to grant this power and to sanction the first loan; see Stats. Prov. Can., 22 Vic., c. 116, sec. 11. 7. Kingston Daily News, 12 May 1860. In the course of his evidence one director stated that he rarely attended board meetings and learned of the D&M situation in the course of a casual conversation with Ross. 8. Q.B. Reports U.C. (1862), 14. 9. Street was Thomas Clark Street who owned 400 shares in the bank. I have been unable to learn anything about Douglas. 10. A large Kingston shipbuilder who was heavily indebted to the bank. 11. Kingston Daily News, 26 June 1867, Report of Annual Meeting. In the balance sheet the D&M bonds evidently were included under "other debts" which means at face value. The audit committee later valued them at less than a million dollars. The $400,000 in government securities shown as an asset was not really so unless the bank was liquidated. It represented 10 per cent of the capital which the bank was required to hold in government securities. 12. Report of the proceedings at a Special Meeting of the Shareholders of the Commercial Bank (Montreal, 1867). There is a copy in the Metropolitan Toronto Public Library. 13. PAC, MG 26A: Gait to Macdonald, letters and telegrams 25 and 26 Oct. 1867; Halton to Macdonald, private, 15 Oct. 1867. 14. He was, nonetheless, the ablest banker of his day in North America, and possibly the ablest Canada has ever known.

363

NOTES

15. Gait, who was in Montreal, may also have attended. He was certainly kept fully informed. 16. The point was that the other banks were taking all the risk, since should the Commercial fail to repay them they would have to repay the two Montreal banks and would find themselves completely at their mercy. 17. King later heatedly denied this, although it was affirmed by others present. It is consistent with his well-known arrogance and his complete contempt for the smaller banks. See reports of the meeting in Kingston Daily News, Montreal Herald, Monetary Times, and others from 25 Oct. 1867 to December 1867. 18. List of shareholders of the Commercial Bank as at October 1867 (copy in the Metropolitan Toronto Public Library). 19. Of this group Thomas Paton owned 1,264 shares; Robert Anderson, 700 shares; William Workman, 280 shares; Hugh Allan, 404 shares; Luther Holton, 100 shares; A. T. Gait, 260 shares. Moreover, two close business associates of Gait and Halton who lived in Toronto, D. L. Macpherson and Casimir Gzowski, were shareholders— Macpherson, 300, Gzowski, 600. Both had extensive business connections in Montreal. 20. Kingston Daily News, 7 Jan. 1868.

John Macaulay: Tory for All Seasons 1. For Macaulay's relationships, see Margaret Angus, 'The Macaulay family of Kingston," Historic Kingston, no. 5 (1956). For Hagerman's early career, see S. F. Wise, "The rise of Christopher Hagerman," ibid., no. 14 (1965). 2. Stephen Miles to Editor of Kingston Chronicle & Gazette, 26 May 1846, in R. A. Preston, ed., Kingston before the War of 1812: A Collection of Documents (Toronto: Champlain Society, 1959), pp. 355-56. 3. PAO, Macaulay Papers: Strachan to Macaulay, 8 Dec. 1818. 4. Ibid.: 31 Dec. 1818. 5. Ibid.: 11, 25 Jan. 1819; Chronicle, editorials of 15 Jan. 1819, 5 Feb. 1819; Macaulay Papers: Strachan to Macaulay, 11 Feb. 1819. 6. Chronicle, editorial, 3 Sept. 1819. 7. Macaulay Papers: Strachan to Macaulay, 11 Feb. 1819. Straehan's essays are probably those printed in the Chronicle for 5, 12, 19, and 26 March, 1819. 8. Ibid.: 27 Aug. 1819, 9. Ibid.: 7 Jan. 1820. 10. Macaulay Papers: Strachan to Macaulay, 9 Oct. 1820. Major George Hillier, a man of considerable influence, was Sir Peregrine Maitland's secretary. 11. Ibid.: Robinson to Macaulay, 22 Jan. 1821. This letter makes clear that the Chronicle had already published several pieces from Robinson, though Macaulay had not been aware of their authorship. It is probable that Strachan had served as go-between. 12. G. M. Craig, in Upper Canada: The Formative Years (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1963), p. 116, has attributed to Strachan an "instant dislike" of Bidwell 364

NOTES

because of his support of Robert Gourlay. It would seem, however, that Strachan had nourished his feelings for Bidwell for some years. 13. Macaulay Papers: Strachan to Macaulay, 13, 20 June 1820; Chronicle, 1 July 1820. 14. Ibid.: Robinson to Macaulay, 19 Dec. 1821. 15. Craig, Upper Canada, pp. 114ff. 16. Macaulay Papers: Robinson to Macaulay, 18 Nov. 1821. 17. Ibid.: Markland to Macaulay, 1 Dec. 1821; Hagerman to Macaulay, 25 Dec. 1821. 18. Ibid.: Hagerman to Macaulay, 6 Jan. 1822. As for Boulton, Hagerman wrote: "Pay him, damn him, pay him, we shall not be ruined by it, but I will take care to tell him it is money thrown away." 19. Chronicle, 11 Jan. 1822; Macaulay Papers: Hagerman to Macaulay, 17 Feb. 1823. 20. Chronicle, 11 Jan. 1822. 21. On the proposed union, see Craig, Upper Canada, pp. 100-05; and W. G. Ormsby, "The problem of Canadian union, 1822-1828," Canadian Historical Review, xxxix, no. 4 (1958), 277-95. 22. Chronicle, 28 June, 12 July 1822. 23. Ibid., 30 Aug. 1822. 24. Ibid., 1 Nov. 1822. 25. Macaulay Papers: Jonas Jones to Macaulay, 8 Nov. 1822. 26. Ibid.: Strachan to Macaulay, 8, 13 Nov. 1822. 27. See, for example, the Chronicle editorial of 23 Feb. 1823. 28. Macaulay Papers: Strachan to Macaulay, 5 Dec. 1822; Hillier to Macaulay, 11 Dec. 1822; Strachan to Macaulay, 12 Dec. 1822. 29. PAC, Upper Canada Sundries, vol. 98: Petition of Kingston magistrates, 8 Feb. 1830. 30. Macaulay Papers: Stanton to Macaulay, 18 Aug. 1826; 1 June 1834; 16 Dec. 1834. 31. Ibid.: Strachan to Macaulay, 26 Dec. 1829. 32. PAC, uc Sundries, vol. 57: Macaulay to Hillier, 5 July 1824; Macaulay Papers: Robinson to Macaulay, 5 July 1834. 33. Macaulay Papers: Macaulay to Hillier, 4 June 1825. 34. A letter to his wife shows that he submitted the lighthouse, canal, and penitentiary reports simultaneously. Ibid.: Macaulay to Mrs. Helen Macaulay, 9 Dec. 1833. 35. Ibid.: Robinson to Macaulay, 25 March 1823; Robinson to Macaulay, 5 July 1834; William Allan to Macaulay, 9 June 1835; Thomas Ridout to Macaulay, 16 Jan. 1836. 36. PAC, Colborne Papers: Macaulay to Lt. Col. Rowan, 30 March 1835. 37. Macaulay Papers: Robinson to Macaulay, 12 June 1824. 38. PAC, uc Sundries, vol. 59: Macaulay to Hillier, 30 March 1823. 39. Macaulay Papers: Robinson to Macaulay, 24 Jan. 1828; Stanton to Macaulay, 5 April 1828; Stanton to Macaulay, 18 July 1828. 40. PAC, uc Sundries, vol. 167: Macaulay to Anthony Manahan, 11 June 1836. 365

NOTES

41. Ibid., vol. 67: Macaulay to Hillier, 5 July 1824. 42. Angus, "Macaulay family," p. 7. 43. Macaulay Papers: Strachan to Macaulay, 24 March 1832. For some examples of the evidence for Macaulay's political writing, see ibid.: Macaulay to Hillier, 4 June 1825; Stanton to Macaulay, 2 June 1826; Stanton to Macaulay, 18 Jan. 1830. 44. Ibid.: Robinson to Macaulay, 24 Jan. 1828. 45. Ibid.: Robinson to Macaulay, 8 Dec. 1835. 46. Ibid.: Stanton to Macaulay, 20 Sept. 1827. Macaulay, who had some official responsibility for the Midland District Grammar School, also attacked Strachan for his handling of district grammar schools, for the failure to support the Kingston grammar school, and for the establishment of Upper Canada College. Although Strachan certainly had no responsibility for the founding of ucc, it is evident that the Kingstonian thought he had done precious little for grammar schools outside York since 1819. Ibid.: Strachan to Macaulay, 12 May 1831. 47. Ibid.: Strachan to Macaulay, 16 Feb. 1832. 48. Ibid.: Macaulay to Mrs. Ann Macaulay, 7 April 1838. It should not be imagined that Macaulay was as moderate in all politico-religious matters as he was with respect to the Clergy Reserves. His attitude towards the Reserves question was founded upon a more astute assessment of political reality than Strachan ever proved capable of, but in other ways Macaulay could be more extreme than Strachan. For example, he entertained seriously the idea of launching a journal of politics and religion, to be edited by Rev. A. H. Burwell. Burwell, the author of the notorious "One of the People" letters, held fanatically antidemocratic and High Anglican views. Strachan's tepid response killed the project. See ibid.: letters of August to October 1831. 49. Ibid.: Macaulay to Robinson, July 1828 (draft). 50. Ibid.: Robinson to Macaulay, 19 July 1828. 51. Ibid.: Strachan to Macaulay, 15 Dec. 1828; Markland to Macaulay, 27 April 1829. According to Strachan, Macaulay was passed over because Maitland wished to appoint him to the Executive Council in place of the failing Baby. When Strachan visited him in Halifax in 1830, Maitland claimed that he had recommended Macaulay strongly to Colborne, "which I suppose ruined you with him as he has uniformly disliked all Sir Peregrine's friends." Ibid.: Strachan to Macaulay, 31 Jan. 1831. 52. Ibid.: Hagerman to Macaulay, 27 March 1830; PAC, C.O. 42, vol. 423, Colborne to Spring Rice, 18 Nov. 1834, 192. 53. PAC, uc Sundries, vol. 154: Macaulay to Lt. Col. Rowan, 1 June 1835. 54. Macaulay Papers: Macaulay to Mrs. Ann Macaulay, 23 March 1836.

Hugh C. Thomson: Editor, Publisher, and Politician 1. Mackenzie's epithet. Colonial Advocate, 20 May 1831. 2. A Manual of Parliamentary Practice . . . Compiled, Edited and Published by H. C. Thomson (Kingston, 1828). 366

NOTES

3. Colonial Advocate, 2 March 1826. 4. See Richard B. Splane, Social Welfare in Ontario, 1791-1893 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1965), p. 129. 5. John H. R. Thomson, "Fourteen Generations in North America," a genealogy of the Thomson and related families. (Typescript, Public Archives of Ontario and Douglas Library, Queen's University.) "I made contact with Lord Thomson . . . and discovered that we had the same great-great-grandfather [Andrew Thomson of Westmark, Scotland]"—Foreword. 6. PAO, Baldwin Papers: Thomson to Quetton St. George, 1808, 1813, 1815; MTPL, Baldwin Room, Quetton St. George Papers, 1810. 7. Prospectus, Upper Canada Herald; see Kingston Chronicle, 15 Jan. 1819. 8. In referring to the "Report of the Commissioners for Settling the Affairs of the Pretended Bank of Upper Canada, Kingston" the offending article (probably by Thomas Dalton) substituted "Unsettling" for "Settling." It was this that Col. Nichol found contemptuous, although he was in general agreement with Thomson's political views. 9. Upper Canada, House of Assembly, Journals, 1 Dec. 1823. (For full account see Niagara Gleaner, 27 Dec. 1823). 10. Upper Canada Herald, 21 June 1825. The cup is now in the possession of Mr. Arthur Hugh Thomson of Montreal. 11. Colonial Advocate, 6 April 1826. Russell's book, Letters Written During a Six Years Residence in Canada, was published serially by Mackenzie in the Colonial Advocate. 12. See items 1234,1237,1280,1306,1319,1342,1359,1396,1399,1440,1457,1474,1479, 1514, 1517, 1521, 1563, 1591, 1674, 1687; Supplement 4858, 4970. 13. Canadian Magazine (1824), n, 463-64. 14. Upper Canada, House of Assembly, Journals (1831-32), app., p. 121. 15. PAC, Morgan Papers: Thomson to Legislative Assembly of Lower Canada, 13 Dec. 1831. 16. County elections received scant coverage in the Kingston press. In 1824 Frontenac returned two new members, Thomson and James Aitkinson. In 1828 there were three chief contenders: Thomson headed the polls with 360 votes, followed by Thomas Dalton with 227. (Henry Mackenzie was runner-up with 200.) In 1830 the results were Thomson 412, Campbell 224, Marks 206. (Chronicle, 23 Oct. 1830). 17. Upper Canada, House of Assembly, Journals (1825-26), p. 28. 18. Ibid. (1826-27), 14 Feb. 1827, pp. 87-88. 19. Ibid., app. D. 20. Kingston Chronicle, 2 Aug. 1828. 21. 22. 23. 24.

Upper Canada, House of Assembly, Journals, Sess. 1831, app., pp. 211-12. Ibid. (1832-33), app., pp. 26-41. Ibid. (1833-34), app., 103-105. Ibid. (1831), 5 Mar. 1831, p. 88. 367

NOTES

25. PAO, Macaulay Papers: Stanton to Macaulay, 26 Dec. 1833. 26. Douglas Library Archives, Queen's University (photocopy of original in the possession of Jonathan Allen, Adolphustown, Ont.)

Municipal Government and Politics, 1800-1850 1. PAC illustration, "Plan of Kingston" 1801. 2. It has been estimated that the number of houses in Kingston was between 120 and 150 from 1794 to 1811, but increased two or threefold by the end of 1816. The population, a little over 300 in 1794, grew to at least 2,250 by 1816. See R. A. Preston, ed., Kingston before the War of 1812: A Collection of Documents (Toronto: Champlain Society, 1959), p. cxiv. 3. The area and scope of their authority in relation to the totality of local government functions has been described as "all pervasive." See James H. Aitchison, "The Development of Local Government in Upper Canada, 1783-1850," (Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto, 1953), pp. 2, 28. 4. Ibid., pp. 28-30. C. R. W. Biggar, Municipal Manual (Toronto, 1900), p. 3. 5. The term "Canada" at this time referred to territory subsequently known as Upper and Lower Canada created by the Constitutional Act of 1791. 6. For example, the central feature of the New England type of local government system was the town meeting with its popularly elected local officials and its elected "silent men" who had general oversight of town matters. Although such regulations as they enacted were subject to the approval of the court of quarter sessions, in actual practice the inhabitants exercised local self-government. Conversely, in the southern colonies (e.g. Virginia) the county court of quarter sessions formed the basis of an autocratic system of local government. Approximately three-quarters of the Loyalists who came to Canada were familiar with the New England type of local government. See A. Shortt and A. G. Doughty, eds., Canada and its Provinces, 23 vols. (Toronto, 1914-17), xvm, 405, quoted in K. G. Crawford, Canadian Municipal Government (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1954), p. 22. 7. A. Shortt, "Early records of Ontario," Queen's Quarterly, vn (July 1899), 52. 8. 27 Geo. m, c. iv (1787). 9. Contained in the letterbook of Hon. Richard Cartwright and quoted in Shortt, "Early records," pp. 53-55. 10. Ibid., p. 54. 11. Later renamed Eastern Midland, Home and Western. 32 George m, c. vii, 1792. The district of Mecklenburgh (later Midland) included Pittsburgh, Kingstown, Ernestown,Frederickburgh,Adolphustown,Marysburgh,Sophiasburgh, Ameliasburgh, Sydney, Thurlow, Richmond, and Camden. Ibid., p. 55. 12. Shortt, "Early records," p. 140. 13. Townships at this date had no municipal significance but were merely areas of land survey. 14. Preston, Kingston before the War of 1812, p. cvii. The Adolphustown town 368

NOTES

meeting minute books are now preserved by the Lennox and Addington Historical Society. 15. 33 Geo. m, c. ii (1793). 16. If there was a parish church (as in Kingston township) with a duly appointed minister, he was to appoint one warden and the town meeting was tp elect the other. This practice had already been adopted in Kingston where by 1790 a people's warden was elected as town warden before his election by the parishioners. For the various ramifications, see Preston, Kingston before the War of 1812, p. cviii. 17. A slight additional power was given to the town meeting the following year (34 Geo. in, c. viii, 1794) permitting them to fix the limits of times and seasons for certain animals running at large; even this power was afterwards curtailed. 18. Shortt, "Early records," p. 140. 19. But see ibid., pp. 51-59, 137-52. 20. Preston, Kingston before the War of 1812, p. cviii. 21. Shortt, "Early records/' p. 140. 22. Preston, Kingston before the War of 1812, p. cviii. 23. E. E. Horsey, "Cataraqui, Fort Frontenac, Kingston" (typescript, Queen's University Archives, 1937), p. 81. 24. E. A. Cruikshank, ed., The Correspondence ofLt. Gov. John Greves Simcoe, 5 vols. (Toronto: Ontario Historical Society, 1923-30), m, 235. 25. Ibid., IV, 12: 20 May 1795, quoted in Aitchison, p. 93. 26. Col. Simcoe papers A 7: Osgood to Simcoe, 30 Jan. 1795 (secret and most confidential), quoted in Aitchison, p. 548. Simcoe also proposed county lieutenants on the model of the lords lieutenant in England but this idea did not receive favour either and county lieutenants were appointed to control the militia only. Preston, Kingston before the War of 1812, p. cix. 27. uc Statutes, 41 Geo. m, c. iii (1801). 28. Kingston Gazette, 30 Dec. 1815. 29. Ibid., 27 Jan. 1816. For complaints about law and order in Kingston generally at this time, see Kingston Gazette correspondence, 3 March 1816. 30. Aitchison, "Local government," p. 551. 31. uc Statutes, 56 Geo. m, c. xxxiii (1816). 32. Although it was not until 1826 that an act was passed establishing volunteer companies. 33. uc Statutes, 56 Geo. m, c. xxxiii (1816). 34. Ibid., 4 Geo. iv, sess. 2, c. xxx. 35. Kingston Chronicle, 2 Aug. 1822. 36. Ibid., 17 May 1822. 37. For a discussion of the growth of municipal institutions generally during this period, see Aitchison, "Local government," chaps. 30 and 31.

369

NOTES

38. Assembly debates of 30 March 1821 as reported in Kingston Chronicle, 20 April 1821. 39. Kingston Chronicle, 31 Oct. 1823. 40. Aitchison, "Local government," p. 558. 41. Kingston Chronicle, 27 Dec. 1828. 42. Ibid. 43. Ibid., 10 Jan. 1829. 44. Qualifications for, and terms of, office are of interest. Candidates for the office of burgess had to possess a freehold property or leasehold of the assessed value of £50 or have resided in a dwelling house in Kingston for two years prior to the election and have paid one year's rent of £20. In addition the seven council candidates had to have held freehold or leasehold property for not less than ten years in Kingston of the assessed value of £80 or have a dwelling house residential qualification of two years, plus paying £30 annually. Electors and candidates had to be British subjects. There was a staggered term of office; at the first annual meeting half of the burgesses were to be elected for two years, the other half for one year; subsequently half of the burgesses were to be elected at the annual meeting for two-year terms. 45. For the full text of the petition, see Kingston Chronicle, 10 June 1829. 46. Kingston Chronicle, 3 Jan. 1839. 47. Ibid., 24 Jan. 1839. 48. See Aitchison, "Local government," p. 566. 49. 1st Vic., c. 27 (1838). 50. Canadian Freeman, 1 Jan. 1829. 51. Ibid., 11 Nov. 1830. 52. British Whig, 17 Feb. 1836. 53. Aitchison, "Local government," p. 604. 54. British Whig, reprinted in Brockville Recorder, 22 March 1838. 55. British Whig, 31 March 1838. For a description of the election and subsequent events by an eyewitness see Horsey, "Cataraqui," pp. 82-83. The first Kingston town council consisted of the following elected representatives: AldermenThomas Smith, James Fraser, Edward Noble, and Thomas Greer; common councilmen—Edmond Boyle, Samuel Phippen, Walter McCuniffe, and Daniel Caffney. Under the Act of Incorporation the mayor was chosen by the council. Thomas Kirkpatrick, a well-known lawyer, was selected at a meeting held for that purpose on 1 April 1838. See City of Kingston, Proceedings, 1838-42 (microfilm). 56. For a detailed discussion of the Toronto acts of 1834 and 1837 and the similarities and differences with the Kingston act, see Aitchison, "Local Government," pp. 584-96, 605-608. 57. 1st Vic., c. 27, s. ix (1838). The differences between aldermen and councillors were that candidates standing for the former position required a higher property and longer residential qualification; in the case of a tie in the election of the mayor, 370

NOTES

the alderman assessed for the greatest amount of property was given a casting vote; in the case of a mayoral vacancy, it was to be the aldermen who elected the mayor from duly qualified inhabitants. 58. A mayoral candidate was required to possess in freehold and leasehold, real property assessed at £75 annual value and have a ten-year residential qualification. 59. In the original Toronto act of 1834, voters were merely required to be male British subjects over 21, residents of the wards in which they voted, or of the liberties attached to it, and to possess either in freehold or as tenants, a lot or a dwelling house—a self-contained home in a portion of a house—counting as a dwelling. Under the Toronto Amendment Act of 1837, the unusually liberal franchise was abolished. The more stringent voting requirements thus introduced were followed in the case of the Kingston act. 60. 1st Vic., c. 27, s. Ixiii and Ixiv (1838). 61. City of Kingston, Proceedings, 1838-1842: Council meeting, 3 April 1838 (microfilm). 62. Ibid. 63. Chronicle and Gazette and Kingston Commercial Advertiser, 20 April 1839. 64. Ibid., 24 April 1839. In fact an act to amend the incorporating act was passed the following month. The main provisions empowered the corporation to levy penalties imposed by their by-laws (a notable omission from the incorporating act) and empowered the mayor and senior aldermen to be justices of the peace for the town by virtue of his and their respective offices. 2nd Vic., c. 37 (1839). 65. Chronicle and Gazette, 12 June 1839. 66. He mentioned that the fact an act had previously been passed amending the law referred to was decisive against its repeal; further notice of application to do away with the corporation had not been given within the time prescribed by the rules of the House. C. A. Hagerman to J. Nickalls, clerk of the peace, Kingston, 23 May 1839. 67. Chronicle and Gazette, 12 June 1839. 68. For this and succeeding examples see City of Kingston, Proceedings 1838-42 (microfilm). 69. Chronicle and Gazette, 30 May 1840. 70. Argus, 20 March 1846. 71. Ibid., 20 Jan. 1846. 72. See City of Kingston, Proceedings, 1838-42: Council minutes, 1 and 8 June 1840. The removal of the capital of the United Canadas from Kingston to Montreal in 1844 after only three years was an economic blow to the town, particularly as the corporation had embarked on an elaborate and expensive municipal building scheme in 1843 at a time when the town was still relatively small. 73. See Aitchison, "Local government/' pp. 606-607, from which some of the following information is taken. 74. In a petition to the governor general in 1842 requesting incorporation as a city, 371

NOTES

the necessity for annexing lot 24 to the town was specifically mentioned. See City of Kingston, Report Book, 1842-46, p. 42. 75. PSO no. 6502, October 1843. 76. Ibid., no. 290, 8 Feb. 1849. The question agitated Kingston for at least a decade. 77. Kingston Chronicle and Guardian, 18 Sept. 1841. 78. See An Act to Establish a Police Force in the Town of Kingston, chap, xxvm, 20 Dec. 1841. 79. For a full report of this meeting see Argus, 6 March 1846. 80. In addition a petition of the mayor and common council of Kingston requesting incorporation as a city had been forwarded to the governor general in council in September 1842 and a committee to draw up details of a new act of incorporation had been set up in 1845. See City of Kingston, Report Book, 1842-46, p. 42. 81. His figures showed: total debt, £36,000 (of which £25,000 was for the market building (Town Hall) loan); total revenue, £3,142; total expenditure, £3,275 (mainly for officials' salaries and labour). 82. The view was generally expressed that if the town was relieved of the large tax paid to the district there would be sufficient funds forthcoming to meet all the needs of the corporation and in addition enough for a respectable surplus fund. 83. The District Councils Act was passed in 1841. It introduced representative local government to the rural areas. For further details see Crawford, Canadian Municipal Government, pp. 29-31. 84. John A. Macdonald had been elected to the council from Ward 4 in March 1843. In 1846 he was MLA for Kingston. His reasons for resigning from council were pressure of business and the likelihood of conflict of interest. As lawyer to the Commercial Bank of the Midland District it had been his duty to take legal proceedings on behalf of his client in which the corporation was a party. Macdonald felt he could not consistently retain his seat on the council while doing so. 85. Argus, 6 March 1846. 86. It was felt in particular that the burden fell especially heavily on small shopkeepers and owners of the poorer classes of dwellings. 87. Argus, 6 March 1846. 88. 9 Vic., c. 75, s. xv (1846): An Act to incorporate the Town of Kingston as a city. 89. For a description of the debates on the bill, see Argus, 10, 24 April and 5 May 1846. 90. British Whig, 5 May 1846. The Whig was against the reduction, contending that as the population of Kingston was of a particularly fluctuating nature (like that of any frontier town), it was the more necessary that the franchise qualification be kept high. 91. For further provisions of the incorporating act, see 9 Vic., c. 75 (1846). 92. Argus, 29 May 1846: Correspondence. 93. Ibid., 5 June 1846: Correspondence. 94. Ibid., 9 June 1846. For a description of the election see ibid., 9 and 12 June 372

NOTES

95.

96. 97. 98. 99.

100. 101. 102. 103.

104. 105.

1846; British Whig, 9 June 1846, quoted in the Kingston Whig Standard, 3 Aug. 1946. The council elected was as follows: Sydenham Ward—aldermen, John H. Greer, Matthew T. Hunter; councillors, James W. Brent, Samuel Smyth; Ontario Ward—aldermen, Henry W. Benson, James Baker; councillors, William Ford, Robert Channonhouse; St. Lawrence Ward—aldermen, John Counter, Matthew Rourke; councillors, Robert Allen, John Wiley; Cataraqui Ward—aldermen, Edward Noble, James Meaghen sr.; councillors, Robert Anglen, James Meaghen jr.; Frontenac Ward—aldermen, Augustus Thibodo, John Flanagan; councillors, John Breden, John Harvey. The Argus found it puzzling that the Irish had combined in the way they did, arguing that the Irish had had a large majority on the council since Kingston was first incorporated as a town so they had nothing to complain about on the ground of exclusion. The British Whig argued that the reason for the Irish combining to elect their own countrymen was because at the previous March election, on examination of the poll lists following the election, it was discovered that a defeated Irish candidate, James Barker, apparently a man of striking character and well suited for office, had been supported by no other ethnic group than the Irish. Taken by surprise, the Irish failed to vote in sufficient numbers and he was unexpectedly defeated. This rankled with his supporters and they determined that at the first general election following incorporation they would show the new city that they could not be thus scurvily treated with impunity. The Argus disputed this view, arguing that the reason for Barker's lack of success at the previous election was not that there was a combination against him by non-Irish voters, but that he had been seen to be supported by several members of the old corporation and their friends. Argus, 12 June 1846. City of Kingston, Minutes, 13 June 1846. Counter received 10 votes and Benson 9. Benson did not vote while Counter voted for himself, thus assuring his election —an unusual procedure to say the least! Argus, 1 Aug. 1846. Ibid., 14 Aug. 1846. A select committee on arrears of taxes in 1845 had reported that in the 1842-43 financial year the arrears were £1,100. Collectors had not shown enough vigilance, and as a result it was difficult to ascertain the true state of arrears and amounts then owed to the town. City of Kingston, Report Book, 1842-46: Select committee report, 6 Oct. 1845. Argus, 29 May 1846. Kingston City Council, Minutes, 3 June 1843. The estimated cost of the city buildings according to the tenders accepted was about £19,500. The actual cost was about £28,000. See Chronicle and News, 21 Feb. 1849: Mayor's annual address to city council. For a full description of this question see City of Kingston, Report Book, 1843-51: "Report of a select committee showing the proceedings taken by the council to arrange a settlement of the city debt with the Commercial Bank," 5 Dec. 1848. See Chronicle and News, 21 Feb. 1849. City of Kingston, Proceedings of Council, 1846-53, 15 and 23 June 1849. 373

NOTES

106. For a more detailed description of municipal structure during this period, see C. E. McGaughey, 'The development of municipal institutions in Ontario, 1785-1888" (M.A. diss., Queen's University, 1939), chap. IV: "Municipal development between 1841 and 1849," from which the following brief description is largely taken. 107. Chronicle and News, 27 Jan. 1849. 108. City of Kingston, Proceedings of Council, 2 Feb. 1849. 109. Chronicle and News, 7 Feb. 1849. 110. Ibid. 24 Feb. 1849; Proceedings of Council, 19 Feb. 1849. 111. Chronicle and News, 24 Feb. 1849. 112. City of Kingston, Proceedings of Council, 19 Feb. 1849. Various resolutions along the lines already discussed were passed at this meeting. In addition a motion was made that a clause be added to the new bill giving the council power to loan £30,000 to apply in liquidation of the city debt. Ibid., 5 March 1849. 113. In fact there were two acts. The first, 112 Vic., c. 80 (1849), repealed or amended 68 acts dealing with local government. The second, 12 Vic., c. 81 (1849), (better known as the Baldwin Act), covered the whole area of municipal affairs, filling 84 pages of the statute book. 114. Aitchison, "Local government," p. 792. For a comprehensive discussion of the act see Aitchison, pp. 792-809 and McGaughey, chap. V, from which this discussion is taken. 115. See Chronicle and News, 16 May 1849. 116. Aitchison, "Local government," p. 792. 117. Second report of the Commission of Municipal Institutions, 1888, p. 55. 118. For example, Chronicle and News, 14 Feb. 1849, felt that the bill would create financial hardship for the multitude of smaller municipalities. The City of Toronto set up a special committee to report to council on the provisions of the bill and how it was calculated to effect any change in the composition, powers, and duties of the Toronto Common Council. The report was very critical. It is printed in full in Chronicle and News, 3 March 1849.

The Orange Order and the Election of 1861 1. William Shannon, Narrative of the Proceedings of the loyal Orangemen of Kingston and Belleville. . . (Belleville, 1861), p. 32. 2. Details are drawn from: Toronto Daily Globe, 3-8 Sept. 1860; Kingston Daily News, 27 Aug.-7 Sept. 1860; Shannon, Narrative; N. A. Woods, The Prince of Wales in Canada and the United States (London, 1861), pp. 183-93; [H. J. Morgan], The Tour ofH.R.H. the Prince of Wales through British North America and the United States (Montreal, 1860), pp. 144-53. 3. Kingston Chronicle and News, 1 Sept. 1860. 4. Shannon, Narrative, p. 32. 5. H. Senior, "The Genesis of Canadian Orangeism," Ontario History, ix, no. 2 (1968), 13-15. 374

NOTES

6. See S. F. Wise, "Colonial Attitudes from the Era of the War of 1812 to the Rebellions of 1837," in S. F. Wise and R. C. Brown, Canada Views the United States: Nineteenth-Century Political Attitudes (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1967), pp. 16-45; Northrop Frye, "Conclusion," in Carl F. Klinck, ed., Literary History of Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1965), pp. 830-34. 7. R. A. Preston, "The History of the Port of Kingston," Historic Kingston, no. 3 (1954), 3-17; C. W. Cooper, Frontenac, Lennox & Addington (Kingston, 1856), pp. 34-49, 76-80, 105; see also Hutchinson's Kingston Directory for 1857-58. . . (Kingston, 1857); Hutchinson's Kingston Directory for 1862-63 (Kingston, 1862); The Canada Directory for 1857-58 (Montreal, 1857). 8. Census of the Canadas, 1860-61 (Quebec, 1863), I, 48, 128. 9. For a suggestive interpretation of the social background of anti-Catholicism as nativism, see John Higham, "Another Look at Nativism," The Catholic Historical Review, XLIV (July 1958). 10. Kingston Chronicle and News, 4 Sept. 1860. 11. Ibid., 14 Sept. 1860. 12. Toronto Daily Globe, 8 Oct. 1860. 13. Kingston Daily News, 12 Jan. 1861. 14. Toronto Daily Globe, 6 Oct. 1860; Kingston Daily News, 29 Oct. 1860. 15. Kingston Daily News, 3 Nov. 1860. 16. Ibid., 8 Jan. 1861. 17. Toronto Orange Herald, 27 Sept. 1860. 18. For the ideas of Edmund Burke on "party and its implications," see Richard Hofstadter, The Idea of a Party System: The Rise of Legitimate Opposition in the United States, 1780-1840 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1969), pp. 12-13, 29-34; Ronald P. Formisano has noted a similar antiparty phenomenon in his study of Michigan. "Although the triumphant coalition had explicitly emerged as a political party, antipartyism lingered on in the late 1850s, both as rock-bottom sentiment and as a convenient rallying cry for dissident political factions." R. P. Formisano, The Birth of Mass Political Parties: Michigan, 1827-1861 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971), pp. 326-27. 19. Kingston Daily News, 8 Jan. 1861. 20. Toronto Patriot, 6 March 1861; Kingston Daily News, 2 March 1861; Toronto Leader, 28 Feb. 1861; Durham Standard, 1 March 1861. 21. Owen Sound Comet, 22 Feb. 1861. Fears of Roman Catholic ascendancy at the polls were outlined as early as November 1860. See Toronto Orange Herald, 28 Nov. 1860. 22. To piece together Macdonald's manoeuvres, see C. B. Sissons, Egerton Ryerson: His Life and Letters, 2 vols. (Toronto: Clarke Irwin, 1947), n, 426-33; F. A. Walker, Catholic Education and Politics in Upper Canada (Toronto: J. M. Dent, 1955), pp. 258-62; D. G. Creighton, Sir John A. Macdonald: The Young Politician (Toronto: Macmillan, 1952), p. 308; W. L. Morton, The Critical Years: The Union of British

375

NOTES

North America, 1857-1873 (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1964), pp. 94-95, 104-108. 23. PAC, Egerton Ryerson Papers: Macdonald to Ryerson, 29 May 1861. 24. See S. F. Wise, "Tory Factionalism: Kingston Elections and Upper Canadian Politics, 1820-1836," Ontario History, LVII, no. 4 (1965), 205-25. 25. Kingston Herald, 3 Nov. 1847. 26. Kingston Daily British Whig, 21 Nov. 1851. 27. Ibid., 27 Nov. 1847. 28. See Bishop Koran's general correspondence with political leaders in his letterbook, Archives of the Diocese of Kingston; for the example of James O'Reilly, see Donald Swainson, "James O'Reilly and Catholic Politics," Historic Kingston, no. 21 (1973), 11-21. 29. Macdonald to Brown Chamberlain, 21 Jan. 1856, in J. K. Johnson, ed., The Letters of Sir John A. Macdonald, 1836-57 (Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1968), p. 339. For an analysis of Roman Catholic votes in 1861, see n. 50. 30. Whitby Chronicle, 27 June 1861. 31. Kingston Daily News, 8 June 1861. 32. For biographical details, see Creighton, Macdonald: The Young Politician; J. A. Roy, Kingston: The King's Town (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1952), pp. 271-73. 33. For biographical details, see Margaret Angus, "The Mowats of Kingston," Historic Kingston, no. 13 (1964), 41-49; C. R. W. Biggar, Sir Oliver Mowat: A Biographical Sketch, 2 vols. (Toronto: Warwick Brothers and Rutter, 1905), I. 34. Mowat to John Mowat, 9 Oct. 1844, in Biggar, Mowat, I, 36. 35. Mowat to Alexander Campbell, 16 Jan. 1858, in ibid., pp. 73-77; see also A. Margaret Evans, "Oliver Mowat: Nineteenth-Century Ontario Liberal," in Donald Swainson, ed., Oliver Mowat's Ontario (Toronto: Macmillan, 1972), pp. 34-36. 36. Queen's University Archives, Macdonald poll book, 1861. 37. No issues of this newspaper could be located. 38. Toronto Daily Globe, 5 June 1861. 39. Kingston Daily News, 11 June 1861. 40. Ibid., 3 July 1861. 41. Toronto Public Library, Mowat broadside, 1861. 42. Ibid. 43. Toronto Patriot, 26 Sept. 1860. 44. Kingston Daily News, 9 April 1861. 45. See Macdonald's collected speeches of 1860-61 in Address of the Hon. John A. Macdonald to the Electors of the City of Kingston, . . . (n.p., 1861). 46. Toronto Daily Globe, 6 June 1861. 47. Kingston British Whig, 6 June 1861. 376

NOTES

48. Kingston Chronicle and News, 28 June 1861. 49. Province of Canada, Journals of the Legislative Assembly, Sess. Papers, no. 24 (1862); Kingston Daily News, 3 July 1861; the figures cited in the Macdonald poll book at the Queen's University Archives disagree with official and unofficial accounts and with the poll book in the Macdonald Papers in the Public Archives of Canada. 50. The correlation of Roman Catholic population to votes for Macdonald in 1861 is as follows, by ward: % Catholic % votes for Macdonald Ward 72 45 Ontario 60 39 Cataraqui 64 37 Sydenham 59 30 Frontenac 66 29 Victoria 29 58 St. Lawrence 54 17 Rideau 51. Of twenty-three Orange leaders named in various city directories and whose votes could be traced accurately in the poll book, sixteen voted for Mow at. 52. Kingston Daily News, 3 July 1861; see n. 50. 53. Address of the Hon. John A. Macdonald, pp. 21-26. 54. Toronto Daily Globe, 29 June 1861. 55. Ibid., 13 July 1861. 56. Archives of the Diocese of Kingston, Bishop Horan Letterbook: Horan to C. F. Cazeau, 14 July 1861.

Kingstonians in the Second Parliament 1. See for example D. C. Masters, The Rise of Toronto, 1850-1890 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1947); J. M. S. Careless, "Frontierism, Metropolitanism, and Canadian History," in Canadian Historical Readings (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967), I, 63-83. 2. Kingston Daily News, 29 Aug. 1872. 3. The author has studied aspects of the lives of each of these Kingstonians (except Hamilton) in "The Personnel of Politics: A Study of the Ontario Members of the Second Federal Parliament" (Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto, 1968); John A. Macdonald: The Man and the Politician (Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1971); "Alexander Campbell: General Manager of the Conservative Party (Eastern Ontario Section)/' Historic Kingston, no. 17 (1969), 78-92; "Richard Cartwright Joins the Liberal Party," Queen's Quarterly, LXXV (1968), 124-33; "George Airey Kirkpatrick: Political Patrician," Historic Kingston, no. 19 (1971), 28-40; "James O'Reilly," Dictionary of Canadian Biography, X; "James O'Reilly and Catholic Politics," Historic Kingston, no. 21 (197), 11-21; "Schuyler Shibley and the Underside of Victorian Ontario," Ontario History, LXV, no. 1 (1973), 51-60. 4. For general material on Macdonald see Joseph Pope, Memoirs of the Right Honourable Sir John Alexander Macdonald, 2 vols. (Ottawa, 1894); Donald Creigh377

NOTES

ton, John A. Macdonald, 2 vols. (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1952-55); T. S. Webster, "John A. Macdonald and Kingston" (M.A. diss., Queen's University, 1944). 5. Creighton, Macdonald, I, 82. 6. J. K. Johnson, "John A. Macdonald, The Young Non-Politician," C.H.A. Historical Papers (1971), and "John A. Macdonald and the Kingston Business Community, 1843-1867," included in this volume. 7. Macdonald was a Presbyterian, as was his first wife whom he married in 1843. In 1867 Macdonald was married again, to Susan Agnes Bernard. After his second marriage he began to attend St. Alban's (Anglican) Church in Ottawa as well as the Presbyterian church, a process doubtless facilitated by his wife, who was an Anglican. In 1891 his Ottawa funeral services were conducted at St. Alban's. 8. PAO, Campbell Papers: Macdonald to Campbell, 19 Dec. 1871. 9. In this paper the term "£lite" is used simply to denote the upper levels of society—those possessing prestige and wealth. It was thus used in the last century by Sir Casimir Stanislaus Gzowski, very much a man of the £lite. See Ludwik Kos-Rabcewicz-Subkowski and William Edward Greening, Sir Casimir Stanisl aus Gzowski (Toronto: Burns and MacEachern, 1959), p. 82. 10. The Week, Toronto, 15 Dec. 1887. 11. PAO, Campbell Papers: Hamilton to Campbell, 2 Aug. 1872. 12. Mary Katherine Christie, "Sir Alexander Campbell" (M.A. diss., University of Toronto, 1950), p. 6. 13. Cited in Peter B. Waite, Canada 1874-1896: Arduous Destiny (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1971), p. 96. 14. W. R. Graham, "Sir Richard Cartwright and the Liberal Party" (Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto, 1950), p. 11. 15. PAO, Cartwright Papers: Campbell to Cartwright, 24 Feb. 1866. 16. No politician could succeed in Lennox and Addington without paying careful attention to a host of often complex local issues. For an excellent introduction to the politics of the county see James Eadie, "The Political Career of David Roblin," Lennox and Addington Historical Society, Papers and Records, xiv (1972). 17. For a detailed analysis see Donald Swainson, "Richard Cartwright Joins the Liberal Party." 18. Cited in Toronto Mail clipping, 1876, on Cartwright as a Reformer, in PAC, Macdonald Papers, vol. 204. See also Toronto Globe, 19 Aug. 1872, however, which lists him under "Opposition." 19. Toronto Globe, 14 Dec. 1899. 20. D. B. Read, The Lieutenant-Governors of Upper Canada and Ontario, 1792-1899 (Toronto: William Briggs, 1900), p. 237. 21. Cited in P. B. Waite, "The Political Ideas of John A. Macdonald," in Marcel Hamelin, ed., The Political Ideas of the Prime Ministers of Canada (Ottawa: Editions De L'Universite d'Ottawa, 1969), p. 58. 22. John Willison, Sir Wilfrid Laurier and the Liberal Party (London and Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1926), n, 222; Sister Teresa Avila Burke, "Canadian 378

NOTES

Cabinets in the Making: A Study in the Problems of a Pluralistic Society: 18671896" (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1958), p. 285 [Sister Burke's source is Oscar Douglas Skelton, Life and Letters of Sir Wilfrid Laurier (Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1921), I, 481]. 23. House of Commons Debates, 1891, n, 4190 (20 Aug. 1891). 24. T. P. Slattery, They Got to Find Me Guilty Yet (Toronto: Doubleday, 1972), is a fascinating account of the Whelan trial. Slattery argues that Whelan was innocent and concludes: "Who killed D'Arcy McGee under the full moon of Canada's April sky is still a mystery," p. 353. 25. PAC, Macdonald Papers, vol. 194: Campbell to Macdonald, 9 July 1872. 26. Canadian Parliamentary Companion (1873), p. 227. 27. Nicholas Flood Davin, The Irishman in Canada (London and Toronto, 1877), p. 370. On question of judgeship see also PAC, Macdonald Papers, vol. 204: Cartwright to Macdonald, 4 Jan. 1867; vol. 194: Campbell to Macdonald, 16 July 1872; Ottawa Daily Citizen, 16 May 1875. 28. Canadian Parliamentary Companion (1873), p. 167. 29. Cited by Edward Blake in Address by Mr. Blake at Bowmanville (1873), p. 6, in PAO, Blake Papers, n, 15 (d). 30. It might be argued that Shibley should not be included with the group of politicians discussed here. He is included, however, because of his close ties with Kingston and because of his non-agricultural and wide-ranging interests. His wife was the daughter of "a prominent merchant of Kingston" (Canadian Parliamentary Companion (1875), pp. 305-306) and he was at various times closely allied to O'Reilly, Campbell, and Cartwright. Like R. J. Cartwright he was heavily involved in land speculation in Lennox and Addington. He also had interests in Kingston and Frontenac. 31. Cited in PAC, Macdonald Papers, vol. 194: Campbell to Macdonald, 16 July 1872. 32. Canadian Parliamentary Companion (1873), p. 246. 33. Facts about the life of Hamilton have been gleaned from Kingston British Whig, 11 Oct. 1882; Toronto Globe, 12 Oct. 1882; Dominion Annual Register (1882), pp. 343-44; Canadian Parliamentary Companion, various editions; Geo. Maclean Rose, A Cyclopaedia of Canadian Biography (1886 edition); Edward Marion Chadwick, Ontarian Families, i; Agnes Maule Machar, The Story of Old Kingston (Toronto: Musson, 1908); E. E. Horsey, "Cataraqui, Fort Frontenac, Kingston" (typescript, Queen's University Archives, 1937); W. Stewart Wallace, The Macmillan Dictionary of Canadian Biography (Toronto: Macmillan, 1963); J. K. Johnson, ed., The Canadian Directory of Parliament, 1867-1967 (Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1968). 34. Wallace, Biography, p. 297. 35. Ibid. 36. He built his home, "The Elms" on Maitland Street, in 1832, but does not seem to have settled in Kingston until about 1840. Kingston British Whig, 11 Oct. 1882. 37. Toronto Globe, 12 Oct. 1882. 38. Kingston British Whig, 11 Oct. 1882.

379

NOTES

39. Some of the classifications that follow are, at least in part, subjective judgments. They are based on as much firm evidence as is available, and should be reasonably accurate. 40. James A. Roy, Kingston: The King's Town (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1952), p. 280; Encyclopaedia Canadiana, v, 417-18. 41. Encyclopaedia Canadiana, v, 417-18. 42. PAO, Cartwright Papers: Macdonald to Cartwright, 12 Feb. 1872 and Campbell to Cartwright, 12 Feb. 1872. 43. PAC, Macdonald Papers, vol. 204: telegram, 23 Jan. 1871, Cartwright, Walkem, O'Reilly, Gildersleeve, Kirkpatrick, and Bowden to Macdonald. 44. Macdonald was in all likelihood not without considerable influence in Victoria county. During an earlier period he speculated so extensively in Victoria county land that he had retained an agent in Lindsay. See Johnson, "John A. Macdonald The Young Non-Politician," p. 141. 45. Provincial politicians have not been looked at as part of the Kingston group. During the early 1870s federal-provincial political relations were not yet well enough settled to make detailed analysis profitable; dual representation was not ended in Ontario until 1872; 1871-72 was a watershed period in Ontario history, and hence extremely unstable; provincial, not federal, patterns and institutions were in effect new. There is no doubt however that D. D. Calvin, MPP for Frontenac during most of the 1870s, was a close ally of the Conservative politicians discussed in this paper. 46. John Porter, The Vertical Mosaic (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1965), p. 391. 47. The figure was 12,407 according to Census of Canada, 1870-71, i, 428. 48. House of Commons Debates, 1880-81, I, 434 (19 Jan. 1881). 49. Ibid., 1880-81, I, 1127-29 (24 Feb. 1881).

The Poor in Kingston, 1815-1850 1. E. E. Horsey, "Cataraqui, Fort Frontenac, Kingston" (typescript, Queen's University Archives, 1937), p. 70. 2. As quoted in E. E. Horsey, Kingston A Century Ago (Kingston: Kingston Historical Society, 1938), p. 30. 3. Robert Gourlay, Statistical Account of Upper Canada (London, 1822), p. 473. 4. Kingston Spectator, 24 July 1834. 5. Chronicle and Gazette, 10 June 1837. 6. Robert Legget, Rideau Waterway (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1955), p. 48. 7. Kingston Spectator, 17 March 1836. 8. Kingston Chronicle, 4 May 1821. 9. Kingston and Frontenac Land Registry, General Index of Lot 24,1st Concession, 1830-50. 380

NOTES

10. British Whig, 6 June 1837. 11. Kingston Chronicle, 4 June 1819, 27 April 1821, 27 Sept. 1822. 12. British Whig, 9 June 1835. 13. Ibid., 24 Feb., 20 April 1836. 14. Gourlay, Statistical Account, p. 472. 15. Archives of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Kingston (hereafter AOK), Census of the Roman Catholic Population in May and June 1844. The figures cited are for Kingston and Stuartville. Further references to the Roman Catholic population in 1844 are taken from this census unless otherwise indicated. 16. By-Laws of the City of Kingston from the Date of its Incorporation as a City in 1846 to 31st December 1906 (Kingston, 1906), By-Law 76, p. xxxiv. 17. British Whig, 19 June, 3, 7 July 1835. 18. Kingston Spectator, 24 July 1834. 19. Helen I. Cowan, British Emigration to British North America: The First Hundred Years (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, rev. ed., 1961), p. 223. 20. See for example, J. E. Hodgetts, "The Civil Service When Kingston was the Capital of Canada," Historic Kingston, no. 5 (1956), 20. 21. Kingston Chronicle, 23 Aug. 1822, 7 Jan. 1825. 22. Ibid., 13 April 1821. 23. Kingston Spectator, 11 Nov. 1836. 24. See for example, Kingston Chronicle, 20 Sept. 1822; British Whig, 30 April 1836.ril 1836. 25. British Whig, 6 June 1837. 26. Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society, Annual Report, 1872-73, p. 4. 27. G. P. de T. Glazebrook, Life in Ontario: A Social History (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1968), p. 69. 28. Queen's University Archives, House of Industry, Records, Box 8, Book 1. All but one of the children hired were Irish and all but four were Roman Catholics. 29. Mary I. Campbell, One Hundred Years of Service, Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society, 1857-1957 (Kingston, 1957), p. 9. Employers hiring children from the Home paid a small sum at regular intervals which was put aside to be given to the child at the end of the period of indenture. 30. Cowan, British Emigration, p. 146. 31. Ibid., p. 77. 32. Kingston Chronicle, 3 March 1820. 33. The property, a plot of some 200 acres, was granted by the Crown to Rev. John Stuart under a patent dated 22 June 1796. The land passed to George Okill Stuart upon his father's death in 1811. 34. Kingston and Frontenac Land Registry, Book M, Memorial 363, Book L, Memorial 179. 35. Journals of the Legislative Assembly, 1844-45, p. 304. 36. House of Industry, Records, Box 8, Book 1. 381

NOTES

37. PAC, H2/440, Kingston 1842, no. 1. I am indebted to Mrs. Margaret Angus for bringing this map to my attention. 38. Canada West Census, Kingston, 1861, Reel 1096. 39. Journals of the Legislative Assembly, 1844-45, p. 304. 40. James H. Aitchison, "The Development of Local Government in Upper Canada, 1783-1850," (Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto, 1953), p. 606. 41. Journals of the Legislative Assembly, 1844-1845, pp. 281, 324; Papers of the Provincial Secretary's Office, no. 209,5 Feb. 1849; Kingston Spectator, 21 Jan. 1836 and Chronicle and News, 24 Feb., 16 May 1849. 42. uc Statutes, 32 Geo. 3 c., 156 as quoted in Richard D. Splane, Social Welfare in Ontario 1791-1893 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1965), p. 65. 43. Aitchison, "Local Government," p. 644 and Splane, Social Welfare, p. 69. As late as 1871, an inspector, reporting on conditions in the Kingston jail, commented that "a poor house would have been a fitter place of residence for nearly half the number found in gaol." Ontario, Sessional Papers, 1870-71, no. 6, p. 14. 44. James A. Roy, Kingston: The King's Town (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1952), p. 44. 45. Kingston Chronicle, 19 Feb., 23 April, 14 May 1819. 46. Ibid., 4 May 1827. 47. Splane, Social Welfare, p. 76; Kingston Chronicle, 17 Sept. 1831. 48. Aitchison, "Local Government," pp. 662, 665; City of Kingston Records, Box 1848-1849, Directions of the Mayor to the Chairman of the Board of Health; Chronicle and News, 8 Nov. 1848. 49. Aitchison, "Local Government," p. 682. 50. Chronicle and News, 17, 20 Nov. 1847. 51. Ibid., 4 Dec. 1847. 52. House of Industry, Records, Box 8, Book 1. In no year before 1871 were less than half of those admitted Irish born. 53. Orphans' Home and Widows' Society, Annual Report, 1882-83, p. 7. 54. Ibid., 3 and Campbell, One Hundred Years, p. 7. 55. Life of Right Reverend Patrick Phelan, Third Bishop of Kingston (Kingston, 1862), p. 21. 56. PAO, Macdonell Letters, i, 39-40. 57. Life of Phelan, p. 26. 58. British Whig, 2, 9, 13 March 1836. 59. Cowan, British Emigration, p. 56. See also Kingston Chronicle, 13 Oct. 1820, 10 June 1832. 60. British Whig, 24 June 1836. 61. Kingston Chronicle, 15 April 1825. 62. British Whig, 22 Nov. 1844; Horsey, "Kingston," p. 25. 63. House of Industry, Records, Box 3, Memorandum of Rules. 382

NOTES

64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69.

Chronicle and News, 5 Feb. 1848. Roy, Kingston, p. 113. Kingston Chronicle, 4 Dec. 1820. Midland District School Society, Minutes, 14 Nov. 1837, pp. 70-72. Agnes Maule Machar, The Story of Old Kingston (Toronto, 1908), p. 231. Rev. Sister St. Kevin, "The Early History of Notre Dame Convent in Kingston," Historic Kingston, no. 9 (1960), 15; Kingston Chronicle, 28 April, 14, 21 July 1820 70. Life of Phelan, p. 27; AOK, Letters of Bishop Koran, MS Report of Meeting of Separate School Trustees (no pagination); ibid., Horan MS Sermons, 2nd Sunday after Easter 1861 (no pagination). 71. Kingston Chronicle, 20 Sept. 1822. 72. Ibid. 73. British Whig, 30 April 1836. 74. James Edgar Rea, "Alexander Macdonell and the Politics of Upper Canada," (Ph.D. diss., Queen's University, 1971), p. 62. 75. City of Kingston, Report Book 1842-46, p. 23. The Select Committee placed most of the blame for "the moral degradation and crime arising from the great number of licensed taverns" on the lax application of the licensing laws by the magistrates. See also Bytown Gazette, 10 Dec. 1840. 76. Kingston Chronicle, 28 May 1819. 77. Ibid., 14 Jan. 1832, 10 Oct. 1823. 78. British Whig, 22 May 1835. 79. Chronicle and Gazette, 30 Sept. 1840. 80. Chronicle and News, 15 Dec. 1847. 81. Ibid., 21 Feb. 1849. See also ibid., 13 Nov. 1847.

John Travers Lewis and the Anglican Diocese 1. See Synod of Ontario, Journal, 1862, pp. 81-88: "Bishop's Charge." 2. Lewis described the situation with understandable bitterness, viz. "We wonder that law officers of the Crown should have hitherto been so simple as to write such elaborate documents as Royal Letters Patent without a suspicion that they were advising Her Majesty to act illegally by putting the great seal of England to a piece of waste paper." See Synod Journal, 1865, p. 292. 3. The situation is set out fully by Lewis; see Synod Journal, 1862, pp. 75-81. 4. For a description of Strachan and his relationship to Stuart, see D. M. Schurman "Bishop Strachan and the Archdeaconry of Kingston," Historic Kingston, no. 8 (1959), 24-33. 5. General information concerning Lewis's life is readily available in the biography by his widow Ada Lewis, The Life of John Travers Lewis D.D. (London, n.d.). This book is often inaccurate in matters of precise detail. For instance, Lewis was LLD not DD as in her title. 383

NOTES

6. See K. C. Evans, 'The Intellectual Background of John Travers Lewis," Historic Kingston, no. 10 (1962), 37-45. 7. See R. Elrington, The Life of the Most Reverend James Ussher D.D. with an account of his writings (Dublin, 1848). 8. Ibid., pp. 208, 258, 260. 9. Ibid., pp. 78, 92. 10. Ibid., p. 176. 11. Special Synod, Diocese of Toronto, Proceedings (1861), p. 227. 12. Ibid., 1863, p. 163. 13. Ibid., 1862, p. 74. 14. See n. 2 above. 15. D. M. Schurman, "The Kingston Rectory Dispute in the 1860's," Historic Kingston, no. 13 (1965), 50-69. 16. Synod Journal, 1862, p. 75. 17. Ibid., 1862, p. 129: 1864, p. 176: 1864, p. 271: 1865, p. 315 etc. The entries clearly show the influence of the Rectory dispute on Kingston giving. 18. Synod Journal, 1863, pp. 107-108. 19. Ibid., 1862, p. 200. 20. Ibid., 1866, p. 362. 21. Ibid., 1866, p. 403. 22. Jubilee of the Archbishop, printed testimonial, 1898. 23. Lewis, Life, pp. 71-81, which is generally sound for 1866-67. For 1893 see D. M. Schurman, "The First Archbishops in the Canadian Church," Journal of the Canadian Church History Society, v, no. 1 (1963). 24. Encountered by the author both in Kingston and in England/rom an Australian! 25. See Lewis, Life, p. 84.

Immigrants in the City 1. For a useful survey see J. M. S. Careless, "Frontierism, Metropolitanism and Canadian History," in Canadian Historical Readings (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967), I, 63-83. 2. W. F. Willcox, "Distribution of Immigrants in the U.S.," xx, Quarterly Journal of Economics (August 1906), 523-46. 3. A particularly insightful work on this rural-urban problem can be found in Charlotte Erickson, Invisible Immigrants (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1972). Letters sent by settlers to their relatives at home left little doubt that higher wages could be obtained in the city than in the country. Yet often the city was seen as a necessary evil to be endured until sufficient savings were accumulated to provide the down-payment on a farm (pp. 41ff). What proportion of those immigrants who first took up life in the city eventually moved to the country would make an interesting study. 384

NOTES

4. Between 1901 and 1911 (Canada's "boom" period), urban population growth ranged from 241 per cent for Vancouver to 15 per cent for Windsor. W. A. Mackintosh, The Economic Background to Dominion-Provincial Relations, Carleton Library Series no. 13 (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1964), p. 54. 5. For details see P. J. George and F. T. Denton, "An Exploratory Statistical Analysis of Some Socioeconomic Characteristics of Families in Hamilton, Ontario, 1871," Social History, no. 5 (1970), 16-44. A review of these methods is given by Ann Green and Alan Green, "Towards an Accurate Estimation of the Labour Force Based on a Sample of the 1871 Census/' mimeographed (Kingston, Ont.: Queen's University, 1969). 6. The original classification scheme was derived directly from that prepared by B. Blishen, "The Construction and Use of an Occupational Class Scale," Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, xxiv, no. 4 (November 1958), 519-30. Although in working with this scheme distinct ambiguities emerged, it was used since the results for Kingston could be compared with those using similar data for Hamilton. For a discussion of the problem of classifying occupations by skill levels, using nineteenth century census data, see M. B. Katz, "Occupational Classification in History," Journal of Interdisciplinary History, in, no. 1 (Summer 1972), 63-88. 7. See Note (a), Table I. 8. Report of the Royal Commission on Dominion-Provincial Relations, Book 1, "Canada: 1867-1939" (Ottawa: King's Printer, 1938), chap. I. 9. Such a "discount" (re troop withdrawals) should probably be made cautiously. Although the troops were not a permanent part of the local population their presence added substantially to the economic viability of Kingston by their impact on local demand for provisions, housing, etc. 10. G. P. de T. Glazebrook, Life in Ontario: A Social History (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1968), p. 131. 11. See R. A. Preston, ed., Kingston before the War of 1812 (Toronto: Champlain Society, 1959), pp. cxiii, cxiv. 12. It is interesting that in the 1840s four major churches were built in Kingston: St. James's, Cooke's Church, St. Paul's, and in 1847 the Free Scotch. In addition to this spurt of church building, fear of war between Britain and America over the Oregon boundary dispute precipitated investment by the government in four Martello towers in 1846. This construction activity gave added vigour to Kingston's economy during the 1840s. See James A. Roy, Kingston, the King's Town (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1952), pp. 232-33. 13. Recall that the sample results shown in Table II are for male household heads only, who reported holding a specific job, i.e. carpenter, clergyman, etc. at the time of enumeration. 14. M. C. Urquhart and K. Buckley, Historical Statistics of Canada (Toronto: Macmillan, 1965), pp. 14, 19. 15. As a guide to work in this area the reader is referred to Oscar Handlin's Boston's Immigrants (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1959), and D. B. Cole, Immigrant City: Lawrence, Massachusetts (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1963). 385

NOTES

16. Roy, Kingston, p. 237. 17. Helen I. Cowan, British Emigration to British North America (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1961), p. 289. 18. From 1845 to 1849 Irish migrants accounted for 62 per cent of total English, Scottish, and Irish arrivals. However, between 1855 and 1859 the number of immigrants of Irish ethnic origin had declined to only 14.2 per cent of the total. The average annual total inflow also declined, from approximately 42,000 a year in the first period to 13,000 in the second. Ibid., p. 289. 19. In the Hamilton study, the seven occupational classes designated by Blishen were rearranged into five classes. Unfortunately, the authors regrouped occupations in a manner which makes direct comparison between the Kingston and Hamilton complex difficult, except at the unskilled level. In addition the range of observations in the Hamilton scheme is from 14 in category 1 to 143 in category 5, which reduces, for some classes, the weight applied to conclusions drawn from the data. Here the minimum number of observations (for Level m) is 63 and the maximum number (for Level n) is 95. 20. Blishen, "Occupational Class Scale," esp. pp. 523-24. 21. Even two decades later a clearly defined "society" as such was still observable in Ontario. See Glazebrook, Life in Ontario, pp. 194ff. 22. It is worth noting that the majority of grocers among the immigrants were Irish and their stores were located mainly in Cataraqui Ward. 23. Cowan, British Emigration, p. 189. 24. S. Thernstrom, "Immigrants and Wasps: Ethnic Differences in Occupational Mobility in Boston, 1890-1940," in S. Thernstrom and R. Sennett, eds., Nineteenth Century Cities: Essays in the New Urban History (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969), pp. 158-61. 25. Ibid., p. 158. 26. In his presidential address to the American Economic Association, Simon Kuznets suggests that large inflows to cities during periods of rapid industrialization tend to widen income inequality due to a swelling of the ranks of lower-income groups. Only gradually is the economic position of this latter group bolstered and with it a decline in inequality. See S. Kuznets, "Economic Growth and Income Inequality," American Economic Review, XLV (March 1955), 1-28.

Queen's University: Town and Gown to 1877 1. Dr. George Lawson who became professor of chemistry and natural history in 1858. 2. Queen's University, Finance and Estate Minutes, 1864-99. 3. Queen's University Letters (hereafter cited as QUL): Henry Smith to Trustees, 31 Oct. 1861. For information on the school see numerous entries, Minutes, Board of Trustees (hereafter cited as B. of T.) and QUL, 1842-62. The amalgamation caused some measure of ill-feeling, and a sense of resentment on the part of Rev. John May, headmaster of Queen's Preparatory School. Argus, 13 Oct. 1862. 4. Trustees' Letters: A. Pringle to John Macdonald, 13 July 1840. 386

NOTES

5. Queen's University Archives, Morris Papers, case i: Morris to Harper, 19 April 1841. 6. B. of T. (Exec.), 4 March 1856, 16 March 1859; Trustees' Letters, 13 Aug. 1855, 9 Sept. 1856; QUL, case iv: Petition to Council, 15 April 1855. 7. Minutes of Senate (hereafter cited as Senate), 4 March 1857. 8. Examples of this at a rather later date in Queen's University Archives, Adam Sfiortt Letters, and also in proceedings of Alma Mater Society, and in the Queen's Journal. 9. B. of T. 27 July 1859. 10. B. of T. vol. n, 17 June 1863; B. of T. (Exec.), 6 Jan. 1861; Calendar of Queen's University 1862-63, in QUL, case vm. 11. For general statement of this issue, G. Craig, Upper Canada: The Formative Years, chap, ix; for the Presbyterian position: Ontario Historical Society, Papers and Records, xxx, "Journal of the Honourable William Morris's Mission to England in the year 1837," 212ff. 12. QUL, case VI: Leitch Testimonials, 3, 4, Oct. 1859. 13. QUL: Williamson to Hamilton, 30 Sept. 1862; Stewart to Williamson, 22 Dec. 1862; Argus, 22 Oct. 1862. These are examples. There are many other letters in QUL and the Trustees' letters which show at once Paton's competence and dedication, and his capacity for irritating others. 14. George was officially vice-principal from 1853 to 1857, when he resigned, believing that the board was not supporting his authority. Rev. John Cook acted as principal and did reside for the theology term (1857-58). During the next year he remained in Quebec, and George was asked by the executive of the board to act as viceprincipal again. As George and Weir pronounced this unconstitutional, Professor Williamson presided over Senate meetings. 15. QUL, case vn: Williamson to Hamilton, 30 Sept. 1862, in which "the junior trustee" referred to is Paton; see also ibid.: Leitch to Paton, 30 Jan., 1 Feb., 10 Aug. 1861. 16. B. of T., 13 March, 10, 24 April 1861; 5, 7, 12, 19 March; 15 April 1862; Medical Faculty Minutes, 6,13 April 1861; 13 Feb., 13 March, 21 April 1862; Argus, 12,19 March, 23 April 1862; QUL, case vn: Secretary, Kingston Hospital Board, to Leitch, 2 April 1861. 17. Senate, 18 Dec. 1862; QUL, 22,27,31 Dec. 1862. For examples of Stewart's style see almost any issue of Argus in 1861-62. 18. For the complicated struggle over the preparation of a code for the government of the University, see entries in B. of T. passim, 1862-64; QUL and Medical Faculty Minutes for the same period. For Leitch's views, QUL, 26 Jan. 1863, "Report to the Synod," Spring 1863, MS signed "W. L.". See also references in Weir v. Mathieson (Toronto, 1865). For the statutes as passed, Statutes of Queen's University and College at Kingston (Kingston, 1863) in QUL, case vm; for the professors' plan see Senate, 6 Sept. 1862. 19. B. of T., 28 March 1866,26 April 1867; QUL, 1870,27,28 April 1871; Margaret Angus, "The Old Stone of Queen's, 1842-1900," in Historic Kingston, no. 20 (1972), 5. 20. B. of T., 25 March, 4 June, 1,15,16 Dec. 1868; QUL, case xn: Snodgrass to Hamilton and end., 14 Jan., 16 Dec. 1868. 387

Index

Adam, Robert 46 Addington: riding 271; Road 75, 77 Address to the Liege Men of Every British Colony and Province in the World 212 Adolphustown, Ont. 185, 206, 221, 225 Africans, in Kingston 27 Aikins, J. C. 265 Aitken, Alexander 66 Alaska 97, 125 Albert Edward, Prince of Wales 9, 245, 247, 256, 258 Alien and Sedition Act (1804) 189 Allan, Sir Hugh 175, 177, 179-80, 275 Alwington House 7, 307, 332 American: Civil War 98, 100-101, 108, 120, 123, 127, 307, 316; Revolutionary War 85, 223; settlers in Canada 70, 97, 191-94, 216 Amherst, Jeffrey, Baron 89 Anderson family 185 Anglican Church: Kingston 153, 263, 266-67, 272, 331; of Canada 309 Anglo-American Magazine 4 "Antonia" (pseud.) 58 Arch Street 334 Architecture in Kingston 37-61 Argus (Kingston) 234, 238, 240, 337 Armstrong, Dr. E. W. 207, 209 Gen. John 89-91 Maj. Gen. Sir Richard 113 Arthur, Sir George 202 Artillery Park 105, 116

Athenaeum Fire Insurance Society of London 148-49 Atkinson, James 207 Auxiliary Bible: and Common Prayer Book Society of Kingston 204; Society of Kingston 148-49 Baby, James 197 Bagot, Sir Charles 93 Bagot Street 332 Baillairge', Thomas 37 Baldwin, Robert 218, 242, 269-70, 275 Dr. William Warren 192, 218 Baldwin Act. See Municipal Corporations Bill (1849) Bancroft, Ont. 305 Bank: of British North America 148, 174, 178-79; of Canada 128; of Kingston, see City Bank; of Montreal 6, 161-62, 169, 174, 177-81; of Toronto 178; of Upper Canada 155, 169-71, 173, 175-77, 197, 206 Baring Brothers and Company 178 Barker, Dr. Edward John 2, 114, 118 Barrack Street 105 Barrie Street 289 Barriefield, Ont.: 101, 111, 120; Common 116 Barry, Sir Charles 39 Bartlet 199 Bartlett, Rev. J. 113 Bath, Ont. 191, 284 Bathurst, Lord 7, 94, 192

388

INDEX

Bay of Quinte 198 Bayne, Dr. Herbert A. 133 Beauce County 28 Beaver Dams, Ont. 90 Beckwith, Julia. See Mrs. G. H. Hart Bedford township 69, 71-72 Belleville, Ont. 11, 230, 245, 247, 269, 305, 309, 340 Benevolent Society 295 Benson, Henry 238 Samuel 72 Bergin, Darby 274 Bernini, Gian Lorenzo 44 Berry, Edward 174 Bessemer steel process 164 Bethune, Rev. A. N. 304 J. G. 216 Bidwell, Barnabas 191-94, 199, 215 Marshall Spring 11, 194, 198, 209, 215-17, 220 Birmingham, C. 163 Biscoe, Catharine Mary. See Mrs. Edward Osborne Hewett Blair, Andrew G. 166 Blake, Edward 267, 269, 271, 275 Blishen, B. 322-23 Blockhouses 104-105 Board of Agriculture 73 Boer War 132 Bonnycastle, Lt. Col. Richard Henry 11, 53, 58, 113 Boston, Mass. 321, 326 Bouchette, Joseph 6 Boulton, D'Arey 250-51 Judge Henry John 192-93, 214, 221 Bourchier, Col. H. P. 113 Bowell, Sir Mackenzie 265, 269, 275 Bradstreet, Lt. Col. John 85, 88 Bramley family 128 Brant, Capt. Joseph 204 Breden, John 162 Brent 238 Brewer's Lower Mills 282 British: 25-26; army officers 107, 109, 111-17, 119-20, 122-23, 125-26; Methodists 204; North America 286-87, 297, 339; North American Union 13, 100, 339

British Whig (Kingston) 114, 232, 237, 257, 284-85, 294 Brock, Maj. Gen. Sir Isaac 88 Brock Street 292 Brockville, Ont.: 25, 28, 199, 245, 303, 305, 307; Police Board Act (1832) 230 Brockville Recorder 210 Brown, Maj. Gen. Jacob 91 George 251, 254-55, 275 Browne, George, 37-61 Bruce County 28 Brunell, Alfred 52 Brydges, Charles John 161, 169-73, 275 Burnet, William 84 By, Lt. Col. John 94 Bytown (steamer) 284 Caldwell (sloop) 86 Calvin, Delano Dexter 148, 274 family 4, 267 Cook & Counter 148. See also Hiram Cook and John Counter Cambridge, Duke of 121 Cameron, Major 114 Capt. Donald Roderick 125-26, 128, 130, 132 Mrs. Donald Roderick (Emma Tupper) 125, 128 George Frederick 12 Hugh Innes 125 John Hillyard 269 Sir Matthew Crooks 269, 275 Campbell, Dr. 263 Judge 217 Hon. Alexander 144-47, 149-52, 154, 250, 256-57, 261, 263-67, 269, 271-76 Mrs. Alexander (Frederica) 149 Charlotte Anne. See Mrs. Maxwell William Strange Rev. Peter Colin 332 Canada: Act (1791) 86; -Alaska boundary 125-26; East 247, 250, 258; First Group 12; Trade Act 216; -U.S. Boundary Commission 125; West 141, 169, 174, 178, 245, 248, 250-52, 254-55, 257, 259, 262-63, 332; West legislature 148-50, 152-54 Canadian: Army Staff College 101; Engine and Machinery Company 161, 389

INDEX

164; Inland Steam Navigation Company 271; Locomotive and Engine Company Limited 161-63; Locomotive Company 13, 157-67, 267, 314; Locomotive Company Limited 163; militia 129, 131, 152; national destiny 195-96; Pacific Railway 161-63, 166, 277; Shield 64, 69 Canadian Freeman (York) 217, 230 Canadian Magazine (Montreal) 213 Canonto township 76 Cape Vincent N.Y. 143-44, 155, 158 Cappon, James 12 Cardinal, Ont. 305 Carey, John 215 Carleton, Sir Guy. See Lord Dorchester Carleton: riding 199; Island 85-87 Carmichael, James 253 Carmichael-Smyth, Maj. Gen. Sir James 94, 96 Report (1825) 96, 105 Caron, Sir Adolphe 128 Carr-Harris, Robert 133 Carters' Benefit Society 291 Cartier, Sir George Etienne 250, 258 Cartwright, John Solomon 48, 235 Hon. Richard, Jr. 25, 67-68, 185, 197, 225-26, 244, 271, 291 Sir Richard J. 162, 174, 177, 179, 181, 261, 266-67, 269, 271-77 Rev. Robert David 113 T. R. 196 family 2 Cataraqui: and Peterborough Railway Company 143, 145-46; Bridge & Company, see Kingston Bridge Company; Cemetery Company 143, 146, 153; River 83, 107; Ward 11 Cathcart Tower 98 Catherine (gunboat) 86 Cedar Island 96-98 Celtic Society 254, 262 Centre Huron riding 277 Chapmen, bylaw regulating 285 Charlevoix, Pierre-Francois-Xavier de 85 Chateauguay, battle of 91 Chauncey, Comm. Isaac 89-91, 93 Chicago 4 Children, in employment 286-87

Cholera epidemics 288, 292 Christian Guardian (Toronto) 210 Chronicle (Kingston) 186, 188-89, 191, 193-94, 196-97, 199-200, 206-208, 210-11, 213, 218, 221, 229 Chronicle and Gazette (Kingston) 282, 295-96 Chronicle and News (Kingston) 292-93, 297 Church: of England and Ireland 26, 211, 299, 301, 303; of Scotland 331, 339 City Bank 178, 198 Clarendon township 75 Clergy: reserves 67, 71, 200, 211, 213-14, 299-301, 307; Street 332 Clitherow, Maj. Gen. John 113 Cobourg, Ont. 230, 288 Cochrane, Lt. Col. J. B. 133 Cockerell, C. R. 39 Colborne, Sir John 198, 201, 218-9 Colenso, Rt. Rev. John William 300, 305 Collins, Francis 215, 217 Colonial Advocate (York) 210, 215, 217-18, 220-21 Commercial Bank of Canada 169-81, 240, 262, 266, 339; balance sheet (1867) 175; borrowers' default 174; Detroit & Milwaukee account secured with bonds 174-75; depositors' reaction 176-77; founding 169; Kingston's big losers 181, 339; Montreal and Kingston directors 179, 274; new board 174; no help from government or other banks 177-78, 275; noteholders' reaction 176; overdrafts 172; payments stopped 177; railroad loan 169-72; shareholders 179-80; writ against Great Western and trial 173 Commercial Bank of the Midland District 6, 143, 145, 152-55, 271 Commercial Mart. See S & R Store Compassionate Fund 111. See also Kingston Compassionate Society Confederation 32, 250, 259 Connaught, Duke of 117-18 Conservative party and Conservatives 185-202, 203, 251-55, 258, 261, 263, 265-67, 270, 272-73, 275

390

INDEX

Consolidated Bank, Toronto branch 263 Constitutional Act (1791) 225 Convocation Hall 341 Cook, Hiram 148 Rev. John 335 Cooper, C. 32 Corbett, Capt. Patrick 113 Corn Laws, repeal of 20, 248 Cornwall, Ont. 199, 230, 245, 299 Counter, John 2, 4-5, 144-48, 151-52, 155, 158, 160, 238, 240, 244, 252, 284 Court: House 195; of Quarter Sessions 197, 220, 223, 225; of Quarter Sessions of the Midland District 226-29; of Requests for the Midland District 220 Coverdale, William H. 53 Cowan, Helen I. 324 Crawford, J. W. 242, 269 Creighton, John 115 Crimean War 112, 123, 316 Cronyn, Rev. Benjamin 300-301 Crooks, Adam 275 Crown lands 67, 71 Cruikshank, John 254 Crysler's Farm, battle of 91 Gumming, John 196 Customs: Duties Arbitration Commission 196, 198; House 332; regulations re salted port, 216-17 Daily British Whig (Kingston) 163, 252, 290 Daily Standard (Kingston) 164 Dalhousie, Earl of 217 Dalton, Henry 209 Thomas 199, 212 Davin, Nicholas Flood 270 Davis and Sons 5 Dawe, N. 234-35 Day, Forshaw 133 Dearborn, Maj. Gen. Henry 88-91, 93 Delay, Joseph 209 Desertion, from Kingston garrison 108-109 Detlar, George H. 206 Detroit: Mich. 86, 89, 170; and Milwaukee Railroad Company 170-74, 181; River 224 Dickens, Charles 8, 109

Dickson, Dr. John R. 338 Diocese: of Huron 300-301, 307-308; of Ontario 300-301, 305; of Ontario, problem of authority 300, 303-304; of Ontario, background 301, 303; of Ontario, Lewis's election 304; of Ontario, Bishop Lewis's plans 305; of Ontario, See House 307, 309; of Ontario, mission priority 307-10; of Ontario, incorporation vs. church society 307-308; of Ontario, journal of the Synod 308-309; of Ontario, administration and fund raising 308-309; of Ontario, growth 309; of Quebec 299; of Toronto 301 District: Councils Act (1841) 241; of Newcastle 216 Dominion: Bank Act (1871) 181; Day (1867) 117; Note Scheme 178 Domville, James 275 Donaldson, William 209 Donelly, Patrick 289 Dorcas Society 294 Dorchester, Lord 86, 224 Dormer, Dr. 270 George 261, 270, 272, 274 Douglas 173 Robert 289 Draper, William Henry 252, 271, 275 Driscoll 192-93 Drummond, Lt. Gen. Sir Gordon 91, 93-94, 112 Dubs and Company 162-63 Duke of Gloucester (schooner) 87 Duke of Kent (scow) 87 Duncan 160 Francis 9 Dupuis, Nathan Fellowes 12, 340 Durham: County 28; riding 215 Dutch, in Kingston 27

EarlofMoira 87

East India Company 125 Ecclesiastical Chart for the Province of Upper Canada 211-12 Edwards, Maj. Eustace Gresley 131-32 Elmes, Harvey Lonsdale 39, 60 James 60 Elmore 70

391

INDEX

Elrington, R. 303 Empress (steamer) 115 English, Capt. Charles Edward 130-31 English: in Kingston 26, 123, 125-32, 136-37, 318, 321, 324, 326, 337; Charity Organization Society 294 Enlisted men in army, conditions of 117 Epidemics 21 Erie Canal 20, 96, 190, 257 Ernesttown: Ont. 191; township 30 Essex County 214 Eugene Louis, Prince 130 Evans, Rt. Rev. Kenneth C. 303 Fagan, Mary 296-97 Family Compact 11, 33, 128, 169, 185-86, 202, 208, 211, 218, 252, 323 Farming: cash crops 73, 77-78; pioneering 68, 73, 76 Farmland around Kingston 6-7, 66, 68 Female Benevolent Society 291-95 Fenians 100, 121, 269 Ferguson, Rev. George Dalrymple 122, 133 "Fidelis." See Agnes Maule Machar "Fifty-four Forty or Fight" 97 Fleming, Sir Sandford 12 Flynn, T. 160 Ford, William, Jr. 144-48 Forsyth, John Richardson 144-49, 151-52 Joseph 148 Richardson & Company 148 Fort: Erie 160, Frederick 98, 101, 107, 315; Frontenac 83-88, 101; George 90; Henry 2, 12-13, 96-97, 101, 105, 107, 111, 115, 118, 245, 282, 315; Niagara 84, 90; Ontario (Oswego) 123 Forwarding trade 103 Fothergill, Charles 208, 215 Fowler, Daniel 12 Fraser 255. See also RobinsonLivingston-Fraser Fredericksburg township 197 Free Church Colleges 339 Freemasonry 152, 204, 254, 262 French: Canadians 9, 25-26, 28, 83-84, 194, 207, 248, 250, 253, 257; civil law 224

"French Village." See Picardville Front Street 297 Frontenac, Count 1, 83, 85 Frontenac: Agricultural Society 120, 204; County 28, 64, 66-67, 72-73, 120, 213, 236, 267, 269, 270-71, 277; militia 89, 152; Road 75-77; Ward 11 Gage, Thomas 31 Gait, Sir Alexander Tilloch 177-78, 180-81, 275 Gananoque: Ont. 75, 149; Road 69, 120, 149 Garden Island 4, 284 Garrison Garden 105 Gazette (Kingston). See Kingston Gazette Gazette and U. E. Loyalist (York) 199 George, Rev. James (18017-1870), 334-38 Georgian Bay 198 Germans, in Kingston 26 Gibbon, Col. 117 Gildersleeve, Charles Fuller 174, 267, 274 Henry H. 144-48, 150-52 Overton Smith 144-46, 149-52, 255 Girouard, Sir Percy 136 Gladstone, William Ewart 100 Glazebrook, G. P. de T. 317 Globe (Toronto) 256-58, 267, 339 Glover, T. R. 12 Glyn Mills and Company 178 Goldmark, H. 166 Gore, Maj. Gen. the Hon. Charles 113 Lt. Gen. Sir Francis 88, 192 Gourlay, Robert Fleming 6, 11, 188-89, 282 Gowan, Nassau C. 251 Ogle R. 251 Grand: Haven, Mich. 170, 172; Trunk Colonization Road 75; Trunk Railway 112, 158, 160-62, 249, 252, 316-17 Grant, Charles William, 5th Baron of Longueuil 71 Mrs. David Alexander (MarieCharlotte Le Moyne, 4e baronne de Longueuil) 71 George Monro 12, 21, 33, 340-41

392

INDEX

Grant Cigars 6 Grassett, Arthur Wanton 127 Mrs. Arthur Wanton (Catherine Frances Hewett) 127 Great: Lakes 18, 101, 312; Northern Railway 163; Western Railroad Company 169-73 Greer, Alderman 234 Grey, 3rd Earl 98 Grey County 251 Guarantee Act (1849) 158 Gunn, Alexander 162, 277 Hagerman, Christopher Alexander 11, 149, 185-86, 191-93, 196, 198-201, 207, 214, 231-32, 234, 267 Daniel 191 Nicholas 185 Haldimand, Sir Frederick 85 Hales, Charles 40 Halifax, N.S. 19, 123 Hallowell, Ont. 262 Hamilton, George 271, 304 Hon. John (Kingston) 147-48, 150-52, 154, 261, 271-76, 304, 332, 336 Hon. John (Ottawa) 275 Mrs. John (Frances) 150 Hon. Robert 150, 271 Hamilton, Ont. 13, 72, 171, 230, 243, 271, 312, 317-18, 321, 329 Haney, M. J. 163, 165-66 Harbour shoal tower 98 Harper, Francis Archibald 262, 331-32, 334, 336 Harris, Robert Carr. See Robert Carr-H arris Harrison, Hon. S. B. 107 Hart, G. H. 213 Mrs. G. H. (Julia Beckwith) 213 Harty, James 174 Harty, Hon. William 162-66 Harvey, Theophilus 209 Hastings: County 72, 275; riding 199 Hawkers, bylaw regulating 285 Hawkesbury, Ont. 304 Hawley, Davis 197 Hayter, Wilmot Beresford. See Mrs. Joseph Bramley Ridout Head, Sir Francis Bond 202

Henry, Dr. Walter 109 Herchmer family 185 Hesse District 224 Hewett, Catherine Frances, See Mrs. Arthur Wanton Grassett Edward-Osborne 122-23, 127, 130 Mrs. Edward Osborne (Catharine Mary Biscoe) 122, 127 John 123 Sir William 123 House 127, 130-31 Hibernian Society 293, 295 Hickory Island 97 Hickson, J. 161 Hill 235 Francis Manning 144-47, 149, 214 Hillier 191, 199 Hinchinbrooke township 69-71, 77 Hincks, Sir Francis 161, 266 Hinds, H. W. 160-61 Mrs. J. 161-62 Mary. See Mrs. John Ryder Oliver Hockey, first official game of 136 H olden township 70 Holland, Henry 46 Samuel 85 Holton, Luther 175, 177, 179-80 Home District 236 Koran, Msgr. Edward John 253, 258, 270, 273, 295 Hospital Sisters of St. Joseph 292 Hotel Dieu: Hospital 292-93; Sisters 292 House: of Assembly 208, 213, 221, 230-31, 235-37; of Commons 261, 269, 273, 275, 277; of Providence 293 Howard, John 52 Howe Island 71 Hunter 238 Hurault, La (sailing vessel) 84 Huron: and Ottawa Tract 75, 77; -Ontario Grand Trunk Colonization Road 75 Hutton, Gen. Sir Edward 128, 132 "Ichabod" (pseud.) 70 Independent (Bobcaygeon) 78 Indian Mutiny 125 Indiana 198 393

INDEX

Indians at Tyendinaga 309 Ingall, Lt. Col. William Lenox 108, 113 Intercolonial: Express Company 263; Railway 161-63, 166 Irish: -Americans 100; famine immigration 21, 288, 326; in Kingston 10-12, 20-21, 26, 94, 114, 238, 245-59, 282, 285-89, 293, 296, 318-19, 321-22, 324, 326, 329, 337 Iroquois Confederacy 84 Isolated Risk Fire Insurance Company 263 Jay's Treaty (1794) 85 Jebb, Joshua 94 Jervois, Lt. Col. W. F. D. 100 Jews, in Kingston 27 John Counter (car ferry) 155 Johnson, Sir John 204, 224 Johnson Street 289 Johnstown District 224 Jones, Inigo 44, 51 Jonas 196 Judicial districts 224 Kaladar, Ont. 69 Kempt, Sir James 96-97 Kennebec township 69 Kensington, Lt. Edgar 130 Kent, William 46 Kilduff, Thomas 296 King, E. H. 174, 178-81 William Lyon Mackenzie 21 King's College 212-13, 331, 335 Kingston: and Newburgh Railway Company 143, 146; and Pembroke Railway 24, 75-76, 263, 266-67, 269-70, 274; and the War of 1812 19, 86, 94; architecture 37-61; as artistic centre 12; as capital of United Province of Canada 7, 20, 103, 111-12, 169, 284, 288, 290, 292, 312, 317, 331-32; as capital of Upper Canada 7, 103, 113, 312; birth rate 27-28; Board of Education 35; Board of Health 292, 294; Board of Trade 148, 160-61; Brass Band 255; Bridge Company 105, 120, 197, 282, 288; Building Society 148-49; business community 394

141, 143-55; Census (1871) 314; character 17-35, 104, 107, 111, 119; City Council 35, 291, 334; City Hall 20, 43-44, 51-61, 97, 116, 240, 250, 282, 335; City Park 116, 290, 335; Collegiate Institute 269; commerce 2, 5-6, 13, 103, 143-55, 160, 281; Compassionate Society 288, 291-92, see also Compassionate Fund; conservatism 25-35, 119, 137; death rate and causes 27-29; debt consolidation (1852) 153-54; divorces 29; domestics 285-86; emigration from 25, 288, 316; ethnic origins 9-10, 12, 20, 25-56, 111, 114, 238, 249, 259, 272, 312, 318; Fire and Marine Insurance Company 143, 146; fortifications, 104-105; garrison 13, 30-13, 101, 103-18, 119-20, 281, 312; Gas Light Company 143, 145; General Hospital 143, 146, 224, 242, 282, 288, 290, 292, 337; government establishments in 24, 94; grain trade 4-5; Grammar School 267, 332; growth 23-42, 104, 111, 315-17; hinterland 6, 63-79, 154-55, 274; hinterland, first settlement period 64, 66-68, 103; hinterland, second settlement period 69-73; hinterland, third settlement period 73-79; hinterland, land patents 64, 67, 72-73, 76-77; hinterland, population growth 64, 71-72; Historical Society 13, 120, 127; House of Industry 148, 287, 289, 292-94; immigrants 11, 94, 103, 223, 281-82, 287-88, 296, 311-30; Incorporation Act (1838) 232, 236; Incorporation Act (1846) 237; incorporation, annual address to council 241; incorporation, dissatisfactions 234-25; incorporation, first council meeting 233-34; incorporation, powers of corporation 233; incorporation, voters 233; industry 13, 281; influence of Queen's University 35; justice, administration 223-26, 295-96; labourers 282, 318; liquor, taverns, drinking 107-108, 296-97; local

INDEX

government 1784-1834, 223-30; local government 1835-46, 231-37; Lunatic Asylum see Kingston Psychiatric Hospital; manufacturing 5-6, 28 285; Marine Railway 144, 148, 28 market 281-82; military presence in, 11, 13, 21, 83, 85, 94, 104, 107-109, 111-18, 119; militia, 270; Mills 282; municipal government 141, 147-51, 179, 181, 223-44, 267; naval dockyard 86-87, 90-91, 93-94, 96, 101, 103, 111, 119-21, 282, 284; naval presence in, 86, 88, 91, 93, 100, 104; Observatory 335; occupations 29, 284-85, 312, 314-15, 324, 326-30; Penitentiary 2, 21, 185, 198, 203, 215-16, 219-20, 315; Permanent Building Society 148-49; Pittsburgh and Gananoque Road Company 149; Police Act (1816) 228; poor 281-97; poor, accommodation 288-90; poor, public responsibility acknowledged 297; poor, welfare 290-95; population 23-24, 72, 104, 111-12, 223, 276, 281, 296, 311, 315, 31 port of 2, 281, 284; Psychiatric Hospital 315; religious make-up 26-27; Scots influence 32-33; shipbuilding 5, 281, 284; shipping 2; suburban areas 29-30, 72; Sunday Schools 335; temperance 296, 33 theatre 117, 131-32; township 30, 66-67, 77; trade 1-2, 4-5, 103, 154, 28 travellers* opinions of, 8-9, 109; vital statistics 27-28; wards 237-38; Water Works 143, 145, 160, 197, 26 workmen 282 Kingston (steamer) 245, 247 Kingston: Daily News 181, 254, 256-57, 261-62; Gazette 204, 206, 226; News 247, 250, 257; Spectator 282, 286 Kirby, John 196 family 2, 185 Kirkpatrick, Sir George Airey 136, 162-63, 261, 267-69, 272-77 Mrs. George Airey, 1st (Frances Jane Macaulay) 136, 267 Mrs. George Airey, 2nd (Isabel Louise Macpherson) 267-68 Gen. Sir George Macaulay 136

Thomas 230, 235 Thomas, Sr. 144-47, 149-50, 152, 20 252, 267 Mrs. Thomas, Sr. (Helen) 149 family 185 Kitson, Lt. Col. Gerald Charles 126, 1 Mrs. Gerald Charles 126, 128, 131 Lachine Canal 94, 190 Lafontaine, Louis-Hippolyte 242 Lake: Champlain 93; Erie 19; Huron 75, 198; Ontario 1, 19, 64, 75, 83-85, 88-90, 93, 98, 100, 271, 284, 305, 340; S Francis 224 Lambeth Conference, First (1867) 309 Lambton County Lodge 250 Land: boards 71; distribution policy 67-68, 70-71 Lande, Dr. Lawrence 212 Lapum, James 271 La Salle Hotel 40 Lasher, Henry 209 Lauder, Rev. W. B. 305, 30 Laugier, Abbe" Marc-Antoine 39 Laurier, Sir Wilfred 164, 26 Laval University 270 Lavant Road 75, 77 Lavell, Dr. Michael 255 Law, Mark 296 Lawson, George 335-36, 338 Ledoux, Claude-Nicholas 39 Lee, Arthur Hamilton (Lord Lee of Fareham) 131 Leevas, Mrs. 286 Legislative: Assembly of Lower Canada 214; Assembly of Upper Canada 11, 202, 214, 236, 270, 289, 29 Council of Upper Canada 201-202, 213-14, 230, 265, 271-72, 332 Leitch, Rev. William 332, 335-39 Lennox and Addington County 11, 72, 191-92, 198, 266, 275 Leo, the Royal Cadet. See under Royal Military College Lewis, Rt. Rev. John Travers 303-305, 307-10 Mrs. John Travers, 1st (Annie Sherwood), 304, 31 395

INDEX

Mrs. John Travers, 2nd (Ada Leigh) 310 Liberal party and Liberals 128, 164, 251, 267, 271, 273 Liddell, Rev. Thomas 335 Lightfoot, Lt. Col. Thomas 113 Lindsay, Ont. 270 Liverpool Town Hall 60 Livingston. See Robinson-Livingston-Fraser Livingston's, clothiers 6 London: Canada West 13, 72, 123, 170; England 308; and Canadian Loan and Agency Company 263; District 224 Longueuil, Baroness. See Mrs. David Alexander Grant Lot 24, 235, 242-43, 284, 289-90 Loughborough: Road 69; township 69-70, 77 Louise, La (sailing vessel) 84 Lower Canada 67, 169, 194, 196 Lundy's Lane, battle of 91 Lunenburgh District 224 Lyons, John 211 Macarow, Daniel 258 Macaulay, Frances Jane. See Mrs. George Airey Kirkpatrick, 1st Hon. John 11, 154, 185-202, 206, 208, 214, 221, 267; buys Chronicle 186; differs with Strachan 189; on economic development 189-90; election activity 199; fellow businessmen 185-86; friends' opinion of him 188; government posts 196-98, 201-202, 219; method in politics 186, 200, 202; political views 188, 190-91, 200; on union of Canadas 194-96, 207; vs. the Bidwells 191-94 Rev. William 191, 304 family 2, 275 Macdonald, Hugh 262 J. G. 181 Sir John Alexander 2, 9, 11, 21, 32-33, 69, 98, 127, 132, 141-55, 161-62, 174, 177, 181, 236, 244, 245, 250-54, 256-59, 261-63, 265-67, 269-77, 336 Hon. John Sandfield 274

Macdonell, Rt. Rev. Alexander 10, 293, 296 Alexander, of Greenfield 150 Archibald John 144-47, 140-43, 155, 174, 253, 256 of Leek, Capt. "Red George" 89 Macfarlane, James 199, 207, 211, 213-14, 218 Machar, Agnes Maule 12 Rev. John 33, 335-36 MacKay, Elizabeth. See Mrs. Archibald Thomson Mackenzie, Hon. Alexander 101, 121, 265-66, 271, 275 George 148 Kenneth 252 Sir William 163 William Lyon 97, 203, 210-11, 215, 217-18, 220-21 MacKerras, John H. 339 MacLean, Allan 195-96 Macpherson, Sir David Lewis 267, 275 Lt. Col. Donald 87, 104, 262 Isabel Louise. See Mrs. George Airey Kirkpatrick, 2nd family 185, 275 Macpherson-Crane Shipping Company 6 MacRae, Marion 46 Madawaska River 75 Madoc, Ont. 69, 75 Mahan, Adm. Alfred Thayer 88 Mair, Charles 12 Maitland, Gov. Sir Peregrine 191-92, 201, 210-11, 216-18 Manahan, Anthony 252 Mann, Sir Donald 163 Manual of Parliamentary Practice 213 Market Battery 97-98, 105 Markland, George Herchmer 185-86, 191-92 Thomas 196, 201, 207 Marks, John 120-21 Marquise de Vaudreuil, La (sailing vessel) 84 Martello towers 13, 97-98, 105 Masonic Order. See Freemasonry Matthews, Capt. John 216-17 Mayne, Maj. Charles Blair 130 McGee, Thomas D'Arcy 258, 269

396

INDEX

McGill, Hon. Peter 129 Lt. Col. Sydenham Clitheroe 129 McGowan's Cigar Factory 6 McGregor, John 8 McKelvey, John 162 McMaster, William 275 McPherson, Allan 196 Mechanics' Institute 197 Mecklenburgh District 224 Melville, Viscount 113-14 Merchants Bank 177, 180-81 Methodists 212, 270, 272 Michigan 198 Michilimackinac, Mich. 86 Middlesex riding 217 Midland: District 69, 72, 111, 225, 235-36, 250, 263, 291; District Building Society 148-50; District Council 291; District School Society 204, 295; District School Society Amendment Bill 221, 295 Miller township 76-77 Minerals 75 Minto, Earl of 128 Mississaga (top-sail schooner) 86-87 Mississauga Point 86, 89, 104-105, 158, 160 Mississippi: River (u.s.) 190; River (Ont.,) 75; Road 75-76 Mohawk (schooner) 87 Mohawk River 83 Molson, John 161 Thomas 6 William 267 family 275 Monahan, A. 207 Monck, Viscount 98 Montcalm, Marquis de 84-85 Montreal: 1-2, 4, 13, 19, 25, 84-85, 89-91, 107-109, 112, 179-81, 194, 224, 242, 248, 275, 288, 296, 315-17, 332, 339; Road 66, 105; Transportation Company 5-6 Morgans, Sgt. Maj. J. 131 Morris, Alexander 175, 177, 179, 266, 275, 334, 336 William 219, 331, 336 Morrison, J. C. 251 Morton, James 6, 144, 155, 160-61 W. L. 10

Morton's Distillery 144 Mowat, John 40, 44, 144-47, 149, 151-53, 254, 332, 336 Rev. John Bower 33, 40, 336, 339 Oliver 32-33, 253-56, 258, 336 Mowat Building 40, 43-44, 332 Muckleston, Samuel 255 Municipal Corporations Bill (1849) 242-44 Murdock and Eraser's Bank 255 Murney's Point 97-98, 105 Murney Tower 98 Murray, J. 285 Rev. J. C. 339 Murvale, Ont. 270 Muskoka and Parry Sound District 28 Napanee: Ont. 75, 262, 266; Road 69, 282, 284, 286 Nassau District 224 National: Defence College 101; Policy 276 Naturalization Act 216 Naval Depot 103 Navy Bay 91, 105 Nelson, Viscount 91, 120 New York: N.Y. 226, 321; State 249, 257 Newburgh, Ont. 143, 146 Newcastle, Duke of 9, 245-46, 249-50 Newcastle District 224 Niagara: 4, 83, 86, 90, 103, 204, 221; District 211, 224 Niagara Gleaner 210 Nichol, Robert 192, 208 Nickalls, James, Jr. 214 Norfolk County 218 Oberndorfer's Cigar Factory 6 Observer (York) 210, 215 O'Conner, John 274 Oddfellows 254 Official Gazette (York) 215 Ogdensburg, N.Y. 86, 89 Old Lamps Aglow 212 Olden township 69 Oliver, John Ryder 123, 125-27 Mrs. John Ryder (Mary Hinds) 127 Oneida lake 83 Onondaga (top-sail schooner) 86-87

397

INDEX

Ontario: 25, 180-81, 243, 269, 299, 327, 339; Archives 213-14; Bank 178; birth rates 28; Foundry 144, 160; provincial government 291; Ward 255, 258 Orange Herald (Toronto) 250 Orange Order: 10-11, 245-59, 262; Roman Catholic friction 10-11, 197, 247-48, 250-51, 259 Ordnance 105 Oregon crisis 97-98, 105 O'Reilly, James 253, 255, 261, 267, 269-75 Peter 269 Orphans' Home and Widows' Friend Society of Kingston 148-50, 153, 287, 293 Osborne, Brian 6 family 123 Osgoode, Chief Justice William 226 Oso township 69-70 Oswegatchie. See Ogdensburg Oswego: N.Y. 4, 83-86, 89, 91, 123; Canal 20 Ottawa: Ont. 27, 72, 75, 309, 312; and Rideau Forwarding Company 2; -Huron tract, see Huron and Ottawa tract; Ladies College 131; River 4, 265, 305, 340 Owen, Comm. Sir Edward W. C. R. 94 Pacific Scandal 267, 269, 271 Palladio, Andrea 48, 51 Palmerston township 76-77 Park, Mr. 171 Passenger Act (ships) (1835) 287 Passport (steamer) 115 Paton, James 174, 180 John 336-37 Thomas 180 Patriot (Toronto) 250, 256 Pembroke, Ont. 75, 274, 305 Perry, Peter 11, 215 Perth: Ont. 69, 340; Road Company 148 Peterborough, Ont. 75, 143, 145-46 Peterson 215 Phelan, Msgr. Patrick 293 Phillipsville: Ont. 69; Road Company 148, 150 Phoenix Fire Insurance Company 149

Picard Street 289 Picardville 289-90, 295 Picton, Ont. 230, 245 Pike, Brig. Gen. Zebulon Montgomery 91, 93 Pittsburgh township 30, 66-67, 77, 149 Place d'Armes 105 Point: Frederick 86, 89, 91, 93-94, 98, 101, 103, 105, 120-21, 127-28, 136, 282, 284; Frederick Tower 98; Henry 87, 89, 94, 105, 282 Polk, James Knox 97 Poor: Law (England) 291, 293; Law Unions 286. See under Kingston. Pope, John Henry 265 Port Hope, Ont. 169, 230 Porter, John 276 Peter Buell 88, 91 Portland, Duke of 226 Portland: Me. 158; Road 69, 71; township 66, 70, 77 Portsmouth: Ont. 284; tannery 144, 149 Presbyterian Church 181, 254, 262, 331 Presbyterians 32, 200, 211-12, 272 Prescott, Ont. 4, 25, 28, 199, 230 Press of Kingston, The 256 Preston, Richard A. 1, 5 T. R. 8-9 Prevost, Sir George 87, 89-91, 112 Price, Alderman 274 Prince: Edward County 72, 197; of Wales, see Albert Edward, Prince of Wales Princess Street 332 Pringle, Alexander 188-89, 199-200, 206-207, 332, 336 Privy Council 300, 305 Protestant clergy 214 Protestants 10, 20, 27, 249-51, 257, 300 Province of Canada 86, 177, 272 Provincial Marine 87-90, 103 Public Lands Act (1853) 75; Lands Disposal Act (1837) 71 Purdy, J. T. 251 Quarter Sessions. See Court of Quarter Sessions Quebec: 28, 68; Act 224; City 8, 19, 98, 100, 109, 332

398

INDEX

Regiopolis College 153, 270, 282 Religious Tract Society 149 "Rep by pop" 251, 256-58 Reynolds 171-73 Rideau: Canal 2, 4, 20, 70, 72, 94, 96, 100, 105, 111, 125, 154, 158, 198, 282, 288, 292, 312, 317; Ward 243, 258 Ridout, Capt. Joseph Bramley 125, 128-29 Mrs. Joseph Bramley (Wilmot Beresford Hayter) 128-29 Thomas 128 Thomas Gibbs 171, 178 family 128 Roads, to and from Kingston 4, 64, 66, 69,75 Robinson, John Beverley 189-93, 197-98, 200-201, 214, 217-18, 266 Raban, Brig. Gen. Sir Edward 130-31 John Beverley Jr. 275 Raglan Road 289 Hon. Peter 216, 287-88 Railroads 75 William 255 Randall, Robert 216 Papers 188 Ranfurly, Earl of 126 -Livingston-Fraser clique 274 Ransur, Joseph 286 Robison, Thomas W. 174 Rathbun, E. B. 275 Rocheleau, Joseph 207 Reade, John Page 126 Rockwood Villa 44, 46-52 Lady Mary Stuart 126 Rolph, Dr. John 217 Lt. Col. Raymond Northland Revell Roman: Catholic Schools 295; Catholics 126 10, 20, 26, 212, 247, 249, 251-53, 255, Rebellion of 1837-38 11-12, 97, 112-13, 257-58, 269-70, 272, 285-86, 289, 115-16, 120 292-93, 296, 300 Reekie, James 161-62 Reform party 11, 250-56, 258-59, 269-70 Rome, Watertown and Oswego Railroad 158 Regiment: Frontenac County militia Ross, C. S. 171-72, 174 89; 2nd Shropshire Light Infantry John (lawyer) 269 126; 9th East Norfolk 113; 10th Royal Maj. John 105, 119 Veterans Battalion 87, 89, 104; 15th Rowan, Maj. Gen. William 113 Yorkshire East Riding 113-14; 24th Warwickshires 113-14; 34th 119; 37th Roy, James Alexander 32, 319, 321 Royal: Artillery, 105, 109, 112, 114, 123; North Hampshires 107, 112-13; 47th Canadian Academy 133; Canadian Lancashires 108-109; 62nd Foot Bank 178; Canadian Corps of Signals (Wiltshires) 9, 108, 113, 115; 66th 109, 101; Canadian Horse Artillery 101; 114; 68th Durham Light Infantry 113; Canadian Rifle Regiment 108-109, 70th Glasgow Lowland 112-13; 71st 118, 129; Corps of Engineers 136; Highland Light Infantry 113; 83rd Electrical and Mechanical Engineers 113-14; 85th Light Infantry 126; 86th 101; Engineers 105, 123, 132; 128; Cheshire 126, 129; King's Royal Engineers School 132; Field Artillery of New York 85, 119; Royal Artillery 84th Brigade 131; Geographic Society 85; Voltigeurs 94 126; Humane Society 125; Mail Line Regimental bands 116

Queen's College Journal 240-41 Queen's Preparatory School 332 Queen's University 9, 12-13, 21, 23-24, 32-33, 35, 121, 131, 133, 150, 179, 181, 185, 202, 254, 262-63, 269, 272-73, 289, 331-41; Douglas Library 207; incorporation 331; charter 331; enrolment 332, 340; extension courses 335; Alma Mater Society 335, 340; discord, feuds, scandal 337-38; financial losses 340; Kingston Hall 340; Conversazione 340; fund-raising 339-40; Glee Club 341; staff 12-13 Queenston Heights 89 Queenston, Ont. 271

399

INDEX

271-72; Military Academy 123, 130; Regiment of Artillery 125; Sappers and Miners 94; Society of Canada 133. See also Royal Military College Royal George (corvette) 87, 89 Royal Military College 13, 21, 24, 86, 101, 119-37, 185, 269; athletics 131, 136; cadets 128-29, 132-34, 136-37; ex-cadets 132, 134, 136; first Canadian commandant 126; first graduation 133; June Ball 136; Leo, the Royal Cadet 133-35; location at Kingston 121; "Old Eighteen" 133; original staff 122-23; Ridout controversy 129; social life 119-20, 122, 127-28, 131-34, 136-37; staff, 122-33, 137 Rush, Richard 93 Rush-Bagot Agreement (1817) 93-94, 96 Russell, Peter 210 Ruttan, Elizabeth. See Mrs. Hugh Christopher Thomson, 2nd William 206 Ryerson, Rev. Egerton 210 Sackett's Harbour N.Y. 4, 89-91 St. Andrew's Church (Presbyterian) 9, 33, 160, 254, 282, 332, 335, 339; Presbyterian Manse 44-46; Society 33, 152, 272 St. George, Quetton 204, 206 St. George's: Cathedral (Anglican) 282, 305, 309; Church (Anglican) 111, 204, 208, 211, 301, 304; Church, Charitable Committee 148; Society 293 St. Lawrence (ship of war) 91, 120, 160 St. Lawrence: College of Technology 24; -Great Lakes System 64, 196, 248, 315; river and canals 1, 18, 24, 154, 158, 190, 194, 248, 257, 271, 305, 316-37, 340 St. Mark's Church (Anglican), Barriefield 111, 120 St. Mary's: Cathedral (Roman Catholic) 282; Mission (Roman) 111 St. Patrick's Society 270, 293 St. Paul's: Cathedral (London) 60; Church (Kingston) 111, 206; Church (Montreal) 338 St. Peter's Anglican Church (Brockville) 303

St. Ursula's Convent, or the Nun of Canada 213 Sampson, J. H. 220 Dr. James 121, 201, 207 S & R Store 40, 42-44 Sangster, Charles 12 Sarnia, Ont. 98, 158 Sault Ste. Marie, Ont. 75 Scamozzi, Vfncenzo 48, 51-52 Schultz, John Christian 12 Scots: Fusiliers 131; Guards 131; in Kingston 9-10, 12, 26, 32-33; 296, 321, 324, 326 Senate 261, 265, 272-73, 275 Serlio, Sebastian 44 Settlers: relation with lumbermen 77-78; relation with seasonal population 78-79 Seven Years' War 83-84 Shaftesbury, Earl of 226 Shannon, William 247 Shaw, John 252 Shedden, J. 161 Sherwood, Annie. See Mrs. John Travers Lewis, 1st Judge 193,208,218 Shibley, Jacob 270 Schuyler 261, 270-74 Shortt, Adam 12-13 Simcoe, Lt. Gov. Sir John Graves 67-68, 70, 86, 88, 192, 225-26, 291 Lady John Graves 86-87 Sisters of Notre Dame 295 Smith, David John 230 Henry 236 Henry, Sr. 219-20 Thomas 209 William Henry 58, 73 Smyth, Gen. Sir Edward Selby 121 Maj. Gen. Sir James Carmichael. See Carmichael-Smyth Snake Island, 94, 96 Snodgrass, Rev. William 338-41 Soane, Sir John 39, 46 Society: for the Promoting of Christian Knowledge 308; for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts 308 Sophia (gunboat) 86 South: Ontario riding 254-55; Renfrew

400

INDEX

riding 261, 270; Victoria riding 270 Southern Ontario Railway 160 Spafford, Elijah 204 Elizabeth. See Mrs. Hugh Christopher Thomson, 1st Speedy (gunboat) 87 Spurr, John 120 Standard railway gauge 164 Stanton, Robert 214-16, 221 Statutes of Upper Canada 213 Steel, Capt. 87 Stephen, Sir George 161-63 Stewart Dr. John 337 "Stone Frigate" 93-94, 101, 282 Stoney Creek 90 Store Street 289-90, 295 Storrington: Road 69; township 77 Strachan, John 185-86, 188-89, 191-92, 196, 199-202; 204, 210-14; 299-301, 307, 331, 335 Papers 188 Strange, Lt. Col. Courtland MacLean 127 Maxwell William 144-47, 149-52, 174 Mrs. Maxwell William (Charlotte Anne Campbell) 149-50, 152 Orlando S. 245, 255 Strathmore, Earl of 217 Street, Thomas Clark 173 Stuart, C. 8 Archdeacon George Okill 196-97, 204, 289-91, 305, 334 Rev. John 301 Stuartville 235, 284, 288, 290 Summerhill 7, 289, 334, 339 Summerson, Sir John 51-52 Supplies, for garrisons 115-16, 118 Swift, Pindar (pseud.) 212 Swift (gunboat) 87 Sydenham, Lord 7, 107, 198, 202, 275, 332 Sydenham: Street 292; Ward 11 Tache", Sir Etienne-Paschal 265 Taverns 107 Taylor, Col. Edward Thornton 126-28 Mrs. Edward Thornton 128 Tazewell, S. 0. 209 Terrebonne, Que. 194

Tete de Pont Barracks 85, 101, 119, 121 Thernstrom, Stephen 326 Thibodo 238 Thomkins, Thomas 199 Thomson, Archibald 203-204 Mrs. Archibald (Elizabeth MacKay) 204 E. W. 204 Edward 204, 221 George 204 Hugh Christopher 11, 188, 198-99, 203-22; admonished by Speaker 208-209; and expulsion of Mackenzie 220-21; member of assembly 214-18; mercantile business 206; and penitentiary 219-20; publisher 212-14; on union of Canadas 207; Upper Canada Herald 206-11 Hugh Christopher Jr. 206 Mrs. Hugh Christopher, 1st (Elizabeth Spafford) 204 Mrs. Hugh Christopher, 2nd (Elizabeth Ruttan) 206 of Fleet, Lord 204 & Detlar 206 Tidy, Lt. Col. Francis Skelly 113 Timber, repeal of British preference on 20 Tinling-Widdrington, Maj. Gen. G. F. 112 Toll-bridge, T£te de Pont to Point Frederick 105 Toronto: 4, 13, 18, 25, 27, 72, 98, 109, 112, 154, 181, 202, 230, 232, 236, 243, 245, 254, 261, 265, 267, 275, 299-301, 307, 315-17, 336, 339, see also York; and Nipissing Railway 161; Grey and Bruce Railway 161 Transportation: development in North America 157-58; to and from Kingston 4, 64, 66, 69, 75, 281 Treaty: of Ghent (1814) 91; of Washington (1871) 94, 101 Trent: Affair 98, 123; Canal 198 Trenton, Ont. 160, 301 Trinity College: (Toronto) 300; (Dublin) 303-304 Truax, Abraham 209 Trust and Loan Company of Upper Canada 143, 145, 152-53, 262, 331, 336

401

INDEX

Tapper, Sir Charles Hibbert 125-26, 128 Emma. See Mrs. Donald Roderick Cameron Tutton, Francis 160 Twining, Capt. Philip Geoffrey 132-33 Tyendinaga, Ont. 309 TVphus epidemic 288, 319 Union: Army, recruiting in Canada 108; of Upper & Lower Canada 194-95, 207, 332; Church 282; Street 289 United: Church of Canada 26; Empire Loyalists 1, 9, 11-12, 20, 67-68, 85, 103, 119, 128, 185, 203, 206, 223, 225, 266, 270-72; Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada 161, 250-51, 262-63; States of America 4, 7, 9, 11, 25, 88, 97-98, 100, 104, 125, 157, 190, 198, 250, 311-12, 326 University: Avenue 289; of Toronto 131, 270, 273; reform 256 Upper Canada: 7, 11, 29, 63, 67, 83, 86, 89, 100-101, 143, 158, 185-86, 189-96, 202, 212, 217-18, 222, 225-26, 241, 250, 257, 261-62, 282, 288, 291, 293, 301; politics 150, 185-86, 187, 191 Upper Canada: Gazette 210; Herald (Kingston) 188, 199, 203, 206-10, 212, 214-16, 218-20, 222 Ussher, Rt. Rev. James 303-304 Van Rensselaer, Rensselaer 97 Stephen 97 Van Straubenzee, Col. Arthur Hope 122, 132 Varin, Father 194 Vaudreuil-Cavagnal, marquis de 84 Victoire, La (sailing vessel) 84 Victoria and Grey Trust: 40; Building 40-41, 43-44 Victoria: Orange Band 255; Tower 98; Ward 243, 290 Victory (warship) 91 Viger, Capt. Jacques 94 Vitruvius 51 Voltaire, Francois Marie Arouet de 85 Wadsworth, James 284 Walkem, J. B. 341

Miss P. 341 Walker, Maj. George Robert 130 War of 1812 9, 19, 32, 83, 86-91, 93, 120, 128, 185, 192, 206, 282, 284, 317 Warburton, C. D. 8 Waterloo Academy 270 Watertown: N.Y. 25; and Rome Railway 143 Waterways 198 Watkins, John 144-48, 151-52 Mrs. John (Eliza) 148 Watson, John 12, 33 Weekly Register (York) 208 Weir, George 336-38 Welland Canal 19-20, 158, 190, 198, 248 Wellington, Duke of 93-94, 105 Wesleyari Methodists 251 Whelan, (Patrick) James 269, 273 Whig-Standard Building 204 Widows' Friend Society 293 Wilcox, W. F. 312 Wilkes, John 189, 226 Wilkinson, Maj. Gen. James 90-91 Williamson, James A. 33, 335-36, 339 Willis, Judge John Walpole 217-18 Wilmot 66 Wilson, William Henry 40, 144 Wilson's Buildings. See Victoria and Grey Trust Building Windsor, Ont. 160, 170 Wolfe (frigate) 90 Wolfe Island: 108, 144; Canal 4, 155; Kingston and Toronto Railroad Company 143, 145; Railroad and Canal Company 143, 145, 154; township 71, 77, 108 Wolseley, Viscount 126 Women, in employment 285-86 Workman 180 Worrell, Rt. Rev. Clarendon Lamb 133 Wren, Sir Christopher 60 Yeo, Sir James Lucas 90-91 York: 7, 32, 66, 90, 103, 188, 191, 194, 197, 204, 211, 214, 218, 221, 230, 288, see also Toronto; County 218; Road 66, 105; Street 289 Young, Col. Plomer 113 Young Men's Society of Kingston 254

402